> L Sold By Thomas Baker, 85 Charlotte Street, London, W.l. Eng. THE CLVESTION QVESTIONS Which rightly refohed refoheth all our Quejiions in Religion, THIS QVESTION IS Who ought to be our Iiidge in all thele our differences ? THIS BOOK ANSWERETH THIS QVESTION And Hence shelpeth a mojieafyj and yet amojl fafe ipay , hoip among fo many Religions the mofi'}?nlearnedj and learned may find the true Religion. BY OPTATVS DVCTOR Gall far one Simon , whofe furname Is Peter, and he will tell thee what thoH oughefi to do. Ad: i o. Verf. 5. 6. ^Printed in GANT. By MaxifnilianGraet. 1^58. The Four cKeife Points handled ia this Book. The firft Point; T^hdt theY0 muft befome infallible ludgeyor Rule ig decide all wcejfary Contr$ver[ies to whom all are bound vnder pain of damnation to fubmh theyr vnderfiandings^ Queft: i. The fecond Point. That the Scripture is not this infallible ludge Viule appoin-^ ted vs by God to end all our Controverfiesm Qoeft; The third Point. That the Church is the ludge appointed by God to end all our controvcrfu in Vaith. Qucft, ^. The fourth Point. That the church which is the infallible ludge m all Controm ^erfies is the Roman Church, and therefore all are bound to fub^ mit to her. Queft; 4 J There followeth a Table of the feverall Queftions and Sedions into which the foure fore-faid Points are derided. THE QVESTION OF QVESTIONS. Wf) ho ought to he our ludge in all Controverfies I The Preface. The importance of this Oueflion^ and how eafely even ignorant people may come to be fully refolved in itt^ all beeing reduced to fover mly:points. P* i • The Firft Que'ftioh. \V!)ether ther^ muft be fome infallible Judge or Rule to decide all necsfary Controverjies^ to whom all are bound vnder paie of § § damndm The Tabic. nation u fubmti thejr vnderftandini? And how orderly me pro* ceed in the finding out this ludge. Pag: i. The fecond Queftion. Whether the Scripture be this infallible Judge or Rule appoin^ ted us by God to decide all neceffaryControverftes? Pag: The firll Sedion, Conteyningfive proofes that Scripture is not this ludge or Utile. Pag: 9. Sedion 2. That scripture conteyn^th notplainlj all things necef ary to be believed or done to Salvation. This is shewed b^ i^.Exam^ pies. Pag: 26. Scdion 3. By Scripture wee know not which bookies bee Canonic all Scrip^^ ture, whkh not. Neither is Scripture k!}own to be Gods word bj its own light. Wherefore Protejlants do not believe Scripture with divine Vaith* Pag: 43. Sedion 4. That the Scriptures canmt decide this Controverfy > which book.es be the true vncorrupted copies of the true bookes of Scrips ture ? And therefore Prote(iants believe not Scripture with di" vine Faith, A word of the famous Bible now coming forth at London. Pag:6y. Sedion p [ That Scripture cannot decile this Controverfy which Trans^ lations of the word of God be true ? And therefore ordinary Pro^ tejiants cannot believe Scripture with divine Faith. Pag: 85^ Scdion 6. That the Scripture cannot decide the Controverfy about the truth of S.Matthe^ves Gafpel And that our advcrfaries do not Relieve i his Gofpel wit h divine Faith. . P ag: 1 04,^ Sedioa&i The Table* Scdion 7. That the Smpture cannot decide the tnanifefi Controverfm abont the true fence thereof-^ Therfore in the belief of the true J(n[e thereof our adverfaries have no divine Faith y nor fur e gi Qund out ofthejr Religion^ Pag; 110. Scdion.S. Diver fe other neceffarj points not conteyned itt , or decided by Serif ture. Pag: 136. Sedion 9. A Four and tmntjth mce^ary foint not conteyned in Scrlp-^ ture. Pag: 1480 Sed:ion 10. Fy the text V(>hich our adverfaries bring to prove, that Scrip'* ture conteynes and decides all nece^ary Controverftes, v^ee prove the contrary. Pag: 15^. Se(3:ion 11. Although Scripture only should be our ludge: let this ludge would decide many points clearly againfiyou, Pag: 18 1* Sedion 12* That Holy Tathers never allowed Scripture for th3 only Rule ^fVaith. Pag: 185. The third Queftioru Whether the Church be the ludge appointed by God ta end all ^ our Controverfies. With a word to thj Socinians coruernin;^ rea^ frns beeing our ludge, Pag: igi.^ Sedion 13, If /V declared what weevnderfiand when wee feeh whether the Church be our ludge or no. ^ p ag: 1 54^ Scdion 14. It IS prav-d out of the ould Tefiament that the Church is . ut infMible ludge in all Conti overfies of Faith. Pag: i97* The TMcl Sedion 15* Wkftih^i'^kt of the new Vefimeni fhdt th dinrch is our infallible ludge in dil CmrWtrfies of Fahh^ Pstg: fhefme is proved by fever all UeafoHr^ Pag: 342; The fourth and laft Queftion, Wbkb is 'that Church ii;phich is the infallible ludge in all Con-^ trover fiei ^ Hor^ shee exercifeth her infallible ludgment? Ani vpbat fubmipon is dew vnto her ? Pag; 368* Seiiion ij. Whether the Roman Church be that Church v^hich is om iti^ fallible ludge i I'^g-Syo^ Section i8. Xn what court this infallible ludge decideth our C^ntroverfi^s inVaithl ^^.g: 373* Sedion 19* This Courtin deciding Controverfies ruleth her felfe by the i^ord of God mitten and v^wr it ten. And why shee ruleth her felfe by Tradition ? Pag: 3 8 SeiStion 20« That the Fathers teach thefe Traditions y and the definitions of Councels or Church to be infallible. Pag. 40 j. ScifHoii 21. That the Tathers teach in giner all the Church tobeitifalli'- He. Pag:4i4» Seftion 21. That aU which the fathers fay of the infaUtbilhy of the church in her Traditions or CoanceU, or in generall teaYmes , * meant by them particularly of the l^oman Church as wee vnder^ }tind the Rufly to all men whohad eyes.To our purpofe. Many thoufands there be who knowing Zeal in Sff Religion The impftdnee of this ^eflhn and ho^ Religion to be laudable , aiid having a moft preju- dicate opinion of the truth of that Religion, in which they were from the firft vfe of realon bred Vp , and which bringeth many temporal! commo-^ dities vnto them ; they ftand fo hotly to the main- teyning thereof that theyr paflionate affedion quite putteth cut that clear eye fight ofreafon ; Whence it cometh to palTe that, when the Truths is no iefle clearly fet before the eyes of theyr vn- derftanding , then the brighteft Sunne-ihine is fctbefore our corporall eyes, they are not ih caffe to behould it, though nde of mean capacity ivogld molt e\ridently fee it , when they have layd a fide all paffion^ and prejudice , and with a calrtie arid humble mind begged of Allmighty God grace.tp imbr^ce that fincerly, which vport diligent fearch, they iKould vnderftand to be truth. He who thus feeketh , lhall not faile to find. II. 1 know the multitude of Controverfies which have been ray fed this laft age , and the ma- nifold difficulties with which they are now grown to be intangled,do make the Search of Truth fee-^ me an impoffibility to the ignorant , and overwe-; arifome to the moll ftrong and ftrugling Witts : Therefore no Bookes feeme how more neciefTary then fuch freatifes which handle the maine que- ftion of Queftions, vpon which all other particii* larqueltions lowholy depend, that the true folcrJ tion of it doth negeflarily draw with it thefoluti- ignmni men may eafly he refohedin if. 0n of all other controyerfies which are or can be. This Queftionof Queftions is , whether God, out of his moftfincere defire to bring all Soulesto that happy eternity for which only he created the hath not left vsfomeludge vpon earth to end all our> otherwifeendles, controverfles? And who this ludgeis For the inconiparably greater pare ofthofeSoules, for which Chri(l hathflxedde his moftpretiousbloud, beeing vnlearned , his pro- yidence had been defedive^ if the meanes of end-, ing controverfies in points neceflary to fal vation , had been fo hard to be applyed that it had been out of the vulgar reach. It befeemed therefore the Divine Providence to leave vs fuch meanes as Ihould be botheafy forallmen to vfe ( that fo all men might ^ by the vfe of them , cometo the end which God fo earneftly defireth ) and Ihould alfo be moft fufficient for our fafe diredion* For, to provide vs of eafy meanes, which had been vnfuf- ficienttodired vsfecurely, had not been to his , or our purpofe. 1 1 1, Wee mufl: fay then , that God hath pro- vided vs both of meanes fufficient to bring vs fe- curely to the knowledge of that Truth , which is neceffary for the Salvation of our foules , and wee mufl: fay alfo , chat this meanes is fufficien tly eafy to be duely vfed , and applied by the farregrcater part of the world, confilting of vnlearned people. For if it were notfufficientlyeafy tothemtoappb' I'he imfortanct of this ^uefiion and ho"^ U duly , fo as by it to atteyne to that true belief/ Wnhoat lohich if is imj^ofiihle to pleafe God ( 1 1 . Hehz 6.) It would alfobevnproficaDle vntothat end for which God did give it them. This is nioft agrea- ble to re ifon and alfo to thofe moft conmfortable words of Scripture ( Bfay. 35.) Sa'^ to the faint hat- ted (al^e courage 4nd fear nos. Behould God htm/elf e '^iU.come and^ill fX)i>9you. 7hen the eyes of the blind Jha//be opened and the eares ofthe deaf, s^^d there jball he a fath and a l^ay^ and it (lull he called the H oly H^ay\ jlndthu [hall be l^moyou adire^ ^ay^ fo that fooies camos em by it. Thefe words muft be made good, and therefore fuch a way nniuft be given vnto vs. And itmuft notonly bea Way diredin it felfe, but alfo itniuft be 'i^/ a dtreB ff^ay, and that fo dktdi that ey en fooies canmt (except Wilfully^ crre by $t. This way was promifed to be given vs , asitis therefayd i^henGod him/elfe (hould come and fave w; and provide better for our Salvation then he had done for thofe of either theLaw of Nature^ or lewi/h Law.Our labour muflbe to find out this Way. And this mu ft not be hard even to the igno- rant. For it had been to fn>all purpofe to provide fome where , in this vaft world , a Way , fo direct for the guidance of the ignorant, without the nne-^ anes , to be put in this way , were alfo-fufficiently eafy,even vnto them as ignorant as they are. See my fecond Sedion , alfo the 3 . 4. J. 6, IV. 1 intend then (by the grace of God ) in this Tgnohnt mn my e4ply he fifohedin ti] this Treatife to Aew that this Way may be eafily found out,by only fatisfying our felves in the true Refolution of this Queftion of Queftions^ leading VS to know affuredly fVho ts to he our ludg$ in all our C ontr oyer fie s appointed tobefohy God Hmfelfi For when wee have once found hinfi,all Controverfies ceafeof whatqueftions fo ever; for without all Controverfy wee muft follow this ludge appoints ed by God to no other end , then to make an end of all our Controverfies by his cleere fentence ; Whence/), in his 27, Sedion^ Indeed {ueh a Judge or Vmpire of Chriflendome T»ould(iftohehad y be A ready manes to compofe all differemes and refiors truth and peace. Wee will then indeavour tofkew that fuch a ludge is to be had: And our prinae care lhall be to proceed fo clearly , that a man , of or- dinary capacity, may carry away the fubflance of our whole difcourfe , which for this effed > wee draw to only four pomits. Ftrfii lhall Ihew that wee muft have fome infallible Judge , or Rule de- ciding all our necelfary Controverfies, to which Rule wee will fhewall men bound vnder paine of damnation to fubmit even with interior fub- miffion of ludgment* Secondly I will fhew att large that the Scripture is not this ludge cm: Rule, which point will require a very full examination ,becaa^ leoutadverfaries ground them felves mainly in the contrary opinion , andall our new Seds have no other ground at all I wiUihe w ibmlly that this The impmance ofth^ \^eSion andho*» infellible ludge can be no other (as things Hand) then the true Catholike Church; And this, muff be alfo fully handled becaufe it is the groundiDf our Religion; Andche true Refolutiori of the Que- ftio of C^eftiosdepends wholy on itt.Z^//^ I will flieWthatall thearguments, which convince the true Cathohke Church to be this ludge, do con- vince the Roman , and no Church but the Roman. To be this infallible ludge to whom all confe- quently muft be bound vnder paine of damnation to fubmitt theyr Judgments, and accordingly 4iv'e vniced tohet Communion: this blefled vnion will end bur Controverfies. V. indeed this Queftion of Queftions truely refolved quite vndermineth the foundation of all SediS oppofit to the Roman Church, fliewing vs a mofteafy, andyetamoftfafe way, how in thefe times the moft learned and vnlearned may find the true Religion , to witt , by following the Judgment of that ludge , whom God hath ap-^ pointed them in all doubts of Religion to fol- flow. And therefore , in this infinite confufion of new fangled Seds , this Queftion ( though never fo often handled heretofore , ) feemeth now more neceffary then ever, even although I ftould do nothing , elfe but publiHx new Cop- pies* of ould arguments ; fuch Coppies beeing now fo very necelTary to be thru ft in to every mans hands. My beft indeavours ifeallaime at making ' • " . Thele igMunf tfien ufily he hfohedhst thefe arguments truly publick : that is to fetthem downe fo plainly , and in fo vulgar and cleer lan- guage, devoideof Schoole Tearmes , that ordi- nary people may fully conceave and perfedly vn- derftand the force of them. If my endeavours in this can befucceflefull , 1 hope this work, after fo manyother mens writings will, not be ynfeafo- nable at leaft for the vulgar. But they muft have patience with a long anfwer to a moft important and ample Queftion. THE FIRST Question; ■ • Whether ^here mufl he Jome InfalUhle ludge ^ or%ule to dednce all necejfary ControlDerfies to Tinhorn all are houndlpnder paineof damnattonr to fuhmh their l>nderjhndm^s, AND Ho-tl; orderly M?ee proceed to the finding out of this ludge-. His Queftion is put m the firft place, rather for order fake-, then for any de- batable difficulty which it ccnt^ynes. For all ChriftianSj of what Religion fb cuer they be^do agree in this,that there mull be fome certain and allured mea- nes to end all Controverhes or doubts , which cither be, or can be in Religion* The rea/bn is apparent , bccau{c Dtherwife euery man miglit be left free to belieue what he iudged bell: 5 and fb wee should foon haue as many Religions as there be priuate and different iudgments. Truth is but one: wherefore though iiU thefc diftercnc opinions , may be falfc , yet it is manifeft that, (though they be thoufands, ) but only one of them can be true. For whofoeuer dijfercth from this one opinion which is true , diffcreth from the truth. S. Paul eels vs ( \ u Hcbr:6.) IViibout Taith It is impsfible to plcafeGod. That is y it is impofTible to plcaic him witbffut true Vj^thilor he is notplcafecl mth jdfe ^aitk Without wee pica/e God A i There muft he ci Judge it is niip0i1ible to be favcd ^ and you fee it is impoffiblc topleafchim'with out true Faith. And againe you, fee that true Faith cannot be found in quite contrary per- fwafionSjof which one only can be true,there muft there fore be feme meanes to know this one true Faith from fo infinite a multitude of falfe opinions. What meanes is this ? z. It muft be a meanes infallible, as all Chriftians ngree, butSocinians. For if it be fallible , all Religion may beaphanfy. Chriftian Faith is an infallible affent, to which no fallible meanes can bring vs. This meanes therefore muft be infallible. Hitherto wee all agree. Sec whitaker Cent, !• 0^ i. Cap. 8* 3. All alfo cannot but agree in this , that our inward Vnderftanding muft be bound , vnderpaine of damna«i« tion, to fubmit it (elfe vnto that infallible Iudge,or Rule appointed by God to decide all neceflary Controverfies. For if you in your private judgment , without any fault at all , may follow what you really thinke fitteft to be followed , why may not I, as well as you ^ And an other as well as you or I, follow what really feemeth fit^ tcft to be followed? "Wherefore, it were to no purJ pofe at all (in order to the prefcrvation of vnity in faith) to have an infallible ludge , vnlefle every man in parti-i cularwcre bound, by a moft ftrid precept, tofubmit to that ludge. Again he who (hould not fubmit to an authority acknowledged to be appointed by God to fuch an end , should m-anifeftly rcfift to be governed by that meanes by which the Divine Providence had de- creed to govern him , which is a damnable rebellion jigainft God , and an ad of high tre afon it is againft the DiymcMajefty, to refuf^ to ftai^d to tlie judgement of Tolohntallmuftfuhmit. Q^i. ^ that ludge, or determination of that Rule which God hath placed,for no other end but for all to ftand and fub- mitt vnto it, that by thisXubmiffion, they may be guided infallibly to that one true Faith , without which it is im- poflible to pleafe God , or be faved. Now becaufe all Faith effentially confifteth in the inward vnderftanding ( which is the very feat of true or falfe Faith) Godj who looketh vpon our interior Soule , exadeth to fee in that a ready imbracing of that Faith, without which no Sal- vation is to be had, and therefore he fliould not feriou-» fly delire our Salvation , vnle/fe he delired that wee in- teriorly yealded full alTent to this one, and only Saving ^ Faith, which Faith confilling effentially (as Ifayd) in the interior judgment,God would haue ihisjudgmet readely to fubmitt to that infallible ludges determinatio, appoin- ted by him , as the only meanes to bring vs affiiredly to this one true Faith. Things which are neceffary to pleafe God, muftof neceffitybe things of precept and ftri(3: c6mand,cven vnder paine of danation, becaufe our very greateft obligatio,ofall obligatios, is to obey his will,and pleafure. And his Sacred pleafure is to exad: that moft at our hands , which is moft for our good , and which ma- keth moft for our Salvation. True Faith therefore bee* ing a neceffiiry meanes to bring vs to our eternall good, he, with all reafon , exadeth ofvsall, to fubmit our interior vnderftanding (the very feat of true or filfe Faith) to the full affent of that, which shall be prefcribcd vs to believcjby that meanes, which his holy providence shall affignevs, for our guidance in Faith : that fo all may be vnitcd in Faith interiorly: for in dcede otherwife they be not of one Faith at all. And hence again appea- rcth that this meanes muft be infallible, for it is not pof- A 2 ~ iibic ^ ThereniuJlheaJudge itble that God fliould put a Cominand vpcn all to follow jhat which might lead to any errour gr<:at, or litle. A. Out of this generall doctrine;, received vniverfally without any confiderable contradidjon, there followeth manifeftly this confequcnce, tha^t two iTiQn,oftwo diffe- rent Religions , cannot be favcd) if both of them know what dodrine is taught thcim 5 by diat infallible ludge or Rule , appointed them by God to be followed , as theyr guide Jn matters; of Faith. For both thefe men, knowing on th<: one fide that God hath put an obliga-^ tion vpon rhenvoiiibmitt to the believing ofthatjwhich is propofed by his infallible ludge or Rule^and yet,oR the " other fide, one of them flatly refufing to believe what is thus propofed vnto him; this oae; who proceedeth thus muft needs be guiky of the damnable finne of refradary disobedience againft the express command of God, obli- ging ftridly all to fubmitt to the ludge appointed by him,to guide all to the necelfary true Faith, and known^ to be fo appointed: Hence it is Scripture :Ee who doth not believe shall be damned. M^rk,. 1.6. v. 16. And of thofc who follow feds, S. P^«/ fiyth. : Gal. 20. 2i.The^ Vfho d0 the(e things shall, not ohtejntl'c K'rngdame of Heaven. J. Thcfe principles I lay down fo diftindly in the be- gining,and will again inculcate at the ending,that all may lee 'of how high concernment it is tomakevfe of this meancSjWholy neccffary to that only true Faith, without which it is impoffible to pleafe God and to be faved.They therefore arc in a damnable cafe , who beeing ftridly obliged to vfc that mcancs, which is wholy -necelfary to come to the knowledge of this only true Faith, do not informe them fclves carefully to find out this meanes ap- pointed bj God to guide and dired all to this only true ~ ■* " " ^ faith The ^Umdllmufl fuhmtt. j FaiA , cither fondly believing that men of contrary Re- ligions may be faved ( which wee have juft now proved to be falfe^ except in cafe of invincible ignorance) or elfe by damnable negligence, omiting to vfe that ferious care in feeking out, and /blicitoufly fearching,thc know*- kdg of this meanes , which they are obliged to do in a matter concerning a no lefle bufines, then an eternity of cvcrlafting bliffe^ or never ending mifery. Now leaft any one fliould (ecretly dilpaier of finding out this meaneSj ad fo grow flack in the fearch of it(which is the lamenta- ble cafe of many thoufands)! (in my preface at the begin-i ning)tooke care to Ihew^that^evenignorat people, might, by a very tolerable care come to the knowledge of this meanes, or elfe God had not fufficientIy,according to his moft f\veet Providence , provided for the farre greater part of thofe Soules , for whofc Salvation he died^intcn- ding ro favc them all, by firft brmging them to the pro-? feffion of this only true Faith 3 and confequently, inten- ding to leave them fome certain meanes, to come to the knovv^lcdge of itjby fuch diligence as is very tolerable to human lrailety,and very polfible to vs,as ignorant as wee are. 6, What then is this meanes? It is (as I /aid in the be* •ginning of this Queftion ) to follow fome infallible ludgc or Rulcjdireding vs plainly and clearly to the knowledge of what God would havevs believe, to whom wee arc all bound vnder paine of damnation to fubmit our vn- derftandings. But who is thisludge or Rule ? This is the Queftion of Qaeftions.Herc wee and all Prote(tants,and all other Sediries notably difagree.They all /ay that wee arc obliged to foUoWjand admitt no other in&llible Ru- le theii the Sx:ripture^ wiiich Scripture they all affirme to A3 " be 5 Hhere muft he ad tudgi. be a Rule fufficient, by it felte a lone,to tell vs /b plainlfiJ and fo cleerly,all that is necelTary to Salvation in matters of Faith, that wee need no other meanes to diredlvsin this point. Wee, who are Roman Catholikes hold the Scripture to be indeed a Rule infalliblejand to which all ar bound, vnder pain ofdanati6,to fubmit theyr vnder^ ftandings; but wee have very many,and very convincing reaibns, which move vs to believe that God did not in- tend the Holy Scripture to be , by it felfe alone , our only guide in matters of faith neceffiiry to Salvation, as I Ihew by hue proofes in the'firft Sedion. Moreover wee (ay that wee ftand in need of fome other infallible guide * to know many things neceflary to Salvation,which be not clearly fct down in Scripture,and I fhallfliew no fewer then 24.all not to be knowne by ScripturCjWich doth not tell vs wich Books be the true wordof God,which be not, wich be true vncorrupted coppies of thefe Bookes ^which Coppies be faUe and corrupted, and in what places they be corrupted. Here comes in an vnanfwerable difficulty about S. Uatthem Gofpel. Again wee ftand in need of an other infallible guide to tell vs which is the true , certain and vndoubted fenfe of thefe true Coppies, and whichis^ not»For/rom hence arrife almoft all our grateft Contro- verfies. Again,becau{e our adversaries widiout fuch an in- fallible guide, different from Scriptures, can neither in- fallibly know which books be the true word of God, which be not;nor v/hich be the true Originall Coppies of thefe true books, which not; nor which the true Tranfla- tions of the true originals; nor which is the vndoubted fenfe of thefe true Originals or Coppies,and which is not. Hence wee conceive it impoflible for them truly tobe- leeve Scripture with that divineFaith, which is grounded . aliwaycs ^ The ^Um all muft fuhmh. Q^. i. 7 allv^ayes vpo divine revelation, and is wholy necefTjry tp falvatio. Whence wee hould our felves only to be the true believers of Scripture ; for we beleeue it with that Faith which refteth vpon divine revelation.Moreover by- cur adverfari^s arguments alleadged out of Scripture, tp proue^t to be the only Rule of Faith^fufEcientby itfelfe to decide all neceffary Controverfies^wee proue that it is rot fuch a Rule. Yea though Scripture were granted to be this Rule,wee from hence can prove^that it cleerly de- cideth many neceffary Controverfies for vsagaiuftour advcrfaries. But wee hould that/or our Rule cleerly deci- ding all neceffary Controverfies^wee muft have a Living ludge which the Scripture is notjand therefore the Holy Fathers, in theyr difputations againft Heretikes^often re- fufedtoftand to Scripture only. This infallible Living ludge wee fay is the Church , regulating her felfe in her determinations according t© the infallible Rule of Gods Wordjout of which Word fliee judgeth her felfe to be ob- liged alfo to Rule her felfe according to thofe Traditions which the Apoftles did deliver by word of mouth only, and not by writing. For the Scripture not conteyning all matters ncceflary to Salvation ^ but the Apoftoles of Chrift delivering fome of thefe matters only by word of mouth, fhee ruleth alfo her felfe in her definitions accor- ding to thefe traditions knowing that thofe things which the Apoftoles taught by word of mouth^are no leffe worthy all credit , then what they taught by pen and pa- per.And by the fame Traditions flic is asfufficiently affu- redofwhat was delivered only by word of mouth, as of what was delivered by pen and paper. Now leaft that in taking true Sripture for falfe,trucTraditiosfor falfcjor in delivering the true Scnfe of the one>or the other, this ~ ' ' ' Cbur^b H ^ • ' • . There mujlhe a fudge Church fhould be fubjed to error ,wee %, fliee n in thefiS mattersjolwayes afSfted in her publike dcterrainations,by the infallible aflittance of theHoiy Ghoft^promifed to her for this ed to lead her into all truth.That cheifeCourtjiu which fhce delivereth to the people her infallible Defi- nitions, wee all hold to be lawfull generall Counceisj^. which the (upreme Paftor of the Church prcfideth* Neither doth this Church want meanes to make all her decrees evidently knowne to the people , to be her true Decrees, And all this, which hath hitherto been fayd of the Church in generally wee Incw to be verified only of the Roman Church ; of whom alfo ail the/c prime things which theScriptures fay of the true Church^are verified, andvnited in her alone: The Roman Church therefore beenigtbis our infallible ludge appointed by God to cndjand determin a^ our Controverfies.all vnder pain of damnation are to fubmit theyr inward Judgements and vnderftandings to her decrees , Neither are they in ftatc of Salvation who refufe to do it. 7. Here you have a briefe Summe of all our dodrine in gcnerall^and juft almoft in that very order that I have deliuered here fb many imp ortant points , without brin*« ging here any fiiUproofe of them. I ihall now proceed to the full proofe of all, and every one of thefe points here fet downe,fb breifly,to the end that thou mayeft fee how cleerly wee proceed ,refolving firft this Queftionl^/?^ Is to be our Indgey by fhewing in diverfe Secflions that the Scri- pture is not ludge. And then fhewing that this infalli- ble ludge can be no other then the Church. And thirdly, that this Church can be no other then the Roman. And confequetly all that hath hitherto been (aid, or hereafter flial be faid, to agree to the infallible ludge ( whom wee are To ^hom all mnjl fuhmit. Qj . 9 ztt now feeking out ) is verified of the Roman Church and of no other. THE SECOND QUESTION. Whether the Scripture he this infallihle ludge or (^ule appointed us by God to decide all necef- fary Control^erjles. THE FIRST SECTION. Contayning five proofes that Scripture is not this ludge or Rule. LI Proteftants , and all that numberles number of our new Sed:aries,do affirme that the Scripture, and only the Scrip- ture by it felfe alonejisthat infallible Ru- le, by which all necejTary controverfies that are,or can beware to be decided. As for the mcanes to regulate our felves in the knowledge of true, and fal/e Scripture , and for the finding the cer* taine and vndoubted true fenfe of the fame , they make no other vfe of the authority of any Church, or any ge- neral] Councel , but to confider of what they fay , and ponder how agreable,or difagreable theyr opinions be to Scripture,And then,if,by theyr private judgement of difi cretion,they in theyr own vnderftandings be convinced that, what they fay, is agreable to Scripture,they5for this reafon, give beliefe vnto it. If they by theyr private jud- gcmcnt ofdifcrction be convinced that,what they fay,is B not lo Tlpe^ihle is not not agreable to ScripturCjthey freely rejeA^it, and disbc** lieue it. And this hath ever been -the proceeding of all an- cient Heretikes and is ever like to be the proceeding of all Heretikes to come. For by this meanes thy all come to thatjwhich they all defire, that is,tQ have that paffe for truth which each of them , in theyr private judgements of diC^ cretio, do think to be true according to theyr manner of vnderftanding the Scripture. And they all truft more to theyr private vnderftanding of the Scripture, then they do truft to the interpretation of it made by the greateft Dodors that ever the Church of God had for thele thou- fand and fix hundered yeares,how holy or hovir learned fo ever they were: Yea more then they will truft all the cheife Paftours and Prelats of the Church alTembled in a General Councell, after they have with all mature deli- beration confidered all the texts of Scriptures concer* ning fiich a point and conferred them with the otiginalis, and with other places , and after they have examined each Biiftiop of each nation what they find to have been delivered to themby theyr aceftors touching this point, by much prayer, and publick fafts of all the Church difFu- fed, implored the affiftance of Allmigty God to direcSt them to the knowledge of the truth in fuch a poind:. For after all this done ^and after all thefe prime learned, and Ho y Prelats of the Church,have, by full confent,defined fuch a point to be held as true , and that vnder paine of excommunication. Bchould! When this decree C ometh forth, there will ftart vp fome devout CobIcr,or Weaver: he wiil take this decree into the one hand , and in the other he will take his Englifti Bibie, tranflatcd by fome body (though neither I, nor he have any aflTurance of hi^ hontfty or skill, or of the vncorruptedncs of the Coppy our Judge. Qjt. S. !• 1 1 by which this Englifh Bible was tranllated ) yet into hi$ hands he will take it. And then fincerely he will make a reuew o£ this decree, or of the whole book of decrees, made by this,or by any generall Councell.And then if af- ter his ferious perufal of the matter his rude vnderftan- ding , according tohisprivat judgement of diicreiion, doth in good earneft think this Decree ( or all thefe De- crees ) to be contrary to the word of God ( righriy inter- preted by him ) this man , according to the principles of our adverfaries , may fecurely disbelieve this dodrinc, though propofed by fo great an authority as I have fayd, yea though this authority jas they them felves fay , be the very greateft authority vpon earth. To relate this prodi- gious opinion is enough to refute itjand to fliew how far more rationally v/ee Roman Catholiks rather truft to the interpretations of generall Councels , which wee on the one iide find feconded every where by the authority of the graveft Do(2:ors of the Church of God , according to theyr judgement of difcretion, and the Tradition and judgemet,ad perpetuall pradife of their Anceftours.And the on^the other fide wee fee our own felves, that all this is to the very full as much yea and farre more agreable to the word of God according to our owne private judgcmet of difcretio.wherefore in» this refped wee are to the very full as well grounded as they , and wee fee as well what wee do : But wee infinidy exceed chem in the advantage that wee have, by following not only our owne, but aUb a farre better fighted judgement the our owne,even in the ufe of naturall reafo,befides which reafon thofe Generall Councels have a more ipeciall affiftance of the Holy Ghoft. And thus wee perfever in all ages in all vnity, Whilefl; they in diis one age have fo runne divifion vpon Bz the 11 The^ihleisnot the ground of Scripture , that the meer relation of thcyr feverall Seds in this one age , with the feverall opinions oFcver/ Sed of this age, filleth whole books, which be to to be feen in every Stationers Shoppe.And it is a woder if any new year pafle without one or more Religions fpringing vp, as long as this one Principle pafletb for currcnt,and men may have free liberty to follow the con- fequences which manifeftly follow from it, as of late they have it. If this dayly hatching of Religions happened not fooncr , it was becaufe this liberty was not graunted foo- ner.For althouh tbeyr Bifliopsheld the dodrineof giu- ing all liberty to follow in Confcience what they in theyr private judgements of difcretion held to be conforma- ble, to Gods v/ordj yet they very inconfequendy , forced theyr Confciences to an exterior conformity , as long as theyr power lafted , for fear that fliouldhotlaft long, if men were permitted to pradife what they were permitted and taught to believe. 2. But to go on more orderly , wee fay the Bible by it felfe alone is not this ludge, or rule appointed by Goa to decide all neceffary Controverfies, without you. take the Bible as it , by many and very cleer texts , iends vs for mqfre full inftrudion to the Church. In this fenfe , it is m6ft true that the Bible is a* very fufficient Rule, as fiiall hereafter be more fully declared. But wee deny that , which our adverfaries affirme , that the Bible , ta- ken by it felfe, doth fuffice to decide, and end all our co- troverfies. This I prove firft , by an argument fo mani- feft , that , in thefe dayes , he muft put out his eyes who will not fee the truth of it. For who feeth not now the Bible dayly confulted, place conferred with place,the beft originals learched for,and looked for, and publiflied mo- mr Judge. Q^S.i. rc then ever (wee having the advantage of printing:) and yet after this^who feeth not that Controverfies about the very cheefe points of Religion, are fo far from beeing Icflened , that never was age feen , or heard of, in which they multiplied more No fooner had M^mwlMffcer broa- ched this Principle, that every man might take the Bible into his hand,and follow that interpretation, which after due diligence vfed, he thought to be beft; but prefently, there Iprung vp an incredible number of different Sefts. For An.i ^26 .Car0loftadmyZmngrm and OEcolampadius be* gan to preach that opinion of the Sacramentaries, which denieth Chrlft to be really prefent in the Sacrament ( an opinion which Luther did curfe vntill his very death, )Thc next year after Vaciomontanm and Rothomamus , reteyning other opinions of Luther broughtin Anab aftifme. And thefe Anahaptifis are now growne to be devided into twenty different Seds, all defcribed particularly by Span^ themtus. In fine Luther himfelfe ad his difciples did To tum- ble about theyr new Religion , turning it with fo many chopps, and changes, that OEcolampadius objeded vnto them,rf wee reflect vpon jour dijfentions^ furely there are almojt found among you feventy [even changes. /^qua refponfto ad LU'^ thenm.Pr^fat.Thcyr cheife permanent Seds were,ffce tinomiansy Ofiandrians , M^jorlfisy Synergifisy StancarianSyAmf^ doffianSy Flavians i Sub flantiat urn , Accident arianSy Adiapho-* rifts y Mufc44lans,T[ejfringianSj Vbiquifis* So much for Lu- therans, 3» Now in the year 1538. lohn Calvin a difciple of Zmnglius , delpifing his mafter did fet vp of him felfe, ad- ding many opinios to that of the Sacramentarians. This mans Religion,and his difciples began fo quikly to be di- vided, and fubdivided in to fo many feds, that Luther did 14 The ^ihle M not live to write thus of them: I fearer ever read ofam^ri ie^ formed herefy , which prefently in the beginning was divided int$ fo many headsy fuch a number of Sells (mark what foUoweth) not one like an other , and fuch variety and dif agreeing ofopU nions. Tom. 7. f, 380. And in another place he addeth. Six or (even Seits of them to have rifen in only tm jeares fpaccm T.6. f.SJf* Thus much couid Lf/rfc^r fay of theyr very bc-» ginnings.Wecjatthis day,{ee thathisEnglifti difciples can ring the Changes as well as any of theyr forefathers,fo that now every family is like a houfe in which the Mafter (peaketh high Dutch,the Miftres French, the children one Spanifh, one Iri£h,one Scotifli, and fome fervants welch^ fome laponian, fome Polonian &c. And all this Babilo- man confufion proceeds from this one principle,of thru- fting the Bible ( in the vulgar language ) into every hand with teaching them this Principle , Behould here is the bnly RuleGod hath given you to Rule your owne (elves by ; and by which Every one is to ludge forhimfelfe, which is true dodrine 5 which is falfe, after he hath vfed fuch induftries,as (hall be decIared5Sed:.2. n. i3.Though eve after the vfe of all thofe induftries wee do fee with our eyes no end prefent , or ever like to be made of our Controverfies ftill encreafing, and encreafing like Snow falling from a mountain. 4. A Second Reafon much illuftrating and declaring the former (becaufe it difcouereth the true original cau-« fe why wee (hall fee no controverfies ever ended by {lan- ding only to the Sentence given by God in the Bible) is this, that whilft wee t ake thus the Scripture for our on-« ly Rulc,and God,ashefpeakethby the Scriptures alone, for our only ludge , wee needs muft fall into a vaftcon- fufion. For every one of vs having our private ludgc- ment$ cur Judge. Q^^. S. i • ly Mcnts as different almoft from one an other,a$ our faces arc>and thefe Judgements beeing io very weake in hard, and high matters, how can it be but that prefently wcp fliould come to frame different ludgemeuts of the trufc Sence and interpretation of that fentence which wee find giuen bjr God in Scripture as ihall be very fully de- clared Sed.y.well then in this variety of judgements you fay wee may refufe to ftand to the interior imbracing of that interpretatio, which is made by the graveft general! Counceli that can be gathered vpon earth, vnles, peru^ fing the definition of this Councel, wee , in our private ludgement of difcretion , ludge it conformable to the word. But if ( after vfe of fuch induftries as you requiii re ) wee , according to our private ludgement (fo very various and fo very weake in points fo hard ) do really think the definition not to be conformable to Scripture, then (you fay) wee may interiorly diffent from it, And yet it is true that all faith cofifts in the interior affent.Whccc it foUoweth thatthelaft Rule which is followed , when tU comes to all, is the Scripture, not taken as it ^ounds (for that wee allrejed:) but taken in that fence which our private ludgemey ( for th/s is your doctrine ) draweth from it.This is that^fay wce,which openeth a wide gap to all Sedaries aud D. Fern in his 13. Scd, m vain labours to Ihew the contrary by telling them they muft bring evl- dent Scnpture and demon ftration againft puldick, authority of the Church And that vpon dtffent and gain fajing they muft vn* dergo th Churches lenfures^ which cefures,according to our adverfaries dodrne^fhal) nothing hurt your SouLAnd he concludcth, that there is no other meanes topreferve vnity pro^ per to the Cburch3\it qucftionles this meanes is moft vnef- fcduall p which both cx£>ericacc teachcth vs (as I have y6 Thel^ible Unot. juft now (hewed ) and the very confidcration alfo of the Nature of the meanes. For this mcanesmuft atlaft heap- plyed by men, that is,by thole to whome Nature hath gi- ven as different judgements in theyr vnderftandings , as affedions in their love and wills. Well now , when this weake, this moft fallible and moft various vnderftan- ding, hath got in to his hands the Rule, by which only every one is to be diredted in Faith,what can wee exped but that , as every ones judgement is different, fo alfb will the Faith of every one be. And every one believing that to be evident which he judgeth to be fo, Every . one will fincerly fay that he bringeth evident demonflrations of Scripture,and therefore he contradideth publick au* thority vpon as good ground as you did, when you (at your divifion from the Roman Church) did contradid, not only her authority,but alfo the publick known dodri- ne of all other Churches which God had vifible , at that time,vpon the face ofth^^earth.Tm^^t/i^r wittily fayth:wfe4f VPOS lawfull to Vdentlnm rcojs lav^full to the Valentinians. As lawfully as Luther yZmnglm^calviny and others did fepera- te from all the Prelats and jPaftors of the Church of theyr age. So lawfully at the leaft the Luthcrians, Zuinglians, Calvinifls may feperate from them and theyr few new Prelats and Paftors, and may according to the example | which thefe men gave them, make them felves indepen- dents ad cafl of this remnat of depedency not only of hi- gher Prelates,but alfo ofall inferior Curates: for this is ' but to go on eonfequently to the example given vnto them. But for the importance of the matter,! will further declare this by a clcer example^which may here after be vfciuUto^ys. Let Vstake an Armn CobUr y and give him ' - one one great principle more of D: Ferns , that his pan is th$, negative: for he denieth the affirmative dodrine of thofc who teach , that God the Sonne is of the very felfe fa- me fubftance with his Father; and that coiifequentlj our Church muft fhew him evident Scripture for what wee affirme.Ifyou tell him, the great Councel of Nice hath rnanimoufly declared the ftnfe of thefe words in Scrips* tmc J and mj Father am one things to be this, that God the Sonne is one and the felfe fame fubftance with is Father, though yet he be a difl[^rcnt perfon: well , will he fay, I reverence Councels very higly, yet I muft perufe theyr decrees, and confidcrhow conformable they be toScri-» ture J beginning to do this, began to ponder how God the Father and his Sonne are one thing 3 being they be quite different perfbns ? And furely this different perfb*« nality, in all rea(bn,{hould be a different thing.How then (fay d I) are they one thing ? Is it not perhaps the true meaning of thele words, that they are one thing only by afFcdion ? As I have often been tould by our great Do^ dlors. This I can eafely vnderftand : I will fee a litlc fiir* ther whether this interpretation , conferred with other texts of Scripturcj may not be found to be very good* I conferred it with the text, which one of our Dodors ci^ ted out of rafe«.i7.2i.where Chrift prayeth to his Father That all his difciples may be One thing , as thou father in mee^ and I in thee. Here I marked that Chrift demanded,that his difeipl^ might be one thing , as he and his Tsther are one thing. Now every body feeth, that Chrift never begged, that his difciples might one thing in fubftance xvith hitn. Hecel manifeftly coclude that I now am not covinced of my negative opinion,for which I hcivc all human rcafons - but contrary wife I bring for my opinion the evident de- C monftra- iS The'Bihkisnot monftratio orScripture^againft the publick authoritf if the Councel of Nice. Wherefore if the followers of that Councel prefTe mee to make publik profeffion, that God the Sonne is of the fame fubftance with his Father j 1 may an d muft gainfay them all* Good M •Dodor either •convince this Arrlan Coblery or give vs better fatisfadio» why you deny, that thefe your principles open a gap for Se or tore a peeccs, arc moft likely to have been (ach as they did (ce the Apoftles to cite mqft for the proof of Chriftian dodrine as alfo it appcarcth by thcyr making away the Prophets Bookes cited by s. Matthew. See S. lujlin againft Tryphon (hewing that the lew^s did make a way many Bookes of the ould Teftament,that the new might not feeme to agree with it,as it fhould. . 8. W'ell then by all this it is manifcft that many, and rery many Bookes of Scripture have quite perifhed,be- Cdes thofc many which you your felves thurft vniuftly out of your Bible. Will you have us now, in all our Con- troverfics about ncceffary points, bewholy judged^y/rJi the Bookes of the Scripture ? Then bring thera forth all^ that wee may know what is writer all ot them, For who can doubt but many things,as neceffary as others that arc in the Bookes wee have, werewriten in thcfe Bookes which wee have not? Efpecially the lewcs malitioufly beeing moft likely to have deftroyed thoib Bookes firft, which conteyned the moft cleer places for our Religion. Where is it written that all things neceflary to be belee- ved, be written in the Bookes which wee now have? Cite mee a Text proving this , and I have done , Nay you your felves teach, that all the whole body of the Bookes of Scripture is required, to give us thofe points which are neceffary to Salvation rand the reafon is,becaufe you can* notaffigne any particular Bookes , or particular num»- ber of particular bookes , conteyning cleerly all thefe neceiTary points. Yea, wee £hall prove , that there bee no fewer then twenty foure neceflary points, which are, not conteyned in any of thofe Bookes of Scripture which wee have, whether they were conteyned in the Bokfs which have periflicd, no man but a Prophet can tell;or if they were, then ( now acleaft ) fince they are perilhed, wee cannot know thefe nccefTaiy points by them. Yet, thele points beeing necclfaiy to be known, God muft 21 The BiMi^ k fLo£ provide vs of fbme other tn^atxe^ to fenow thei»i ^. A fifth reafon. If either all th^ bookes df Scripture^ or fbme particular number ot them, had conteyncd the only neceffary dired:ion,for every man to guide him jfeU fe by > in all points necefTaryto Salvation, it cannot be doubted but the Apoftles , who fpent all theyr labours and hues , in feeking the Salvation of Soules,and who knew very well that, on the one fide true Faith in mzt^ ters necelfary for beliefe ad pradice^was wholy necefla* ry to the Salvation of every one j and knew alio on thcJ Qtherfide(as you muft fay)that the only mcanes, appoint ted by God for theyr neceflary diredion in this neceflTa- ry FaithjWas the Scripture,and nothing but the ScriptuJ rCjby which every man was to ludge for him felfejit can- not,! fiiy, be doubted but they (had this been true)would cither themfelves have procured, thp Scriptures to be put into fuch toungSjand languages,as the vulgar people of fo many different nations vfe,and only under ftand^for without theyr under ftanding the Scriptures, it is impoCr fiblc to dired them felvcs by them : and with out thcjr dired them felves by them, it is impoffible to be rightly t^ireded to the knowledge of that Faith,with out which it is impoflible to pleafe God* The Apoftles knew this to the full as well as you , if it be true,- And yet wee could never heare , that they tooke fo much as the leaft care by them felves, or charged theyr fucceffors to take the leaft care, to turne the Scripture,either all, or that part which isfo wholy necelfary, in to fuch languages as the feverall people of thefe ;feverall nations ( which they converted) did vfc:neither could wee ever hearjthat theyr jfucceffors (fo very well inftruded by them) did ever take the leaft caxx to do this/o wholy neccflaxy to be donc,if your db-» Mr Judge. 2j iftrinc te true^ Yet you all deny , that theyr immediate Succeflbrs did fet forth our Latin vulgar cdition,which is the moft ancient of all Latin editions,S.P(?fer and S.Vml living {b long in Rome caufed no part of the bible to be tranflated into the Romifli language : yea S. Paul writes to fhem in Greek. lo. Some anfwer , that the Apoftles tooke this care becaufe they writt the greateft part of the new Teftament in Greek. And then , they beeing put to prove that gree* ke was vndcrftood either by all , or by the greater part of the world , they prove this moft pittifully , by only ci- tiqg Tully pro Arclna Toeta faying. Gr^ca omnibus fere genti^ hm Uguntur. Greek, is read al mojl in all nations. I anfwerjthat as wee commonly fay , that rw//y and FzV^iHn latin, arc read in al nations ; and yet our meaning only is, that the more learned fort in all nations read thefe latin bookes: fo, in this fence, Tully may fb mudi the eafier be fuppofed to haue faid, Greek was read almojt in all nations, becau- fe he added the word Almojl even then , when he delive- red this his faying in an encomiafticall Oration, in which Orators make freeft vfe of amplifications , and hypcrbo- licall exaggerationSjCver without any reftridlions at allj; efpeciaily when fiich Amplifications be for they r turn, as here it was for Tully his turne , becaufe he was to fliew that this man (though a Greek Poet ) could by his Greek Poetry make the Romans famous , Greek Poets beeing read , by the learned fort of the neigbouring nations , and the fame among the learned of thoTc natios beeing chee- fly to be regarded. And either , in this vfuall fenfe , Tul^ Ijf rauft be vndcrftood 3 or elfe flat Scripture muft be de- nied. For die Scriptuer Alt. 2. intending on fet purpofe to give vs the nacacs of feverall people whofc languages were 24 The ^ihleitMt were all different one from an other, at the beginning of' the ChutcKuzmcth PantuSi Cappadccia ^ Afia (minor)PiTy- gia J FamphUiay all which places are fituated between that, Citty j Vvhich now wee call Conftantinople, and the cit-t tyof Antioch> in which townTully fayth that Poet, which he vndertook to pray(e , was born. Within that compafTe alfo is Gdathiy which S* lerom teftificth tp haue had a language fome what like that of Trevers. Now , if even in thele places , where a man , by Tuliy his words , would moft imagin the Greek toung to be the Vulgar la-, guage , it is manifeli: (by Scripture it leli^) that it was not Jo^furely wee haue ail reafbn to imagin jthat in remoter ]parts,both in Eaft , Weft , North , and South , it was in tew places the vulgar language in rc/ped of the farre greater part of the world. Call here to mind how much you vfe to cry out againft vs , for ufing our common pii^r blik prayer in latin , though this language, be Co common among all wel bred people,Mnd yet, this ourCommon pu- blik prayer is a thing only offered to God, for the people of all Nations ; and not a thing fpoken to the people o£ all NationSjfor theyr neceflGtry inftrud-ion,as you fay all the Scripture was. And moreover MaiTe is offered vp by aPrieft, who vnderftadeth the language in which he offe- reth vp thefe publike Prayers: But the Scripture , e(peci- ally the new Teftament^ is delivered to every one of the people (as you teach) for everyone to judge by it for himlelfe, what is neceffary for him to believe, and to doe, to work his falvation^ and this is his neceflary direction appointed by God to be fo- Why then do you not cry our much more ngainft the Apoftles, and theyr ill inftruding theyr SuccefTors in fo important a poind: , as was the conununicaiing or delivering to the people of all nations our hdge.Q^.S.u if iiations,in fuch languages as were knownc to all nations vulgarly and commonly , that very Rule of Faith , fo wholy neceffary for theyr direiSrion , that alPother mca- nes are accounted by you fallible, and confequcntly vn«> fufficient to bring forth an infallible affenc,fuch an one as true faving faith muft be. But the truth is , that the Apo- files knew well enough , that orali tradition , joy- ned to the dayly profeffion of the faith fo delivered, and t-o the dayly pradife y anfwerable to what they fo profef- fcd , would abundantly fuffice for the fufficient commu- nicating of Gods infallible word to all Nations, II. Air this is confirmed by this demonftration.The lewcs in theyr Captivity at Babilon did vvholy loofe the vulgai: vfe,and knowledge of the ould hebrew tounge in which the Law and Prophets were written, and ever af^ ter Ipok Syriack , a language Mixt with Hebrew and Chaldean, and wonderhiU few by theyr private ftudy did fo much as vnderftand Hebrew. This is teftified by your own grcateft Dodors of antiquity, who now are letting forth that admirable bible at London ( of which I fliallYpeak Se£t. 4. w. 8.) in theyr introdudion they fay : Certum eft ante Chriftum ntdUm fuijfe verfionem Syram. It ii certain that before Chrifts time ( and fome time after) there was no Serif turetranjlated into the Syriack language. So that for fourteene generations the lewes had not the bible in theyr own vulgar language : bur the law and Prophets were read in theyr Synagogue,ad the Pfalmes were iujig, in a language which the people no more vnderftood the they nowvnderftandlatin^This was done before Chrifts own eyes , and he never found fault with it. An evident pxoofc of the lawfuUnes of prayer in an vnknownc tcung, and that God gave not the lewes die Scripture t6 The ^Ible notconteyntng aU po ints only for theyr Rule or ludgeifor then it would have bcci judged neceflary to have been tranllated into Syriak^ the only toung they vnderftood.Lct us go on.Yet before w^e proceed, let us note by the way 3 how foon yoU came call your publick fervice into queftion ,when once you had got it in your vulgar language: every vulgar fellow prefumes to cenfure it ; yea it hath in your Courts beea araigned and condemned: and is fo vulgarly contemned that fcarce any minifter dare^ offer to reaid it. But wee mull proceed to other Matters* SECTION IL A SIXTH ARGVMENT. That Scripture cmtejneth not playnly all things necejjary to be belielDed or done to falj^ation^ This is here shewed by 14. Examples, Odor rerne in his Se3, 22. tells us: Thdt Scripture coteyttes all things of them felves necef" (ary to be believed of done to Salvation : not ex^ frejly and info many mrds.but either foyor elfe , deducible thence by evident , and fufjicient confequence. And in his Selt 26 What is neceffarj to life ad faith is for the moft parte 'plainly fet down. I fuppofe he fayihit is Co, for the mojl part ^ becaufe fometimcs it is bnly deducible by confeqaencf , which muft be evident and clear -yZs a litle after he fayrh.And yet for fear all this fliould come fhort > he pre/ently adds that things thus neceflary are not deducible , all bj every me cannot he our jud^etn all joints. Q^. S.i. 17 that reads : but it is emugh if done bj the Vaftors and guides which God appointed in hiS' Church to that purpofe ^ vfing the manes that are needfull to that purpofe-yfuch as is attention and diligence in fearch of the Scripture, collation ofplaces^and obfer* ving the connexions , alfo fincerity and impartialUty in the coU union or dedultion which they makfi > alfo prayer and devotion for apllancein the work. So hej very difcomfortably for the farrc greater part of the world , who (though moft vnle- arned ) are moft prepoftcroufly byProteftant Dod-ors invited , yea declared to be commanded, to read the Scriptures y to the end they may plainly know by them- felves \^hi^ is neceiTacy for them to be beleeved and done to falvation • and yet here they are plainly tould that thefc p eceflary things arc notallybut only for the ntofiparty^hin^ ly fet down , and though they be deducible from Scrrp- turcyyetthey be not all duducible by every one that Reade$ • but it is enough if done by theyr Tajlors and Guides. What by them all ? No , not by them aD , but only fuch as have vfed all tbefe great diligences here expreffed : to which he ought to have added feverall things more,as perfeA skill in Greek, and Hebrew, with the perafall of the true , and certainlj^ true , Originals : which diligences, with ail thefe condi- tions-, one Minifter amongft one hundred vfeth not, and thofe, who have v/eth it, cannot be evidently known by the people to have vfed them j and though they could be known to have done fo , yet they ihou d be known to have vfed meanes that are fallible. How then grow thcfc confequences to be evident ? Yet all the people are all to houldiuch conrequcces eytdendy deduced^and yet with- out they themfelves vfe thefc meanes ( impoffible vnto them) they cannot know the evidence of this dedudion. For how Ihould they know it evidently ? And yet aeain. Da thefc The !Bihk not conteynlng all points thefe poor good people are moft prepoftcroufly taTighti to prefer the dodrine of thcyr Minifters , thus and only thus deduced, ( even according to theyr own confeflion) i>efore the quite contrary coniequences deduced by in-i comparable better meanesifor what our Church teachetH in her generall Councels , is deduced from Gods Word by moft skilful! , and moft learned Prelates aflembled fro all parts of the world,bringing with them the beft Schol- lers that can be got by them in the world: all chiefly hail- ing regard to what was firft delivered with theyr firft faith. Moreover all the Chriftian world isfti}! helping them by theyr prayers all the time they are affebled.Again ihe very conference of fuch men with one an other, is a thing wonderfully helping to the finding out truth; to fay nothing of the fupernaturall afliftance of the holy Ghoft, made farrc furer; by promife of Chrift , to them , then to any private Minifters : what then more vnrca- fonable then ta forfake them ^ to follow thefe? 2. But let vs go on. The world confifteth of people,' commonly not very learned: For thefe men, God muft have provided fomc way , to know clearly what they arc obliged to bclieve,and to do for theyr falvatio.For many things which are to be believed , aremoft hard to vnder* ftafid: And many things muft be pradiced, which are very hard to be done. And the beliefe and pradice of thele things muft oblige all the world, as long as the fame fiiall continue.Now to oblige all for ever to this with out giving them meanes to know plainly and clearly, what they Ihould btleeve or doe , had been a thing vnreafon- able , in To fweet a Providence , as that of our Heavenly Father is. This obligation then in every particular point yhich is neceflarily to be bclccved , and done by vs , for cannot he our Judge In all points. Q^.i. 29 the bbteyning heaven and avoidring hell , muft be clear- ly intimated to vs all, even in all and every one of thcfc particulars. The mcanes,by which this is only to be done> is thQ Scripture taken by it felf alone , as all you Prote- ftants teach : Wherefore an vnavoidable neceffity doth faJl vpon you , to affirme ; that all things necejfary to be be^ leeved , or dom , are plainly fet dov^n in Scripture : And con- fcqucntly what is not fo delivered , is thereby fiifficient-' ly hgnified not to be ncceflary. As for your limitations ^ in declaring thefc words , plainly fet down , wbe fhall (be- fides what wee have already faid ) fay much more in the end of this Sedion and Se£t. 7. Now wee. muft give a di- ftiri (3: declaration of this ^(?«r opinion , which perforce muft be held by all kind or Pr o^eftants 3 for neceffity en- forced! them , who disagree fo often , here wholy to a- gree. Firft then , let vs declare thofc firft words of theyr aflTertion : All things necejfary tpf h beleeved ^ or done. Thefc words muft of neceffity be vhderftood fo, that all things are plainly fet down in Seripture,which are thus necefla- ry : Virfij to the vniverfall Church, as it is a Community; Secondly , all things which are neceflary to all fuch ftatcs, and degrees, as muft needs be in fo vaftly diffufed a com- munity ; and Thirdly , all things which are thus neccilrLry, to every fingle perfon, bound to be of this community. As for thefirfi ; the Church beeing intended by Chrift to be a Community diffufed through the whole worldjand intended to be continued to the end of the world ; fuch a Commvmiry as this is , muft ,. by infallible authority , be plainly tould many things , wboly ncceffary for her dircdion, and perpetua^l prefervation , which no one of you can fhew to be plainly fet down in Scripture. 