no man euer dreamed of viz. that we commonly build our faith vpon our English translation So that the Scripture may well be the rule of faith for ought that you haue said against it concerning the first propertie of certaine truth which it were blasphemie to denie of the scripture For the second that the rule must be easie to vnderstand I haue shewed that there is no necessitie of that condition and that the scripture is easie in matters necessary to saluation In the last point of the scriptures defect touching many things that must needs be beleeued you do both wrong God in making his word writtē so vnperfect and by a foolish craft insteed of proouing that the scripture containeth not all matters of faith needfull to saluation vndertake to shew that which no man denieth that all points of beleefe are not expresly set down and determined by scripture And lest we should forget your shuffling in this point you offer new proofe of a needlesse matter from the authoritie of Austin Basil and Epiphanius whose testimonies I alledged before to prooue the sufficiencie of the scripture in all matters necessarie to saluation The places by you alledged are not of such matters neither speake of things not expresly contained but onely shew that for matters of fact ceremonie the Apostles haue not determined al particulars The Apostles saith Austin haue commaunded nothing touching not rebaptising them which haue bene baptised by hereticks but the custome which was pleaded against Cyprian is to be beleeued to haue had beginning from their tradition as there are many things which the Church euery where holdeth that we wel beleeue therefore to haue beene enioyned by the Apostles though they are not found written What is this to prooue that there are matters necessarie to be beleeued to saluation which are not exprest in the scriptures Basil was not the the author of that Treatise at the least of the latter part of it from about the 17. chapter and so forward That appeareth first by obseruing the difference of style being neither like Basils writing nor in one place like an other as Erasmus hath truly obserued who translated it Secondly by the fond discourse he maketh propounding one thing handling an other and concluding a third which not onely Basil would neuer haue done but no man of any discretion Last of all he bewraieth himselfe to be a counterfeit by speaking of Meletius as one dead long before who liued in his time ouerliued him as it is manifest by the Ecclesiasticall historie But admit the booke were Basils what is there in it to proue that all points of doctrine which appertaine to true Christian faith are not expresly set downe in Scripture This Author saith that we must beleeue oraditions VVhat In matters of doctrine There is no such word in him He speaketh of outward carriage in ceremonies and phrases of speech The question in that part of his Treatise is of the preposition with that is to speake that euery man may vnderstand whether it be lawfull to say in the Church seruice and otherwise Glorie be to the Father and to the Sonne with the holy Ghost or whether we must needs say and to the holy Ghost not with For this speech that author pleades tradition Do we denie any such matter Or do we not acknowledge the libertie and authoritie of the Churches in such matters Who sees not that our custome now is to say Glory be to the Father to the Sonne and to the holy Ghost Not that thereby we condemne the other kind of speech but because in matters left to our libertie we take that which seemeth fittest Epiphanius speaking of praier for the dead which hath no warrant of Scripture is glad to helpe himselfe with the authoritie of tradition telling vs that some things must be held by tradition and not all taken out of the scriptures But Epiphanius doth not say that this is a doctrine or action necessarie to saluation A. D. §. 6. Some obiect against this conclusion that place of S. Paul Omnis Scriptura diuinitùs inspirata vtilis est ad docendum c. vt perfectus sit homo c. But this place prooueth nothing against that which I haue said For it saith not that scripture alone is sufficient to instruct a man to perfection but that it is profitable for this purpose as it is indeed and the rather because it commendeth vnto vs the authoritie of the Church which as I shall afterwards proue is sufficient Now it is certaine that to be profitable and to be of it selfe alone sufficient be farre different things Stones and Timber be profitable to the building of an house yet they alone without a worke-man to square them and set them in order be not sufficient for this purpose A. W. Of this place I haue spoken sufficiently otherwhere and shewed that the Scriptures are able to make vs wise to saluation and therefore sufficient to that purpose Now the Apostle hauing giuen that commendation to the scripture vers 15. proceedeth in the next to exemplifie that in particular which he had before said in generall It is able to make thee wise to saluation it is able to fit thee to teaching reproouing correcting instructing Can any reasonable man thinke that the Apostle deliuering by way of amplification his former commendation of the scripture that he might the rather stirre vp Timothie to the studie of it would say lesse then he had done before But it is a great deale lesse to say no more but the scripture is profitable to such purposes then to commend it as able to make a man wise to saluation Therefore though the word indeed doe not expresly signifie sufficiencie yet it cannot be doubted but the profit mentioned implieth such a sufficiencie especially since he addeth perfection which must arise from this word of God And so as I haue shewed elsewhere do Chrysostome and Theophylact vnderstand it who make the Apostle speake to Timothie to this effect that he being now to be offred vp leaueth the scriptures in his steed of which he may in all things take aduise and counsell as if the Apostle himselfe were present with him But you forsooth would make vs beleeue that the scripture is indeed profitable to this end but not sufficient Is not the knowledge of arts tongues philosophy and history of verie good vse also to this purpose Slender then too slender is the commendation our Apostle giueth the scriptures if it be of no greater excellēcy then these humane furtherances but only in a certain degree of profit To helpe the matter you propound one particular for which the scripture is profitable namely to commend vnto vs the authority of the Church But neither doth it cōmend to vs any such authority as you imagin if that be the rule of the scripture one sentēce had bin as good better then
excused in your iudgement by ignorance concerning any positiue commaundement of God but out of doubt there are many points of truth reuealed by God onely as positiue not as such meanes to saluation that without the beleefe of them a man cannot be saued Adde hereunto that a Christian may be ignorant of many points held by the Church and that by negatiue ignorance because he could neuer come where he might heare that the Church beleeued such and such things It is therefore an vnreasonable thing to condemne all ignorance for heresie and a most vncharitable conceit to cast all into hell fire that beleeue not in euery point as the Church generally doth yea though they know what the Church mainteines be of a contrarie mind Your proofe which is a comparison of likenesse or equality betwixt infidelitie in denying all Christian religion and heresie in not beleeuing some points of it is a great deale too weake Similitudes argue indeed but rather by way of illustration then proofe And there is no equalitie betwixt denying all and doubting of some The former absolutely ouerthrowes true religion the latter onely misconceiues some points leauing the grounds of truth vntouched and beleeuing them as most certaine A. D. § 6. Fourthly I may confirme the same with the testimonie of the ancient Fathers First of S. Athanasius in his creed which is commonly knowne and approoued of all Quicunque saith he vult saluus esse ante omnia opus est vt teneat Catholicam fidem quam nisi quisque integram inuiolatamque seruauerit absque dubio in aeternum peribit Whosoeuer will be saued before all