consider the substance onely of the scripture which without all controuersie is most ancient But the verie scripture and writing it selfe hath his excellencie also for that the scripture in respect of the very writing is said to be giuen vs also by diuine inspiration For there is not a iote or pricke in the Scriptura est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 very writing which is not by the inspiration of God Here the Aduersaries take exception and as els where often so here they prefer their Church before the scripture and they affirme the Church is more ancient then the scripture For they say there was a Church two thousand A Popish obiection full yeares before Moses the first writer of the scripture And since Christs comming the Church for many yeares wanted the scriptures But that which hath beene alreadie written and is aforesaid can easily solue this obiection For if we vnderstand by this word Scripture not only the characters and books but also that substance and matter contained in them for we haue the Prophets and Apostles speaking in the scriptures we haue their liuely voice we haue I say the liuely voice of God himselfe and the very expresse mind of God contained in them if I say we vnderstand by this word that substance it cannot thē be denied but the scripture is more ancient then the Church which was borne not of mortall seed but of immortall euen by the word of God who liueth and endureth for euer 1. Pet. 1. 23. I say the premisses well considered it shall appeare the scripture is not onely more ancient then the Church but to be of greatest antiquitie and to haue beene with God from euerlasting But if by this word ye vnderstand both the matter and writing in this respect also it shall be no disparagement to auouch it to be of greater antiquitie then the Church yea to be most ancient as we haue at large before shewed And thus far of the first propertie of the sacred scripture and of the third controuersie CHAP. X. Of the second propertie of the sacred Scripture where begins the fourth controuersie THe second propertie of the sacred scripture is opened sufficiently in a manner alreadie in the second controuersie before handled This propertie is this that the Scripture is most cleere in it selfe and most easie to be vnderstood for it being the very word of God which word euerie man must necessarily graunt to be in it selfe most cleere most manifest and most perspicuous whether you respect the words or the matter contained in the words if men will not offer extreme iniurie to Gods holy Spirit assuredly it must follow I say that the holy scripture is in it selfe and of it selfe most cleere and euident in euery part and in euerie respect Of this great perspicuitie of the scripture the holy ghost testifieth often Psal 119. The word of the Lord is a lanterne to my feete Psal 19. The precept of the Lord saith the Psalmist is cleere and inlighteneth the eyes Prou. 6. The commandement is a lanterne and the law is a light The Lord by the Prophet Esay chap. 45. 19. saith I haue not spoken in secret and 2. Pet. 1. 19. he saith We haue a most sure word of the Prophets to the which ye do well that ye take heede as to a light that shineth in a darke place Wherefore the whole scripture al places of the scripture are by themselues and in themselues most manifest most cleere and applied also to the capacity of the vulgar sort and of the most vnlettered among the people For it is certaine that the Lord in the scriptures doth as it were lispe with vs Io. 3. 12. If I haue spoken to you of earthly things and you beleeue not that is I haue spoken vnto you after an earthly and plaine manner and I haue applied my selfe to your capacitie c. I haue auouched that the sacred scripture is in it selfe cleere and easie True it is if ye respect men as they are All the scripture cleere and easie to the weakest beleeuer 1. Cor. 2. 14. men that is naturall and carnall the holy scripture vnto such is altogether obscure and strange For the naturall man doth not conceiue the things which appertaine to the Spirit of God But if ye consider the spirituall man and such as be taught of God I grant to such it is partly obscure because they be as yet in part carnall And for this cause the godly put vp continually supplications vnto God as feeling the reliques of their naturall blindnes and corruption and making requests that the eyes of their vnderstanding might be opened that they may behold the bright shining light of the scriptures and of euerie place and portion of the scripture being otherwise most euident in it selfe All the religious and godly in their prayers are so farre from laying any imputation of hardnesse and obscurity on Gods word that they do euer accuse condemne themselues and their owne blindnesse and dulnesse And albeit this be true that all the scripture and all places of the scripture be simply and in themselues most Note cleare and easie and onely darke and hard by reason of our corruption and blindnesse yet this cannot be denied but that some places of scripture be more cleere in themselues then others more easie and more euident as those scriptures concerning faith and manners which bee so necessarie vnto saluation they be I say so cleerely set downe so often repeated and in so manie places expounded that we need not manie rules for interpretation or to find out the knowledge of them But these places also require the grace of Gods holy spirit for without him spirituall things which be most perspicuous and euident cannot be vnderstood of anie man on earth Wherfore he that is ignorant of the most cleere scriptures which doe so much concerne his saluation is altogether blind and lieth as yet in the wofull state of perdition for so the Apostle speaketh If that the Gospell be hid it is hidden to them that are lost 2. Cor. 4. 3. 4. As for other scriptures which are more hard in appearance for that they do not so much concerne the necessarie articles of faith and rules of life and conuersation we may be ignorant of them without danger of faith and saluation albeit the knowledge of such places might bring some light for the better vnderstanding of the How to interpret expound hard scriptures scriptures which of necessity must be knowne concerning faith and manners And we may attaine some tolerable interpretation of these scriptures analogicall vnto faith if we obserue those rules of knowlege and interpretation which are commonly recommended by the learned euer making Gods holy spirit our first and principal guide for our inward illumination and instruction The rules which follow this are but the meanes which the holy Rules Ghost vseth and they are borowed partly out of the 1
or common prayers of the Church ought to be in the mother tongue Thirdly whether it shal be lawfull for the common people to read the scriptures translated into their owne language or mother tongue To the first question we answer that it is lawfull yea also that it is expedient it should be so and this we proue by some few arguments First the sacred scriptures must be read publiquely before all the people therefore must they be translated into their owne known language for otherwise it were in vain to read them The antecedent is proued Deut. 31. ver 11. 12. The Lord commandeth that the books of Moses be read to all indifferently when they were assembled Men Women and Children with the strangers Ier. 36. chargeth Baruch the scribe that hee should read before all the people the book which he had Translating of the scripture into the vulgar tongues First argument written from his mouth But some will heere obiect that this precept was to indure but for a time I answer the end shewes it must be perpetuall Deut. 31. The end being this that this people may heare learne and feare the Lord. This end is perpetuall therefore so is the law in like manner specially seeing that the reading of the Scripture is the ordinarie and necessarie meanes whereby we be to come to this appointed end So the antecedēt being thus cleered it followeth necessarily that the scripture must be translated into our knowne mother tongue Arg. 2. The people are permitted to read y e Scriptures Second argu therfore they are to be translated into the vulgar tongue for otherwise the common people could neuer reade them The antecedent I proue thus The Sacred Scriptures do furnish vs with weapons against the Deuil as we be taught by Christs example Matth. 4. who gaue Sathan the repulse vsing none other weapons against him but testimonies of Scripture Ioh. 5. chap. Christ commaunded the multitude to search the scriptures Acts chap. 17. the Christians of Beroea are commended for searching the scriptures whether the points were sound and good agreeable to the sriptures which were taught by the Apostles But see more of this antecedent in the handling of the 3. question Arg. 3. The very Papists graunt the scriptures may be read before the people but they say it must be done in an Third argu vnknowen tongue wherefore I reason thus If the scriptures must be read before the multitude in an vnknowen tongue that shall be fruitlesse and without all edification therefore they must be translated into their knowen language The Antecedent is prooued by 1. Corin. 14. 6. If I shal come vnto you speaking in tongues what shal I profit you q. d. nothing And after in the same Chap. ver 19. I had rather speake fiue words with my vnderstanding that I might also instruct others then ten thousandwords in a strange tongue But of this point more hereafter The fourth argument God requires in his people wisdome knowledge and instruction Therefore the scriptures Fourth argu must be read and therefore translated into the vulgar tongues The antecedent I prooue thus Deut. 4. God wil haue his people to be wise of vnderstanding that the nations round about hearing of this might bee smitten with an admiration and say ver 4. Only this people is wise and of vnderstanding and a great nation The Apostle Col. 3. 16. will haue Gods worde to dwell in them richly or plenteously Paul in his Epistles euery where requires the Churches to whom he writes to be filled with all knowledge The aduersaries contend and dispute much against this knowledge which God requires in the common people The fift argument Christ while he liued among the Iewes spake and preached vnto them in their owne mother Fift argu tongue The Apostles of Christ in like manner did preach the Gospell in their vulgar tongue as in the day of Pentecost and after and for this very cause that they might speake to euery nation in their owne knowen language that gift of tongues was giuen them Thus then I reason If to preach the Gospell in the vulgar known languages was no profanatiō of the Gospell then so in like maner to write the Gospel in the vulgar known languages is no profanation of the same for there is like reason of both The sixt argument is from the perpetuall vse and practise Sixt argu of all the auncient Church For in the Primitiue Church the sacred Scripture was translated neere hand into all languages as the Chaldiac the Syriac the Arabian the Armenian the Egyptian the Ethiopian the Indian the Persian the Scythian the Sarmatian tongue There are not a few do auouch this a Homil. 1. in Io. Chrysostome * De corrigend Graecorum Affectib lib. 5. Theodoret c De doctr Chri. lib. 2. cap. 15. Augustine with others And at this day there be extant the Chaldiac the Syriack the Arabick the Egyptian and the Ethiopian translations all which the learned say were done in the Apostles times Chrysostome turned the sacred Scripture into the Armenian tongue as Sixtus Senēsis reporteth Ierom trāslated the scripture into the * Lingua Dalmatica Dalmatick tongue as these men do testify Alphonsus a Castro Eckius Hosius Erasmus Methodius translated it into the Sclauonian tongue as saith Auentine in his Chronicle * Socrates tripartita historia Vlphilas Bishop of the Gothes translated the same into the Gothes language * De ciuitate Dei lib. 15. Augustine writeth that the old Testament was translated into Syriack Harding against Iuel and Eckius write that the Muscouites and the people of Russia had the scripture in their owne mother tongue The historie of England written by Beda affirmeth that the scriptures were translated into the English tongue before his time Beda saith he translated part of the new Testament himselfe Thus far the practise of the old church whereby as by the rest of the arguments afore going it followeth that the sacred Scripture is to be translated into euery countrey vulgar language Now it resteth to see what the Papists answer to this question we haue in hand Some few yeares past they vtterly denied that the sacred Scripture might bee translated into any mother tongue * De choris canonicis Petrus Asoto Censura Coloniensis and Harding before named these write that some are of this iudgment The Scriptures are not to be translated into the vulgar languages And for this cause such as translated Scriptures they were banished and condemned by the Pope and their bookes were prohibited and burnt And when they saw this to be odious to all men these graue Fathers changed their minds and now forsooth they auouch the Scriptures may be translated into the vulgar languages yet by the Popes permission And this albeit it seeme to be something diuers from the former assertion yet in effect it is the verie same For the Pope will permit no man to