3. As firft^ (heemuft by infallible authority be plain* ly j o The ^ihlenot €onteyntngall points ly tould in what majincr fliec is , in ali timies an4 pKce^Sr to be provided of Lawfuil Paftors^ and that with perp6«< tuall fucceflion ? As , whether it be in her powcjr only t# appoint the manner of choofing ihele Pattors ? Or they may be appointed her by meer laymen , having feculaif authority : and that, whether* this feculai: authority lawfijliy obtcyiied , or vnlawfiiliy vfurped,? The kftoW'^ ledg or this is neceffary : For wee are bidden , not Jil hearc thofe Pattors which enter not by the doore. f ; • f 4. Secondly ; in like manner , Ihee muft be touI4 1 what power thefePaftoi:s have in refped of one an ojtherj whether there be one , or none all , to have fuprciB$ authority over the reft ? And who they be ?' Ox whei^ ther they be all equall , fo that the one cannot be judr oed, correded , ordepofed by the other , or by the leculir Magiftrate ? Or how many of thefe Paltors ^ muft concurre to the lawfuU judging , correcting, or de- pofing of thefe^aftorsfPaftors have fuch a main influcn? ce into theyr flocks , that, in fo vaft a Community /carce any thing is more neceflary , then due and Lawfiill fubotdination among them , legally appointed , legally obferved. Whatplaine texts of Scripture telleth hex how this is to be done ? Thirdly; in like manner , fhee muft be tould, what power thefe Paftors have over the laymen , be they Em- perors , Kings , or other Magiftrates , or common peo- ple ? What Lawes any of thefe Pattors feverally taken can make ? And bow ftridly thefe Lawes oblige ? How juftthe cenfures bcjwhich areimpofed for the breach of them ? Ail which things are of apparent neceffity for the diredion of the Church , that every one of thefe Paftors may know what in confciece he can,and ought to do,not to exceed his power , or not to be dcfcdive in his duty^ 6. Fourthly, iannotle ottr hdge in nUpoints. Qi.S.i. 3 1 " 6/ Fourtly 5 Shee muft in like manner be tould that whieh fo mainly concerns her , in point of vniverfall go- vernment, by the higheft Tribunall vpon earih ; which Tribunall Proteftants acknowledge to be LawfuU gene- rail Councds., and then nationall Councels* For vpon the lav^^fulneis of nationall Councels , and vpop theyr Ic- gall power ( even in matters of making fo great a change of/Religion, as.was made, by bringing in Proteftant Re- ligion , in place of the Roman faith , and dividing from thc'^hole World Vdependeth wholy the lawfulnes of the Englifti divifion xrom the Church of Rome , according to t^c great Defenders thttco£ D .Hammond and D. rerne who Self. 9. Sayth A nationall Church hath its judgment mthin it felfe , for the receiving , and houUing the definitions and f radices of the Church generall : and may have poftbly jufi caufe ofdiffenting ( he meanes in matters of faith ) and re- f arming ; andean do it regularly , according to the way of the Chiirch h Vrovinciall Synods. And thirkconftderable in the Enr glish Reformation. So he here ; and a^ain more fully in his new booke. C. i. num^ z^.againjl D^Chamfny. A ftran- ge^ riiough a neceffary contradidiori , in places fo ve- ry ncerot fo fmal a booke , to lay for one ground of theyr faith ^ thax all things necejfary miifl be evidently dedufed from Scripture ; and that, againft publick authority evident de^ monflration of Scripture' mufi be brought h^oints of diffent (a$ I Qiewed out of his i 3. Se(t. ) And yet here to make thi§ «uthot^rty of a nationall Synod to befb very great , with outftidwing any fingle Text of Scrip ture,fb much as ob-r fcurely intimating any fuch thing : Yea a Dodor could not but evidently know that in all Scripture , there i^no ^here any mention of the authority of nationallSynods, cfpedaUy in lb toainly important matters for the Salva- tion ji iChe ^ihle not conteyning all points: i > tion of a whole Natio. Alfo a Dodror could not but know that neither the name of iiich a Synod > nor the thing fignified by this name , were (b much as conteyned in the Bible. What then is this but to fpeak jufl: what is for the prefent turn? Mr. Dodor this authority of nationall Synods , beeing made by you the fondation ofyourrc-»^ gularly reformmg, (though perhaps out of policy to op-, pofe thefe dayly borne Seds ) fliould have been proved' by you , by evident demonltration of Scripture , to befb^ great,that it may lawfully ftand in oppofitio to all Chur-^ chcs vpon the face of the whole Earth. Now as the falva- tion or a whole nation is fo neerly concerned in the true, or vfurped authority of a nationall Synod , or Councel^ fo the falvation of all nations is no less concerned in the true, or vfurped authority ofa gcnerall Councell: and yet firfi 5 the Scripture neither tells you , who muft of nc- ceffity be called to this Councel,to make the calling law- full ? Nor fecond who muft of necefEty be affembled^to make the affembly full and lawfuU f Or how many may liiffice ? Nor thirdly , who , or how many of thofe , who are affembled , muft confent to the voting ofa decrec,or dehnition before it obligcth ? Nor fourhtlj , who muft call, thefe men?Or what power he hath to force them by cen«- Jures to appear at the time, and place appointed , and to tontinew there? Or whether any one be bound to comc,;^^ except thofe who pleafe , and when they pleafe? Norfift'^ Ijy who muft prefidc in this aflembly? Nor fixtljy what po-« wer this alTembly hath to declare all doubts in faith ? Or whether it can impofc precepts vnder paine of damnati- on ? For example 5 commanding all vnder this penalty to keepc Chriftmas day , alfenfion day , and to commu- nicate once a year > to faft on Chriftmas Eve >yea to faft; ~ a whole Cannot he our fftdgeln all points. Q/i, S.i] ^ j a Whole Lent ? Or whether , after all theyr decrees, eve- ry one / without Sinne , may leave all they command in thcfe , or the like matters, quite vndone at his pleafure? Here you fee fix things , all mainly neceflary to be •known by the Church , as a Community^ none of the which are plainly tould he^ in Scripture. Thefe fixe points , added to the former three , make nine. Let us then proceeds 7. Tenthly, this Community or Church muft alfo be plainly tould, what publike fervice her Paf- tors may , and ought to performe in the Church? Whe^i ther they may have none at all , as now the fafhion is? Or whether they may have fuch an one as is different , e- ven in the prime fubftance, from all the world ; as the fa*^ Ihion was heretofore? For it cannot but be a thing high- ly importing , in a whole Community , to retaine fucb or fuch a publik fervice as was, at leaft in fiibftatice , ap- pointed by the Apoftles; and not to make what changes private men , or nationall Synods pleafe ; nor to difcard allpublik fervice: Yea, that very fervice which all Chrif*. tians of all Nations, (which were not confefled Heretic- kes) every where vfed^as appeares by all theyr moft anciet fervice bookes which you could find in any Corner of Chriftendome.The beginning of the fubftantiall things ia this Lyturgy, or publick fervice,ca never be found out,by all diligent fearchvfed by Protcftants this laft hundred yeares ^ though the time of every lide accidentall change be extant in many records , which would not have failed to record the beginnings of the fubftance of the Liturgy, had ithad any beginning , dijfFerent from that common beginning, o'f all praAifes of Chriftian Religion brought in by the Apoftlest £ Eleventhlys '^4 "Bihle not conteynhfga!! points B. Eleventhly; the Church is priaiely concerned in the ufeiuvvfuii or vniawiiiU of Sacraaients^dd thcrfore ihis(as all other things necdflary for hcr^fcauiJ be pSainly taught her in Scripture : And yet in ail Scripture (hce can nei- ther find the name of Sacrament in this fenfe which wee> and our ad^erfaries take it ^ nor any rule , to dired her to know w hat a Sacrament is^? Or what is required to the lawfudl adminittraiion of true Sacrw>.nients? which our adverfarics hould to be fo necefiary to the true Church, that in theyr Tenth Article^ they make it one of thc3'r two certain fignes and markSjby' which - he true Church may allwayes be known from the falfe Church jrand yet ( O prepofterous proceedings! ) they , who will have al: ne- cellary things (et down plaml.y in Scripture , know veiy well that many necelTary things, concerning the true vfe of Sacraments , be non^where exprefTed therein , as no one ofthofe things are: which I have now named , nor many other things concerning thieyr true vfe ; for exam-» pie, by whom is every Sacrament neceffarily to be admi- niftred ? Whether muft the Minifters of all Sacraments of neceflity have any Orders , or none at ail ? And what order nluft they have? by whom , and in what manner, or in what iorme muft thefe Sacraments be conierred ? or whether are wee bound to uie thefe Sacraments only when wee lift, and as often, or as fcldom as wee lift? For nothing of this point is delivered in Scripture,nor of the other things I juft now named , whence very many, and very important differencjes he amongft vs ;all vnde- cidable by Scripture , which i^fo deeply filcnt in all thefe points. Hence fomeofyou, for ordering Pricfts and Deacons , require Bifliops ordcyned,and ordeyning with fuch a forme as never antiquity vfed^ And without th^(c : :: ' Priefts, I cannot he our Judge in all points. .S. 2. 35 Pricfts, they £7, there is no lawful! adminiftriog Sa»- cramcncs , at Icaft in pubiikiYea, though they hould Ma- trimony no Sacrament , yet wee fee a world make fcru- pic about the Lawfulnes ofit , except by ordeynecl Mi* nifters or at leaft tickett MiniftersrA thing manifcftly not cxprefled in Scripture, rowhich notwithftanding they all conted nothing to be added. Others therefore farremorc confequentiy anflver, that what is not plainly fet down in Scripture, is thereby fignified not to beneceflary^but it is xiot plainly fet down in Scripturcthat of neceffity Priefts -are to be fo ordcyned , or arc only to adminifter Sacra-^ mcnts 5 or that they only (hould have power to bleffe the brcadifor where isthis writte? For Chrift,after he had ta- ken the winc,faidJ)r/«i^^i;/^4//:vvhich words import a co- mand toJayraen to drink (as you fay 5) why therefore do not thefc words:D(7 you r/;/^,c6cerne ail Lay p eople as w^ell as your Priefts , who can fhew no better authority w^hy they only ihould bless the bread and wine? You differ al- fo , whether the bread of neceffity muft be of wheat, or barly?Oats,orpeale?In bapti{me,fome willhaue fuch^and fuch words to be necelTary^ others will allow baptifnac in the name of Chrift alone ^ others will /ay no words at all are neceffary. For (fay they) when our Saviour would haue his Apoftles to ask,in hit name^Ia: i6. 23. 24. he is not to be vnderftood , that of neceffity they fliould vfe any Words , lo when he did bidd them Goe and teach all na^ thns^bapizAngthem In the name of the Father &c.Matt.28.hc is not necelTaryly and plainly to be fo vnderftood , as if he did bidd them to vie any words at all , for this is not ict down in Scripture , and what is not plainly fet dowa in Scripture is there by held by you vnnecelTary.Loc here in this number, how many other things haue been fet Ez dowm j d The © ihle conteyntng all ^otnti down by mcc all/o neceffaiy to the Church, as a Commu^ %ity; and yet not plainly tould her by the Scripture > But let all thefenuny things go to make vp an even dozen. This dozen proues tweiue times over what I fay d of the Church taken as a Community. 9, But raoft of thefc things alfo arc neceffary to bt known by feme peculicr ftates of perfons, wich muft of neccllity be in this Community : For in it there, muft be Lawful! PaftorSj who cannot know them fclues to be lawful! Paftors,nor carry themfelves for fuch , vnies thej know them felves to be fent by lawful! authority ibecaufc (according to your doftrin) , the other ( and the only other ) mark of the true Chf/rch, is fet down in your tenth Article to be the true preaching of the word of God* But how fhall they preachy vnles they he (lawfully)pnf ? Rom. 10.15.Tbey muft know alfowhether,accordingto Gods ordinance, any other be theyr Superionrs to iudg them, corred them &c.that fothey may difcharge theyr duty in obeying them* Thy muft know the bounds and limits of theyr power over fome, or all Lay men.They miift know what theyr duty istoifeethe Decrees of national or ge- neral! Councels ob(erved,when thefe Counccls are law- full^and confequently they muft be furnilhed with fiiffi* cient meanes to know die lawfulnes of them : which they can never be , bur by knowing thofe fix things fpeci* fyed aboue N.6, no one of which fix things are clearly tould them by any Scripture. To thefe Paftors alfo it bc- longeth to performe the publick fervice in due manner, and to teach the people when they are bound to affift at it ; aud confequently they, of neceffity , muft be tould which is the publick fervice vfcd by the Apoftles,ad theyr fuccdiors inllru(Sled by them to vfc it» For who can be. eanmt he our ludge in all points. Qj.. S. !• ^7 feeue they vfed none at all, though what'^they vied bee no otherwife written then in the publick Prardife of, not one, but as many Nations as they converted ; all which vfed Lytnrgies conteyning the eflfence and (ubftance of a true facrifice^ Thefe Paftors alfo mull know all that in the laft number wee {aid to belong to the wholy neceffa- ry knowledge of true Sacraments : they muft know, tor example, whether they may permit woemen to baptize,in cafe of neceffity ; as I (hall fhew all antiquity to have held and pradiifedjthough there be no {iich thing clearly fet down in Scripture y And io for other things* And Thus much for Clergy men, and theyr ftate. Marriage is alfo a ftate of millions of lay men,and to which fo many of them, not yet married 5 doe pretend : now (bme things vndcr pain of damnation muft be pradiced , and conlequently known^by thefe menjwhich notwithftading are not plain- ly tould them in Scripture : as whether they may have two wives , or no, at one time?wee all hould this damna- ble, and yet this obligation of having but one ( fo hard to many) is no where clearly, and maniteftly fet down in any Scripture:Secondly,it is damnable to them to marry with- in /uch and fuch degrees of kindred^ as wee all hould; where be thefe degrees cleerly tould vs in the new Scrip- ture f If v^ee are to pradice what is in the ould Tefta- mentjmen may, at once, have one or more wives; againft which you have no clear Text in all the new Teftament. I might add that it is nece{rary,to thofe who marry5to know whether it be lawfuU to do fo without a Prieft,there being no fuch thing intimated in Scripture according to which holy and mifterious things are known to have bee lawful- ly performed by the Miniftery of Laymen. For the killing of the Pafchall Lamb was both holy and mifterious , E 3 and j% The Bthk contejnln^ all points and yet dene by Lay tnen* Why may not then mar^ riage be performed without a Pridt? Adde now theic two or three th ings to the former dozeo , and you have at Icaft fourteen ieverall things, the knowledge of which arc all nccdi ary to men of feverall ftaces in the Church j^and yet no where ]ct down in plain Scripture. I lay here no- fliii g of the obligation which parents have , to fend theyr children to be baptized in due time; becaufeof the cbii-* gation of baptizing children wee fliall ^>eak hearafier leS, 8. n. 3. asaiib ot lending them to liich who can law- fully adminifter Baptiime - of which I haue laid Ibmc thing. 10. Laftly, (peaking of all in generall , whatfocver they be, many of the things n©w ipecificd muft , under paine of damn.:tio be known by them,that they may prac-* tice theyr neeeffary dutie which obligeth all and every one to be of a Church which hath lawful! Paftors, and which hath lawfuil Priefts,Ordcyned,with the matter and forme which is neceflary , by true Bifhops, and not falfe ones; and the Preachers of which Church muft have true million. All muft know alio , how farre they are bound to obey theie theyr lawful! Paftors,both with interior fubmit- fio of iudgemct in feme cales, and alio exterior coformity, inothers.Thcy all muft know the lelues to be of a Church where God is publickly ferved, with that publick fervicc which theApofties brought into the Church, and comend^ ed to theyr lucceflbrs. Every one is bound not to work vpon the Sunday es,as wee will fhew , though neither this> nor yet many other things ( of which wee ihall Ipeake in many of the nextledions ) be plainly fit down in any Scripture, Here wee haue had above 14. of thefe things Ipecified, only for the full declaration of thefe words^ cannot he our Ittd^ in off pomts.Q^. S.l. ^ ^ ftec:ffdfj u fdvdtu:a3ii which jrou fay are plainly fet down inScripcuie* 1 1. Let vs now declare tBde words, fhitdj fet dawn lit Serif tare ; that all may plainly fee how many more great new difficuit!es fpring from them* Tbe^fi dt^ctdtj ( Clear- ed by no plain Scripture) is, whether the Book of Scrip- ture,in- which fiich a. point is fet down , be Gods, word, or no; as when it is written; in the book of Toby, luditb, the Machabees,the Apocalips? The fecmd difficuhj^ cleared al- io by no plain Scripture^ is whether, though fiich a book be Gods word;yet t be lecured,that it hath not been cor- rupted in die Chapter , or verle , exprefEngrhe point in c6troverlj\ Tfc^ third difficulty yc\co.rcd plainly by no Scrip- ture is, that thele words , on which the controverfy de- pcnds, be infallibly taken in this place in theyr Common and vfuall fenfe, or perhaps taken figuratively, or ■poken miftically of fpme other thing. For how is it poffible, by Scripture only, to come to have an infallible knowledge of this, on which the controverly wholy depends? beeing this dependeth meerly on the inward free will of God, who perhaps would v/e oly the plain vulgar lenfe of thele Words in this place , perhaps would vfethem only figu- ratively ^or only myftically* To know this fecret free will of God,and that infallibly,! muft have fiich a Rcueiation, or fuc^i* an afliftance of the Holy Ghoft,a5 you will not al- low to the Church reprefented in a CounceI,and therefore it cannot prudently be allowable to any private man : neither can any private man fliew plaine Scripture for his particular pretence , to know infallibly this fecret will of God. A fourth di^adtj (not to be cleared by plaine Scrip- ture ) is, that after I have perufed the whole Scripture, puipoiely to know what I am boud:of neceffity to believe. 2 38 1^^ 4© The !Bihle oonteynelngall points and do , for my Salvation j I find no where plainly touM mee , that I am only to believe, and do that only which is plainly tould mee in Scripture : io that perhaps I may be bound both to believe , and do, fomewhat not expreffed clearly in Scriptui:e> efpecially it not beeing clear, plain, and manifeft by Scripture, that I am not to hear the Church , nor admitt of vnwritten traditions , but ftand only to what is written. But of thefe jmer dif- ficulties wee fhali fpeak fully in the following Se-« drions . 12. Now wee rauft confider how the/c words , Pl4/w- /; fet dom in Scripture , be yet Uable to a fifth difficultj-^ which is, that men of quite contrary perfwafions in faith.> fayjthat fuch a text fayth plainly this an other fayth,that it fayth plainly no fuch thing,- yea, that it fayth the plain contrary: witnes thofe words,T/;i5 is my JB(?4)'s'^hich3as you bring it about,muft plainly figmfy :,thif it not my Body. And, thus we contend whether Scripture be plain e and clcare? which makes it plaine and clear, that Scripture, though fubmitted to by vs both , endeth neither of our differen- ces in moft important matters^ 13. A fixth di^culty ( and a moft fruidfull Mother of a number of difficulties ) arifeth from your own cxplica-. tiOns , and declarations , and modifications , and limita- tions , and as good as annihilations , by which you fo re- ftrain t his principle; which you ftrain fo much at other ti- mes , to make it reach home to all points necelTary , by a clear decifionof the all,euen in any neceflary controverfy. Doctor Yerne , with whbfc words I began this Sedion , tells \5S , that all things neceffary are not jfb plainly fet down,that every one who reades Scripturc,can manifefl- ly draw out of it the knowledge of all po ints that are ne- ceffary cmnothe our Judge In aK points. Q^S.i, 4pl icflary ; but( fayth he ) it is enough , If it be done by the Mi^ nijlen. So litle plain dealing there is in calling , or miC calling that thing |?/4/«jwhich plainly proveth itfclfe no€ to be lo,by not beeing plain to any, who are not as know-* ing menas theyr Minifters, Allvvoemen C who fo def^ peratly read^ad cite the bible) may now defpaire of know- ing 5 by theyr own reading, even thole very things which are neceffary to falvation* This , they now tell you , muft be done for you by Minifters ^ from whom if you will have it , you muft take it on theyr word: For you are a re- probate it you tell them theyr plain dedudions be not plain, nor conformable to Scripture j though you may be one of the eled , and yet fay fo much againft what whole generall Councels have deduced from Scripture, But this which they would have you beleeveto be plainly letdown, they tell you cannot be found out to be lb by all kmd of Minifters, only by fuch { point them out with your fin- ger if you can ) as vfe all thefe things following* i . Atten^ tlon^f 2. Diligence in fearch of the Scripture ^ ^. Collation of f laces , 4. Obfervingthe connexions , 5. Sincerity and tmpar-* tiality ^ 6. Prayer ard Devotion for apfiance in the To all which you muft ever put this Not anduniy that neither you can tell , when they have vied thele things fufficient- ly , to come to the plain and wholy neceffary truth ; nor they can tell whether there hath not creapt in fome error in the vie of thefe meanes , fpoiling alL Neither will the vfe of thefe only fuffice: Skill in Greek, and deepe skill, is required for pervfing the new Teftament , and no lelle skill in Hebrew for the ould. To thefe, ftill fallible Rules, To many more are to be added out of your own Divines,, that your great Divine Sancbim ( dc Sacra Scriptura Col. 409.) aflignethno fewer then Nineteene Rules ^ befidcs the F having 4^ IChe^ihlenotcmteynlngatl^^^^ having the Spirit of God (quite forgot by Da Fern ) and be^ fides vnderjl ending the mrds and places of Scrinure.N'o won- der then that your learned Scharpius {in curfu iheolvgico de ScrtptorihsyControverf^ S^V*^^') aflignes fulltwemj Rules for the vnderitanding of Sci?ipture,' wfc/V/; , vnles they be kept , wee cannot but erre , as he faytb# 1 wonder how ma-^ ny more Rules be neceffary for ordinary^vnderftandmg men , to know that you have not erred in the vie of all thefe twenty Rules , elpecially he and others exading,a- mong other Rules, to know Orrgmall languages , to difcuffe tht words and Bebrdifmes. Now,dear Reader,a$ thou loveft thy fbule, (tand h ere a litle , and ponder how thy Minify tcr5 abufe thee > which do , all or them , teach this dod:-' rine ( delivered by D. Tern.inSeB.S, 9. lo* 11. and 14. in thefe words, the place laft cited:) if you mil be with vsy jQUr shall fee what jou do. Wee require jour obedience to what wee demonfirate to be Gods will.Xhe Churth of Rome (becaufe, ;forfooth 5 flie will have you ufi the better light of Coun- eels illuminated by the holy Ghoft) fajth 3 if you will come to mee^you muftpuit out your Eyes. So he, fo all the reft do plainly cheat thee , when they tell thee , thou shalt with thy own ejesfee all things plainly fet down out of Scripture:Fb^ now , when they come to theyr try all, they tell thee thou muft truft Minifters , and not all, but fiich.as can,and re- ally do vfe 20. hard Rules. But of this more Seit. 7. n. 3^ Here , I only bcfcech thee to tell mee , how thou canft come to think that he , who for our faivation gave his precious bloud , w6uld not give vs alfo fome more plain ^Rule to dired vs to the infallible beleefe of that , which «he obligeth vs to beleve vnder pain of damnation. S^e my Preface n urn. 2.3. Dear Lord ? Is this that was pro- jnlfcd for an cxrraordinary favour ( not yet graunted ) when Cannot he our Wge In aU points. Q^. S.l. 4^ r^hen God himfelfe should come;, and fave uSyund give us away^ lo furpaffing all former wayes. Aw'aj fo dinit vnto us, shatfooles cannot erre by it: Forfiirely wife, and very wife men know neither Greek, nor Hebrew, nor the meanes how to know that thofejW^ho know thele lariguages,havc duly ufed theyr knowledge , and the other odde nine- teene Rules, Tv/wfe vnles theybe kepy v^ee cannot but erre. See alio Se£t 7. Here proteftants with weeping eyes may lay , what luvenal did fing , O quis cujlodiet iffus Cujlodesl What Kules to men short-fighted given shall be^ To k!fow vph^n Overfed overfee? SECTION IH; A SEAVENTH ARGVMENT By Scripture wee know not which Bookes be Canonicall Scripture , which not i ^either is Scripture kno-^n to be Cods Worthy its oT»ne Light j "tpherefore Trotefiants do not helie'Pe Scripturelpith dil^vi^ Faith, He force of- this Argument Isrcefijr is this. If Scripture were our only Rule of beleefe,it would tell us all thing's nc^, ceffaryly to be believed: It doth i%ot-teU y s wbat bookes be the only true wor d qf 44 TheBihlcmt conteymng [mnts Godjwhicb is apolntmoftneceflaiy to bebeleeved: It is not therefore our only Ri Ij ot be^ietc : Here you fee a fifrbteetb necelliry , and molt neccflary pointy noi plain- ly let down in S zriptm c.lutber denyedi the Avccalip, vbc ifijtle t§ the Uehrevcsytbc EftftU of S. J^mes . and other parts of Scripture , to be true Scripture what text tells him plainly he muft beleeve the contrary ? Wee houid fomc balte a fc are book es to be true Scripture, which you hou.d Apvcnpbaiwhit Scripture , or one iingle {^'liable of Scripture,tel:s vs wee hould talle,and you true?Cite that text , axid wee yeeld. If you cannot cite mac text , then yeeld your feives to beleeve many , and fo,very many parts of Scripture to be Gods word^which by no one iixi^ gic text of Scripture, you can prove to be io. Tell mee then,! pray^tcU mce,as you tender your own and my fal- vatioujvpon what ground you beleeve the to be fo?You beleeuc all things for the laying of true Scripture :W'hy do you beleeve the Scripture to be Scripture and Gods wordfNot upon any text,for you have not one: And yet you belceue this infallibly. What other ground have you, bchdes texts ofScripture,able to fupport an infallible be- iiefePls the tradition of theChurch to be relied vpon in fo great a matter? Then much more may it be reived vpon inlelTer matters. But if ihee be fallible in :he delivery of her traditions, how can I,vponher authority, ground an infallible alTent to the beleefe of all rhe books of Scrip- ture beeing Gods cerrain word r For this is a very hard point , becaufe many of them contein things of them lelves very incredible, as tha:-the perfonality of God the Father (hould be all one thing with the divine elTence j and that 5 the perfonality of God the Sonne fhouldnot be dll ouc thing with the peifoiulity of God the Fatherj Cannot he our Judge in all points. Qj.. S. 4f and yet be all one thing with the divine efTece^which di- vine elTeceisali one thiug with thepcrfonaiity of God the Father. That the ferpent (houid fpeak to Eve: that all the world fhould be ex-cludcd Hjaven for one mans eat- ing an Apple. Is not that authority, which is able to fup- port the infallible bekefe of Books, which contain things fo hird to be.ecve , abje aifo to fupport the infallible bc- lecfe ofthings farre leiTe incredible, as Purgatory, Pray- er to iaincls , an inferior worlhip or Images in re/ped of the perfons they repre/et? Have you any text to teli mee, that I muft beleeve the Church in this moft hard and im- portant matter, (to witt in this matter that fuch and fuch Bookes be infallibly Gods word) and that I muft not be- leeve her in leffer matters ? Give me this Text , or con- • felfe that you voiucarily beleeue a moft huge hard point, on which al your belecfe in all other pomts muft rely, without any fingle text of Scripture. 2. D. Fern, to prevent this argumeiit3puts yet a new limitation to the common alTcnion of Proteftants ^ that all things necelTary are plainly fee down in Scripture. For fayth he fed. 13. Wee pj the Scripture contemns all thi m^i^ teriall objects of fayth necefjAry to S2ilvAtion, that is, All tkinos that had been necejjary for Chrijlims to believe and d^y though there had been no Scriptures, Whence fed. 24. he, out of this principle, anfwers my objedion thus,- That to believe Sai- pturetobe the xordof God, is not ofthofe materiall objects of faith v^lnch vs^eefay are contejned in Scripture , and are fuch as hdd been necelfary for Chrifiians to belteze though there bad been no Script ure.XncX the he proueth the impo/ribiiicy,th..t there is, that Scripture iliould fufficienily tell vs whivh Bookes be infallible Gods word: and that, therefore wee muftfuppofe vniverfaii Tradition itUi to brmgicdown f 3 to 4^ The %Ue not conteyntn^ aU points vs.But you mark ♦ not how pittituUy you vndoc thai very prime dodrine of yours ^ which forccth yon all to maintayne , that, all things neceflary are plainly iet down in Scripture,to wittjThat(according to you)Scrip- ture is given vs by God, to be our only diredion, in all that wee mult necelTarily believe and do for Salvation^ for if this dodrinc muft paiTe among all for fb very true, that it muft be imbraced by the beliete of all,before they ca wifely fay,-r» this Bible only vcee arc to find all necejfarj truth^ It foUoweth then moft vndoubtediy vpon Gods giving Vsthe Bible^to be taken by vs as our only Rule^that there muft needs arife a neceffity of our believing fome- thing which weefliouldnot have been bound to be- lieve, if there had been no Scripture written. For there muft arife a necefEty of believmg this very doctrine of yours, that the written word of. God is given vs for our only diredion in the points aforefaid. Or elfe no man is bound to believe this^and to admitt of: Scripture only for his Rule. For nothing can be more fure, then that this dodrinc' hath not vniucrGU Tradition, ftill to. bring it down to vs: Therefore either this dodrine is moftfalfe, (as really it is: ) or moft falfe it is that wee vpon the writing of Scripture, are only obliged to believe that, to the beliefe ofwhiich wee fhouid only have been obhged though there had been no Scripture.For what fay you to this argument.True faith is neceffary to Salvation^ there- fore the only Rule guiding vs to true faith, muft of necef- fity be known affuredly by vs; Becuufe, without the guid- ance of this Rule wee have no affured meanes ( as you ■fay) to true faith : But the only true Bookes of Scripture, are the onlyRuIe guiding vs to true taith;as you all teach: thercfore.wee muft have an infallible aiTurancje Qf thefc true eannot he our Judge In all points. Q^.i. 5; 47 ^true Bookes.Again,the more impoilible it is for Scripture to informers fufficiently which Bookes be Scripture, which nor, , and that infallibly ; the more certain it is^thac iuft as this moft important point of all points, and the liardeft of them all( for it conteyneth all the points that are moft hard. in our faith)can be made infalliby affecur- ed vnto vs without Scripturc^fo other points alfo may bee; as Purgacory, Prayer fo laints &c?and therefore thefe other lelTe hard points may be^as infallibly, by the Tradition of the fame Church , aflecured vnto vs* For if tradition can lupport an infallible aflfent to the hardeft points,it ca fup- port the like ailent to the ielTe hard. He that can carry a Jhundred pound weight, can carry three or fowerfcore ppund weight. ^ 3. Hence it is that D.Fi^rw, in the fame placc,is forced -to fly to that paradoxical] op inion,to which nothing, but .deiperation of cfcapingany other way, hath driven him and his Proteftant bretheren^Thus then he fayth-yScripturc teeing received v fen fuch traditwn^it dijcouers it felfe to be de-* vine by its orvn light, or thofe int email arguments which appear in it to thofe who are verfed in it* Which others expreffc thus," the Canonicall Books are worthy to be believed for them (elves ; as wee affent to the firft principles by theyr own lightjfo wee do aflent to Scripture to be the word of God, throijgh the help of the Spint<>fGodjasby its own light TheCanonieall- Bookes beare witnes of them fclves, .they carry theyr own light, by which wee may lec them to be Gods word;aswee (ee thefunne, to be the funnejby his ow^n light fo they. 4. Wee muft then firft fpeake a word of this Tra- dition, which D^Vern called vniucrfall Tradition, that is the tradition of the whole Church , which you all lay is ' fal- 48 The ^thle not conteyning nil points falliblc^ad fo you muft not rett vpon it-wiih an infallible afient, but take it as a prudent motive periwading fuch BookeSjas you houid to be CanonicalI,to be Gods word, which you believe to be lb for it felFe. But it is moft faife that vnluerfall Tradition hath dehvered luft that nunnt- ber of Bookes , and thofe Bookes , which you hould to belong to the true Canon.The Councei of Laodicea (itt which you vfe to boalt your Canon to be conteyned) emitteth the Apocalyps or Revelacions, and,befides R«f- finus ^ you will not find one ancient fi^riter who ey ther putteth not fewer or more Bookes in the Canon then you do* Our Canon you deny, and difcard fomc halfe a fcore Bookes out of it. Yet ours is the only Canon w^hich can ciaime a fufficient Tradition, as I fliall here (hew Num, II. And as for the Councei Of Laodicea,it is farrc from beeing againft us/or it defines in deed fuchBookes to belong to the Canon of Scripture ; but it doth not exclude any one of thofe which alfo afterward^when due cxamen was made,were found delivered, if not with as full, yet with a Tradition fufficientlytull; as you may fee in the third Councei of Carthage, to which 5. Auflen fub- fcribed in perfon. An evident Proof of this is, that the sixth Generail Councei doth confirme both this Coun- cei of Laodicea,and that very Coucel of Carthage,which by name defined all the Bookes, fet down in our Canon^ to be Gods word:fee Num. ii.And then tell mee with what face you can fo much as pretend to vnluerfall Tradi-' tlon,, for admitting your Bible a Bible putting among the Apocrypha fo many Bookes, flatly againft the tradition of the precedent 12. hundcred yearcs.If this Tradition be a prudent inducement to imbrace what it commcndeih, then ic induceth vs to imbrace halie a fcore Bookes more then cannot he aur ludge in all points. Q^.S. 49 then you putt in your Canon: If it be not a prudent indu- cement,ie helpeth you nothing.Ifyou ifly to the tradition of the Church only of the firlt four hundered yearcs, re- member that the Councel of CarthagCjiuft after the end of tho(e y Cares, alledged the ancient Tradition of theyr^a^ thers, which they iudged fufficient for defining our Ca- non* They, who were fo neere thofe firft four hundered years, knew far better the more vniverfall Iraditionof that age,then w^ee can 12. hundered yeares after it. True it is (nothing beeing defined as then ) prirat Do^fiors were free to follow what they iudged to be trueft : and as you find them varying from our canon, lome in fome bookes , fbme in others ; fo you will finde them varying from one an other , and varying alfo from you # For in thofe firft four hundered yeares Me- lito and Naz.ian7ien excluded the book of EJ?er,which you ^ddcOrigen doubts of the Epiftle to the Hebrewes,of the fecond of S. P^fer,of the firft and fecond of 5. lohn. S. Cy- frian and NazaanTien leave the Apocalyps or Revelations out of theyr Canon. Eufebius doubteth of it^ Only Rufinm aggreeth iuft with you.Doth he make alone a fufficiently vni-^ verfall Tradition from Chrifis time to this ? Now then all of you, by retufing the Canon commended by the Tradi- tion of our Church ; are left to the fagacity of your own «ofes, to hunt out that moft important and infallible cer- tain truth of the true Canon of Scripture. ' 5. Here wee muft examin what help you will have by the true Bookes of Scripture, which you fay carry theyr own light with them, by which they may be as clearly (ecn to be Gods word, as the Sunn by his own light.For to the truth of this ftrange Paradox, explicated as aboue , you have brought the whole fubftance of your faith, whic}^ G nuift JO The ^ihle not conteyning all points itiuft all fall to the ground, to be trodden vpon by tht Socinians,if this groundles ground houlds not fure : Be- cauie you believe all other particular points relying vpon Scripture only ; All the Scripture you believe relying on this ground only, that you know by the very reading of fuch a booke,that this booke is as evidently Gods word, by a certain light which the reading of it ( with Spirit) producctb , as you fee the Sun by his light. Indeed yon have brought your Religion to as pittitull a cafe asyoux greateft enemies could with it in. 6. Firft then this ground (vpon which you ground ali)is accounted a plain e foolifib ground, by your own re- nowned CbilUnpvorth I fay ,y our own,for the moft lear- ned of both your vniverfities have owned, and higly ma« gnified his booke,notwithftanding his fcornfuU language concerning this ground oi your whole Religion, C/;/7- lingrvorth then {p.6^.n»^^.) anfwering thefe words of his adverfary.rt^ the divinttj of a writing cannot be k^iown by it felfe aton€ybut by fame intrinfecall authoritjivcplyeth thusj This you need not f^roue:for no wife mandenjeth i/.And UMoor fe^r (efteemed the learntdefi Frotefiant winch ever putt penn0 rap^pfr)writeththus; Of things neceffary ^ the very cheifeji is to k^ow what Bookes wee are to efteeme holy, which point is confejfedimpopble for the Scripture it felfe to teach* So he EcckPol: L.i^S. 14.Pag.86. And D. Coa/el in his defen- ce, Art.4,P. 31, If is not the word of God whiih doth or can af* fure usy that wee do well to think it the word of God. Yet that which fuch men as thefe hould impoflible , and a mecp Chymcera, or phanfy,which no wife man would hould , yoi^ hould to be as evident as the funne beeing fecn by its own light ; as evident as the firft Principles^which areip cvid-ciiC of dicmrdves that they iieed no proofe,but arq ^ ' ' ' cleaxer cannot he our Judge in all points. S- ^ . dearer then any thing you can bring to proue them. For example That the whole is greater then any part. If is impofi^ ble that any thing fhould be [o^ and not be fo, iuft in the fame circtmftances take the book o^ludhb , which you reied for Apocryphall , as not carrying with them a divine light , and thofe internall arguments :takc ( 1 far ) eyther of thefe books, and read it over, and be as well verfed in it as you are in the book of Numbers , for example; and fee if it be poiEble for you, with all the help your Brethren can afford you , to point out any one Chapter^verfcjOr word in the book of Numbers^carrynng with it more divine rayes > or better internall arguments, then appear in either of the bookes I named^ What would you have vs do with our eyes , to keepe vs frona feeing how clearly this is impoflible vnto you; which ne- vertheles fhouid be moft eafy , if yoiur opinion were true» or any thing like to true.For thefc divine rayes (fay you) carry an evidence of high a degree , that you doe not only beleeue (as wee poore>folkes dQ)but you doe know thefe bookes to he divine:and this you know wi:h a moft infallible knowledge , produced by the evidence carried in the clear Sunnefhine. of this Light, and theie fo con* fpicuous internall arguments making it no leffe apparent the;i the firft Principles, : ' 1 1 Sixtly if any one verle , orany one fmall word > changing thefeafe of the holy Ghoft (efpecially this litle- word,N(?f) bejeft out in any one Ch apt ex^ eyther through ignorance , malice or carelefness of thofe writers (whofc Coppies our printed Bibles have followed; ) whom will you be able tp^make beleeve,that you are fofharpe-f^b t- cd as to fee this fmall omiflion,and that by a light ZiiiHce^- ing for an infalHble beleefe of it appearing to you only by the reading that place. And yet thisyau muflrdoto diftinguiHithe true word of God from the falfe. But how &rre all of you; are from doing dxis , I will now declare : ^6 Th ^ihle ccnteynin^all points All the daycs of Qiieen Bliz^ahth your Bibles did read m the loj. Plaim. v. 28. thejmremt obedient^ contrary di- redly to the true text ^ which hath, They were not dlfobedi'^ €t^OY rebelled not againjl his vpords^as now you read it.l hefe> and two hundcred more Corruptions in the true Pfal- mes 5 you did fing dayly. And who was there who did lee in what places thcfe corruptions were ? Yea the Queen, then head of the Church , made her Clergy fublcribe that all thefe corruptions were God^own word. See the 5. Se£t. num. 4. whence appears that you cannot fincll out thejfe Corruptions i of which I (hall fay more in the place cited. They then of your Religion beleeve the Scrip- ture vp on no ground which is not fallible , and which may not really oe falfe as this light may be ; and therefore it fufficeth not to a divine faith : and fo you have no in*- fallible beliefe affurifig you, that this book is Gods word; ivhence all that is in that book hath no divine authority, of which you are affiired.And thus,moft pittifuUy , allof you are deftitute of divine faith,in all points you beleeuej becaufe you beleeve them all vpon the authority of thofe bookes,which you,vp6 noe infallible ground,can beleeve to be divine.Seehere how you,who boaft of Scripture fo iDuch, come,by rejeding the Church, not to beleeue the Scripture it leife with any divine faith^but only with fiich human perfwafion as may be falfe , becaufe it is fallible, hauing no infallible ground toftand vpon.Hence it isthdt your famous Chillingmrth y having witt enough to dif- cover the vngroundednes of this ground,and not having grace enough to fet fure footing vpon that firme rocke of the true Church , in plain tearmes comes to defend ( P. 327.) it to be fufficient to beleeve Scripture with noe o- ther kind aUent , then Wee beleeve^, Thai there is fuch^ dtic Cannot he 6ur judge in all points. S. j . J7 df fy as Confiantimple , or the Uijlorj of Cxfar and Saluji. Whence the ground of his belcefeofthe Scripture (vpon whofc authority only he beleevcthall other things)beeing thus confelledly found to be human,and to have nothing of divine faith : be is forced to fay (P. i J9O have , I beleeve , asgleat reason to bdceve , That there was fuch a Man as Henry the Eight King of England , as that lefus Chrijt fuffered vnderVontim Vilate. Is this a book to be owned by the prime Dodors of both vniverfities , and to be fo vniver- felly cryed vp by our Nation ? J)ear lefulto what times were wee come ? No wonder that thefe times arc iiow come to vs, 12. Seventhly ; I further flhew the manifeft falfity of jrour dodrine , by vnanfwerable experience , confirmin^\ what now I fayd N«. 9, Luther ( a man acknowledged by common conlent of Englifli Divines, to have had Gods Spirit m a very Large meafure ) did read the Epiftle of S . James^^nd he held it to be an tpiftle of Straw Trxfat: in Kov.Tefl.2ind his cheefe difciple Pomeranus^wpon the fourth Chapter to the Romans , layth : Out $f this place jou maj difcover the error of the Epijile of James ^ in which you fee 4 mckedar gurnet: moreover he ridiculoufly deduceth his argumet: he citeth (fayth this fellow) Scripture againfl Scripture. But I ?o on with Luther she did read theApocalyps,ad,for all the ight and internall arguments he could difcouer in it,hc thought it not mitten mth an ApofloUcall Sfirit^ AW our En- glifli Devines read thefe /clfe fame bookes , and there is not one of them,nor of theyr difciples, lo ill-fighted , but they can difcouera light no jefle clearly (hewing thefc Bookes to be Gods infallible word^then the Sune fliewcth him felfc to be the Sm^ne by his light^they all fee internal! H argu« The ^ihle not conteyning all points arguments fufEceing to an infallible afTent of the quite Contrary verity* But how can that ground be biitfaifc which groundeth plain Contradidions ? If you reply ^ that Luthers not feeing fuch Bookes to be Canonicall, is. only a negative argument of fmall force. I anf\ver, that^ where things are affirmed to be as evident as the Sunnc, Ihine , and as clear as the firft principles : and that thefe. things, affirmed by you to be fo clear, are alfo dayly fet before the eyes of a man fo well feeing , Luther^ and his prime difciples were^andyet, that neither he,nor his prime difciples, (hould euer be able to fee this lighr ( though theyr fharp - fighted eyes fo often laboured ta difcouer it : ) this cannot be but a certain figne that ei- ther thefe men were pittifully blind, or that you mife-^ rably phanly fuch a light to fliine in the ver^ reading of the Apocalypj, the EpiiHe to the Hebrews, the Epiftle of S James 8cc. Is it a weak argument to fay I have been itx the hall on fet purpofe toiee if there were a Candle fct vp lighted there, and I could fee none, though I moft care* fully endeavored to fee it, and had ray eyes about mee;r therefore I coclude there is no light let vp there?! cocludc alfo that eythcr I, who fay thisjam. blinde; or you,who fay? there is (iich a Iight,are manifeftly deluded by a falfe fanfjr of your own? And I can alfo make my argument as ftrog in the affirmarive,as in the negative*! do it thus y S: Aufie^ (the moft fharpe -lighted ma that the Church hath had ) a man confeifedly indued with the true fpiritj and a matv of your own Religion, as you will fay; ahd'CGnfequentijr a man agreeing with you in that dodrine, on which all' your whole belcef is built- to witt j that true Scripture! were infallibly believed to be Gods word , btcaufe theyt were difcouercd in the very reading of them to be /b, by i^divioc cmnot he our ludge in all points. Q^.S^^. a divine light, and by internall arguments fufEceingto ground an infallible allent to this verity; this man, I lay, and the whole third Councel of Carthage together with him , did believe that all and every one of thole bookes, ,which wee believe to be Canonicall and divine, to be fo indeed^and to be propounded to be fo to the peopIe.Be-- hould here, as good eyes, as you can pretend to have, reading thefe bookes^and beleeving them infallibly to be idivin« -.which they could not do ( according to your dodrine) but by difcouenng in them a divine light, (hewing this truth evidently, and by fuch internall argu* jnents as fuffice to infallibility. Therefore thefe books, ( feenfo infallibly to be divine ) are indeed fo : and you tnuft graunt them to be fo,and not to be Apocryphall,a$ -you hould them or elfe you muft graunt, that S. AufieH and the Fathers of the Councel of Carthage and all the : Fathers, who ever after this Councel held this our Ca- non, did not agree with you in the prime principle of your Reiigion,teaching that there is no infallible ground to believe fuch and fuch bookes to be Gods w ord , but that diuine light appearing in the reading of the to fuch Readers as they were,For if they agreed with you in this •principle, then they did conceive themfelves to difcouer this divine light in thofe very books, which you call Apo* cryphall, as wxll as in the other, which you hould Cano- nical): And if they allweredeceiued by this principle, in thofe bookes;then you may be deceiued in all the other, becaufe your only groud for theyr.beeing divine,is hence cieerly proued to be fallible and falfe, and moft vnfuffi- cient to ground an infallible beliefe ; But you have nee tother faith,then that which refteth wholy on this gruud- Therefore all the taifhypu^: have is fallible» And if any H z one 6o The ^thle not conteynlng alt points one obied that SJerom^ ( as great a Dodor in point of the knowledge of the Scriptures as S. Aufiin) did not hould the Bookes of the Machabces for Gods word, which S» Auften helde to be Gods word: therefore one of them relied on a fallible ground; why not S. Auftetiy as well as S. lerom ? I anfwer, that even from hence it is evi- dent that neyther of thefe two ( though the moft Eaglc- fighted Dodors that ever the Church had)did make the ground of theyr reqciuing or reieding books for true or falfe Scripture ,to be any iuch divine light, appearing to fuch readers as both they were: For then they could not have helde q^uite contrary one to an other ; as i fayd of the Lutherans and you* The true reafbn, why thefe two great Dodors were of contrary opinions concerning thefe bookes,as alfb divers other holy Fathers were con- j ccrning diuers other bookes, ( which had bin impoffiblc i if the evidence of true Scripture had bee fo great as you i make it ; ) the true reafbn , I fay , was, that as yet the f Church of Cbrifl: had not defined which Bookes were j Gods true word , which not: wherefore, then it was firec ! to doubt of fuch bookes as were not admitted by fuch a Tradition of the Church^as was evidently fo vniuerfall, | that It was cleerly fufficient to ground an infallible be- leefe. For all thole holy Fathers agreed ever in this, that fuch bookes were evidently Gods word which had evi- dently a fufficient tradition for them Now in the dayes of thofc Fathers, who thus varied from one an other, it was not by any infallible meanes made known to all, that thofe books ( about which all theyr variance w^as ) were recommended for Gods infallible word , by a tradition i clearly fufficient to ground beliefe: for the Church had j not as yet examined and defancd,whedacr Tradition did I ' ' ' clearly , Cannot he our Judge in all points. Q^. S. 3. 61 clearly enough (hew fiich , and fuch books, to be Gods infalli ble word. But in the daycs of 5*i4/i/?^Wy the third e Councelof Carthage Anno 397. exammed how fufE- cient, or vnfufficient the Tradition of the Church was, which recommended thofe Bookcs for Scripture, about which there was fo much doubt and contrariety of opi- nions. They found all the Bookcs conteyned in our Ca- non(of which you account fo many Apocryphalljto have been recommended by a Tradition, fufficient to grouad faith vpon.For on this ground(Can.4y,)they proceeded in defining all the bookcs in our Canon to be Canoni- cal!. ^^y them to be held to be fo vpon tradition duly exami- ned ^ And this within four hundred yeares after Chrift, yet after the time of S. lerom. Now after this was done, there comes S. Aufierij and fctts down all thefe bookes for Canonicall Lib. de doltrina Chrifiiana After him comes Gelafm the Pope ( who lived Anno 492. ) and confirmes the lame Canon.After him comes the Sixt generall Cou- eel celebrated Anno 68o*which in the fecond Canon (ac- cording to the Greek Coppy tranflated by Getttianu$)dt'^ firing to ciksbliOn what thejr holy fore Vathers had delivered vntotheniy confirmeth this , and the other Councel of Carthage, Go further downwards, and ftill all Doc9:ors and writers, in theyr dayly allegations of Scripture, cite thefe bookes as Scripture. The true Canon again is fett fortli by the Councel of Florence Anno 1438. To which Councel the very Grecians , Armenians, and lacobites fiibfcribed: No man pertinacioully gainfaying thisfo well eftabliflied tradition vntill Luther. Now if the true difcouery of Scripture be to goe by the votes of the beft and the moft eyes , who feeth not, but that even by this rule, wee fliall have above halre a fcore bookes difco-« vered to be Gods word,which your own fharpe eyes ca- not fee to be fo ? efpecially that fecond book of Macha- bees in which wee fo clearly difceuer Purgatory c. 12. 43. 44. 45. If any man obje(5teth,that,in theCouncel of Carthage &c*that one book of theProphet Barueh is not fet down by name ( though never excluded:) he muft re- member that this book of Baruch , is ioyned in our Bible with leremy, whole Secretary he was,and as his Secretary he ioyned his book as an Appendix to leremj: And there- fore it is vnderftood by thefe Fathers to be admitted to Cannot he ottv Judge in all points. (i^:S^^ 6^ gcther with all leremjy excluding no part of hira , as you exclude.I end then this Sixth reafbn thus.The beft feeing eyes of antiquity have feen different bookes to be Gods word, from thole which youhould to be fo : again,your Own firft bretheren in: your Reformation have leen thole books not to beCanonicall,which you have feen to be fo 9 therefore the true Scripture is not infallibly to be known by To evident a light as. you fpeak of, by which Contradictories can never be feen. X3. If any man think he can cfcapc the force of any of thefe arguoients, by pretending the private afTurance of the Spirit, making this dimme light appear clearly to him > which fb many others ( for vp^ant of the affiftance of this fpirit) come not to fee: this man will runne .vpon twa mayne inconveniences. The Firft is, that he moft vn- groundedly, layeth claioK; for him felfe , . and for all thc^ litle flogk of his bretheren , to. have in private this al^ fiftance of the fpiric aflifting them , even as farre as in-^ fallibility , to the hardeft of all points: and yet , moft vn- groundedly denyeth any fiich affiftance to the vniverfall, Church, reprefented in agenerall Councel. He denyeth ^Ifo the fame fpirit vnto the grcateft Doctors of the Church , confeffed by all to have been the cheefe lights cfthe world for Sandity and knowledg in Scripturesr For all thefe are found ftanding dire^:ly oppofite to the in their Canon of Sct?ipt.ur^ii^ ,-aQd notoiie of them can be fhewedto agree withkhem ^n this grime ground of ad- mitting any book for Godswf d , vpon the light which God gave him by the Spirit. Thc*fecoud inconvenience is , that 'Avheh be is cjueilioned to give an account, how lie is afTureJ that he in particular hath this alEftance oT the lpirit,fufficeing to groudaninfaliibk aflentjand how- he ^^4 not conteynlng all points he is moft aflured that this is not an illuGon? He can on- ly anKver^that he hath tried, as well as he ( poor Soulc ) <^ould, whether this Spirit were from God or no; and he found it ( and that infallibly ) to be from God. But S/ 1 ask you by what infallible meanes did you try it ? If you £y (as you muft needs (ay ) that you trycd it by the word of God; wee cannot but pitty your pittifull anfwer; for you forget that , before this triall was made , you could not have any affurance diat tlie Scripture was Gods word I to the beleefe of which truth you cannot poflibly come, vntill you have firft an infallible aflurance,that you in particular have Gods Spirit. For tell mee, by what other way you can come to this affurance?How can you then fay , that you have tried your Spirit by that word > which > before this triall ofyour Spirit, you could not pofEbly know to be infallibly Gods word* You will all walk in a circle , as the wicked do, and as that wicked fpirit who circles about to fee whom he candevoure: vntill youcome to Hand ftedfaftly vpon the Rpck of the Churchf SECT. IV. €mnot hemrludge In allpomts.Q^.i.S.^. 6y S ECT: IV. AN EIGHT ARGVMENT, IChat the Scriptures cannot decide this Qontrolper- fa 5 Tii^htch hookes bee the true l>ncorrupted Copy es of the true hookes of Scrips turei And therefore Proteftats believe not Scrip- ture with divine Faith, d T^ord of thefamom ^ihle no^ coming forth 4t London-. S it is in vainc tolcnow for certainc, that my Father did ( to my great advantage) make a true authcnticall will and Telta- ment, of which I conceive my felfe to have a true Copy : without I can authen- tically ptorc^theCopy that I have to bee nideed authen* tical. So^ it is to fmall purpofe, that God did,by his Pro- phets, write fiich bookes as Genefis, Exodus and the reft of the old and new Teftament , to our ineftimable advan* tage ; vnlefle I can aSfo, by vndenyablc affurance, (hew myfclfeto have the true authenticall and vncorrupted Copyes of all thefe bookes,-vncorr upted, I fay, in all parts of them : for if it were not known to bee vncorrupted c- ▼cry where,it might bee fufpeded offalfity every where I Now 66 T^^^ ^ihle not conttynlng alt joints Now , that the Copyes , which wee have of Scripture^ even in the Hebrew , or Gieelce tongues', bee vncorrnp- ted, wee areno where toW plaindy in Scripture^ The laft part of the Scripture which was written , was written a-*- bout a thoufand and fixhundred yeares agoe. No Scrip^ii- ture hath been written , fince that time , to telle vs , that Cncc that time no corruption hath happened , or falfyfy- ing the copye3 written fince that time : no Scripture thea written did pkinely aflure us , that the Scriptures fliould never bee corrupted by thofe who printed, or writt them. Neither did the Apoftles take care tohauetheCopyeSj,; written by them, to bee authentically figned , fealed, and delivered into the hand§ of fuch and fuch , as might au- thentically declare their being true originals , or agree- ing in ajl things exadly with the true originals ^ which is. an evident fignc , that God intended no^ the Scripture$^ for our ludge 5 and only diredion in all points : For all law-makers vfe this diligence > to fecure their lawes from corruption. Behold then , here is now a fifteenth point primely neceflary to falvation, and yet no where fett downe in Scripture: liay, primely iieceflary ; for if it bee neceflary to have feith , it is neceflary to have the only Rule direding , and guiding to true feith , no where msidc crooked and directed falfe, asa falfe corrupted Copy would doe. Here then , you muft %e to the tradi- tion of the Church ; yea, and to the Tradition of the prefent Church alfo : for the Church of other i^ges could not afleure vs. that the Scripture Ihould bee vncorrupted- in our Age. Is it not as great a contradidion as can bee , to lay , wee know by the tradition of the prefent Church that ; that very Scripturcis vncorruptcd , which very 5jcri;^turc bids vs not to bekeuc the Tradition, of the Churcbi cannot he our ludge in allpohits. Qx. $.4. 6y Church : Which if I doe not beleeu« , I cannot belceuc the Scripture to bee vncorrupt, and that infallibly if her Tradition (vpon which onely I beleeue this) bee fallible? The traditions then of the prefcnt Church bee as infallib- ly true as your faith ; which I proue by this Demonftra- tion : Your faith cannot bee more infallibly true , then it is true that the Copyes of the Scripture bee vncorrupt ; for your &ith is built vpon the word of God ^ as deli ver* ed to you by thefe Copyes : juft as wee fay , our faith is built vpon the word of God , as propounded or deliver- ed to vs by the Church : but it is not infallibly true , that the Copyes wee hafte now bee vncorrupted, becaufe that very Tradition of the prcfent Church which telleth vs this 5 is held by you to be fallible and fubjed: to lye i and which in a multitud-e of her other Traditions > hath lyed vnto vs, according to your dodrine. Here you fee againe that you beleeve nothing at all with divine faith ; Far all you beleeve, you beleeve vpon the word of God , as de- livered to you by fuch Copyes as you onely , by an hu- mane faith , know to bee the true deliverers of Gods vn« corrupted word : This ground is fallible , being meerely liumane ; therefore the ground which. fiipporteth all youL -beleeve, is humane , and not divine ; Therefore all your faith IS humane 5 and not divine : And this hoideih true in all and every point which you beleeve, 2. I will now further fliew you, how you cannot know by Scripture onely , that the copyes of it bee vn- corrupt , in thofe very languages in which the Scripture Was written: And yet this point is primely necelTaiv to falvation , as I now proved^ And indeed if the Originalls canot bee known alleuredly to bee vncorruptcdly copyed cut ^ all the tranflations of thefe Originals may aUb bee Iz. faUc 6? like !Bihle not conteynlngaltpointt falfe : Now the more they agree with corrupted Origin- fials , the more wee are fure they are eorrupted. But of Tranflations I will ipeake in the next fedion: Here I will Ipeake of the Copyes , which are fayd to be Copied out of the true Originall Copyes, agreeing word for word with thofe very Copyes , which 5. Paul , 5. Uathew , M0fep &€• did write^ Thefe Copyes wee know by no fcripturc to bee vncorrupt, Yea,if you will hold the Church to bee fallible I will briag you feverail convincing proofs,. that there can bee no certainty , that thefe Copyes agree witb the true Copyes written by the true fcripture writers* Thefe fcripturc-writers did write, eitlier in fuch Hebrew as was vied in the Age in wh ich they did write , ( as did the writers of the old Teftament: ) or they did write ia Creeke 3 as did moft of the writers of the new Teftamet* Lett vs fee firft,how dilagreeing the Hebrew Copyes may bee , from the Originall Copy^e of the true writer thereof Then wee will fee the fame of die Greeke Copyes. 3., Firft ; diverfe of the very originals themfelvcs, were written by foch men as wee know not at all , and fo wee cannot know them certainely to have been true Pro^ phets , but by Tradition ; which , if it may bee falfe , it may aUb bee falfe, that they were true Prophets, baveing Gods true fjpirit , affuring them infallibly in all that they did write ; And lo , though wee did infallibly know , that wee had a moft vncorrupted Copye of what they did write , yet wee (hould not bee able to know that is were Gods infallible word ; For how could wee know that he who writ this booke , was a true Prophet^no bo- dy ( as farre as any body kngweth ) telling vs one word of that man^ good or bad ? For thefe bopkes were writw»« ten, by Ggd kuoweth whon:^* W^e haue nothing h\\t viv ianmt he our Judge in aUpolnts. Qj^S4. 6^ certaine opinions^ concerning the writers of diverfe of ihemoft affured and protocanonicall bookes of fcrip- tureias of the bookes af Ruth j ludges , Efier , the bookes o£King$ the bookes ot Chronicles, or Haralyfomc'* nomSo d\Co,\t is not certaine whether Solomon himfelte did write his bookes. of proverbs : or Tome that were about him didleverally, in fcattered papers, one note what hee heard atone time;, another what hee heard him fay at another time: And then ^ in the dayes of BuchUS y iconic certaine naen ( God know's who they were ) belonging to 'Ez.echiaiy did make that coliedion of them which wee now have ; as the moft learned Ljrantis holdeth , Avritirvg on that booker , and grounding himfelfe on ihefe wcrds.^ cap: 25". *Thefe are alfoTroverbs of Solomon which the men of tj:^eihm Co^jed mt. Wherefore notvpon the authority of aay fcripture but mcerely v^^on the authority of Tra^dl- tion,wee know thofe true Onginall Copyes to have been penned by true Prophets :. though wee. know not who they were. 4. But , that which I prelle moft is ;^ that , though wee had all infallible knowledge that could bee., that, fuch Prophets arid Mojfes had writt, with their owae hands,.fuch andiiich DOokes:-Yet it is impoffible. ( if the prefent Churches authority bee fallible) to know, iniallib^ ly , wbetherxthe Copyes, wee have now in our dayes,. agree in all places exadly with the Onginall. Yea ^av^c are (lire, they do not agree with, ir, which i prove thus :: Noe bookes of Scripture were fo folemnly , pubUckly ^. and moft authentically dciivered to bee kept- , juft as th^y were written as the. bopkes of ,.witnefle the Scripture > Uxodm 24. v.^ and Deutr. 3 1 v. 24* Ani i^^ ^mjo^^uj^ whm MojfcLhad mMi! M m writing the words. TO iChe T^ihle no t cmteymng all points iff thelavp in a hookey vntill they were fimsbed : that Uoyfti commanded the Leuitesy which bare the Ark? of the Covenant of our Lord , (aylng tak^ this hok^ of the Law , and put it in the fide of the Arke of the Covenant of the Lord , that it may iee there for a wttnefe &cJ6ut thcfe very bookes,thus wr/r- ten^ vntill they were finished^ have manifeftly received the Addition of the laft chapter of Deiitronomy which was tvrittcn after the death of Uoyfes ^ as Calvin him(elf con- felFcth. So Gen. 2'^. the 3i» verfe is cleerely added by Ibme body,\vho lived in the times in which the Children of Ifrael had Kinges : which was long after the dayes of Moyfes: how then could he C^jyAnd thefe are the Kings Tvfc/V& reigned in the Land of Edom , before there reigned any King over the Children of ifrael? Who could lett downe theie Kings as haveing reigned vntill the dayesofthe Kings of Iffael, Butlome body who lived after their reigne ? Bonfrerim , in his preface to the Pentateuck , adderh two other pla- ces , changed fince Mojfes writt them. That the like chan- ges have happened to the booke ohoshua , to the fourth of Kings and to Jeremy y is witnelled by Tornielltis Anno Mundi 3^12. But let no man thinke , thut 1 recount thele changes as corruptions^ for w^^ee all believe ihofe additions to have been made to the true Copyes of Moyfes ^ and thofe other writers by ncien fpeciaUy mlpired by God to make them : Yet wee , ftandingonely to the humane au- thority of hiftory , cannot tell by whom tho/e changes were made: no hiftory teUing vs, that the authors of thefe changes were Prophets j or Impofters. Onely wee have the tradition of the prefenc Church , aflTuring vs infallibly {which fhee could not,iffliee were fallible)that the Scrip- tiires,wee now at pre/ent have.jare infallibly Gods word: and conlequcntlyjwhat changes lb ever have been made in emtmt k Qjtr Itidge in all points. S. 4. 