things it is needfull that he hold the Catholicke faith which vnlesse euerie one doe keepe entire and vnviolate without doubt he shall perish euerlastingly A. W. If the ancient writers should affirme a thing so vnreasonable there were good reason for a man to looke for some proofe of it out of the Scriptures But no doubt we shall finde your citations of their writings as much to the purpose as we haue done your former arguments The first you alleadge is Athanasius in his Creed to which I answer that Athanasius speaks not of all points reuealed by God but of those substantiall matters which are there set downe by him and namely of the Trinitie of persons and Godhead of our Sauiour Iesus Christ This appeares by the last verse of the same Creed where he thus concludeth This is the Catholicke faith which except a man beleeue faithfully he cannot be saued But Athanâ—siuâ— hath not comprehended all points of religion in that Creed for he leaueth out the buriall of our Sauiour Christ vnlesse you will say he put his going downe into hell for it neither doth he require in that place any other point as necessary to be beleeued to saluation but those onely that he there reciteth which must be kept entire and vnuiolate of euery man that will be saued A. D. §. 7. Qui sunt in sacris literis eruditi saith Saint Basil ne vnam quidem sillabam diuinorum dogmatum prodi sinunt sed pro istius defensione si opus est nullum non mortis genus libenter amplectuntur Those that are well instructed in holy Writ doe not suffer one sillable of diuine doctrine to be betraied or yeelded vp but for the defence thereof if need be doe willingly embrace any kinde of death A. W. That of Basil is lesse to the purpose For first he saith nothing of any doctrine propounded by the Church or of your vnwritten traditioÌ„s but only of the Scriptures And how makes this for the beleeuing whatsoeuer the Church wil deliuer without which in your iudgement faith cannot be one or entire Secondly he speakes not of all ignorant men whose faith vpon paine of damnation you will haue entire concerning euery point but of those onely that are learned in the holy Scriptures or at the most so farre as they are learned in them I astly what saith he of these but that which we alwaies require that a christian should not suffer any sillable of true doctrine to be betraied This makes against you who rest wholly vpon Popes and Councils and by that meanes oftentimes betray the truth of God manifested in the Scripture yea so farre are you from mainteining euery sillable of it with hazard of your liues that you doe what you can for shame to destroy it all You Papists depriue the people of them altogether at least for their priuate reading howsoeuer your Pope Pius 4. makes a shew of permitting it You haue thrust out the Authenticall copies of Hebrew and Greeke and in steed of them authorised a corrupt Latine translation which no man may refuse vpon any pretence though it haue 8000 places as Isidorus Clarius a great learned man of your owne affirmeth in which the sense of the holy Ghost is changed yea Cardinal Hosius blusheth not to write That it were better for the Church if there were no written Gospell extant I omit your blasphemies against the Scriptures whereof I haue spoken otherwhere A. D. §. 8. Nihil periculosius saith Nazianzen his haereticis esse potest qui cum integrè per omnia decurrant vno tamen verbo quasi veneni gutta veram illam ac simplicem fidem dominicam inficiunt Nothing can be more perilous then these heretickes who when they runne vprightly through all the rest yet with one word as with a drop of poyson doe infect that true and sincere faith of our Lord. A. W. What if Gregorie Nazianzen complaine that heretickes which held most points soundly according to truth as Arius Eutyches Macedonius Nestorius and diuers other did were very pernitious to the Church because they did more easily and secretly poyson the truth of doctrine by their heresies Will it follow hereupon that therefore a man cannot be saued vnlesse he beleeue euerie point of truth reuealed by God or that a man hath no faith because his beleefe agrees not in euery small matter with other Christians Remember I pray you we denie not that faith should be entire but that it cannot be auaileable to saluation if in any one point it misbeleeue Thus haue I examined the first part of this your Treatise of Faith which I know not how I should apply to your maine syllogisme implied in your preface when you shew the vse of it in any part thereof I will giue you answer accordingly A. D. CHAP. V. That there must be some means prouided by almighty God by which all sorts of men may learne this faith which is so necessary to saluatioÌ„ A. W. The title of this Chapter is so propounded that your meaning may easily be mistaken There must be say you some meanes prouided May not a man gather by these words that as yet there are no such meanes prouided where as you would haue vs beleeue that God hath already made prouision of fit meanes to that
iniuriously you deale with vs herein a blind man may see For we neither claime any such priuiledge of being free from errour in citing and vnderstanding Scripture nor desire to be any farther beleeued for translation or interpretation then we can approue them by euident reason And this you knew well enough and are ready with the rest of your complices to accuse vs of referring all to euery mans priuate spirit But malice is as wel without sight as without shame That of Saint Austin we acknowledge to be most true and find it verified by your Rhemish translation and the applicatiō of Scripture in your Canon law and Schoole-mens writings out of which it is easie to bring a cloud of witnesses to this purpose For the other place of Austin you quote two treatises his 18. tract vpon Iohn and his 222. epistle to Consentius In the former whereof there is no such word to be found nor any such epistle either in the Basil or the old Paris print But in your late edition of Austin at Paris both the epistle and the words are wherein Austin maketh the misunderstanding of the Scriptures the occasion of heresie Who denieth it This may serue vs to proue that the ignorance of the Scriptures is exceeding dangerous euen as Chrysostome saith the cause of all euils In another place the same Austin telleth vs that men are for nothing else hereticks but because not rightly vnderstanding the Scriptures they obstinately maintaine their owne opinions against the truth of them And Tertullian goeth somewhat further shewing that heresies durst not peepe vp without some occasion taken by the Scriptures But he addes that those very heresies may be conuinced by the Scriptures If we misinterprete the Scriptures why do not you great Clearkes that haue the spirit tied to your Church refute our false interpretations by the Scriptures Do we refuse this triall Is it not that we stil vrge to haue all things examined by the Scriptures or is there any thing you more feare then to be confined to the Scriptures What though the diuell and hereticks alledge them Did not our Sauiour himselfe say so too What plea can you make wherein some heretickes haue not gone before you Will you brag of the Church Hereticks also both thinke and say they are of the Church yea they are in all things so like true professors that in Antichrists time as an ancient author speaketh there is no meanes of triall left but the Scripture If you vrge tradition so do heretickes too running vp and downe right like you Papists from tradition to Scripture and from Scripture to tradition They pleade Councels as well as you The Arians obiect diuers against Austin and other writers As for the Fathers was not Austin prest by the Donatists with Agrippin and Cyprian Did not the heretick Dioscorus cry out in the Councel of Chalcedon I haue the testimonies of the holy Fathers Athanasius Gregorie Cyrill I vary not from them in any point I am cast out with the Fathers I defend the fathers doctrine I haue their iudgement extant in their bookes Neither may we rest vpon miracles To let passe what before I said of that point remember what Austin saith Pontius say the Manichees did a miracle Donat prayed and God answered him from heauen The Scripture onely is