can be in this when the people are so diuided in prayer which in the publike assemblie should offer vp with one mind and with one mouth one and the same prayer vnto God The sixt Argument is from a point which Bellarmine himselfe yeeldeth He granteth that the publike administration 6. Arg. of prayers c. at Corinth were done in the known Greek tongue wherfore then may not all other Churches in the like manner haue their Leiturgie in the vulgar knowne language What can he answer heere but this happily that the publike administration at Corinth was done in the mother tongue not for that it was the vulgar tongue but because it was Greeke for Papists giue the Greeke tongue when they please some prerogatiue The seuenth Argument is from another point which 7. Arg. Bellarmine graunteth The Collations as himselfe speaketh and the exhortations ought to be done in the mother tongue wherefore in like manner may not the publike administration of Gods worship be done in the mother tongue best known to y e people He answereth that the reason is not the same of the collation seruice For saith he the collations tend to the instruction and consolation of the people but the publike seruice principally concernes Gods worship I answer Doth not all the people worship God in the publike administration or seruice of God and therefore ought they not to worship God in a knowne language if they wil worship their God in faith The 8. Argument is from the practise of the old and best Church In elder ages so manie translations were done principally to this end to celebrate the publike seruice of God and that herein the Scriptures might bee read to euery man in his owne knowne mother tongue * Lib. de origine Bohemorum AEneas Syluius writeth that to Cyril Methodius it was permitted that the people of Morauia should haue their common prayers in the mother tongue And at this day the people of Armenia AEthiopia Egypt and the Muscouites haue their common prayers in their known tongue Here Bellarmine answereth all these are heretiques I say they be no more heretiques then Papists Assuredly as touching publike prayers I had rather be in this heresie with them then with the Papists as they thinke to meane well And thus for our iudgement in this matter The Aduersaries say that the publike prayers may not be in a knowne tongue but in Hebrue or Greeke as in the East and Greeke Churches or in the Latine tongue as in the Latine and West Churches The arguments they produce for this purpose be first from the prerogatiue of tongues the first is this Christ in the title of his Crosse gaue honour to these three languages therefore publike prayers ought to be done in these I answer albeit wee graunt the antecedent the consequent will not follow yea rather we may infer the contrarie The Lord would haue the cause of Christs death to be manifested to all people in those languages which then were best known which cannot be denied of the Greeke and Latine therfore publike prayers ought to bee done in the vulgar tongues and knowne to the people The 2. Arg. These three tongues Hebrue Greek and Latine are of greatest excellencie antiquitie authority therfore the common prayers and seruice of God ought to be done onely in these tongues I answer Grant the Antecedent be true yet the fequele is not good for that verie gift of tongues which was giuen the Apostles in the feast of Pentecost plainly proueth that euery toong be it neuer so base is sanctified of God for holy vses and Note for the execution of publique and ecclesiasticall offices and seruice vnto God The 3. Arg. The Scriptures was originally written in these three tongues therefore the publique prayers ought to be done in these only I answer first the Antecedent is false for neither the whole Scripture nor anie part thereof was written first in the Latine tongue For whereas they say Saint Marks Gospell was first written The Papists say Saint Marks Gospeâ— was first written in Latin in Latine it is false but of this point else where Next I answer that it will not followe of that Antecedent that publike prayers should be sayd in vnknowne tongues but rather the contrarie followeth for that whereas the Scripture was first written in these two tongues Hebrue and Greeke for this very cause for that euen then and in those times these two languages were most common and best knowne to the people hence it followes rather I say that the publique prayers ought to bee in the most common and best knowne tongues Thus farre we haue heard of arguments drawne from the prerogatiue of tongues now follow arguments from the practise and vse of the Church The first here is this From Ezra vntill Christ the Scripture was woont to bee read in the Church of the Iewes in the Hebrue tongue that is an vnknowe tongue Ergo publike prayers may be said in an vnknowne tongue I answer I grant the Scriptures were read in the Hebrue tongue but I denie that this was an vnknowne tongue For Nehem. 8. it is very cleare that the sacred Scripture which Ezra read in Hebrue was vnderstood by the people which were present and heard it Whereupon the contrarie consequent must follow The Scripture was read in the Church of the Iewes in elder ages in a known tongue therfore it must be read at this day in popular and knowne tongues The second Argument is from the practise of the Iewish Synagogue of these times To this day saith hee the Scripture is read in the synagogue of the Iewes in the Hebrue tongue therefore publique prayers must be celebrate in an vnknowne tongue I answer The Argument followes not from the euill example of the synagogue of the Iewes for that this reading of the old Testament in an vnknowne tongue is the cause wherefore so manie of them hold backe and will not be conuerted to the faith of Christ The third argument is from the practise of the primitiue Church In the primitiue Church the publike prayers were said in one of these 3. tongues therfore the conclusion followeth I answer the Antecedent is false for that as hath beene before shewed in the time of the old Church yea in the verie dayes of the Apostles the Scriptures were translated in a manner into all languages The fourth Argument is from the continuall practise of the catholike Church for in it the publique prayers were euer either in the Greeke or Latine tongue I answer if by catholike Church they meane the Church of Rome then I weigh not the example and practise thereof but if by this word they meane the true catholike Church then it is cleare alreadie by that which is before deliuered that the Antecedent is false And thus farre of these Arguments taken from the practise and vse of the Church To the former Arguments they adde more from a finall cause The
vnto vs no lesse certaine and firme then if we heard God himselfe speake or did behold and reade the verie mind of God yea the very diuine oracles written in Gods owne breast but now we haue not the liuely voice of God now we see not the secret mind of God therefore it must follow that we haue something to supply the want of the liuely voice of God euen meanes to reueale vnto vs the secret mind of God and nothing can do this but the sacred Scripture therefore Gods holy written word is and must be vnto vs as the verie voice and as the verie mind or wil of God himselfe manifested vnto vs. The fourth reason The Scripture containes all those things which God hath spoken in elder ages and what God himselfe hath decreed in his secret counsell so farre as is meete for vs to know concerning our life and saluation Ergo c. Thus far of the immediate word of God The mediate voice of God we call the voice of the holy and true Church of God for albeit men speake yet the word spoken is the word of God himselfe Here the aduersaries rise vp and contend that the voice of the Church must haue the priority of excellencie and that it supplieth the want of Gods liuely voice and the manifestation of his mind rather or better then the Scripture for say they the voice of the Church is a Popish Obiection cōcerning the testimonie and the authority of the Church before the Scripture Scripture written not with the penne of any Scribe but by Gods owne finger in the heart of the Church therefore the voice or testimonie of the Church ought to bee accounted the principall voice of God For it is a liuely voice proceedings from the liuing heart of the Church wherein God hath ingrauen all truth with the finger of his owne Spirit whereas the Scriptures of the Prophets and Apostles albeit they were deliuered and spoken by God himselfe yet they were not written by Gods owne hand but by the Prophets and Apostles which were the pen-men Again they were not written in y e liuing hearts of men but in papers and books or tables Hence therefore it followeth that this scripture which is found in the heart of the Church is the principall Scripture of God and that the voice of the holy Church is that most excellent voice of God ought to be vnto vs as the immediate voice of God in steed of the secret counsel of God I answer true it is the testimonie of the Church is a liuely voice proceeding from a liuing heart sanctified by the holy ghost for we speake of the true Church But first I say that the only Scripture prophetical and apostolical is to be accounted that Scripture which was written by Gods owne finger and that immediate word of God Next I say that the heart of the Church is taught and sanctified by the Spirit of the Scripture and that the Scripture which is in the heart of the Church is nothing els but a certain transcript that so I may speak or a copy which the holy Ghost hath written in our hearts according to that ancient and authenticall copie which is the holy Scripture For the holy Ghost teacheth the Church nothing now but that which is written and doth by the scripture after a sort beget the Church the Scripture is the mother the Church is the daughter the Scripture is the mistresse the Church is the scholler Thirdly I adde that the knowledge of the truth which is in the heart of the Church by means of the scripture is not so perfect nor so absolute as is the holy Scripture And lastly I say that the Church being inlightened and renewed but in part may erre from the truth euen in the greatest matter of waight and that it doth erre so often as it forsakes the canon and rule of the sacred Scripture Their former assertion being thus cast downe it is euident that the voice of the Church I vnderstand here the true church only not that whoorish church of Rome the voice of the Church I say is not that primarie and most excellent word of God nor ought to be vnto vs in steed of the liuely and immediate voice of God nor to be reputed for Gods minde and counsell but this prerogatiue is due only to the sacred Scripture I ad further that if thou doest first not so much respect the truth it selfe which the Church speaketh as the instruments of the speech vttered which are men next if ye compare the voice of the Church speaking with the sacred Scripture it selfe it doth not deserue at all to be called by the name of Gods word but may more properlie be called the worde and testimony of man For Christ himselfe calles that testimonie which Iohn the Baptist gaue of him the testimony of man I receiue not saith he or desire not the testimnoie of man Ioh. 5. 34. Be it so that the testimonie of the Church be true agreeable to the holy scripture notwithstanding it is truly called an humane testimonie whether yee respect the men which speake or compare their testimonie with that which doth proceed from the mouth of God and Christ himselfe But it may be replyed that the very Apostles and Prophets which writte and spake all these things which we haue in the Scriptures were men in like manner therefore all the Scriptures are but an humane testimonie I answere that I denie not all is obiected if we were to esteeme the words or writings of an Apostle or Prophet as they are instruments and Ministers or if this were to be compared with the very liuely voice of God and Christ himselfe For in respect of the instruments if we compare the words or writings of these men with the words and writings of God himselfe theirs I say must come after and giue place vnto this and must beare the name of an humane testimonie for so the testimony of Iohn Baptist himselfe as being an instrument in comparison of Christ the Lord of life was called the record of man Wherefore when we auouch that the Propheticall and Apostolicall Scripture is the immediate testimonie of God himselfe we make no comparison with the liuelie voice of God himselfe neither doe we so much respect what Organs the Holy-Ghost vsed to set forth the Scriptures but we consider the matter it selfe and the diuine oracles which be written and we ponder in what estimation God himselfe will haue vs to accept the sacred Scripture not as the writings and sayings of men but as the writings and words of God himselfe And we consider this also as in a comparison made with the Church For to vse that comparison againe the voice of the Scripture is Gods owne voice but the voice of the Church of Christ is called an humane testimonie as the word or writing of a Prophet or an Apostle compared with the liuely voice of God is called the