71 fei them^ were made by fqfficient authority from God* You, who reje(3: this authority of the Church , can have BO aflurancc that many other changes were not made, as well as thefeiandfuch changes as may bee moft foule cor- ruption , for any thing you know., iVgain. j[. If wee fpeake of fuch changes as may bee both: corruptions, and moft pernicious corruptions, in the He- brew BibIe:You (who rejed: the teftimony of the Church^ as a fallible witnciTe, ) cannot poflibly make it appcare 3^ that the Hebrew Copyes bee not groffely corrupted fmce the times of the Apoftles : For many and great chan-^ ges might , after their tir^es,be made by the lewifli Rab-- bins (men moft perfidious and malicious,) when they did adde points to the Text , vnder pretence of preventing; fiich miftakoiS, as might eafyly happen to the lefle skillfully, in reading the Hebrew text ; which to that day had no jpoints to exprelTe the vowels : For in the Originall it was written onely with Confonants , and the vowels were left to bee added by the well inftruded Reader for whofe ttelpe ( in reading the Scriptures right, ),the lewifh Rab- jiins did firft beginne to addc certaine points, fo to tell vs- iivhere an A, or an Eyor any other vowell wasto bee added. ;iGcording to thetrue manner of reading.that place. Now rOnely Qod knowcs whether thefe , lo malicious and per?- :fidious lewes , taught vs to reade every vowell as it (bould bee read in fuch a place: and did not, by the add*- •^f^g.^f what vowels they pleafedxhange the fence of the word , tpfignifye what they pleafcd. The, putting of the vowels. right or^wrong depcaded , not oncIy vpon the aC lurednciTe .of thcyr skiU^which (for any thing wee know^ ; ^ight in iopie. places bee deiicicnt,and wee not knowing ^.^^ pjftS?.^ ^.^^f if^^ : but alio the putting; 71 The %Me not cmteyningallpohts oi thefe vowels depended primely oa their fincerc , anl vpright honeft dealing -.which wee cannot , in true pru«« dence , much expefm^/w^ and rash additions. If you will bee ludged by the Grecke Cop)^es , then you muft confefle that Chrift in the Sacrament did give vs his true blood ; For all the Greeke Copyes of S. Luke cap» ^2. V. 20. reade thus. This cup is the new tefiame t in my blood , which (cup)?5 shed for youSo that the Cup, that is the thing contained in the cup , was that very thing which was flied for vs 3 But not wine , but Chrifts true blood , was fhed for vs : Therefore not wine , but Chrifts true blood , was the thing contained in the cup. It is a memorable thing which is lately related by Mr. Creffy Exomol: Ca. 8. Nu. 3. in thefe words ; In my hearing , Bifhop Vsher profeHed, '* that whereas hee had of many yeares before a defire to jpublifli the new Teftament in Greekcj, with various lec- "tions and annotations; and for that purpofe had vfed great diligence , and (pent much money to furnifli him- (elfe with manufcripts ; Yet in conclufion hee was forced to defift vtterly , leaft, if hec fhould ingenuoufly have noted all the feverall difFerenccs of readmg which himfelfe had collecT:ed :the incredible miiltitude of t"he ^* almoft in every verfe , fliould rather have made men A- ^'theifticall^th^nfatisfy them in the true reading of any ' * " particular I Canmt he onr judge tn all points. Q^* 8.4^ 7^ parncularpaffage* An evident fignc that Governoars •* of the Church did not rely onely vpo what was in writ- '•ing. So hee. And though hee hath now twice printed this, and though others have alio divulged the fame in Srinc ; Yet Bifl^op V^her , feeing this done before his eyes, oth not dilclaime fro it; Therefore I cannot but believe the ftory to bee true; And if it bee true, how wonderfully corrupted is your only ludge. Now if B. Vsher alone, in this remote corner of the world , beeing a private man , could procure fo many old Copyes in writing ; what might have been done by fome greate Prince, vfeing all induftry to gett ( by meanes of other greate Princes , and all other diligences , ) ail the old Copyes they could? For as the multitude of Copyes , procured by Biiliop Vsh€ry did increafe the variety of different readings; fo a farre great- er mul :itude of Copyes, would , in all probability, have yet much more increafed this variety & difference. And the fame variety , for the fame caufe, might yet have been found to bee farre greater, if five or fixe greate Princes , liveing in five or fix Kingdomes ( at the greatefl diflancc from one another , } fhould have all conTpired to gather together all the ancientefb Copyes that were any where to bee had. Wherefore , if in thofe onely copyes procured by Bifli^p Vsher J the multitude of/everall readings mre in-* $reUHe almoji in every verje: how much more hicYedibU would the multitude of/everall readings bee , if the dili^ gence , I fpoke of, Ihould bee vfed to procure a greaxjr multitude ofwantten Copyes ? I aske now , when^ in thefc later dayes printing was invented, how th-ofe, who cauf^ ed the Greeke Tranflation (which wee have ) to bee printed: how (I fay ) could they know for certaiqe , that, that one jfcadiiig ( which they drought good to follow 78 The ^Ihle not conteyntng all points in their printed Copyes ) was the true reading ? Or how could any man teil which written Copye of Vshers was the true written Copye ? I pray lett vs fb much as know our ludge, before wee bee obliged to accept of him in all fnatters-Yea^you make vs know hee is corrupted in many matters : and others may make vs know that he is cor- rupted in many more.And fure I am^that corrupted lud- • ges, are not competent ludges. Grooked Rules are not good diredors. The Rule that is given to vs all by God, to dired vs ail, muft bee a rule ealiiy apply able by all: For thisreafon 5 you fay all muft reade the Scriptures , and your meaning is (and muft bee ) that they muft reade the trueScriptures^that is,fome true cdpye of the true bcokes of Scripture : by what meanes ftiall they bee affured , that rhey read the true Copye , there beeing luch an in- credible difference between Gopyes which are fett forth for true ? Not one , among an hundred thoufand , can have this affurance 9 either want of meanes to gett the reading of thcfe manufcripts,or for want of skill to reade them^and vnderftand them fb , as to bee able to informc himfelfe of their perfed agreeing in points neceffary: cfpecially feeing that youfo litle agree in teaching vs , which points be neceffary and fundamentall:, that you could never yet bee able to give vs the number of them 5 >much lelTe to tell vs which they were, or in what bookes, or Chapters of the Bible, they were to bee found* W here fore hee , who will vpon his owne knowledge , and «iot vpon fome other mans credit , ( farrc inferiour to a generall Councell, ) informe himfelfe of the truth of his. Copye (fufficiently to have a full afTurance that it is the true vndoubted Copye of the true vndoubted Word of Cod:) hee (I fay) who will fb much as h ope to doe this, is not Cannot he our Judge In aU points.Q^. S.4. 79 not one among an hundred thoufand. How then can this be that Rule given by God, to bee applyed by every man , to Judge by it For himfelfe : by which one aaiong one hundred thouland cannot bee able to iudge for him- fclfe , whether this vndoubtedly bee that Rule given him by God.Excellently Seneca, Omnia delibera cum ami'* CO , ^ed prius delibera de amito, All confultations vcith thj fare friend mak^\ Butfirjl confult Whom for this friend to take. Be- fore thou confiilteft the whole bufynefle of thyne eternity With thisCopye , firft confult how lure thou art of the furenefle ofthis thy Copye. If every man (as proteftants Will have it) bee to bee iudge for himfelfe , in points which fo neerely concsrne himfelfe , then doubtlcue, in the very firft place , hec is to bee iudge for himfelfe of this point aboue all points , which concernes him as much as that vpon which all other points of higheft con- cernement doe wholly depend. Thus you fee, how, not one man among one hundred thoufand efcapeth being gulled by you, Whileft you all make himbeleeve, that irheewillfoUow you , heethall fee w'th his owneeyes , what hee doth , and hee fliall iudge for himfelfe : and not take his religion vpon truft, as you make them beleeve wee doe , becaufc wee truft general! Councels. O deareft Brethren m C/?r//? , for his and for your owne fakes,feLt your eyes at leaft halfe ope, and you flia! prefently fee, whether wee, or you bee thofc who take vp our faytb on truft. Doe wee doe this, becaufe wee belseue and truft general Councels ? Thefe Connects, Euen in humane knowledge and fincerity of iudgement, farre excell any private man, trufted by you in this capital point : and , befides humane knowledge, they have the infallible alTiftance of the holy Ghoft pro^ mifed 8o Yhe ^ihle not conteynlng all points mifed to them ; at leaft as much,if not more then to thofc- men , vvhoai you truft. Or rather do not yoti take your fayth on iruft ? for who of you is able to iudge for himTeite, Which is the true vndoubted Copie of the true Word of God, by which one y you muft rule your fayth in all points ? And who therefore is there among you, vvho leeing himfelfe wholly vnable to iudge for himfelfc in this point, (on which all others wholly depend) is not forced to rely vpon incomparable Weaker authority, then is the authority of a Generatl Councell , to which the prime Prelates of diis World are called, bringing iviththem the ableft Divines they can getc , Each one in the Province , from which hee cometh. And a:l of the Councel deliuering no. fb much theyr opinion (equall at leaft to yours) but deliuering what hath be5bytheieceiucd Vniverially from their Anceftors^without note of novel- ty. Whereas you , when ail comes to all, muft in this very point of points , rely whoLy on the authority of thofe tew learned men , who have thought good to fett forth this Copye , which you t ike vpon their word to agree faythtiilly in all places With the true vndoubted Originall. And this alio muft bee done by you M"^. MU nifiery and by you Mr. Doltor , Without you bee Perhaps a man mure learned, then that one, who cannot bee picked out among an hundred thoufand. Now if this be the cafe of men though lo very learned; What more clecr then that the kife learned (which make vp the multitude of foules redeemed by Chrijl ) cannot polIib;y uxdgc for themfelves in this point of points j but n)uft tvuQ^ others to iudge for the, and rely wholly vpon their ludgc- ] ment. What thinke you now? is this asfafcas relying Qii the Church Vniverfall , repreiented in a General! ' ' Councell? 1 / cannot he mrlud^e in aUpoints.Q^ Si CG-unccIlf Now if this Councell may bcc more Prudent- ly rclyed vpon in this point of high concernment; Why tnay it not bee rclyed vpon,and iudgc for vs,in points of le/Ic concernment?ShaU I wifely trull a man with a thou- fand pounds, and bcc vn wife, if I truft him with an hun- dred pounds ? fliallitbcemoft prudendy done, to iett Gcncrall Counccls iudge for mee, which Bookcs I am to hold for the Copyes of Gods Word , and (hall it bee im-* prudence to lett a General! Councell iudge for mec^, whether I am to pray to Saints , or no? to pray for the • dead, or no? to hold Chrifi moft really prcient in the Sa-» crament, or no? What Scripture, or any thing like Scrip- ture, have you , to tell mee that the Church, reprefentecl in a Councell , (hall not deceiuc mee in this point (moft important of all points:), but that it may decciue mec in "^t^ther things , in which it is more Eafye to Iudge right? TheChurch is a Iudge,(as I fhali Chew hereafter)to which the multitude of people may have free acccflbiand heaxc plainely, clearcly, and moft vndoubtedly, what is delive- red for true , by the (entence of this moft grave Iudge: And fuch a iudgc it be/eemed the Divjin^ Providence to give to the people, if hee ferioufly defired to bring them, by belief of the onely true fayth,to (alvation. Whereas it is not po/fible, for one among one hundred thoufand, to heare plainely, clearely, and moft vndoubtedly, the fen* tence delivered byany-Booke of Scripture, concerning the true Copye of the true Scripture ; though all my fayth muft depend vpon this , as you fay : Neither caa you findc any other way to make mee fecure of this choice of a true Copye,comparable to the authority of a ^nerall CounccU. 8« To £hew this more plainely , I will moft fkithfullr The ^ihk notconttyntng all po ittps relate vnto you , that which you may foone fee with yovat owne Eyes , if you plcafe. Your prime mafters of anti- quity, your chiefe Dodors in ail thofe languages, in which Scripture anciently was written , have begun to fete forth the moft compleate Bible that ever yet appear- ed (as they fay) for the number of the angient iangua* ges m which it is fetting forth , and for the exquifite p?* adnelle of the Copyes, of which I fpake Se£l. 5. n. 9. Th^c firft five bookes are already printed , and to be leen in jnany perfbns hands. The fame men have alfo ( in order to .heir Bible) ictt forth an introdudion^ printed at Lon- don hy tha/Rpycroft ^ Anno 16 In the preface to this Introdudion, they profefTe , they cannot produce any- one Copye,whicb they can affure vs to agree in all things with the true Originall handwriting of the Authors f IVherefare (fay they) in the variety of Cvfyes y Vi^h at better Meanes can fo much as hee invent^dMpckj^nut ihe true nad^ ^' tn^ i then the cmferrin^ af the ntofi chme andmojt ancient ^* Copyes lanithen to ft and to that reading , V(/hich agreeth b^fi with the greater parte of the mo ft ancient > and moft choice *' Copjes ? Xhiscourje 5. lerom (jci Thk3. 4uften t^l^ &c; So *' thej. The cbcefc thing they pretend to cxcell others m. , is Exemplarium optimorum def eltu , In the chaiceneffe of tlu very bcft Copyes,. Well now ( deare reader) can humane in- duftry , luchas this is ( tliat is , asgreate as is to bee ex- peded in this world by thee) take more paincs , or doc more , to procure for thee the trueft Copyes , which can bee had tor love or money ? And, ftanding in huiDanc induftry, millions of millions have wanted thi^ meanes of difcovering the true Copye, which thefc learned nvep Jbave. But what doth all this avaiic another man? Fox jo^r religion wil have every one in pamc 4^f faith to ludge canmtifPitK in ^11 points. Q^S.^. 8 j iune ;ii>i'»^f; Concluding, by the due vft (note thefe vt^ords) of hii cealo,that k is Gods holy will th^t they fliould to dot ad beicevc. An4 by ad by he tels you why he fay d, that hce inuft conclude (alLthat hee is to bcleeve) by the ^* duevfe of his reafon. F^r notwhbfianding the publicke ludgih mem the Church in full Counfell , ( ladde notwith ftanding allfp the private iudgem^nt of fuch greatc Doc- tors as thefe ^ire , Who now fo painefully labour in pro- curing the , true Copy e gf the Bible For vs ) Private ^* Cbrifti^ns,( fayth lern) have their private iudgc- **mcnt of dilcretion foxthemf,cives oneiy , which is the '^vdifcerning, and rcceiuing to themfelves onely , as the <*;wiUQfGp that you give mee the beft Copyes that can bee ^ott; and that,, which is more, I fee it is evident diat yoii doe indeed fay all your Copyes agree in things , which arc neceffary to falvatibn r .But I doc not, nor cannot /ce (though one am^ng one hundred thoufand bee not lb learned as that all you fay to mee is evidently true, Tntill I. have conferred all the Copyes as well as youjand vntill Ibec as fully certifyed of the antiquity, and choice exadncffe of all your C opycs , a3 well as you: and this is impoflible for aiee, vntill I can vnderftand all thofe lan- .^uages as well as ypuj and pcrvfe all the authciiticall tcC tmionyes^ which you have of this antiquiiy, and pertcA exaApcfle ,Orf y9yi: Copyes. Befides^ ail this , how can I truft you to ludge in all and every point , whether the agreement of all the Copyes beecxadlin all and every •point fuodaiiacntall and neceffary to (alvation : for I k;noW t w ; r 9. As for cur parts, wee, to fay nothing of what you Mpcntion concerning B€7L4 y lAunjt^m Oind Erafmas &c. from, whom , as from profefled enemyes , wee cannot without iuft /ufpicion receiue any thing) wee I fay , be- sides this, doe not oncly fulped:,but alfo evidently know ihwjQU; «iaioly difagree fromi V5 in vndcrftanding the t6 Tht ^thlemt eonteyningdU pohfft ^ ^ ^ icnfe of your owic wprds 3 wlien you fay , T&rrr h all the Ccpy^a you have by you) graat sgreement in M things Mmging ta f^Jth , and necejlarj u falvdtion Set: And mor^ towards the end^ you fay , Tbdt thej ^greeiu f ^ ^Uij* BifliQp Vs^er , (whofe Gopycs you profeflfe %o yl^fo much) ifheehad gopc oh with his worke I ^oke of n. /jf.had given vs better latisfailion in thi^par** ticular, in that w^ee had feen how great, and where, the dilagreements bee: but you make ys rely ;whoHy on your authority in thispoint^I k,nQw yo6 could not doc'other^ wife* But as for your iwdgcnient in funi^entalsy wet k now not h ow to rely on you ; You tell vi our religion znd yours agree in fundatnentaU: If y out Copye$ agree in fuqdancientais no more then our two Religions; thi« 4i,grecipent will bee little to our iatisfaftion, nor much to the Tatista<3:ion ofn^any of your Brethren: TFbr bceing they know you account all the points, iii which wee and you di/agree,not to bee points fundamentatl btnecdSary to falvation: they^by your granting frequent difa^reeihg in jpur Gopyes in points not funclamentall,are notfrccd from, butjconfirmecl in the ftifpicion which, many have^^ that the Copyes of the Bible agree no tetter then Pupifliis & ProteftaixtSiand that(For any thing they can yet iudgc cby their owne iudgemcnt ofdifcretion)' thefc your Go»» pyes difagree about the texts concerning the reaH pitfen- ce J the Fopes fupremacy ; Image-worlhip ; Prayer to Saints, and for the dead; yea about oui: iuftiiR'Catioh it felfe; the number , the right vfe, the fruit, the A^cefKt^^ tif Sacraments,- and iuch points as thefe arej Which, thgugii you account them not to be fundamental! , yet you ac^ count them of fo great concernment , that the difference in thefe points , gave you mod iuft caufe of iepatatin^^ tanm he m luip In aHpolntsXJr^S.^. %7 and dividing from the Romane Church , with all thofc Scandals and publike evils en fneing vpon th is divifion. Will not then , this bee a fufficient realon of not embra- cing the Copyesprellented vnto them in this moft accu- rate Bible , they haveing np better alTurance , that thcfe Copyesagree with thofc other Copyes concealed from them, inthcie pojy^ts^ (iil'Which their greatcft difference from the Roman Church doth confift) then the autho- i^ty of thefe learned meq, who mpft plain ely confeffe the frequqnt differences of tlieirCppyes in points not fuhda- mentail,and who alfb, bjr thb v^^mcoffdntf npt fundament tally are known moft jcpfi^i^spijly (to meane fuch kinde of points , as containc no meaner differences then thofe rflR^hipb- arc between Pamfts apd Proteftart ts ; and wh ich caufed thisgreatjiiyiUf^n* A word more of diis Bibdeln the nckt ^ft: J. ^ ' ' " ! 10. To end ithen this matter^ you fee ( Gentle Rea- you vndoubtedly knov^* , & much as by c^^dence of hu- mane knoVirledgc, to bee Gods vndoubtcd word : Vf \\i you , who contend fo eagerly to have notl\ing be!ceyed,. |pr whidi there is not clearc S^fipture i ^bive vs , in the jCQoft imporknt point of belecfeY bclc^v^-that forwhi^jh. wee have neither Scripture,nor evidenGe of humane rea- ibn? Ifyou (ay the divine Providence would doubtkfle kecpe the Copyes of die Originals Vncorrupted , bccaufa therwifb wep fhould have no fure Rule otFaith : I an- .Jwer^^itt th;lis to fuppofe the very thing which k in cjuc- %\on y Whdtbet Chrsfi gave vs SfriptuYe faf mr ongly Rule. ^^ea;,becaureit is cleate that , ftinding in humane evi- 4jence,ri6 Cx)pyc caft bee freed of the gxiitt of corruption:. Thefefore^aodWQbld huivc no <^ep^]f^e^l to bee our 8s TSe Blhle not couteynin^idl point t only Rule of faith : but hath provided for our dirediu another way, SECT: V. A NINTH ARGVMENT. That the Scripture cannot decide this Contr&lfer^ fye ^ tohich Trmjlatims of the Tfiord of God bee t^ue : And therefore ordinary Proteftants cannot believe Scripture withPivine Faithi , , ^ I^ivinc goodiicflc deiSring paiHonatelj I^SI ll^i ^ appcarcs \m paffioji for all ) the lal- vationofall , and intending to make faith J^yl lP^ a neceflary meancs to this their Salvation , ■^"^ muft cQft^quently provide (bme mcanes to guide and dired vs to the truth of this faith ; which mufl: bee a meanes fo eaiy to oec applyed by all , that all , hf the ufe of this meanes , may ( if they will ) attainc true fayth , which is but enc} for faith vnleffe It bei one is not Vakhy as 5. Leo %th Ser. de USatiy^ Hence it appearcs , to the very eye , that if the Scripture cannot Co bee vfed by all (or the farrc greater parte ) as to guide themfelyes by it , in all points neceffaiy to falvation ; it cannot bee the onely meanes given them for their guide in points necel> (ary to falvationiBut it cannot doc this to the farre great- er parte of the world , as I prove i For the farrc greater parte cannot beowludge m allpoints.Q^.i.S.j. 89 parte of the world cannot make vie of Scripture m thoQ: ianguagesj in which it was writtcn^as hath been Ihewcd in the laft Seiilion , even concerning men , who arc more learned , then any one among one hundred thouland ^ and it is in it (elfe cleare enough concerning thole , who know not Greeke and Hebrew in anyperte^ degree of knowledge , in which languages the Scripture was writ- ten: whence it follcweth , that the farre greater parte of the world, cannot know what rlie true word of God (their onely ludge and diredor), didiay, but by the iRcanes of a Tranflator or interpreter, Now judge you, in: what vnocrtainty that man (hould bee ieft^, who ihould A^avc a very good guide locked vp in fome place ^ to which he himielfe could never have accefle , but muft fecare all the diredions given him by fome Oiher man who is exceedingly fybjed to miftake very many things, which that good guide ftiouJd'lay to him^ e/pecially this meflTenger beeing often to truft others of np vndoubted credit: In thisxa^ , your oWn dbdrined'oth put you (O ^eare People) Who make Gods Word your onely guide, in ai way full qf a Worid of doubtfuil turnings , in which tomiffe is euerlaftingly to perifh. This word is locked vp« Jfb in Hebrew andGfeeke el ofets, that you cannot know what it fayth , but by the vie of a Tranflaror , as by a mcflenger^who beeing a man, and haveing a weakc v^ndeiifcandini;,: and a will fubied .pot to tak^ ail the pai- MS reijjuircd fortbeicxahe knowcth Gopycs as were Written by men of vnknown fidelity, who perhaps often were fiicb hireling pen-men as -had more ^ care' to write much , that they might gain tnu^rh ; then to write witk all j^erfed exa here ludge tor y.gur Icives , nor can poffibly. Iudge for your felves in this (Gapitall point (comprchendipg alji) d?ie points you are to bcleeve;) yet you are tayght by ^'ii your prime Dodors, that, as you are to anfwere to God for your ielvcs in ail you bcleevc; fo you muft , by your (elves alfo, ludge for your felves in all you belecve. Yet; (O prp|>ofter9us! QMonftroufly prepoftcroi^s! }/ycu, ip^. M 2 thi The ^ihk not C(^^tt*ynin^ dU points this cheefeft point of aK, muft rely vpon th« autiiotity dt a few Englifli Tranflators; who cxaftofyou to rely oft them wita more confidence, the they will permitt you t# rely vpon the authority of a whole generall Councell, fecondcd by the authority of the gravcft Fathers which the church of God hath had : And you, who are taught to follow and believe nothing but fcripture , are nov/ taught,without any one text ot fcripture to take theTraC* lations of men for your onely guides , in all and every point ofyourfayth; andfiich Tranilations aUo as wee iuft now dcfcribed , and fhail here more fully defcribe. In the meane time note , that here I have one more ne- celTar/ point , not clearcly fctt downe in fcripture , to addc to the former fixteen. Ifany deny this point to be« neceifary to falvai;ion,iet him anfwer this ArgumentrtHat is neceirary to lalvation , without which I cannot come to bee affuredly guided to true feythj But I (who vnder^ ftand not both Greeke and Hebrew) can not , without a truely Tranflated Bib e , come to bee affuredly guided to true fay th ^ the true Bible beeing ( as^ you teach i^e*s) the onely rule guiduig and dire<9:jng to true faythrTber*- fore ic is iieeeirary for mee , to vfe a truely Tranllated Bible: But no fcripture doth dired: mee in tlie choice of atcucly tranflated Bible ; Therefore fcripture doth nof dire<2; me^ in all paints ncc^ffary for me^ to lalvatton* ^- 'i,- ^ tJerc againi^ P infeirre', lehat ail that vaft ' iiumbel* cii?p?ppk^ vvho, knqwing tjot perfectly both' Gf ceke ai>d' i*tbre\v^V are forced not to ludge for themf elves which^ is the true word ot God, mufl of neccflity rely vpon ma- ny vnccrtaiatyes in this very point, vpon which all their whole fayth doth rely. Firft they niuft rely vpon this vn» ccrtaintiy., whether the Copyc Which this Tranflated ^ Bible Cannot he our lud^ein a!lpomt5.Q^S.^. Bible doth interpret to them, were a true Copye of the true vncorrupted word of God ; which, how grcate ati ,vnccrtainty it is, hath been (hewed in the laft Scdionj Where I fliewcd alfb (and here you may fee it againc) how much more you take your religion vpon truft, theA ^€ doe: Even thofc greatc Doctors, who now fett forth the famous Bible , ConfefTe (in their IntroduHhn) that C9pye$ are omlj fo f^re Gods true mrdy as thfj agree mt h tht true Originall C^pje^ written by the Prophets or Apoftle^. How thy Tranflators Copyc agrceth with the trut Origin mllj God knoweth ; I am fure thou knowcft not , not ihy Tranllator himGdkSetondly ^it u vncertaine , vvhetheir thy Tranflator did in every place interpret fincercly,an peruerfcM Hitherto thou fecft thefe Tranflationsof thy prime Dodors condemned by the .authority ofotheri>o Icffe famous TranjQators-And both thofc who were cpndemned thus, and who did thu$ coademne, were men more famous among you then is any one tranllator. of any one EngliCh Bible : Co that a greater authority , then is the authority of that man (whofe tranflation thou takeft for the only Rule of faith) •tcUeth thee that Tranflations of furrc more learned Tr^t iljttors then thincj bee fo full of Corruptions , that gre at Volumes would not conteyn. thero:How then canft thou h ope that thy-lefTc skilfull £ ng;i£b Tranflator hath done his part bewr then any ol tby gieateft Doi^^oxs. But I muft yet fujcther aske thee, how tbou docfl: know this cm tiby owpe knawkdge^and how k is pofliblefor thee he« toliidge for thy jfelfe > which thy Dodors/ib often teU thee thou flialt be able to doe if thou wile follow thcMoeft not thou here again fee how ina moft importaat poinft^ thou art enforced to truft an inGOEtiparabie leHeautho-^ rity tfecfn that is qf any ^ne of our general Counsels, wh ieK they fb ftridly charge thee not to truft. even m farre leffe points? O blindnes. 4.. But thou canft not but lee how mtichthou art gulled hctin , and how impoflible it is for thee to iudge oftruth and' faith by thele Englifh tranflittioES , whcD thou {halt yet heare what I have to fay of thenii rmr firfi BngHsh Btbk was fet forth i n the dayes of Henry the eight Tlndal , whom yours dfteemc the AfcfiU of England in this Reformation. May I not truft him will you fay ? Truly Bishop THnftall nvted no lejfe then tpa thmfatU Corrujfi^ tions m ht^ tranjldtion in thenm r^jf^wfTfr^onfyiaswitneiTetii the Remifli Teftament in the end of the Table ctttam f laces; 8cc. How litlea part of the Bible is the new Tefta^ ment ? And yet two thou fand Cofruftipns in that only ? Yet ftirely in <2^en Bliz^abeths daycs,who lived fo- very long, and did fee the Gofpell fo well perfe^ed , our Tranfl®- tions (wilt thou fayjwere compleatly exade'.For then, if ever , our Do<3:ors had the true Spirit. Indeed then they were fb confident their Tranflations did agree with, the word of God , that the Queen (•whoat all your Dodors by oath acknowledge Gouerneflfe of ydur Church inEn- g'and) in the 26. year of herReign^( as Sir Bii;hard^k£r write th in that year) di 1 c 4 77;^ ^ihle not conteyntng all points we ftill require an other Bible to affufe vs of the like things ,- and this other will require yet an other , and fo with out end. What circle can be more indies? S E C T: VL A TENTH ARGVMENT. That the Scripture Qa nnot decide the Controuet^ p about the truth of S. Matthe^ys GofpeL And that our aduerfaries doe not heleeue this GofpellQith diuine faith. Ere alfo I muft needs propofe a difficulty^ which , in the principles of your Religion , I concciue to be vnanfwerable. You do no leffe beleeue all things written in 5. Matthews Gofpel, then you beleeue all things written in any other book of the Scripture : But euen your Dodrors of the higheft forme, haue no other authority tor all things in S* Matthews Gofpel, but the Authority of aTranflation made by one , whom none of vs all know,-andfo wee can neither affure our felues of his fidelity, nor of his skill , nor of his care to vfc a true Copy , nor I of his induftry in the vfe there of &c. Now you tell vs (and it is truej that Tranflations (prefcinding from any decree of the Church apprcuing of them) haue only lofarre authority, asfarre as they agree wuh the true Originall; But it is impoffiblc for you {great Dodois) to know , how farre the tranflated Co« cannot he ottr Judge in all paints. 6. lof pycs of S. Matthews Ghofpell agree with the Originall; Dccaufe, fou thefe many ages, there hath not been knowa extant in the whole world , any one Copie of the Origi-^ nal-hand-writing of S. lAatth^rv , who did write in that kind of Hebrew which the lewes fpoke in his daycs , as all and euery one of the ancient Fathers (who haue writt of this matter , and whole workes wee haue) do teftify, and S. lerom lib. de Schritporib. Bcclefiaftkh affirmeth himfelfe to haue feen , and to haue alfo written out that Hebrew Copy* But for thefe many ages noe one Hebrevr Copy hath appeared in the world which, with any fiilfi- cicnt probability , could be (hewed to be a true Copy: whence it is euident , that none of you all can tell , howr &rre the Tranflations wee haue of that Hebrew Copy,dD agree with the Hebrew Copy; therefore , not one or you all can tell, howfarre thefeTranflations, which wee haue now, be of diuine Authority, and how farre now wee may admitt them as Gods vndoubted word^there beeing no rcafon known to vs , why w^e ftiould admitt thein more in one place (vpon5. Matthem authority) then in an other : and there beeiftg no reafon why wee ftiouId admitt of the whole Tranllation, made by I know not whom , rather then of other Tranflations , whom wee know , to haue been made with ill the beft induftries which human ability can afford : whence I can neither admitt the whole Tranflation as diuine , nor any part of it, rather then the part I admitt not ; I not knowmg any one part to agree more with the true Originall , then the other. All the wjbole Gholpel I cannot receiue as diuine, for no Tranflation at all , (much lefle the tranflations of a man vnknown) is to bee admitted as diuine and infal^ lible , there beeing no one fuch in all Europe as you 1 ay, O lUiic 10^ Bible not conteyningall points Hence I demonftrate , that you beleeuc not Mathhevff^ Ghofpel with diuine Faith : For you cannot fay , that you glue credit to any one thing in it for the authority of the writer of it, becaufe you know not any oiie thing de* liuered from God by the writer vnto you, but vpon the authority of the Tranllation, which is no further diuine then agreing with the true Copy ; which agreement you neither know to be in this one point , or any other you can name.How can I know,how the Tranflation agreeth with the Originalirif I know not what theOriginall laith? 2. Again, tobeleeue M^fr/?W5 Ghoip^l,is as neceft fary to faluation, as to beleeue S. Lukes or S, lohns^hut no infallible Scripture (Tranllations not beeing infallible) doth tell you that S. Matthews Ghofpel is the vn^doubted word of God; How will you then proue this by Scrip- ture againft the Marcionifts the C erdonifts,and the Ma- nicheans, who deny this Gholpel to be Gods word ? All points neceffary to faluation, you fay, are plainly fett down in Scripture : Shew me this, point plainly fett down. Here then I haue one neceffary poind more, not plainly fet down in Scripture which makeththe former leuen-teene poinds to be eightcene. Neither can you fay, that, by the very reading this Tranflation , you can difcouer a light (hewing it , as clearly as the Sunne, to be Gods word: For, though I can fee no realbn , why fuch light might not be difcouered , as well in true Tranfla- tions, as in true Originals ; yet becaufe you of your Re- ligion , who only haue eyes to fee this light , do profefle (as wee haue lately feen your greateft Scripture-Dodors to profeiTc) that there is not one infallible Tranflation in Europe ; and becaufe wee fee, euen fiich Dodors as they are^ not fo much as tohope todifcouer , by fiich a cannot he my Judge in all points. Q^.S* 6. 107 light , true Tranflations fromfalfe ones,- but to beftow great paines in conferring the leucrall Copyes , oftheyr fcuerall tranflations, with the beft copycs of the originals which they can findf and by the agreeing,or not agreeing with thefe beft copyes,to approue or reproue thele Traf- latios; wee are by this certifyed,that they truft nothing to this clear light, which if it were a reallity,and not a reall phanfy , were the beft guide of all , and would faue them infinite paines; Yea, whatfoeuer (toauoid our argu- ments) they boaft of this light; yet euen in the approuing or reprouing the Copyes of the Original itfeltc, they truft nothing to it. If 1 thought , they did truft to fuch an vngrounded Imagination , neither I, nor any one of my opinion (nor of thine neither, as I think) would euer buy one Copye of theyr Tranflations. 3. Now; if you cannot difcouer any fuch light alTur- ing you of the truth of all things in 5* Matthem Ghofpelt I am furc you cannot do fo in S. Johns or S. Lukes , or any other : And your own Confciences cannot but tell you^ that the light difcouering its felfe in S. Matthew , is as great as in any other book of Scripture 5 But this light is now clearely fliewed to be vn/iifEcient to proue S. Mat^ thews Ghofpel to be Diuine,it beeing only a Tranflation, which your beft Dodors confeffe to be fallible : neither is there any meanes to know one part of it to be more in- fallible then an other , vpon the authority of the writer there-of^becaufe wee know not which part agiecth wiih the true Copie of the writer. You fay you fix your faith vpon what is Tranflated, and not vpon the Tranflation: But Ifay , if you fix your faith vpon what is tranflated by a f alfe Tranflatour, you may foonc fix your faith vpon a lyi at leaft you cannot tell when youdofo , and when O z you io8 The IBihle mtconteynlng alt points you do not j For you know not wh ether the thing delw uered be agreeable to Gods word, or only to the Inter- preters fancy j" efpecially when you know not of what credit the Interpreter is. Do you know it becaufe your phanfy alfo tells you this is Gods word? then thus wee may haue a double phantafticall aflurancc, and nothing clfe; one from the vnknowne interpreters phanfy , an other from thy own. I thought your feyth had relied on Gods written word. What written word is that which can neither be fliewed afliiredly written in any Original!, nor in any Copye,nor in any Tranflation of the Original Copye? If you fly atlaft to that miferable fliift, as to /ay, that the Illumination of the Spirit can tell you Gods iR'ord, without the mediation of any certain vrdoubted meanes , conueighing it vnto you; then you muft needs be Prophets all, and euery one of you. Who euer heard of (uch a Church in this world , in which there be as many Prophets as there be men and women ? This is not the Church of 5. P^«/,in which he faid, i. Cor.jz.i^^ Be all! Pr^phctsPand in which hegaue only fome Prophets^ Epht 4. ijt. But all of you who know , imediately from God , that which no mediat meanes conueigketh vnto you , muft needs be true Prophets. If this be true , then stUb any Englift clown , by theJlike illumination , com- municated to him in the reading of his Englifli Tranfla- tion , may as well, and better, ( becaufe by diuine illu- mination) be affured , that all is true which is in his En- glifh Tranilated Biblc^ and fo, by good confequencc, be affured that it is a very true Tranflation; though he nei- ther knew Greek, nor Hebrew. And indeed your Greek and Hebrew only hclpsyou to conferrc the Tranflation with the Ofiginallsj but MAttb^ws OrigiDail Copye not bceing Cannot he our ludge in aBpoints.Q^. S, 6* 1 09 beeing for many ages vifible in the worId,can be no more conferred with by your Hebritians , then by this En- glifli Clown : And if his illumination alGTures him of all that is written in S. Matthews GhofpeUi wee will all, with one confent, graunt that it may aiTure him as well that all other parts of the Scriptures bee Gods word : what thca need you talke of conferring with the Originals , or knowing Greek or Hebrew? 4. Now at laft, I hope, when you Co v^niuerfally al- low to euery man and vvoeman who belieueth S. Mat-' them Gho/pel>fb large ameafure ofdiuine Illumination, that it is fufficient to ground an infallible beleefe You will confefle your felues to fpeake raoft inconfequently, if you offer to deny the like illumination to the whole Church tcprefentatiue in a gcncrali Councell : jfo now wee lhall haue a Church infallible ; which is ail I am en- deauouriug here by degrees to prouc. And tell mce not> that you are not aflured, whether they in Councels haue vied the due meanes to obteync this illumination^ for I (hall as eafily tell you , that neither I, nor my Bretheren , bee affured that you, and your Bretheren, haue vfed al- Ibthcdue meanes to obteync this illumination concer- umg euery Book , Chapter and vcHe of Scripture, affu- ring them ail to be Gods word ; erpccially when tl^jr Ipeak contradidions fo faft a:; wee fee they do. SECTION 1 1 o T7;^ ^Ihle not conteynlng alt points SECTION THE VII, ^ AN ELEVENTH ARGVMENTt That the Scripture cannot decide the manifold Controuerjies about the true fenfe of the Scriptures Therefore in theyr beliefe of the true fenfe there of^ our aduerfaries haue no diui- ne faith,- Nor no fure ground of theyr Religion^ N the former feAions I hauc giucn yoii cighteene points , all neccflarie to {alua^^ i^l tion , and yet not one of them plainly fet ^1 down in Scripture: Now 1 ad de a nine- ^ teenth point , which, though moft neccC- fary , yer, it is fo farre from being cleared by only Scripture , that almoft all our Controuerfies do arife from hence 5 without euer beeing filenced by the definitiuc fcntence of God , deliuered in the Bible : An j cuident (igne that God, in the Scripture only, hath not palled the clear decifiue fentence of all neceffary Con- trouerfies: For all parties fubmitt vnto that fentence, and j yet none of them is clearly caft thereby. They do then I the holy Scripture much wrong , who fay that God did - - write cannot he ourludge in all point s.Q^.i.S. 7. lit write it on fet purpole to end all controuerfies : and yet they cannot pollibly fliew how God hath done this com- pleatly: And lb, by confequence, they are driuen (to tha Icandail ot all Chriftians)to makeGod tall fliort of efFed- j ing that by Scripture , which they fay he intended to ! cffcd; to witt , the ending of all Controuerfies ^ which with pur eyes wee all lee wax endles, euen among thofe, who all fubmitc to Scripture as Gods word. Wee Roman Catholiks are far from doing the Holy Ghoft this wrong: ll wee fayj Scripture was dictated by him, for many moft I high ends belonging to the knowledge and loue of God, I and belonging to the encreafe of all vertue and hatred of i Sinne, armmg vs with patience in Gods feruice, by pro- I pofing moft comfortable motiues to vs : fb S\ Taul teach- I eth vs 5 what things fo euer haue been mitten^ to our learning i they are mitten y that by the patience and confolationof the , Serif turei me may haue hope , and thus walking cheerfully I by thofe confortabie examples, and thefe rare docu- ments, and feruent exhortations giuen vs in Scripture to all vertue , wee may giin the end for which God made vs- Yea wee adde, that Sgripture wanteth not this honor of prcuidingiufiiciently for our vnity in faith, about all points which can euer fall in Controuerfy not that it ends all thefe by it felfe alone :but that it bidds vs haue our fccourfc , in thefe cafes, to his Church, and to heare her^ ^d that yndcv p^inc oSbeeing accounted as a pubhcan or ! Meathen', 2Lnd telling vs , , that the Gates of Hell shall not pre^* u^ile againfther, by any fal/e dodirinCj- telling vs, thzX shee j u the pillar and ground of truth 5 that he is with her all dajes euen to the consummation of the world ; and that He hath pr^v- id his Father togiue her an other comforter , that he may abide I viitb her for euer ^ the f^irit of Truth y who shall teach and fug^ Ill The^ible mt conteyning aU points geft vnto her all things vphat fo euer Chrifihatb tau§)t hU Ap§2 files y guiding her into all truth. He tels vs alfb that he hath giuen vs fuch Dodors, and fiich Paftors , as may fecurc her fr$m aV(:«i»«enntf» 0/ error ;for his Couenant with her is this,Mj Spirit which is vpon thee and the words which I hauc f ut in thy Mouth ball not depart out of thy Mouthy normtof theMouth of thy feed,nox out of the Mouth of thy feeds feedyfro hence forth and for euer. And thzx her Sunn shall no more go down; For the Lord will he vnto her an euerlaJUng light ; $hee fliall be a Ktngdome Jlanding for euer ; that the Nation and Kingdome which shall not ferueher, shall perish. No Nationall Synods fliali iuftify any nations diuifion from her Com- munion. All thcfe Texts I (hall (hew to be fpoken of the Church^by which ( I think) it is as apparent by Scriptu- re, that God intended not in Gontrouerfies of faith , to inftrud vs by Scripture only; the very Scripture fending vs fo often to the Church, as alfb to herTraditions 5 as 2* Thes.z.i^.Houldye faJlyZnd{to doe this)hould theTtaditions which ye haue learned, whether by word , or by Epijlle : and a- gain , 2. Tim. 2. The things which thou hafi heard of mee by many witneffes (he (ayth not by his writing only) thefe com^ mend to faith full men , which shall befitt to teachothers allot And again, Thofe things which ye haue been taught^and heardf and feenein mee , thefe doe. Who (eeth not that wee wcr^p to do, not only what wee had read , but what had been taught vs , and what wee had only heard or feen (hining in publike pradice. But of this here after fee in the next SeSt:n. 4,5. 6, 7. 8. God then teacheth vsall things neceffary in Scripture ; firft, by deliuering many things clearly in it; fecondly , by fending vs for the reft to the Church, and to her traditions: By the Churches Paftors alone he inttru(3;ed fome fufficicntly in faith j as he did S.Taul cmmthemU^ $. P.Mly to whom it was fay4 9. Go int(y tht Citty, mi it shall he tonU the^ what thou mufi doe ; md as he di4 Cornelflusy to whom it was lik^yi^e faid ^ Call for one Sifnon;^ .wbofe furnameis Feteryand be will tell thee what thou oughfi to do.: AH. :io, i/.5, 6. Wh^Xif<^-^^ anwer S^il. 10. n* 6*,/ -n'/W r %r:Mt:loi tb: n'-rAh)(^'') vl Z, I retume to you, who iay, God intended hy Scrip* Wre only to teach vs all neceflary points 3 which if he •h^ith not done , you make him deficient in an ynworthy ,cnanncr:ad that he hath not done ii; I haue already Ihewcd in eight^iei^ ncceoTary points :.and now I ad4c > that by Scripture alone he doth not teach vs the true fcnfe ^of Scripture : And yet the true fenfe thereof is that which -muft giue fentence in the decifi^n of all controueifiesj the ienfe is the k;ernel5the Iifc,the. Soule of j;he text^ miflc that , iiiifle all ; A w^roi? g dn d falie ft:mv no k ife dan- gerous th^n^ifaKe text obtruded for a true one, Hence Tertull : de Praeforip: fenfe adultered is Uke ferilous as the fiile corrupted And S.lerom Ep : ad Gal: fayth. Tbt Gojpel is not in the word but m the fenfe} not in th^ barke j ht in the fappe. whmcSox^ D. Re^mUs in r his Conference with ;Mr. HArt::Mk^Syqcmkiif\k ^ thatiit U not tfif shew k^tthie fenfe of the words ythat muf^ decide Contfoueffies* So he. It it tiot then the Text as it founds, but the fext thus expound ded, which muft end (^s you fay) all pur debates : And this .expounding thu pr thus,is that vejry thing which firift m^esraU o^^r |>i^^^ debates and Contrpuetfies; and it is alfo that veiy : tjjing which qaakethk th^fii to be end- ie$. Tfr« I j?i7i inculcate, becaufe. - 3. This, and thfe true reafon of this, is exceedingly to .fee noted: if or i$ is iipt the Te^t, but the text thus crthui fexpouudcd:, which is to decid,^ Contrpu^rfi^s : not, the dead icad ietter,but the true fenfe of it,clcliuercth the fentenc« ofthe Holy Ghoft. The text , as expounded by priuatc iudgraents , is not to be held Gods vndoubted Word? vnles wee firft know the interpretation thereof to be ifl^ ideed true , and agreeing wholy to the mind of the Ho- ly Ghoftjwhich to know is a thing wholy inipoffiblc with cut a revelation; and yet , vntill wee come to know this, wee fhall neither have reafon to agree in one inward faith interiourly , nor in one outward profeflion extcri- ourly Butftill «ur harts and lips will be devidcd. Thk; wee fee , as clearly &$ noone-d ay-light , happen among thofc who take Scripture only for theyr iudge j which all Herctikcs did ever vfe, and will ever vfeto do fo >to eC cape beeing condemned or caft by any other iud^ment^ Scate. Hence they all ftill appcalc to Scripture } tor then they know beforehand all that can be faid , and know alfo by what interpretatios to fhcw, all that ca be^brought cut of Scripture againft them , not to be fpoken by God in any fcnle contrary to the opinion they hoiild»And thus contrary opinions, grounded in contrary interpretations, are held , and wiU be heW vntill the Worlds end if there be no other Iu , but the fcnt^nce given hy God in the Text of Scripture; not as the text founds, . but as the Interpreter expoundes. Here with all poffiblc are I would haVe you note, that all the faith which our adverfarics have , relying on their interpretations^ which^ are fallible , cawhc but fallible and human : For thc^r believ'e,- all that they l>elie ve, bccaufe they fully pcrfwade themfelves , that , God lay th that thing tn the Scripture taken not meerly as the words found , but taken as^they verily apprehend and iudgc the true interpretation to be liQyOX fo^ This i« the gromul of theyr ^bckefe in. all points; Cannot hemr ludge In all points. $. 7. 1 1 5 points - and therefore this is fundamcmall to their Relir: fion jand that as properly as any thing can be called fun-* amcntall to any Religionrfor it is the foundation it feUc on which euery fingle point of theyr bcjcefe , and theyc. whole belcefc in gencrall is fo wholy built, that they refc vpon nothing but this. Where firft I obfcnie^ that you * and wee muft needs differ in the moft fundamental! point which concerns Religion: for wee beleeuc nothing at all becaufc, by our priuate ludgoicnt orjy, wee iudgc it to be the truly interpreted fenle of Scripture butbc- caufe wee know it interpreted lb by the Church,affifted by the holy Ghoft in all her publik interprctations.You will beleeuc no one point (for example , that there is a Trinity,) for this rcaton only;becaufo for footh you hold the Church fallible in her publik interpretations of Gods word:ad wee will not beleeue any point of our faith(for example, the Trinity) vpon that ground^ becaufe wee know alTuredly that our own iudgments , in our priuatc mterpretations of Scripture, are moft fallible. Whence it is euident, that in thole very points in which wee do a-* gree, wee fundametally difagree: becaufe wee dilagrce in the very foundation of our beleefe concerning thofe p6inds. Now> in point of beleefe, we muft mainly atted, not &ly to the truth of what wee beleeue; but to the gro- und vpon which v/ee build our beleef.For, if wee think our felues to build our beleefe fccurely , vpon afounda* tion which is deceitfiill , ( as our own interpretation is, ad the Churches not:) wee (hall be loon lead to beleeue tilings which are fal(c; as wceJec a world of People do^ by relying on the fcripture as interpreted by thejT priuatc Judgment, The Turk bclceueth that there is a God, be- caiiic his Alcoran (whicli is the Rule of his faith) tcachcth M ^ ^ hio* ti6 TJ)e 0hhftomnteym)igMpom^^^^^ biiTi fo: Now' , ' becaufe belecueth the truth Vpon a dei ceitfull fbuodatioh jhe, vp^ the fame foundation, buii- deth the beleefe of a thouknd faiftties. Adde to this, that this ludgment ofthe interpreter(who according to you is iuery priuate mafj , yea eucry priuate woenian , for his or ller pwn f@Ife:}this iudgmet, I fay; is moft Weak,a nd many points of faidi arc matters very hard to coficeiue,and va- fould; and controuerfies alfo are exceedingly intangledj and the conferring texts with texts , like and vnhke, ra- ther increafethvnceitainty of hitting right , then it helps to any full aflured certaint^ : what then mare'fure,then a moft vnaffured proceed ill gv in this iilterpreter? Ag:ain, j^riuate ludgmems beeing aim oft as various as priuat© taces ( yea often differing from them felues) infinite va- riety of interpretations muft needs proceed from infinittt priuatc mens iudgments , fd very various^. You may fee chisin your Patriarch Lf#fc^r; who >^in matters ofhighefjj n^dmeiit , is tioted no leflte then four fcoore times to taiught fla- 1 contradi<9iions: as you may fee fliewed in tho end of the firft tome of our learned C^i:l»$. Not only yout U^rm Lmlnr thns eontradidred him f^lfe in wor4s • but: alfo your Martin Bu€er coiitradidicd him fdie iti^ extci< riot -change from Reiigioh to Jl^cligi^stii : At' 0116 time be fMf iudged thofc texcis of the' S^^npfere , whak;h fpeak the Sacrament of the Body ofoUr Lord y to be truely in- terpreted by the Roman Catho^iiks ; and fo he beiceuedr Chrifts Body to be really preferit,'rctad^ ^i-thpfe- texts., giuen by canmk\ditrlu^m 3 if Ziinglkris> to be the only truciehfe of the Holy Ghofl^ and then he bccaine a Zmnglian, denying Ghrifts Body to be really prefent in the Sacrament ; for which Luther tearrried him perfidioiis: fourthly , ha onC£ more mpfi fimerly hdged L^ih^rs 'mhriptttiktw^^ the truer fcnib of the Holy Ghbft j arid dnGe more became a 'Lu- theran: arid therefore in his firftEditibn of his Commen- taries vpon the fixth of S. lohn and 26* of S. Matthew , he ashthfardonof God and the Church for hauing . bewitc hed ma^ fKf wkh the Herefy of ZmnglM. fiftly ^ yet after-tbis he fince'- tdj hd^ed 4^Mn Ztiinglius his interpretation of thofe Texts to be the only true one: And this interpretation he did publickly profcffe and defend at Cambridge -^ko which Vniuerfity he was called out of Germany as a prime Dodlor y to helpo vs here in England in our new begun ftefocpriiation* And ii is to be .noted , that, at euery one ©fthefe hisxhangcs, he ftill vfed maft earneft'froteftationi 'undoubted certainty , eonceaued from the Scriptures: as you. toay feein the mofl: learned Brierley in his treatife o£ S» Aufiens Keligionin the Preface ; where he cites his authors for aiLthefe'ehangcs* To which 1 adde that after all chofe changJcs, he is at laft affirmed to haue died a lew, by Pof- pvin in notis .Verbi D^? and Vlenhergim Caufa 12. And in- deed tor oney who hath firft beleeucd Scripture, as in- terpreted by euery Alans priuate iudgment, to be to euc- ly man the only ground of aii he is to belciric concerning Cbirift,.and his do:d:rine: and then haih confidered after this, how groiindlcs a ground this is^ and how, if th is be tlic only meaiiies left by Chrift for vnicy in hisChurch,hi3. Church is moflrpittifuily prouided: for in this moft high- ly important point , itcannot but breed a ftrong. temp- tatioKi':,-, to fell qiiitd.'Qutvdfio\ic with and his Rtiij- eion,. 1 i 8 ^ ^he$ihk notconteyntng^ all paints *gion,in thofe who will not adttiitt any thought oFfcek- ing for a better ground amongftvs^ where it might be fo eafily found. v" 4. Qieftionles if ChrJfthc God as lie is; and if he truly lo vet h thefc foul cs for which he dyed ; he would <¥ot have failed , to provide them of fome more affured meanes ^ to know that true faith without which he will not fave them ; then this mcanes is , of leaving them to theBible as interpreted by each one as he thinks righteft. What Law-maker in -any Common-wealdi was ever yet found any where fo imprudent as only to leave the peopk of his Gommon-weaith fo miferably provided (for the finall ending all theyr Controverfyes ) as they (hould be, if he did only leave them a Law-book for their fole and only ludge in all theyr diflfcrencesi without any liv- ing ludge to expound it with vnappealeable authority-. Well now the Church of Cbrift is a Community , which was to be l^read over the whole face of the Earth 3 and intended to laft vntill the confumation of the world: and therefore this Community ^ above all others , had the greateft need of a moft fuper-abundantlyr-fufficicnt mea- nest© end all theyr Controverfyes which do not con- ccrne theyr temporall , but etcrnall welfare. A world of ,Controverfies muft needs be ftill rifing in a community concerning fo many forts of people , and thofe ftill fur- ther and nirther removed trom Chrifts time vntill the very end of the world. Wherefore tliis community had been moft miferably and pittifuUy provided for , in poind of vnity infaidi; and Cferi/? ftiould have gathered together a moft heart-difvnited ibrt of people , if in all theyr numberlcs diferences , after all theyr reading of Scriptures , conferring of places and fuch like Rules as you ^aimot he pur lud^e in all points. Q^.S.7. j 1 9 you prefcribc^ they fliould have no other meaner left them to end thofc Controverfies but the written Text of the Bible, to be expounded according as they" can gheffc at the intent of the Holy Ghoft. True faith con- lifteth in the interiour judgment it then Chrifi dcfircd Xhcy fhould he of one faith , he defired alfo they fhould be of one inter i our judgment : But how could the wif- dom of God expcd this vnity in the inward judgement, knowing fo weil that every one of thcfe iudgemcts were fo exceedingly different in framing fcvcrall iudgments 3 and that even after they have vfed all the Rules whiclpi you give them^. * ^: . , By this dilcourfe, without going further, thou mayeft once more fee the vngroudenes of all thy whole belecfj relying only vpon the word of God: as this word is expounded and vhdcrftood by thy iudgmet ^ which in farre eaficx matters hath deceived thee a thoufand times, aiul may da fb in this hard matter , in which a world of better vnderftandings then thyne do vaftly differ from tliee. If thou doc anlwer , that thou relyeft not on thy iud^cntj buron the word of God. I ask, whetlier, thou ^ocft rely on the word of God iyft ^Si^tl>e letter (c>unds > 'Thou niuft fay, fao.How the? Thou needs^ fay, that thou docft rely vpoa it ,. as ;it is expounded by thy own iudgment. This al/a appearcs by the infinite cgatrariety ofcxpofitions;atid interpretations given by fo pany re- clyin^ i ( i'lift as thou dqeft ) vpon the word ofj^od : inlo TOuch that there ho, ft;wet ihtxx twa hmAreJk ieverall in- terprctatiohs^]6f tbf fe fmv^r words jTfcis is mjf Body : which interpictatiohs although thc^y be not all allowed of by thy Bieligion , yet. they all of them , proceed from this )Tcry groai^d(Q£thy ^R^igjcr^^Qf tq^kipg the wotd of God, not: ti6 ' \^<^i^ihleni^ ^ hot is foiinds ,^nor as expounded byrth^ Chuifceb >;hMt ^ts eVery 6ne in his private judgmen thinkit ought to be expounded. Wherefore vpoi,! the Vhole matter , it is all one to reiy vpon a mans private j-udgractc and to rely vpoh the Scripture , as interpreted by his own jprivate judgment ^See the vaft variety ofReligions lately ^riing vp by following this Principle, in my firft SeSt. nh iy. If thou replyeft that thou doeft not truft to , and rely tpon thy judgement ; but vpon the fpirit of God /which thou knoweft aflurediy to rule this judgement ^ fecuring It from all misvnderftanding of Qods ward r thisithy ant fwer will have many difficulties. Firft, how caitft thou j "ivithout high prefumption aflurae J to thy private felfc fo fccure an afliftance of the Spirit {affuredly preferving thee from allerrour in thy private judgment5}whca thoii ^oeft io peptiri^cioufly deny , that the Church areprefenf itatrve it felfe{whcn it judged^ in a generail Gounccl for the whole wor^ld of beleevet^) is allured! fo well intheyr |)ublick judgment a« thou art in thy private ? And yet, becaufe thou feeft theyr ludgmet quite contrary to tnee, thou mlift fall )i>y^uisannot poflibty- Cannot he our judge In all points. Q^i. S.7. n 1 pofEbly know , with any full afTurancc , that the Holy Ghoft doth affift you : becaufe nothing, but the word of God ca fccure you of thisjand it is no xdiere written in the HR^ord of God , that you A. by your private judgment, can infallibly expound all texts in the Scripture concer- ning neceffary points. And if you , by your private inter- pretation do expound-any text or texts of Scripture fo^ as to fecure you of this : yet you are afluredly to know » that you cannot afluredly know this interpretation of thofe texts to be moft certainly true ; For to know aflu- redly thefc texts to be rightly expounded by you, you muft be afl^ured from fome other text about the right vnderftanding of which text there will be ftill the fame difficultie, and the fame certaine vncertainty ; vntill » without bringing any text, you can prove your feife cer- tainly to be thus infallibly aflifted in your interpretation^ And becaufe you prove this without a text ; wee are not to bicleeve you , who teach vs , that nothing is to be be- Iceved , as infallibly true , which is not written in the Bi- ble : in all which ? I am fure , it is not written , that you A0 B. arc a true beleever : and therefore , though it were written rfiere. That all true beUevers had this afifiance of the Spirit ; You were never the neercr. Fifthly how prepofte-n roufly ridiculous is it, to hoiild your felfe infallible in de- claring Gods word : and yet not to hould tjie whole Church infallible in declaring or interpreting the fame? 6. Wherefore , y our laft refuge is to fay , that all points neceflary are clearly fit down in Scripture j which Ihavelhewed ( and fliall further (hew) to be manifeftly falfe : And you may even with your fingars touch the falfehood of it , in this moft neceflary point , of knowing which is the certain vndoubted true fenfe of Scripture. For>in things^which arc clearly to be feen>therc vfeth not to be variety (and infinite variety ) of iudgments : as wee kave ften there is , in interpretixig the neceflary texts of Scripture : in fo much as no Deuine , by Scripture only, can conuince an Arun Col/ler , as I (hewed 5e^f • i. N. c. Although this C^7/^/^rIiouldeth alfo Scripture for bis only iudge.. This variety of interpretations (one flatly oppofite to, the other) flieweth evidently the Scripture in thefc points not to be evidently cleer. Again ^ if wee mark it> this anfwer is very litle to the purpo/e, in our adverfaries principles : for^r/ , they teach that our Catholike Ro-^ man Religion doth not difFer from theyrs in any point fundamental], or neceflary to faluation: fccondly , they teacb that the Scripture cannot be Chewed to be clear in points npt fo fuLy neccflTary for /aluation* Hence I argue thus y in points wboly neceflary toialuation you and wee all agree,- as you fay:fo that by this you can inferr no ciorc then, that the Scripture is clear in thofe points in whick wee both agree. W hat get you by this? Do you feperate . feom the Vi^h.ole Church for other pointSjWhich you can-^ sipt proue your felues , by this ground > to liaue dear Scripture for ? It is yoiir commpn dodrine deliuered by D-'. V^me in. h is 5^3" i ^A^xdii againfi publick^au^^ ciaily oi all Churches, in the whole world, all which you eppoled in very many importat ^omts)there mujl he brought euident demQnJtration ofclur Sm You do not prone tliat you bring this , vnlcfle you can proiie the S cripture Vniuerrally to be clear in pouits not neceflary " to Salua^^ tion : For about thefe (as you Jay) wee only differ. Ifyouj ptcafe. to fay rheti , though Scripture be not dear in all points vnneceilary , yet it is clear in thofe in, which, wec; i^w difagrec enery child willfee^/ that you begge. thatt mnnot he our Judge Innll points. Q^. S.y. 1 2| ▼cry thing wliich is in queftion. And what argument will you bring , to make vs beleeue that the beft , and the choileft Dodors that were in any Church , for thefe lafl: thoufand and two or three hundered ycares , could not fee the true/enfe of a clear plainc and euident text of Scripture which they read cuery day? And yet you muft cncreafe the miracle, and fay ; that all thofe Dodors of that age in which firft the true Religion decayed , muft needs know, that the whole former Church, from Chrifts dayes to theyr dayes , had vndei ftood thofe clear places iuft as you vnderftand them now ; that is in the) r true fenfe. Now^I pray, vpon what record haue you it relat*« cd , that there did fall in the fourth , or fift , or fixt age, ftich a thick mift vpon all the beft feeing eyes of that vn- happy age, (about which age aUo none of you ca agree j) that no one Dodor could,or would /ee him ielfc to pro- ceed againft the known lenfe of all former Chriftianity> in die interpretation^of thofe texts , which fo euidently ftand for the dodrine of all former Chriftianity againft them? Will you haue vs to beleeue .his ftrangeft wonder of all wonders, without any Record from Antiquit^/j on- ly vpon your faying that it was fb. 7, There is yet an other conuincing reafbn,why this 9 clearnes you fpeak of in Scriptures , to vnfould vnto vs the vndoubted fenfc of the Holy Ghoftinall ncceilary Controuerfies, cosneth to be of no fcruice,for the infallt* ble finding out the true fenfe by euery jpriuat man and. woeman : to all which you vfe ftill to fay ^ ifjou will bt with vsy you shall fee what yon do} Wee require your oltdi^iKe to what wee demonprate U be Gods will for yen to beleeue itni doe , as D. Verne boafts Sell : 14. Heerc w^ee come to the point to fee your demonftration ; if you gull vs here you 0^2 vnd^ 124 TheWthle not Conteyntngatt points^ vndo vs: Make vs then lec , that by clear demonftratiofli of Scripture, wee may fee what God in all -neceffary points requireth of vsto beleeue and to do: and make all of vs men, and woemen, do this. How vaftly you deceiuc vs , Ihaue fliewed all ready , SeB. 2. ». 