the true touchstone in these cases if it be hard Let him that hath an heart saith Austin reade those things that go before and those that follow and he shall find the sense A. D. § 7. Wherefore there is no reason whereby we may be assured that such men haue the spirit of God but we may find many reasons to conuince that they haue not this spirit And to omit for breuitic sake the seeking out of any other euen the singularitie or priuatnesse of their spirit is sufficient not onely to moue vs to suspect it but also to condemne it and to assure vs that it cannot be the spirit of truth as it is very well signified by Saint Austin who saith Veritas tua Domine nec mea est nec illius sed omnium quos ad eius communionem publicè vocas terribiliter admonens nos ne eam habere velimus priuatam ne priuemur ea Nam quisquis id quod tu ad fruendū omnibus proponis sibi propriè vendicat suum esse vult quod omniū est à communi propellitur ad sua id est à veritate ad mendaciū Thy truth O Lord is neither proper to me nor him but common to all whom thou doest publikly call to the common partaking of it warning vs terribly to take heed that we will not haue it priuate to our selfe least we be depriued of it For whosoeuer doth challenge that to himselfe priuatly which thou doest propose publickly to be enioyed of all and will haue that his owne which is common to all he is driuen from the common to his owne that is to say from the truth to a lie A. W. To refute this conceit of a priuate spirit which was not worth this ado you argue from the singularitie or priuatenesse of it as if it could not be true because it is not agreeable to the common opinion And surely he that shall be so arrogant and shamelesse as to denie all the points of Religion commonly held vpon a presumption that himselfe onely hath the spirit of God is fitter to be cut off by the Magistrates sword then confuted by the word of Scripture But it is very possible that in some points and places some one man without any reuelation by diligent searching and prayer may finde out that which no other man yet knoweth at least for interpretation of Scripture as it falleth out euery day amongst both Protestants and Papists Therefore your Cardinall Caietan doubteth not to say that God hath not tied the exposition of the Scriptures to the senses of the Fathers and therefore asketh no more then reason when he willeth the Reader not to be offended or mislike it if sometimes himselfe hit vpon a new sense agreeable to the text though it go against the streame of the fathers For which though Canus reproue him without cause Andradius iustly defendeth him And why should he not since as Domingo a Soto witnesseth one mans authoritie and learning draweth numbers after him to his opinion By reason of a saying of Saint Austins saith Soto all the fathers after his time and all the Diuines with one consent haue worthily affirmed that the glorious Virgin neuer committed any actual sinne for all Chrysostome auncienter then he thought the contrary Yet was Austins iudgement in this case but priuate and for truth inferiour to Chrysostomes If publicknesse or generall consent should cary the matter how chance Paphnutius withstood all the rest of the famous Councel of Nice and preuailed We ought saith Picus Earle of Mirandula to
as you taught vs before of necessitie to saluation that we beleeue entirely all points of faith without misbeleeuing any one what hope of saluation shall be left to any Papist who cannot by any meanes know what is determined by the Church and what is not Or if he may be sure that matters defined by the Pope and a Councell are decided by the Church yet since it is not so determined whether the Pope alone be sufficient to determine of points in controuersie he may refuse to obey some constitutions of the Pope or to beleeue some questions decided by him and thereby shut himselfe out of heauen for not giuing credit to the determination of the Church if that authoritie of determining be in the Pope and he commaund men so to beleeue But if this determination of the Church be ioyntly in the Pope and Councels and that nothing is a matter of faith but that which is so determined to be then was there almost no matter of faith at all in the Church till within these last 800 yeares For it is more then euident to any man that will not be wilfully contentious that the Pope neuer bare any extraordinarie sway in Councels till he had proclaimed himselfe vniuersall Bishop which was by the grant of the murtherer Phocas six hundred yeares after the beginning of the Gospell What shall we thinke of the Churches in the Apostles times and so forward till the Councell of Nice in which the Popes supremacie was not heard of Had Christians then no matters of faith to beleeue How should they if all depend vpon the Pope and a general Councel Let me grant that those Councels in the Acts were generall what was there determined but that the Gentiles were to abstaine from things offered to Idols and bloud and that which is strangled and from fornication VVas nothing a matter of faith but these few points which also till this time were not matters of faith Either shew some good reason why matters of faith were not at this time of the Apostles liuing to be tied to generall Councels and the Pope yet now must be or confesse the truth to the glorie of God that matters of faith haue their authoritie to be matters of faith from the word of God and not from the determination of Pope or Councell or both Neither thinke to shift of the matter by saying they are indeed matters of faith in themselues but not to vs. For so it will come to passe that we shall say the first Christians had no points that were matters of faith to them because they had none determined by the Church in a Councell which opinion is I know not whether of more absurditie or impietie Now that you agreement in matters of faith after the determination of the Church is not so great as you would make the world beleeue it may appeare by the verie ground of religion the Canon of the Scripture which was determined of by your iudgement in the Councell of Carthage wherein the Apocryphall bookes say you were allowed for Canonical yet saith Bellarmine Nicholas Lyra Denys the Carthusiā Hugo de sancto victore Thomas de Vio both these at least the last Cardinals follow Ierom in reiecting thē as Apocryphal But if this Councel may be excepted against sure in your iudgment the Councell of Trent may not which hath receiued those books into the canō of the scripture Yet for all that Sixtus Senensis keeper of the Popes library maketh bold to deny thē such authority euen since that Coūcel as Bellarmine himself confesseth And Arias Montanus since that time doubteth not to say that the Orthodoxe or true Church following the Canon of the Hebrewes accounteth those bookes of the old Testament written in Greeke to be Apocryphal What say you to your Bishop Catharin who being one of the Councell of Trent after the determination of the Councell against assurance of saluation defendeth that such assurance notwithstanding that decree of the Councell may ordinarily be had by them that beleeue You would perswade vs that it is a ruled case of your Church long ago that the Scriptures are not sufficient without tradition What saith Scotus in this case Whatsoeuer pertaineth to heauenly and supernaturall knowledge and is necessarie to be knowne of men in this life is sufficiently deliuered in the holy scriptures The holy scripture saith Gerson is sufficient for the gouernment of the Church or else was Christ an vnperfect Lawgiuer I might runne on in the like course touching other points but these shal serue for a tast and so I passe ouer to your proofe that the learned on your side cannot possibly dissent one from another They which acknowledge that the definitiue sentence of the Pope is to be rested vpon as an vndoubted truth cannot possibly dissent in matters of faith But all Catholick learned men acknowledge that the Popes sentence is such Therefore no Catholicke learned men can possibly dissent in matters of faith All you conclude is that in matters determined by the Pope and a Councell your learned men cannot disagree because they hold that such a determination is certainly