constancie of the Martyrs which daylie seale with their blood the truth of this heauenly doctrine the persecution raised by the enemies of the Church against it the enmitie of Sathan against it and the preseruation of the diuine oracles of God vnto our times and to be short the testimonie of the true Church of God for it All these are without or beside the Scripture and giue vs a secundarie kinde of demonstration whereby the holy Ghost worketh also as it pleaseth him and openeth the eies of our vnderstanding inlightening vs to see and heare God him-selfe speaking and shining in the Scripture But here we be to obserue that the holy ghost doth God rather by these meanes the testimonie of the Church and couersation of the saints prepareth vs to receiue the pretious faith not beget faith in our harts properlie and principallie by this second kinde of externall meanes for the proper and principall instrument of God to breed faith is the very word of God himselfe for it must be necessarilie either the liuely voice of God or the sacred scripture which serueth vs in steede of the liuelie voice of God himselfe but either prepares our hearts only to receiue faith afterwards Io. 4. 1. Pet. 3. 2. 3. wards by the word of God or to confirme the same in some sort beeing already ingendred in our hearts by Gods word For this cause this second kind of meanes sometimes is sent before the voice of God in the scripture whereby the holy Ghost otherwhiles makes mens minds ready to intertaine faith and grace offred This we reade of Augustine for he speaks it of himselfe I would not haue beleeued the gospell but that the authority of the Catholicke Church moued me thereunto by which words he meaneth that when he was a Manichee he was prepared by the authority and testimonie of the Church to beleeue the Gospell Afterwards notwithstanding the same holie spirit which thus prepared him by the testimonie of the Church I say the same spirit did beget faith in Augustines heart by the very scripture of the gospell whereby he did beleeue that the gospell was the verie word of God For this cause he speaks else where of himselfe And let vs follow them saith he which doe inuite vs first to beleeue that which we cannot behold Augustines wordes as yet that being strengthened by faith it selfe we may be worthie to vnderstand what we beleeue not by the relation of men but by the grace of God himselfe inwardlie confirming and inlightening our mindes So the woman of Samaria Io 4. as a member of the Church did by her kinde of preaching prepare the Samaritanes to the faith of Christ they hauing heard Christ himselfe said to the woman We beleeue no longer because of thy sayings for Io 4. 42 1. Pet. 3. 2. 3. Win them with your conuersation which are without the word we haue heard him our selues and know that this is indeed the Christ the Sauiour of the world By which wordes they plainely testified that they were prepared only by the womans testimonie to embrace the faith and that faith was ingendred in their hearts by the powerfull voice of Christ himselfe Wherefore it is cleere that sometimes this kind of meane and argument as is aforesaide goes before faith is begotten in the heart to prepare vs and sometimes this followes faith for confirmation And sometimes also this kinde of argument goes before faith and followes after it it goes before I say for preparation it followes after for confirmation For the spirit teacheth vs many waies applying himselfe to diuers men in diuers Note well Io. 3. manners as it seemeth good vnto himselfe and as mens infirmities do require And here we be to obserue that there is no absolute necessitie of this secondarie kind of argument which is externall and lesse principall to beget faith in vs. For it ought to suffice vs if the spirit teach vs onely by Gods worde but to helpe our weakenes the same spirit addeth the other secondarie kind of argument as Christ plainly teacheth vs Io. 5. where he sayth the testimonie of Iohn Baptist concerning him was not simply necessarie but that God so prouided to helpe their weakenesse and vnbeliefe ver 33. Iohn gaue testimony to the truth but I desire not the testimonie of man Neuerthelesse these things I speake that ye may be saued And that Iohns testimonie was but a secondarie argument only and that Christs owne record of himselfe was the first he sheweth plainly in the words following ver 36. But I haue a greater witnes then the witnes of Iohn for the works which the Father hath giuen me to finish the same works that I do beare witnes of me that the Father sent me And this is our iudgment concerning this argument whereby we proue the Scripture to be the word of God and our answere to the question wherefore it is so as we auouch it What the Papists thinke in this matter it is easily seene How the Papists proue the scripture to bee Gods word by their words and writings Their iudgement briefly is this The meane and principall argument and in a manner the only way with them to demonstrate the scripture to be Gods word is the testimony of the church not only the catholick as they speak but also those of their church which haue preserued the faith as they speake by contiall successions from the Apostles vnto our times and here they vnderstand principally the Popes who as they say succeeded Peter and his chaire These men will haue the Church the iudge and interpreter of all Scriptures from whose iudgement it may not be lawfull for any man to depart for an appeale to any other iudge And they ascribe this dignity prerogatiue to the testimony of the Church because they will haue the Scripture which is written in the heart of the Church to be the principall Scripture and that we account and esteeme of the voice of the Church as the very liuely voice of God himselfe as if God now spake first principally in his Church and by the voice of his Church If they will haue it so that the voice of the Church bee the primarie voice of God and the primarie Scripture of God it is euident that they deeme the greatest light we haue is to be found in the voice of the Church and the same to be most cleere and demonstratiue not only to vs but also in and by it selfe and therefore that this light inlightens the sacred Scripture not in respect of vs only but in respect of themselues also For which cause one of them hath said that the The blasphemy of Papists Scripture is of no more validity without the authority of the church then AEsops fables For the voice of the church being vnto them the primarie voice of God in all respects for as much as it is liuely and vocall and for this cause both by nature
readest thou saith hee and haue ye not read Haue ye neuer read How is it written Againe the Apostles of Christ for all their assertions bring proofe and testimonies out of the old Testament Apollos was a man mighty in Scriptures He strongly confuted publiquely the Iewes with great vehemency shewing by the Scriptures that Iesus was that Christ Act. 18. 24. 28. The men of Beraea receiued the word with all readinesse and searched the scriptures daily whether those things were so Act. 17. 11. Thus the primitiue Church and the fathers refuted heresies by the Scriptures To conclude this point most memorable is that worthy fact of Constantinus the Great who propounding the Bible to the Fathers assembled in the Nicene councell spake on this manner Here I set before you the writings Euangelicall of the Apostles and the sanctions of the auncient Prophets which can informe vs concerning the sacred law of God To beat back therefore the dint of the sword of the aduersarie let vs learne how to answer all obiections of the aduersarie out of the words which are giuen vs of God by diuine inspiration Lastly this I haue said that the Scripture is in it selfe liuely and vocall for as concerning deafe and dead men that is the naturall neuer taught of God vnto such I say it is but as deade mute Here the aduersaries blaspheme and reply saying that y e sacred scripture is but as a dead letter mute and not able togiue answere to any man not able to decide questions and controuersies in religion And contrarily they glory that the voice of the Church which proceeds from the Scripture as they speake which is in grauen by Gods own Spirit in the hearts of men they boast I say that this is vocall and able to answer the demaunders of all questions appertaining to saluation that this cannot be wrested nor peruerted but euer abides the same in al respects The answer to this calumniation and blasphemy is cleere of that which is before shewed for we made it cleere and manifest that the sacred Scripture is most liuely and vocall in it selfe And whereas controuersies are not so soone decided by the Scriptures the cause is not in Gods word but in men which be either so naturally blind and dull that they cannot heare vnderstand the Scripture speaking answering yea crying in their eares or they be so malitious and obstinate that they will not heare and vnderstand yea that they will full often against their owne conscience wrest the voice of the Scripture into another sense and that to their owne perdition Wherefore we conclude this point that the scripture is in it selfe 2. Pet. 3. and by it selfe most liuely and vocall And further we be to remember that to the end it may speake as a liuely voice vnto vs and to the end we may vnderstand it concerning all controuersies in religion we must vse the meanes before mentioned our very Grāmar Meanes to be vsed for the vnderstanding of the scripture is one speciall instrument for this purpose For our eies eares are opened by such meanes to vnderstand the Scripture and to attend vnto Gods voice speaking in the scripture if it shall seeme good to the holy Ghost to worke effectually by them in our hearts and minds If so be that the spirit worke effectually by the aforesaide meanes then the Scripture shall answer to all controuersies concerning faith and religion with a more cleere liuely intelligible and distinct voice then all the men in the whole Church shall answer who can auouch nothing sound and certaine vnlesse first they haue receiued it from the mouth of the Scripture and answer in the verie words of the scripture For whereas these men say the voice of the Church is liuely and vocall heard of all men and cannot bee peruerted and wrested To this I answer first that the voice of the Church as is aforesaid doth depend on the voice of the scripture Next that the voice of the Church is subiect to errours and change so that they may this day answer one thing and to morrow another and this serues no better in a manner then a Lesbian rule to decide controuersies concerning faith religion As for the church of Rome they haue so long and so corruptly answered concerning faith and religion that they haue caried the world from the truth to lies and errours and infinite heresies that there is now no cause wherefore these men may so put forth to sale the voice and sound of their Church which is become so corrupt and adulterous CHAP. XIII Of the fift property of the Church and of the seuenth controuersie NOw it resteth that we proue that the sacred Scripture is simply most necessarie Here then I say that if by Scripture yee vnderstand the substance and the verie matter contained in the words written it cannot be denied that the scripture is so necessarie that without it there can be no Church in earth for the church is borne and bred not Fift propertie Scripture is most necessarie of mortall but of immortall seede which is the word of God 1. Pet. 1. 23. But if ye vnderstand by the scripture the verie writing and forme of reuelation I say that in this respect also it is so necessarie that without this there cannot be a Church For the liuely voice of God is simply necessarie The scripture after a sort is the liuely voice of God therefore simply necessarie I graunt it that when as the liuely voice of God did sound and was heard in the Church this writing and this forme of reuelation was not then so necessarie but when as God did cease to speake and that the scripture came in place of Gods own voice then the scripture was no lesse necessary then the liuely voice of God For the voice of God must euer be in the Church that the church may haue her being and may continue on the earth yea this voice must be heard by the Church either by it selfe or by that which may best supply the want of the liuely voice of God Before Moses time this voice it selfe was heard after his time this voice sounded and spake in and by the voice and writings of Moses and the Prophets When Christ was come his owne liuely voice was heard After Christs ascension for a time the 2. Cor. 5. 19. 1. Pet. 2. 19. preaching of the Apostles and the bookes of the old Testament were receiued for the liuely voice of God himselfe and of his sonne Iesus Christ Then followed the Apostolicall Scripture which together with the holy scripture of the old Testament continue in the Church to supply not only the liuely voice of the Apostles but also of God and of Christ himselfe By the premisses it is euident y t it is simply necessary at all times that the liuely voice of God sound euer in the Church of God either by it selfe or by this supply which wee