13. which place I muft needs intrcat the reader to turn to , and read at- tentiuely,before he goeth further. There wee haue fliew- ed (and that by I>. Terns own confeffion in his SeSli 26^) that all things neceffary are not conteyned exprei- ly in Scripture : but fomc of them are only thence dedu- cible. But tell mee (great Dodror ) be they deducible by all of vs, who you promife fo glorioufly to mak^ eye-wit- ilefTes of this demonftration?T/?^rj? be(fAyth he) deducible not 4II by euery one that reades; but it is enough if done by the ?af^ tors and guides which God appointed in his Church to this pur^ fofe. What? did you call vs all to be blind folded by you, and not to fee the demonftration : but to hear only this newes ofit^ that it hath been feen to be a demonftrablc dedudion by your Minifters ? wee do not fee your de* monftration , but your grofTe cheat* Yet (my dear Bro- ther) thou flialt fee thy felfe gulled £irre more. Euery Minifter hath not eyes (how wilt thou know whether thy Minifter hath or no?) to fee this Demonftratiue deduc- tion : for Dr. Verne addeth that thej muft be Minifters vfe-^ ing the meanes that are needfutl (mark the word needfuU) for that pur pofe-^fuch as is,i .Attention.zJiligecein the fearch of the Scripture. 3, Collation of places. 4. obferuing the connexions, j*. dfo fmceritj and imparxialitj in the colleilio or dedudion they make. 6. atfo prayer and deuotionfor asfiftance in the mrk^ Alfo, befides theft fix Rules, there be fourteene more to be added; as 1 ihewed in the place aboue cited: of which fome be as irapoilibk for the vulgir multitude to vfe (though ^cannot he mr ludge in all points. Q;i.S. 7. 125 (though this multitude make vp the number of the be- leeuers) at it is for them to be cunning in Greek and He- brew^ for they (to know they haue interpreted the Scrip- ture right) muft of neceflity be cunning in both thele languages. Neither do I fay any more in this , then your ovvn moft learned Dodors haue faid befpre mee;to which I adde your moft learnedwhitaker lib. de Sura Serial P. y. 23, where he layeth of thofe who vnderftand not the Hebrew and Greek 5 tYioXthey do often erre , and that vnauoidabty: Ssfe ac netejfario hallucinantur: Now bidde vs poor people Come with yim ^ and wee shall fee what wee do. Now indeed wee fee what wee doe; for wee clearly fee wee do wee know not what; bccaufe wee fee wee leaue, by your inftrudion , the interpretations of all Councels, and Fathers , feconded by the perpetuall practice of all Churches , which God had vpon the face of the Earth, for twelu« hundred yeares together,as is confelTed: and this wee do,to follow , not this euidencc which wee arc tould wee fhould fee with our own eyes to be fuch; but to follow what fome Minifters fay they fee to be euident, tb witt, thofe few Minifters, who are perfedly , skilled in Greek and Hebrew; ofwhofeperfed: skill wee haue no knowledge of our own; and though wee had , wee do not perfedtly know that they haue vfed, in all points they teach vs, thefe twenty Rules which tliey confeffe to be Ne^rf/rt// : and wee alfe) do know that all thefe twenty Rules are confeffed to be fallible,-and wee haue lide hop* by twenty fallible meancs , to come to fee an infallible truth eftablifhed ; for when wee were boyesat fchoole, learning a lide Arithmetike,wee were taught, that nmight times naught did makfs nothing but naught. ii6 Tl7e^ihlenot conteynmgall point f Mill^ licet CyphrisCyphrarum millia jungM, NUprjiter Magnum conficmNihilum. X4> Nothing iojn tenne thoufand Nothings morei Though alt find nothing but of Nothings ftore^ Adde not only twenty, but twenty thoufand fallible Ru- les: you fhali be neuer the neerer that infallible trut h , by fceeing fo well prouided of fallibilities^ 8* I haue (I hope) Chewed thee fufficiently, that tliou canft not fee alTuredly , and vpon thy own knowledge know euidently, which is the true fenfe of the Scripture, Now I will giue thee a further reafon thereof, del luered by one of thy own cheefc DoAors^Voitor leremj Tajhrin ^his Sfcourfeofthe Ubertj of Prophecyingy SeB: 3. where he proueth the vncertainty of arguments deduced (as D« lEerns fpeaks ) from Scripture, by the many fcnfes of Scripturciwhen the Grammaticali fenfe is found put. For there is in very many Scriptures a double fenfe^ a Litter all Mdd Spirituall; andboth thefe fenfes are fubdmided: for the Litter all fenfe is either naturall , 'Or fguratiue; and the Spirit uAl fome'^ times allegoric oily fometimes Tropologicalli fometimes there Art diners littrall fenfes In the fame places \ ib he. Now it de- pends vpon the fecret intention of the Holy Ghoft, to haue vfed thefe words infome one, or two or more of • thefe fcnfes* How fhall wee iind out fo great a fecret , and that fb infallibly , as to be vndoubtedly afliired , of our own knowledge, that wee haue certainly difcoucred this fecret? Twenty fallible Rules, though weefliould vfe them all, as well as a man could , would not bring vs ta this infallible affurance* Eucn your great Do<9:ors (who iiaue vfed them better then thou canft hope to doe) haue had w5^ hunderedfeuer all opinions about the true fenfe of tfaefe four words , ThJs is ntj Body. Thou thinkeft thy felfc tobe cannot he ourludge in aUpoints.Q^.%. 127 to be affured infaliibly, vpon thy own knowledge, that thcfe words be to be interpreted figuratiuely ; becaufe thou haft conferred this text with fome other texts, for example with thofe texts which tell thee that Chrlfi$ words be Jpirit and life , and that The flesh profiteth nothings Alas thou haft oWerued but one of thefe Twenty Rules^ which is Conference ofone text with another; This Rule is infinitely deceitful! , as the fame Dod:or Tayler teachetb thee,who in hisnextSciStion [^'ith; Another great fretence (to iuftify new Interpretations) is the conference of f laces thing of [uch indefimte capacity j tbaty if there be am^ biguity ofmrdsy variety cffenfesy alteration of circutnftances^ or diference of (llle amengfi Dluine writers ^ there is nothing whkh may be more ab ufed bj wilfuUpeople^ y or may more eaflly decelue the vnwarj, or that may amufethe nwjl intelligent ob^* pr^t'ri.What lhail then become of thee and mec who are none of the moft intelligent obfcruers^ And fo this Rule alone leaucth vs at a non plus , euen though wee had both 'Greek and HebrewiFor (as the feme Dodor intimateth) it is a moft pittifull argument to inferre^f/;/^ mufi infallib'^ ty be the true fenfe y becaufe I can Chew that perhaps it may -he the tr4ie fenfe^Ag^iri y when your Dodors bidd mec • confcrre this text with other texts of the Bible : I askc, whether I muft conferre it only with other places of the feme Book in which it is written f They will lay, no^ but I mutt conferre it with all other texts of the word of then to truft thofe choice , butftill fallible Minifters ; vfing ftill only fallible Rules 5 and infallibly fure to contradift one ancticr ? I will tell thee firft what thy own Pro- teftant prime Maiftersin Scripture do plainly tell thee, I mean tho(e Renowned Dodors who now , at this vcrjr time , are fetting forth that Co famous Bible > of fo many learned languages. Thefe Dodors , perufing night and day the beft Originall Copyes of the Bible that be to hp had , may as lafely be followed by thee , as any Minif^. ters thou knoweft. Thefe men iii the Preface to theyr great work , which I citted Se£t. 4. n. 8. hauing firft en- deavoured to cleer that controverfy about the truth of the Copyes of Gods true word which they give vs^^they then (peak thus; The whole Conmverfy heeing ahut the true fence of the Serif turey delivered by tranjlations every where re*» 4cived , me have nadj at band the judgment almojl cf that R 2 wbiU I j 2 The ^ihle not conteyntng all pointf whole church which isCatholike ( or vniverfali ) as vpelt tf^ ref ed^ of its beehg in M places ^ as its beeing In all iimes : which Church vnfoldeth to vs the places in controverfj.To whojejudg" ment ( mark ihis) he vphomll not fubmit himfeli'ey truly he shevpeth himfelfe to be a man of no judgment , and he is fcarci worth the name of a man , much Ujfs of a Chrijlian. So they foL 4. This is a different lelTon from v/hat D. feme taught thee. But it hath better au.hcrity, Gatholique Antiquity beeing altogether of one rrind in this joint. L will tctt thee this out of a moft approved Do(ior of the primitive Church y and no maii doth fo much as queftion whether the words which I fliall cite out of him be his or no He hath but one litle book in all ; It is F/^r^«r/j(5 lerinenfis y who lived in the fifth age 5* he vviitcrh thus: Do Heretikc^ "vfe the tejiimouies of Script ure ? Tes indeed do thej j and that moji vehemently j jou shM f€e th^m fly through all the facred Booke y the Bookes ofMoyks^the Booker of Kings y the F{almeS', the Apojtles , the Gofpels y the Vrophets :. And this whether they be among theyr: own people , oy others; both privately and pub'* licklyyboth in theyr difcourfes and in theyr bookes; both in ban-^ quetSyand in the fireetsr thej fcarce ever fpeakjone word ofthejf own. which they do not fet forth with the words of the Script ure^ Keadbut the,work^ ofVzulm Samozatenias,fli/Prifci]lianus^ Eunomius, lovinianus, and fuch like pefiiferom felloweSy joU shall fee infinite heapes of examples ^and fcarce one fide ofaleafey which is not f ainted out with fentences of the new and the outd Teflament And litle aHeriwkw now they shall begin not on^ ly to bring forth, but alfo to expoundy and not only to cafi outy but aljo to interpret thofe words y tbenprophane Not4elties art lajed open-, then you may fee the hedges cutt down , and thofe li* mitts transferred which our Fathers did put vsy then you tnaf fee the doltrine of the Church tome in peem And by and cannot he our liidge In allpoints.Q^.S. 7. I by But fome one mil faj vpfut shall Catholikjs do, and thefori'^ nes of the Church ? Bj v^hat tneanes shall they diftingwish the truth contejned in Serif tures from thefalftty of theyr interpre'* tations? They mufi exceedingly apply theyr care to interpret the diuine Canon of Scripture , according to the Traditions of the Vniuerfall Churchman d the 'Rules of the Catholik doctrine: vchiclr frailice I faid in the beginning of this Boekjvas deliuered doxvri vntovsbyHoly anllearnedmmSo he. And the place,which he cited out of the beginning of his Book , is admirable to our prefent dilcourfe : for hauing put the very obiec- tion which our aduerfarics vfe to make ; that feeing the Canon of the Scripture is perfect, ai fupef abundantly [efficient in all refpeilsf.vhat need is there that the authority of the Churches interpretation should be ioyned to it? then he anfwers; Becaufe. forfooth all iHen do hot in one and the felfe fame fen fe tak e the facred Scripture by redfon of the great deapth thereof One man expounds tt one wajy one rfia!n an other way/tn fo much that as many ferifes niay feeme to be deduciblefrom ity as there be men^ tor Noviithnus expounds it one iv^jy,Photinus^ offc^r^Do- natus^w (;ffcmArius,EunDmius,MacedoniuSi;i« otker;ApoU hparis^i PrifciliianusJoVihianm ad Pelagius,4« otheriLa^ Jtly Celeftius ad fJcftonu$ an other. And therefore multum w^- ceffe ejtylt is very much neceffaryyto auoid fo great ad fo manifold Labyrinthis of irror , that the line, by v^hich voce rule out the Interpretation of the Prophets and Apoflles ^ be directed accor-^ ding to the Rules of the Church and the Catholickfenfe. So he: Co I i fay thou alfo fo,- and all our diuifions will be ended: for then wee fliould not , vnder pretence of feeing with our own ^yes what wee do , take the Scripture contrary tafo many Councels ,and all authority of Church-Tra- dition ^ becaufe wee ludge it ought to be expounded fo m our priuate ludgement^ though differing from all Churches Ij4 lihe^hle not conteynlngdl points Churches vpon the face of the Earth. But I muft haue i, Church , vpon who{c authority wee all fecurely may and alio muft rely , in interpreting the Scriptures, asS* TSwr^wl-Zpeakethj and that Church, muft of neceffity be granted to be infallible : but no Church can be infallible which hath not this condiiion,that it houldeth ad leach- cth it felfe to be infallible ; as I (hall demonftrate Se^^ 17. ».2. which condition agreeing to no one Church but the Roman (as is manifeft;) this holy Father-, and all the reft(who bidde vs ftill in doubts and Controuerfies about the Scriptures, and theyr feuerall interpretations rely vpon the Church,and take her dodrine for our warrant) do bidde vs rely vpon that Church which was held,and truly held by all to be infallible. And fball very well know that they m^ant the Roman Church, and no Church diflfering in Communion from herj becaufe this condition agreed to none but Her. When this was fb vndi(putably out of all queftion, among all fuch as were then counted Catholikes then tlicy thought it enough to fay; ^elif gn the Church : without laying, Rely on the Ro- man Church. So wee Catholicks , i|)eak to this very day, neuer adding the V^oman y but for our ad uerlaries fake among whom wee liu^: iuft as Englilh men (ay, The Vm^ liament decided fucb a thin^ ; meaning the ParUament of EtH gland:\s/hich all Englifh in England perfe£S. Athanafius hath ever ben admitted by all fucceedingtrue beleeu- crs, and your Englffli Church doth pro- fcfle to beleeve it , and vfed to read it in theyr Common prayer. In this Greed you profefle your felves to beleeve feverall points no where conteyned in the Bible in plain termcs : As that God the Father is not begotten ; that God the Sonne is not made y but begotten by his Father only : th^it the Holy Ghofi is neither madt' nor begotten ; bat doth proceed , atii that from the Father and the Sonne. And that he ycho mil be -faved 5 muji bdeeve this. For this is an Article of that Ca- tholike faith , which faith without amanhouldeth entierly md invkUbly , rpithom dl doubt he^hall pmsb eternallj^ AU this Cannot he our Iidge In aU points. Q^.S. 8. 137 Ais is in that Greed profefled hy v$ ; and yet not one of thofe fevcrall points conteyned in it , can be fhewed to be conteyned in Scripture , no not for the Subftance of them in any fuch texts as clearly decide the matter. Note by the way , how you plainly contradid your felves, who fubfcribe to the truth of all that hath been fayd of the nc« ccfSty that there is to falvation , to beleeve all the fore- faid particulars here exprefredby5*i4tfc4W4jf«5:andyctyou will needs hould the Greek Church for a true Church , which houldedi flatly againft S. Athanafm in this Article; though the houlding of it entkrly be neceffary to Salvation^ 2. To this point (lor I let all thefe feverall points pafle for only one ) I might adde , that in the fame Book of Common Prayer you in an other Creed beleeve , that Chrifl is of one Subfiance with the Tat her; and that the Holy Ghofi proceedeth from the Vather and the Sonne : For which words the Grecian Church houlds vs all Heretikes 3 and yet your Doctors of the Englifli Church will needs hould them a true Church. But that which I prefle is, that wee are bound to give an infallible aflent to this article of God the Sonnes beeing of one Subjtaner^ith the Tat her : But you 5 who will give no infallible afl^nt to any thing but Cods written word, cannot pofltbly give infallible affent tothis Article^ Which is no where clearly fet down in Scripture , but an Arian Cohler will eafely putt oflF all the texts you can bring ; as I fhewed 5. i.n. j. But not to ft and contefting about the clearnes of thcfe Teds , let this point paflTe joyned to the former. 3% For another point not conteyned in Scriptxirc , I bring the Baptifme of Children^ which is vvholy neceiTary to the Salvation of Children. The learned Layman fayth t. y Xra. 2. C, 6, nu^ lu that it hath been by feme ob- S fcrvcd ij 8 The ^ihte notconteyntng all points fcrved that the third fart of Mankfnd djcth before the fe^ 'venth year of theyr age he ended. The third part then of Mankind is concerned in this one point, of giving Law- full baptifnie to them when they are Children : and yet ^ a point fo neceflary to the Salvation of many,is no where plainly fet down in Scripture. To this 0. Yerne an(wers;> 5. 24. B^ftifme ofchildreriy as to thepraSifeofit y is natcon^ tejned exprejfely in Scripture ; (id eft) it is no where comman^ ded to be done , or fayd that t hey did doe it : Bt^t the ground and neceftty of it are fuffic lent ly delivered in Scripture and that ii enough for the doing of it. And that the Arguments, from Scrips ture^y:)icildLTioc\\n and others alledged^do fufficientlishew.lcnr'* therinore,cocerning BW/^mm,the Dodor tells vs, that he ( Lib.de Baptifmoc.S.) fayth that the Arguments for Childrens Baptifme out of Scripture cannot be avoided; and that it is a thing evident in Scripture. But yet ( (ayth Vern. ) when he treateth of Traditions ( L. 4, de Verbo Dei Cap. 4. )This thingof Childrens.Baptifme mujl be one of them y that isnecef^ fary and not conteyned in Scripture. This is not ingenuous , nor Confcionable. So D. Fmi^ but farre lefle confcionably : For Bellarmin L. 7. de Bapt. in all that eight Chapter hatk no word in favour of the evidence of Scripture for Bap- tifme of Children Yea, almoft at every text that he cit- eth , he (heweth , that texttq have nbe fgrc^ pUt qf our ad verlaries Mouth. OF one argumeat out of Scripture he fayth indeed,* that^as it cometh from ys; (which words, D. F^f»^ conceales) it is fomanifeft that it cannot bea- voyded and that is , that Circumcifion was fo clear, jat IJgure ot Baptifme , that S, P^^^l. called it Circumcifton 5^ B.ut Circiiitncirion was given to Infants^ therefore 3ap- titoe may.But here Beliarmin may well mean that thi(8. qtrgumen t , as it cometh ftojni vs , cannot be ejuded to. tmnotheour Wge In allpoi?its.Q^S.^. Ij9 witt , by that vfiial fliift, by which the Anabaptifts cam cafely elude it when it cometh from Lutherans and Cal- vinifts: whom Bellarmln had (hewed to teach that the for- me of Baptilme was only a Sermon j which agreeth not to Infants:This eviafion cannot any way elude this Argu- ment as it cometh from vs* This is all can be convinced out ofthisphcco^BelUrmin, But there be other folid wayes of avoyding all force of this argument , even as it cometh from vs. For firft, every Sacrament muft not be received by all thofe^by whom the figure of that Sacra- ment might lawfully be taken ; Sinners did lawfully eat Manna, but they carmot lawfully receave the Eucharilt j- of which Manna was a figure : So aUo Circumcifion was neceflary for the male-children of the lewes only, and thatnotbefore the eight day and Baptifmeis nowne- ccflary both for the male and female Children of all na- tions in the world , and that before cither the eight , oir fecond day,if there be danger of deathcThe confequence then houldeth not from the figure to the thing figured. Neither is that a neceflfary confequence which is drawn from baptizing of whole families. F or firft , as wee read that whole families were baptized , fo wee read that whole families beleeved, Himfelfe beleeved and his whole family. 4*'z^«53- Will you evidently inferre from hence, that the litle Children , not yet of yearesof difcretion, did beleeve ? They then only beleeved who were capa* bie : So will Anabaptifts % , they only were baptized la thefe families who were capable of firft beleeving j and anfweringfor themfelves. Secondly,in many families all the Children which are alive , are above feven yeares ouldj ^nd of age to beleeue : There be many families of new married people , who as yet haue no children ; or S 2 ihofe 140 Yhe ^thle not conteyning all point f thofe they had be dead: Many are barren, and will neuci have any* Now Mr. DoitoT as thefe two cheefe places ( brought by Bellaminy or others) do afford younoc clear principle , from which you can euidently deduce the neceflity of Infants Baptifmejor that it is good and valid,* and not to be iterated; or that theyr parents are oblii ged to procure it for theyr Htle children: fb other lefle ftrong places will lelTe helpe you to the euident inference of any of thefe pofntS' , which you hould neceflarily to be beleeued. I am not faiisfied by beeing tould , other men; cite texts which doe proue this euidently: You muft cite them, and (hew them to be evident. The beft text, befi- dcs thefe, is this. Except a man be borne of water and the jpi^ fit I he cannot enter into the klngdonie ofheauen , 1(^:3 • 5. but how many Ihifts the Anabaptifts haue, to auoid the force of this text , Bellarmine tells you ^ and you (hall lee one prefcntly. 4. Much more ingenuous and Confcionable is your p. Taylor in his Defenfe of Epifcopacy. S. 9. P. xoo. where he fayth ; Baptijme of Infant s is of ordinary necesfity f# sill that euer cryed ; aiidyet the Church hath founded this Rite vpon the Tradition of the Apojlles. And wife men do eafily obfefm ue^ that the Anabaptifts can, by the fame probability of scriptu^ re enforce a necesfity dtfComunmcatmg Infants^ vpn vs; of wee do of baptizing y Vpon them. For as wee preflTcthem with that text,- Except a man be borne of water and the Spirit 5 he cannot enter into the ktngdome of heaven: fothey prcflevs^ for ihe neceffity of Infants Comunion,by the text which foUoweth but three Chapters after the former: Verily Ve^ rilj ifayvntoyou^ except you eat of the flesh ofthe Sonne of Many and drink his blood^jou haue nolife inyou.D, Taylor ad- deth J And thmfore a great Mafter of Geneva^ in a b^ok he- mitt cannot he mr Judge in all points. S. 8. 141 mlt agatnji the Anabaptijis y was forced to fly to Apojlolicall traditive ordination. Here is the very thing ingcnuoufly coafellcd which wee labour to prove,- that wee muft truft i the Churches Tradition for this point : the neeeffity of which is Co great> that he addeth ; They that deny this arty by the iufl Anathema of the Catholike Churchy confidently con^ demnedfor heretikes. The Pelagians were ever account- ed Heretikes, even in this relped, that they (as S. Auften, witnelTethHerefi,88.}taught,-i4/r/;p«^/;I«/^f5 be not baptize ed^they shall poffejfe an eternall and bleffed life^ though it be out of the kingdome of God.ThoCc Proteftans are farre boulder, who admitt them euen into the kingdome of heaven it felfe. The dodrine of the ancient Fathers is fo manifeftly againft thi^ dodrine , that Calvin himfelfe fayth ; (injlit^ lib 4, C. I j*. n. 20. It vpos vfuall many ages fmce^ even almoji from the begining of the Church , that in danger of deathy Lay People might baptiz^e. So he. And to fay the contrary y v^ere to croffe all antiquity ^ as your Bilfon confeflcth in his Confe- rence at Hampton Court. Hooker fayth noleffe in his j. Book of EccL Policy 62. For, as your Mufculus confefleth ^ Th€ Vathers denyed Salvation to the Children who died without Bapttfme^ though their parents were ja' thfull , So he in Lociss tit^ de Baptifme. ji* To thefe,! might adde the Milevetan Councel^ in which S.Aufien was prefent ancJ fublcribed,and in which {Can: 2 ) it is defined; ThM whofoever denies Children newly hrneto be kiptiz^ed , or fay theycontraB nothingofsinne from AdAm^whickmay be cltanfed by thcLaver of Regeneration: Ana^ thema.hut that which I cheefly infift on, is, that the Fa- thers profeffe to beleeve the neceffity of Baptifine for In-p fants vpon Tradition. So that here D. Fmi^ will fee a point nceei%y tp Salvation to cooac down to vs^by vn- writtten tj[i The ^ihle not conteymng all points written Traditionrwhich he ftifly denyes^S^fl-. i^.Origcn who lived iuft vpo the fecond age (which age knew beft theTradition of the firft Age)writeth thus C^p r^.Epiftola ad Roraanos. The Church from the Apofiks hath received the Tradition to give Baptifme even to Htle ones. And the great 5. i4«/?^w is witnes ot thc Continuance of diis Tradition in his Age j as al(b thac this point ought not to be belec- ved at ail, but vpon Tradition: (Note his words Mr. Do^ Itory they be theie*) The cu^ome of our Mother the Church Jn baplzjng litle ones^ is not to be contemned: Neither is it by any meanes to be ref uted fuperfluous: Nfirfc^r ought it to be beleeued at ally mthout it were an Apoft^licall Tradition, lib^ lo, dt Gen: ad lit. C, 22* Note that he efteenrieth the bpleefe of this neceffity , to be fo weakely grounded in Sc|:ipture, that it ought n^t at ail to be beleeved without it tame down to vs by Tradition. And again ( no faith at ail of this necefEty of Baptifme, as our adverfaries have none at ail of it : For Scripture they have not , and the Tradition of the Church they hould no fiifficient grounds df faithj which S, Aufl^n in this neoeflary poind takethi fbi the checfc ground of his faith; and again {lib.^. ^-^^^ j adverfiis Cannot he our judge In all points. Q^. S-8. 14^ adverfus Donat. de Baftifm. Parvulorum) fpeakiiig of this pointy rfe^r which the Vnherfall Church hauldethy and was not infiimed by CounceUy but jet allwajes held, is mojt rightly be^ teeued to be delivered down to vs bj no other then Apojlolicall Authority. If Apoftolicall Authority be not a fure ground for beleefe; vpon what ground have wee receiucd all our writings as divine ? This Authority fecured Aujlen iri the beleefe of a neccflary point not conteyned in Scrip- turc^The like authority may alfo as well fecurc vs all in thofe other neceflary points y. which wee havefliewed to be conteyned in no Scripture* 6. What I have /aid will be much confirmed by an other neceflary point , which alfo is not conteyned in any Scripture. It is a damnable hcrely to aJffirme that thofe who were baptized by Heritikes , ought to be bap* tized again^ This controverfy was moved in the dayes of Cyprian 'y. and he was a man as able to fee that which was clearly fet down in Sc ripture> as any of you all : Yet, as appeares by his firft Book of Epiftles (Ep.^. ) and o- ther places, he did really judge the Scripture to teach ^ that all thofe were to be rebap tized , who had been baptized by heretikcs. On this ground he held that opi- nioua And for the jfame opinion, faith Vlncentim Lerinenfih there ft ood fo great force of witt , fuch torrents of eloquence , fo great a number of patrons y fo great apparance of truth ^ fo manyOracles ofsctipture though mkinterptetedMow come they to be overthrown? He tells you a litle before ; Then Tope Stephen ofbleffed memory , the Bishop of the Apofiolik^ Sea , together with his fdlm Bishrps , jet more then any other, diii refift them ; efieeming it , as I thhik^y a worthy thing , if he did furpajfe all therefl in devotion ofVaithyas he furpa^ed them m the Authority of his ^lace. In fine in thAt Bp file of hisy which Wi^ 1 44 7^ ^Si^/e nat conteyntng afl points was fent into Africa^ he decreed with thefe mrds: that notbif^g ought to be innovated i but that to be reteyned which was ifWi- vered down to vs. Hence,faith this holy Father, the end of thebufines was that; i4»f/^^^Jfy kept pojfefton. And he add- eth yftrange change of things. The Authors of this felfe fame a* finion are judged CathoUkes , and theyr followers Here-^ tikes. The Uaijlers of it are abfolvei , and the difciples condent'* ned. So he: For it was not a neceflTary point of beleefe, before the Church had declared this opinion to be con* trary to true faith, becaufe it was contrary to Tradition j now in aCouncel examined by theChurch,ad foud to be full and ftrong enough to aflure vs ot the Apoftles autho- rity in this point. And fo^^.CjfprMand others did hould th^ contrary opinio,and were not Heretiksrbut all thofe who, after this declaration, oppofed this tradition thus exami- ned,and proved for Apofl:olicalI,were,for that very oppo- fitio of fuch aTradition adjudged heretikes.Neither were they before adjudged to be Heretikes for theyr oppofing the Scripture as clear in that point. No fuch thing was ever fo ipuch as objeded againft thc.Hence that great A- frican podor S. i4«y?^?i, fpeaking of this very point of Rebajytization , writeth thus, DevnitateEccU c. 22. This is nejther openly nor evidently read ( in Scripture) either by you or by mee : Tet if there were any wife man , of whom our Saviour had given tejiimony y and that he should be confulted in this quefiion 3 wee should make no doubt ( Mark this all you who oppofe the infallibility of the Church ) to per^ forme what he should fay 5 leafi wee should feeme not fo much to gain fay him ^ as to gain fay Chrifl j by whofe teftimony he tvas recommended. Now Chrijl beareth witnes to bis Church. Marke alfo this reafon , and conferre it with all thofc tcftimonics given by Scripture to the Church , which I " ^ cited mnnotUmr ludgeinaUpotntsS^lA.^*^. 14^ cited the laft S€&;^ n. i. and then marke S. Auftens confe- I <[ucr\cc ^ which is ^ Who foever ufufeth to follovQ the prailife I 0} the Charch , doth refijl our saviour himfelfe vpho bj his tef^ I timony commends the Church. Go now , and tcMs. Aujlen j that feeing neither he nor you could find this point in I Scripture , therefore it is not neceflfary to hould with the ! Church in this point, for which fliee hath only tradition: You fliall fee if he will not again tell you , as clearly as I doe, that as you fhould oppofe Chrift him felfc , if you jrefufed to obey fom€ one aian, whom Chrift fhould bidd you obey in points of beleefe ^ and you should not jo much difobey the man , asjou should difobej Chrifi authorizJing thk fnatti Co hcdng that Chrift biddeth you obey the Churchj you fhould not fb much difobey the Church, in refufing to obey her in points of faich^as you Ihould difobey Chrift who authorized the Church, and invefted her with this power in the Texts cited Se£t. 7. i. 7, Heare again Auften de Baptifmo contra Dona- tiflas, lib. 15:0. 23. The Apftles (in Scripture) have fre* jcribed nothing concerningthis thingy (the point 1 fpeake of) hut this cuftome , which was oppofit to S. Cyprian , ought to be leleeved to have tak^n is origen from thejr tradition^ As ther^ Are many things (note that he fpeakes in a matter necefla- ry to bebeleeved) which thevniverfall Church obferuethiand for that reafon (O excellent reafon) are rightly beleeved to have been commanded by the Apoftles y although they are not found in theyr writings. Give me leave here to aske; whe- ther it be not damnable, to refufe the obfervation of that which, vpon fo good a reafon, (as is the tcftimony of the yniverfallChurch,)is rightly beleeved to have been com- manded by the ApoftlesPSure I atn that you cannot have the ttoufaadpart offogood ateftimony, that fuchan T one 14^ Tloe^MenotconH^mngaltj^om^ one is your fathctf no , nor that fuch an one is your itio« ther: And yet it is damnable to rcfufe to obey them* Tell mce then, tell mee I fay, tell mee, why (hould it not be much more damnable, to refule obedience in a point(for example, the faft of Lent) which the vniverlall Church teftifieth , that it is rightly beleeved to have been com* manded by the Apofties. Whence Ci^rfwri^r in his fecond Reply againft Whitg: p4r. i. fayth. l/S. Auftem judgement be a good Judgement; then there be fome things com^ manded of God y which are not in the Scriptures. Whitakers and Rejnolds words Ipeake much to that efFed;* Scalfb S» Aufien lib^ 2. contra Donat. Cp/f. and my SeB;: 21. n; j^. 8. Here I might Chew , out of moft evident texts of holy Fathers , that the Apofties did make the faft of Lent a matter of precept ,• and confequcntly the breach of it to be damnable , and the obfervance of it neceflarjT to Salvation. See S. Leo Serm. 6. Serm. 9» 5. Ambrofe Serm^ 2f.Serm:^^. Serm. 36. S* Hier: Epifi. C4. S Aufien fully: Serm. (^2. And fee him prefencly againft ilmin. Alfo that thole are judged heretikes by the Church , and called Quarta-'decimani.who would needs obfervc Eafter on the fourteenth of the Moone , though it were not Sunday • Yet no cleere Scripture was againft them ,• but they were againft the Church. So for the fame reafon Aerius is lift- ed for an Heretike ; and one of his Herefies is related by S. Aufien ( in his Book of Herefie , Herefy y 3. ) to be this: He taught private opinions of his own , faying j That wee mufi not pray or offer for the deadyand that the folemly approUm e4 fa(is were not to he kept ; that every man was to fafi when be pleafed; that he might not feeme to be vnder the L^Wf. Were iipt thcfe herefies good proteftant dodrine ? So is that * which fglloweth j lfa$ all I will fafi , 1 will choofe any day cannot he our hdge in all point sS^S. 8, 1 47 ^fmy feife ; and I will faft tlhtt day to shcfQ my liberty i Sayth I the lame Heretike in 5. Ep/pft^: his Catalogue : Hi«r. 72, I might alfo adde that S. Auften^ in the fame bookc (H^cr* 84.) puttcth down for heretikcs > the Eeluldiansi for a&» I firming that the Virgin Mary had other Children after the I birth of our Sauiour : and there i^ no clear t^xt of Scrip- I ture againft them. Yea 5. lerotn Iweats hard to anfwcr all the texts ofScripture "wh^^chUelvidius broughtifee his book againft that Heretike : whole Heretical followers S. Ift^ I fhanius in his catalogue calleth Antidicomaritas. I might jj alfo adde fe verall fiich points -^asto communicate faftingyani I iut once in the day : and fuch like points wholy neceffary f for our obfervance^and whofe tranfgrellioTi is damnable; I y«t,to be libcrall,! will take all thefe laft points fpecified I in this Number, only for one* Now/or the peoples lake, who are moft capable of that point,I will adde one more in a fedion apart j andfo will make the former ninetee* ce points to be ruft two dozen, by the addition of thefe four points explicated in this Sedion , and of that othc*^ point which foiloweth.I ftiall adde alfo an odier Sfd:: i6.n a. And yet an oiher Silt : 2c« n. 4. Andyet another Si&i ScA: 9; 148 The !BlhIaiotconteynm^ntt points SECT: IX. A THIRTEENTH ARGVMENT. A four and tvventith neceflary point not conteyned in Scripture. Lt things, fay you, which are ncceffary cither to be beleeved oj? do ne > for ob- teyningSaivati5,arc clearly put down in Scripture: Inow,by afour and twentith inftance^fliew this to be falfe. That is ne- ceffarily to be done toSaIvatio,which left vndone caufeth damnation ; But the obfcrvation of the funday , (commanding the abfteyning from all lervile vvorkes) if negleded , or left vndone, bringeth damna- tion- therefore to ob^erve in this manner the Sunday > is a thing^^neceffary to lalvation* And yet this point is Co farre from beeing clearly put down in Scripture > that^ ftanding meerly to the fole iudgmcnt of Scripture, wee can Chew farre clearer texta for ftill oblerving the Satter-^ 4v^)rjthen for thelawfulnes of working vpon that day,and the vnlawfulnes of working vppn theSundayifor neyther of thefc have fomuch as one clear tcxt;but the ftill keep- ing oftheSatterday (For all thofe tvhohould Scripture^ the only Rule of fiiith and neceflary pradices) hath many texts » wholy Vnanfwerable ; if this main Contro- verfy bctwen vs and the Sabbatharians be to be tried by ^criptuxe as the only lu dge. And it is impojflible for you,' by cannot he ourltdge in all points. Q^.S. 9. 149 by Scripture only, to tonvince the iEthiopians, who arc fayd to oblerve both the Satterday ad theSundayjground- ine them felves alfo in the Apocryphall Recognitions CIS. Clement lib. J. 24, where the Satterday is com-* manded to be kept, as wellas thefunday , fee Bellar: lib: de Scrip: in Clem. 2.4 It is fupcrfluous to cite the many texts , by which God comn7anded reft from allworkevpon the Satter- day , which was the fevcnth day ,* because it was the day on which our Lordrefied. And it was not any one day in fevenji but the feventh day, of which ( and not of any other a- mong the feven dayes ) it is fayd; And God blejfedtbe venth day , and fanitiped it y becaufe in that ( and not in a- ny other ) he had reftedfrom alt his mrke. Gen. 2*How co- mes this bleffing given to noe other day among the feve, but given to the feventh day only, to be loft? Who tookc a way the fandification of it, given by God himfelfejand given for a rcafon , which is as obliging now as ever ? Give me a text , which telleth vs ( and that clearly) that this Sandification was ever taken away. If you contend, that a new Sandificationwas giucn to the Sunday , be* caufe our Saviour did reft that day let it be fo , to the honour of his holy name : but where do you read,, that, at the giving of this new Sandification ( for which alfo you have no clear text) the former fandification gi- ven to the feventh day , on which God refted , was tai- ken away from that day? Again, the day of our Saviours Afcenfion to heaven was vpon the thurfday , and that may, exceeding properly, be called the finall periode of all his adions : what clear text of Scripture tells you , that any particular landification was given to the Sun- day in lauonour of our Saviours Refunedion , more then was^ ifo The^ihlenotconteymngd was given to the Thurfday in the honour of his Aiccn^il fion? ^ Butftanding to the new Scripture only, I will Ihew that wee have ftronger texts, refting in the ftrength of the text only, (as you will have^s jfor ftill fan^lifying the leventh day or Satterdayjthen for Sunday J will give you text for text^and let any reafbnabk man judge whe- ther the text be not more clear for Satterday , then for Sunday. I have in the Revelations, that S. lohnv^asin Spirit vpon our Lord$ dajf'y that is Sunday. What then? Is every day to be fandified , by abfteyning all the world over from aU worke,becaufe S. John had a Revelation on that day ^ as alfo he had on many other dayes ? O but hence it is clear that there was fiich a Day as our Lords day: To it is. But how do you prove from hence^ that the Sandification given to Satterday was taken from th at day ? Or that there was given a Command to all the " world not to worke vpon that day which was called our Lords day? How prove you tkat by Scripture only ; Or that it was not the day of the Refurredion^orAfcenfion, or C/^ri/f-mafle day which S. lobn called our Lords day ? Now give vs as good an anfwer (if you can) to the text I (hall bring for ftill keeping the Satterday/ Wee are ftill obliged tokeepe all thole Commandements which our Sauiour did bidde vs keep with his own mouth ; But he did with his own mouth biddevs keep the whole Deca^ logue^ or thofe ten Commandements given to Mofes , in the very (enfe which the lewes vnderftood thcm3 Who did vnderftand, that by Remmbting to fanllify tht Sabhtb day 5 they were obliged to fandity the Satterday. I prouc | what I have laid out of the lo.of S. Mattiwhctt wee read dut one came to our Sauiour faying ^ what good shal l do^ ' '^^ ' that Cannot he our Judge in aUpoints.Qj^ S.p. 151 that I may have life euerlafiing? Our Sauiour anfwered ; If thaw mlt enter into Itfe^^eef the Commandements. And when that man replycd to know what Commandements our Sa- uiour meant? our deer Lord did clearly explicate him- fclfe to mean all the Commandements of the Decalogue given to Mofes ; thofe very Commandemenrs which this man knew very well , as appeares alfo by Mark^io. LU" ks 18. You fee here the very Author of our new Law, with his owne mouth , requiring no lefle the keeping of this Gommandement^as neceffary for our entrance into fife cverlafting,thcn the keeping of any other Command dement. 4. Give mee your fecond text for the Sunday, and I *rill returne a more clear one for the Satterday. Your beft text is AS:: 2o* v. 7. Andv^on the firftdaj of the vpeekewhen the difciples came together to break head ^Vaul preached vnto them^ ready to depart on the morrov^. Hence (will you fay) it appeares, that the firft Chriftians wer^ accuftomedto Communicate vpon the firft day of the week; which was Sunday, I anfwer firft,that it is not clear out of the text that they vfed to do fo;but that they did fo that particu^* lar Sundayrof which a very good reafon may be give out of the words following,.teIling vsthat , S Paul was ready to depart on the morrow , Wherefore thofe firft fervent Chriftians might all affembie themfelues to ccmmunica'^ te at the hads of fo <^rcat an Apoftle before his departure^ and they beeingaflembledjthe Zelous5. P4«[ made them, a Sermon: butyou have no where that he preached every Sunday. But I have a clear text for his preaching every SatccH.a- • For he dijputed in the Synagogue every Sabb&th and he exhorted the iewes and the Greeks. il^.i8.Again no won-» icr theyaflcmbkd to commumcalc that day before 1 52 The Bihlemtcortteyntn^aU points Pauls departurc,becaufc they were vied then to Commtf* nicate every day,as many Doctors fay^or wonderful! frc-* quently , as is ftrongly gathered by that text. Ait. 2. 46* 4nd they continuing dayly (mark the \votddayly)mtb one ac* i;ord in the Temflcybreaking bread from heufe to boufe. Third- ly how doth theyr commnicating vpon Sunday [take away die Sandification which God himfelfe gave to the feuenth day^fetting that day a part from all fervile work? Again do you think they never worked on that day of theyrCommunion,who communicated dayly or exceed- ing frequently ? Is theyr communicating once vpon a Sunday enough to prove, that all the world muft never more worke on the Sunday ? And that, from that day, it fhall be ever lawfuU to work on the Satterday ? Is fucb a text clear enough to abolifli a precept clearly confirmed by the mouth of the Author of the new Law? My fecond text for ftill keeping Satterday, isfarre clearer, out of i» Cor: 7: 19, Circumcifton is nothings and prepuce isnothing^but the Objervation of the Commandements of God; that is the thing wee muft now looke after , if wee will have life cverlafting. Behould here that great Apoftle of the new Law doth tell vs , that even then when Circumcifton was quite abolifhed and made nothings yet the obfcrvation of the Commandements (of which the fandifying thc(e- uenth day, or Satterday , was one) did ftill ftand good, and in its full obfervance; fo that wee have now ourSa- viour him felfe, and three of the fower Evangelifts, and S. TauU for the obfervation of the feuenth day , as much as for the keeping of the other Commandements. J. Let vs hear your laft text for you have but three. It is I. cor. 16. Now concerning the collections for theSaind^s^as I have given Qrder to the Churches of Gdati a ^ even fo do jec ^" '][ " vpon cannot honrludge In all^olnts.Q^.i. S.p. i vfon the firfi day of the week ; ( that is Sunday ) let every one of you lay by him in Jlore as God hath projpered him , that there be no gathering when I come. Avery weake pl,ace to aboliflj an ould known and ftill obferved Comoiande- mcnt , confirmed by Chrills imouth and to bring in a new obligation vpon all the world forever. I pray marke, that it is not fo much as laid , that thefc monyes were to be gathered when the people did meete at the Church vpon Sundayes : but , Let every one lay vf by himfelfe in fiore; for which worklbme one day of the week waste be appointed^ S.Faul thought fitt to appoint the firft day for a pious beginning. But how will you deduce from hence by evident confequence ( as you muft ) that he gave them leave to workc the day before , and obliged them ,and all others not to worke that day , vntill the lyorlds end ? Neither this 5 nor any other place can be brought out of the whole Bible , from which this confc- quence can be evidently inferred* And now comes my turne , to give you a third and farre more evident text, for the ftill farii^ ifying the Sabboth or fevcnth day ; For my text fhall ihew , that ftanding to Scripture only , the feventh day was of command to be oWerved long after Tml did fay thofe words ; and long after the praAice of Communicating vpon Sundayes was in the Church> My Text is Mat. 24. v. 20. But pray you that your flight he not in the Winter , neither on tbe fabboth day. Hence our Saui- ourforete Is clearly the deftrudion of lerufalem (which was to happen inth^ year of our Lord 73:) that is forty yeares after the Refurredion of Chnfi. Then , if ever, a cnan would thinke the command for the obfervation of the Sabbath, or feuenth day , to have been aboliflied; lo that it could not be prophancd : and yet our Sauour did V bidde i 54 The %ihle mt conteyntng atl points biddehis Apoftles, (for tothemhe fpoke the fe words;); jra^ that this flight might not he vpon the Sabbaeth orfeuenth day , to auoid the prophanation of that day j on which indeed lerufalem was taken , and pillaged* And there was, befides a perpetuall maffacring ^ a perpetuall pilla^ ging, and carrying theyr goods to places of fecurity; as alfo a perpetuall flight of thofe lewes which could fly, ^indcarry a way theyr goods if they could , or endeauor- ing to carry them or Yweating with inceflant labour to hide them, by which actions the prophanation might. Icem to be committed. Therefore all the places alledged before hand do not convince, that the obligation of not prophaning the fabbaoth day was taken awayc asalfa they convince no new obligation of not working vpon the Sunday to be brought in. For both thefe things I ask for Scripture , and nothing but Scripture : for it is no-' thing to our purpofe to bring reafbns , why the labbaoth might betaken away; and this obligation of not work- ing vpon the Sunday might be introduced : But y'ou, who affirmc not the polEbility ©nly of the fad , but the reall fad of abolifliingSatterday, and of inftituting Sun- days you, I fay , muft prove both thefe things with clear texts, Or elfc yourmeere difcourfcs and realonings will not be halfe fo good arguments , as our conftant Tradi-^ tion of the Church , which you abfolutely deny to deli- . ver down to vs any necefl'ary obligation, not clearly ex-i^ preiTed in Scripture. Your own Dodor Taylor in his Defenfe of Epifcopacy,p.ioo;confcfleththeplaine truth, Vor that (fayth he,fpeaking of the keeping of the Sunday), in the new Tefiament wee hjive no precept^and nothing but the Example of the primitive difdples : at Geneva they were once akout changing Sundajesfeafiinta a Thursday^ to shew thejt ChripAfi camothe mr lud^e inaUpoints.Q^S.^. 15^5 I Chrijiian Liberty. So he. Had the contrary been plainly let dowi],your fo illuminated Brctheren of Geneva fhoiild have feen it. Give mee then infallible texts, and not falli- ble dilcourfes concerning the abrogating of rhe fatter- day, and inilitution of the Sunday feaft in place of it. 6. But I have a new difficulty in this matter , which is objeded by no body that I know of, becaufe it is not very obuious. My difficulty is this; that wee are bound rndcr pain of damnation, to keep our Sunday in a man- ner, not only not expreiTed in any clear Scripture, but aUo againft the vfuall manner of keeping the Sabbaoth| and all feftivall daf es , cxprefled in clear Scripture. For, according to clear Scripture we are to beginne the Sab- baoth or feaft on the Euening before , and to end it the next eueningras is clear out of the twentith three Chapter of Leviticus,where all the ould fabbaoths and feafts, and the manner of keeping of them ar€ put down^Vrom E«m- ing to Eaening shall jou celebrate your fabbaoths. It was then forbidden, vnder pain of damnation , to work on fry- day after the evening: in Jfb much that a taylor,flioe mak- er , weaver &c. who fhould have continued working for any long time betweene funfett and twelue a-clock at night, (hould have been damned for his labour : and yet at the next Euening he might lawfully have worked vn- till mid night:But I hope there is noliich thing held law- full on Sunday after the euening; neither is it vnlawfuU to do any , though never fb laborious worke, vpon fat- tcrday evening vntil mid night. Here then you have an other obligation vnder pain of damnation , which is not plainly put downe in Scripture,- but delivered vnto vs by the tradition of the fame Church , which deliucreth the obligation of faftuig iuLcnt vnto vs. Wherefore none of V 2 you 1^6 ^he ^ihle not conteyningall points you all can Chew any ground, vpon which any obligatiott of keeping the Sunday, and keeping of it in this manner (which I now^^ccified) can be grounded folidly^but vpon die very ielfe fame ground wee will as iblidly grcK und the obligation of keeping Lent with a faft of precept (as I fliewed Seit: 8. w. 8. as much as Sunday is a feaft of precept. This argument will trouble D. Terne who 1 3* moft inconfequently to his other principles, houldeth the obligation of keeping the Lords day , made plainly known vnto vsby Tradition only: And yet houldetk that in theScripture only all necefiary obligations arc fctt down plainly: plain contradiction.. SECT: X. A FOVRTEENTH ARGVMENT. ^ By the Texts which our ad verfaries bring to prove chat Scripture eontay- nes J and detides all necefia- ry Controverfies , wee proue the con- trary.. 11 of you lay, that all things which are nccel- fary to be beleeved or done for obteyning falvation are clearly put down in Scripture: ^ therefore if it be neceflary to our falvation tobclccvcScripture to be by it fclfe alone oux only rule of Cannothe our judge in all points. Qj^* S.iol 157 faithjorto hould that by it felfe alone it decides all neceC- fary cotrovcrfyes ; the Scriptur e muft alfo be (hewed by you dearly to conteyne ad determine all this:For cisyou preffe vs to hould that which no clear Scripture bids vs to hould f which thing you all account vnrcafonablc in vs. Your part is he ere afErmativef and in this prime point you contradid the pradice of all the Church ; againft lb great and Co publik Authority y you muft bring the evi- dence of clear Scripture , according to your owta prin- ciples^ : If wee then can but fhew that al the texts you; bring do not fufSce to this evidence, you arc condemn- ed , even by your own principles. Let vs then hear your Texts :and that out of D. Verna v for he hath the chiefe of them^^ 2» The firft text which is brought by D.Ffrw^ labour* ing in his S^^f. 23. to fatisfy my doubt , is this^ Toy in thefii (the Scriptures) Tethink^ye have Salvation^ loan. ^. v. 39* I pray marke what I fay 3 and you (hall fee how weake this ad other fiich like arguments arc.In the feventeenth verfe of this Chapter begins a difcourfe of our Saviours to the lewes and when he comes to the 34. verfe , he k,yt\i'^Thefe things I (ay vnto you , that you may be faved.. Now my anfwer is this : That which our Saviour laid vnto thera , that they might be faued\ is a ftronger proofe thatthat alone by it kife vv^as fufficiet to falvation^without any thing elle: then to fay. The laves did think fuch a thing to have falvation ; Therefore that thing by it [elf e alone doth {svithout doing any more) fujfice to Salvation : Forvn- doubtcdly our Sauiours faying fuch a diing,is better then the lewes thinking fuch a thing. This fuppo/ed , would you not count him madde who fhauld fay that tbofe pre- «^d?5^ Y^^%? "^t^i^^ our Sauiuur had then faid when he; _ _ .... ^q]^ ijS The^ihle not conteynin^dU points Ipookethefe words, Thefe things ifay vnto you that y^u mdy hfavedy did conteyne alon a clear exprefEon of all par- ticular nccefiTary points diftindly putting them all down? How then doth it follow , that becaufe the levves did think (and perhaps truly think) to find that which might (ave them in the Scripture, therefore the Scripture did conteyne alone a clear exprefEon of all particular ne- ceflary points, diftinitly putting them all down? Where- f(M:e, as you muft not vnderftand that Chort /peech made by our Sauiour to have fufficed to Salvation, by expreit fing diftindly all particular points neccflary: but becaufe it did fuffice to bring them to the knowledge of the truQ Meffias , vi^'hom they acknowledging might, by his par- ticular inftrudiottjknow dittindly all particular necefla- ry points: fo the Scripture did fuffice to Salvation, by ex- preffing clearly enough that lefus Chrifiv72iS the true Sa- uiour of the world; whom they could not but beleeve if they would beleeve Mofes: for hadye beleeved Mofe$ , ye vpould have bele^d mee^for he mote ofmee^fajth our Lord in the fame Chapter v, ^6. beleeving then our Sauiouji? they ftiould from him (and his Church after him) receive full inftrudion in every particular neceffary point. But D. F^r» vrgeth this place wonderful! weakely ; because ,(faith he) they might know all things neceffary to falva-f tion (by Scripture only ,) therefore he bids them fearch the Scripture y and they fliould find they tejlifiedof him. A weak confequence to prove that they might know all neceflary points out of Scripture, becaufe they miglit know this one point of our Sauiours beeing the true Meflias. For it is noConfequence^This one point is clear in Scripture; therefore all other necelTary points arc clear in Scripture, My fecond anfwer is^ Go and fearch the Scrips tares cannot he our Judge in all points. Q^S. i o. 159 fures now and youfliall finde Salvation in them ; for they will clearly Send you to the Church for your particular inftrudion in all points neceflary ; as Ifliewed Seii. 7. n. I. Thirdly fearch the Scriptures and you shall find Salvation in them-^nt not in them as expovnded by every man for him felfe (for thefe very men found not Salvation by them as they vnderftood themf) but you fliall find Salvation by them as evpovnded by the publike interpretation of the Church. And as it is no coni'equence, Chrift did bid the Icwes Search thofe Scriptures which they had then , be- caufc in them , they fhpuld find clearly pu:t downe, that one point of his beeing the Meflias; therefore thofe Scriprurcs and all the ntw Teftament (of which ho one word was then written) are affirmed by Chrift to con-» teyne all points now necefTary y and to put all down cle- arly : fa alfo it is no confequence , Chrift biot fay , that fpeech , by it felfe alone, fufficed to make them mfe to salvation; but it did inable them with fiiffict- entprinciples,by following of which Salvation might be tjfeAually obteyned 5 and lb that fpeech was able, not in part and imperfedly only, to work the effeft, by giving fome knowledge to that purpofe^but that very knowled- ! ge which that lliort fpeech gavej was a knowledge cffec^ ituall for the diredion of all thofe lewes ; not by direc- ting them in euery particular , but by telling them clearly whence all particular diredions were to be had, which mj one foUowmg will foonc prove a man of God perfeB^ \ throughly furnished to all good mrkes. Is not all this true 1 even of that fliort ^eech? Much more is it true of Co ma- i fij fpeeches made to vs in Scripture /«r our Salvation, and itble to bring vsefFc dually to it , if wee follow them, cfpceially fuch fpeeches as bidde vs fo often to follow the Church. See the many places I cited S. j.n. i.Thefe Scriptures then fo full of thefc fpeeches, andthefedi- Tiiie writings expounded, not by private, but by publikc *«|>ofitioB ofti^Ghureh, do not in part only and impet'* , ^^^^ X feUlj i6i The^ihlenotconteyningaUpdin^^ feSlj^ mrk, this efed; , bj teacbingvs fome knowledges to thOf, ejf.eil'y but they teach ys a great fUmme of fiich knowIed««. ges, as are able tp efFed the worke,. though not by giuing vs every particular point to be done, butbytelUng y$ whence every particular point might fecurely be had*, Yet ro give you fuller /atisfaition,*! fay, it was farre froin S. Fauls mind to (ay the Scriptures an able tojnake vs m^C: to Salvation^ as they are vied by thofe , who take them a§ interpreted according to that fenfe , that every man Ihall in his Conlcience iudge to be true. The Scripture thuSe, taken , breedeth infinite inconveniences, as I (hewed at large 5^5^. 7* whence appeares, that the Scriptures vfed fo, are the caufe of many mens daamation. S% ?ml then] did not fpeak of the Scriptures taken To (as you doj) but Yi^hxAythey.were able to makjs Timothie wife to Salvationybc^ caufe he was indeed a man of God vf ho did continue in the things which he learned and h4d been ajfured pf; to witt , bf the orall tradition of the Do dors of the Church, and by S. Tafil himftlfe: for (o S.Taul teacheth mec in the begin-^ ning of his former Chapter faying to Timothle-yThau there^ fore {my Sonne) be flrong in the grace , that is in Chrifl Icfu$% and in the things which thm haft heard of mee among many; VPttnefes And in the Chapter before that 13* HoMldfafi, the forme of found words which thou hafi heard of mee *Ye2. and in this third Chapter, But thou hafi fully known my doltrine^ Manner oflife Scc. All this dodrine he could not have known by any Scripture,, ofwhichafrnal part was thea writtc:n • Give mee then a Timothy, a man fo well prein^ ftruded by Tradition , fo faft a houlder of Traditions,; ad a man fo knowing from whome he had learned thefe things,- and I will freely allow you, that the Scriptures wiW t^ak^ fuch a man wife to Salyation ; For he will be/ure tOj Omiothe our ludge In alt points. Qj^* S. i O- 1 6| take thcm,not vpon any priuate mans iudgmcnt,or vpon his own ; but to take them as interpreted by the Church, whom he will be fure never to contradid^fhee beeing the pillar and Ground ofTriixh, as that his great Maifter I faith, dll whofe DoBrine he fully knew. But th(jfe Scriptures which are able to makj^ juch a man ofdodyinch. a Timothie, Vdife to Salvatioriy and throughly furnished or perfected to every \ good mrky ^re not able to do this efFed, if vied in a man- r lier contrary to that which I have Ihewed they were vied r j by him, and fhould be vfed by vs. Wee do abufe them if 1 wee take them and difcanon them (as I may fay ) by our 3 private interpretations , contrary to the Tradition, and I Vnfinimous expofition of the Church. Thefe men vfe . Scriptures to thejr perdition ^sS. P^f^rfaid fome did the I hard places oi Pauls E-piUhs : Whence you fee that misinterpretations of hard places were made to the pet" I dition of the Interpreters. Wonder not then to hear v$ { fay that the obfcurity of fbme ]places of Scripture have .: I occafioned the perdition of the falfe interprerers of thofe I j places , out of which ftate of perdition fome guide there } fnuft be who can leade them fectirely: Can you find mee afurer then the Church? Thete is no Want of Infallibi- I lity in S cr ipturc but there is great abundance of fallibility ^ ih our private iud^gment of difcretion,which maketh vs i need a fure guide in the interpretation thereof. 4. Having now (hewed in what (cnfe the text allcd-^ ] X geddidfay , the Scripture xs^as able to make a man mfe to ^falvation -y I fhall eafily fliew how weakely from thefe Words s'. Paul is fayd to have meant , That the Scripture by • it feife alone vaas fufficient for do^rine , for reproofe^for correc^ ' I tion > foY infiruUion in right eoufnes 5 that the man of God may beperfed; , throughly furnished to all good workes. 1 then freely X 2 graunt' i64 The Bible ndt cdntejnhig all pom^^^ graunt the Scripture fuiSicient for all this , but ftill in lame fenfe that I have explicated the Scripture to be a- blc to make a man wife to falvation; to witt,as interpret- ed by the Ghurch , or as vnderftood by men well pre-» inftruded by Tradition,who will be fure in all doubts to have recourle to the Church;and cfteeme as much what tradition teacheth the Apoftles to have fayd , as what theyr bookes teach them to have written ; theyr words beeing of the fame authority vnwritten as written ; and tradition beeing a more vncorrupt deliverer of theyr dodrine , then writing ; which is fubjed to be fo many wayes corrupted, and altered, and of which wee are on- ly certifyed that it is Apoftolicall by the Tradition of the ftlfe fame Church , which doth as well certifye vs that other dodrines be Apoftolicall , befides thofc written ia this booke* Here alfo Imufttell you how M. Fisher did, excellently filencc D. White ywho^n in theyr publikc con* ferece he vrged,this tenyThe Scripture kprafitabU:8cc.