true yet for all this as I haue shewed your Church may be rent in peeces with contrarie opinions in matters of as great moment as most are in religion if for all this it cease not to be a true Church why should not the Protestants haue the like priuiledge who haue the same opinion of the Scriptures that you haue of the Pope Be not so iniurious to reason or blasphemous against God as to auouch that no controuersie can be ended by the word because diuers men will expound it diuersly For it is contrarie both to religion and sense to imagine that the Lord would giue his people such a Scripture as cannot be certainely vnderstood in all points necessarie to saluation but by I know not what reuelation to some one man More particularly I denie your Maior They that acknowledge such an authoritie in the Pope may yet differ in opinion about matters of faith I bring you example in that point of assurance wherein Catharin disputed against that doctrine which Sotus and your writers generally since the Councell of Trent affirme to haue bene the certaine decree of the Councell Yet were they both present in the Councell and none of the meanest there assembed The reason of that their dissent and the possibilitie of the like betwixt other men ariseth from this that decrees of Councels and Popes being set downe in writing may be diuersly interpreted and so the meaning of them mistaken as Catharin saith that he foresaw some men would misunderstand the Councell of Trent in that point This is all the inconueniences you can alledge in admitting the Scripture for Iudge and this followeth the decrees of Councels and Popes at the least as much as the writings of the holy Ghost
the truth to flie to the Scriptures And Tertullian reiects that which is brought if it be not in the Scriptures Origen saith Christ is no where to be sought but in the mountaines of the law and the Prophets Yea Ierome makes the Scriptures the bounds of the church beyond which she may not go Are you able to shew this authority in all particuler points of Controuersie whereof a man may doubt Are you not faine in many particulars to deny the sufficiency of the Scriptures and to run a madding after traditions What talke you then of shewing sufficient authority The bestauthority you can alleadge for many matters is the Popes will who cannot erre as you ridiculously imagine And this authoritie is all the reason you haue in diuers points except such stuffe as Durād brings in his Rationale diuinorum officiorum wherof many of your own men are ashamed I had thought your Friers vow of obedience to their superiours or at least the Iesuits special vow of blind fold obedience head bene the height of all perfection in this life but I perceiue now that there is a greater opinion of holinesse in these vowes then there is cause why For you tye the obedience of euery Christian in such sort to the authoritie of the Church and indeed of his particular pastor yea of euery Priest or Iesuite that comes licenced by Blackwell or some new Garnet that be must beleeue without enquiring any reasō whatsoeuer such a fellow shall deliuer to him for truth This is the obedience one of your Cardinals speakes of Obedience without reason saith Cusan is full and perfit obedience namely when a man yeelds obedience without requiring any reason as a beast horse or other obeies his maister So doth your Popish Clergie vse the people as men do their Asses make them beare and do what they list yea euen to the attempting of most horrible and incredible treasons against their Soueraigne and countrey I will not now dispute what agreement there is betwixt faith and reason nor whether of them is the former nor in what case a man may require reason onely that no man may conceiue amisse of our doctrine concerning our demanding of proofe for that we are enioyned to beleeue he is to vnderstand that we aske no farther proofe but to be perswaded that the point deliuered to vs is warranted by Scripture Let it be neuer so much in seeming contrary to reason if it be agreeable to Scripture we hold our selues bound in conscience to take it for truth though we be no way able to answer such reasons as we know are brought against it Neither yet do we rest satisfied as soone as some place of Scripture is alledged in a doubtfull matter but here indeed we hearken after reason Yet not to prooue that true which we find affirmed in Scripture but to make vs perceiue that such and such is the meaning of the Scripture Whatsoeuer the Scripture saith we acknowledge to be absolutely true so farre as it is deliuered for true by the holy Ghost But what the sense of the Scripture is we thinke it must be prooued by the true vse of reason according to the certain principles of diuinitie and such helps as obseruation of circūstances vnderstanding of the tongs conference of like places logical discourse with such other helps reasonably affoord vs. But why should you find fault with demanding reason or not be most willing ready to ioyne it to your authority since as Cusan saith faith is not abased by reason but exalted euen as water in a vessell supports and lifts vp oyle As for your proofe that therfore we may not demand a reason nor so much as enquire whether the points that are taught vs be sutable to the Scripture or no because Christian beliefe must onely be grounded vpon the authority of God speaking by the mouth of the Church we say that you auouch that which is not true For Christian faith must be grounded vpon the authoritie of God speaking by the pens of his Apostles and Prophets in the Scripture not vpon the authoritie of any company of men liuing from time to time in the world The Church you dreame of will I doubt not in another part of my answer be shewed to be nothing but a fancy and a gay word to deceiue the simple when as by it you meane no more but your clergie or perhaps your Bb. onely assembled in a Councell or the Pope himselfe alone who can with no more reason be called the Church then the head may be tearmed the body or the whole man if I should grant you that he is the head which is both false and absurd The Lord vseth not the authoritie of men to enioyne what they list for a matter of faith but their ministery to beget faith by declaring what he hath reuealed in the Scripture through euidence of truth and power of exhortation testified and made effectuall by the mightie grace of the holy Ghost in the hearts of them that shall be saued A. D. §. 11 The which briefe and compendious resolution of faith whosoeuer will as euery one may securely and as in the discourse following shall be declared must necessarily embrace beside the ease he shall also reape this commoditie that cutting off all occasions of needlesse and fruitlesse doubts questions and disputes concerning matters of faith wherin vnsettled minds spend their time and spirit he shall haue good leisure and better liking then ordinarily such vnquiet mindes can haue to employ his endeuours more fruitfully otherwayes to wit in building vpon the firme foundation of stedfast faith the gold and pretious stones of Gods loue and other vertues in practise whereof consisteth that good life which maketh a man become the liuing temple of almightie God the which temple Gods spirit will not onely visite with holy inspirations and blessings oftentimes in this life but he wil also inhabite and dwell continually in it both by grace here and by glory in the other most happy and euerlasting life A. W. The securitie that ariseth from resting vpon the authoritie of the Church is freenesse not from danger but frō care This latter I confesse will easily be wrought by this perswasion in the heart of a carelesse worldling or a man superstitiously ignorant if he can be senslesly obstinate inough in keeping his eyes and eares from seeing and hearing the truth of God in the Scripture for to such men God sends strong delusions to beleeue lyes that they may be damned which haue not receiued the loue of the truth that they might be saued But alas what shall this ease aduantage them but onely that they may go laughing to destruction as a foole doth to the stocks and whip What necessitie can there then be of embracing such a dāgerous resolution Besides the ease you tell vs now of another commodity that may be reapt by embracing that