now auouch to be only the sacred Scriptures of the old and new Testament Wherefore we plainly conclude the Scripture is most necessarie The Aduersaries oppose themselues against this assertion as against the former and they denie that the scripture is simply necessarie it is necessary say they that is it is profitable or commodious for the well being of a Church but is not so necessarie for the being nor no such thing as without which the Church can haue no being And for this cause do these men denie the necessitie of the Scripture that they may open the doore to their authoritie and traditions that is to their owne dreames which they say be simply necessary and preferre them before the scripture They are easily answered by the rules before set downe For if by scripture they vnderstand the substance of the scripture it cannot be denied that the scripture is simply necessarie but if they vnderstand not the substance onely but also the verie writing in this respect also we haue shewed it by cleere demonstratiō that the scripture is simply necessarie for that it is vnto vs in place of y e liuely voice of God himselfe Wherfore their assertion is false howsoeuer they take this word Scripture either in this sense or the other But they say the Church wanted the scripture neere two thousand yeares all which time religion was preserued by tradition only Therefore the Scripture is not simply necessarie I answer If you vnderstand by Scripture the verie substance of the couenant then your argument followeth not for the substance of the scripture was in those verie traditions whereby the Church was edified and kept But if by this word ye vnderstand the verie writing then I grant the scripture was not extant so manie yeares and I say that it was not then necessarie for that then the liuely voice of God it selfe was heard If they conclude that because it was not then necessarie therefore it is not now necessarie or that it was not necessarie after that God had commanded it and after that it began to be extant surely the consequence is very euill for as ages and times haue changed so diuers formes of reuelation were necessarie Or we may more briefly set downe this controuersie in this forme THe scripture is necessarie not onely for the well-being as Popish Schoole-men speake but also for the being of the Church Et hactenus est simplex necessitas And this necessitie is in respect of time only for there was not a necessitie of the scripture in all ages I vnderstand The word written not necessary in all ages Heb. 1. 1. 2. by the word Scripture not onely the substance of the written word but also the manner or forme of reuelation but this simple necessitie must bee auouched of the substance and forme of reuelation in diuers respects For the scripture as touching the substance of it was necessarie to the Church in all ages but in respect of the manner of reuealing the same it was necessarie for a certaine time only to wit vntill it seemed good vnto Almightie God to teach his church by the scripture ARG. 1. For the Lord God had not giuen his Church the Scripture if he had not thought it necessarie euū for the being of his Church ARG. 2. The liuely voice of God was necessarie in the time appointed for it ergo the Scripture also is necessary in the time the Lord hath decreed for it for there is but one and the same reason of both ARG. 3. It is necessarie that Gods will be reuealed and communicated to the Church at all times in one forme or other either by Gods own liuely voice or by writing or by both but now the liuely voice of God hath ceased therefore now the word written is necessarie The aduersaries deny this absolute necessitie moued hereunto with these arguments following First from Adam to Moses there was no Scripture Ergo. I answer the Lord God thought it not necessarie for all that time But when as the Lord himselfe began to write and that the 2. Pet. 1. 18. 19. 21. holy men of God were acted and moued by the holie Ghost first Prophets then Apostles then the Scripture began to be necessarie euen simply necessary ARG. 2. From Moses vnto Christ Iob and his friends both beleeued and were saued without the Scripture I answer It is most like these also read the scriptures as may appeare by the Eunuches story Act. 8. Next I answer that so manie as were called without the visible Church God dealt with them in an extraordinary manner ARG. 3. They did more attend the traditions of the Fathers then the written word euen in the second age I answer this is false ARG. 4. In the third age there was no scripture of the new Testament extant for a long season Ergo. I answer the Apostolicall scripture beganne not long after Christ Next all that time I grant it was not necessarie but when the Apostles were dead and when their liuelie voice ceased then began it to be necessary CHAP. XIIII Of the sixt propertie of the Scripture and the eight controuersie THE Scripture is perfect containing in it all things necessarie for faith and manners not onely sufficiently but also abundantly for this is the perfection which heere wee doe auouch The sense then of the Proposition is this This kind of reuelation containes all things c. The proofe is this Argument 1. The liuely voice of God contained all articles or instructions concerning faith and manners Ergo so doth the Scripture The reason of the argument is euident for that nothing in respect of substance was spoken by that liuely voice which is not recorded in the Scripture ARG. 2. If the Scripture contained not all things necessarie perfectly then euill were the condition of our Church and of our time which heareth not the liuely voice of anie man speaking by diuine inspiration nor of any prophet or Apostle ARG. 3. The religious and such as be taught of God haue an holy experience of the sufficiencie of the Scriptures and of the fulnesse of it Adde to these arguments these diuine testimonies Deut. 4. Ye shall not ad to the word that I speake c. Reuel 22. If anie shall adde to these things God shall Vers 18. adde vnto him the plagues which are written in this booke Albeit these sayings are to bee vnderstood properly of particular books yet the same reason serues for all books of the canonicall scripture and surely the reason binds more strongly for if we may not ad to particular books how much lesse is it lawfull to adde to the whole Canon Prou. 30. Thou shalt ad nothing to his words This seemes to be vnderstood of the whole Scripture Matth. 28. Teaching to obserue all things which I commanded you Gal. 1. 8. If we or an Angell from heauen shall preach vnto you another Gospel or otherwise then that which we haue preached vnto you
publike administration of Gods seruice and worship being performed of all or most Churches in one tongue to wit the Latine this might serue well for the preseruation of the vnitie of faith To this I answer this serues notably for the continuance and increase of vnbeleefe and ignorance Againe our verie experience teacheth by Gods good blessing in these times that notwithstanding the great variety of tongues in the reformed Churches yet they agree well to God be praise in the vnitie of faith Next they reason from the little good which hence ensueth as they imagine It profits the people nothing at all that the Scriptures be read in the vulgar tongues for they vnderstand not any sentence of Scripture albeit they know the words To this I answer Euerie one of the vnlearned if they come to heare the Scriptures with Gods feare and reuerence they shall reape and receiue some profit by it Againe from another danger which may happen they reason thus The reading of the Scriptures in a knowne tongue may more hurt then profit the people for deuotion hath rather decreased then increased since publike prayers or seruice of God hath beene celebrated in popular tongues I answer the consequent is not good The sacred Scripture read in the mother tongue hurts manie therfore it is not so to be read at all because accidentally and through the default and corruption of the people it hurts and profits not So the preaching of the Gospell is the sauour of death vnto death vnto manie therefore the Gospell is not to bee preached Furthermore be it knowne that this is no religion nor true pietie which is so coupled with ignorance but a damnable superstition when as the sacred Scriptures are read and prayers administred in a strange and vnknowne tongue Thus far these three Arguments from the finall causes and effects Againe they reason from an inconuenience first on this wise If the scriptures must bee read in the vulgar tongue then translations must bee renewed in euery age for auncient words weare out of vse and this is inconuenient I answere what losse is it if translations be reuised and renewed in euery age for the whole translation needes no renuing but some words which happily are become obsolete and out of vse Againe an other euill which might follow this conclusion is this The Pope vnderstandeth not all vulgar tongues But the publique prayers must be celebrate in a language which the Pope knoweth Ergo. I answere it is not necessarie that prayers be in that tongue which the Pope knoweth This they proue * Vne concesso errore mille consequuntur because he is the vniuersall Bishop And this I deny also Wherefore there is no domage shal follow if publique prayers be contained in a language which the Pope knoweth not And thus far the 2. question The 3. question followeth whether it is lawfull for the lay people as they call them or the vulgar sort to read the holy scriptures We auouch that it is lawfull for euery one euen of the basest of the people to read the holy Scriptures For this point see Deut. 6. Chap. 11. c. and 17. c. Iosh 1. c. and 10. c. 5. Search the Scriptures saith the Lord Christ Acts. 17. the men of Berea searched the Scriptures and for this cause are commended by the holy Ghost Matth. 4. The example of Christ who resisted the Deuill with no other weapons but of the scripture teacheth vs that the scripture ministreth vnto vs such a furniture as euery man must be prouided of to withstand Sathan in his assaults against vs. Lastly this is prooued by the practise of the Church For wherefore were the scriptures in the old church translated into so many popular languages but that they might be read vnderstood of the people And this is our iudgement in few words What say the aduersaries Some yeares past they taught it was not lawfull at all for any of the common and lay people as they vsuallie tearme them to reade the holy Scriptures Afterwards when they saw how odious Vide Censuram Coloniensem this was they changed their minde and now forsooth they say it is lawful to read the scriptures but with conditiō if it be permitted permitted I say of whom They answer by the Pope his Bishops or inquisitors I demaund what of these only They answer not of these only but of them with the aduertisemēt of the parish Priest or confessor Well I vnderstand who be to permit the reading of the holy scripture now I aske to whom is this permitted They answer not to all indifferently but only to such as the parish Priest whom they call the Curate shall well discerne both by their confession and by their whole cariage of their life to be a true Catholick that is a stubborne or stiffe-necked Papist I see then to whom they yeeld thus far the reading of the scriptures I demand in the next place what translations be allowed them They answer they will not haue them to read all translations indifferently but such only as some Catholicks haue published such as at this day the English Rhemish translation of the New Testament is Thus far briefly of that permission which hath so decreed the condition of this libertie of reading the scriptures And this is their meaning according to the decree of Pius Quartus the Pope which decree is confirmed also by the councel of Trent commended by the Rhemists in the preface of their English translation And this is Bellarmines iudgment who differeth in words only a little from the former popish assertion but in matter and purpose is the same in effect for what difference is there if there be no permission at all to be thus permitted with such a condition as is aforeshewed And thus of the 3. question and as touching the controuersies which are moued at this day concerning holy scripture I remember not any that we haue left vntouched We haue therefore spoken of the word of God which is the word of both couenants as also of the sacred scripture which is a certaine meane wherby it pleased God to manifest his word and wil vnto men It resteth now that wespeake of sinne and of mans miserie CHAP. XXIIII Of sinne in generall THE common place of sin as also the former before handled is subalterne to the place or generall head of our calling For calling is the transferring of a man out of the state of sin What our calling is and miserie into the state of righteousnesse and happinesse Therefore we shall speake of sinne first in generall after we shall come vnto his kindes or partes The name of sin signifies a certaine thing compounded of his owne matter and forme The matter of sinne to speake thereof in the first place is a certaine being or thing that is and that being is not a substance but an accident and What sin is that is either a qualitie or action and this
truth receiued from his Fathers notwithstanding he became an Apostata and an Idolater as is manifest by the historie Next there was an intermission also when the people liued in Egypt for from the death of the Sonnes of Iacob euen to the departure out of Egypt Ezechiel testifieth Chapter 20. that al the people were fallen frō God to the Idols of the Egyptians Lastly there was an intermission from Malachy the last of the Prophets vntil Iohn Baptist in all which time no Prophet was raised vp notwithstanding the word of God was cōtinued amongst the people of y e Iewes by high Priests and the ordinary ministery but not without corruptions so that at the comming of Christ for the more part the doctrine of truth was now corrupted Q. Ought not the liuely voice of God which is not subiect to errour bee continued in the Church vntil the comming of VVhether a liuely voice not subiect to error continues til Christ Christ because you said that this liuely voice did continue in the Church till the comming of the Apostles only A. The liuely voice of Christ continues in the Church I confesse but not the liuely voice either of God or of extraordinary men such as were the Fathers Prophets and Apostles but only the liuely voice of ordinary men of pastours and doctors who both may erre do erre whensoeuer they depart neuer so little from the prescript word of the Prophets and Apostles Q. But God hath giuen a greater measure of his holie spirit to his Church which now is vnder Christ then euer he gaue to the old Church Therefore if in the old Church there was a liuelie voice which could not erre how much more shall there be now in the Church of Christ a liuelie voice which cannot erre A. It is true indeed that together with this full reuelation which is cōtained in the writings of the Apostles a more full spirit was giuen to the Church of Christ which now is then was giuen to the the old Church But hence it followeth not that either the Church or the Pastors and doctors in the Church are so gouerned with that Spirit that they cannot at all erre in deliuering the truth For this was the extraordinarie gift of the holy Ghost which was giuen but for a time but the gift of the Spirit which was giuen to the Church of Christ since the times of the Apostles is