¥oY^ faydhe , AhhaughwaoihprofiuMe to make the fubfiance of 4L houfe , to make wainefcotyflooles , tahles^ and other furniture^ yet hence doth not follow wood alone is f ancient to^ build ani furnish a houfe : So Scripture is profitable for all thefe ends^ but alone it is not f undent. Whence all the weight of your ar- gument comes to this ; that if it be fo profitable as t© make a man wile to Salvation , it muft be fufficient by it felfe alone to do fo : which I have already flbewed to ht falfe i without you take the whole Ganan of Scr ipture as, interpreted by the Holy Church , or as vnderftood by thofe who are preinftruded by Traditions z:s Tiniothii was. J. Indeed you fay, this fuf^ciencj belongs to the whole Scripture ^though in proportion only to ever j book^^nd there- fore ' iannot he out tudge in aU points.Q^. S. I ©• 16^ ^rc the Apoftlc fayd , That Serif turn are Me to make s man mfe to Salvation. How they are able to do this,I have fliewcd ; But M. Dodor of what Scriptures did S. Tanl fay thefc words ? If he did not lay thefe words of the whole Canon of the Scriptures which wee now have , and to which you ftreach thcfe words 5 this place cannot poflibly prove that this fufBcicncy belongs to the whok Scriptures wee now have : But it is evident he did not fpeake thefe words of the whole Canon of the Scripture which wee now have ^ for almoft ali the new Scripture waias then not written. How could that, which was not at all,haue a beeing then abk to make Tim&thie wife to Salvation ? S. Paul fpoke of the fiifficiencf ( if yovk pleafe) of all Scriptures which were then extant. Yo« deny this fufficiency to them , and you fay : It bekngs to th/t whde Smfturcj though in frcfortion to everj booke: there- fc>re it belonged in proportion only to thofe bookc$ which wer^ written then. Why did S. Paul then [zy of tiiofe bookcs then extant , that they were able to make a man wife to Salvation ? Now anfweryour own argu- ment. Again; if^very Book of Scripture cantribmeth its proportionable part, to make vp a whole body of tBookes complcady fufficient to this purpofe ; how will you do »ow , v/hen no fewer then twenty Bookes of the Scrip** Uirc arc quite loft as I have (hewed Se^. i. n. j. Wee have niot any thing like a Text , by \^4iich wee can prove that thete 20. Bookes were not as requifite to make vp this full fufficiency of the whole Canon , to decide all Cont/rovcrfics ^^s any other twenty which wee have j c*- i|)ectally ifyou except the four Ghofpels. And yet the O^- riginall of one of cbefe Ghofpels is alio quite loft ; and iwcc tiave no furer grouad for tkai beleefe^ by wkicJi wee j66 TI)e(Bihlenot conteyning^^^^ ^ee beleevc our felves to have the true Coppy of it, thc^i the Tradition of the Church:if fhee be fallible in her Tra* Xet thus the scripture could not be fay d to makevs perfed for the Law might he [aid to ma^e w perfe^ , btcaufe it sheweth vs Chrift , and was a Schoolmafter UMm. Gal: 3. And lohn Baptift might have been f aid to have perfelted his Difciples by shewing them Chrift. So you. lanfwer, that you all fight againftthis objedion with every text you bring in this controverfy againft vs : For as the two former > So all the following texts objedcd againft vsjfpeake of the ould Teftament , or Law ; for In that ( Chrift faid ) the lewes thought to find Salvation ; of that he faid , Search the Scrips-* tures ; of that S. VauI (aid ^ It was able to make a man wife to Salvation ^ it was profitable, fo that bj it the man of God is throughly furnished or perf cited ( mark that word ) tO£very good work,. And now behould you your felfe come and in- ferre for an abfurdity^that the ould Scripture fhould be a- ^ . ble to do this. Wee freely acknowledge that the Law of it felfe could perfed no man, no nor juftify any man , as S# P^«/ clearly fayth in the place cited ; but they were all to be juftified by faith in Chrift. The Law , as introducing to this , did fufBciently perfed all thofe , who were per- fed vnder the Law : indepen4€ntly of this , it did not do fo. As (or S. lohn J you are clearly tould by S. Luke C. 1. V. I 3. that he was lent Far are Domino flebem perfect am , to prepare to our Lord a perfect people : and towards the end «f that Chapter, Thou Child shalt be called the Frophet of the higheft: cmnotheourludge in all points. Q^.S. lo. 167 highefi : for thou shalt go before the face oftheLordtoprepare^ for his wayeSy to give knovs^ledge of Salvation vnto his people by the remipon of theyr Sinnes. Can you Ihcw the Scripture, doth more in this point then it fayth S. John did? 7. Your third text isjou shall not adde to the mtd which Ijpeak'^n^o jou^nor take from it. Deut: 4. 2. Therefore the Scripture is foperfed:, andfo fufficient,that it alone con- teynes^ all neceiiariesf and therefore condemns the fuper added Traditions. You have forgot M.Doltor your very laji mrds}, That the Law (cheifly conteyned in Deutronomy) could not make vs perfeH^^d now you bring thefe words as words implying the perteilion and fufficiency of ky For of it alone thefe words are fpok en. Secondly you have forgot ysOur veryfirit words of this your 23.. SeB. whcxe you. putt three lorts of Tradition thatyou allow there , and ^. 13. Bee not thefe additions to the written word?Third- lyyou have forgot that the lewes had atleaft two vn- denyable Traditions, befidesthofe which delivered the Scriptures and.the true fenfe of the Scriptures vnto themr For they knew only by tradition what remedy was to be vfed to free thejr female^Children frojn originaU Sinne;^s alfb to free thejr male^Children in danger of death before the eight day. This remedy they knew and obferved 5 and were, bound to know and obferve. And. yet they infallibly knew it without haueing any Scripture exprefEng to them the knowledge of this remedy, or of theyr obliga- tion to vie it, Or that it was foncceilary for the Sal- vation of theyr Children, v;^hom they did beleeveto be in Originall Sinne, and by that debarred from Salvation,, vnles fome remedy were applied. Some remedy fiirely was as necclTary for the female , as Circumcifion for the, male; Shew mep thisRcmcdjr in Scripture, Secondly they 1^8 The Bihle not conteynin^ alt joints truly bcleevcd fbme of thofe bloudy Sacrifices to have been apppointed vnto them by God , fur the expiatio«i of theyr Sinnes ; but they could not truly beleeve that any of thofc Sacrifices could expiate theyr Sinnes by its own vertue : They beleeved then that thofe Sacrifices had this expiative vertue from the merits otchnjt: fhew mee any text in which this was then written. It i^ ridicu- lous to fay that this faith was not neceflary to that Church, atleaft fb as to be beleeved by fome among them^ Voufthljj M. Do^or , you forget againft whom you bring this tcftimony: If it belongs only to the lewesj why do you bring it againft Ghriftians ? If it belongs al|b to Ghriftians ^ why do you not circumcifcyour felves? You vrge againft vs, Te shall not aide : Wee vrge againft you, ye shall n0t diminish. Viftly M* D^Rn you forget that yo^ are to conclude thus j The whcle Canon of S€ripmre u a fuf^ fchnt direBfon for vs: and you conclude 3 that the Law 9f U^fesis a (undent direS^ion for vs ; which you and yours confefle to be hKc.Sixtly you forget that a whole fcorc of bookes are diminiflied fro the Canon by beeing quite loft| halfe a (core more you will take from vs, and caft amogft the Apocrypha. Do you think that no part of this fum- cicncyis wanting to luch a Canon as you now have? Give mee your text for th^t.Seventhly^you forget that it is impofEblc for you to prove , that the Scriptures muft be taken either as they found, or taken by every man in that fcnfethathe in bis own Confcience iudgeth. Give vs th4 Scriptures taken in the fenfe which the vifible Church iudgeth (for the Judge of the fenfe muft be vifible^) and wee will graun t all. For then without any addition , and by only true interpretation, wee will prove that wee muft take the Church &r t>ur infallible guide : and fliee will fecw j fliew vs Scripture rightly by her interpreted , for the I admitting of vnvvrittcn Tradition. In the naidle of this iat your feavenfold foxgctfulnes 1 pray remember what pit-* iQ tifuU texts you have putt in the forefront to prove that^ :« wrhich j if not proved better ^ your Religion will prove ;w moft pitti fully grounded. The fenfe of the words which ^ you vrge is litterally this; Let no nian prefume by his pri-' at vate interpretations to deprave any Law either by reftre-i ,g yj^ing, or itreaching the natural fignificatio of the words B in which it is delivered. For example,- God in the 17. of 1^ Deutronoray j i . 1 2. layth^ Thou sbalt not decline from the 5 I Sentence which they (that is the High Priefts) shall she'^ J thee^ to the right hand nor to the left. And the man that will d^ ^ frefumptuoujlyy and mil not barken vnto the Vriejty even that I i man shall dye. God would not have this Law depraved by luch an interpretation as you vfe to give; that the Sen* j tence is to be followed of thofe ludges which God ap* t i pointed to tell you what was Gods Law rightly vnder«< ; ftoodjif they give fentence according to Scripturejasyott would have it expounded, 8* Tour fourth text out of the end ofrhe Revelation^ is incomparably weaker , and it evidently daroneth your Father Lwffc^f' and Lutheran Brethcrcn vnto Hell j For S^lohn tefiifyethto every man thatheafeth the words 4ff the frofhefie of this Book^ei^Q Ipeakcs of thcKevelations On\yi)lf dny man shall adde vnto thefe things, God shall adde vnto him theflagues which are written in this Book* And if any man shall I tdke away fr4)m the Words of theBook of this frophefie^God shall iah his part^ut of the Bool^of Life , and out of the Holy Cir/V» But X«tfc^r took away all the Words of the Bool^of this prophe^ fie y when he faid in his firft Preface to the new Tefta* mcnt y that he received this hok neither for trophethalt nor ^..^ - Y ^ j[p(j/?(^/V^II i 70 The Bthte not conteyntng all joints f MPoftoUcatl : Therefore God shall take his f art out of the hoo\ 0jlife y and out of the Holy Citie. The fame fliall be done to j his Lutheran difciples. Thus you fee l have concluded | evidently vi^hat I laid , let vs hear you conclude ^y^othlng t mufi h added to this bookytherefore all the Scripture is [undent to decide all conttoverfies j though twenty whole bookes of it be loft , and though you take all the texts of the whole Canon in that lenfe which every man in his confcience . thinkethbeft : Thus in eflfed you conclude. Note alfo that there is no kind of certaintie that the Apocalyps was. the laft book of Scripture;for your own Kemnitius houlds^ S. lohn his GofpeJ written after that ; and moft hould his Epiftlcsthe very laft part of Scripture. Now marke^that the very laft verfes, which were written in his laft Epiftle are.I had many things to write (now when all the Scripture was written:) B«f I will not with inke and pen write vnto thee. Bm I trufi I shall shortly fee thee and wee shall fpeakeface face. Teace be to thee. Now for Gods fake , what text alTu- res you ( for all other affurances wee by your own prin- 1 ciples reje(3:j ) what text ( I fay ) aflurcs you , that thofe things which S. lohn had jet to write ^ but did expreffe ; them by Mouth only > were all of them things vnnecef^ i fary* » 9. rourfift text GaL 1.8. Though wee or an Angett from \ Meaven preach an other Go fpel vnto you then that which wee^ \ kave preached vnto you ; lett him be accurfed. As I faid before, fa I fay now again , if any man preach an other GH)ofpel vnt9 you then that yee have received y. let him be accurfed. Firft Dodor you forget that y in the beginning and in o- ther parts of your booke > you will have our Church ta • be one and the fame with yours in fuch fundamentals as i \ ca^fti^ute a Church; ad will you now prove this Churchy I umotheowhdge in all points. Q^. S. lo.iyi by the fentencc of the Apoftle to have been accurfed, natheinatized,and excommunicated, or cut off from the true Church?You muft fweat to find God a true Church vpon Earth , if ours^ ftood excommunicated by S. Taul «verfinceithcld Traditions. Secondly you forget that you bring this Curfe vponyour own head , for it is you who preach an other Gofpel from that which S. ?mI preached , and that which wee received from him , Tt hand f4 and hould th TradUims which wee have learned \pmerbrmrdorEpiftle.2.Th4.2. ij.And fure wee are thatthe Epiftlestothe Theflallonians did not conteync the whole Gofpel : If they did, then find m thole tpiftles, that you mM& take the Scripture only for your Rule in all Joints of faith, and all other neceffary points It is alio The dodrine of S- Paul-ylhe things wh,h thou hafi hearcL^f me befvre many mtnefes, the fame commend thou vntofatth^ mmtn,whkh sbxll kept to teach others alfo.z.Tm:2.2.\o}x will have vs commend to other men , not thole things which were only heard before many Witneffes by publicke Tradition, but only fuch as are written: You theretofc cainfay S. Pad , and on you the Cuxle of his Excommu- nication falleth. Where you fee, by the way, a good rea- fon why wee could not hould you in our Communion, Voubeeing anathematized by S. Paul himfelfe. Wee then, ionformably to the dodrine of S.Paulyfaj that the Ghol- nel which he preached vnto them,and theGhofpel which had received(fee his firftEpiftle to diem C^p.i.&2.) was a Ghofpel, which is moft truely expounded by vs to conteyne bodi his vnwritten and written dodrme: Yet in all probability very litle of the Gho/pel had been , as then, delivered in writing vnto the Galatiansj or tell mec how much.if you can ? Sure I am that,befides what was ' * ■ Y a wntte» 17* The ^Ihle not conteynhg appoints ivrittcn, they were yet to receive much more in writiagt Yea the fureft: opinion is , that the fir ft thing that ever S. Vaul did write was the very Epiftletothe GitlatianSj ^% \% well proved by the Remilh Teftament in the Preta^* cc of (he Epiftle to the Romans* And you can bring no- thing but coniecStures to affirme that he had delivered a£ this time any written Ghofpel at all vnto them. Again yoB moft. vnskilfully fay ^th at this text mujt be meant of the mitt's Cbojpel only y for that which is mitten beareth (you meane, only) the name of GhoJpeL for firft this very place proueth the contrary; Secondly many other places fliew the con- trary, for in 5. U^thew c.4. v. 23. lefm went about all GaV^ nice preaching the Gbo(pel: SN'hzt Gholpel was then written? And c.(^.v.^^Aefm went about all the Cities ad Villages frea^ ching the Ghjjpel: wh^at Ghofpel was then written? or writ- tien when our Saviour fay d ; where faever this Ghofpel shaW hepreached,c.26.v.i^.S Maric.i.v.i^ lefm cameiHti> Galilee f reaching the Ghaf^el of the kingdorney faying repent andbeleeve the GhoJpeU What written Ghofpel did they know? or S;. Pfr^r,to whom in the 10 Chapter C/)n]/? ipeaketh about leaving goods for theGhojpeL And thus , I might runnc over the newTeftament, where the word Ghofpel isfo of^ ten taken, for the dpd:.rine delivered by word of moutbj and perhaps. not thrice in all Scripture it is clearly taken for the written Ghofpel. And alfo To Evangeiiz^e is far more frequendy taken for preaching the vnwritten word> then the written. This text then mpfl convincingly pr®-- tieth that 5. P4«/ commandis them by nomeanes to go againft the dpdtrine, received by Tradition. As for 5. Auftens authority, with which you back your interpretation, Bel'^ Idrmin tould you.truely^that he did'not expound thistext,. k^:t did only cite it to proue that nothing was to be be- mmothe mrludge in altplnts. Qi, S. lo. 17^ kered agaiiift Scripture;. No nor befides Scripture inter-^ preted truely by the publick authority of the Church as i faid before : And this anfwer (atisfkth what you bring out o(s.Ierom^ although indeed be Ipeaketh of thofc who bring not known and publik tradition of theGhurh; but of thofe who devife new things-^ and give them out for ould Traditions : which not becing true Traditions delivered by the Church, muft needs be of no authority; terithout they can prore theyr truth by Scripture, which they cannot prove by true Tradition. lo.. It is therefore falfe which you (ay, that in the iudgment of 5* Aug : and S. lerom it is enough to incurre the Anathema,, if they teach any thing of faith befides that which is receiued from Scripture , in the fcnfe you take this word Befides Jt is alfo impollible to (hew that laul thcrc jfpoke ofScripture.Yeahclpeakes ofthat which they had received from hiniy who neuer writt any thing be- fore that Epiftle,as I faidineither do wee teach any thing of faith that which liAth.authority from the Scrip- ture, though not from the Scripture expounded as pri- uate men think fitteft , but from Scripture righdy expo-* unded by the Church, to which wee adde nothing but what Scripture bids vs adde* Wherefore die authorities you. cite are ill applyed to vs , for wee /peake nothing without authority and teftimony of the.Scripture takeii in this manner , as it fliould. euer be ; neither adde wee any thing what.is not wrjtreri|For it is written, H^^^/.i! ye the Traditions. If you fay, this is no true Tradition. I am by Scripture bidden to hear the Church before you* Note that it is a very good argument to fay^ it is now here written , therefore it is not to be admitted; if this argu- ment be. only; vfed. as. the Fathers vfe it ^ that js; when it 174 notconteyningalfpirai was notorius that fuch a thing was not delivered hy txH dition: For what is not delivered by Church Tradition, mull beproued by Scripture. SeeS* 12. n» 6. You fee what litle need wee hauc to interpret the woords, iefidcs vphat I haue preached, to be the fame, as if he had faid^O^f^ \i trary to what I preached. Yet becaufe this is very true, it [ isiuftifiedby Bellarmiue: and you, not going about to anfwcr fo much as one of the proofes, deferve no anfwer, Yetmarfee what P^a/faythKm: i^. J deftre you Bre^ \ theren to mark^ them who Make dijfentions andfcandah (note j the next word) contrary to the do£irine which yeju ham lear^ li mdy and amid them. Who are contrary to what was delip uered to the Roman Church, to which S. P^^^ did write thefe wordsf who be they? mark them:auoid them, !!♦ Your fixt obiedion is no text, but an argument I drawen from this text,!!? mans Teftament noe one addt. Gab i ^Af.Much lejfe isit lawfull to adde to Gods teftamet-^hj you, Wee anfwer , that wee adde nothini^ to Gods teftament: But with all reafon wee ftili ftand to have it interpreted, not by any mans priuate authority^ For what Common- wealth permitts The Teftaments and Laft wills of man j to be fo interpreted ? Let vs have Gods teftament both i oew and ould, mterprcted by that Publik Authority ira- f * powered by Gods commifEon to this end , and wee re* quire no more LefTe then this cannot in rcafon be requi- red : fb that your ieft of a will partly wricten parly nun- cupatory is loft. No wills worfe made then thofe which concerne many intricate matters belonging to very feve- rall perfons, and yet prohibiting any Court in the world to interpret them, but do let the fcnfe be iudged by eve- ry one concerned in it. In fb much that though Cbtifl^ ia four feverall places of his will, clearly tells vs that, he " ' leaueth cannot he our Judge in all points. (^^S. i ol 175 Icaueth vs the vneftimable legacy of his pretious Body and blond; and that his flefli is truely meat &c: Yet by priuate interpretations it fliall be lawful! to tell vs, that wee muft have only a figure and figne of his Body. Would any man admitt of the figure or pidure of a Horfe or Houle , in place of a HorTe or houfe given him by Legacy? Shall there be no Court in the world to pre- vent thefe incon veniencies? Thus you would have Chrifl make his Teftament. Who hath fo litle difcourfc as to think a Teftament , left to noe Courts interpretation in the world, to be a fitt iudge, by its own evidence, whea twenty, or thirty leaves can be proued to be miffing vnto it? And yet to the whole teftament^ new and ould,tw«i- ty whole bookes be mifling,as I have proued Se^: i.n.j* and halfe a fcore more be moft vniuftly pulled out oi the Canon by you, and caft among the Apocrypha. And yet you would have all vs ftake ourioules vpon the full alTu* ranee wee have that this broken teftament taken thus> and alfo taken as it is expounded by youjagainft Fathers^ Councels, and the conftant iudgment of the greater fort of the prefent Chriftian world, and the known iudgment of all the Chriftian world for a thouGnd yeares together? what more rnreafonable, With mmi tejlament nom dcdes. thnSy much lejfe with Gois^ ix^ I muft needs alfo put you in mind, that you are much miftaken when you fay that the word Teftament fignifieth only a written teftamentrFor our Saviour in his laft (upper hiAyThis thebloed of the new Teftament, Mat. 26^ 28. mark^i^. 24. and again, rte cup is the new Teftament in: mj bhod which (cup) is sh^df^rpuMctQ wee have tiie new ttftamcnc made by vnwritten words eight yeares before foc of ttwa^ wntien^and well towards eighty yea* jyS The !Bihh not onteyning all poittis yeares before all of it was written to the end.Hauing tliS ihewed that the words Ghojpel and new Tcfiament 2Lccor^ ding to Scripture , do molt properly fignify the vmvrit- ten vv^ord oiCbrijl: wee may confidctly fay, that wee ad- de nothing to the Ghoipel of Chrifl , or new T«ftament: If you ask, how I know what was deliuered by Chrlfis vnwritten Ghoipel and new Teftamcntf I cafily anfwer j I htm this by the teftimony of the felfefame alwayes vifi* ble Churchjby whofe teftimony you know that fuch boo- kes conteyne C/?ri/?i written Ghofpel , and written new Teftament. I kpow tVis by the Tradition of the fame Church., by which only all Chriftians did knowit ^ for diofe feventy or eighty yeares^which pafTed between the paflion of Cfor/^ and the finifhing his written Ghofpel or siew Teftament. I by a better Teftimony then all the world knew the Articles necefTary toialvation be-» fore any one mrA of Scripture was written , which time conteyneth aboue two thoufand yearesifor if the Tradi- tion of that Church, in the Law of Nature ^ were fufEei- cnt to ground the iiifallible alFurance of all the articles belecued by that Church, for two thoufand ycars^I hope the Tradition of the Church , which is now in the Law of Grace , is yet a more ftrong ground to afliire mec of that vnwritten dodrine of Chnfi delivered farre more pubhkely by him and his Apoftlcs , then that vnwritten word of God was delivered in the Law of nature to fomc few Patriarchs, in a manner verypriuatc in compari- fbn of Chrlfis vnwritten dodrine^ as ftall be ^^\^LSe^ : i6# 1 3. Tour sixth and lajl text here obiedcd is our Saui- ours fpeach Matt^ 15. taken from Ip. 29. 13* X^eir fear t9ward$ met is tau^t bj the ftece^ts tftnm^ Whence you in. ferre cannot he our luJge in all points. Q/i.S. lo. 1 77 ferre that all things of worship or faith neceffary to falvatlon r^hich are not commanded or mitten , are to be condemned. Be- fore I rcturne an(wcr , give mee leave to tell you whofe language you {peak when you deliver this your own do- drine. S. Auften {contra Maximum Li.) Bringeth in this A- rian Heretike fpcaking thus to the Catholikes bring any thing from the Scripture > it is necejfarj that wee bear it ; But thefe words which be befides Scripture y are in no cafere^ cetvedofvs^ feeing our Lord ddth admonish vs faying^ in vain thy worship mee teaching theCommandmcnts of menSo that Heretike. luft fo you and yours. lanfwerfirft that many things may be commanded by God and yet not written, and lb be precepts not of men , but of God^though wee bcalfured ol them by men* For all precepts which were for thofe two thoufand yeares and more > concerning worfhip or f iith,neceffary in thole Ages to Salvation, be- fore the fi ft Scriptures were written, were truly the pre- cepts and dodrine of God , and asfuchtobe obferved,* though this obligation was notified only by the men of that Church.For example, the fall of Adam, and the pro- mife made of our future Redemption , was notified by Adams Children, who delivered the fame to theyr Chil- dren, and fo downwards* So wee read Gen: 9. That God [aid to ISloe and his Sonnes, that it was not permitted to them to eat blood v. 4. This precept was obliging all the world vpon the credit of the Tradition of Co few. So li- kewife wee read in the i7.of Genefis^that when Abraham * was ninetie yeares ould and nine , the Lord appeared vnto him ad made a Couenantwith him andhis lccdy to makehim the Father oi the faithfuU , to blelTe ail in his feed : And then he gave him, and all his pofterity, a moft ftrickt precept of Circumcifion^ All this Abraham only notified to hi$ Z pofleiity,- 178 The "Bible not conteyntng all joints pofterity ; They all beleeved this promife aiid Covenant of God,and they all ftridly oblexved this precept of Cir- cumcifion: And yet neither this precept , nor this Cove-« nantjwere written for thofe four hundred years ad more which paffed between the time of Abrahdm and Mofes^ the firft Scripture writer. Was that vn written Covenant the doctrine of man? Was Circiicifio the precept of man?No« Was the precept of not eating blood the precept of man? and yet by Tradition it had all its forcc>even from Noe to Chrifls time,araog the Getiles, ad vntiU the times o^Mofes among the lewes. Well th5,why fhould the vnwritte doc- trine and precepts of Chri(l,2x\d his Apoftles^be called the doctrine and precepts of men? You can fay nothing, but that the teftimony of men is notfufficient ground for vs to bould this dodrine, and thele precepts to be divine or Apoftolicall^ which is apparently falfeiFor the men of theChurch of C/?r//?,and the fupreme Paftors and gouer- nours thereof, cannot be oflefle credit and authority, then were the men of the Law of Nature , or of the feed of Abraham, or the teftimony of Noe and his fons. Their teftimony could, and did fuffice to make their do<3:rinc, and precepts, delivered by God in a farre more private manner , to be notwithftanding prudently beleevedj. and imbra^red for divine. Why then Ihould not thete{i timony of theChurch fuffice to make the vnwritten doc- » trine of Chrljl and his Apoftles to be held for divine? It is therefore no kind of proofe to fay^CfeWj? reprehends human doBrines and precepts , therefore me muft not imbrace divine do^rine$ and precepts meerly becaufe thej are not mitten. You imbrace thedodrinc ofmen , who teM vs this dodrinc of yours^which is neyther written nor delivered by vni- yerfali tradition. Again^ were not all tlic precepts and dodrines cannot he our ludge in allpoints.Q^.i. S.io. 1 79 dodrines of Chrijl belceved as divine for tho/e fourfcorc y^eares or there abouts,before the whole Canon of Scrip- ture was finiflied? of all thefe Traditions lee my Selt: i6. n. It 2. and the whole j^.Seit. Secondly, I pray how do you auoide the imbracing dodrine ofme^wbo hould the Churches authority to be meer human : and yet meerly vpon her authority you receive ftich and fuch Copyes to be the true Copyes of the true Originall word of God; fee Selt.j:^. n. 3. 4. &c Yea, vpon the meer weak tefti- mony of your owne private Tranflatours , all you (who are not exceeding skilfuU in Greek) take your Englifli Bible tor the word of God and againe , vpon the meer weak authority of your Minifters,you take that interpre- tation for true which they tell you to be fo ^ though you cannot know it to be fo, for want of skill in Languages, and for want of skill in conferring places, and for want of ability to vie thofe twenty Rules which your own Dodors hould neceflary for the knowing alTuredly the true Icnfe of God. Thus I might (hew you how in all thofe twenty four neceflary points (w hich 1 have hither- to Ihewed not conteyned in any part of the written word of God) you hould truly and properly the dodrine and precepts of men , whom you believe to have meerly human authority. Thus you proceed as the lewes and Pharifees did , not relying only vpon che traditions they had from Mofes; (for example, concerning the remedy againft originall Sinneappliable to female C hiidrcn:)but relying vpon traditions devifed by fome ill interpreters of theyr Lawj by Sammai , by ki^lel ^ by Achiba and fiich other Rabbins:as Urom teacheth in Severall places. 14. Whereas you adde,that our Traditions are to be chalengcd of contrariety to the Scripture for the moft Z 2* part. 1 8o The ^ihle not conteynlng alt points part , you proceed in your vfuall manner to fay bouldjr what is for your turne, but never turne your han d or fin* ger to prove it, H. DoB^ylwiW vndertoke to makjg-good at any time, that there is incomparable more difKcultic to (hew that one part of the written word is not contrary to fome other, then to fliew that any one of our Traditions, be farre from the leaft contrariety to the word of God: fee SeH. 23. n: 6. All Schoilers know I Ipeak in this point that which is evident. Thus I have anfwered your whole 2.}. Scdion. 1 5. I have now a word of great importance to fay to youand yours^ You affirme the Scripture alone to be ncccffarily admitted by vs, as our fble and only iudge. In this, your part is affirmative, and Co you muft prove what you fay. In this you contradid all vifible Catholik Chur- ches which were in the world at your Reformation : A- gainft lo publik authority evidence of Scripture muft be brought^or elfc you do moft iniurioufly oppofe fo publifc an Authority5according to your own principles. Thirdly in this you deliver a point which (if true) is nolefle ne- ceffary then the true choice of the only Rule direding to true faith Therefore, according to your own princi^ pies this point muft be clearly conteyned in Sripture , in which you fay all necefTary points are clearly contayned. But wee have now at large heard every text you thought fitt to bring for a thing of fo great concernment 3 The anfwers given to every one (hew clearly , not any one of them to conteyne that point clearlyrWhence I conclude, that what in fiich kind oi matters , cannot be proved by clear texts, muft not be beIeeved,according to your own principles^ therefore, even according to thcnft,wee arc not 5o beieye that Scrijpture is by it fclfe alone our fplcand Cannot he our judge in all points. Q^. S.id. iSi only Rule of faith , or that it clearly contcynes the plain decifion of all necefTary controverlies^which itmuft^^ta be our ludge in them all. Remember M. DcG^or how you $♦13. tell the Antiprclaticall Party that they are bound to bring plain and exprejfe Scripture to demonfirate that Epif^ copacy is mlawfulLlt voere well^more Authority mre yielded to Tradition of the Churches ofCod.And §. 14. vpee thence receU ved Bishops y whence wee received the Chriftian faith. So yoUt Say To of allycu received, and I need fay no more, SECT; XL A FIFTEENT ARGVMENT. Jit hough Scripture only should he our Iudge,yet this Judge iQOuld decide many points clearly againjlyou^. O V cannot but give mce leave to call that clc^ arly decided "againft you by Scripture , for which I can fering,at the Icaft, as clear texts, as you bring for the decifion of many necefTary points , which yolThould (by reafon offuch texts) to be clearly decided by Scripture , as you fay all points are^ which be neccffary to Salvation. Therefore , if I can bring as clear texts for fome points of our faith , oppofit to yours , as you can bring for thofe fourteen neceifary points of which I treated in my lecond Sedion and as clear as you can bring for your beleefe of thole divers points ipecified in my eight Scd; in which I have parti- cularly 1 82 The %hle is notourludge. Q^. Sxi. cularly examined all your cheefe texts for baptizing chiL dren: if I alfo can bring as clear texts as you could bring in my nineth Section , for the lawfulnes of working on Satterdayes , and vnlawfulnes of working on S un day es j or as you could bring in the precedent Sedion to prove that the Scripture conteynes,and clearly decides all ne- ceffary Ccfntroverfies: if I can do all this, then thefe texts of mine cannot but be allowed by you to be indeed cle* ar; becaufeyou fay , you can bring clear texts for all- points neceflary (as all the above mentioned points bc^ ) but I will fliew that the texts that I lhall here bring^fqr io- me prime points in which wee beleeve contrary to you, be at the leaft as clear as any of thofe Texts brought by you ad affirmed by you to be very fiifficietly clear •where- fore my texts^beeing as clear as thofe which are acknow- ledged to be Sufficiently clear, muft alfb be acknowled- ged to be fufficiently clear. Now then to my Texts* 2. What importeth more a dying Chriftian, then to have his Sinne, forgiven him ,• and that vpon the word of God? and yet you crj Superptiony Superfthioni if a Friefi he called to pray over himy mi to anoint him with ojle , topro^^ CHteforgivenes of his Sinnes. But what faith your own Bible? Is any Man ficke among you^let him call for the Elders (the Pri- efts) of the church , and let them pray over him, anointing ' him mth Oyle in the name of the Lord , and the prayer of the faithfull shall fave thjjick' And the Lord ihall rayfe him vpj dndifhe hath committed Sinnes they shall be forgiven him. la- mes J. 14. Have you among all the texts which you ci- ted, and I examined in the laft Sedion, any one text but faalfe fo clear for what you intended to prove,as this text is to prove extreme-'Vndnon to^orgive Sinnes j and confe- ijuently , The ^ihle is not our ludge.Q/i. S. 1 1. 1 8^ 5 quently to be a Sacrament , or vifible figne ((iich an one )n as the ad of anointing is) ofinvifible grace conferred )j thereby to forgive his Sinnes, for ( fayth the text ) i/ he be e inSinnes , they shall he forgiven him. If you haue but any > one text halfe lb clear for that prime fundamental! point iS of yours , I pray bring it forth now whileft that and the % I anlwer to that is in frefli memory. That anfwer will tell I I you what I have to fay againft any fuch text : Let vs fee j 1 what you can fay againft this text? Come anfwer , that it . I relateth to the guift of healing in thofc dayes,' which fliift I, is diredly againft the words of the text faying, if he hath 7 ' committed Sins^they shall be forgiven,h^^\nQ what Scripture . have you to prove that the elders in the days of 5'. lames . cured ail infirme men with anointing them with oyle? , Laftly I am moft earneft to know by what clearer text then this, you were forced to forfake the pradice of this I Sacrament vfcd by all Catholike Churches vpon earth, 1 I when you caft it ofFas Superftitious f Where is, I pray, ( ^ your fo much boafted-of evidence of Scripture againft fo . pubIikx\uthority?M.Dodorrememberyour own words cited in the end ofmy iaft Sedion* Remember that you 43. fay that the vniverfall pra£the of the Church U the ( hefi I nterpreter of Scrif ture^V(fhere there is no plain Text (as I . here there is not) to take away all gainfafmg* 3, When a litle after your firft Reformation you(con- , ! trary to all the Churches both of Eaft and vi^eft ) denyed the Real Prefence of Cfcr//? in the Sacrament; by what I clearer text could you evidently demonftrate that thofe following texts could not be truely interpreted of a rcall prefence ? Tto is my Body : The bread which I will give is mi pih^ my flesh is meat indeed , my blood is drink indeed : in fo much as he who eatetb or drinketb vntPorthHy is guilty of the Body 1^4 TJye ^ible is not our ludge.Q^. S a Body and blood of our Lord. This is the cup of the new teftamenl^ which Cup(2L$ is evident by the Greek text where the gen- der agrecth only with the cup) shall keshedd forjou : that then in the Cup was the very fame blood which was £hed* Give mee as clear texts as thefc are^to prove, that one ma may not at the fame time have two wives, or that he may Labour on the Satterday, but not on the Sunday &c? 4* Again,when you denied the priefts of the Church to nave power to forgiveSinnes,contradiding alfo here- in all the Catholike Churches vpon the earth 5 what clearer text did you bring againft them all, to prove that they falfely interpreted to theyr purpofe this textrff^ brea^ tbed vpon them^ andfaidy whofe Sinnes fo ever jee yball remitt^ they are remitted: and whofe Sinnes fo everyee shall retejn they are reteyned ri?.20«22. Againft publik authority you (hould bring evident demonftration of Scripture, according to your own principles: wee now moft earneftly call for this evidence in the three Sacraments here mentioned by mec. Wee call at leaft , for clearer places then thefe be, in cafe you fay thele be not clear enough to decide the controverfy for vs.And wee call for fu:h places to decide all thofe four and twenty jnecelTary points which I have mentioned : which beeing neceffary , muft be Ihcwed to be decided rightly by clear Scripture^ad confequent- ly by clearer texts then any of thefe are,* in cafe you deny thefe to be fufficiendy clear : Give vs thofe clearer texts, stndwee will confelfe our felves Silenced* If you cannot do thisj thislitie will fervc to filence you. SECTION The ^itk is Hot Of^y Iu^e.Q^; S. 12. 185^ SEC T: XIL A SIXTEENTH ARGVMENT- I X?^^ th Holy Fathers neyer atlo'^ed the Scrips I ^ tare for t]}e only %ule of faith. T is moft ynreafonablc to fay , that the gr.cat€llDp(^torsdfthe primitive GhiiixK did nptknow the onlyR^ule of faith :For this point importing above alJ points>^ the Apoftle^ muft needs (had it been fb) have imprinted it deepely in the minds all they inftradediand alj theyr Difciples would have ilone the like to theyc Difciples : fo that many of the 'Churchpclpecially the moft learned of the wholeChurch^ vtould not be ignorant of this point : atleaft lam fure> l^hat you mayfooner now be prefumed ignorant of the oHily true Rule of faith; thpn tfi^y then* • 2. Firftthen, had the Holy Fathers ever allowed of the Scripture for the only Rule of faith , they neither would^nor could have held any menHeretikes for hould- ingthat which was contrary to no clear Scripture: but/ they didhould manyfuch to be, Heretikes , as I have Jhewcd sed; : 8. where I fliewed that Aufien did hould . on the one fide,that Baptifme of Children could not bC; })roved by cleare, Scriptures and yet he , in and with the Milevetan Councelcondemned thofeforhcretikes who did deny the necefSty of Baptifbac for Children* See Selt: rS6 Tk ^ihle is not our ludge.Qj. .S. 1 2^ ^<»»: 3.4,y. There alfo n: 6. He and Vincentm Lerinenjis ^ecovnteth them heretikes who held rebaptization ne- ceHary to all baptized by heretikes:ad yet he held on the;i other lide^that this point could not be cleared out of on*, ly Scripturc/ce them n: 7. In the next number I did fliev^ j how Antiquity held al/b the Quaiita-^decimani for heretw kes , though the belceving Eafter ought to be alwaies kept on the fourteenth day of the Moone be not againft clear Scripture. There alfQ I fhewcd out of St ipifhantm and alfb 5. Auflen (who exprefly in the beginning of his. Catalogue profefleth to put down none but fuch as arc? true heretiks) that i4m[(5 was held by anpiqui^ for an He-* retike , hcaufe he denyed prayer for the dead ■ md held that there Vi^ds no pfitng dayes of precept: in which points I am fure you will fay that this i4&i^5 held nothing contrary to ; Scripture. There al(o Ifbcwed outof S: Epiphanius and i Aujlen ithat the Antldhomarites or Hehididns were held he-, retikes by Antiquity, for-denying that our Lady after the • 1 birth of our Saviourdid em' Uvea Virginrwhich point is. ? not clear in Scripture. Therefore all thofe were heretikes^ , not for coTradiding Scripturc;yet they were heretikes for ^ contradiding fome Rule of faitlirthereforc there i5^fome 1 QtherRule of faith befides Scripture j and confequcnt- iy Scripture alone is not the only Rule of faith* 'J 3. Secondly it was by holy Fathers noted to be pe-ri culiar to heretikes to ftand to Scripture only , and to re-; 1 fufc all other Rules:5(? the Macedoniam and Emomiatts.hau^ ing no regard of v^hat was taught to the contrary by the mulr'') titude and antiquity ofch ijlians , denyed the holy Ghofttobe glorified^xitktheTather and the Sonne; bee an fe the Scripture ^ did no vchjre exprejfely faj this. S. Bafii de Sp z- Sane: c. 2^.. , and /. I. contra Eiwom: So the Pelagians ( in S. Au-^.f Jien de H^ura q gratia r. 39* ) were vfcd to fay ; Iff i The ^ihle Is not our ludge. Q^.S.ii. 1 87 heUtve that which me Had , ht let vs believe it to be 4 veick^ ednes to beleeve that ivhich r^^^e do not read. So S. Aujlen L. i. againft Uaximnm the Arian Bifhop, bringeth him in fay- ing : ly thou bring forth anj thing from thofe divine Scriptures VPhieh are common to vs both , me miifi needs heare thee. But thofe fpeecheswbich arje not in Scripture y be ,by nomeaneSy r^- €eav€d b!f vs , Jeeing that our Lord adnwnisheth vs and fajth , without cdufe thej mrshlppe mee teaching the Commandements andprecepts of men. So he. And juft io you , as is clear by your objedrion in thelaft Secilion but one before this. Num. 13 . iand again I wish to be the Difciple of divine Scrips* tvm. Wherefore the Councel of Sens m the fevendi age decreed ( Deere to 5 ) That it v^as a dangerous thing to be in that error ^ that nothing is to be admitted which is 'not drawn from Scripture. For many things are derived by Chrift/row the hands of the Apoftlesfrom mouth to nmuth ^c. which are tabe houUen without all doubt. See Seil: 20. 4, Thirdly the Holy Fathers exprefly refufe to dis- pute out of Scriptures only 5 v;poa this very caufc^ that they do not fufficc to end and decidib all controverfi es. So the moft ixncicntTertulHan Ipeaketh firft in geneir^ll of never difputiiigwith heretikes. C. 17. Out of Scriptures enly , Becaufe this Scripture-combat availeth to nothings but to the make'mg either onesjlomaksy or ones brains to turn^. lib, dePrjif.C. 17. And by and by he in particular fayth of the Gnoilikes , that which wee may fay of our adverfa- xics. This here fy doth not receive fome Scriptures (you put ten bookcs among the Apocripha) fofne Scriptures they receive with additions ad detradions ordered totbeyr turne:(fcc what Uaid of your tranflations i'v^ff. 5. and thofe Scrips tares they receive in arty manner intierly, theyturneto fheyr turne by mw devijed ex^ofttions (fee how you do this Sect.^. A a ^ Then l88 The^ihteii not 00 U^ Q^S^il Then he concludes generally : vpe^thiift mt tbeHfiairi^^pt^- i& scriptures ymr in mr combat rely^mi tlHfA, in^hkh eithtf fto viBorj is to he obteyned y m dvefyVnt&f tuln^ne, Which how true it is , you m^y fee in my Scripture-difputatioii about the keeping of Sunday y Se^^ 9> where I gave yoti text for text, as good as you brought or could bring* Thus the Anabaptifts donot oriljr wciary you out, and fhew you to the very eyeithat,ftading to Scripture alone, th^y are invincible by you: but alfp they fome tirnes force your prime Podors to leave they r ftandin^on Scripture ipnly^and force them to fly to Tradition, SeeD, Taylors plain confeffion hereof Se£t. i/n.^. And your great X,a found this infifting vpon Scripture only to breed fiicfo cndles iarring that in his laft book but one, heprofefet^, himfetfetobe wearjoffuch comb at es and encounters yh^caufe hefindeth controversies ther^ehy made bm brawles and there^^ fare, wishes that in/ome Cornnron affeMj of cHmches all thtfe firiffes at oncewere decided.'Vhcc^id^n^ mj^c your teamed Sutdiffe 'w h^ i:cvkw K 42* to fay 5 h itfaift that wee mil admitt of nir ludge hm Smpt^r^ y fd^ wee appeaU- ftill to a /^^^//^^wn'^n GowrW.Bu^t here I would ask,^ wee can reft vpon the fentece giuen by a gemeratll C oun-. cell , if that be not infeHible ;;tbr ftiil every mtin mutt be calling this Sentence to review mad^ by his own wi^ak iydgement: as hath been fully declared 5^(3-. t. 3. 4.. ' J.: Some of out adveriaries think to fhift off the au- thprity o^ tertultian , as if it were delivered ^gainft thofei only who r eie.dred great parr of the Scriptufcs, and.cor-i rupted otber parts; whichjfay^the)^ wee dbnott tahfwer thatj of your like proceedings I have- spoken enbfigh ia- the places I cited ioyntly with Tertullians words:But this yQuv iJiift is clearly vndone by TertulHam oWi> \Vc>rd^ foilowingj following, 4J;. Wee hitherto have inserter all (mark this wot^)xredteia^gmfi^^M^ "OpH cmain tuft And necejfarj eptceptions from Conferring out of Scriptures. So heJ, Yea the veiy drift of a great part of tluS hisiitlc bo ok is, independently of all Scripture , to Cdii- fute all heretikes, by proving that true beleevers m\ift bfi able tQfl)ew by tradition the defcent of theyr dodrihi from the Apoftles, But if indeed truth fiands for vis (fay th hti, C. 37.), who foever vpee be who walk in that Kule which the Church hath received from ChriJ^y Chrijlfrom God, Wee proceed manifefily in our intent y defining that heretikes ought hot to b'i admitted to make thefr appeale t^Sfrlpturvs whom wee do pfdt/e without the Script ures i not taJjave any right to theScriftU- m*Note heere firl1:,that;he fpeake« offuch^ would appeal toScripfures'y therefore^ they did receive them , Note Se^ condly , that without Scriptures ferfuUian 2^^^^^ hinli- fdfe tbe fitreft. Vidlory p b^ fc^rceing. tUcmto fkt\^th^i vifihle'Tucce/ljon atid.to fhcw tlieyr doiStrine dcliv^l^ed fiom hand to hand by l^tadition word of Mourh • ai^ that worjd was vri&iVfc the Anffles received from Chrt^ y dntt Qbrififrom God, B^jhis iiHle would have ys alL'walkei- . 6. , 0u-r adveriariels vie to alledge Toipc foliages c f Jl^thers appealing, in theyr difputes againft heret t#: tfrc S or tures^ ichee jSy S\ Aufim Avho d i fp^|tYprg;r» i h'ft • the-Donajtifts. conceived himfeife to have mv^fi: marlM^f texts to prove agalnfl: them thitCi;n/5 trufcChuivch cou^^^ never grow fo iow^as to be vifiblc only in pu.rt of Africa,- the vifibiiity of Cfcr//?5 Church through the world becuag manifeft in Scripture, as he kith de vnitate Ecclefix, C. 7. II. J-5.& i7.But it is no good argument o lay,The Fa- thers appealed to the Scriptures in lbmefev>r points , in they knew they had manifcft ad vatages; therefore they approved appealing to Scr^ture only in any kitad of controverfy : So it is ho argument to fay ; the Fathers did exad written texts of Scripture in piroofe of fomc hercticall Novelties; and profefl<:d ilicy would not give pare to fucK Novelties without written tcXts : therefore wee muft not admitte of any , thoughnever fb aticient, beleefe of the whole Church,deliyered byTxaditioh from the Apottlcs, without fbfne clear written text can be al- ledgcd for it. This is no con/equenceitot in poi:ni:s which are knowne not to be delivered by Tradition, yea not fo much as pretending to it , is a good argument to fayi Give mee a clear text for this , o^r etle with the fanic fa- cility that you affirme it, I will deny it^: as I fayd S. lo. n: 9, 10. Do but note what I (aid there, and then ioyn it to the(e place.^- and all places alleageable out of the Fathers will cafely be fblved. ^ i_ 7. All thofe Fathers which might be alledged (and part of thcai is alledged SeczS.) for houlding Traditions in points necelTary to Salvation , no where exprelTcd in Scripture ,- asalfoall thofe who hould the Authority of the Church by it felfe tofuffice to ground our faith, and to determin all our Controverfies , (whom wee (hall cite Se(i:2i*^ all thefe I fayjclearly hould that Scripture is not' the only Rule,guide and diredion of all that is neceifary' to be belecved, or done by vs for obteyning Salvatioiiii ' JTHE I THE THIRD QVESTION. VFhether the Church he the Judge appointed hy G »d to end all our QontrolDerfies / Ipith a -poord of the Soanians foncerning ^eafons bee^ ing our ludge. , Om E men may perhaps wonder wKy, in fb fhort a work 5 I ftiould be lb long in proving the Scripture not to be>by it lelfc alone,our only Rulcjordiredion of faith,* but thoft who are vnderftanding^ Schal- Icrs will cafely fee, how , after the pro of c of that point, I have in a manner difpatchcd all thisbu** fines : Bccaufe all Scdaries , making theyr (landing to the folc ludge.mcnt ofScripture^to be the only foundation of all and, every one of theyr fo fevcrall Seds; when now this foundation is fhevved not to fcrve the end they in-* tendj, but that w.ee muft.yet have ^ ludge giving vs infal- lible alTu ranee of many neeelfary verities ot which the Scripture alone doth not afTure vs: heaice followeth ma- nifeftly the vxter ouerthrow of all thefe and all other imaginable Seds, by the apparent Neceffity ofhoulding the true Church of Chrlfl to be this Judge^ (he only beeing the ludgCjto which wee arc (cnt by Scripture it felfc^with^ an obligatio ofour beeing held forRublicansor Heathens vnlcs wee bearher.. Neither is there any kind of probabi- lity no\vJeft of finding any oihcr ludge fufiicict t© dircd: m 1 gi The Church is our infallible ludge Q^l v^s.iaalltkiagiiJeaeS.ri'to Sal\{at;io% apclto ert4 ^\\o^ Ccntroverfies , and (ufficient to conteyne vs all in vnily of otfi^ i,.i|i^^i(Pkr f^^ithi at?4 exterior profq^pa of tbc^lai^c, with all othqr,cond it loas requjfite in our ludge. 2. Hitman Reafon> ^0 adored by^tbe Sbcmii;^!^, can- not be th is,Iu.4gS > be«^iii(q feilitjie . ; BjHt with this they eafily difge,nfc , 4^nyW^^ infallible. Secondly no one parifli in the w.orld was c\^er yet known to be of this their opinipn; is it the^lijf ely to be true in the eyes of any rational! man? What wftt is there in thinking t^-^be, w.^C^rr tJiena^^^^^^ what reafon to make R eafon i]^^g^ in. ihjings iiirpaflfe Reaftn? l^y^ff^'doth. not r^afqn perfwade any ma to thinke that it is fitter for hmto J^bmitt to the authority of all the Chriftians of 4jj^.age^, acl j)Ia^ ever hi^d apy thing like a Church, t^iqn tp; adhei:e to a fev;^ fcattered felfe-conceited people , pjri^tjC^^ing tp find out; a vvifer ground of Religion, then qver was acknowledged by any kind of peopk in tfee^ ^(^Qrld, who had ihethapc of an Vniyerfall and perpetually Church?of which more i^.Tounhljf how imprudent* ' ly did the Appflle exhort z\\ Idem fapere ^ t& be fof one oph nlon^ to kjefe "vnity in faith ^To j^eak^e one thing y ^o perfe^ in one fen fe^ and one Judgement i. Cor:i.& 2. Cor: 13. if he fcnew it wereGods will that every one fliould follow li,i$ own iud|;eraent , which every one hath as different ajmoft fro^n an other, as theyr faces are > fiftly what an i^iproipoTtionable meanes is this to keepe that vnity in f^ith^ and to adhere to what hath been evangelized or deliver^ e^ vnto vs J though an Angel should come teperfwade the con^ ttaxf^^Qi let but an ablei: Man then my felfe copie, and fhew mee, that I have not Ip good reafon for what I be- Iqe^ve as hehath , and as he ( if wee ftand only^ to tea- fon^ Tht Chmhhommfdlihlelu^e 2c^j, 1 9| Ibn, without refped to authority) can bring to the con- trary jl muft (fay they) follow what he propofethrSo that weake men muft be weather cocks, Sixtly^\$ it not all rca-» jon , that what convincing motives make evidently credible to be reveajed by Cod, th^t I ibould credit that not as the word of man, but receave itas the word of God, as fruely it is j and fb rely vpon it as ftrongly as is fitt to rely on the word of God ? Seventhly ^ according to tjiis vnreafonable Ground, there muft be allowcd^all the world over, as great variety of belee ving more pr kjflfey as tl^erc. isofvndierftanding more, or leSe : anaii in, different occafions. Can any creature who is. but like a r^tiooaU man , beleeve that the world was taugh to proceed fo by Chrift^^nd his Apoftl^sjor that the world ciid ever proceed fo in any one age? What i^ecord teftifieth any fu(ph thing ? Is this to inwg mt^. G^^i^/V/ 4^ widerftandings tp the ObedUme of Chrift? z.Qor: lo. j. If this wilde Liberty be called Captivity^ I aijafiire that^ by as good a figure , you Socinians (wl>Q call your (elves- Ra- tjonall m^n) oaay as truly be called the moft IrratiQjtis^ll ^f all ChijiftiaH men. You needs niuft pardon ipee if I ludge fo , for your own principle of foUowing what Qiy own Reafon tells mec, m^eth mee moft KQSilly ^o thii)kif it were to be followed by vs as our ludgcjthis very I udge of ours(that is our own Reafbn)tould vs (hee neither was,nor appear- ed like to that judge wee fought for , ihec beeing a ludgc not ending, but endtcfly rayfing doubts in all points: ftill therfore wee are in our generall fearch. And wee have only in groffe got a hint of finding fbmc infallible meanes^to guide vs fecurcly in all our doubts,in that bict fed congregation of people which followed the inftruc- tions of Cfer//f, ad his difciples, ftill propagating the doc- trine delivered to them from age to age vntill wee come to our Age . Here , or no where , this infallible diredioa is to TheChmhU our infallible lud^e.Q.^.S.i^.ig^ is to be had^ Buc by what particular way this Congrega- tion is to communicate , and impart this direction vnto vs ^ is not the thing wee now Iceke at the firft • but it is the very laft thing wee can feek for. For that beeing found , wee are to follow that particular meanes, and by no meanes to ftray one foot from it. Wcc muft feckc that wee may find; and afcer wee have once found what wee fought for , wee muftftand ftiil firmely fixed in the faith wee have found. Becaule by what wee have found wee are alto taught to belecve this particular , that wee are to reft free from further enquiry ; Bccaufe our God would not have vs follow any other ludges then he ap* points : therefore he would have vs feeke after no other; but beleve that no other was to be fought after ; leaft fa wee I fliould bee allwayes ftekers 5d never be Beleevers: as Tertullian difcourfeth admirably C. 7. de Fr£lcript: 2, Wcc do not therefore as yet fcarch whether this particular meanes of direding vs, be by the Decrees of the checf Paftor ofthis Church;or by the Covncelsheld without him, or held by him and defining together with him for this fearch is yet a further worke though it be a work Toon di/patched/or as much as concerns our purpofe , after that wee have once a/Turedly found out that this infallible meanes is to be found in this bleffed congregation inftitutcd by his difciples , and theyr fol- lowers with a vifibk fucceffion in all ages fro Cbrifls^^c this. Now then , this one thing wee fearch. For, is, whe- ther this blelTed Congregation (which wee alwayes vn- derftand here , when wee name the Church , as long as wee fpeakof icarching ourGuide or ludge in a more ge- nerall manner) hath not fbmc meanes or other appoin- ted by God, by which (hoc can infallibly guide vs to the B ^ ^ knowledge Jg6 The Church is our Infallihle ludgeQ. ^.S. I j knowledge of the true iayth? When wee have found that ' Ihee hath^fome (uch mcanes ; wee fliall readily paffe oUi further, to fee what ineanes this is. Now let vs be fiirc not to intangleour felves with that futther Search , or any thing belonging to it , vtitill wee have fully fatisfied our felves of this generall verity, that this blefed CrnigregOi* tion bath in it fome meanes appointed by God ^ t& direit alt t^^ the k^nowledge the only true faith. Neither yet do wee be* gin to fearch , whether this Congregation , inftituted thus by Cj&rijJ,and ftill vifibly continuing in his dodrine, be the Church of Rome , or the Proteftant Church, or both thefe, or any other befides thefe, of which hereafter: but that onp thing for which now wee only fearch is, whether this Congregation (wherefoever it is) hath not: fpmc infallilj^le meanes appointed by God,to be followed by all, chat all may come to be faved in it? 3. And wee moft grounde dly lfay that this Church (ft ill meaning, by this name ,thc Congregation wee (peak of) isjour infallible ludge: and coufequentlyjthis Church hathibme infallible meanes to guide all to the truth in all points of faith , though not exprefly conteyned in Scriptures, and to decide all our Controverfies. in Reli- gion : for which Ifhall give myrcafons in the enfuing Section. But before I begin it,^! note in a word;, that this Church, hailing fome infallible meanes appointed by Godto dired vs in the only true faith , (without which, faith eternall Salvation cannot be had)it muft be a dam- nable Sinne not to take paines, in a tolerable manner, to find it outi and to imbracc it , when wee have found it: for othc wife wee flionld negled the execution of what: God hathappointed vs todojin a matter neceffary to our; S^vation j and wee Ihould alfo Sinne againft that Cha-- ! \i The QhwchkmhfMlkhdg S. 14. 19/ t i rity, which^evciy ont oweth to his own Soailc, if, bailing ^ i j meanes <#cred vs , to be infallibly guided in the choice «lj of that faith neceffary Salvation , wee (hould neither ^ take ordinary paines to find it , nor to follow it , when ^} f7ce had found it. This lellon is fo very neceflary to - \ many thoufands, Alt it deferaeth to be: a thoufand times ^ \ wcr inculcaftcd vnto thcmt I SjECT: XI\r ;y It k fml>ed em af th mid Tefiment that the Church is our infaRihle ludge in aU Con^ trQlfferjtes ofFaitk ^^^^^^^ "^ ^^^^ then two thoufand yeeres , be- ^^^>j.5rfoTeany word of the ould Teftament was written , Gods Church had fome infallible gy^glgwaYto end all controverfyes for all that time there was no Scripture , and yet there were many points tfcicn neceffary to be beleeved , in which men of various judgments might vary in theyr judgments ; Foir example , about the beleefe of reward ^,and punifliment of tlie life to come ; a bout the immortality ol the Soule ; a bout the fail of Adam i the promife of a Redeemer j and afterwards of this Redeemers beeing to be the Sonne of Abraham; about theneceiEty of the Circumcifion given vnto him&c. The Church of that time was the only I ludge of all thefe , and fuch like Controverfies : and as I they, who oppofed her known tradition , w^re account- ed f^ifbeleeYcrsi^fo thofe who beleeved ^b^xri , arc de- clared;, ipS The Chnrchh ourlnfallihle lud^e 2* j«S.i4J clared by 5. ?auI to Kave had the fame Spirit of Vaitk that wee- 2. Car: 4. i 3. Shall not then Chrifls Church be as • much enabled by God to paflfe an infallible dccifion^ of what is to be held now by us in poind of Faith ? The like argument houldeth ftrong in the lewifb Churcb^ which trom the time of Mo/^i, to the time ofC/;ri/? , had fome infallible meanes, befides Scripture, to end all Coi^ troverfies, as appeares by Deutr. 7. 8. Where rhofe words , Ani they shall shew the fentence of judgment , md thou shalt do according to it ? &c. And tho(e other words The Man that mil do prefumptuouflj and will not barken t0 the Frieft , even that man shall dj : Cleerly intimate the in* fallibility of this ludges fentence. For God would never oblige all to follow an erring judgment , which defines often lyes for truth : And oblige all to imbrace thofe lyes, vnder paine of death. Secondly the refiifers to embrace a ly do not do^refumptuouJlyyas-God fayth thofe doc who will not barken to the Priefts: He therefore ever fayth the Truth. Thirdly according to the true tranflated Bibles it is (ayd in the ninth vcrfe, of the Prieft , Who shall shew thee the truth of the Judgments Which words prove tl\at God would allift in declaring alwayes the truth. Tourthlj it had been a moft vnjuft murther to put a man to death for not following that which might well be a Lye : God would never have ena(ied fiich a Law. liftly , Jofeph the lew L. 2. contra Apion: teftifyeth theyr High Friejls to have teen theyr ludges of Controverfes. And D. Whitakgr de Sacra - Scrip: ?ag: /\66. Acknowledging as much (ayth , It was not Law full to apipeale , forotherwife there would have been no end^f contention. Shall Chrifts Church , which is the mif- tris and Lady , want that which the lewifh had , (hec beeing but the handmaid ? ^ - 2. Before i "Xhe QhurcJ) is our Infallible ludge Q^^^ ! 2r. Before I come to the texts , which Ipcak particu- jf larly of Chrtfis Church , I ajppeal to any fober judgment, who (ball ponder them with due refledion , to judge whether they be not , to the very full , as cleer to prove ^ my intent , as any of thofe , wbich any of our adverfaries I can bring , for any one of thofe twenty four neceffary \\ points , which I have heretofore (hewed to be clcerly fct \\ down in no Scripture , though they affirme them all to have deer texts of Scripture for them ? Whence againe I ask, how you can deny thefe my Texts to be cleer, wh^cb are in any fober judgment as cleer , as thole which you all hould ( and muft hould ) to be cleer ? And par- ticularly , I wifli the texts I am nov/ going to cite , were equally baliance d with thofe texts which D . F^rw^and others cite , to prove that Scripture is our only judge; for lb my Reader (ifhe wnll but plcaft to turne to thofe texts SeSt^ lo. ) may fooniee wliether , even according to the judgment of Scripture, ( theyr own. only ludge) the Church be not better proved to be our ludge , then the Scripture alone improved to be fo. And I defire all to note , how vnjuftly wee arc dealt with-all , who bccing advantaged by the peaceable poflcflion of all publick ec- clefiafticall authority , which any Catholik Church had in the world , at that time in which you began yourRe-* formation ( all which authority ftood for the Churches beeing the infallible judee^ ) and yet no evidence of Scripture, half e fo good , beeing brought againft this our authority as wee can bfing for it ^„ wee notwithftanding were difpoflefled of it , and condemned of the moft vn- juft vfurpation that ever was , by thofe who hould , that againft publik authority evident demonftration ofScrip- ttre muft be broii^ht.Examioe the texts I ftalijaring and too. TheChurchk our InfaEiMe Za^e.g. j.S, 14 thea^^xamincyour weak evidences brought in loy tcyath Se<9:iom 3 . Again , before I cite theile text« , I muft neecjs de- fire my reader to carjy alpng with him. in his mind one note more , which is. this. > that alltfaefe texts fpeak fijiU of a Church aKvayes teaching truth in all points which file propofcth to be believed , and not in fome certain points only. This I defixe much to be noted , becaufe^ouc adverfaries only acknowledge, that by theie t^xts the Chur ch is fccurcd from erring fundamentally To the fuln verfton of fxvingfaith j as D. F^rw^ acfcnowledgeth Se£t. lo* This confelEon of theyrs vndoeth all Reljgionj becaiJfe the texts I am going to alledgc fpeak as vnivftrally , and as farre from all limitation of the Churches beeing by God fecured from all kind of error , fundamentall, oX not flindamentall, as any texts fpeak of the Apoftlcs or Prophets beeing fecured from all kind of error fonda- mentall or not fundamentall: And you by Limiting thefc ttsxts to the only fecuring of the Church fro only funda- metallerrorSjdo teach others in like mancr to limit thofe texts by which theProphets,orApdftles,are /aid to bee fe- cured fro errour,to only fuch a iecurity,as fccuredi them fro fundamentall errors only^which would be a mofl da- nable do in any matter (what;; The Church is our Infallihle ludge Q ,3 .S J4. 