Leo faith that is true is a strong bulwarke to which faith nothing may be added by any man from which nothing may be taken because vnlesse it be one it is not faith sith the Apostle saith one Lord one faith one baptisme Is it not euident that he speakes of the points of faith that are to be beleeued For to them may a man adde I speake of power not of lawfulnesse from them may he take wheras the qualitie of faith seated in the soule is free from all such danger The learned father had found by experience that hereticks from time to time tooke vpon them to diminish and augment the faith of the Church that is the articles of religion and therefore denieth them to haue any faith that hold not firmly and onely the truth of doctrine according to the faith of the Church agreeable to Scripture A. D. §. 3. Omni studio saith S. Hierome Laborandum est primùm ocurrere in fidei vnitatem We must labour with all diligence first to meete in the vnitie of faith A. W. Ieroms testimonie wherein either the printer or you reade vnitatem for vnitate which is also the word in the text is to the same purpose that Leos was There are saith Ierome many winds of doctrine and by their blast when the waues are raised men are caried hither and thither in an vncertaine course and with diuers errors then follow the words you alledge Therefore we must labour with all diligence first to meete in the vnitie of faith then in the same vnitie to haue the knowledge of the sonne of God Which last point is added because of Sabellius who denied the distinction of the persons and against whom Ierome speaketh professedly in that chapter as also against Arius Macedonius and Eunomius about the holy Ghost and our Sauiour Christ A. D. §. 4. Hanc fidem saith Irenaeus ecclesia in vniuersum mundum disseminata diligenter custodit quasi vnam domum inhabitans similiter credit ijs quasi vnam animam habens vnum cor consonanter haec praedicat docet cradit quasi vnum possidens os Nam quamuis in mundo dissimiles sint loquelae tamen virtus traditionis vna eadem est This faith the Church spread ouer the whole world doth diligently keepe as dwelling in one house and doth belieue in one like manner those things to wit which are proposed for points of faith as hauing one soule and one heart and doth preach and teach and deliuer by tradition those things after one vniforme manner as possessing one mouth For although there be diuers and different languages in the world yet the vertue of tradition is One and the same Thus saith this Father By whose words we may vnderstand not onely that there is but one faith but also how it is said to be one which might seeme not to be one considering there are so many points or articles which we beleeue by our faith and so many seuerall men who haue in them this faith yet One saith this Father it is because the whole Church doth beleeue those points in one like manner That is to say because the beliefe of one man is in all points like and nothing different from the beliefe of another or because euery faithfull man beleeueth euery point or article for one and the like cause or for mall reason to wit because God hath reuealed it and deliuered it to vs by his Catholicke Church to be beleeued For which reason euery one should beleeue whatsoeuer he beleeueth as a point of Christian faith A. W. Irenaeus as the two former speaketh of the articles of religion many wherof he had recited in the next chapter before whereupon he infers the words you set downe The Church saith he hauing receiued this doctrine or preaching of this faith though it be spread ouer the whole world keepes it diligently c. And this your selfe acknowledge in these words To wit which are proposed for points of faith whereby you expound that which Irenaeus said The Church beleeues those things which is all one with his former words in sense This faith the Church holds So doth Feuardentius one of your learnedst Fryers vnderstand Irenaeus telling vs that he sets the consent of all Churches as a brasen wall that cannot be ouerthrowne against hereticks Of the same things saith Feuardentius they thinke beleeue write and teach the same By this place it is manifest that you take faith as it is a qualitie because you distinguish the points we beleeue from our faith by which we beleeue and so speaking of faith in that sense neuer a one of your proofes is either plaine or certaine But let vs see how you interprete Irenaeus He saith The whole Church doth beleeue alike meaning that all beleeue the same things not that the habit by which they beleeue is of like force like strength in euery particular Church or man which neither belongs to his purpose nor is true The intention or inward strength euen of the Catholick faith may be greater in one mā saith Domingo à Soto then in another and according to that increase our faith Therefore your former reason which you giue why faith is said to be one namely because the beleefe of one man is in all points like the beleefe of another must be vnderstood of likenesse in regard of the articles they beleeue not of any equalitie in the habit or qualitie it selfe and in that sense onely doth Irenaeus say that faith is one Which saith he no man by his eloquence maketh greater no man by his weaknes in speaking of it lesse We see saith Feuardentius that Irenaeus vehemently vrgeth the vnitie of doctrine and consent of faith which we affirmed to be one of the notes of the true Church Therefore whereas you said of Irenaeus that he affirmes faith to be one because the whole Church doth beleeue those things points of faith in one like manner you mistake his meaning and auow that which is vntrue It is great pitie but that such as you are coming in the name and by the authority of the Church should haue absolute credit giuen to that you teach without doubting or examining it at all Your second reason why faith is said to be one neither agrees with Irenaeus meaning as appeares by that which hath bene alreadie said and in the latter part is false too for both it is a fansie of yours that God hath deliuered it to vs by the Catholicke Church since the Prophets Apostles and Ministers are not the Catholicke Church but members of it the last all of them seuerally and ioyntly subiect to many errors though not fundamentall And the reason of beleeuing is simply and onely the authoritie and will of God made knowne to vs by the ministerie of men the holy Ghost enlightening our vnderstanding and enclining our hearts to beleeue But
the points that are deliuered by our teachers and receiue those that are agreeable to the Scriptures and reiect those that are diuers from them Other things that men inuent of their owne head saith Ierome as it were by Apostolicall tradition without the authoritie and witnesse of the Scriptures the word of God smiteth A. D. §. 4. Secondly that man which beleeuing some points should denie others cannot while he doth thus haue one and the same faith which other Christians haue Sith he doth not as Irenaeus requireth to the vnitie of faith beleeeue the points of faith in a like but in a different manner from other Christians That is to say Neither doth he beleeue all the points which they doe neither doth he beleeue those points wherein he doth agree with them for the same reason that they doe that is to say He doth not beleeue those points which he seemeth to beleeue precisely for that God hath reuealed them and by his Church propounded them for if he did sith this reason is common to all points of faith he should assoone beleeue all as any one He hath not therefore I say one and the same faith which other Christians haue who notwithstanding haue the true faith And sith as S. Leo said Nisi vna est fides non est If it be not one faith it is no faith at all It followeth that he that beleeueth not entirely all points of faith hath no faith at all and consequently sith one that hath no faith can no way be saued it is euident that he that beleeuing some articles doth obstinately denie others cannot be saued A. W. Your second reason to prooue that faith must be entire is thus to be framed If faith cannot be one vnlesse it be entire then it must be entire But faith cannot be one vnlesse it be entire