ordinarie and perpetuall to wit the gift of sanctification illumination and regeneration Q. The Church then which now is seemes to be in a worse case then the old Church was which had the liuely voice of God of men which could not erre A. That doth not follow for this Scripture of the Prophets and Apostles which nowe the Church hath doth not erre in doctrine and containes also a most full and most cleare reuelation of the truth Q. Albeit I should graunt the condition of our Church to better then of that old Church which was before Moses and which had the tradition and vse onely of the liuely voice and that verie imperfect and obscure notwithstanding I see not how the Church was not in better case which was after Moses euen to the comming of Christ as hauing not onely the vse of tradition and of a liuelie voice but also of the Propheticall Scripture as a light shining in a dark place A. Truly that Church had both that is both the sound of a liuely voice and of the Scripture and written word of God but neither perfect and absolute But this Scripture which our Church alone hath containes a most full and plaine reuelation for euen one forme or maner and kind of reuelation which is perfect and full must be more excellent then two which are both imperfect or which containe an imperfect reuelation of the truth Q. But there is no man who would not say it were better with this our Church if it had some liuelie voice which in speaking and answering to all controuersies might not erre A. They haue Moses the Ptophets and Apostles that is the writings of Moses of the Prophets and of the Apostles and those truely not onely sufficient but most perfect whēce only if they cānot learne the truth by thē and decide and end all controuersies they will not be instructed with the liuely voyce of anie extraordinary man howbeit as I haue said before the liuely voice was to continue onely so long in the Church as some thing was wanting to the full declaration of the mystery of Christ So that if now there should be any need of the liuely voice either of God or of some extraordinarie man in the Church of Christ that truly should plainely argue that the reuelation of the truth and mysterie of Christ is not perfect as yet nor accomplished Q. You conclude then that since the Apostles time there hath beene no liuelie voice heard in the Church which could not erre A. Yea truely Q. Whie did a liuelie voice not subiect to errour continue in the Church all that time which was from Adam to the Apostles A. To speake nothing of the will of God with the which alone we ought to rest contented first the condition of the Church did require this continuance then the measure of the reuelation that then was Q. Whie the condition of the Church A. Because the visible Church in all that time which was from Adam to the Apostles was both in place more streight as being shut vp in one family or in one nation was by reason of age weaker or not so wel growne For the Church before Christ if I may so speake was either as a child or as a young man Q. What then A. The liuely voice doth more easily reach or extend it selfe to a Church which is in place more streight and to the Saints fewer in number the church being as yet vnexpert by reason of the age of it and lesse growne had neede of the liuely voice of a teacher none otherwise then children haue neede of the liuely voice of a maister who as it were stammereth with them but after the comming of Christ when the Church was sufficiently instructed by the liuely voice of Christ and of his Apostles and now come to mans estate there was no more heard anie liuely voice either of God or of men extraordinarie Q. Whie did the measure of Reuelation require this A. Because all that time which was from Adam to the Apostles there remained as yet some thing more clearely and more manifestly to be reuealed and the reuelation of the doctrine was in seuerall ages made more manifest still as pertaining to the substance of it and so long as some thing remained to be more clearely reuealed so long a liuely voice was to continue for euerie new reuelation ought first to begin with a liuely voice Q. Seeing that the last and most full reuelation was by the liuelie voice of Christ and his Apostles hath there euer since
time after this he added the writings of the Apostles And when as the mystery of our saluation was fully reuealed by that liuely voice first and then that full reuelation was written euer since there hath beene no more vse of the liuely voice of any extraordinarie Prophet or Apostle But the Scriptures written first by the Prophets and after by the Apostles remained only without any liuely voice which could not erre Q. Where must wee begin to count the third age of the Church A. Not so much from the comming of Christ and the sending of his Apostles to all nations as from that time when the Apostles ceased to speake with liuely voice aswel to the Iewes as to the Gentiles for euen then the Church catholick came to mans estate full growth and then the Church began to vnderstand and to learne the wil of God by the written word as being a more accurate and perfect manner of reuelation The time then which was frō the cōming of Christ vntil the death of the Apostles was as it were a passage from the middle age of the church vnto the ful growth ripenes of the same Q. I vnderstand what you say cōcerning the causes of additiō of the written word to the liuely voice of the seuerall ages of the Church now I would haue you speake some thing concerning the scripture or of the writing of Gods word A. I will do so Q. What then call you writing or Scripture A. I call scripture or writing the second kind of reuelation whereby God either by himselfe or by the meanes of men extraordinarily reuealed those things which already had beene deliuered by liuely voice before to wit in that first kind of reuelation Q. Who then were they who euer since the beginning haue written A. First God himselfe next men Moses the Prophets and the Apostles Q. This kind of reuelation which was by writing was it not subiect to error like as that kind which was by a liuely voice A. No truly for concerning that which God himselfe did write there is no question and touching men they were so extraordinarily inspired and gouerned by the spirit of God that in writing they could not erre at all Q. When began it then to be written A. In Moses time Q. How long did the word written continue in the Church A. The scripture or the act of writing continued from Moses euen to the Apostles all which time there was almost no age wherein extraordinarily some one was not stirred vp who in deliuering the doctrine of truth by writing could not erre Q. You thinke otherwise of the scripture it selfe then of the act of writing A. I do so for the scripture it self or that which is now written by Moses the Prophets and Apostles yet continues in the Church and shall continue vnto the second comming of Christ Q. Was there any intermission of writing the word from Moses vnto the Apostles A. There was for it appeareth in all that time which was frō Malachy to Iohn the Baptist none was stirred vp either Prophet or writer inspired by God for the books of the Machabees be not giuen by inspiration as we shal shew hereafter Q. You said that writing continued in the Church vntil the time of the Apostles ought it not then to continue euen vnto the end A. Like as since the Apostles time there is no liuely voice heard in the Church which can be said to be so goned by the holy Ghost that it can not erre at all So since the Apostles nothing is written in the church which may worthily be called or said to be giuen by inspiration Q. What then do you think of so many writings of godly and learned men which haue been published since the times of the Apostles from time to time to the great good and profit of the Church A. Verely I thinke of the writings of Pastors and Doctors in the Church as I think of their preaching to wit that both be subiect to errour and neither is so gouerned by the holy Ghost but that in deliuering the truth of God they may erre Q. It seemeth then that the condition of the Church which is since the time of the Apostles is not so good as hauing neither the liuely voice as is afore said nor the writings as now you speak of those very mē who in deliuering the truth cannot erre A. It hath the scriptures of the prophets and Apostles which as pertaining to the substance of reuelation is full and as touching the kind forme of reuelation it is giuē by inspiration not subiect to error out of the which scripture whosoeuer do not learne all things which are necessary to faith and saluation assuredly such would not receiue from the mouth of God himself openly speaking in an audible and intelligible voice the doctrine and instructon of faith and saluation Q. Wherefore did the Lord so continue to record his will by The cause of the continuance of writing Gods word writing in the Church all that time which was from Moses to the Apostles A. There are the same causes of the continuance thereof as are of the addition of the liuely voice vnto writing For both the condition of the church and the measure of reuelation required the same Q. Why the condition of the Church A. Because the church continually increased and grew as in number so in knowledge Q. What then A. The greater number and riper knowledge do require this that the word be written Q. Why the measure of reuelation A. Because the reuelation of the doctrine of saluation was from time to time made more cleare and manifest euen vnto the times of Christ of his Apostles at which time it was in the end compleate and perfected For it was meete that euery reuelation manifested more cleerely fully should be recorded in writing to this end that it might be surely kept and deliuered to posterities Q. Can ye gather by these things the vse of the continuance The vse of writing of scripture in the Church of God A. Yea truly Q. What is then the vse of it A. To passe by the conseruation of the purity of doctrine the first vse was in respect of the Church for the instructiō thereof as being now in place more ample large in knowledge more perfect Secondly it was in respect of the reuelation of the doctrine it selfe that it might cōprehend and keepe it more fully and cleerely Q. By this vse of scripture or writing which you giue it seemes that this kind of reuelation which is by writing is somewhat more perfect high as that which is best agreeing fitting to persons and things that are more perfect A. It is euen so Q. Thus far then forwriting or scripture now I would haue you declare something vnto me concerning the subiect of this writing of the matter it selfe which is written A. As touching the substance the very same is
written which was before deliuered by the liuely voice Q. I pray you speak in order vnto me of the subiect or argument in scripture written first by God himself secondly by mē by Moses the Prophets and Apostles A. I will do so Q. What then hath God written A. The sum of the doctrine of the couenant of works of the law euen the very same which he had deliuered first by a liuely voice to the Fathers and to Moses Q. What hath Moses written A. All the celestiall doctrine which he had receiued partly of the fathers by tradition partly of God himselfe Moses books who spake mouth to mouth with him for so the scripture speaketh partly he had learned of the holy Ghost by an inward inspiration to speake in a word whatsoeuer had happened to him and to all the people in his life time for the space of 100. and 20. yeares all these things he committed to writing and gaue to the people Q. Did Moses then write what soeuer true doctrine was deliuered from the beginning of the world to that time A. Moses omitted no point of true doctrine which at any time had bene deliuered concerning either faith or manners for from the beginning vntil that very time one and the same doctrine of truth as touching the substance was taught full and whole in all ages The difference only was in the measure of the reuelation of it that it is accidentall Moses deliuered this doctrine fully and wholy by liuely voice more cleerely and manifestly then euer before then after this it was recorded in writing Q. What did the Prophets write who followed Moses euerie one in their time and order A. The same and all as touching the substance which Moses had written before the difference only was herein that euery one by reuelation did adde a more cleare manifest interpretation as the bright morning starre did approch more neere Q. What haue the Apostles written after the Prophets A. All and the same which from the beginning of the world in al ages before them was both by liuely audible voice deliuered and written they first also by a liuely voice deliuered the same and after committed it to writing Q. Doe you then make no difference betwixt the writings of the Prophets and of the Apostles A. In the matter and substance none in the clearenes and perspicuity thereof very great for the scripture of the Apostles conteineth the same reuelation of the mystery which was declared from the beginning of the world but most fully and most clearely Q. I haue heard you speake concerning both kinds of reuelation considered without comparison now I would haue you to compare together the liuely voice writing that by comparison it may appeare whether is of greater dignity authority A. I will compare them together the liuely voice and scripture are compared either in respect of substance and matter is selfe which is reuealed by these meanes or in respect of the kinds of y e reuelatiō of it If cōparison be made in regard of the matter or substance they must needes be both equall alike seeing that the matter in either is one and the same but if you compare the kinds of reuclation together it cānot truly be denied but that the first better place is due to the liuely voice seeing that the liuely voice is both in respect of time more auncient was before the organs or instruments thereof for the mouth is an instrument more worthy to be preferred before the hand and is a kind of teaching more familiar more fit for the capacity of such as are more rude ignorant Albeit also in some respects writing is to be preferred before the liuely voice For it is a more perfect accurate kind of reuelation fit to instruct those that are more perfect to keepe the truth more firmely In the meane while it cānot be denied but y t in other respects they are both alike for they haue both spoken written the same thing in the same manner to wit as being guided moued by the holy Ghost inspired of God 2. Pet. 1. 21. 2. Tim. 3. 16. To conclude seeing that now the liuely voice by the wil of God hath ceased and in the place of it the scripture hath succeeded so that whole dignity of the liuely voice before mentioned is and ought worthily to be ascribed and referred vnto the scripture or written word of God Q Doe you meane then that the Prophetical Apostolical scripture ought to be now in as great account with vs as the liuelie voice of God himselfe and of extraordinarie men was in times past A. I meane so and in his kinde of reuelation alone I willingly rest as in that which came by inspiratiō from God so long vntill I shall heare at his glorious comming that liuely and most sweete voice of Christ my Sauiour when he shall say to them who shall be at his right hand Come ye blessed of my Father inherit the kingdome prepared for you from the beginning of the world To whom be all praise for euer Amen To God only wise be praise through Jesus Christ for euer Amen