20I (whatfoever itbee)ispropofcdby him;whether this inftru- ment be the Church , as it was for the firft two thoufand ycares of the world, or the Prophets or Apoftlcs rayfed rp inhisChurch.And iiow let vs proceed ow to our texts* 4. Myfirjl text is out of the fecond of Ifa: v. 2» 3. And it shall come to pajfe tntheUft dajes (fb the Apoftles called the time of the New Law) that the Mountaine^ of the Lords hotife shall be ejlablishid in the toff ofUountaines (behould its great vifibility,fo that) AllNatios shall fio^ vnto /V(behoM its vaft cxtcm)ad fay (witfli ioY)Come je and letvsgoevf to the mountain of the Lord^to the houfe of theGod of lacobiad He (note this word He)mll teach vs his yvayes{in this Houfe or Churchj) Tor out of Sion shall go forth the ta'W (as it did by the Apoftles on whit-Sunday3)4wrf tht wordof God from Ic- ru£lem(from whence theChurches firft preachers began the diuulging of thcyr dodrine:) And he shall iudge among the ^ationsy (not in his perfon , for Chrift went not out of Iewry;but he shall Iudge among the Nations)bY his Churches tribunall ereded amog all Nation$,fo confpicuoufly,that they all may flow to it: Will any man fayHis iudgement is fallible ? in this tr ibunall it is who teacheh vs his v^ayeti dare you fay that He teacbethvs errorsHsSiny error,(tbough not fundamental!) his xvay}Chrifi then, ere<^inga Church vifible to the whole world, that the whole world might refort with ioy vnto it for neceftary inftrudio; and intcd-» ing himfelfe to inftrud: them by it, and by k toludgc among all Nationsjhad not coplied with this intention of his, if he had not fecured thatChurchfroall errorjby which he himfelfe teacheth all the x^oyU his wayesy and not fuperfti*. tiouserrors And had this his Church bcenLiablc to pafic faHeiudgement,in deciding controverfies about faith^th^ difgrace had redounded to God, who authorized that C G Tribunal^ 102 The Church is our Infallible ItUge 2- 3*5.14/ Tribunal,to be that very Court in which,to the joy of alU: lie iudgeth among all Nations. 5. My Second text is out of the fame Prophet C. 35', promifing to vs,at|the coming of Chrifi^a v^ay fo direil[not only in it felfe) butfo dired: vnto vsythatfooles cannot em hyit.ls it not then infallible ? But of this text I fay no more here ,,becaufe I have podered it already in the very; Preface, Num. 3. 1 only note that this way, bceing fo di-\ red to vs all, muft needs be only in fuch a Church , as is-, of a Vaft extent , and (b vifible every where in all ages,, that, all men of all places might be in all ages direded by it, and ib direded as not to erre^ Torfooles cannot erm by it. What more infallible in order to vs? \ 6. My third text is out of the (ame Prophet. C. \ where firft mention is m-ade moft glorioufly of the vaft- ; extent of Chrifts vifible Church; Sing O barren &c.Enlarge the place oftby tent , and let them fintch forth the CurtaineSy of thy habitattons. Spare not , lengthen thy Cords , andjlreng^ then thy flakes. Tor thou shalt break forth on the right hand and] on the left, and thy feed shall inhr it the Gentiles. AslhaveA fworne that tht waters of Noah should no more go over the\ Earthy So 1 have fsK^orne that I would not be wroth with thee(^sl I am with all who admitt fupcrftirions and foul errors to I rcigne over them.) Every toung that shall fife againft thee ini iudgment thou sbAt condemne. The toungs of all heretikesi be toungs that rife againfi the Church, in judging contrary! to her definitions in matters of laith : but fcarenot (Ol Church of God ) for every toung that shall rife againft theejk in Iudgment thou shall condemne : Yea they r very rifing in oppofition of iudgement vnto thee , is theyr condemna-C; tipn; becaufe hence appeareth that the Church differethfr in iudgcmpnt froii) rhcm , which is enough (in thp opi-L nionA I TheQhurch is our Infallible ludgeQ.i.S. 14 lo j nion of S. Aufien) to make vs hould them heretikes; For iuftintheend oi his catalogue or Booke ofHerefies he fayth , itisfuperfluotts to fet down vphat the Church (in parti- cular) hath defined againft them all: but (fayth he) Scire fuffi^ tiat earn contra ijla fenfire , tet it fuffice (tor theyr condera- nation of hcrely)f^^r sheeis contrary in her iudgment to them alL And therefore it is not lawful! to hould any one ot them. See 2 1, n:^. 7 . My fourth text is out of the fame Prophet Cap: ^9. V.20. and 21 .which text (Raw: ii.':/.2^ )S.Paul interpreteth to be fpoken of the Church of Chrijl, to which , after his rr^ coming , many of the lewes were to vnite themfelves beeing to be baptized in it, inftruded in it , governed by |, it, and confequently the text fpeakfth of fuch a vifiblc 1} Church, as that muft needs be, to whom the lewes con- 7( verted could vnite them felves , to be by it baptized, in- 'efc ftruded,governed. To this vifible Church thus fayth our r. Lord ^ As for mee this is my Covenant with them , fayth our ,1 lord: My jpirit (free from all error} that is vpon thee and my ;fi mrds (tree from error great or litle) vphiihlhave futtin thy Mouth, (that Mouth by which Vifibly fliee doth teach J my way es to all Nations th at flow vnto thee, that Mouth • 3 by which I iudge among all Nations, that Mouth which ihall condcmne every toung that Ihallrife againft it in iudgment) Mj words ( I (ay) whiih 1 have putt in (this) thy 1/ Mouth , shall not depart out of thy M^z/ffe (thus vifibly tea- I ching, iudging &c. ) nor out of the Mouth of thy Seed-^ > nor out of the Mouth of thy Seeds Seed ^ fayth the Lord , from hence forth and for ever. Behould here the Spirit of truth intaled vpon the Church vifible , and Gods words put in her Mouth , by which (hce teacheth all j Nations in her firft Age 5 And in the Mouth of her Seed, ' C c 2 by to4 The Qhurch is our Infallihle ludgeQ^. i.S.i^ by which fliec tcacheth all Nations in the fecond age; ani in the Month of her feeds feed from thenceforth and for ever^hj which ftiee tea cheth all Nations in the third age , and ia every other age thence forth following, to the end of th« world. Find mee then an Age , in which this everlafting vitible Church fliall teach any error, though never fo Utle? If you can do this , then in that Age his Covenant was made voide. 8. Uj fifth text fliall be out of the very next Chaptir (to wi tt I fa: 60. v. iQ.)in which God by the Prophet tri- umpheth in the vafl: extctand glory of his Church vifible,. The Sonnes of firangers shall build vp thy vpalles , and thejr Kings shall Mintfler vnto thee^ 7hj gates shall be open contlm* ally (A poor glory if they admitt in Idolatry, Superftition &c,) they shall not be shutt day nor night, that man may bring vnto thee the forces of the Gentiles^, and that theyr Kings may be brought (Iccurely from all error to be iuftruded by thee:) ¥or the l^latjon and Kingdom which will not ferve thee, shall perish. The fenfe of which laft words is cleerly this,- What Nation fo ever refufes to ftrve the Church, by not fubmitting to her dodrine: fliall perifli, not temporally iu ^ this world, in which they often florifli ,• but aeternally iu the next. It is therefore damnable , not toiiibmit to the dodrine of fome Church, which is vifible at all times, and 'known to all Nations : for it could never be damnable not to fubmitt to an Invifible Church ; There muft then ever be^; fome vifible Church on Earth,which all Nations, vnderpain of damnation ar.e to ferve ; And to which, God may tr uly fay , The Nation ani Kingd(hm that will not fsrve theey shall perish. Now tell mec,I pray, when this Eu- glifli. Nation , by a Nationall Synod (as they call it) ac- knowledged no viliblc Church, which this Nation was- bound; T!he^Chur€l? is our mfallihle Indge.Q^.i.S. 14.20 J bound to ftrve^ but decreed many things contrary to all the vifible Churches: how efcaped they this Sentence of damnation?! confefle Nations fliould do well, and ftiould further theyr Salvation, in refufing to ferve all Churches then vifible^ if all tho/e Churches did both erre, and alfo father theyr Lyes vpon God the Father of truth,- venting theyr own errors for divine verities: But, I /ay, it isimpofEble that all the vifible Churches in the whole world fliould in any Age come to this paffe; For in every Age it mufl: be true, that The nMton and iangdmevchich v^ill not ferve thee,shallperish.B\ityo\i will layperhaps,for thefc 10. or 12. Ages her errors have Eclypfed her? Read then the following Verfes , I mil make thee an everlafiing excellency (an excellent Church indeed which fathereth her Lyes and fupcrftitio vpo God him felfe.ft foUoweth, but fliould not follow,if this were true,-i4^^i thou shalt fuck^ the breajls of Kings ^c.ycz ^Thy Sunne shall no more go down, neither shall thy Moon Withdraw it felfe: but the Lord shall be mto thee an everlasting light: How an everlafting light? an everlafl:ing excellency, which ended with an Eclipjfe of fbme thirteen hunded years; iffliee failed with the third Age, asD. Hammond and others pleafe to fay ? which third Age was before r^ee fucked the breads of Kings when- ce appeares the falfitie of their affertion. Againe , how doth it follow,-Tfe> dajes of thy Mourning shal be ended? when you make her to have had fofaddeatime of mourning 4s thirteen hundred or (at the le aft) a thoufand years, vnder the yoke of Popery ? How truly then doth God in the next Chapter v» 7. promife hcr Sonnes, That an everlafting loy shall bevntothem: Where as the dayesof Popery are acknowledged to have covered the face of all Chriftendome four times as log as the day of her true Icy ,?Hqw then alfo is itlayd to her in the end of the next ^u..*^— -~ - Chapter 7o6 The Church is our Infallihle ludge 2- j.5.i4? Chapter foIlowing,T/;^« sbatt be called a Citty fought for^ani notforfaken , if all this while ftiec were the woman fleddc into the defert? Away, away with thefe falfe gloflesi thelc words of Efay muft needs be vnderftood of a vifibic Churchjwhich was not only fought for,but alfo inhabit- ed, and waf /^r/ii^w, nor left forlorne, nor made abandon- ed by Idolatry , lupcrftition &c, and Errors intolerable, as D. Vern calls thofc of the Church Se£t: 19. 9 fixth text ( for I will count all the many texts, in the laft number , but for one ^ which might be vrgcd feverally , all having great force) lhall be out of the Pro- phet Daniel C. 2. v. 44, In the dajes of tbofe Kingdoms , the God of Heaven shall raife vp a Kingdome , vphhh shall not be differfed , and his kjngd^me shall not be delivered to an other people. And then tofignify the vaft extent , the manifeft vifibility, and Perpetuity of this Kingdome ( which is his Church, founded by Chriji) it foWowcthy And it shall breaks inpeeces and confume all thefe ( Idolatrous ) Kingdomes , and it shall ft and for ever. Bchould here , God promifing the Kingdome rayfed by him , that kingdome of his only true Church , which vifibly hath by its dodrine broak in pee- ces all Idolatrous kingdomes of the known world , and isib well fecured of Gods affiftance , to prelcrve it in quality of a kingdome, that , even in this quality, it (hall alwaies continue , and ftand for ever a glorious vifible Kingdome. And thus literally is fulfilled tha^,Luke 1. 33* And he shall reigne in the houfe of lacob for ever. Whence I argue thus,- No Church fallen into Herefy, fchifiiic, Ido- latry, Superftition; yea no Church fallen fb deep towards Hell, as to father grofle , and intolerable errors vpon God, delivermg them as divine Verities , can be fayed to be Gods Kingdome j or (beeingfo fouly fallen) to be his fiandlng Hhe Church is our infallible ludge Q 3 .S. 14. 207 ftandingKingdome-, or permitting groUe errors to raigne in quality of divine verities, to be the houfe oflacoby in which he reignes/(?r ever Thercfore,to verify thefe of Scripture, there muit be found, fbme ever vifible Church vpon Earth , a Church florifhing in quaiity of his ftancling Kingdome , not fallen into luch errors as you fay did ra- igncjbut a Church where hee^^nA, not any error may reigne* This Kingdome , fo (ecured from error , is that w hich I call Chrifts vifible , perpetual!, and infallible Church, The Houfe of our Lord ejtablhhed (fo as to ftand vifibly for ever) in the toppe of all Mountaines , and all Nations shall flow 'i^nto it.ad fay comeyadlet vs govp to the Mountain 0^ our lord^and to the Houfe of the God oflacoby in which 7;^ shall relgne for every an d he mil teacb vs his wayes and not groffe errors of fuperftition, Idolatry , and there he shall Judge among the Nations;Evcn who cannot give a falfe Judgment, and confequently infallible is his Tribunall ereded here in his Church, to fend forth his Decrees, by which he gouerns, and reigncs.If error be prefident m this his Tribunal,Er- ror (hould reigne, and notH^: I pray mark how fitly all the above cited texts agree with this interpretation , and how harmonically they explicate, and confirmc one an other. 10. It is alfo a thing moft remarkable how , at the very firft attentive reading of thefe texts , all thefe new vpstartfe(as(and Socinianilme a*s well as the relt, yea and fomuchthc^iooner becaufe it neverfloriftied in one whole P.r fli; ) how, I fay, all thefe new vpftart feds , prefently appear tobefo exceedingly vnlikc to Gods only true Church, which is forctould to be of fb vafl extent, fo i>lo« rious for the multitude, and magnificence of her prt^fei- [.ours yos Kings ;yea all Kings, Prmccs, and cheefc Potcn- lo8 The Church is our mfalUhle ludge 2.- 3.S. 14? tatcs of the Earth , fo confpicuouily vifible in all Ages> and placesjthat there isnoe tolerable interpretation to be thought of, by which thefe and fuch like Texts can be applied to any one of thefe Congregations. Take Protef- tanifme, and allow ktoconteyne all thefe newfangled Sects ; and yet all the profelTors of it will not make the thirtith part of Chrifl:endomc> although Chriftendomc be but the fifth part of the world. But take Proteftanif- nie as it was for lome twelve hundercd yeares before L/i- ther y and fo down ward , in every one of thofe twelve Ages to L«rfc^r ; and you will not find it to be thetenth thoufand part of the world , even by its own accovnt: Yea by true account it will be found not to have had one parifli anywhere* How then do fuch kind of Religions agree to thefe defcriptions of the true Church in the Scripture? eipecially if to the former places you adde di- vers others of the fame nature , As that Ifa: 49. ( which S.Taul Alt: 13, intcrpreteth of the Church) Tf is a light thing that thou should be my Servant to rayfe vp (only) the tribes of Jitcobil wilLalfogive thee.for a light toGentiles .that thou mayft be my Salvation vnto the end of the Earth. Kings shall jee^and arife ; ?rinc€s alfo shall mrship. Behould thefe shall come from farre , and loe thefe from the Worthy and from the Weft , and theft from the Land Sinam. Sing O Heaven , and be iojfull O Earth yXhe Children which th^ou shalt haue shall faj againeyThe place is too ftraitfor mee : give place to mee that I may dmll; Kings shall be thy Nurftng^-Eathers , aud Queens thy nurftng Mothers (They fliall not be thy Heads , or Governours, but) They shall bow down to thee with theyr faces towards the T^rth y and Uck^vp the duft of thy feet Cproftrating themfel- vcs to kilTe the feet of thy Supreme Paftour.) Tell mec now, of what Church /peakes this Prophei?where was it^ ^he Church is mr in/allihle ltiJ^eQ^.^. S.i4.log Read alfb his next Ghapter^ Kings shall walk in the bright'^ nes ofthyrifing. Theyr Kings shall Minijler vntothee^ And not Rule over thee , as thy cheefe Gouernours. And yet much more Cba^: 62. particularly^ii;/ Kings shall fee thy no'* tie one, with that other eloquet expreffio of the Churches vifible glorioufhes , Paj^eje, P^Pj^ through thegates, and prepare a y^ay for the people , and make the tourney plain , antL pick '^P /^^^^ y ^^(i "^P the figne to the people : BehoulA our Lord will make heard to the end of the jE^rfft.Forjas David faidrp/: 21. v 2S. All the ends of the Earth shall remember ^nd be converted to our lord, and all the families of the Gentle les shall adore in his fight. And Malachy 11. from the rljing of the Sunne even to ihe going down of the fame^my Slame shall be great among the Gentiles , and every where incenfe shall be offered to my name (as it is in the Roman Church,) and a fure offering (of Chrifts pure Body.) II. Thefe and divers fuch like palTages bee fo cleac of the vaft extent , majefty, and glory of the Church, with its perpetuity in all ages , that divers of our adverfa- ries , not finding any Church vpon Earth , but the Ro- wan , to which they could be applyed , and pcrfwading them/elves that the Roman Church was fal/e^ became fo wicked , as to deny all Chriftian Religion , ibecaufe they could not fee theyr own Scriptures verified in it , as it is moft fully Chewed in the Frotejlants Apology Trail: z. c. i. S. J. There you fliall fee how this confideration made ^hat famous Proteftant David George to preach againft i^hrift and his Apoftles. This made your cheif Paftour of Heidelbourg , Adam Nauferm, to turne Turk. This made your Alemanm to turne lew , having been a great difciple ©f your great 'Bez.a , with a multitude of others here in England , cited by the above named author. Now I con- ^ ~ D ' elude aiQ The Qhurchis our Jnfalllhk Judge Q^.i.S^4h elude , that Chriftianity cannot be maintained without fucK a Church , as is here defcribed , to be found fome-^ «/hereon earthy which Church canotbc found if thcRo- inan Church be fuck a Church as you make her.But whe- ther Ihee be Chrifts only true Church, and our ludgc, wee lhall fee here after. Now I go on^ SECT: XV^ It is proved out of the nel0 Tejlament, that the ^ Church is our infalUhle ludge in all ContrOf^ J)erJiesofFatth 1;%^^^^ O my fixe texts out of the ould Scripture I. adde fix more out of the new. Myfeventb- text then ijs Mat: 19. Vpon this Hock ^ ^itl j^^pl^^ build my Churchy (that Church which Chrift ^"SSi*^ foretould by the. Prophets to be.of fo vaft extent , fo vifible in all ages to the end of the vrotld) and the Gates of Hell shall nop prevail 4gainft if. Of this text !>• F^rii^ treateth in his whole twentih Sedion.Thc fiibftancc is 5 that the Roman Church, is but part of the Catbolik Cliurch j.and fo though the gates of Hell had prevailed againft hcr^yet they had not prevailed againft the Catho^ lik Church. Yet fay th h?e, Wee acknowledge that Hell gates did not privaile againft the Church of Rome to a fubverfton of the Vaith in it y or a. tot all infeilion of the members ofit, with Ml the errors an4 fuperftitions that prevailed in it*, 2» Although it be i>ot to my purpofe ( as long as 1 5;pntinue ftill in^ gcncrall fearch after jibme, infallible _ ^ Chwch^, The Qhurch is our infallthleluige Q^,S. I 2 1 f Church ) to pafle to thatparticular inquiry, whether this Church be the Roman or no , (of which afterward: ) yet becaufe this prime objedion may be beftfolved in this places I anfwer^that neither !>• Vevne^ nor any other Doc- tor , can find outvpon earth fuch a Church , djifFerent from the Roman , as hath been promifed in the texts of the former Chapter, to which all N/ir/Vw5 mretoflow , to which Kings and Princes were to minifiery vpbofe gates sh9uld ba Of en night and day , whofe Sunne should never fet &c: For by the Roman Churcli wee do not vnderftand the par- ticular Diocele of Rome 5 but wee vnderftand all iiich Churches as are joyned in Communion to the Roman , as members to theyr head. Had Hell gates privailed againft all fuch C hurches , where (I pray) had there vpon Earth bee found any one fingle Church againft which Church, Hell had not more prevailed , then againft the Roman? Name but one , and I am latisfied. But that one mtift 'b& Chewed to have been perpetually con/picuous to which all nations might flow , having Kings and Potentates of the earth Minifters vntoher^ info much that the Nati- ons which would not lerve her (as the Nations joyned to the Roman Communion would not ) fliould perifh.That Church muft have thefe and fucli other qualities, expref^ fed by Scripture in my precedent Section. Knowing yoti could not find e any Church vpon Eiarth fo qualified but the Roman , which taken ( as wee vfiially take it ) com* prehendeth the Churches of all Nations joyned in Com- munion vnto her, you are fotced fo to qualify your cen- lure of her errors preuailing in her, that you fay, theyfrC'- nailed not to a totall infection of the membersofit ,x^tth all the errors and fuptrftitlons that prevailedin it. Wow come you ^ know this j if it be not vpon record,thatfome confi* ' D d 2 deraWc inThe Church is our infallible ludgeQ^ 3 .5*. i derable quantity of men in All Ages (fufficient to confti- tute fiich a Church, as wee have leen Chrijls true Church muft be) did not aflent to all that was defined by the Roman Church ^ nor to other errors as great as hers^but kept themfelves to that which you call the pure dodrine vfChrifi : if this be not vpon record (as I was faying) then, you fay you know not what: If it be vpon record, begin to tellmee whothefemen were in thatfecond , third, fourth, fifth, fixt age after Popery,againft whom thefe er- rours prevailed not^ and I will trouble you with no fur- ther examination of your Re cords. You can as well eat a whole Milftone to breakfaft , as prove any fuch thing by any Records, 5. But you fay the Fathers interpreted this promifle,' of the gates of Hell notpreuailing againft the Church, of the not failing of the Church; and never of the not er- ring of it, Thofe who objed this, mark not that the cheif way a/failing is to faile by erring. How did the Church failc in the Dominions of the Arians , was it not by er** ring? And jfo of all dominions corrupted by Herefy. So alfo the whole vifi ble Church had failed, if the whole vi- fible Church bad propofed any errour to be believed for a point of faith^for to do this is to propofe alye as vpheld by divine authority,- which is to fall noleife foully then he fhould fall who fliould teach, God to be an affirmer and confirmer of Lyes. For whatfoever point any Church held as a point of theyr faith, they held it as a divine ve- rity, affirmed and revealed by God : Therefore if in any age the vifible Church held any Errour for a point of faith,it did failc moft miferablyjAnd yet your Proteftant Dodors generally tcach,that the only vifible Church did teach fcverall errors as points offaith. So, Fm accut TkChufchis m infalltblehdge Q^.i.S.lf. ill feth even the primitive Church of teaching the Millena- ry beliefe, and Infants Communion, though moft falfelj^j as our Dodors often have (hewed: Thus they throw dirt vpo Chrlfis vnlpotted Ipoufe. And as the black iEthiopias painted theyr Gods black : So your fouly erroneous Church would have all Churches to have been fouly er- roneous j asyou would have even the pureft Church to have been,had fliee propofed thefe two groflfe errors for divine vcricies.as you fay fhe did. 7. Yet to make a fhev/ of fbme thing like a Church^ P. Vern fayth ; the Gates of Hell mayprevaile^not to the ouer-^ throwing ofthefmdafmtall Sauingfaithibut to Superftrullio of hay^ ftuble and mrfe^ I mem errors in beleefe and prallife-, let fuch as may ftill be convinced bj the doctrine offauing faith ^fiill preferved in the Church. Withthefe fuperftrudions you charge the Roman Church^yet adding that shee hath the fmdamentall faith in expref^e tearmes delivered down in her^ atU fuch faving knowledge as was [undent to difcerne thefoun^ dationfrom the fuperfiyullHres. Alithis is confidently fayd by youjbut ftill (like your felfe) you end the matter, and offer no kind ofproofe : Neyther do you adde any one fyllable to iatisfy the great difficulties v^hich occurre in this confident afrertion,againft which I have fome thing to fay. Firft, to affume fuch Liberty to oui: privat felves, of Limiting that which the Holy Ghoft thought not fitt to limit ,- is to teach others to limit fiich texts aspromife divine affiftanceto Scripture V7ritcrs,and to the Apoftles, foj^s to fay in like manner, that they (hall deliver nothing againft the fundamental! fauinglaith, but yet that they may fuperadde a vafl multitude of theyr owne private phanfies, ^^raw^fi^ you cannot name a perpetuall vifiblc true Church> which Chtifi had vpon Earth, againil whic!i 2 14 TheQhuYchUmr infallible ludge Q^. i.Sa$1 tnis Error (for fo you call it) did notpreuaile, of ad0:jtt-« ting for an infallible truth whatfoever was propofed by the Church/Of this error(if it be one) you can afligne no. beginning in the Roman Church, (nor in any other Ca- tholick Church:) But this error is a fundamental! error, not only becaufe it layeth the foundation , vpon which infinite errors muft be built; but cheefly,becaufe it admits of no other ground vpo which to foud any divine faithj For it admits of Scripture it felfe vpon this only ground. See Sell: 20. n. 5. If this ground be an Error, the founda- tion of all the faith that is in the Roman Church is an cr«* ror , and an Error fundamentall , as properly as you can proue any error to be fiindamentall: For it makes the fo- undation of all our faith to be an error .Have you as good ground to lay (as you do Se£t: 6.) The Ariaii Hercfy is an error diredly fundamental!? Wherefore you muft needs fay that the gates of Hell prevailed againft the Roman Church to the Overthrow of fdndamentall faving faith. And then you will never be able to finde Chrlfta, true vim fible Church, by which you received your dodrin , your MifEon,yourOrdination,your Succeffion from the Apof* tlesrfor thefe you had not from the Greek Church*Thirdly^ as I iuft now vrged, every Church, to which you dare afi. firme the name of Catholike to have agreed, did teach all the Articles (hee propofed to be beleeved as divine veri- ties revealed by God : even the Gireek Church did this* But now, as it is damnable, even in matters ot fmaleft im- portance, to aiiirme with an Oath any Lye (becaufe wee ihouldtake God for a witnes and affertor ofour Lye;) fb it is a moft damnable thing to all diofe Churches , to propofe errours even in matters of fmalelt importance iox Articles jpftheyr faith , to be beleeved as divine vcri- ~' ' ties. The Church is our infallihle ludge.Q.i.S.if. iif tics, revealed , and affirmed, and confirmed by God. If the Roman Church,as well as all the reft, did this (as you muft fay (hee did) flie.e was no Church, but a Synagogue of Satan , becaufe fhe propofed Lyes to be beleeved equally to divine verities:, and thus did make the Spirit ©f Truth, to be the Father of her lyes: wherefore you muft needs fay the gates ofHell prevailed againft her fuf^ ficietly, to bring her (and thofe who followed her doftri- lie) to hell. Butwhen, not only the Roman, butalfoall other Churches for the laft thoufand yeares did this, where will you find Chrifi fuch a Church as Scriptures promifeffrom whichChurchyou didrcceive your doftri- ne, your miflion, your ordination, your fucceflion to the Apoftles. Vourtbly neyther you, nor any of yours , can teli (with any certaiuty),which be thofe particular points by the beliefe of which the laving faith is preferved fo,thar, if all tho/e points be held^ this faith is held intirely ; if they be not all held, fhee is loft. How blindely then do you proceed,when you affirme, that the Gates of Hell pre^ mailed not to the overthrow offundametall faving faith ^^vhich is more then you.can know, vnles you can tell in the be- Icefe of which particular points,, this fundamentall faith confifts. Doyou thinke this was done by prefervingjlltl in her fuch k^norvledge as was fu§cient to difcerne the foundation from the fuperjlrulture? If this ht enough, then Ariauifme-, or any other Herely, prcferving the Scriptures , and not having fiifficient force to abolifli the kiiovvledge of prin- ciples, by which, they may be reclaimed, , may be faid not to have erred in fundamentall iaving faith ; for you /ay that in the. Scripture all fuadaraentall points are ciearly fetdown. . 8 Now give weeieayc to^vrge the foxcc of my tc xt- 2 16 TheChuref/thnrinfatlihle ludgeQ.i.S.i^^ God buildeth vp5 a Rocke(a full expreflio of greateft Cc^ curity ) not any Church , but that very Church defcrib- cdin my former Sediqn out of the Prophets: And fo all that hath been faid of that Church^muft be verified of this,- with a reiterated pnomikythat the gates oj Hell shall not prevaile againft it : without breach of which promife this Church could not have erred fo notorioufly , as I have fliewed you afBrme all Churches vifible vpon Earth , to have erred ^ And particularly the Roman Church vfes to be ftiled by yours, idoUtrom , Super ftitioiis , the Seat of Antichrifi , the Synagogue of Satan , a Neft of Errors , covered mth an vniverfall Leprofiey overvchelmed with more then Cy^ merian darkenes , averted by apftacy from the vfhole^ Body of Chrifi. This IS the charader you give of the Roman Church : And then, when wee prefle you v/ith this and other clear Texts ; you , for your own ends , jfay,the Ro- man Church erred not fundamentally : yet your famous French Brother lohn Daille^ whofe book of Schifme hath been now twice or thrice publifhed in England, inex- prefle tearmes chargeth the Roman Church With funda^ met all errors overthrowing the foundations ofChriftianity.C.j^ And then in the next Chapter, he begins tofliewhow our opinion of adoring the Eucharifl: is a fundamental! brror,- in the proving whereof he laboureth even vntill his nineteenth Chapter, the title of which is^That there be very 1 many other beleefes in the Church of 'Rome which overthrow the foundation of our faith. And indeed he is the true difciplc li Of CalvlnyV7\io Injtit: 4. C. 18. fayth of vs ,• They made all t he Kings and the people of the Earth drunks from the ^r ft to the la^. Adde now to this , that which P. Whitaker Controv: , 4, r.3. confefl!eth in thefe words; In times paft no Rell"' gion but the Fapifiicall had place in the Churchy Therefore , < ^ (^^7 1 5 ^ I Tf^eChurch isourm/aMIehdge.Q^ h ) i ((ajr 1) if this Papifticall Ch^arch was fuch an oae as yours i ) deferibe it ; and if there were no other Church but this; i ) the gates of Hell prevailed againft all Churches vpon the ^( f I Earth. And indeed the very claime which this Church J ( maketh to infallibility , and her conformably prefEng all J I the world to fubmitt to her definitions , and hould them J |; for divine Oracles { if they be errors ) is the very bane of , 1 i Chriftendome.zs D* Tern calls it Se£t:z^. For vpon this prin- |j ciple fhee may oblige all to hould your Church ( which , you will fay is Chrljts pureftChurch)not to be anyChurch nt all, but a damnable Congregation of Herctiques. Hov/ then have not the gates of Hell prevailed againft her,' who teacheth the pureft Church to teach moft damnable ' Herefy ? And again, if Hell gates have prevailed againft Her ; againft what Church did they not , for a thoufand years before Luther ^ prevaile ? So much of this Text. o. My eight Text, to prove the Church to be our infallible ludgejfe cured by God from leading vs into any error great or litle is Mat: 18.17. Ke that mU not he are the Ghtcrchylet him bee vnto thee as a Vublican or HeatheniThevc-' fore 5 meerly for net hearing the Church , a man , acfcording ; to the true ludgment of God himfelfe, is to be held (and confequently doth juftly deferue to beheld ) asa Publi- can , or Heathen : But all men are obliged not to do that, ' by which fo heavy a ludgment may de/ervedly fall vpon them: Therefore all men are obliged to hear the Churchy . tlie meerly not hearing of her,deferving fo heavy aludge- mcnt 5 even in the fight of God j who faith in the next vcrfc ^ that the Churches judgment ( condemning thofe whorefufe tohearc her) flialibe made good , and ap- proved of in Heaven. No man therefore is ftcure in con- fcience, or innocent in the fight of God , who rcfiifctii ' oi Ec ■ to % I ^Tk Qhmch is mrhfdllihteludge Q^.^ I tofecar , or obey tiie Church* Henoe followcth^rj?, tjiat tiii^ Church caiinot errc damiiably , for fb a man in con* Ccicncc might be bound to follow a damnable error. S^- ^MiH/, hence folio weih that (bee cannot erre in ^iny finaM matter belonging to faith> for all men beeing bound tp bear Ji^r ^and follow what Ihee teachiethj and it beeing^ irnpoffibie any nxan fliould in conlcieace be bound to houldthc leaft faliity asan article of faith revealed by God ( for that were ito hould God a re vealer or affirmeiC of a Lye ) it foUowetk, that it is irnpoffibie the Church fliould ever deliver any fmall error for an Article of Faith.? In hearing and obeybg die Chiarch wee follow Gods Command : But no kind of Errour Litlc or great can W incurred by fpllowing Gods Command ^ Therefore in hearing and. obeying the Church wee can bckd inoot no kind of Errour litlc or great, lo. Now if any one reply,' that wee are to hear thc: Churc.h> fb log as fliee fwarveth not from Gods word* M^f anfwcr is j that to (warue from Gods word , is to erre:: But this text proveth Cbe cannot erre : thereforcLthis text proveth fliee canot fwarve fro Gods word. And indeed ^£ Jjie cpuld erre^r fwarue from Gods wordithe meerly not hearing, or not obeying her, could not deferve that a ma Chould be juftly accoutcd by God as a.publica,or Heathe. See here. N. i^.Others reply that this text is to be vender- ftood^not of hearing this Ch urch in matters of Faith andi rnbeleefe, but of matters of trespafTe between Brother ad' brother, which trefpafles are alfoto be tould to every par-»i, ticularChurch ad to feveralll?relatesiid thercforethispla-» ee maketh nothing tor the authority of the vnivcrfeU Church J afwer; particular trefpafles arc to be referred to particular PntaW iid that theChurch is m>t cp be a/scbled: f ; 1 j!!^ Chtird hour m/alM Inige% S- t^jttf \ \ in a generall Couccfl fdf eve^ty |^ri\ratc' mas trc^affe^SinH' H I galar privatemen ard to btJ concfct^tacd by theyrpar^iou^ \ \ lar Prelates of thcyr particular Cbtirches, proceeding ac* j ; cording to tile known that every matn, wlid i ^ifobeyeth the particnlarludges, iudging clearely aecorcf* M ing to the known Lawesotthe Commonwealth ,di/b^ i lieyeth die Commenwealth. And it is this refrarder t4 i difordet. W!^ence'yoii may eafi^^^ not obeying and foUowinig patticulat Prelates , in fo well ordered a Commonwealth as the Church is, doth commonly come to be the vety fclfi fame enormous Crime of not hearing the Church. And becaufe all particular Prelates of the Church are iuppoled (if the contrary be not notorious) to dotheyr duty in giveing fentence according to the known Decrees ^ orders, and Canons of the vniverfall Church , thofe who difobey the Prelates of particular tJhurches, muft (by no lefFe generall a manner of fpeak- ihg) be 4yd to difobey the vnivcrlall Church; as thofe, who difobey the Iudge,are fiiyd to difobey theCommon- wealth* So that at laft , this difobedience againfl the I Church, is againft chtfi and God himfelfe^according to which for doing fo, is truly ludged not fo much to dif- obey the Church, as to difobey God who gave the Com- miflion to the CKurcb: fee Sell : 22. 7;: And therefora Cbrift commanded the Lawfuil SucceUors of Mofes to be obeyed , in what they commanded (to witt, either by publik authority, or by the known dodrine or pra<2:icc lormerly ordered by publike authority^ ) although thefe Succcilbrs of Mofes were men^ not only wicke4 in theyr lives, but alfo did (on theyr private authority) teach er- .rours, and thatpublickly J Yet never , authorized by any^ one publik definition of the leat o^M/)fes. And they were thefe never-authorized crrours of theirs , which Cbrifi called the Leaven afthe Thari fees -^bidding bis Apoftles take li^ed of it. But now , for as much asconcerneth the doc* trine, which was authorized by the publik dcfinitiont of that feat,C/;rf/J wasib farrc from bidding, eve the com-* mon people, to take heed of it, tharbe fayd publikely, to the whole promifcuous UuUitudey and alf$toJifis difciptes^ : f *JlfiQhmchkmrmfaUlhleM i^^.iii r «j Kp^nthe ChajerofMofes have fitten the Scribes and Tharlfes ^ i All therefore XQhat foever thej bidde yoUy obferve^and d&. Mat: i ^13. V. I. Note thofe muft ample words (Atl therefore VPhat foever.) O ! will you fay, what if they bidde vs do 1- I againft the Scripture; what moft you do? I anfwer that, 0 1 iuft as you muft fay concerning that voice , which came y S ! from Hcaven,commanding(Mat: 17.)^^ hear our Sauiour^ IS r Ipfum audtteyVr^s not to be eluded by the Pharifcs fay i ng, n ; h^are him if he teach no falfity, but was a declaration from t Heaven, that he, who v^as fo vntverfallj to be keardy should be fecuredffom teaching anyfaljity: fee ScH: 22. n: fo alfo I thefe words. All therefore whatfoever ^ And theie words of the text I am now vrging , if any m an will not hear the \ Church &c, be words conteyning a declaration made by our Saviours own Mouth,that thq ould and new Church . So vniverfally commanded to be heard , were fecured from teaching any faKity. And I fliall anfwer,beforc I end ifcU your cheefe obiedions to the contrary , Si'ct: 2 3. II. Now as the Synagogues authority was to be heard In all Vfhat foever rfc^^^ ti/^ ^i^rfi? in matter of dodrine, and I not only in point ot trefpaffcs bet?wren Brother, and Bro- ' ther ; wee cannot (without notably depreffing the Au- thority of Chrijts Church, and eafting of it vndcr the Sy- nagogue) allow to the Synagogue ia power to be vniver- I fally heard atlwhktfoever / and yet confine the Autho- rity of C/?nj?i Church to thofe narrow limits of beeing 1 heard only in point of trefpaffe betwee Brother and Bro- ther; where as the Synagogue is but the Handmaide, the , Church the Soverain Lady , and hatb a better Covenant ' ijtabihhed vpon better prafnifes. Hebri The f^rce then my text is thi^, 1/ any one mil mi be^r the Church ^ even 1X5 trefpa(fe between Brother and Brother belonging to her Court) i^ribi>^^ acc^utHedas apuHkan^r ileathen4iiA^ much more, lot him to accounted if^he wi& ii6t licaie thcChurdh in (uch trei^aiJes which oiieBroth^r cotmnitts j^arinft ail his Brothers, aiid againfl: his Dcar-cft MotKeif 4ihe Church ^ this hecing incomparablf a crime moro* haylious, and fiiofe particularly belongiiig to the CourC of the Church j over wbicljji crime if Godhad not givca iher power, he had not given hex lufficient power for hetf ijwiie pre4rvation^ as every Commofiwealtih hath, and oi ^ceflity muft havciefpedally anaple a Comonwealth^ els was intended to be dilated ov^er the whole facc of tha Earth , and to be ^ftabiilhed in a vaft extent for or decree. And as the broaching of herefy, and the ftanding out in defence of II by Sphi/hic , is incpmparabjy more deftrudive to our Ikr^ber^q j an4 ofFenfiye to our Mother the Church, wliicn this is done by a great multitude or. a whole Natio^ fo, in thisCaie^ the Crime more.. Neerly concerns the Court of the Church:, and (bee is impoxvcrcd topalTeien-^ fence againft it which beeing no felTe, but rather more iuft , then in the fofmcf.Cafc,, will r*o kfle ? but rathen more. ai4 The Chrch is our Infallthle fudge 2. }Sif J more afluredly,be ratyfyed in heavcJ note this forCftritf fake, who , vnder pretence of Reformation, licenceth a whole nation to ftand out againft all other Churche!5.S:4« ' i^. Here fitly Cometh in the diftufling of that(whichr fomc inconfidcrady vfe, to elude the force of this Text;} that this fentence of the Church confifteth only in ant exterior excommunication , in which fhec may drrc, and the party (erroneoufly excommunicated) maybcaiuffe man in tUg fight of God. lanfwerj if wee deceive not our felves by putting a Caufe different firom that which concern ech the true vnderftanding of this text; the mat- ter will Ibonebe cleered. This text fpeaketh of one who will notheare, norfubmitt to the Church, after ftiec hath given fenccnce againft him: Give mee a man, who, in this cafe , doth not fubmitt to the Church 9 and this very not fubmifEon of his , cannot but be that very crime, for which Cftr// him lelfe houldeth him ac- countable as a Publican or Heathen 5 and afHrmeth that diis fentece fliall be ratified in heaven: wherefore it is im- poflible this Cenfure fliould be vniuft, if he be truly guil- ty of not hearing the Church, It is true that by fiilfc infor- mation , or fome fuch way , a man may be iudged to be guilty of not hearing the Churchy when really in the fight of God he is not guilty i and fo there may fomc times be an errour in the miftake of the fad : and thus CUvt er- rante , by an errour only in matter of fad (in which the C hurch is not infallible,) the fentence will not be ratified in Heaven. But this is nothing to the purpofe oi our ad- verfaries, who would have a man be innocent in the fight of God , who profefleth in many particulars not to conforme to what the fentence of the Church comman- deth all to conforme; for example to adore the Sacred Eucharift TheQhurch hour mfdUhle ludgeQ^.^.SAf.tij Eucharift &c,Every tnan who profelTcth this, profeflTcth not to hear the fentence of the Church , which is ftill by fcvcrc Cenfiiresprefling this vponhira. Wherefore in pronouncing fentence here (where the fad of not hear- ing the Church is maynteyned as good and laudable,) there ca be no errour in the fadifor they cdlcffc ad pro* fcffe that here they neither do, nor will hear the Church; agamft which they (withD. lerne Seil: lo) fay, they have Bvidenc4^ of Scripture, demonfiration ofReafon, and a conform-^ Me confent of Frimltive times , the pure ages of the Gbarclu Wherefore when the Church pronounceth thele perfonsj. fo notorioufly refradary,to be accounted as Publicas^or Heathens ; her fentence lhall be ratify ed in heaven ; anci cither Scripture muft be falfc, or thofe men guilty* 13. That all may clccrly fee what an empty boaffi thisis^ which D. F^rw^-, and others make of theyr having evidence of scripture againji what our Church teachcth;! chal* lenge him, or any other, to lliew, if he can , by Scripture enly (for that you all make yourludge) that the texts ivhich here I alledgc for the Church her beeing our in- fallible ludge , cannot be interpreted truely , as our church layth they are to be interpreted. For to (hew this,it is not enough for you to dcvife fome differet interpreta-* tion , in which it ispoffible for thcfe texts to be taken: 'F or it is no proofc to fay,Tte may be the true interpretation. Therefore it i$ fo: Or, it feemesprol/aUy to be fo^ therefore evU dcntly this, and other but this interpretation is true: But you muft, (and that by evidence ot Scripture only) fliew that thefe texts cannot be truly interpreted, as our Church in^ terpreteth themi and you muft proue by Scripture only, that the tradition , by which fliee hath received thele in terpretations, is not a true tradition defcended from the Apoftic ll6 The QhuYchk our Inftllthk ludgeQ^. |. Ss f Apoftles, For if it be a. true tradition (ihe contrary to which Cin never be evidently demonltrated x^ut of Scripture alone) fliee is grounded as well as thote who received theyr dodrine frooi Scripture only. For the Tounges of the Apoftics were as intallible as theyr pcn-» nes ; atid what they fayd , and caufed to be reduced to pradice all he world over, is farre lefle fubjed,to be ei* tlier counceneited, or miftakcn,then iheyr wridngs. Yon alio will never anfwer what 1 fay that thefe texts, which " BOW I am bringing for this pv)int, be as ciecr evideces out of Scripture for the Churches beeing our infallible ludge, :1s thole other texts broug^ht by you, and examided here by inee 5«(5t: io.be cieer cvidccesto detnoftrate tbatScrip« ture only i&to be our ludge ; which point, if you cannot make more evident out of Scripture then I can make this point|;t is manifeiijthat you ftand out againli all the Pre- lates of all the Churches vnder which you lived before your divifion , Without convincing chem by evidence of Scripture that you might and ought refufe /ubmiffion to thcnt; The Church th -n beeing in polfelEon of her Au-* thoriiy aver you , and not manifeftly convinced. by you With any evidence of Scripcure(of theEvidcncc ofv/hic|| th'^re is.farre more rcafon (hee fliould beiudge, thea j^ou.) you , for not hearing her, are by her iuil Icntencc denounced to be h:ld as publicans or heathens;, and this fcnrence is ratifyed in heaven. 14. My N/wr&^cext, to prove the Church infallible m feer Defininos and iud'^cnierits, is out of .SJ^^/^ i.Tim.j*. cal ing h r rfn ChU'rch &f t1h* living Gadjthe fUUr and ground' af tl>e tYuih: May not ail /ccurely rely in theyr faith vpoa th^ very pular of truth? May they not,mc>lt groundediy, ground th^yr faith vpon the very ground oi Xruch it jfeife? The Church is our wfallille IudgeQ.i.S.1 j. 2x7 felfc? what do wee fey more? Now I pray, what poffibi* lity can there be for you to fiicvv rby evident Scripture^ that this text is not capable of this interpretation, which cur Church gives vnto itfin place oflhewing this(which only maketh co the purpoic;) you go about to ihcw that text may have other interpretations , therefore {you in#i fer) this is not the true one:which is ii pittihiU airgumcnt. For what text was ever cited by iS.P/^«/>or other Apoftks, which might not have had lome other interpretation putt vpon it?T hus in place of brmgingxvident Scripture aga- inft vs, you ftiil bring your owne interpretations of ir^ as if Scripture (falliblv inteiprcted by you ) were to be our ludge. What text ha e you for that? If you fay,Scriptu« re interpreted truly, niuft be our ludgejbut you do inter- pret it truly; therefore Scripture, as you interpret it, muft beoutlu ige^ W hatheretik u iil not fay thus much for his damnable interpretations?Tell mcc then, what inter** pretation can bee dcmonftrated to be the only true one, which is different trom our interpretation ; which fayth thus ; The Church beeing the pillar it felfe of truth, wee may , without fear of ever erring, rely vpon her ? Shec beeing the very ground of truth it felfe,- wee are fecurely grounded, asiong as wee are grounded on her Authori* ty» W hat have you in Scripture only, to prove this inter- pretation to be manifeftly falfe; as you mufl: prove it aga- inft fo publik authority ? what (1 fay) have you out of Scripture only, to demonftrate this? NothingiBut, in place of bringing vs evidence of Scripture, fo vainly bo- •afted of^ you bring vs, for your beft aniwer, an interpre- tation ot your owne, which you (ay niuft be true, becaufe perhaps it may be true; Asiflfliould iufficicntly prove diat Jl, JBf muft be a theefe, becaufe perhaps he may be fo. F f 2 To ai8 The Omrch is our infalllhle ludge 2.- 3 -5. I f • To anfwer in the like forme, I ma^ as well fays this inter- pretation ofyoursmuftbefallc : be caufe perhaps it may bcfalfe* But let vshearc what your beft interpretation is*You commonly iay,therc is a double Pillar,and a dou- ble Ground: One pillar, or ground which is principal!, and that is theScr pture^an other pillar or ground lubor- dmate to the former, and that is the Church,. But this double dealing in diftinguilhing, hcipeth you not. The Church muftftillbe a true pillar and a true ground of the iiuxh.Thepofle beleeved God and Mo^es^Uyth the Scrip- tixic,Ex:i^*v.^i.lAofesysr2iS infinitely vnder God,andfub- ©rdinatc to him,-as the Church is vnder Scripture and fub- ordinate lo it ; and yet this did not hinder but that all the people didmoft truly beleeve Mofes , and ground theyr taith on what he faid ,• becaule they knew he had received what he laug .t from God* So all the fubordi- »ation the church hath to Scripture , doth not hinder, Jbut that wee may truely rely in our beleefe vpon the Church as the people reiyed vpon Mofes'^o^cczuk wee alfb knpw that what the Church teacheth, fliee hath received ftom God by Chrijl , and his Apofties. Again, the tradi- tion or dodrine ot our Church is as fecure , as the tradi- tion or dodrine of theChurch in the Law of Nature was for all thofe two thou&nd yeares which were before ali Scripture: but then men might (and all did) Iccurely re- ly on that Church as the pillar and ground of truth , on which all thcyr faith relied: Ergo they may now thus rely on C/jr//?5 Church. Again, what clear text have you to 'prove, that Chrifis Church is lefle fecured fro falfey,then that Church? Had not this ground been fure enough (a$ it had not if that Church had been fallible) the faith of all the world;r could not have been grounded fufEciently ■ " vpon Church is eur infallthle ludge Q. j.S. 15.129 vpon it : And that, which is moft to our purpofe , at that very time in which5.P4ut did call the Church the PilUr i$nd ground of the truth-, he did call her ib before the Canon of ihc Scripture was finiflied,bel:ore which timc,you your fclves confelle the Church might be , andwas fecurely relyed vpon, in allpoints of faith; And no one ChrilHari can, by any text, be proved to have then vndcrftood S# Taul to (peak thefe words of theChurch,as of a pillar and ground of truth fiib ordinate to the Canon of Scripture when itCbouId be finiflicd* How then comes this now to be the only true fenfe of Scripture? what text have you to jrove (and that demonftratively) that the Church of C/;yi/?,which, before any word of the new teitament was written , was the Pillar and ground of truths and that fa vniverfally , that £hee was fecured from propoung any cr- tour to be beleeved, were it great or litle:but yet {hcCjim- mediately vpon the writing of the Scripture (confirming this title vnto her) became leffc vniverfally a Pillar and ground of truth, and more fubjed: to errour then before? You, who will have nothing of moment held without cleer Scripturerfhew but one (ingle clccr text of Scripture for this. More again of this 16^ in the beginning W.I. 2. 3» 1 5:, An other Oiift to elude the force of my text, is,to Jayjthatby thefe words 5. Titul intended only to fet forth the office of the Chiirch,and nor her authority. For Gods {ake mark bow you handle Scripture againft vs. You fay you will hTmg evident dmonftrathn of Scripture ^ and now you bring your meer conjedures of ^. P4^^5 inward and fecret intention , known to God only. Letmee then ask you.What Text t els you cleeriy tha^ 5:. Paul had only an intention to fet forth th? Churches officc,and not her au- ' thority 2 5 oT7^^ Church h otir trfaUMhdge:^^.^.^^^^ thority? wherca<>,in fewer words,I think it fcarfe pofEblc more iiiily, and more cmphaticaily, to fett forth her in* fallible authority, then by tearming her the Fillar andgr^'^ md of lie Truth ; whic h words ftrvke fo ftrong vpon ouf vnderftandings, even at the firft hearing of them, that the firft conlequencc wee can make from hence is; thac^ fore vfron this pillar of truth wee may fecurelj rely in our be* itefe oftmth'yTherefere vpon thu ground of truth V9cemaj fafe^ ly ground our beleje^ Conccrnirg the office of this Churcfc no man thinketh^vntili he be f ut: i i mind, or hath' turned a while his vnderftanding to the learch of feverall inter- pretations. S, Paul then vfing words as {iifficicntto dc-i clare the infallible authority of the Church,as men in or-» dinary {peach vfe to do, yea, vfmgamoft Exprellivc Meiaphore^which comeih fully home to this intentjwhat do you but tell vs your bare conje&ures (and thofe moft wcakely groundcd)\^ hen you tell \ s,you know his inten- tion was not to declare the authority of the Church* So* me prove this weak conjedure by an other weaker : for they fay , to what purpofe was it for 5. Paul inftruding Timothy, how to behave himfelfe in the Church of God^ to fet forth vnto him her infallible authority f I anfwer, that is was not only much to the purpofe to inftruft all j)ofteriry in one of the moft necejTary points j but alfo it was moft pertment to that particular end of moving TU motbj to behave himfelfe irreprthenfibly in the Church , becaufe flieewas conftituted the Publike Oracle for all the world, that ail in all ages might come to her for fecu* tc diredion in theyr faith, and for aflured decifion ofall Ulcyr controvedies (fliee becing the Pillar and ground of truth) S. Paul thought fitt to admoniih Timothy , and all other Prelates in bis per/on^ fo to behave themfelves, as "^k Church Is our infMble ludge Q^ ^. S. 1 231 as n^tjby theyr luildemeanour, to make men think it im- probaoie Uut God thould give a perpetuall iniaiiible ai- liliaacc to iuch a Church , whole prinae and firft govcr* Bours (tW^ho Ihouid be the patcme of the reft) lived fcan* daiouily; or lefl'e Godiy. How mu.h do, {tiot your mul- titude only) but even your greateft Dodors, think them* libives to lay againd the Church of Rome , claiming this iiifaliibiiity (yet improbably lay you^) becaufc her Prela- tes have been avantiGus,,crueIl,. lalcivious, orotherwilc fcandalous ? This indeed is a pittifuil argument > for fo it fliould be proved improbable that God aillifted infalli- bly wicked men to write (without the leaft crrour) fomc parrs of the Holy Scripture* And yet wee know Davti was both an Adulterer and murderer Salomon was an Idoiater^w&a mm afm AfiorotJ) the Goddejfe of the sidonidns^ snd after Mic horn theiakmmation of th Amoniusii.K'mgs.ii* v* 1^.7.01 diverfe bookes wee know not the Authors, and fa wt:e caunot tell whether they wer e good or badde.YeC ts pittifuil an argument as this is , wee know it troubletb Weak Saules^and thcrciore you vfe it; againft vs. Where-^ fore, to take away all icandaU from thtic Ltkones, it ,was very convenient that BiUiops^^e Specially thofe who firft held e that place in the Ciiurch ( as Thnothie did ) fibouid be bimeles, cortlnent^ vigilant^ l&kty of good b bavU Otur 8cQ For iiich good preccpis as chele were Ixcre gi- :yen by Sw P4^«/, as mu h aiakmg to his purpofc;, to main- ,taine the credit of fuch a C^iurlh as might leem to aU,iitt to bc that which mdecd was canft tated th<- Pubiikc Oracle of the world, the PiLar. and ground of truth. 16. My tthtb text is out of the lait words olr SMatthcvi*^ Soyoti tfhrefore^And teaib all natiotis^hpl^ing t.befn-^&a 1m. 1 4im witkjoM dmji > even iu th^ but alfo acc ording to manifeft reafon , thefe words were fpoken as a promife both to thena and to theyx fiicceflbrs for ever,by whom they were for ever to be teaching all Nations, and baptizing : and confe* quently this promife was made to the aflcmbly of Tea- chers 5 Dodors, and BiChops of that vifible Church , in ^hich they were vifibly to performc all that belonged to the inftrudion of all Nations vnto the worldcs end. That Church which had no {uch vifible becing in all a- ges, hath no (hare in this promife 5 for who is not the party to which the promife is made , hath no part in the promife. You then , having no fliare in it , envioufly la-« botr to lelien it, by laying^that it is not to be vnd^rftood that there fliould be a^quality of afliftancc in all agcs,fc- curing the Church at all times, from all crrour in every age > as fhee was fe cured in the firlt age , when Cbee was governed by the Apoftlcs j And after they had written the Scriptures,therc was no further need of any other in« fallible Rule j a lefTer afliftance therefore might ferve aC» terages. lanfwcrthat this is only to tell mee what you think might be fayd : but where is y our evidence iff Scrifm^ f , to demonftratc that the afliftance God promiffed was indeed extended to infallibility in the firft age 5 but was not fo in any other age ? I aske for infallible texts , and not for fallible reaibns : Though I muft tell you, that according to rea{bn,after the firft age (when the Church was now grown firoma graine of muftard/eed to be a vaft txcc , extending her branches from Sea to5ea , and ft ill growing to a greater extent ) in proecflc of follow^ "The Church U our tnfalUhleludgt.^^ 335 ing ages , there rauft needs , in fbhuge a cornpaflTe of the world , unbracing men of different vnderftandings , dic« tamens , principles , educations , inftrud:ions , humors , and wills ; there muft C I fay ) needs happen in the pro- greffe of many ages ( ftill removed further , and further from Chrifis time , and the dayes of his Apoftles) a world of Doubts, debates, and controverfies , fome affirming filch and fucb Bookes to belong to the true Canon of Scripture , others rejeding them as Apocripha. Some affirming fiich and fiich Copies to be the only true vn- corrupted Copies of thole Bookes, others affirming thofe Copies to be corrupted , and others different from them to be the only true ones. Andagaine after they had a- greed vpon the true Bookes, and the true Copies(though perhaps they might in that agree in a fundamental! er- rour ) yet they would be fure mainly to difagree about the true lence of thofe copies .Why then might not Chrift^ to fecure his Church from erring in fo important Con* troverfies (vndecidable by Scripture,) promife al/b an a/Eftance extended to infallibility in latter ages , as well as in the firft age ? For infallibility was given to the A- poftles, not fortheyr own fakes, but for the good of thofe whom they were to teach , and to fecure them from errour. Now the Chriftian people of after ages were in- comparably more in number, and theyr very number made them incomparably more fubjed ( in proccfle of many ages ftill remoter from Chrift ) to be led into inex*- tricable errours i wherefore furely they did exceedingly need this infallible afEftance , given , as I fayd , for the peoples fake. Thofe who had been inftrudcd by the A- poftles, before Scripture was written , converted and ini- ftruded thoufands , who never had heard any Apoftlc 554 ^^^^ Church is our infallihle ludge 3 .5. 1 5. preach: AH tbefe Beleeved vpon the authority of the then prefent Church > and theyr faith was infallible y therefore that Church , which was then before Scripture , had an infallible afSltance to fecure her from propofing any er- rour. What Scripture tells you fliee loft this alBftance when Scripture was written f And that men could not rely vpon her authority , when now , befides the help of tradition , (he had alfo the help of Scripture , to rule her fejfe by ? See this more fully S. 16. n. 2. You fay,this in- fallible afliftance waslelTe necefTary for her after fliee had received the Scripture.! might fay,ir was more neceflary; becaufe in proceffe of time heretikes would arife , who would affirmc the Scriptures to have beepurpofely writ- ten to be our fole and only Rule of Faith ; and this they would fay of Scripture as interpreted by them,and not as interpreted by any infallible, vifible interpreter. This he- rely , into which all heretikes have ever fallen, maketk the neceffity of an infallible afliftance greater after the writing of Scripture , then it was before. Again , what Scripture teis you that God is fb sparing in his providing meanes.for the diredion of his Church , that, giving them Scripture, lie will fubtrad his afliftance formerly c;xtend.ed to infaliibilicy , and not leave them with theyr ISibles in theyr hands , to go which way every one in his private judgment (hall think fitteft , with out the former diredion ot a publik, vifible , and infallible guide ? Had wee not better have kept fuch a guide ftill? D.Terne could not but acknowledge, thjt fuch a vijlble infdlible ludge , or Vmpireofall Chriftendome y muld { if to be had) be a ready, memes to compofe all differences, and.rejlore truth and Veace. 5. 27. The Church was diis infallible vifible ludge before Scripture was written j and it is aUa confelled , thatiucb ~ ^" aludgc ' i The Church is our infallible ludge Q. l.S.l^. 35 5 |; a ludgc would now , after wee have the Scripture, be an 8 exceeding benefitt: why then do you fay , God took a-^ way this inellimable guih from his Church with one I hand , when he gave the Scripture with the other 5 there I not beeing the ieaft text in Scripture for fo iniportant an afi'ertion?! think anyone would hould it moft raflito fay, that SAohn the Evangelifty after he had writt the laft words of the whole Canon or Scripture, prefentlyloft his in- fallibility in teaching, inftruding guyding , interpreting &c : Why then ftiould the whole Church of Chrifi loofe that infallibility which confefledly fhee had before the Canon was quite finilhed ? Again , you cannot fay the Scripture was fuperfluoully written,though theChurch, before the writing thereof , was an infallible guide: How then can you fay the infallible guidance of the Church is > foperfluous, after the writing of the Scripture Jefpecially, beeing fuch an infallible guidance is even now confelled to be lo ready a meanes to end all controveriies; which among thofewho adoiitt no fuch guides, are endles. See alfo my next Seel: n. i, 2. ^.Chrift therefore, not only kn the firft age , but even to the confummation of the ' worldjis with his Church ; But he is not with thofe who introduce^ and father vpon him , as the firft Reuealer thereof, many grofle, and intolerable Errours,and Itiper- ftitions,as you call thofe which you found in all Churches vpon the face of the Eartiijthis laft thoufand yearsiThere- fore thefe laft thouland yeares he was not with his Church , or ellje her errours were not fuch as needed Co fadde a Reformation as yours was,to the difturbance of aliChriftendom. If her errours were tolerable, they Ihould (to auoid fo great mifchcefes} have been tolerated: if . , diey vcre intolerable, how was cf)r}fi with her? Or what ' G g 2 ether The Church is our infalUhle ludge.Q^ iS.i other Church can you name whofe errours were not as^ incoler\ble? Now that all iruy clearly fee^that this promifa of Chrift affured the Church of an afliftance extended ta an iniallible iecurity from all errour fundatnentall,or not fundaincntalh this will appear by that farther, and fuller explication made of this promiie in S, lohfiy who writt oa parpole to explicate more fully fome points , leffe folly let down by the former Evangelifts* I My. eleuentb texs then is out of SU lofe^f, where C. i^l V, 15. Our Sauiour faythf I veM praj the Vather And he i^ill give pji an other Comfarter ^ thatbe ma-j abide VHth pufi^ emt y even the Rfmt of Truth whom the world cannot receive^ Aud V. 27. The Comforter which is the Eolj Ghoft whm the Tatker wiil fend in my ^.tm^^ h€ shdl teach jou all tkingiy ani fuggcfi vntoyou^ all thidgs whatfoever I shall fay mtit yot^ (fundamentaJ or not-hiudamentalkjAad C. 16. v. 12. 1 have j€t many things to faj vntif you (the fundamentalls be not many th'.ngs,as you all conl'ciVc; ) ilow ke it y wken th^ fiirit of Truth is come^ he mil guide you into all Tmr&,not on^ ly fundainentall,but alfo not-fundamentall>which belong, to^thoie many things which I( who have tou d you ihingf fttndamentall) have not yet tould you. lathefe things thuSpirit mil guide yowinto atl Truth. But all Truth ex;clud- eth all Errours, not only in fundaiBentall , butalfo in Bot-fundamentall points. You know not which points be: fundamentall,which notjvvhich deftrudive of Salvation, which not ; which curable, which incurablejYet £;are not: be eeve theChurch in teaching thefcjor any other pomts;. for Chec, guided by chis Spiric of Truth, will guide you into all Truth : But yau wiil fay , How long* ftiali her cheefe Paft<^rs have this great privilege? F(?r^z^^y,fayththe foft partof my Text; by wh ich words it is made evident " - " that The Church is our infallihle ludge ^ ^. i "^.