Therefore faith must be entire I denie the consequence of your proposition For it is not absolutely necessarie to saluation that faith should be one in such sort as you imagine There is indeed an absolute necessitie that all men should agree in the beleefe of certaine points without the beleefe whereof there can possibly be no saluation But that there should be such an agreement in all points though it be necessarie positiuely to speake as you doe because Gods truth is in euery particular to be beleeued yet it is not required as a meanes without which a man cannot be saued as I haue already shewed I grant the assumption in that sense you vnderstand being one otherwise I denie it Faith may be one in all points necessary to saluation and yet not entire in beleeuing all things that God hath reuealed To your allegation out of Irenaeus I answered before the exposition you make of it as I then signified in regard of the latter part thereof cannot be drawne out of Irenaeus who speakes not a word of the reason whereupon men beleeue but onely of the principall articles of faith euery where beleeued in regard whereof there was as he saith an vnitie of beleefe Neither is your proofe sufficient if we grant your exposition For a man may beleeue that which he doth beleeue because God hath reuealed it and in that respect haue one faith with other Christians and yet doubt of or denie some other points which are commonly held because he cannot perswade himselfe that they are reuealed by God though it be generally so beleeued I may say the like of matters propounded also by the Church because the decrees thereof are not so plaine but that they may admit diuers senses But I respect not that clause as being a point foisted in by you without any warrant of Scripture or reason Though it be no great matter what you build vpon so slipperie a foundation because it cannot long stand yet perhaps it is not amisse to push it downe presently that it may not continue to make a shew Thus you build He that hath no faith at all cannot be saued But he that beleeues not entirely all points of faith hath no faith at all Therefore he that beleeuing some articles doth obstinately denie any others cannot be saued I denie your assumption A man may doubt of and denie many points as I haue shewed and yet both haue faith and be saued Your proofe to the contrarie out of Leo was answered before Your conclusion is not so large as it should be For you restraine it to obstinately not beleeuing which cannot barre a man from saluation but in those points alone which are necessarie as meanes to bring him to euerlasting life A. D. §. 5. Thirdly to beleeue some points of faith and to denie others or any one is heresie as to denie all is absolute Infidelitie But it is sure euen out of Scripture that Heretickes shall not be saued no more then Infidels For as it is said Qâ—i non credit iam indicatus est he that beleeueth not is alreadie iudged so the Aposile Saint Paule reckoneth heresies among the works of the flesh of all which he doth pronounce Qui talia agunt regnum Dei non consequentur Those which doe such like things shall not attaine the kingdome of God A. W. Hereticall faith is liable to damnation That faith which is not entire is hereticall Therefore that faith which is not entire is liable to damnation I must intreate the Reader to call to minde what I answered before in generall concerning this point about liablenesse to damnation There is no heresie nor error in matter of Religion but it is a sinne and being so makes the partie that doth erre liable to damnation But yet many errors and heresies are of so small moment in comparison of other that hee which holdeth them may notwithstanding such his error or heresie be saued I gaue examples before and will not stand to repeate them So then the proposition is thus farre true and no farther Hereticall faith in matters necessarie to saluation is simply damnable so that he which continueth in such an estate cannot possibly be saued Againe Hereticall faith in any point of Gods truth whatsoeuer of it selfe deserueth damnation yet he that doth erre in some points may be saued else I thinke there are fewe men liuing or euer haue bene that could haue come or shall come to heauen As for the authoritie of the Church it is not of force to make that simply damnable which in it selfe is not so though it much increase the sinne whensoeuer it determineth truly of any point in question You will say Saint Paule reckoneth heresie amongst the works of the flesh So doth he contentions c. yet may a man in ignorance be contentious thinking he doth well and contends for the true faith as he ought to do and for all this contention not depriue himselfe of the interest he hath to the kingdome of heauen in Iesus Christ I deny your assumption A man may be
certainly and plainly knowen but that euerie man must be able to perceiue that this or that is the rule What is your meaning That the rule must not be hard to be vnderstood Thirdly your terme of vniuersalitie is not so plaine as it might haue bene because it is commonly I thinke euery where in this Treatise saue in this one chapter taken for that which belongs to all persons times and places no where for all points of doctrine no not there where you speake of the entirenesse of faith And I pray you tell me why as you apply infallibilitie to faith and the rule you do not in like sort deale with entirenesse and say that the rule must be entire because faith must be entire I come now to your proposition which I denie because it is not necessarie that the rule of faith should be such as may be certainly and plainly knowen that is vnderstood in euery point It is sufficient if it may be vnderstood in those points that are necessarie to saluatiō Who would say that he which is to measure out timber in length had not a perfect rule to that purpose hauing an ordinarie Carpenters rule because there are vpon the rule some figures circles triangles squares and such like the vse wherof he vnderstandeth not If you runne backe to the entirenesse of faith I will follow you for a refutation of my answer thereunto and a founder proofe of that your conceit A. D. CHAP. VII That Scripture alone cannot be this rule of Faith A. W. The title of this chapter as it shall appeare by and by agreeth not with the discourse in the chapter and besides propoundeth very craftily a matter which is no way in question betwixt vs and the Papists For there is no Protestant diuine that thinks the Scripture alone that is without the ministerie of man a sufficient meanes for the saluation or instruction of all men to which the fond example of this Author tendeth where he talketh of locking vp an vnlearned man that cannot read alone without any helpe but a Bible A. D. §. 1. Out of these former grounds foure conclusions The first conclusion is that Scripture alone especially as it is by Protestants translated into the English tongue cannot be this rule of faith This I prooue First for that these translations faile in the first condition that is to say they are not infallible as the rule of faith must be for neither were the Scriptures written in this language immediately by the holy Ghost neither were the translators assisted by the same holy Ghost infallibly Infallibly I say that is in such sort as it were vnpossible that they should erre in any point Sith therefore the translators as being but men may erre To say nothing of that which by Gregory Martin is prooued and by the often changes of new and variable translations is shewed that some haue erred how can a man and especially an vnlearned man who hath not sufficient meanes learning nor leisure to compare the translations with the prime authenticall originall how can I say such a man be infallibly sure that this particular translation which he hath doth not erre And if in some places it erre how can he be infallibly sure that in those places which do seeme to fauour that sect which he followeth it doth not erre vnlesse he wil admit an vnfallible authoritie in the Church to assure vs that such or such a translation doth not erre in any point of which authoritie I shall speake more hereafter A. W. The Scripture is in it selfe such a rule or meanes and no doubt so