and to vs most manifest it followeth according to their iudgement that it yeelds light vnto the Scripture not only in respect of vs but also in respect of the Scripture it selfe yet is it in verity but a certaine secondary Scripture and a certaine secondary voice For as they auouch it the voice of the Church is as Gods owne voice sounding from heauen seruing to confirme the voice of the Scripture which now is but mans voice only and to ratifie and make authenticall the very Scripture as being written but by certaine Scribes and published onely by the hands of men This must bee the consequent of their principles or conclusion of their premisses albeit other men be of another iudgment As for our selues like as we denie the conclusion which they inferre vpon the former principles so we reiect also their very principles For we denie refuse their first ground to wit that the voice of the Church is to be accounted the liuely voice of God himselfe and that the Scripture written in the heart of the Church is to be accounted for that scripture which was written by the very finger of God And we affirme that the only propheticall and apostolical scripture is to be esteemed as the liuely voice of God we auouch it I say that this Propheticall and Apostolicall scripture only serueth vs in steed of that scripture which was written by Gods owne finger We adde also that the sacred Scripture is vnto vs a booke of reuelation of those diuine mysteries which were hidden in Gods owne breast from eternitie for this is the very will of God that we attend on him speaking in the scripture as it were in his owne liuely voice They haue saith he Moses and the Prophets Luk. 16. vers 29. that is the bookes of Moses and the prophets And God will not haue this scripture in no lesse account then that scripture which hee wrote in times past with his owne finger in tables of stone The voice of the Church I meane the true Church not the lying papisticall synagogue is but as the voice of the handmaide or as the voice of a crier which is to publish and to proclaime that voice of God full of excellencie speaking in the scripture But the scripture in the heart of the Church that is the Maximes of Gods truth written in the hearts of the faithfull they be nothing els but a certaine secundarie scripture taken out by the holy ghost out of that primarie and most sacred scripture and ingrauen in the minds of men For how much think you of that ful measure of the Propheticall Apostolicall scripture is there taken forth and ingrauen in our minds I say that if all mens hearts were bound together yet all they could not comprehend all those things fully and perfectly which be recorded in the Propheticall and Apostolicall scriptures For the catholicke Church so long as it is conuersant on the earth is not capable of al that light which shineth in the sacred scriptures of y e apostles the prophets Let their first principle be thus beaten downe and their Corolatie or second conclusion to wit that the voice of the Church is most manifest both in it selfe and vnto vs will fall to the ground of it owne accord and so both principles being shaken their conclusion which they inferre is of no strength to stand but must fall away CHAP. IX Of the first proprietie of the sacred Scripture WE are now to proceed and to make it manifest that the holy scripture is of greatest antiquitie and this is the first proprietie The 1. propriety of the scripture most ancient before ascribed to the Scripture Here first we be to find out the diuers acceptations of this word Scripture This word Scripture may be taken either for the matter onely and Acceptation of the word scripture the very substance which is contained in the words and letters or not only for the matter and substance but also for the verie writing it selfe or the forme wherein that substance is expressed and set before vs. Now if by this word Scripture ye vnderstand the verie substance it selfe it is without all controuersie that the Scripture is most ancient because it is the substance of those diuine oracles which not only Patriarches and Prophets haue spoken but also God himselfe vttered which things also were hidden in Gods mind from eternitie But if yee vnderstand by this word not onely the substance but the very writing and in this respect also the scripture may be said to be most ancient For as touching the Propheticall and Apostolicall scriptures in respect also of the writing and manner of reuealing of them as wee said often before it is Gods will that we so esteeme them not onely as the liuely voice of the Prophets and Apostles nor onely as the liuely voice of God himselfe or as a booke written with his owne hand as the Decalogue was set downe with his owne finger in tables of stone but also that we so accept them as the very mysteries and if I may so speake as the verie diuine notions which were ingrauen in Gods owne mind from eternitie To cleare this point a little The veritie kept secret in Gods mind from eternitie was in time manifested manie wayes or in diuers formes for it was reuealed partly by the liuely voice of God himself partly by the voice of the Patriarches Prophets and Apostles to passe by Angels in silence and partly also by the scripture which was written by the Prophets and Apostles The liuely and immediate voice of God did cease long since neither haue we that copie which God himselfe wrote the Patriarches How to esteem of the written word of God also the Prophets and y e Apostles haue ceased to speake the writings only of the Prophets and Apostles remaine to this day Wherefore this we hold as necessary vnto faith that we accept these writings or books first in steed of the liuely voice of the Prophets and Apostles 1 Next in place of the liuely voice of God himself 2 Thirdly of the Scripture written with Gods owne finger 3 Fourthly and lastly as that holy veritie and diuine mysteries 4 which are recorded in Gods owne breast which Oracles being simply without comparison of greatest antiquitie it is very manifest that the Propheticall and Apostolicall scripture is after a sort most ancient For what may be auouched of the liuely voice of God himselfe or of the Oracles of his mind the same in some respect may be said of the scripture supplying vnto vs their defect For Substance of the scripture simply most ancient if I may truly say in some sort the scripture is the liuely voice of God himselfe doe I not as truly speake also in like manner the scripture is most ancient for as much as the voice of God is most ancient But it shall suffice vs to commend the antiquitie of scripture to
holy scripture as by conference of places of the scripture 2 either the very same or the like in sense and phrase partly 3 from els where as of the common places of diuinitie 4 of the testimonie of the Church of the Grammar it selfe 5 specially the Hebrue and Greeke and good rules and 6 helpes are had from Rhetoricke and Logicke which teacheth vs to consider not onely of simple arguments set apart 7 but also of the disposition and connexion of arguments bound and knit together in Axiomes or propositions in syllogisme and methode For Logicke teacheth vs the coherence of Antecedents and consequents which serueth not a little for the vnfolding and opening of hard places And to passe ouer other things some little insight in Ethickes and Physickes c. may giue some helpe hereunto But aboue all things we must remember to put vp vnto God contiuall and feruent prayers to open and to enlighten our minds by his holie Spirit If men obserue these meanes for the interpretation and vnderstanding of the Scriptures and hard places of the Scripture we shal not lightly erre from the truth of God Here fume the aduersaries and endeuour to proue by The drift of Papists in affirming the scriptures to be obscure manie arguments that the Scriptures in themselues and of themselues are obscure euen in those places which are necessarie and appertaine to saluation to this end and purpose forsooth to withdraw mens minds from reading the Scriptures that they may attend and trust to their dreames and that they may obtrude their glosses on the Church euen what please them what for the most part they preferre before the text it selfe writhing as it were and drawing rather the text of Scripture to be their glosse then giuing any light of interpretation by or from the text it selfe And heere they contend against vs with testimonie first of the Scriptures themselues next of the Doctors and Fathers of the Church lastly with arguments of their owne all which may easily be answered if we obserue well the grounds before set downe It shall suffice vs now to heare onely one or two of their arguments refuted They demaund whether for these Scriptures now extant of the old and new Testament we haue no need of commentaries which are now in the world verie manie written by manie men I answer that the diuine Scriptures of themselues haue no need of the comments and interpretations of men for the Scriptures we account thē to be the liuely voice of God himselfe and what is there that can make this voice of God more cleere and euident in it selfe Can either man or Angell speake anie thing more cleerely then God himselfe or doth God purposely affect obscuritie both which to auoch is verie blasphemous As for the Commentaries or expositions Commentaries of the godly learned which haue spent some good time in the Scriptures of God we graunt they helpe the ignorant and the common sort very much and that they serue well to dispell the clouds of our naturall corruption But this may seeme a greater question and more doubtful touching the preaching of Gods word and the expounding of the Scriptures by Pastors and preachers in the publike assemblies whether preaching be not necessarie I meane the liuely preaching of Pastors and teachers I answer the Scriptures of God which we account as the liuely voice of God haue no need of this meanes in themselues I say that God and his word in themselues need neither this preaching nor interpretation of the scriptures But the necessitie of the ministery and of preaching is only in respect of vs and of our blindnesse and ignorance which be but as children yea as infants in a manner all the dayes we liue on earth Ephe. 4. 1. Cor. 13. And when as we shall become men in the world to come then shall we haue neede of no such ministerie for we shal rest contented being filled with that The state of the elect in heauen onely light of God and of Christ without any further instruction of men or Angels And thus farre of the second propertie of the Scripture and of the fourth controuersie CHAP. XI Of the third propertie of the sacred Scripture whereof ariseth the fift controuersie THE third propertie of the sacred Scripture is this It is most * Simplicissima plaine and pure whether ye respect words or phrase neither hath it any ambiguitie or doubtfulnesse in it This property differs frō the former herein for that whereas perspicuitie extendes it selfe and concernes words and matter this simplicitie or plainnesse as I may so speake is of words only This we auouch then that the sacred Scripture is of it selfe most single and plaine voide of all ambiguitie and Circumlocution by speech Amphibologie or that it contayneth nothing doubtfull in one place which is not expressed in another if there be any obscuritie in it For the word of the Lord and his spirit be euer single and sincere neither doth God at any time speake to catch men with ambiguous and doubtfull speeches as doe Diuels and Sophisters but to teach men his holy truth For the spirit of truth leadeth vs into all truth Io. 16. 13. And the Scripture is giuen of God by inspiration is the very word of God as is before shewed Wherefore if we will not offer God extreame iniurie we must necessarily graunt that the Scripture in it self is most plaine and * If the scriptures seeme doubtful condemne thine owne sinne and corruption simple in sense and signification I say the Scripture in it selfe is plaine as touching the sense for if there be any ambiguitie in any words of scripture that diuersitie or darknesse may not be imputed to the Scripture but to the blindnes and ignorance of men euen of such also which do not of any euil purpose of hart peruert the Scripture For there be many which impiously wrest the same to the one side and the other when as they know right well notwithstanding the sense of the same Scripture is onely one plaine and euident To approue this plainenesse and simplicitie of the Scriptures first the Son of God himselfe in his disputations against Sathan and all his aduersaries borroweth hence his weapons by his owne example recommending the sacred scriptures to all men Next after him the Apostles and their successors and the Fathers themselues haue drawen their arguments from the sacred scriptures against Heretickes both for confirmation of truth and confutation of error The aduersaries here contend against this property of the sacred scripture and they hold that that is doubtfull ambiguous and blasphemously report that it hath a nose A lutae instar of waxe and may be turned here and there For which cause they affirme it is the book of Heretiques that of it spring heresies and that al men seeke to maintaine their errors by it But these blasphemies are easily