^y that th^ promifc was made ,not only to them for themlel- ves(they not beeing to live/i?r ever teaching vs thefe Tru- thesi) but alfo for they Succeflburs in the prime govern- inent of the Church, who were to guide the People into all Truth ^wr^as I (hall prefently Ihew farther out of 5. t^uU I argue hence (iuft as I did before^) This alEftanca l^hich was promiffed /ar ever , was evtr-^ and in ail ages» performed ; therefore inthofe ten ages (which made the thouland yeares before your R eformation} this promifc was performed Therefore what All the prime Prelates of the Church did teach all that while for truth, was not err oneous> or fuperftitious : But in all thele ages they all confeiledly did teach for truth thofe very points ^ which you hauld to be our groffcft errours; Therefore thefe be I^Qt errourSjbut truth. Here you fee again e clearly , why this great promife cannot belong to your Prelats or other Goverrhours of your Church, as it is different from ours* J/>j?3, becaufe you had no viiible govemours at all of your Church as diftind from ours. For Govemours muft needs be vifibly cliofen^ have vifiblc fubjeds, fend forth yifible decrees &c. Name fuch governours as thele di& feient from ours > if you can. You can name none but ours. With ours- then ov\^ thcBd) GhofiaUde^dzll thefe xg^^guidmg them mo di Truth. Whence Secondly it follow- Cth , that he cannot now be guiding your govemours irtto ^11 tvuth ^ they beeing manifeftly guided into opi- i^iipDjS dire(ily oppofit ta thofe dodrines which were, all ^q{& Lafi thou/arKl yeares , taught by al! thole who were govecnours of the Church Jf you could fliew govemours ©f Churches in ailchele laft ten ages ftill teaching thole po.iats> ia which you di.^er from vs without teaching (Qth^ £Ui>.toiui^.^r^^ thm^ ifidecdy^u ia;iight have 5 j8 T/^e Church is ottrlnfallihle Judge Q. i.^.l^"] fome colour to plead, that this Spirit of Truth might as truly have been fayd promifed to the governours of y our Church, as to thofe of ours: But this promifc, not beeing' jperformed to theu> (there beeing no fiich perfbns to be found in thofe ages) was not doubtles promifed to them; ochervvife Chrifis promife had not been performed. i8. Uy twelfth and lafi Texty (hewing clearly that this promiled alEftancc was extended to inl:allibiiity,is. ^hefi 4» Whence appeareth that the end, and intention of Chrifi in giving the chiefe Gouvemours of that Church C which was to be vifible in all Ages ) was flich an end , and fuch an intention , as could not be compared by giving vs fuch cheefe Gouvernours , guides and inftruc- tors in beleefe , as were meerly fallible , and who might lead vs into circumvention of errour , even then , when they were legally aifembled togeather to deliver the Truth jfrom theyr high eft Tribunal!, in a generall Coun« cell. For had all thelc our cheefe Gouvernours, even then ,been lyabkto broach groffe errours, vented for divine verities ( and prefl'cd vpon all to be admitted as fuch) how had Cfer/^ obtained that end for which he gave vs thefe our prime Gouvernours , guides and in- ftrudors ? Vor hegave fon^e Apoftles (fuccecding alwaies in full Apoftolicali outhoritic, as wee lee in S. Vemrs fuc- cefTors; ) [ome Prophets ( thofe fayth S. Thorn. 12. Rom. Vm 6. Are called Prophets m the new Teftament who ex- pound the Propheticall fayings wiih that Spirit with v/hich the Scripture was written:) and fome Evangelifis ( that is Preachers of the Ghofpcl ; So Philippe is called an Evangelift Ail: zi.v.i. So 5. Paul bad Timothie do the work of an Evangelift. Tim,^. v. 5. ) fome Pajtors and Team {hcrsi whofe offices are morcknownc. Butto what end did . I The Church is our tnfalUhle ludge.Q^ ^.S. i J.J 39 ti didhegive all thefe? ItfoUoweth; For the fer felting the I Saints. How pittifuUy ftiould they beperfeded by ob- J truders of grofle intolerable eriours for divine verities ? I Tor the mrk of the w/wi^^^r/i how pittitully alio had inch i men performed this work? Tor the edifying of the body of ) Chrift: fuch Broachcrs of Errours had been fitter to work { her deilrudion. How long did God intend to give ail t thefe forts of perfbns , of which fome were to be endued \ with the plenitude of Apoftolicall authority , and confe- \ quently with an infallible authority; How long, I lay, did^ j God give fuch to his Church ?r/7/ me all come into the vni^ ty of thefaith',which will not be^vntiii the laft dayes of all: ! Wherefore vntill the end of the world, the world fliall be provided. But arc wee, by beeing thus provided , fuffi- ciently fecured from all Errour? 'The next verfe will tell ! you,that this was Gods chiefe intent; That wee hence forth be no more childeren tepd to and frOy and carried about With every winde ofdoltrine , by flight of men and cunning craf tines ^ whereby they ly in vpair to deceive^ Gods end then was fo to provide vs of ameanes,by wbich wee might befo fecured . in our belicfe that no mans craft or cunning might be able to tofe vs to and fro^^ as wee fee now all they are, who hould themlelves abie to bring evidence of Scripture , j againft all thofe who for the lail ten ages have been Apo- fties , Prophets, Evangcliits , Paitours^ and teachers in Chrifis vifibie Church*. ! 151, To elude fome of my texts , our adverfaries vfc to fay; wee muft indeed hear the Church , as long as fhee tcaceth what is conformable to Scripturciand.fo iojig the gates of Hell fhall not prevaile againft her; fo long,and no longer , fhee is the pillar and ground of auth , and God ^H!? 1 ?^^vvcr^r^;That in conlequcnce to this 3 ^oTk Qhmh is ourlnfaltihleludge Q^*] S. 1 5^ ! the father of lyes himfelf may be belceved fo long as he teacheth comformably to Scripture. Secondly who feeth not how ridiculous it is to f^y'^me shall heare the truth from the Church as long as shee doth not teach again^ the truth. I3 this to be the pillar of truth ? A ftraw is a pillar as long as it bendeth not , and quickfand is fure ground vntill it yeelds.Blafphemous is the sefe which maketh Cfrr//? Ipcak non-fenfe. As all by a voice from Heaven were biddc %o hear Chrifty fo all are bidde by Cimftxo hear his Church: her governours therefore fliall never come by vnaniraous conlent to propofe lyes for articles of faith. For if all ] fhould teach a lye (as every errour againft Scripture is a i lye) with who is that promife made good, that thefpritof truth should guide them into all rm&.If wee may be mifleled by all thofe guides which God gave his Church , to the end that mehence forth he no more children tofedtoandfro, and carried about &c : how fhort did God fall of his intent in falling vpon fuch guides as bceing lyablefo to fwarue from the Scripture , muft needs leave vs , yea make vs | tojfed to and fro. Read but over the texts I cited laft Sedio \ out of the ould teftament,and you (hall fee how flatly this ! interpretation oppofeth Gods word , Vffhich shall never de-^ 1 fart from the Churches moith^ nor her Seed^nor the Seed of het \ Se^d &c. See alfb my anfwer above,«: icTfoirrf/j^^thus you ' will leave no Text to prove fliee (hall never erre in fun- damentalls: for you will ft ill be anfweredjthat ib long as ! in them (bee teacheth conformably to Scripture, fhee fhali not erre in them i But if once in them fliee teacheth not conformably to Scripture , ftiee (hall erre even in them,- and fo Chrift fhall have no Church. 20. Having now ended the complcat dozen of texts brought partly out of the ould Scriptures, manifcftly promifling T!he Q)urch is our infalUhle ludge.Q^, ^.S. 1 5.^4 f promifing infallibility tx) Cfer//^ Chu^^ partly out of the iicw , manifeftiy conferring the fame: I cannot but defire all thofe who read thofe lines out of a defirc of finding the truth , that they would ftay here a while , and examin carefully whether thefe texts be not clearer, and come not farre more home , then thofe texts which were the beft D, Verne brought to prove , that Scripture by it felfeis fo our infallible Judge. See thofe texts examined SeS^. 10. See alfo if you have any thing neer ib good grounds out of Scripture for any one of thofe 24. points which I have Chewed to be neceffary to falvation , anS for which confequetly you fay you have deer Scripture* Conferre thefe with the beft you have for the keeping the Sunday, for baptizing infants &c, Which I have here exammed and ask your owne confciencc, whether you can be able to give your owne ludge a reafon why you did not heare his voice , fpeaking farre more home In thefe texts , then he did in thofe ? Laftly , I again call vpon our adverfaries , to fliew by evidence of Scrifture ^ if they can, that thefe twelue texts here cited by mee , are not capable of that interpretation which wee,conformab- ly to our Churches dodrine , have given them. Butftill wee note that they fallfbort of doing this , fo long as they only fliew, that it is poflible to invent fome different in- terpretation of thefe texts, from that which wee have given them: for fo even the texts which the Apoftles ave interpreted out of the old Scripture , may be (hew- ed to have been capable of other interpretations, though the interpretation they gave them were very true ; you muft then fliew, and that by evident dcmonfiraticn, that the interpretation which our Church givcth them, is not true i Or elfe vaine is your boaft, that you heare not our Hh Church 541 The Church is ottr tnfdtihle Xudge %^l^S. Church, be caufc ^fou have evidem demonftrattan of ScriptiiY^ againfi her ; For no lelFe can fuffice againfl: fo pubiik thority, even according to your own principles* SECT: XVI, Tl^e Jame is prol?ed hy fij>erall ^eafom. He firft rcafbn , why the Church muft needs furniflied with fome infallible meancs bcfides the y& of Scripture , ( which vfe is not infallible though th^ f . Scriptures be infallible ) is taken out of that which I touched vpon(5r. lo, n.tj.) to wit ; that there is no Rea 'on , nor any one fingle text, teaching that the Church in the Law of Nature, ihould be (aid to be pririlcdged vvtth iivraliibility, above the Church of Chrifl: in the Law of grace : But theChurch in the Law of Nature , which lafted for two thoufand yea- res ( vntill the fiHt writing of Scripture by Mof^j) was all that while infallible in propofing true traditions, and not fo much as lyabie to propole falle ones. This I prove, be- caufe all the faith which thi true beleeving people had in thofe two thoufand yeares was infallible , though it re- lyed only on the propofall of theChurch ^propofing fuch, or liich a point as received from God revealing to Aditm er ibme oiher Patriarch thofe verities: for exaaiple, tha,t they were to obferve the fabbofh, Gen. 2. the diftmdion between cleane and vncleane bcafts ad meates,Gwhich> fro thebegining of fhe world vnto thc finifliing of the laft book of Scripture ad publifhing of the fame^had been the commo pradife of true beleevcrSjdid presetly turne to be Popifli,ad viilawfuUJ canot coceave: But I a fure all our adverfaries ftoutly affirme that it is foj ttud here theyr part is affirmative/ and affirmative of th e vnlawfulnesof that w hich from the begining of the world' was ever lawful! vnto that day. Wherefore to plead aga^ inft fo long a prefcription (that the world was not capa- ble of a longer) for introducing a new obligation pf not beleeving vpon a ground which had been, for above four thoufand yeares , able to beare all the fiith of the World, evidence ef Scripture ought to be brought: What' then more reafonable then to ask of them to cite it ieaflr one fingle cleare Text, commanding all the be;ecverv of Cbrifts Church to give over relying vpon her authority, as now never to be any more infallible after the finifhing and publifhing of the laft booke oi Scf ipture?Our adver-" laries cannot bring any ftich text affirming this clearly, without wee wiilbe pleafed to take theyr fallible and vrn grounded intcrpretaticms to be a ground fure enough to make the Texts reach "home to the proof of what wee demand: j ^ d-cmad: which camiot be allowed by vs^bccaufe,by theyr 0wne confeflion > theyr interpretation is fallible; And V wee muft have an infallible ground to overthrow an in- f ) ^Uible authority, ftanding fure even from thebcgining of tf the world. Call then , and call again and again^tor this i f text .> and be lure to allow no Ixiterpretation to help the : I t^xt jtaxeach home, but iiich as can^ by clear Scripiure, ! I be fliewed to convince that the Text tells you evidently, i 3 chat after the finiihing and publifliing of the laft book of ' I Scripture, no bod:y W3.$ ever to rely vponthe Churches I jtuthority,now growo fallible, though ever before infalli- ble. Do but ftaftd clofe to this , and theyr vain boaft of AeiBQuftrating this by Scripture, will fall down dead bc- fcre thy feex to be trampled vpqn by thee. Yea , not to condecEtue theyr owjq Bretheren the Lutherans (who de- ny the Apocalyps or Revelations to be Scripture) they will tell thee that for diyc^r(e ages this Book was not lM)Own to be certain Scripture , and yet perhaps this was tixe very laft Booke of Scripture , vntil the publilhing of wiiicb the infallibiiity of die Church was to laft. IF this be I fp JshfiUiyou nauft allow it probable that the inf;^llibility of I &e Church lafteth vatill tkis y.ery day, for any certainty ysfi^c have pf the contrary : Foj: your Lutheran Bretberen 1 w\\ fay,r^hat Book of the Apocalyps was never as yet fuffi- cdcndypublifhedto the Church to be Scripture; for if it I uwre ib, they i;ieytber could,.nor would rejed it. Secondly I it fcemeihiaconceptible how the writeing and publjfhing &ch a. Scripture^ .as was at laft wiittea andpublilhed^ • ftiOiul4awithout any difticuS.er iicclaration then the Scrip- I ture,by litleandlitle:(thatis , aspcQple were pleafed to I cppy it out)i£hGUjild make invalidj? the hitherto-ijiiallible j awi^iority ^f ihi&G^rdh thej:$ .Ueeing ia thi$ Scripture •weluc 348 Hhe Church ts our Infallible Judge % ^S. iil twelue texts at the Icaft (as I have flicwed in the two £br-i mer Se<9tions) recommending to all, the authority of the 1 Church;befides divers others bidding them hould ftill her j Traditions, and inculcating this over and over again ; as \ I (hewed Sell: 10. n. 9. Traditions do not grow weaker^ but ftronger, by being witneflTcd alfo by writing; and the more authority the writing hath, the more ftrength is ad- ded to the former tradition: For example, wee know by tradition there is (uch a place as the Indies, where gould | is to be found J but when our own fleetes come toga 1 thither , and fetch the gould from thence , and in tefti- mony there-offtampe goiilden peeces with this infcrip- tion, Brought by ourfleetfrm the Indies ; and when A<9:s of 1 Parliamei;it come to be kt forth concerning the value of 1 iiich, ad fiich peeces; whe I fay this goulde-printed-tefti- 1 mony comes forth,is not the former traditio grownrather ■ 1 more, then become leffe credible?So whe any of the for« i mer moft credible traditions come to be now written la j the goulde letters of the Scriptures,and of fuchScriptures 1 as commanded Traditions to be heid j and commanded ] again and againe the Church to be heard , followed, [ \ obeyed , relyed vponas the very pillai' and ground of h ( truthj'is not her authority and the credit of her Traditions i r rather increafed, then leflened,by this goulden and divi- ne writing? Again; it was wholy necelfary thatif aft^r s l the finifliing of the Canon, the Church was no longer to : ^ be infallible , that notice tliereof , by fbmc very publikc > ^ pecree,or Ad, fliould have been given to all the people \ in the Church ; that they might not goon , grounding thfeyr fayth vpon the infallible tradition of this Church, 1 as they did before ; leaft fo doing they fhould rely now, \ nxiot vpon the pillar and ground of truth, but vpon a fal- / liWe hi . r " . The Church is mr infalUhle Iikl^e Q. ^.S. 16*349 lible authority. That this was done you can prove by noc kinde ofteftiraony. 3. But I can prove , by a moft grave teftimony, that, long after the finifhing of the Canon of Scripture the faithful! beleevers ftill held on theyr former manner of relying in theyr whole Faith wholy vpon the inialliblc authority of the Churck : juft as I laid before that, when Miffes gave the S cripture to the lewes , the faithful! people among the Gentiles had notthefe Scriptures, but con- tinued ftill to beleeve vpon Tradition only ( See my firft Number : } My teftimcny is out of S. Iren^us , who was difciplc to 5. P(?/)'t^^rp , though he lived a hundred and fourleore yeares after Chrifi.This faint, in that vnqueftio* cdwork of his againft Vdentinm* I. 3^C. 4. Where he (heweth,in what manner wee were all to beleeve the fame things which now wee do beleeve, although there were no S cripture at allj and he iheweth this by (hewing how, €ven after the writing of Scripture, many whole Nations did bcleeve,who had never feen the Scripture,by follow- ing (as an infallible Rule} that order of Tradition which had from hand to hand been dilivered to the Pre- lates of die Churchy and by them to the Churches of which they rclpedively had charge.For thushe fpeaketb; What If the Ap^fileshad not left vs the Scriptures? Hujf vaee not Irave follow; ed that order of Tradition vphich they delivered ta tho(e towhofe charge they left the Churches to be governed? To thts arder of Tradition^hy the vnv;rritten word ) many barba^ rjous Nations do affentyVpho have beleeved in Chrifi without any Writings heping diligently the ancient Traditions, Note^ that he calleth thefe Traditions ancient becaufe they had ftood a good while after the finifhing of the Canon, be- fore.- which time all Nations beleeved meerly on Tradi- 1 1 tion. 3 JO The QhurchU owXrifalllhk \udge 2-^. S.i6 tion,asI fayd, and before which time , no one tradition ofGbriftian faith could be ancient. HcncQ then S. Irenxut proueth, that wee might beleeve with divine faith, vpon the fble account of, or meerly relying vpon, that very tradition, which the Apoftlesrf^/^rfl^^ left to thofe to who they left the government of the Church j although the Apoftles had never written any thing at any time. S. Ir^* 7?jef(5 therefore did beleeve that the tradition rf^ failolcft by the ApoftleSj was a fiifficient ground to vphould divi-^ ne and infallible faith;and confequently that it was infal- lible : So that vpon it meerly , whole nations might be- leeve: For, if he had not thought that they had beleeved meerly vpon tradition , but had only by it been recom- mended to take the Scripture for theyr ground; he could not hence have (hewed (tofhevv which he brought this proofe) in what Meafure wee had all been obliged to be* leeve all the points of our Chriftian faith, although never any Scripture at all had been at any time to be written jin which caie it had been impoffiblefbr our belcefe to have had any kind of Relation to Scripture. And becaufe the beleefc ofthefeNationshad no fuch Relation, this exa- pie was to his purpofe: vvhich othcrwife had not been So# Now what S: Irenjim fayth muft needs in all reafon have been true; for the Scripture by the Apoftles was only written in Greek,and fome very few parts in the Hebrew then currant: A vaft multitude of Nations vnderftood Viot thefe languages,as I have fhewed Seit:i. n. 9. neither did the Apoftles take any care to procure the Scripture to be turned into the languages of every converted NaJ tion which had a different toung; For had they done So,' divers of ihefc tninflations would either have been for fbme ages extat, or at Icaft fojne memory of themjwherc Hhe Church is our mfalllhle ludge Q^*i^S.\6.^^i as there is notthe lcaft figneofany fuch thing^The La- tin toungwas by the Romanes impofed vponmoft ot thofe many Nations , which were converted in the Apo- ftlcs Agc,andthe Ages folIowing;vvherefore ami would think that in the firft place , or among the very firft, this laguage would have bene chofcn by the Apoftles for pub* Itfliing the Scriptures, if the Scriptures had been the only ground to be relyed vpon in faith : Yet for ail this you will pot graunt our vulgar Edition (which you graunt to be the moft ancient of all LatinEditions)to have been fet forth by any command given by the Apoftles , or by any one of theyr immediate SucceffourSjor to have been approved by themifrom hence then wee manifeftly ga- thcr,that the Apoftles efteemed that very tradition^which they delivered to thefe to whome they committed the government of the Church, to be a moft fufEciet ground to fupport infallible faith : And confequently they held fuch traditions infallible, leaving them for the only gro- und of faith to the farre greater part of the Natios which they converted; to whom they delivered no Scripture at all in theyr own toung, nor left any Command (that can fce proved) that Scripture fliould be (prefently after the JBniftiing of the CanonJ delivered to them in theyr own languages/or had this been done/ome of theyr Tranfla- tios would have been kept.lJFyou fay they h^d theScrip- turesjthough in Greek only J anfwer, that tho(e who vn- derftand not Greek , are never the neerer for having a Greek book* Why did not S.Peter and S.Paul (who writt in Greek even to the Romans themfelvcs) at that time they ftayed in the Latin Church, procure or order the Scriptures to be putt in Latinjif, without grounding our (elves vpon Scripture in every point of bcleefe, no part I i z of our )^iThe QhmhiS onrlnfdUMel^ge j t of our beleefe, which is not lo grounded , cani>c infelli- j ^ blc. And hence cleerly and orderly foUowethf | ft -4. My third reafon , That no man now hath any infal- j ID lible faith , but he who relyeth vpon the Tradition of the i prefent Church , as an infallible ground, Thislprovis 1 out of what hath been by mee already dcmonftrated. $ Firft, for the moft learned forte that be in the world,thef cannot know, by any ground which is infallible , (ex* r cept the Tradition of the Church be infallible , ) which It Bookes the Prophets orApoftles did write , which notj 11 as Ihaveihewed Se^. 3. Nor which be the true vncot- B rupted originall Copies , which not ; as I (hewed SeB: 4* i I and iherefore they muft rely in thefc two points , ( vpon fi which no leffe then all cheyr faith doth rely, ) vpon the Traditfo of the Church as infallible,-for a fallible TraditiS canot be a futficient ground to fupport an infallible faithr either then chey have no luch faith , or they muft allo\^ Tradition to be inrallibie.As for thofe who are not fo lear-i \ wd as to vnderftand Hebrew and Greek , or who have not meanes to k now which Copyes be vncorrupted ixi Greek or Hebrew They muft bekeve this but oy meet humane authority,if they refufe thfe Churches Traditionj So by and by: n: 7. And fo for Tranflations, which be the \ very prime con veighcrs of all that is in Scripture, to thofe who vnderftand not Greek , andHebrew; either thelb men muft rely vpon the word of God, as conveyed vnto them by luch fallible men, as 1 have Ihewed theyr Tranfii ktors to be, Se£t: 5. or, farrc more wifely, they muft rety vpon the Tradition of the Church as infallible : Arid it they do not, theyr faith will ever be fallible, as 1 have fbewed. Again, it is not the bare letter of Scripture which can be a Rule or ground of faith vnto vs^but it is the fenfe " ' ' ' of • '^1 t)f thh letter interpreted atcording to the true mindtof t the holyGhoft : Now the private interpretation, which •1 Any particular Mans Witt, or learning, or Spirit can ' i give to this bare kttcr, is Mible; even though he Chail ' : cxaiJ^ly obfervc thofe 20 JScverallRules of which I fpakc } telt. 7. n: 7: for thefes Rules are all fallible^ wherefore ' i the bare letter , taken in the lenfe that wee, by our privat ' f I writt, k arning^ and Spirit imagin, and meerly conjedurc ! j it to be taken^is not the inEllible (enfe of the Holy Ghoft^ I and therefore no ground of faith, even to thofe moft lear-, I lied men who are able to vfc exa&y all thole twenty r Rales. Sec the place laft cited. But as for ail that vaft : multitude which cannot vnderftand perfedly Hebrew Stnd Greek , it is irapoiliblc for them to obferve thoit twenty Rules {of which one rup|)ofethperfe& skill iti I Hebrew and Greek:) wherefore itbeeing our adverfaries town dodrine that , without the exad obfervance of all . thefe 20. Rules, the infaliible fenfe of the Holy Ghoft can- not be infallibly known to any one,but only foUibly: iftct all that ftill fallible induftry, it is a cleaxe demonftratioft, that thofe who know not Greek and Hebrew^, x^^^i^^ ' know infallibly what the Scripture biddeih them do ot bekev^e^ they not bceing able infallibly to know the fenfe i)f the bare letter,which ferife (you lay) is the only Rult ^ and diredion of faith , and the only infallible grounds j tpon which all divine faith muft rely. Wherefore almoin aU mankind,who is \Xiskilfull in Greek and Hebrew,inuft j fii:ft hav€ not only the letter of the Scripture faithfully delivered Jrnto tl>em vpon txuft of the TranllatotsjBut ' ! Secondly , thismuft be done after tliat ilicfe TranflatofS have made an vn^jucfticnjib.e choice of fure vncorrupted Priginall CopyeU , ^iavbliich choice itisnct gofliKeibr thcffi I ^^i4TheChurchis 0ttrinfaliihteludge.(l^.$.i6^ ^hem to proceed , but very fallibly as I (hewed ; 5.) Thirdly alio they muft have the fenfe of the letter deli- vered truly and afluredly vnto them. I aske, by whomf- You fay , by your Minifters. Then (fey I) you rely vpoti the witt , skill and Spirit of thofe Minifters. Is this pro-^ ved infallible ? No.How then is your faith infallible ? As for vs , wee rely vpon the vnanimous tradition of thofc Governours of our Churches to whom the Apoftles, with that charge, delivered alltjie important points of our feith, as well by word of Mouth, as by dayly pradice an« Iwerable therevnto : commanding them to deliver to all in theyr Churches (among whom were theyr future Suc- ceflbrs) the fame points both by word of Mouth, and by the anlwerable pradice, iuftasthey had received. In like manner theyr SuccelTors fucceffively were dircdcd and commanded to proceede* No writing (as I fhall £bew SeH: 19. n* 4. 5. 6. &c,) can, with fo full afliirednes, bring down to our age, what was taught and pradifed in | iheftrft age, as perpetuall Tradition of the fame dodri- I ne , confirmed by the continuance of the fame pradicc | firft received, and never able to be fhewed to have been altered or changed. Vpon this Tradition wee are fure thatwee beleeveas groundedly, attheleaft, as all the true beleevers did for the firfl tw o thoufand yeares before any Scripture was written : And as groundedly as all th? Gentiles (for only lewes had the Scripture) beleeved at^-* any time after wards: And as groundedly as the lewes be- leeved ftill fome things only vpon Tradition^ forexam-» i pie, whatremedy was to be vied to take away Original! Sinne from theyr female-Children , or from theyr male-j , Children dying before theyr Circumcifion on the eighf" day: And again, asgroundedly asthofc many Nations,' | • V f . ^ - . converted I ?! i \ ' ^ - . ,ji Tl)t Church Is our infallihkludge 2- ^ 1(^,^55 converted by the Apoftles fucccflbrs , bcleevcd after the i: \ Scripture was finifliedj though they never had fo. much oa I as fcen Scripture f butwholy relied , in thcyr whole be- 0 I leefe, vponthe ancient tradition received from them from As "whom the gpvernoms of theyr Churches bad originally received 1: thejr governments and authority; to witt > from the Apo-^ ftles; as I fhewed out of S. Irenxus. Tradition then ofthefe Governours of our Churches,delivcred vnanimoufly by u them, maketh the points fo delivered now as evidently 111 credible^ and as fitt Obje(3:s of divine faith ,. as it made the points delivered then by theyt Governours or Paf^ )j tours; Wherefore wee have as good reafon now, to take n what is thus propofed for truth revealed by God , to be d indeed foj and confequently to be imbraced with fo fir- !l me and inimoveable adhefian of vnderfl:andiog,and will; that the preaching ofth^;^ contrary by an Angel from n Heaven (hould not ftagger our beleefe therein: And wee - have a5 good rea/bnto proceed thus in our beleefe, as all e thofe, I fpoak of, had to proceed Co in theyr beleefe. a I My fourth reafon hence deduced is , thatChriftr *r I him felfe expedeth and exadetb an. infallible aflent of 1 i faith to be given to any point, which is confirmed by ; miracle from Heaven ^ and fuch an aflent hath a fuffici^ ; y cnt ground to (upport its infallibility, Chrifi calleth thefe t Miracles a tefiimony, greater thm John. Mark^^. Yea a tefti* , mony ( in order to vs) greater then his own virord ; if yon xvill not beleeve mee y beleeve my works. He calleth that a 1 1 kinde offure knowledge which is groilded on the tefti- , mony of a miracle^ So Matt: 9. v: 6. Qut that you may know I that the Sonne of man hath pmr on Earth to for^ve SinneSy, I be fajth to the man Sicke of the falfu: Arife , take vp th f bed, md go into thine houfe. YonCocChrtJt vfed the teftmiony^ of this ooQ miracle , as. fuffici^ot to make, thm kjiov^ the ttuthofhis haviiigpowei: to forgive; Stanes. Miracles tjien grcmcia fiirc kiiQwIedge oXfaithjor an infallible afc feat tQwbatthey confiriBe; But the Tradition of iha Church makqtk that which it witnefeth to be as infalli-* ble y and as evidently credible in order to vs , as th is ci*« * ring ofthe man fit eke of tfeie palfie , o;: any fuch Miracla i can d^^therefore this Tradition may be as folid a grountould vsfoiYet, when again wee are asked, why weefirftbc- leeved the Church to be infallible ? wee do not (ay (as our adverfanes would needs make vs fay, whether wee. would or no) that wqc firft beieeve our Church to be infallible, becaufe the Scripture tould vs the Church wa^; infallible ^ But wee anfwer , that wee firft beieeve ):he Church o be infaUible by her Tradition deHvered het by the Apoltles before any S cripture was mad:^. ; which tradition maketh things fo evidently credible , as I have, iuft now declaredjthat even a miracle wrought purpofely to confirme fuch a point maketh not that point more evi- dently credible. Tradition therefore is a ground able to fupport an infallible alfent. Well then, I beieeve Chrtft to have been crucified becaufe the Scripture fayth fo: I be- ieeve the Scripture,becaufe the Church by her tradition, faith the Scripture to be Gods word ^ I beieeve the Churchy and her tradition, for its own credibility. If you ask mee why I do fo?I anlwer,becaufe I will do prudent- ly in a matter of fo great conlequence; that is, 1 will fub- mitt , and I will captivitate my vnderftanding in fuch manner, as to yield all firme aflent , which (by God his grace) I poilibly can do, vnto that , which the. Church The Church is our tnfallihle ludge.Q^. 3 I j 59 by her Tradition propofeth vnto mcc as Gods true word- vpon which word my vnderftanding fliall be fixed fo im- moveabiy, that no Angels words ftiail move mcc from it: fee 5'e^(ft:23.w:j.6.Hence you fee to what my vnderftand- ing cleaveth lb faft^ to witt, to Gods true word propoC- ^ ed by the Church , or her vnanimous Tradition. N.ow c if you askmee; why my will is (o refolute in making \i choice of thus fubmitting, and thus captivating my vn- e derftanding? I eafely anfwer^becaufe my vnderftanding i hath evidently Seen (I do not then go blindely to wor- \, ke, (as our adverfaries conceive wee all do. Sell. 8:) Be- is caufe my vnderftanding hath evidently feen that , even e according to allreafon, prudence, and piety , it ismoft ,g j vnreafonable , imprudent and impious, not to yield this 5 I fubmiffion of vnderftanding to that which is evidently credible to be Gods word ; and that to the full as that v/hich is confirmed by miracle: For what is affirmed by the Churches vnanimous Tratlition, is no lefTe evidently credible then what is confirmed by miracle , (as I pro- ved in the verylaft Number^) Therefore (and in many other refped:s) it is moft vnreafbnable , moft imprudent, ^ and impious, not to yield all poflible fubmiffion ofvn- Q . derftanding to that v/hich is propofed as Gods word, by the vnanimous Tradition of the Church. It is madnes not to beleeve what is made evidently credible , even* then when heaven isofifered vnto mee if I v/ill beleeve ir,and |i when hell is infallibly to be my puniihment , it I will not beleeve it. For fo our Sauiour himfelfe {aid , when men \ had only Tradition to rely on (to witr, before any word ^ of that new Scripture v/as written) He that beleeueth and is . b4ptiz.ed^shall be faved-^but he that beleeveth rot shall be dam^ J Iir4 {Mark i6- v. ly) And many were damned for not „ I K k 2 bckcving The Church k our Infallihte ludge 2- 3-S. 164' beleeving theChurch,before either the ouidScripturc was.' written in the Law of Nature , and before the finifliing of the new teftament in the firft jfeaventy yeares after Chrifis palBon and after the finilhing of it alfo , many were damned for not beleeving among thofe Nations to whom the faith , without any Scripture was fo well pro- pofed , that thoufands of them were moft true believers, meerly grounding theyr whole faith, vpon the Church and her vnanimous Tradition. 7. The Second difficulty (which may cafely be clea- red by what hath been here faid) is , how the ignorant vulgar forte come to imbrace our faith, and all the points, of it, with an infallible affent^and that prudently fv^hence will appeare that Tradition is the fitteft deliverer of cer- tarn truth, and the moft proportionable to the capacity of: the incomparably greater part of the world. For no manj:^ who is above the degree of a foole, is fo ignorant, but by/ fuch carefull fearch, as all are bound to vfe in finding out the way to theyr laft end (which is eternall Salvation^) he. will prelently find, that the vnanimous Tradition of our prefent Church propofeth fuch and fuch points to be bcf* leeved as beeing points.reveled by Chrijls Apoftles to the Church, for example, the Trinity^ the Incarnation.the Death and Kefurrection of our Saviour^ his having planted vpon Earth an infallible Church for our direllion &c:Then having found, this to be the vnanimous confent , and Tradition of our Church , he may eafily be made capable how evidently credible that is which is propofed by the Tradition of: fuch a Church, Firft, becaufe all thofe who beleeved for the firft two thoufandyeares , didbelecvc all that they beleeved vpon a weaker Tradition then this is,as I diC-. courfed before: Sccoiidly, he may alfo cafily vnderftand: The Church is our in fallible ludge Q, 3.5. 1 6. 3(S c how true it is which I lavd j.that no miracle can move a nianfo effedually to beleeve that there is fuch a place asXondon,as Tradition doth move him there vntoiwhe- refore as miracles can beget an infallible aflent, f© alfo ^majr Tradition. Thirdly 5 he can vnderftand that the Churches Tradition isfecured by God, from deceiving vsi for elfe all the faith of tho/c millions and millions (to whom God gave no other ground buc this to ground that faith which he, vnderpaine of damnation , exadled of them) might have been an error; and could not have been infallible, as he exaded theyr faith fhould be. Now. all this beeing moft true, and beeing alfo a reall propofall of what IS indeed revealed by God (v/hich it is not when any falfe Church vfeth this argument) God can, and will concurre with this ignorant ma,as well as with any Doc- tor , to rayle him by fupernaturall Grace to an infallible aflcnt to the truth , which he embraced moft prudently vpon Reafbns proportionable to his capacity ^ which Reafons do really make the verities which he beleeveth to be firft evidently credible to him.His faith may the be truely infallible, though he kuoweth not that it is infalli-- ble; for this knowledge is no way neceffary even in lear- ned men,as I fhalUay*5^^f.23. Now among our Sedaries ignorant men can never imbrace the points of faith, with an infallible aflfent^For they muft imbrace no point with fuch an afTent but when the Scripture , not taken according to the bare letter^but taken as interpreted tru- ly, tels them that fuch a point is true. But I aske how it can ever be made evidently credible to them that fuch a. place of Scriptureis truly interpreted in that fenfe but el- pecially feeing that the'greateft Proteftant Doctors teach- that the true fenfexannot he found opt but by obfer- 0iThe (^mh is 0urtrifa ving perhaps twcntly Rules,* of which they are by them plainly tould, that they cannot obferve divers , as I no-" the very Walls of which ! Ghurch be many yeares elder then theyr Religion : IF they will go with vs the ould beaten way, trodden by alk I Antiquity , and chalked out by an vninterrupted Tradi- I tbn from the Apoftles dayes to thefe, they (as ignorant as ^ they are) may, as I laid , eafiiy come to fee. Fir ft that, j they (hall have as fiire groud for all their whole beleefe, as all true belcevers ha d the firft two thow^land yeares before rfie firft.Scripture was written.Secodly^they flbali fee they have as fiire a groud as all true believers (the lewes at the moft excepted) had for thofe.two thoufdd yeares follow- ing, before other Nations had theScripture.Thirdly they fibal fee th^t they have as fure groud as allChriftias are co« ftfled to have had the firft fevcnty yeares before the New 3E5^????^ ^^^^^^^^ divulgedtEourthly they (hall 5 6^Tk Church is our infalltMe lud^e.Q^. 5 /S. 1 6, feetbey haveasfure ground asthofe many Nations had, who beleeved ail that other Chriftians did,and beleeved it with as true a divine faith ; though they never did fee Scriptureias I faid eve now out of the moft ancient Doc- tor S. Iren£!is. So that they fee that the ground of theyr beliefe hath been a moft fure ground of true divine in-« fallible faith for above more then four thoufand yeares, to witt, a good way down-ward after Chrifis time. Fiftly,, they fee alio that the laft thoufand yeares , which was iuft: before your Reformation, all thoie vaft muititudcs,whoaa you confefTe to have followed Popery, to have ftill be-» iieved on the fame ground relying on the prefentChurch as infallible 3 Therefore from Chrijfs time to the Refor-» macion they fee only a wonderfull (hort fpace of yeares, in which fpace you fay all refufed to reJy in theyr beleefe vpon the Church ; What is this /pace to be compared to that almoft whole fpace of time which was from die beginning of the World to this Reformation: in all which vaft fpace all faith of all men relyed on the Church as infallible. Again (as fimple as I am) I vn- derftand this evident argument , that in the thoufand yeares iuft before your Reformation there were many Councels , many learned , and many very holy men (for ihey fay that then men generally rather lived better then now) Now thefe Councels , thefe great numbers of lear- ned and Holy men could not but Tee the truth of thofe matters which are clearly and plainly fet down in Scrip-i turcj And even the Proteftants themfelves teach that all nccciTary matters are clearly and plainly fet down in Scripture: I therefore neither have charily nor witt, if ilay that they then could not lee the truth, fo manifeftly dear in fuch pointSiwherclore vpon good reafon in thole 7%e Church Is our infallihleludge Q^.^.S. I^.3^J points I will agree with the Roman Catholicks: But now for thofe poim:s which are not clear in Scripture , I will alfb not difagree fronn thcmjbecaufe,in things confeffed* ly not clear, you are likelyer to misvndcrftand Scrip- ture then they: And they ( befides Scripture ) give mec that excellent fure ground of the Tradition of the Church , which hath been a fure ground for fo many ihoufand yearcs ; and queftionles is a fiirer ground then trufting you^ I will then, in theie points, truft them, and not you. And fo you fee why I refblve in all points to truft the Church. But all this is (poaken by the way-novar letvsgoon. 8. My fifth Reafon for the infallibility of fomc mea« nes in the Church fufficient to ground divine faith , and yet differing from Sciipture , is this: God hath given vs lome meanesfiifficicnt to come to the faith neccflary to Salvation (as hath been proved Quefi: i.) But this mca- nes is not the Scripture (as I have fliewed in the twelve firft Sedions;) Neither is it naturall Reafon (as I (hewed Se5':i3:)Therefore the meanes which now adually is gi- Ten vs by God, is the infallible direction of the Churchy there bccing hot the leaft appearance of probability tor any other meanes which God hath given vs , though he might have given vs other meanes,if he had pleafed* 5, My Sixt Realon is that , Whatfoever was held by the vniverlall Church, was, without farther queftion- ing jheld for true ; and the contrary to it was ever rejec- ted as an errour: two manifcftSignes of infallibility; both which will appear fufficiently proved, when I (hall come to cite the Fathers authority for the infallibility of the Church. SeH.zo: 21: zz: and you know already S.Auficm faying in the End of his Bocke de Ha:r^y?^M$,that though . LI he ^66 TheQhurchisour Tnfallihle ludgeQ^^yS .iS he tell you not, in particular, what the Church hath de- fined againft every one of thole fevcrali herelies, yet (aith he; Sujjiciet earn contra ifta fentire^lt is enough (to make vsfly theoiashereiics) fei^woiv that the Chu fcb hmldeth the cmtrary. Neither will you ever find any Catholik who ever had the bouldnes to fay , that all the Church of his, dayes did vniverlaliy hould any thing that was an error: And theyr works were conformable y for never fliall you read of any Catholik(much ielTe of any Holy Father) who retufed to conforme him elfe to the vniverfall beleefe and pradice which was current in the whole Church of theyr timesiyour Luther and Calvin head not. theyr Spirit. Here I intreat you to read the Authorities which hereaf- ter I fliall bring out of the Fathers , and you fliall fee the lenfe and feeling which Sacred antiquity had in this point,(ee my Seitiic.SccMow clofe in all interpretatio of Scripture(on wbich all depends) Antiquity did ever ftand: to the Church,, ! have laid Se£t, j. n : gt, out of Vincentim lerinenft$0 lo. Seuentli ReaCbn is that, without the Church beprovided of fome other infallible meanes todire<3;v$ to the truth , be fides Scripture J there wiU never be any Vnityand agreement in the Church, inneceflary points, of Religion, if or I have already fully fliewed that Scrip- ture alone (chough fubmitted vnto by all fides)doth not produce this verity, even in necelfary points; for I have numbred vp. 24. fuch points not fo much asConteyned in Scripture. Hence I frame this argument; vnderpainof damnation all are bound to agree m this one thing , that all and every one interiorly giueth an infallible aiTent to all fuch points,as are ncceflfary to be beleeved.for the atte- yning of Salvationj bccaufc all are bound topleafe God, and The Church is our infallihle IudgeQ^l.S.l6. 367 and ccmfequently to have that faith without xohuh it is impppble to pleafe GodiBut all ca never be brought to agree in this one thing (that all and erery one of them interior- ly giueth an infallible afTent to all (iich points, as are nc- celTarily to be beleeued for atieyning Salvation) without all and every one fiibmitt theyr aflent to (bme other in- fallible Rule belides Scripture^ for fubmitting to Scriptu- re only doth not produce this vnion , as fo long andfo lamentable experience hath taught vs: Neither can the Scriptu»'e alone fuffice for this end , beeing it doth not fo much as conteyne 24. of fuch points as are all necefla- ty to Salvation: Therefore all can never be brought to a- jjree in that one thing(in which vnder pain of damnation they mutt agree)without they all and every one interior- ly give an infallible alTent to fome other Rule of faith then the Scripture: No other, with any appearance of rea{bn,canbe thought of, bur the diredion ot thcChurchj Therefore her dire isonly the meerdiredion of the L 1 2 Church 368 7%e(^omanChurchis Church; it evidently falloweth hat her diredion is Infal-i tible. Whjr I defer to anfwerthe ObjeAions againftthc infallibility of the Churchy and Tome oiher things:! fhaM prefently rell you. THE FOVRT AND LAST QVESTION. jWhich is that Church which is the infalli- ble ludge in all Controverfies? iJoTil; shee exercifeth her infallible ludgement^ and "tphat fubmifsion is due there y?itof I T H E R T o wee havc,onIy in generall, de- clared the Chu^rch to be our ludge , and to be provided of Tome infallible meanes (befides Scripture ) to guide and dired: vs / in faith : not intermedling with other important', but c i more particular doubts ^ vntill wee had gotten fuffici- I a I cnt principles folidly eftabliftied , to proceed to thefc |i 1 particulars with more clear and diftind knowledge By i% ; the Church , wee have hitherto vnderftood that blefled ri I congregation of people which followed the dodrine of i? t Chrifi and his difciplcs, ftiD propogating the dodrine dcm i livered to them from age to age , vntill wee come to our fi Age. But, becaufe there be a number of Congregations ■ pretending to be this bleffed Congregation^wee muft fee rf in particular, iii which of them wee can finde this infal- ; . libk^ 1 mtr infaJlihlelud^e.Q. 4.^. 1 6. 3^9 tible meanes to end all controverfies, and todired: vs {e« curelyi^ all points of faith. Secondly weemiiftfec, in what particular manner this particular blefled Congre« gation doth iudgc all Controverfies^and how ihec directs vs in particular in all our doubts of faith. When wee have found thefc t^o things , wee (hall foone fee the laft thing wee feek for, to witt , what particular lubmi/Iion is due from all , that they all may be fecurely direded in that faith which leadeth to ctcrnall Salvation: the end for which wee all were created i and confequently at which all our moft ferious endeauours otight to ayme. 2. And becaufe wee now (hall come to Ipeake of the Roman Church, and toQiewhow fliec in her gcnerall Councels,propofing vntoher felfe the word of God, as well written, as vnwritren , doth ifliie forth her Defini-* tions, Decrees , and Orders, by which £hee diredeth vs: wee only now can clearly difpatch fome things > whicli^ very properly belonged to the laft queftion, bpt could not be fb commodioufly treated there, becaufe they re-» quired a more diftin<^ knowledge of the queftions to be handled here. Heere then wee fliall folve the obiefttons againft the infallibility of the Church , which our adver-* faries v(e to make againft the Roman Church in particu J larj and therefore they were to be treated heere, Heere alfb wee muft anfwer many things they bring againft Councels j and when wee declare how Councels propofe to them felves Gods word written , and vnwritten, wee muft adde (bmewhat more of Tradition then bath yet been faidjanfwcring what clfe they obje(3: againft it.And becaufe the teftimonies of the Holy Fathers, confirmmg the infallibility of the Church , do fbmetimes fpeak of her inialUbility in generallj iome times they fpeakof the Ro- man mm Churches infallibilify in particular ; (bme timei flow infallible gencrall CoUncels are; fome times hovr infallible the vtiwritten Traditions of the Church arc (which meerly rely on her authority:) wee have thought good to place theyr teftimonics after that wee have treat* ed 43f all ikck particulars: which are linked to geathef with lb neceffary connexion one of an other) that die froofc ^f the one, is the proofe of the other* SBCTi XVII, Whtier the <^mm Chmch he that Church t^hkh is mr infallible ludgef Y the Romati Church, wee do «ot vnderi [[ ftand the particular dioces of Rome : but ' wee vndeftand,that vaftly extended Con>- fnunity of Ghriftians which houldeth Co- munion with the Church ofRome^fubmit- ting them felves to the Bifliop of Rome a s to theyr headj fo that what foeveche dccreeth with a generallCouncel, tliey imbrace as the definitionof th^ true Church, which they hoiild infallible. Thisisthefloci^ vfchr f adhering th^ $rue shtefeheard appointed by hm, as I (hall fliew %o*n.^. Wherefore when you Come now in particular to fee into what wee refolve our faith, when wee fay that wee lely vpon the Church as infallible j you (hall finde that it is relolved finally into the AuthoTicy ot God pru- pofing focli and fuch things to Vs to be bcleeved by this his Church:whofe mindc is made known vnto vs, partly Mr infaUihle ludge Q. 4. S. 1 7. 57 1 fey fuch traditios as vnivcrially go currant in her, and aiC: moft notorioully known , not only to b^ermittcd, but alfo to be on all occafions vnanimouflySaugbt by hct Prelatesf and partly by fiich definitions, and Decrees, as the Prelates of the Church, lawfully affembled by ordef of,and togea^her with theyr head,do fet forth j of which miner of government wee fihall fpeak in the nextSedios^ 2. Wee then coftantly affirme,the RomaCburch thus vb» derftood is our infallibleludge in all our controverfies of faith, and appointed by God to be lb» The proofe of this is eafily and denionftratively performed, fiippofing the^ truth of all that hath been faid and proved in the lafe Queftion,-: in which, both out of the ould and new tefta- ment , 1 have brought moft convincing teftimonies , to Jrove diat God hath appointed iome Church vpon Earth to be our infallible ludge/rhe fame I proved by Severall reafons in the laft Se&ion, So that wee doe not,, without foil proofe,fuppofe thatGod hathappointed fame Church , vpon Earth.to be our infallible ludge. This then (vport good proofe) fuppofed ; wee eafily demonttrate this^ Ghurch appointed by God for our ludge, to be the Ro* man, and only the Roman Church: wee do it thus. The Proteftant Church,and all otherChurches different from the Roman, do iudge, do declare , and profefTe them felves to be fallible,even according to the infallible word X)f Godrif then the Proteftant Cburch,or any other Ghur?» ches different from the Ronaan , be infallible in all that: they iudge , and in that they declare and profefle to be Isrue even according to the word of God they doubties are then infaUible,and Ipeak then the infallible truthjwhen:. they iudge and declare and profeiTejthat even according; to.ths wordgf Gfid*;^, ifey weiallibk : Xirerefwe mfal- 57* T^e^oman Church is ^ libly they arc faUibk. Hence again^ it beeingtfius pirWcdO ' that ua Church different froo:i the Roman is infallible, and it becing formerly proved that God hath appointed fomc Church vpon Earth to be our infallible iudge: it ; dcmonftratively fblloweth, that the Roman Church muft ' needs be this infallible Iudge becaufe no Church diffe-^ rentfrom the Roman (that is, none but the Roman) can be this infallible Churchjas my former argupnent proved. Some of our adverfaries arc pleaied fondly to miftakc this argument,as if wee argued thusjThc Roman Church claymeth infallibility : Therefore Ihecmuft needs have right to it. This argument wee give our adverfaries free leave to fcofF at,as much as they pleale; it is nothing like ours : wee put all the force of our argument in this; that the Church, truly appointed by God for infallible Iudge of Controverfies , cannot poflibly be any of thole Chur- j i. ches which teach them fclvcs not to be this infallible iud- ge j becaufe they teach them /elves to be fallible. If then j they be infallible inthe doctrine they teach,they are infal- lible when they teach them (elves to be fa lible: Whence I it foUowcth that infallibly they arc fallible. The Church at which is truly appointed by God to be infallible Iudge, ^ ie muft needs have this condition ; that fliee doth own her | k infallibility: but this is farre from faying; that meerly the {Co' ownningof infallibility doth make infallibility her own* j the It is a very different thing to (ay, he that muft be a Hinifter^ i' kl muft needs be a man^ and not aWoman: and to fay, thatfuch mi an one muft needs be a Minifter becaufe heis a Man » and not 4 Woman: io it is one thing to fay, the Church which is thft ICo infallible Iudge,muft be a Church iudging, ad houlding, Jane and profefling her felfe to be infallible ; and cannot be ^ gtiiis Church which iudgeth and profcflcth her fclfc to be faU mMil " ^ — iible;^ r mr infallille ludge. Q. 4. 1 8.' ^73 liblc! And an other quite different thing to fay ; that fuch a Church is the infallible ludge^becaufe Ihec tcacheth and profefleth her ielfe to be fb. 3. Others have in exceeding plenty alledged other arguments which may be feen in them: this one beeing a Demonftration ferueth my turne; and th's one beemg put alone, I hope my Reader will more marke the force of it^ SECT: XVIIL Inl^hat Court this infallible ludge decldeth our Control^erfies in faith , Vr adverfaries would make the world beleeve (as may be feen in D. Ferns SeH: 1 7) chat they have a great advantage aga- inft vs, when they put this queftion to vs | for by putting it they conceive they put vs at Variance with one another: becaufe fome will fay, firfi^ the Pope can infallible by him feife , out of a Councell, decide all Controverfies ; others will fay Secondly, that z CounccU can do this without a Pope. But I muft tel them thatf/;;r(i/7 jall and every one of vs (without the leaft difagreement ) do and will vnanimoufly lay^that all thofe definitions declare an infallible truth^which are fet forth by the Pope defining togeather with a general! Councel. Any one w-ay of defining infallibly is encugh, and is fufficient to end any Concrovcrfies Yield but to this one way, and wee will prcfTe you no further. If you will not yield to the Pope defining ioyntly with a Coun- Mm eel j74 The1{omm Clmf) a Gel, wee 'ate Ture enough that you will neither ptli fS Pope alone, nor Councel alone. If God hath provided of one way , which is a fure and infeUible way to know any neceffary point of taich , and to keep vs all in fetled vnity, concerning all matters declared by this infallible authority (fuch as wee all hould. this Authority to be:) it is impo/Iibie that wee fliould want necelTary dire that all the Church might enjoy Co great a benefitt as is the fecure diredion in all points of faith 5 and the perpetuall prefervation in vnity of faith , not to be had fufficiently by any other meanes that is gi-- venvntovs. Yea, who can choofe but think it ftrange,.! th^LtChrlfi, for the fecure diredion of all the firft Chrilti-» ans converted only in the Apoftles dayes, ftiould give this infallibility to all ^ and every one of the Apoftles^ and that he fhould regard Co litle the fecure diredio of all that in- finite number of Chriftians, who were to be converted after the Apoftles times to the very end of the world, that for theyr fakes^ and for the fecure diredion of iheyr Sou- fes , and theyr prefervation in vnity of faith, he would ftotgtve this infallibility fo much as to one only manPNo nor to the Church reprefentative in a full Councel^ even for that ffeort time in which they are to pafle. , theyr de- crees concerning the moft important affaires in Chrif^ tendome ? Bfpecially feeing that on the one fide, this guift of infallibility is given , not for theyr private fakes to whom it is given ^ but it is given forthe vniverfaJI M m z o-ood The %pman Church is good , and ncccflary diredion , concord , and pcrpctuali vaity of the whole Church : And on the other fide, that,t even now after wee have Scripture , the neceffity of this^ infallibility is fo great , that our adveriaries with D. Verm Se£l. 17. do contefle , ihat fuch a ludge or vmfheof Ch/if'^ tendome ( as a Councel indued with mfallibility) (1/ t o be had ) be a ready meanes to compofe all dijferences yand re^ fiore Truth idPeaceAs itthenftrange that God (hould give io necellary aguift,or a guift lb beneficiail to his Church? 3. Having now,by all faid in the former difcourfes » proued that the Church diffufed , or vniverfall , was fur- nifhed by God with lome infallible meanes ^ befides Scripture , to dired ail fecurely in faith, and to preferue them in vnity,by the true decifion of all theyr Controver- sies : wee haue found already enough to perRvade any prudent Man, tofeek after the particular manner by which this meanes is to be appliable,and ferviceable vnta him. Now this is cafily vnderftood. by that manner of government which wee had here in England , from the. Conqueft to our dayes 3 according to which. , all the de- crees , and ordinances , by which wee were governed, or; : direded , wcre to be made by a Lawful! King joyntly with a Lawful! Parliament. This Repreientative , and ' theyr Decrees , be called the Decrees of the Kingdomc. luftfo , the particular manner by which the Church di£»' fuled or vniverfall is direded , and gouerned , is by a Lawful! Pope y as fupreme Paftour , joyntly witka Law-, fell Councel : and this affembly is called the Church re- prcientatiue , and iheyr Decrees be called the Decrees of the Church. This way you fliall find to h.iue been very connatural! to the ClxurcK : For Jt was impofEble that the Chwch vniYcrfali , or diffufcd^ &ouId be aflenabled ; """" " ■ ' ■ ■" " ht our mfaUihk Judge. pyf for the making the Decrees^ And though Children and woemen beiongtothe Church; yet all eafily fee, that the Church government belongs not to them : neither is theyr Vote ( in any mans opinion ) required for the deci« fioa of Controverfies in Faith : Wee fay alfb , that the Laity hath no decifive voice in this point;chey be flieepc, and not Paftours. Euery infcriour Clergyman , is not a confiderable Governour in the Church: This govern^ ment then belongs to fuch as are Prelates Overfeers » and Govern ours over the reft , Bishops placed by the Holy Ghoft over all the flocks , to feed ( or govern ) the Church o^ God. A£t: zo.v. 2S« For not Lay-Magiftrates, but only ec^* Ciefiafticall,, arc /aid ( Eph: 4. ) To be giuen vs bjChififof the vpork of the ldmjlery\ for the edifying the Body of Chrifi that henceforth rveefnaj not be carried about vcith ever jvpmdc- c.f DoHrine ^c. It was not to a Lay Mc giftrate , but to a. Bifliop to whom Chrifi fayd : Teed my sheep* lo. 21. v. ly* It is worth the Readers knowledge to relate here (rut of 'Rufinus l.io.and Caranz^a hisSumme,juft before theCoun-. eel of Nice) how the firft generall Councel was aflembied in the dayes of the firft Chnftian Emperour Conjfantlne the Great. Rujinus then y having related how theherefy o^Arm growing vp to the ruine of Chriftendome , Conjfantine the Great^ex fententia Sacerdotum , by the advice or ludge-^ ment of the Priefts , did call togeather Bpifcop^ale Concilt'^ urn a Councel of Biftiops , to ludgc of the Propofitions^ an d Queftions Arm. Behould theyr power of iudica*^ tare acknowledged by theyr calling , and coming and fittings for thy were called , did come and fitt, for no other endjbut to end Controverfi cs by theyr ludgement. And then ketelleth, how thefe Bishops beginning tagiuc ypiawiitmg^coxiipia^^^ ag*ioft one an otlKi to the Em- jpcjeourj hCi putting all thofe papers in hi$ boibme^withpit ever opening or looking vpoa them, faid to the BifcopSj Gad hath appmntedyaii?ne[fs, andglvmjou power even f# ludg^^ '^s alfoi and therefarevfiee are rightljf iudged iy yowMt jau (fpeaj^ing of thei^v a,s a whole QounQcl)cantwt he iud^^ fed by mem whrefore expeltonly the mdgement of God vpH foui mi that your complaints , whatsoever they bey may b$ re^ ferved tf the Examin of God. Vor you are given vnto v$ bjGod^ Si Gods{i\i^t. is ludges iii his place,-) ir ii not convenient that wefi ih^dd iudge ib^ Gods : hut be alone of wbom itiswritteni (P^l: 821.) God fiand^th in the Congregation of the Gods* ^Hdgetb icmmg the Goh. Conftancin having /aid this^ he cGmnianded all thole papers to be burnt: Andawhenno\^ the fentence of the Councel, defining that the Sonne of God was Confubftantiall to his Father, was brought to liicn, llle tanquam a Deo prol^tamveneratur that is,- He Sd reverence this fentence as pronounced hy God himfelfe^andif my one should offer togoagainft it.heprotefis he Vfill banish bin$ m a man going againft the divine St atutes t 4. fiehould here bow the decrees of Counccis ought to be reverenced^ Hence S. Athanafm In Epiji: ai Mpifcop: Affrkanos^ after this feife j&me definition,faidj| Th4 yi^ord of God by the Nic£an Counceldoth remain for ever an4 ^wr.Hence 5. Uorfmida C:Sicille Dift:^^. fayth Wee believe that in them (the Fathers of this GounceI)r^^ holy Ghofi dii Hence S. Cyrill ( iu the Councel ot Ephefus : Epii ) fpeaketh thus of thejfe Fathers of the Councel of Nice; Theyjeaft they should swaruefrom truth, being in^irei iy tJje Holy Ghofi {becaufe it was not they which did Jpeakj but the Spirit of God and the father who did jpeak, in tbem^ as Chrijl fur Sauiour protejletb) have fet forth the Rule of pure and vn^ iUmabk faith, ^o hcj and the P^^n^be^s alib is his* His* 0ur infaWe ludge Q. 4. S. i J?. klfo be thefe words^ffw can itih doubted iut that Chrifi did frefide hvlfxHj in that holy andgteat C^«r(?/?Epift:ad Anaf* fas : Alexandrinum. S. Leo ( whom 1 fliall cite by and by) faith , that what this Councel dcfineth, it did feale by the holy Gbofi. S.lfidore y in the Preface to hiscoiledion of Canons, not only recomiiends what the firft four Coun* c^ls have defined , but fay th alfo of the decrees of other Councels,' that tbej ftand firmly fetled in all vigour 5 nhich the holy tatbers^full of the Holy Gbofi Jfave efiablisked. Markc how common it is to affcribe the Decrees of the Councels to the a^ifiance of the Holy Ghafi ^ to whom to afcribe anj thing that might be an errour> is a great Sacriledge* Alfo S. Leo Bp: 84.ad Anafticalleth the Canons of the ho* ly Fathers made by the Spirit of God y confecrated by the reve'^- rence given to them by the vHjole mrld.And Hp; 73.hc fayth^ ^e Councel ofchalcedon wai^ affembled by the holy Ghofi , that ^eyt definitions were a Rule proceeding from divine injpifation^ Hence S. Ambrofe fpeakihg of the Heretikes condemned by a Coimcel , Lib: defide ad Gratianum C. n(with out any iudgement and difcretion)frcely rejec- teth and disbelecueth* 6. I (ay not this rafhly , for , as S. 