made effectuall to some by reading without any other outward helpe of man but this is not the ordinarie course that God hath appointed for the instruction of the people in the knowledge of his truth Therefore if at any time we say that the Scripture alone is the rule of faith by Alone we seuer it from the traditions and authoritie of men not from their ministerie and ascribe vnto it sufficiencie in respect of the matter to be beleeued not simply of the meanes to bring men to beleefe The assumption which you should prooue as also the title of your chapter professeth is this That the scripture alone cannot be the rule of faith By what reason do you prooue it Truly by none at all but leauing the question you dispute against the English translation Wherefore I take it for granted that in your conscience you acknowledge the sufficiency of the Scripture to direct vs in all matters and questions of faith And thereupon I inferre that the infallible authoritie which you would tie to the Church is needlesse because without it there is a sufficient rule of faith prouided by Almightie God whereby euerie man learned and vnlearned may be instructed in all points of faith what is to be holden for true Hence it followeth that the first of your maine points set downe in the preface is false and so your whole Treatise void vntrue You tell vs indeed afterward that some of your reasons against the English translation haue also force to prooue that the Scripture alone in what language soeuer is no sufficient meanes but you neither shew vs which those reasons are nor are there any of sufficient weight to that purpose Let them iudge that will read my answer But first I will propound certaine testimonies of the Fathers concerning the infallibility sufficiency of the Scriptures VVhen heresie saith one hath once gotten footing in the Church there can be no refuge for Christians which desire to know the true faith but onely to the Scriptures And afterward Christ commaunds that they that desire to haue certaintie of faith flie to no other thing but to the Scriptures In the same place three seuerall times in one halfe page he assureth all men that in the most dangerous daies of Antichrist there will be no way to know the true Church of Christ but onely by the Scriptures If certaintie of faith knowledge of the true Church may be had from the Scriptures in time of heresie cannot else where be had out of doubt the Scripture is certaine and infallible and so consequently the rule of faith Irenaeus tels vs that the Gospell is left to vs in the Scriptures to be the foundation and pillar of our faith Tertullian cals to Hermogenes for proofe of that he said out of the Scriptures and warneth him and his complices to beware of the woe that is threatned against them which adde to or take from the Scriptures If they bring any doctrine that is not written therein Origen is ours euery where in this question allowing not any expositions or senses but those that are warranted by the Scriptures requiring of vs to bring not our owne but the sayings of the holy Ghost when we teach This was the rule which Constantine the Emperour enioyned the Fathers of that first famous Councell
Let vs therefore proceede in examining this discourse A. D. §. 1. Hitherto I haue shewed that the rule of faith which all men ought to seeke that by it they may learne true faith is the doctrine of the Church of Christ and that this Church doth continue and is alwayes visible that is to say such as may be found out and knowne Now the greatest question is sith there are diuers companies of them that beleeue in Christ euery one of which challenge to themselues the title of the true Church how euery man may come to know assuredly and in particular which companie is indeed the true visible Church of Christ whose doctrine we must in all points beleeue and follow To this question I answer that euery companie which hath the name of Christians or which challenge to themselues the name of the Church are not alwayes the true Church For of heretickes we may well say as S. Austin doth Non quia Ecclesiae Christi videntur habere nomen idcirco pertinent ad eius consecrationem They doe not therefore pertaine to the consecration of the Church of Christ because they seeme to carry the name of the Church of Christ. For as the same S. Austin saith in another place heretickes are onely whited ouer with the name of Christians when indeed Si haeretici sunt as Tertullian sayth Christiani esse non possunt If they be heretickes the cannot be true Christians The reason whereof the same Tertullian insinuateth to be because they follow not that faith which came from Christ to his Apostles and Disciples and which was deliuered by them from hand to hand to our forefathers and so to vs but they follow that faith which they chose to themselues of which election or choise the name of hereticke and heresie did arise A. W. Hitherto you haue laboured to proue the maior of your maine syllogisme propounded in your preface namely that the faith which the authoritie of the true Catholick Church commends vnto vs is to be held for the true faith What successe you haue had in this proofe let them say that haue compared your arguments and my answers together Now you are to proceed to the proofe of your maine assumption that they onely are the true Church which make profession of the Romane faith Your syllogisme is thus framed They onely are the true Church to whom the certaine marks by which the Church is to be knowne belong But they that professe the Romane faith are they to whom those markes belong Therefore they onely that professe the Romane faith are the true Church The proposition or maior of this Syllogisme is not exprest by you but necessarily implied in this thirteenth Chapter where you say that the way to discerne which is the true Church is first to set downe which be the certain marks whereby all men may easily know the Church The assumption or minor you endeuour to proue in the fiue Chapters following by a Syllogisme thus concluded They onely who are one holy Catholicke Apostolicke Church are they to whom the certaine markes of the true Church belong But they that professe the Romane religion are they who are one holy Catholicke Apostolicke Church Therefore they onely that professe the Romane faith are they to whom the certaine markes of the true Church belong Your proposition or maior is in the two next Chapters your assumption or minor in the sixteenth In handling the proposition first you labour to disproue the markes of a true church which we assigne and that in Chapt. 14. then you assay to propound and confirme other of your owne as we shall see hereafter if God will when we come to Chap. 15. Whereas you expound what you meane by a visible Church viz. such a one as may be found out and knowne you straighten the question and auow that which no man denieth For the question betwixt vs is not whether the Church may be found out or no but whether it be so visible and famous a congregation that it may at all times be knowne of all men If this be not that you should proue what will become of your grand reason that therefore there must alwayes be a knowne Church the doctrine whereof euery must rest vpon in all matters of faith because otherwise it cannot be vniuersally true that God will haue all men to be saued It is indeed a matter worth the enquiring which companies of them that professe Christian Religion are the true Churches of Christ For that all are not it is apparent by your Antichristian Synagogue and that all true Christians are bound as much as lieth in them to become members of some true church of Christ it is manifest because else they cannot ordinarily performe the duties of his true outward worship which are no where done but in his true churches If the choise of any doctrine not receiued from Christ be sufficient to make men heretickes and churches hereticall what may the world thinke of your synagogue which is not ashamed openly to professe that she holdeth many points of doctrine which haue not proofe out of the written word of God For whereas to shift off the matter you come in with deliuerie of I know not what from hand to hand by the Apostles and your forefathers who sees not that this conceit of yours both condemneth the Scriptures of insufficiencie and maketh the reports of men the rule of the true faith and openeth a wide gate to let in all deuices of mans corruption What auailes it to know that all doctrine is heresie which comes not from our Sauiour Christ if we must beleeue that all came from him which your Pope and his Councell tell vs they haue receiued by tradition why should we not rather hearken to your Occham who truly affirmed that heresy is an opinion chosen by a man contrary to the holy Scripture Surely there is great cause to suspect them of heresie who refuse to make triall of their doctrine by Scripture whatsoeuer they talke of tradition from the Apostles by their forefathers A. D. §. 