answered by that which is before shewed For this ambignitie and flexiblenesse is not to be imputed to the scripture which is giuen of God by diuine inspiration and serueth vs in steede of Gods owne voice but must be ascribed either to the ignorance or malice or malapertnesse of men who either cannot apprehend the simple true sense of scripture or malitiouslie peruert and turne the same into a strange sense Here they obiect that the scripture is full of tropes allegories Ob. parables words of diuers significations amphibologicall sentences visions all which haue their ambiguity I answer that this matter may the better be cleered we are to looke a little more soundly into it The A. ambiguity which is contrarie vnto simplicity being in the words and not in the matter for the words are ambiguous and not the matter Let vs reduce all ambiguity 5. Principall heads which is in the words vnto 5. principall heads For first there bee simple or common words of diuers acceptations secondlie there bee tropicall or figuratiue words thirdly there be whole speeches or sentences which carry a doubtfull signification fourthly there be allegorical speeches consisting of the continuation of tropes fiftly there be also typicall words and sentences concerning types and figures Of all these this I say generally that in all such places the holy Ghost hath but one only simple sense and meaning For as touching words of diuers significations if any such words be found in scripture in the originals Hebrue and Greeke as that can not be otherwise but there must be such in the scriptures first I say that such words haue but one signification only in such places and that the holy Ghost purposeth and intendeth but one thing by them For the holy Ghost desireth not to vse any fallacion or sophistication Next I answer that wee may deprehend that one signification and that one plaine How to vnderstand a doubtfull worde Phrase or sentence in scripture meaning of the word we desire to finde either by the drift of the holy Ghost in that place or text where any such word is or by conference of other places of Scripture where the like worde is to be found or by other Scriptures expressing the same sense and matter in other words or by obseruation of Grammaticall accidents accents points or pricks and such like And where we find tropes and words borowed and drawn from their proper and natiue signification in any text of scripture I say that there such words are vsed by y e holy ghost purposely to expresse in a more significant and liuely manner but one sense and meaning As where it is saide this is my body by the Metonymie which is in the word body the spirit speaketh more significantly then if he had said This is a signe of my body For by that metonymicall phrase the holy Ghost plainly auoucheth the sacramentall vnion which is of the signe and of the thing signified Next I say if the trope seeme somewhat obscure and strange that ye may finde the signification of the same trope by a word of proper signification either in the same scripture or in some other scripture where the like trope may be found If ye meet in scripture with a sentence seeming ambiguous A sentence in scripture seeming ambiguous first be wel assured that Gods spirit doth not purposely speake doubtfully as sophisters do but hath euer one single and plaine meaning but men doe both giue and receiue an euill construction of the context either ignorantly or malitiously Next I say that other places of scripture do more cleerly set forth the selfe same matter Finally if you find allegories in scripture of them this I affirme that first they serue for illustratiō next that they haue but one signification or sense and the same is either manifest and needeth no further exposition or if it be obscure it is more cleerly expressed some where else in the scripture And as for scriptures concerning types I say of them also first that they haue but one signification and A typicall speech in scripture signify types only and not also the matters signified by them next that one very sense of the types is applyed to signify another thing that is the body it self for the types themselues cary in them the signification of the things signified and shadowed by the types and not the words themselues which are vsed to set forth the types for in that historie recorded Gal. 4. this name Sarah signifieth Abrahams wife that is the type only next the type signifieth the couenant that is the thing shadowed figured and signified by the type And thus farre of the third property and fift controuersie CHAP. XII Of the Fourth propertie and Sixt controuersie THis we say also cōcerning the sacred scripture that it is most effectuall most liuely and most vocall sounding to euery man an answer of all things necessarie vnto saluation The life which here I vnderstād is not any fleshly or carnal life as the life of man but that spirituall life as the life of God and by a liuely voice I meane a spirituall voice speaking not so much to the eare as to the minde of man For first if ye respect the substance of this diuine reuelation this which I auouch is without all controuersie For the scripture containes in it the word of God which is liuely powerfull c. Heb. 4. Next in respect of the forme of the reuelation thereof that is the very writing of God this is euident in like manner for it was giuen and written by diuine inspiration and whatsoeuer is of this kinde must necessarily be in it selfe both liuely and spirituall Againe this Scripture is vnto vs if not the liuely voice of God yet certainly in stead thereof For we haue none other liuely voice of God but this for as for the voice of the Church pastors and teachers in the Church the same may erre neither may it properly be called the voice of God The voice of God we must auouch of it that it is a liuely voice ergo c. Thirdly the very Scripture speaks of it selfe as hauing a liuely voice as we may reade Rom. 9. The Scripture saith c. Againe Esaias Scripture is said to crie concerning Israel Rom. 9. 27. Fourthly so many as propound questions of any matter necessarie to saluation be sent to it Esaie S. Should not a people inquire at their God from the liuing to the dead Turne rather to the law to the testimonie If they speake not according to this word there is no morning light in them Againe the Sonne of God himselfe so often as any propounded questions vnto him of the law of diuorcement of the Sabboth of the Messias of regeneration and of the resurrection or how to attaine eternall life he alwaies gaue them answer out of the sacred Scripture and euer he sends such as moue any such doubts vnto the Scripture How
of this sinne Heb. 6. 4. and 10. 26. 27. the Apostle calling it an apostasy or backslyding from God It is so also described 2. Pet. 2. 20. And 1. Io 5. 16. It is called a sinne vnto death As for the other kinds of this sin before specified some of them are consequently of this sin which we call a blasphemie and appertaine vnto it for desperation and final impenitency are the punishments of this sinne Obstinacie is in the very nature of this sinne for it caries with it an obstinate maliciousnesse And as for the other kinds I cannot see how they may be called sins against the holy Ghost for as for presumption what is it els but hypocrisie To Presumption repine at the graces of God in our brethren is a sinne against our neighbour and against the second table of the law Therefore let this rest that there is but one sin against the holy Ghost so called to wit the blasphemy against the holy Ghost or an apostasy from the grace of the spirit once receiued for these are one and the same to blaspheme against the holy Ghost and to fall from grace receiued Notwithstanding I deny not but that this sin which is but one in substance may haue his increase or growth for then it is come to a height when as it fighteth against all the known truth which is according to godlinesse Next we say that this one sinne is impardonable not for that it is seldome and hardly pardoned but for that it is neuer pardoned because such a one can neuer repent him of his sinne that he hath committed For this mans heart groweth to such a hardnesse and that by Gods iust iudgment as can neuer after be mollified And that this sin is simply impardonable is manifest by y e very words of the lord in y e gospel before cited for where it is sayd in Matth. it shall not be forgiuen him neither in this world nor in the world to come and in Mark This sinne is neuer forgiuen but is culpable of eternall damnation Do not these words cut off all hope of pardon So as I cannot but wonder at the Rhemists so impudently to extenuate Rhemists impudency 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the force of the words of the lord To the Heb. 6. he saith it is impossible that he which so sinneth should be renued by repentance then he addeth a waighty cause and most necessarie for sayth he This man crucifieth againe to himselfe the Sonne of God that is as much as in him lyeth Which point the better to conceiue it we must know there is a difference betweene all other sinnes and this sin against the holy Ghost as touching the remission and expiation of them For to expiat all other sinnes the sacrifice of Christ once offered is sufficient for them all and the vertue thereof extendeth it selfe to purge all sinnes for euer But when a man hath once sinned against the holy Ghost and profaned that pretious bloud the vertue thereof will neuer after be effectual for the expiation of his sin Wherefore he stands in neede of some new sacrifice to purge his sinne which thing shal neuer be granted him For if this were graunted then must Christ be crucified againe or some other sacrifice must be offered but neither can Christ be crucifyed againe neither can any other sacrifice bee offered for him as it is written Heb. 10. 26. For there remaineth no more sacrifice for sinnes Therefore this sin can neuer be expiat because a new sacrifice can neuer be giuen for it And this is the cause of the impossibility of the pardon of this sinne The aduersaries namely the Rhemists in their obseruations on this place do thus interpret this impossibilitie they say there is a double repentance or renuing or purging of sinne They say the first is easie and light in and by Baptisme where say they all the sinnes before Baptisme are purged by that light washing of baptisme The second they call penance or the purging of sinnes Popish sacrament of penanc as they say by the sacrament of Penance and in this Sacrament as they speake such sinnes are purged which are committed after baptisme and this is hard and painfull as consisting of fastings prayers satisfactions and other corporall afflictions If you graunt them this distinction then they say this impossibilitie of being renewed is in respect of that repentance renewing and purging of sinne which is in baptisme For they say it is impossible that a sinne committed after Baptisme some baptisme being iterated should be purged for we may not be rebaptized As for the latter penance and renewing they say there is a possibility in it For the greatest sinne after baptisme may be expiat by it Therefore they affirme the Apostle speakes couertly to such as sinne after baptisme sending them to the Sacrament of Penance that by vertue of that Sacrament their sinne may be expiat and that they may be renewed But by this their interpretation 2. Pet. 3. 16 they peruert the holy Scripture to their owne destruction For this is certaine that the Apostle here takes away all possibilitie of being renewed as the reason annexed manifestly proueth Finally it is euident by that place of Iohn before cited that this sinne is impardonable and that this is proper to that sin that it can by no meanes be pardoned For Iohn saith we may not pray for that sinne If we may not pray for it there is no hope of repentance or pardon for it I know what the Rhemists heere would say to wit that by this sinne vnto death we must vnderstand finall impenitencie finall impenitencie is not remitted because here wants repentance and therfore we may not pray for such a one after his death for he died in impenitency contemning the Sacrament of Penance But they affirme it to be lawfull to pray for other sinnes after death This againe is to peruert Scripture for the Apostle speaketh not of prayer to be or not to be after his death which hath so sinned but that prayer must not bee conceiued for him whilest he liueth after that it hath manifestly appeared vnto the church by infallible arguments that such a one hath sinned vnto death As for Iulian the Apostata for whom the Church prayed not while he liued yea it prayed against him in his life time after it was clearely discerned that hee had sinned vnto death that is had blasphemed against the holy Ghost I passe ouer that place of Peter before cited where the Apostle speakes of no difficultie but of a meere impossibilitie of being renewed of repentance and of remission of sinnes where it is said Their latter state is worse then the first and as it followeth but it hath happened vnto him as it is in the true prouerbe the dog hath returned to his owne vomit and the sow to her wallowing in the mire And thus farre of this second controuersie and so much shal suffice concerning sinne
record of man as Christ himselfe testifieth 10. 5. And thus farre of the 1. controuersie CHAP. VIII How it may appeare that the scripture is the worde of God THE second controuersie is by what argument may it appeare that the scripture is the word of God Like as then the first question was this whether the Scripture bee Gods worde So the question in hand is this how and by what euideÌ„ce this may appeare that the Scripture is Gods word To this I answer on this manner That we haue no need simplie of any other light or of any one speciall euidence to demonstrate this matter but that very light which is in the Scripture For the Scripture being the first and immediat word of God is of authoritie sufficient in it selfe * Scriptura est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so likewise of it selfe mâ—st cleere and euident and the onely cause of al that light which is in the Church and in the harts of men For like as the light of the sun is not perceiued nor to be seene by meanes of any S. other light for that it so far exceeds al other bodily external Note light So that spirituall light of the Scripture hath no need in it selfe of any other light to set forth the same for that of all spiritual lights to inlighten the mind withal it is the most bright and most beautifull in the world But whereas euidences and demonstrations be here demanded for the proofe of this matter to confirme the Scripture to be Gods word that is to be the very light the cause of this doubtfulnesse is in our selues for that we be so bleere-eyed and so blind by nature Wherefore the arguments which are brought for this purpose ad no light to the light of the Scripture which is of it own nature so cleere and can not be made to shine more bright by any additioÌ„ but al serue to this end to make that thing manifest vnto vs which is most euident in it selfe and that our eies may be opened to see that most ful and most glorious light of the sacred Scripture that is to behold the diuine maiestie of God shining bright and speaking S. vnto vs in the holy Scripture Like as if a man were to proue to a blinde man that the Sunne did shine hee would not produce arguments to commend the excellencie of the light of the Sunne but rather prouide such things as whereby if it were possible he might open the eies of the blind that with his own eies he might looke on the glorious light of the Sunne Wherefore in a word whatsoeuer arguments men aske of vs to demonstrate the light of the Scripture they ought not to be demaunded because of any defect in the Scripture but in respect of vs because we bee so blind hauing neede of all arguments and helpes euery way to open our eies that our sight may be quickned to behold this glorious light The arguments and helpes whereby our eies may be opened to behold the light of the Scripture or God speaking and shining in the Scripture these arguments I say which the godly and learned vse for this purpose be not of one sort but many in number But if the holy-Ghost speaking in the Scripture doe not first of all inspire our Eph. 1. 16. 17. minds opeÌ„ the eyes of our vnderstanding for he alone can do it assuredly it is but lost labor to speak of any other argument or help if we be not taught of God and by his Esay holy spirit all other meanes shall profit vs nothing at all Wherefore the first most principal cause to effect this y t we may behold the light of the Scripture so bright in it selfe must be the holy ghost teaching vs inwardly in our hearts and opening our vnderstanding that we may behold that light of the Scripture and may acknowledge the voice of God and of Christ himselfe speaking in the Scripture And the holy Ghost also himselfe in this work giues no new light to the Scripture which is cleere and glorious in it selfe as is aforesaid but inlightens our minds to this end that we may see the great light of the sacred Scripture Againe the holy ghost in this great work of our illumination effecteth it by certaine meanes instruments whereby it pleaseth him to work in our hearts and minds The meanes which the H. G. vseth for this worke are of two kindes The first is internall the second is externall The inwarde meane is in the very Scripture it selfe the outward is without the Scripture The internal meane is the principall organ or instrument of Gods spirit in this work and it is that verie light which shineth in the Scripture The holy Ghost then doth first of al open How the holy Ghost first teacheth vs to know the Scriptures the eies of our vnderstanding by the light of the Scripture to discerne that light of the Scripture so bright in itselfe and so vnknowen vnto vs. And hee cleereth our vnderstaÌ„ding to see the light of the Scripture by the verie scripture it selfe and by the light of the scripture manie waies For partlie hee effecteth this by producing 1 certaine testimonies of Scripture which plainly testifie Inward meanes to see the light of the scriptures of this great light of the Scripture and of God speaking in the Scripture as that place al Scripture is giuen by diuine inspiration 2. Tim. 3. 16 partly by suggesting into vs that we obserue the spirituall matters which are 2 therein described partly by admonishing that we note 3 the spirituall words whereby the same spirituall matters are expressed and set before vs partly by warning vs to 4 obserue the truth of the diuine oracles by the complement of the prophecies Againe he sets before vs the 5 beautifull harmonie of the Scripture in the old and new Testament the one sweetly testifying of the other And 6 heere he omitteth not the miracles which be recorded therein whereby the celestiall doctrine had in the beginning a confirmation Hee putteth vs also in minde of the Martyrs which sealed y e same truth with their blood as we read in the same Scripture By these meanes and such like the spirit teacheth vs out of the very Scripture that the sacred Scripture is Gods word by cleere euidence manifesting that great excellent light which is in the Scripture Ad also vnto the aforesaide meanes the worth and holinesse of those men which wrote the Scriptures as the same is testified and recorded in the Scriptures And this is the internall and principall meane and instrument of the holy Ghost whereby he teaceth vs breedeth faith in our hearts whereby we be certainly perswaded that this Scripture is the very word of God There are also other meanes without the Scripture Externall meanes to proue the scripture to be God word whereby the Spirit proueth the same thing as the
the Syriack translation as the 2. Epist of S. Peter The 2. and 3. of S. Iohn The Epist of Iames and of Iude the Apocalypse and the storie of the woman taken in adulterie which is found in the beginning of the 8. Chap. of the Gospell according to S. Iohn By this defect he gathereth that seeing the Syriack translation was extant before the Church accepted these books as canonicall the Syriack translation must be very auncient Againe he saith he found a singular faithfulnesse in the Syriack translation by conferring it with the Greeke and originall which experience any shall finde if they shall please to conferre both languages together Of the premisses the conclusion is this that the Syriack translation both was in elder ages and is now at this day of great authority in the Church Thus farre of the Chaldiack and diuers Greeke translations of the old Testament and of the Syriack translation of the New CHAP. XXII Of the Latin translations of both Testaments WE be now to speake of the Latin translations of the New Testament and of the Old The Latine translations of the Bible were very many This say a De doctrina Christ lib. 2. cap. 11. Augustine and b In prooemio in lib. Iosuae Ierom who complaineth much of the varietie and diuersity of Latin translations Of all the Latin translatiōs the first was an Italian c De doctr Chri. lib. 2. cap. 15. Augustine preferres this before all the rest as keeping most strictly to the wordes of the originall and beeing more perspicuous then others in sentences This was not that translation of Ierom for it is euident this was far more ancient then that translation of Ierom. And who should bee the Author of this it is vncertaine After this Italian translatiō Ieroms followed next who is said to haue left a double translation in Latin of the old Testament In the first he followed the 72. interpreters in the latter the Hebrue originall text For as touching the New Testament Ierom is said not to haue translated it into Latin but to haue corrected the old Latin translation as himselfe affirmeth it in many places This edition of Ierom when it came forth first it began forthwith to be d Aug. Epist 10. ad Hicron accepted and read publiquely in the Churches but with no contempt of that old Italian copy For as Gregorie saith these two translations that elder Italian and the latter of Ierom were of greatest note in the Latine Churches and most vsed At length all those old Latine translations together with that Italian were not respected and Ieroms translation only remained if we may truly auouch this to be Ieroms translation which at this day is vsed and is caried about in his name for the learned greatly doubt of this matter Here therefore we bee to consider of this point And two questions principally are to be answered First who was the Author of this The second what authority it may haue in the Church As touching the Author of this Latin translation diuers men speake diuersly Some thinke it was Ieroms and that it is pure without any mixture So think al Papists for the most part speciallie the Iesuits Others thinke it not to be Hieroms as Sanctes a In praef in Interp. Bibl. ad Clement 7. Pontif. Pagninus and b Forosemprouianus Paulus a Bishop to passe by Erasmus Munster and other popish writers Others deeme it to be Hieroms but not to want corruption of this iudgmēt are these men Ioannes Driedo Sixtus Senensis and Bellarmene seemes to incline this way as may easily be gathered by his propositions and reasons touching this matter We say it is neither Hieroms nor yet * Not his in whole nor yet in parte pure nor mixt and this we proue on this manner Hierom translated the old Testament out of the Hebrue into Latine accurately or exactly But this vulgar edition is not exact therefore it is not Hieroms The proposition is euident for Hierom himselfe testifieth in many places of his works that he had labored and done this translation very exactly as in his preface before the 5. books of Moses in his Preface before the books of the Kings in his Preface on the Psalter in all which places he saith he changed nothing but followed faithfully the Hebrue text and he appealeth to the Iewes to testify of the faithfulnes of his translation And a De ciuitate Dei lib. 18. cap. 43. Augustine affirmeth it that the very Iewes did confesse his translation was sound and true d Hispalensis lib. 6. Etymolog cap. 5. Isidore preferres Hieroms translation before all mens for keeping himselfe more strictly to the words of the Hebrue text and for his perspicuity of phrase wherefore if we may beleeue these men Hieroms translation was exactly done So farre the proposition the assumption followeth But the vulgar Latine edition is not accurate neither doth it agree with the originall the Hebrue text yea it so far dissenteth from it that necessarily one of these two assertions must be true either that this Latin edition is most corrupt or that the Hebrue fountaine is most troubled and disordred And this last point Bellarmine himselfe dare not auouch but taxeth such as do so affirme and that worthily It resteth therefore that we proue this great disagreement betweene the Latine edition and the Hebrue text And this can no otherwise be done but by conference of the one with the other Let the comparison begin at the book of Genesis compare not al places which dissent for that were infinit but some speciall places whereby ye may soone conceiue of the rest and iudge what they be And by this conference of places you shall discerne that the defaults are not of one kinde but of diuers as for changing of words and sentences for defect and superfluitie For so many waies the vulgar Latine edition is faulty In my iudgement this comparison cannot better be found by any man or meanes then by that vulgar Latine which was corrected by Iohn Benedict a diuine of Paris whom that I may passe ouer this point briefly I recommend vnto thee gentle reader By this cōference that shall appeare both that this is not Hieroms translation that this vulgar Latine edition is not authenticall so as we shal not need to spend any time in handling the other question CHAP. XXIII Of the translation of the Bible into the mother tongue IT remaineth now that we speake of such editions and translations as be in the vsuall mother tongue I vnderstand that translation to be in the mother tongue which is done in that language which is vulgar common among the people of that countrey whose language it is as the Dutch Italian French English Scottish and Spanish translations c. We may moue three questions of these translations First whether it be lawfull to translate the sacred Scripture into euery mother tongue Secondlie whether the leiturgie