2. The way therefore to discerne which is the true Church is irst to set downe which be the certaine markes by which all men may easily know the Church and then to examine to whom these markes doe agree The which that I may the better performe in the Chapter following here I thinke good first briefly to note what belongeth to the nature of a good and sufficient marke Note therefore that two things are required in euery sufficient marke The first is that it be not common to many but proper and onely agreeing to the thing whereof it is a marke As for example it is no good marke whereby to know any particular man to say he hath two hands or two eares because this is common to many and therefore no sufficient note or marke whereby one may be distinguished or knowne from all other But a marke whereby we may discerne
so many Bishops of their faction Vincentius acknowledgeth a succession continued though secretly from Simon Magus to Priscilian Let vs see ' now whether you bring any better reason for your selues then you haue done against vs They are euen much about one That Church which can shew a line all succession of her Bishops without interruption from the Apostle Peter to Cloment now liuing is Apostolicke But the Church of Rome can shew such a succession without interruption Therefore the Church of Rome is Apostolicke Tertullian thought it sufficient to proue the hereticks not to be Apostolicke that their doctrine agreed not with the Apostles And Ambrose truly affirmed that they haue not the inheritance of Peter which haue not the faith of Peter He saith Nazianzen that professeth the same doctrine of faith is partaker of the same throne But he that embraceth contrary doctrine must be thought an aduersary euen in the throne He may haue the name but the other hath the truth of succession Therefore Irenaeus saith plainly that those Bishops onely are to be obeyed who together with succession haue the truth But of this I spake before Chap. 15. Where there is no beginning what continuance or successiō can there be Is not the question whether Peter were euer at Rome or no full of doubt Are you able in any sort to resolue it by Scripture vnlesse perhaps we may say that he neuer came there because it is no where plainly set downe nor probably to be gathered from thēce that euer Saint Peter was at Rome But it is more vnlikely that euer he was Bishop of Rome I might go forward to aske you who was his successor Linus or Clement which is a point not agreed vpon by auncient writers Since that time you haue had 32. schismes in your Church sometimes two sometimes three Popes at once that your succession cannot be so cleare as you would make it To proue your minor you tell vs that the auncient Fathers did much esteeme succession from the Apostles and vsed it as an argument to confound the hereticks and to confirme themselues in the vnitie of the Catholicke Church Who denieth that succession is to be esteemed and that it hath some force to confute and confirme But what succession is it that is of such price force Personall succession alone without truth VVe heard ere while what Tertullian Irenaeus Nazianzen and Ambrose say concerning succession that without truth it deserueth no credit Yea some of your owne writers confesse that an argument from succession doth not hold affirmatiuely as if there were a true Church wheresoeuer there is succession VVherby doth Irenaeus confound heresies by shewing a personall succession of Bishops from the Apostles VVhat could that helpe the matter vnlesse he be also able to proue that the doctrine he maintaines hath come successiuely from the Apostles by them He speaks plaine enough We confound all errors by the doctrine of the Apostles and the faith preached to men by thē Let not the word tradition trouble any man Irenaeus for that expounds himselfe where he saith that the Apostles first preached the Gospell and afterward by the will of God deliuered it to vs in the Scriptures to be the pillar and foundation of our faith The continuance of this doctrine by succession is vsed by Irenaeus as a motiue to perswade men to the liking of that truth which had receiued so good acceptation and was warranted by so good authority as the teaching of the Apostles themselues In a word Irenaeus saith that heresies might then be refuted by shewing that they who had bene ordained Bb. by the Apostles and their successors continued in the doctrine receiued without any approbation of such hereticall fancies Austin you say was held in the Church as himselfe professeth by the succession of Priests from the verie seat of Peter And why should he not be held by that rather thē leaue the Church for the dreames of the Manichees VVe say as Austin did that such a succession is a better proof of the Church then their bare promise of truth especially since as the same Austin sheweth otherwhere they wold haue their word to be takē as you now would haue yours for sufficient proofe But Austin in the verie same place you alledge addeth withall that if they could shew that the truth was on their side he would preferre it before succession and whatsoeuer other reason that made him continue a member of the Church In this sense did those other ancient writers esteeme and vrge succession whose names you muster to small purpose but onely for shew of authoritie Concerning that speech of Athanasius be not so iniurious either to him or your selues as to presse his testimony to so leud a purpose Would you haue men thinke that he which refuted and confounded Arius and his complices by so many and so worthy proofes out of the holy Scriptures would condemne not onely other men but himselfe also for deriuing his faith in that point from the Scriptures But though you care not what become of all the Fathers so your Popery may flourish yet like a reasonable man consider what a terrible blow you giue your owne cause Is there no other marke of the Church but succession Then by Bellarmines iudgement there is none at all who allowes it not as a certaine light to shew vs the Church But what wants it of blasphemy to pronounce men to be hereticks for making the Scriptures the foundation of their faith to which purpose Irenaeus saith that they were left And I pray you answer me directly why it should not be as lawful for me to groūd my faith vpon the beginning of this succession in the Apostles as vpon the continuance of it in other men Yet might Athanasius well say concerning that point of our Sauiour Christs Godhead that he was to be counted an hereticke that should deriue the beginning of his faith from any other ground then the whole succession wherein the Apostles were comprehended and whose doctrine the Churches of Christ till that time in that matter had followed But how will you proue out of this place of Athanasius that this should be a mark to discerne hereticks by alwaies It was then an excellent and admirable argument in that point not of it owne nature but because the truth had successiuely bene held till those times How will you answer Bellarmine who affirmes confidently and truly that truth goes not alwaies with succession For if it did why should not succession be a certaine mark of a true Church But Bellarmine saith it is not You tell vs that otherwise the ordinance of Pastors made by our Sauiour Christ shall be frustrate of the effect intended by him What vnlesse there be truth wheresoeuer there is succession Then can it not come to passe that any Pastor hauing lawfull ordination can erre For if one