'Bernard fayth in a Sermon vpon the Refurre that wee hould the authority of the Roman Church greater then that or Chri^ , and the Ghofpeh whereas wee all hould , that e-^ very generall Councel is taexamin cotroverfies belong^- ing tofeith, according to the woid of God. But, be-- caufe alVhuman learning, witt, and ludgment would ftiii be lyable to errour, wee fayj that Chrifi , of his^oodnc^^ bath obteyned for his Church ( thus lawfully alfembled,)'. iuch an a-lliftance of the holy Ghoflr, as {hall cverpreferue: it from errour. True itis^, that in witt, aiid judgment^ a-nd learning , fo great an aflembly farre-excells^ your pci^^ vate Minilfcrs : But thisafliftance of the holy Ghoft is dm advantage lurpaiSng all that is human - Thisafliftance: wee hxve pr^vcdali thelaft queftio»,and in the laft Scc^ ^^^^^YL^^^^i^^^^"^^ gtven togCBcrdl Coucels*;^ ^B6 "t^^pmnQhurchU 2. Now to lee what the Counceis on theyr part itc to do; I nxuft tell you, that theyr cheefe bu(ines is to exa- min the points in controverfy ^ hearing all that occurreth for the one fide and thic other , and permitting fevcrall replies, it any remaine^in due time to be made. After thi« diligence is vfed they confider what feemcth moft con-« formable to the word of 3* If you aske, why the Church or Councels eftecme fe much tradition ? I anfwer ^y^^ Becauie in prudence, 1 and piety,they cannot but efteeme as much God s vnwrit-- l' ten word, as his written,' feeing that the word of a. true, feoneft Man ,isas much to be elleemed true , when it is ©nly delivered by word of Mouth ^ as when it is deliver- i ed by writings Ifour Minifters vfualiy fo confound thc; bufines^ that they make theyr Auditors even to ftarde ^ ! wbeathey tell them , that wee hould Tradition equall to.^ Scrigtur^^be^aufei^ tikj; faavadeeply imprinted in?. 3^8 Th^^oman Church U tlieyr minds , that Tradition is nothing but an ould tald let on footc by I know not whom z But if they meant to deale really , they fliould (ay what the Truth is that wcc Ao indeed equalize Tradition to Scripture, and that wcc .Jhaue all reafon to do fo- Why ? What is Scripture? Gods word written. What is Tradition? T he fame God^ word notified , not by writing, but by the full report of the Catholik Church. I pray now > how do wee wrong God, when wee fay of his word , what wee fay of the word of onej whom wee mofl commend for Trutb,that his word only fpoaken , and not written , is as fure ^ or true ( and confequently as much to be efteemed , and credited ) as anywordofhis that is written even with his own hand. Nay , I pray mark how you wrong God^who flight Tra- dition,which is nothing but the word of God vnwritten. What wrong is it to an honelt man, to flight all he fay th vnlefle he confirmes it by writing ? I know the befl an^^ fwer you have to juflify your felves is , That Scripture is alTueredly known to vs to be Gods owne word : But as for our Traditions , you do not know^ nor cannot be-*. Iceue that God doth owne them for his own word^ But giue me Icauc to aske , whence are you aflTured that the Scripture is Gods own word? Your beft, and indeed your only, afliirance is, that all the Chriftian world fayth lb: See SeH: 20. n. y. That then which makes you j with fo great afrurace,know Gods written word, is Traditioxu But the fame Tradition , which tells vs that the Apoflles delivered thefe points to vs as divine verities in writingj^ telsvsalfo, that the fame Apoftles delivered thefe and tliefe points to \fs as divine verities by word of Mouth only. If the Tradition of the Church be a Lyar in this laft part>fhec may as well be a lyar in the firft part. When you belccvc our infallible lud^e (^4. 19. 389 belccve Scripture , youtruft to tradition, teftifying that the Apottles gave fuch and fiich bookes to the Church ofthe firft age to bebelceved as Gods word: fee two ad- mirable places of S. Auften preffing this hard, which I cite prefently n: 7. Again, when you beleeve that the Copies, which wee have now of thofe bookes, be neyther forged, nor corrupted Copies, but do truly agree widi the Ori- ginalls given out by the Apoftles; you again wholy truft to the traditions of all the after Churches that have been in every age from the Apoftles to this very preset Church. For it was as much in the pov^er of the Church , in any one of thefe ages , to have thruft a falfc Copie into your hand , in place of a true one^ as to thruft a talfe tradition into the Mouth of every Catholik every where, in place of a true one.Admirably Tertullian (de Prefcript: C.28.) How is it nicely that fo many and jo great Churches should erre in orte faith ? Among many events there is not every where one ijfae. The errours of the Churches (had there been any in the delivering of theie Traditions) mujl needs have varied'y{ior though every man Ciould agre to teil his child a lye , yet every one would not agree in telling luft the very felfe lame lyes:) But that vphicb amongjl many isfoun^one, isnot fniftak^n , tut (as a fixrc Tradition) delivered : Audeatergo aliquis die ere eos erraffe qui tradiderunt ? Dare then any mar$ fay that they all erred who delivered (with fiich vniformit) ) this traditioniSo hc^ houlding it, as you fee, impudence to fay this tradition could be tallible. Is not this clearly to hould the Tradition of fo many and fb great Churches infallible? Behould here then plain Popery in thchigheft point proved and approved with in two hundred yeares after Chrifi.But more of Tertullias opinio concerning tra» ditio hereafter,S. 20,^:4. ad much hath bee faid;5. 12-^.4.5' O o 4. My jpo The ^oman Qhurch is 4. Mjrtask nowis,toflievv tradition doth conuey and bring down Gods word to vs as furc, yea rather fu- rer, by perpetuall pradice, and vnifurme dodrine, then by any writing.To fhew this,I brought many ftrong argu- rnentsSffl^: lo.n. 13. and Seil: 16. n. 1. 2. In both which Sedions I have faid many things of traditions rand in the firft place I folved the cheeFe objedions againft them. Bur yet I will clear this, and one or two other doubts Avhich trouble many. For clearing then of this doubt, let vs take two traditions, one confefled by you to be a true one , the other to be proved by mee to be no lelTe true then the former , becauic it is tcftified by as good a tra- dition as the former ^ and therefore either the former is not proved Sutficienrly by this teftimony, or elfe the lat- ter is. Yet the truth is (and my argument fliall make it good) that both of them be made as credible to be Gods word by T radition only , as any writing by its fole force could make them. The firft. tradition which I will, for example fakc,take,is the Baptizmg of Children(of which I fpok 5^5':8,w:3.)The Second is of praying for the dead. Ot thefc two I difcourfe to my purpofe thus. Both tbefc points (%I) we.c icr divine verities and pradifes re- commended by the Apoftles to the primitive Churchjand f o from hand to hand came moft vndoubcedjy deUvered down to vs. Hence, conformably to this tradition, every where the Chriftians baptize d theyr litle Children,- every where they prayed for the faithful; departed. Nothing more common to ail men then to be borne,nothing more common then to dye, for every one who is borne:hencc, as thcdayly cuftome is of beeing borne, fbthe dayly , cuftome in all the Church, is to baptize ihofe who arc newly borneiand as it is the dayly cuftome for all that arc ^ " " bona our infallihle ludge Q. 4. S". 1 9. J9 1 born to dy^fb the dayly cuftome was to pray for the dead. But yet prayer for the dead was, by more frequent prac- tice, teftilied in this refped; becaufe thofe who are bor- ne,are baptized but once in theyr Livesibut thofe who are dead are many times, and that for many yeares after theyr death, prayed for by name; befidcs the dayly pray- ers for all the faithful! departed in general. Well now, let vs fuppofe that both thefe traditions be called in queftion, whether they be faithfull deliverers of the true word of God or rather, in place of it, deliver fome hu- man invention ; as you vi^ill fay, Praying for the dead is; and the Anabaptifts will fay , that baptizing of children is. Let vs now further lee, which of thefe two traditions cannot defend it felfe from forgery, as v^ell as any Scrip- ture queftioned ofbeeing true Scripture: for example, the Apocalyps,or Revelation,which your Lutheran Brc- theren hould not to be true Scripture. How will you de- fend the Apocalyps ? youcanfayno more then I have laid Se^. 3. n. 12. for all pur Canon in general); And the tradition vpon which thofe Councels received the Apo- calyps had more contradidion, then ever prayer for the dead had. For the Apocalyps was riot only rejeded by the mofl ancient Heretikes,the Marcionifls,theAlogians, The Theodotians ; but alfo by divers ancient Catholiks (efpecially the Grecians as5. I^row^teflificth Epifl: ad Dardanum:) BucPrayer for the dead was contradicted by no Catholike at all: amongft ancient Heretikes, Aerm indeed did contradid ir,-but this is looted in him aS;a pe- culiar Herciy of hisovvn invention , boih by S. Aufien- (whofe words I gave you^^^f : 8. fine:) and S. Eftpharius Herefy75'. f^yeth,this Aerius had an aertan mckcd Spirit againjl the Church 3 and theAi he denovnceth againil him 5 Oo 2 • ihdt 59 1 Ti^f ^oman Chu rch is thatprajefs d&e profit the dead. And the fame Saint there fayth , the Church doth thU neceffarily (this is his word) bj^ The Tradition received from her Anceftours. And he not long after (Herely 77.) doth profeffe, that every mmfalleth inta firange inconvemencies , if he mil but once fafe the bounds f ft him by the Holy Churchy and leap over the hedges of traditions. He held ther .fore prayer for the dead futable to the doc- trine of the Church , and Tradition. And as for S. Auften (Chap: 1. dcCurapro Mortuis agenda) Hefayth, thattht vniverfall Church did shine with this cuftome of prating for the dead at the Altar. The greateft Dodors of the Church could not be ignorant of a Cuftome shining in the Churchy not particular , but vniverfal. And it is this shining of this Cuflome which I prefTe ^ and not S. Aujiens authority* othervvife ihen as a witnes oi this shining Tradition He alfa Serm: 32.de Verbis Apofioli{whkb place Bedea. ThesiA al- moft a thoufand yeares agoe cited out of S. Aujlen) layth thus By the prayers of the Holy Chur^ h^and bj the whole fom facrifice y and by the Almes vphich are %iven fo^r theyr SouleSy it is not tabi doubted hut the dead are helped:fo that our Lard dea^ les more mercifuliy vfith them, then theyr Sinnes have deferved.. Why is not this to be doubted of ? It foHoweth, Becaufe thisy delivered dovpn fram our Fathers , the whole Church doth ibferveS^c S Chryf: teftimony of this tradition in the next SeH.n:^ And this tradition is that which I now ftad vpon^ which indeed did fliine in the pra who could by human meanes (and fuch meanes as thould not make a mighty Noife a- mongft thofe great reverenccrs of traditioi)) draw all the world , in fo (hort a time after the Apoftles,to follow cuf- tomes as Apoftolicall which then , thatis, in thatage in which they were firft vented, Were evidently, by every man, not only known,but clearly feen to be new hatchca Kovelties ; and not ancient and Apoftolicall traditions* This man who broached this falfe dcdrine fliculd have been putt in the Catalogues of heretikesby S. Epifhantas and 5. Aujlen: whereas they did not only not put him down for an heretikes > but they both did put down Ae- rius for onc^ bccaufc he taught the contrary • Now if you fpeake of thefe Cuftomes, going downward > vntiU the Age in which they began to bee denyed by Anabaptifts> or Proteftants j Prayer for the dead hath come downe «^ith fttch a full ftreame^ that it drew all Countiies in all 394 The ^oman Church ii ages with it j in Co much that every where (^ut among i few late borneArminians and Albigen{es)thc pubhck ler* vice bookes in all Pariflies of all Countries can be as furc witnefles of this cuftomc , as the Copies of Age after age canteftify wee have the true Copie of the Apocalips.And fo ould Rituals will teftify (though not fb fu]ly)Baptifrae of Children , by witne/Iing the Cerimonies oblerved in fuch Baptifmes. And, as for prayer for the dead, the very ftones cry out in all ould monuonents, for our prayers for thofe who ly interred vnder them. The ouldeft founda** tionsbcthofe , which ourgreatefl: grandfathers made (as appeareth by the moft ancient Records) fortheob- teyning prayers for theyr Soules : And this not in one Country , but there is not one Country which aboundeth not with fuch Monuments , and fuch Records^the very jftrongeilproofes of afTured antiquity and vnqueftionabk tradition* Thus, I hope , I have made good that, tradition (hining in perpetuall pradice in all times, and all ages, is a furer relator and reporter, then a teftimony in writing; which , if ancient , muft alfo have the prime teftimony (witnefling it to be vncorrupt) from tradition.And hence aUo you clearly fee , that Scripture , true or falfe , can be no better known to be fo then true traditio from falfe: for if Tradition could be falfe in any point fo vniver* {ally current it might beare witnes to a falfe Scripture, and deny due approbation to many true ones, ^ ^. When then wee are demanded, how wee cari know a true Tradition from a falfe one ? Wee anfwetl firft; that wee can do this better then you can know true bookes, and true Copies of the truQ bookes of Scripture; from falfe: for, before you can do either of thefe;you muft ' - ^ firft our infallihle Judge Q^. 4. 5- 1 9! 395 firft know true Tradition from falfe ; that hecc you mayj not coniciJluraliy, but aflTuredly fay. Tfef/ir be the true bookes Scripture ; tbefe be the true Copies ofthefe true Bookes , be^ €4Hfe true Tradition recommendeth them for fHch:rhefe befalfe hookes^ orfalfe Copies of true bookes ; becaufethe Tradition^ which recommendeth thefe, is falfe* Tell mee the meanes by which infalhbly the true tradition in this point may be known from the falfe^and that very meanes I will affignc to know, in other points^ true Tradition from hlCc.Secon^ dlyy 1 ftiall (hew , that wee have better meanes to do this^ then all the world had to know theyr true traditions from falfe, for the firft two thowfand yeares, before the time of Moyfcs. Thirdly^ I anfwer diredly, by afligning this mea- nest Vi^hich is, when a doubt begins to be farre fpread in the Church concerning any tradition , to call a gcnerall Councell, and there, by the examination inftituted by men moft knowing of antiquity in gencrall, and particu»» larly well verfed in the received, and approved ould cuf- tomes of theyr countrics.For the countries of tho^e in the Councei beeingfo farre diftant, and (o wboly indepen- dent one of an other , cannot poflibly have all of them received, and that without any known oppofition in any one of them , one and the very felfe fame tradition, from any other hands but from thofe , from whom they recei- ved theyr whole faith,and this particular tradition for part of it Forjhad the beginers and Towers of this tra- dition now queftioned , been after the firft Planters of our faith, there would in fome countrye or other, be fo- und out fome author of this firft tradition | there would bee Come fame good, or badde,of that man who was able to perfwade a phanfy of his own,to be Apoftolicall doc- 5?^?^i and to be fimiely held fo by all the world, without The Homan Church is oppofition in any part thereof, even though this tradi^ tion (as you fay of moft of our traditions) had z direft oppofition to the ancient doi3:rine of theApoIlles. Which dodrine , when our traditions were held for ApoftoHcall, was too too irelhto be fo foon forfakeUjand that fo eafiiy, and fo generally,vvith out any oppofition.Now when the the graveft Prelates fro all parts of the world aflembled ^ having inilituted an exa isimpopble that dll the Chriftia Churcbes vahkh began in and about the Apoftoli'^ call times yad fofucceded through all Nations and ageSiSh$uld be either deceavedin vphat they vnanmoufly witneffed^ or agree ^11 gj them to dccjavj thofe vpho follovpcd them. SECT. ifurlrfallthle tudge 2* 4* 1^1 4 of SECT: XX. T'iMttthe Fathers teach thefe Traditions , and the definitions ofthe Counceis or Qhurch to he infallible. 2^f^iffff{ ^ ^ muft firft corrcd the error of fomeapi' W^^WM P^^henfions,who do not conceive fiich Au*- ' l^^'^^l '-^^^^^^^^ of Fathers to fpeake home to our purpofe, vnles they fay plainly the Church i$ Infaltlhle. The Fathers <3id conceive themlelves in theyr writings to fpeake to men capable fo farre of reafon as ta be able to deduce a ckar evident confgquencc , when they are comepleatly furniflied with the principles, froni which it muft needs follow. You lhall not perhaps find a cleare place that faith the Apofiles vcert infallible j Yet wee have evident principles from whence wee deduce that verity. Note that wee now vulgarly vie this word infaU IMcy becaufe no word more fully, and breefly isxpreflcth our mind. The thing meant by this word , was, by mt)ft equivalent exprelBons , fet down to the very full by An- tiquity, 2. I will {hew this clearly by what I have already fliewed Antiquity to affirme concerning the infallibility of Gouncels, in the laft Sedion but one. There you fhall fee Conftantine pray fed by Antiquity fo^ reveremng the fentence ofthefirfi Counccl ^sif it had been jpoak^en by Geds vr^n mouth, and puniiliingthe gainfayers ot it as Violatours ^Aiivlne haw\ Is not this a lull acknowledgment of in* CLq fallibility? 4o6 . XJoe^pman Qhurch is fellibility? As alfo when S.Athanafms calleth this definition the word of God. Is not the like' fully acknowledgment which was (hewed there to be made by S. Harmisda be- leeving the Holy Gboji to have Jpoken in the Fathers of that €auncel , and by S. Cyrill affirming them to have been inf^ fired by the Holy Ghoft th/it they should mtfvparue from truth having the Holy Ghofi Jpeaking in them; and calling theyr definitions^ The Rule of pure faith ^ which nothing can be but what is infaliible. The fame is (poken equivalently when he fay th again, that Chrift did frefide inviftblj in that Councel in which the Embafiadors of the jpilhop of Rome prefided vifibly. The fame is done by S. Leo affirming that tebe fetled by the holy Ghojl vs^hich was defined by the Cmncelly and calling the Canons thereof, made by the Holy Ghoft ot Spirit of God vfing alfo the like (peaches of the definitiSs of the Councel of Chalcedon^ tcarming them a Rulepo^ seeding from divine infj^iration. Is not this to acknowledge fuch a Rule infallible ? What more haih been written of the Apoftles do<9:rine ? Divers other fiich like fayings I have there given you, out of the Holy Fathers, affirming Lawfujl Councels to be gathered by the Holy Ghojl, and what was done In them not to be done by Human indujiry, becaufe tht fathers fo affembled were full of the Haly Ghojl, Hence alfo there was fiich reverence profelTed to theyr definitions as to the very Ghojpels them j^/w5,whicb is to exprefTc infal- , iibility in a luperlative degree: In which degree alfo I may place the fayingsof thofe Fathers , who called the J)efinitlonsofCouncel$j The ground of our faith y TheRock^of cur beleefcy Rules of faith , the very Voundations of truth. All fuperlative exprcffions of Infallibility , And yet men will pleafe to wonder at the deep filence ot Fathers, concer-*, ning this point in v/hich they couid never content them- our Infallible ludge Q, 4 S*. ig. 407 ielvcs to fpeake in a vulgar manner , but alwaies in fuch a high ftrein of veneration, that the true bcleevers might be not only inftruAed to beleevc, but aUb taught to re-* verence this infallibility, as the communication of the Spirit oi divine truth, as indeed it is; Concerning Coun-t eels then what wee faid in that Sedion coteyning ail this here recapitulated Chall (uffice. Remember alfo whatVin- ccntius Lerinenfis C. 4. faith All thofe who mil not be acco-* vnted Heeetikes muft con^orme themselves to the decrees ofgene^ Yd Coumels. Let vs now fee what they fay of the iafallibi- liry of Tradition , taking Tradition as it conteynes what is not written in Scripture, and yet is neceilary to be be- Jieeved or pradiled. 3. This Tradition the Fathers acknowledge infalli- ble and fcvcrall wayes ; fbme of them I have fiifficiently infmuated Seii : 12. where I Ihewed that the Fathers refufed to ftand to Scripture only , as to the only. Rule of faith , becaufc all neceflary Principles for, convincing of Heretites could not be deduced fiifficien* tlyfrom thence: And confequently they did hould that there was feme other Rule of faith , conteyning thofe principles, to witt Tradition , which could not be this other Ruleoffaith, nor furnifli them iufficiently with fuch principles, except fliee, in delivering of them, were infallible. There alfo I (hewed that the Fathers held di- vers pomts neceffarily to be beleeved or pradifed , for which they profelTed , themfelves to have no Scripture, but only Tradition: Therefore they held this to be a fiif- ficient ground of faith. There alfo I fhewed that they held divers points to be damnable errors, which they knox^ to be cotrary to no written Rule, therefore they thought is w^as fufficient to hould them for damnable Hcrefies, Qcj 2 only ^oS^ T^^omanChrchp! o»Iybecaufc they were contrary to the vmvrittcn Kuli^ of faith, which wee call Tradition, which if it were a £z.h lible Rule, it might be gainlaid without falling into th€ j damnable Sinne ofHereJy, ofwhich Sinne the gainfaycrs | of it are> for this only reafon accufed by the FathersJ ha« I vcalfb^^^t: 16. ru 3. fhewed , howmanifeftly S, Ireneus teacheth the vnwritten Rule of Tradition(and fuck Tra*« \ dition as was really in the Church then exiftent) to be a ; fufficient Rule , and ground for divine faith and confe- j quently to be infallible. In the very laft Selt: n. ^. I gave I you Tm«//i4W5 plain words condemning them who fay | the Church can me in her Traditions. ^wtoiVertuUim. See l Se£i: 12. n: 4. y.In the next number following I gave yoit a two clear places out o(s* Eftphmm for our obligation to j follow thefe Traditions. Going on to the {eventh istumlf^^ I I gave you not only a convincing Authority , but an || vnanfwerable argument of 5. jl«/few5 for the infallibility '1 of the Church in her Traditions,- whofe authority he tea- cheth to be appointed by God that there may befbmc i Efficient authority 'zz/^aw rv/?/f ft , men relying, as vpcrn aweW I ^Jfured fteppey may be lifted vp to God ; and he houldcth it ^1 headlong arrogancy not to rely vpon it .-^ which had been il moft inconfideratly fpoken, had it been only fallible, All | this is already difpached 3 let vs now proceed to the full I confufion of thefe who-complaine of fo deepe filenceia. jl this point of Infallibility, Andbccaufe D* Verne Sed!\ 24^ I iayth, tl>e authorities cited by Beliarmin come not home, 11 twill begin with fome authorities take out of him,which ! a I^fliall fhew to reach abundantly home to our purpofe* , 4» .S. Denis Difciple to S. Taul G.i. Bed: Herarch: iaithf ■ l^hofeourfirfi Captaines of Preeftly funition ( ta witt the Apo-» ^ flcs) M icUv^r to VI tbe ckeefejl and fH$er[ubfiantiall points onrinfallihleludge. 4. S. 19. 409 fartly in mitteny partly in vnr^rltten tnfittutlonsSo that,par^ of the chcefeft, and cofcquently part of the ncceffary and fuiidamentall points , were delivered to vs in vnwritten Traditions only. If therefore this Tradition be only a fal- lible Rule, wee have no infallible Rule to rely vpon in all points neceflary ; becaufe faYt of them muft rely vpon vnwritten Traditions only. S, lufiht in the end of his fe- cond Apology for the Cbriftians, among thefe vnwritten Traditions placet h fbme things made nccefTary by ApoC- tolicall precepts As the confecrmng of Wine mingled mth Water; andtijatitisLmfuU to no body (t\\on<^ never fb con- trite for h is Skim ) to receave the Eucharift before baftifme^ Is not this neccfTary? and yet what Scripture have you fov it and where find you in clears Scripture that the Apoftle* were baptized before they communicated in the laftfup- per of our Lord? There foiloweth the Authority of 5.- Ire-^ neusywhich I have fhewed to reach fo home, that the who* le faith of whole Nations may be divinejand infallible by relying only vpon traditions,even long after the finifhing. of the Canon of Scripture 5.C/;r: vpon 2.16:2. It is mamfeft: that the Apojlles did not deliver vs . all tinngs in writing but ma^ ny things mth out any writing: and thefe he Worthy of the- very felfe fame faith. Good M. DoStor is that, whichis fal- lible , worthy of the fame faith which that which is infalli- ble is- worthy of? Ht held then Tradition as infallible as^ . Scripture^of whichi ha ve'givcn you a clear reafon Sed:^ . mm: 3. TheophilaH and Oecumenim vpon the (ame pla- ce of S. Paul deliver iuft the fame dodrine- Of S. Bpipha*- musl havefpoaken already. And BeUarmin recounts. houf angry Brentius is whith him for faying 3 that it is hy Apofla^ lie all tradition krio^xn to be vnlavpfull to viarrj after a vosv- of ^gmitjAti^i^z^Qitj. that which is djimnablc 4IO The^oman Church is Wherefore to all who have made fuch vowes, the kno« wledge of this point is necefTary Tradition therefore de* liverech fbme neceffary pointy : Heare Epi(>h4nius his words (Hcrefy. 6i.)ltbehoueth vs alfotovfe tradition be-* caufe all things cannot be had out of Scripture. The Apofiles de^m livered fome things in mittngs, fome things by Tradition; As S. Faulfajthy according as I have delivered vntoyou. And in an other place. So I teach , fo f bave delivered to the Churches. The Holy Apoftles of God then have delivered that it is a sinne to marry after Virginity decreed;to witt,by vow.Befides what I have cited out of Tertullian already , he is much to be infiftcd vponin his Book dePrefcrip: where C. 19. he very diftindrly notesj that firft of all,before ever you enter into difpute with Heretikcs out of the Scripture , you muft difpute thefe following points: Trom whom^ by v^how, V(ben and to vphom that difcipUne was delivered by which vs^ee were made Chriftiansfand there affuredly will be found the truth of Scripturesthe truth of theyr interpretation^ and the truth of all Chrijlian Traditions. Marke here how the firft ground, vpon which wee are to ftand,as vpon a ground moft ad- vantagioui for gaining the vidory againft error, and purchafing triumph to tr.uth , is Tradition; For by that aione, and nopolEble way but by that , wee afliiredly know from whom (to witt from Chrijl fending his Apoftles) iy whom (to witt by the Apoftles) When (m the time of theyr preaching) to whom (to witt to the Churches foun- ded by them)rfej^ difcipUne by which wee were made Chriftians was delivered.From the Tradition then of thefe Churches as you take the letter of Scripture, wee take alfb the Sou-* le and interpretation of it conferved in thedayly anfwera- ble pradice firft inftituted by tho/e Apoftles, and thence by Tradition (as furely as by any writing)dcliyercd down by lucceffive p/adtice ofall/iich Churches; to whicfi Churches TertulUan , in his next words,diftinftly expref- fcth him felte to fend vs, for the foresaid end. And thus all things beeing driven to theyr firft Source and Origin^ will be difcovered that only Traditio,is in which all the- feMyfteries of our faith are conteyned^vpon this ground, faith he, I mil pre fcrtbeyTh^t what the Apojlks havepreacbei ought not to be proved any other way but ly thofe Churches ! 'rphich the Apofiles tbem felves have founded either by preaching to thmby mrd ofmouth^or by Epifile.And if this be fo/tt is w/- dent that all doctrine, agreeing with the do^rine of thefe Apof-- tolicall and Mother Churches^ is futable to truthy and to be iw'^ braced without all doubt (fo infallible doth this Tradition make it.) And thus TertulUan goeth on ftill prefling his adverfary, independently of all Scripture^ meerly by the tradition of this prefent Church , fliewing her pedegree fronci the primtitive Church: And this way > and only this way, he prefcribeth that wee ought to flbew what Cbrifi and hisApoftles taught.And in the beginning of his Book de Corona UilltiSy his doctrine comes very home in many things to our purpofe; As firft, when a queftion is asked, why wee in this Church (whofe pedegree wee can draw from the Apoftles) do pray for the deadf pray to Saindls? worfhip the Eucharift &c, the very asking of this Quet tion, why do you do it? proueth that wee do it. And becau- fe wee every where do it in the Church, the obfervation of thefe pradifes is to ftand good, becaufe, wee are bentes obfervatimem inveteratam qujiprxventcndo^ (latumfc'^ . €it.Hancfi nulla Scriptura determinavityCerte confnctudo rebo-^ cavit y qu£ fine dubio(!^c. wee have an obfervatmi winch by frevention^ having got along fianding pre fcriptiony hath fet lei it felfe. And though m Stripture bath detcrminatelj appmnted %ii *The%pmanClourcJ?i5 this obfervMce^ yet cufiome hath given tt Jlre>h: Vfibhb cufio^ me without all douht came from Tradition-^ Tor how can a things h in practice (fo vaiverfally} were not atfirft delivered by rr^rfi/7 . call inftitutionsjhow can a man be faved who contemnes ' them? It was not in vain fayth S. Chrifoftome homiin Ep: ad Philip: and again hom:^^. 2cd ipo^ulutn J twos not in vaifi^:- decreed by the A^ofiles , That in the celebration of thofe moji , dreadfull Myfteries y memory should be made of thofs who are dead : ihey knew well that much benefitt and profipt did hence t redound vnto them. See if you be fafe who condemae that' for fuperftitious, which the Apoftles decreed as moft be- neficiall to the Soulespf which I have fpoaken more Sei^ T^. n: 4. And of S* Aufrens authority SeSt : 12. n: 3.4, ^. (and you muft obferve how he (peakes of that which on : the one 4ide he held wholyneceflary ,as Infants baptifme, . not Rebaptizing Heretikes , and yet now here fet dov/n . iti fcripture:) which is to come further home then D.Verne 1 could wifii. To theJe I adde Origem Trefat: in Lib : Pe- i xhv ch : That only is to be beleeved for truth which in nothing difagrees from the Traditim i)jthe Church; And in our vnder^ . ft an ding our mfalUhle hdge ^.S. i^. 4t? fiandin^ Scripture^me mufi not beleeve othemife the the Church cf God hath by fuccefton delivered vnto vs. Wherefore if all the world vnderftood thofe words, ThUU my Body , con- cerning amoftreall corporall prefence , wee mult not feelceve other wife, again becaule,the publike pradicc of die Church doth vnderftand SAmes (when be bids Ac Prieits to be called tor to anoynte the fick with oyle , to obteine forgiveneffe oftheyr Sinnes) tofpeakofa true Sacrament hee clearly teachcth by this her pradice, that the Scripture Ihould not be vnderftood otherwife. The authorities therefore of the Fathers , com home ta our purpofe when fb often they inculcate this verity. J* So alfb do thofe Fathers who profeffe them felvci to receive fuch and fuch Bookes for Canonicall vpon Tradition. The very fame Rujinus ( who alone is found to deliver the whole Canon iuft as you do) in the words imraediatiy going before the naming thofe Canonicall Bookes, Ipeakcth thus />/ Enarratione Symboli: it feemeth good difiinitlj to fett dovpn in this place xohich be the volumes ef the nev9 and old Teftament , Vfhieh are beleeved to have been injpired by the Holy Ghoft (mark the ground why) according to the Tradition of our AnceftourS;, as me have received them 9Htofthe Monuments of our fore fathers. Note that he here doth not only take the Canonicall bookes for Tradition which moft Proteftants will fay they themfelves do , but taketh them to be Canonicall for tradition', and vpon this ^ound he faith , They wen beleeved to have been injpired by the Holy Ghoft. See alio what I faid of die Councel of Car- thage and others S^^; 3, vpon thi5 ground S.Athanafius { in fiAe Synoffts) receiveth the Ghofpcl of S. Matthew i^ind reiedeth the Ghofpel ofs^rfccw^.Vpo this ground Tcr-r tuUiaa Sf Hierome, S. Aug: S, Leo^do admitt fuch bookes to " ' Rr ^ bc^ 4f4 ithe^omdnChutcJ^^^^^^^ hcl and to deny others to be Ganonicall. Vpon this gfiiS^. und s. il/(/?^.».receiv:eth the Ads of the Apoftles. See his words 23> fine Hence alCo Eufibm %th.m HiJ?of5 £cd:Lik* 3, Such Scrlpfures by Tradition are held far truiygenvm ine and manifefily allmedbjthe opntonof all, and thathen^ iey as hy- an evident note or marke the) be difiinguished from (Others. Bebpuld the moft perfpicuous note or marke by i^hich Scriptures could infallibly be known. l£this.Rule- bp fallible wee, have no infallibility of the Scriptures, tjeeing or not beeing qanonicall Writings. None of thci Ho}y Fathers can be fhew.ed tp havejetfall one word ii^^' finuating that by the light difcovexed infiich orliich/ bpokes , they were affured, and that infallibly of thcyr tqeing Canonicallj of which I /poak SeH: 3«. SECT: xx^ ; That, the Fathers teach in general! the Qhurck tp he infallible, EsiDES thofc manifold authorities whiclfc- I have cited out of the Fathers, clearly tea-^- l| ching the church infallible in her Tradi-y \ rions ( by which and by her anfweraWe- pradice , fhee makes known to herGhil-" ^ dren her beleefc)and befides thofe other Authorities tea-^ ching that this Ghurch ., in her:Reprefentative or Gene-^- rallGouncds^. doth with>the infallible afliftancc ef thc; if ply. Ghpft , fet forth ,her Canons , or RuleS'fdr^beleefc- mr Infallthle ludge (^4. S. 1^. 41^ the Fathers, in very full cxpreffions,decIare theyr belcef^ of the Churches infallibili^rfor when fbever the Father^ (peak of the Churches beeiqg to be followed by vs in all tfiings moll fecurely , as beeing a certain guide or Rulej or when thev vfe any liich kind oflpeach they eithec meane the Cfhurch rcprefentative in a Lawful! Councel, or the Church Vniveriali, delivering fuch or fuch a point ty tradition ihining with conformable pradice. Whence my Reader will obferve how the Fathers(whofe fpeachcs of the Church in generalll am goir^g to cite) when they vfe filch generall fpeaches, do confirme, by tlieyr autho- rity 5 what I have faid of the infallibility of the Church Reprefentative in Councels, or of the like infallibility of the Church Vniverfall in her Trailitios.An by reafon of the vmverfall pcrfecution vnder thofe Hca*- tbenifh Emperours : and fo Tertullian doth not indeed (peak of the Church rcprefentative in Counccls j Yet he fpeakes home of the infallibility of the Church vniuer- fall ^ declaring her dodrinc by Ker Tradition , and her pradice conformable to herTradition and in all thus de- clared Tm«//i4« houlds her infallible f as I have already Ihewed thelaft Seit: w; 4. The third Father is 5'. E^iphanmy who how clear- ly he fpeaketh of the infallibility of the Church in her Traditions , wee have /een in the fame number : I add here further an admirable faying of this fiither of the Churches infallibility: for having (hewed Herefy,45*howf all Hercfics feek to go by new found by waies, he calleth the following of the Church that kjmgi high way of x^hicb Mofes jpoake (Myfticallyby the KingofEdom) faying; that be would paffe by that right an to th Land of Vromtje-^neU ther declining at thirlghr hand mr the left^ neUb^r on t¥j fid^ ndt pn thaty biitWee mil go on ftretght in tln &ngs frfv&- way. tor the tings Ugh Wdy h the Holy Church ofu(fdy ik;^o-ide of Truth, But every one of thefe Herejies leaving this Ktngs high way decline either on the right hand a' on the' !e:t to errow . But m O fj^rvants ofGot yjou Same's of We i!h vxh::of ':^d^, ' ^i^h^ \avt k^ownthe fnrt Rule^ and do go on in'ilTe way ofi^ imclearf'dly y and not called f>ai\bj thejr words and clit^ kours ^ for thejrwayes be erroneous. So he. Hcfe yoli have, that all Herefies agree in thts^that they leave the infallible diredibn of the Charoh,ad become Heretifces by cfaoo- fii>g out wayesouthcyr cnvri heiid ■ erroneous waies ; The^otmn Chm^^^ which in the Church never could havebcca mett witJi all> shee beelng the Kings high vpay, the beaten Roade of Truths thefureRulc , the way of truth. What mor^ clear ? To take th^e Churches direction as infallible , is the ve^y bane oif Chriftendome with DoHor F^rw^^with others it is the moft intolerable er^our in Popery , making all the err ours in- i:urable: and yet this ancient holy Father who (as S. Aufien •in his Book of Herefies faith)is the moft learned man that Jbad written of Herefies reprehendeth all and every one of thefe Herefies, for erring , by refufing to follow the Church J as a fure Rule , and as the Kings high-VPay, and as 4t ktiown Road. of truth. Now if your cenfiiring the ChiircTi for teaching her felfe to be this fureRule and plaine high %yay of Truth , were iuft, S. Bpphanm did him lelfe erre moft miflerably, in imputing the deniall of this to them^ all as an errour , of which every one of thofe Herefiet itood guilty* It is therefore moft falfe which a certain i/niv^rfity man (of whom Ifhall lpeak more in the next Chapter) over raftily affirmeth, that neither S. Epifhanius^ nor Aufien fn theyr Catalogues of Herctikes, branded any one as guilty for gainfaying this infaUibie guidance of the Church. For you fee S. Epiphaniiss brands all Here-* fies with diis foule markc, fay ingj That^very of thefe Here^ |i« IcAUing this Kings high way (of the Church the fure Ru- le, and plain Roade of Truth ) declines eyt^her m the ^ight handy er m the Uft. And the fame Father ending his Bookes x>f Herefies fay th , thefe be the young wenches) fo he ireadeth that "place of the Canticles Cap : 6. v. 8.) which . 4ir^{aid tc be without mmkr: and then to the Church he ap- plieth the next vecfe. My Dove , wy vndefiled is but one. One tins Virgin^ this ohafie one, this fpoufe^ the holy citty of God^ ^ faith^ the foundMm oj truth the prtne Rock^again^ vf^hich 'iurinfatlihle luclge 4. S. t^. 419: Ihe jtatei of HelUball not prevailed And then ^ing to give an abridgem^iit of the faith of the Catholike Church, he exults in the beginning , that be is now to have nothing- 10 do Avith filthy Herefies, but hath made his^approach tit the CalmeCoafisofTruthito witt,d^e dodrine oftheChurch And mark how lecure from erronrs he thinks him fclfc: hcxc;foYnm {C^yth-hc) beehgfre£ofallfeare 4nd trouble anit. tedioufnes , and btmg in an excellent foftmer by reafon of the pme tranquillity and [ecuritj here breathing 5 hov^ did me rti^ iayfe. in jpirit beeing receaved in 4 .S^; ene Edven? Wee: have paf-» fed manyeveU in our navigation y thvough the for ef aid Seas (of Herefies) but now having in fight the Citt^^ (of the Church); lei vs make h'^jl to this Holy lerufalem^and Virgin ofChrijl,ani^ Sfoufeeand fecarefouniation and Kock > our Reverend Iduther^, fnofi feafonably faymg ; Let vs afcend vnto the.mountain of ou7> Lordy and into the Houfe of the God oflacob^ and iheemll teacH' vs our wa^es (and not errours for how free ibee isirora. them he fartherexprelTcth*) Let vs fpeakjo Ifer thefe mrdi Y^)ich her jpoufe did;Cowemy jpoufeftom Libanns^becauje thoti art allfairc y and there is not. any ffott in thee: (this he faiths, efthe vifible Church on earth teaching v&ob; earth I myes , for preleatly he flyeth to her thus^) to tbjend tha^^ heingpiacedin theei me majreji ftomthofe: tfoublefome bufi^ neffes- of thefotegoingEe efiesJn the our Holy Mother the churcb and i thy hoiy Do^rine.;, and thatwee may belief eMd inthei truth with th£ Holy and only faith of God. And having ipoken^ fo full of this perfed fecurity from erro^r in theChurchw heteis vs whence it proceeds^ to witt from $he ipecialL ! afBftance of God, and that ihee is not like thy Ci^ncubiii^ QuecnSjhut that £hee is Qneenjas the truaSpoufe having;: far ikrdamy from Chrijl thiLrejiimmg th^Haly Gk'^^^^^^ I gwdgart-of-tb^ b^' ^10 -v:^ 7^e^ vniverfity man of filence, concerning this point of infaU r libility (which he fb much extoUeth, where as he fliould j h ave putt it for one of theHerefies if he had been one t of your Religion:) fo alfo is 5. Auften no leflfe wronged,' who is the fourth Father whole filence ofthis infallibility , they objed j And firft fay they, he calleth no man Here«« tike for denying of it, whereas all Heretikes mentioned ! j by him in his bookes of Herely,could not but deny it ac» €or ! which the Church held to be falfe , and that therefore ^ every Herefy muft needs teach that the Church is guilty i i of crrours, and bceing^iftris oferrours cannot be infil- i: i lible in deciding all points truly^ A litle skill JEqulpol-^ ^ i Untibus (to whiv.h thole arrive who have paficd the brid^ i I \ ge) would have made an vniverfity man fee a thing /b I t clear. Efpecia!ly beeing the fecond Queftion maketh the i j firft yet more clear , by acknov/ledging that it is the part v i of the Church to declare her meaning againft heretickes, r ivhich is to acknowledge her the ludge in thefe matters: - | jj for this queftion was to know quU centra teneat Bcclefia j it quantum hjlruilioni fatis efi fubdh that as much as 'was necefa-^ > j ai ry foY inftruHian mkht be taiild him concemlng the contrary ^ | n ludgement of the Church. S. Aufien cometh not to touch in I the ieaft word this fecond demaund, vntill the end of his - ai Book, and then he cuts him of thus ; It is fuperfluoujly de-^ i inaunded {vchat you expected to be tould by mee) what the Ca^ j ]< tholick^Church iudgeth againft all thefe feeing that for this end I Jic (of having as much inftrudion as it is ncceffary ) it is fuf-^ ^ \\ fcient to know that the Cathollck Church is of a contrary iud-' - l\ gement to all thefe. Therefore every Qhrifiian Catholick ought / ^ fiot to beleeve thefe things. Behould here the ludgement of j;i the Church , fb much efteemed^ that wee have as much as m is fufficientfor our tnflru (lion to auoid any opinion, when f a tvce do but know that the Church iuAgeth the cotrary rand to [ v defire to know more, is fuperpiom 5 for this alone is enough to j | j make ' *1 i omlhfaltihk ludge. 2.- 4* 5". 413 may my Chrijlian Cathclick "ot to be of a iudgement co« trarjr to the iudgement of the Church, Could any Pope in thofe our dayes have fpoaken more Papiftically ? If you were to make a Catalogue of grofTe errours , and errours incurable , youwouia put this down in capitail letters, J. Let this then be the fa fi authority of 5. Aufien fdf the infallibility of the Church i that wee have enough to disbcleeve any opinion , when (hee l>ids vs disbeleeve it: whence it evidently folio we th, that wee have fufficient to belecve any thing , becaule iTiee bids vs beleeve itjher au- thority being as well aflured for the one, as for the otber# j1 very full place I gave you ^eit: i9.«. 7. Thirdly it is notorious that S.Aufien often profelTeth(fee his words which I citeprelently^that Baptifme given by Heretikes is to beheld of infiUible validity: and^this , not becaufc it is fettdown in any Scripture (for he confefleth it is cle* arly fett down in noe Scripture,-) but becaufe the Church in a Plenary Councel hath declared ittobeefo j as he often vrgeth in the beginning of his fourth Book, de Baptiftna and there, Chap. 4. he houldeth the validity of the bap- tifoe given by Heretickes to be a point reveaUd by the llo^ ly Ghoji; to witt, when the Apoftles delivered this Tradi-* tion firft to the Church ; as he intimateth there Chap. 6m This Revelation , made by the Holy Ghoft of this point, did then grow to oblige all to aflent vnto it , when it was notifyed to the Church by a Plenary Councel after S. Cjr- pians dayes,- as the fame S\ aifo teaches* lourthly he acco^ unteth it alfb to have proceeded from the Holy Ghoft, that wee are obliged to communicate before w^ee eat any thing which will of the holy Ghoft is not notifyed to vs by any ^cripturej but the Church ii; of fufficient authority to no- 424 ^Qman Chrch ts || tify this will of the Holy Ghoft, and to make it obligatoi ry.His words are,- ItismanifeftthatwhentheDifciptes rt» it (eived the Bodj and bloud of our Lordy they did not receive fafm : j ting: Muft wee therefore calumniate the vniverfall Church for i all waies receiving fafting ? For hence it is that it hat h pleafei ^ the Holy Ghoft that, in the honor of fo great a Sacrament y rfte i Body of our lord should enter into the Umth of a Chriftian hc^ \ fore externall meats^ Vor this caufe this cuftome is k^pt through the whole world. Eptft: ii8. ad lanuarium. Fiftly S. Auften I lib. 7. de Baptifm C. 5'3. treating of a queftion in which \ nothing wa$ yet defined by the Church, (ayth ; It is not fafefot vs rashly to deliver our opinion in this matter, which i$ I not determined by any €ouncely but let our care be (fayth be) ta \ afjirmethatto be (fecurji vocis) athingto bejpoaken fscurelf » which in the government of our Lord and Saviour lefus Cbriji h \ confirmed by the confefton of the Vniverfall Church. No dan-' ger of errour in this /peachy For I ask you, were you not (without fear of beeing led into errour) fecurely to rely m vpon die teftimony of that party whom Chrifl fliould bid-i . 1 de you believe? you dare not but fay , Yes. Read then J &ixtly S, Auften y and mark how fully he tells you that^ ;l ivhat the Church tells you, is tould by one , vpon whofc 1 teftimony Chrifi did bidde you rely : and m'ark how he i inferreth from hence that^ as not to heare fuch a perfon^ ij whom cWy? did bidde you hear in fuch a controverfy^ were rather to rejed Chrijl, then to rejed fuch a perfon^ fb not to hear the Church, whom he did bidde you hear in all Controverfies , is not fo much to rejed her , as ta rejed Chrijl. See if he fpeaketb not to this efFed as fiilly as I have done* Thus then he writeth de Vnitatefidei C. 1 9 . Let now an Eeretichef^y 'vnto mee, how do you admitt of mee into your Communion? (he Ipeaketh offuchan one as .. - . .» w W mfdhhtehtdge 2- 4» S. 2 1 ♦ 425 fras baptized by Hcrcticks) then he replicth:! testdilj attf^ vper you. I Admitt ofjou a$ thdt Cbarch Admits ofjmyto which Church our Saviom giveth tefimanj. Do you kj^ovp better ^how you ought to be admitted of^ then oaf Saviour? Here perhaps jou Vfill fajy read vnto me then (out of Scripture) in what man^ ner Chrift hath commanded thofe ta be admitted of, who defire tp paffe from Heretickji t6 the Church ? tWs clearly and manl^ fefily (fetdovvnin Sdtipttire) neither I do fead nor jou. Nom then^ feeing that in the Scripture we^fndn&t that anywhopdf' fed from theH^reticks to the Church , were admitted afy either as I fay (without beeing rebaptized) as you fay (by firft rebaptizing of thcin) I am ofopinroHy that if there should ha-^ ve been feme wife man , to whome our Lord Tefus Chrifl giveth teflimonj and this (wife) man were consulted by vs , wee ought hj no meanes to doubt of doing that, which he should fay , leafl that wee should beiudged not fo much to he refraStorj tothi$ ' (wife) man as to be refractory to Chrfft oUf Lord, by whofe tef^ timony he was commended (to ho, heard.) But Chi ift doth give te^imony to his Church, if then thou wilt not (be admitted of asfliee admireth ofthee)fi?w( doefl majl perniciouflj refiftnot ^me, or any man , who will thus admitteftbee-, but thou doefi mojl pernicioufiy rdftfl our Saviour himfelfCiContrary to thy SaU 'Nation (that is damnably) beeing that thou wilt not beleeve that thou oughteji to be admitted of in fuel) a manfier , as that Church doth admittofthee, which Church he, by histefitmony^ doth commend,he{l fay) who^n youjmr f elves confejfe that it i$ a wicked thing not to beleeve. So he 5 and no Papift could Conference of Ratisbon, were forced to anfwcr to it thus; \n this point me freely dtf* „ y^wf /r(;w In Protocall; Monach:edit;2.Pag. 367. Butlettthem take what ths fame 5. Aup:en tenthlj faith Ep: ad lanuan 1 18, cap. if the vphole Church through the Yporld praHice any thing , it is moft infolent madnes to dijpute li whether that ought to be pralllx^ed or no. So he. Now this by no meanes could be true without the Church were infal- «j lible. For a wife man may with modefty difpute againft I thatjWhich may well be an errour* Eleventhly bccaule the i, enimies of the infallibility of the Church vfe to fright the J defenders thereof with a fond feare of beeing mifled 1^ blindly by her Prelats, who may (^fay they even in Coun- , eel errejS. Auftin anfwereth for vs thus,Epift:i^^. in fine, j. Jnfa much as he maketh, his people fecure from VI Govsrnours, y ie aft for them the Chayre ofvcholefome doctrine should be for ^ \, faken , in Which even the evill are conftreyned to deliver true 1, things. Tor they are not thejr oven things which they fay ; but Cods , xvho hath placed the dodrine of verity in the Chayre of I vnitie whence he fayth^Vo what they fay^ but according to theyr j I works doe y ou not Mat: 23 . So h e. 1^ 6. Twelfly^this Prince of Dodorsjiatlr a place which J I will ponder apart , not only becaufe he fayeth clearly J ji as much as wee could with , but cheefly becaufe he pro- ^ Ij veth vnanfwerably vvhat he fayth. And therefore this au- , thotity is not anfwered with out anfwering the arguments A which h^prefleth like a Maftcr Dilputant, demonftra- . ting cleerly why at the very writing of this, he refufcd I to be a Manichasan , and why every one, both infidels and Chriftians , ought to refufc the (ame. I will putt his I I goulden difcourfe at large, adding a fiiort paraphrafis, * to to putt mf re ader id mind of fiich refteiflion^ is dcfervS C j to be made ot fo admirable words. This place is lib: ct>n^ i tra Bftfi: Vnndamenti cap, 4. The Epifile of M4«/Vfem (which the Manicheans would have paiTc for Ghofpel) beginnt:tb \ thus. Manicbms the Apojlie of Ufus Chrifi by the providence of God the Father. I ask^ therefore (^ayth S. Aug:) who tbis Mani'm cheus if ? you will anfmr the Apoftleof Chrifii I d¬ helevt. j. % it. Perhaps jm will read the Ghoj^l vnto mee endeavoring ^ thence to prove it. And what if you did light vpon one who dii, not beleve the Ghojpel ? what would you do then, iffuch an one \ should fay vnto you, I do notbeleeveyou. (this is his argumet . to prove why an Infidel hath no realbnto be a Mani- > i chean,becau{e you manicheans (you Lutherans and Cal* i vinifts) who deny the authority of the Church, by taking away her infallibility , leave no infallible authority vpon ,\ which, anyman canfafely rely in admitting the GhoipeL - for the vndoubted word of God. Wherefore S.Aufien \ tells them , that they deftroying this ground , leave him § no infallible ground to beleeve the Ghofpel more then 1; infidels do beleeve it. Wherefore he addeth; But I would i not (becaufe now you have left mee no fufficient, that is^ ^fk i no infalliblejground for it) But I would not beleeve the Ghof^ i i ( pel vnleffe the Authority of the Church did move mee there vntOm I i Here is the firft place , where he tells you the Church is i k cfteemed by him fo fure a ground , (which it could not j ( be were it a fallible ground) that vpon it alone he bull- il ]< deth the beleefe of this article; The Scripture is the word of ;j i God'l fay, he buildeth the beleefe of this vpo this ground / 1 alone, becaufe he tells vs, if it were not for this ground, ; \\ he would not beleeve this fundamentall point whence. ; j appeareth the weakenes of our adverfaries befl anfwer; \ which as that 5. only telleth vs here, whatocca- ;( 1 fionaII>^ our infallihle ludge 2- 4* S. 2It 419 fionally moved him , when he was a Manichcarij firft tot beleeve the Ghofpel fo that the fenfe (faj^ thcyj is this; I, when I was a Alanichean,would not have bclecvcd the Ghoffk:I,had it not been that the Churches authority haci firft occ^iionally moved race therevnto. But I pray re-^ fled* how clear it is by S. words that he gives an abfolute vnivcrfall reaion, why , at the very writing of this difcourfe 3 he received the Ghofpel for Gods true word,fo moved therevnto by the authority of the Church that were it not for her authority, he would not beieeve the Ghofpel to be the word of God.Tf he fhould only ha- ve tould the Manicheans , whathehad ^ioneat his firft converfion occafionally vpon a groundj which ground now he himfelfe thought vnfufficicnt, for fuch an infalli- ble aflent , he had given them no kind of fatisfadionj Neither could he have vrged them ftill (as he doth) that he,in reieding Manicheans muft needs rely (as vpon fure ground) on the fame authority vpon which he firft re- lying was moft groundedly induced to give credit to the Scripture. The truth then is , that 5. Aufien tould them^ that neither infidels could beleeve them (they only citing Ghofpel;) nor Catholickes could beleeve them, becaule they only cited that Ghofpel againft the Church, which he himfelfe with all Catholickes beleeved only to be true Ghofpel for the authority of the Church. Whence it fol- lowethinhim; Why should not I (nov/atthe writing of thefe) obey them (the Prelates of the Church) fayingvnto mee , Do not obey Manicheus to whom I obeyed y f^tymg beleeve the Ghojpel. (Note here that he telis you he had fo good a ground for what he did , that even now this motive, as an invincible motive , prevaileth with him: for he ftill makes it good thusj Cimfe which you fleafe. If you fay, be-* Tt Uevc 4^0 ^oman Qhurch ii leeve ths Cathellckes ; they Admonish mee to give m credli ii joH, Wherefore deleeving them I cannot hut dtshleeve you. But ifjoti Jay do not beleeve theCatholickes ; then you do not tak,e a right conrfe to fierce ?n€e , by the Ghofpel, to heleevt ManichcHS ; (I pray mark his reafon) Becaufe I Meevei the GbdJpH it felfe , the Cdtholickes preaching it ttnto mee. But if jou fay [to mt^) you have rightly heUeved the Catholickes prajfing the Ghojpetytutyou have not rightly beleeved them dif^ payfing Manicheus;dG you thinkjnee fo very afoole that.m rea^ fon beeing rendered for ity I will beleeve vchatyo'a Ufi^ and dip beleeve what y oh lifi ; except you do not only bidde mee beleevt whatyou ivi//, but jou alfoy mojl manifejlly and evidently^ ma* he mee hmw itt* If you be (as you will fay) going to give mee^ fuch a reafon as fliali make it manifeftly and evidently known to nice that the Catholickes errcd^ in the bidding mee not beleeve Uankheus, but that they erred not in the bidding mcc receive the Ghofpel., what then? Dimitte Bvangelium. Bidd V or eve ell to the Ghofpel. (why?) Becaufe if jm houldyour felfe to the Gbajpd (vpon a ground that caa- not deceive you) i (for my part) will hould mf felfe ta thofe^ through wbofe teaching I have beleeved the Gho^ely and at theyr command I will not beleeve thee.BQhouldS.Aujlen te. 1 them, that even now , he will not beleeve them, becaufe even now he beleevcth the Gho(pell at theyr teaching byi whofe command he u not to beleeve you^ I pray what had this anfwer been to the purpofe if ^. Aiifien had thought the Catholickes now to be beleeved witht afTent lefTe then in* fallible? For if he had thought they could have milled him in bidding hvcn bdeeue the Ghofpel y he mrght have thought they could aliamiilcad him in bidding him not beleeve Mianichjus.hut you will fay he thought they might bring minifeft andevident dcmonftrations for this aft^^ becaufe mr Infallible Indge 4. S. lU 43 ' becaufe he infinuatcth that if they did To , he would be* Iceve them, even when they /aid he had reafon tobeleeve the Church prayfwgthe Ghofpely but not to beleeveh difprajftng Mamcheus, Whereas from that which wee hould infal- lible, no reafon lhall remove vs. I anfwer , that he who fayth to a man of an other Religion , I do not mean to pafTe to your Religion except you can fliew mcc, by ma- nifcft and evident demonftration that my Religion is faUc,- doth he , by this faying intimate that he doth not give infallible aucnt to the Religion he is now otrFof one may fay to an Athieft. I will dye for fny beleefeinthe Scripture, except you evidently can demonftrate that the Scrips tureisfalfe^ and cannot be Gods w or de^ In thc/e Ipeaches a mans meaning is, that vntill you can fliew mee that you have done this (which I am fure you cannot fliew mcc) you have no reafon to find fault with mcc for not paf- fing over vnto you. I prove this to be fo here if I may but fuppofe (a thing moft true) that S. Aufien did, with an in- fallible affcnt beleeve the Gho/pel. Fori pray obferve if he fpeaketh not of his intending to forfake his beleefe in the very Ghofpcl it /elfe, if the Manicheans can fliew by Scripture that any dodrine contrary to the belccfe of the Church can be true.So impoflible did he hould it to fhew the Church fallible in any one point. For even thus he fayth; Jfferhaps intheGhofpel thoushalt be able to find any place that nianifeft to prove Manichetis a true Apofile , thea indeed you shall xveakevnto ma the authority of the Citholukei bidding mee not beleeve thee (by (hewing thcyr authority is fallible. )Be pleafed to refle(fl attentively on \\ hat follow* eth^Tfeij Authority (of the Catholickcs)^^ Wr^^ weakfiied^nov^ I cannot fo much as lelceve the Gbofpel. The word [now) flieweth that at the very writing of this,hc profcfTeth that T t 2 \£ 4^1 T^e^oman Church is i f the Catholickes aurhority could^, but in anjr one fingle coirit, be fhewed fallible, he cannot now beleeve the Ghofpel} becaufe fayth he, hythofe Catholicises , I had beleeved the Chojpel^whom you now have in one point {hewed fallible* Hereiome of our adverfaries catch hould onthofe wordsf hecaufebj thofeCatboVickfs ^ I had beleeved-^ whereas , fay* they Jf he had meant theyr authoiity had been the Caufe of his beleefe, he Ihouid not have vfed the particles, P^r, by^ or th'ouh^ but the particle Propter for. A weak objec- tion^for how often in Scripture doth this particle^ByjCx- prefle the true Caufe vpon which, and only which mtn beleeved infallibly , as all did firft by or through the prea- ching oicbriji. So« lo. 17. v. 20. Chrift prayeth , not only for his Apoftles, but alio for them which should beleeve in him by or through theyr words. And 5. Vaul 2.Thes: 2. i Would have vs ft and f aft and hould The Traditions which have been taught vs by wordy or by his Epiftle. What was held by thofe authorities was held by them with infallibility. r&/ir by two immutable things , in which it was impopble for God to lye^ wee might have ftrong consolation. Uebr : 6^ iS. Weaker then this is an other cave! tlmty S.Au(len could not efteera the Church infallible^becaufe for a cleare place in Scrip-* turehe would have denied her infallibility ; Foraccor- ding to this fond cavelling reafon be (hould have alfo et teemed the Scripture fiilible , becaufe he likewife fayth^. theCatholiques authority heeing weakened.now I cannot fo much ^ beleeve t be GhojpeL The truth then is that he fpeaketh; with an Heretike denying the Churches infallibility, and difputing igainft it out of Scripture^ Wherefore he fpea* keth iuft v^ith h im , as weevfe to fpeakc with you, doing: h the iike;thatis,he telleth him only whatfbould happe if his^ ' ' |mpoJ(Ebilities were Chewed to be realities.^ And firft he our infdUUelu3^^^ S. tl. 4 faytb , that vnlefle his open fallitics can be demonftrate^ out of the true word of God, (which is one itnpoflibility) he would not beleevc them. Secondly he, even after the performance of this impofEbility tcUs himj he hath yet an other anfwcr, to witt , tliat he will neither beleeve hirn ipeaking that» which he could fliew to be clear Gho5>el, neither would he beleeve the Church any more , becaufc fliee had taught him to beleeve that to be Gods true word, which notwith (landing did beare clear witnesta that, which &ee taught to be a Lyef .whence he , feeing her in one ppint fallible, would never rely on her fo as to- beleevc the Scripture vpon her authority jas then he did. You fhall fee how clearly be fayth th^s,•V^6^ref£^/'^(^aythhe) if in thtGojpel no mamfeft ft ace h found concerning theApoftle-- ship afUmUhem , i will rather beleeve the Catholiciue^ them thee:but if thou shalt read meeout of theGhofpel any place ma^ nife^lj for Manicheus , I vplll ndther beleeve them, nor thee. I will not beleeve them , Bee aufe they have Ijed vnto mee conceY'^ ning th^e (this one Lye fbewing theyr Church to be falli* ble;) Neither mil I beleeve thee{cvcn citing clear Scripture, as thou calleft it) bccaufe tbou cltefi to meethat Scnptnre to V^hicblgavi credit by tbofe wha 1)ave lytd vnto mee.^ Which words be perfed non^fenfc without you fay theScri^ure in S. Aufiem opinion loreth(in order to vs)her infallibility,, if the Catholique Church can tell one lie; For in that cafe5^ i4#^mfayth^ he would forfake both Church and Scripture alfo , if any clear place in Scripture fhould fajr Manic ffeus was^ a true Apofile. Aiyd he fay th that for that cau- le, and vpon that ground he would £oils^t ScriptuTC,be^ caufe it was that Scripture^ which he only held to be Qy^ by the authority of the Catholique Church , which now*^ fcc had taken in one lyc. But for all this, layth he^, Qo:t fer 454^ Tf>t^oman Chttrchis hidd I should not heleevetbe Ghojpel for thou caiift notbrift^ any thing to make mee beleevc cither theChureh,op thai which is commended for Gods word by theChurch to be contrary to truth. For even^beUevtng the Ghojpel I do notfin4 hovp I can he\eeve f/;^^, there beeing in the Ghofpel^nothing for thee. And then he llicweth, how clearly he findes the Ads of the Apoftles to be againft them: Whnh ^aofe(raytb he) it U necejfaryfor mee to beleeve if I do beleeve the Ghof^L Isotc firjl how he (peaketh of the beliefe he had now at the very writing of thcfe fayiiig,that he muft beleeve thU Book which is a Book rejeded by the Manicheansi Whence it is manifeft that he {peaketh of himfelfe as noW a Catholique and fuch a Catholique as received onl/ fuch bookes for Gods true word, as the Church recom* mended to him for fuch;houlding alfo her recommenda- tion fo ftirc , that (hee could not faile in re commend mg any one booke for Gods word>which was not of neceffi- ty to be held fo, meerly vpon her recommendationj For thus he proveth that it was then neceflFaiy for him to be- leeve this Book (of the Ads of the Apoftles which the Manicheans' held to be no Scripture) if he beleeveth the Ghofpel, Becaufe the Catholique Authority (of the Church) dotb in like manner commend both Scriptures vnto mee, to witt as well the Ads,as the four Ghofpels/or indeed it is pro- per to thofe who beleeve the Church faUible tobeleevfi her only when they think fitting : whereas thofe who with S. j4«/?^» beleeve her infallible, muft needs fpeake as he doth, that beeing the Church propofeth this to be be- leeved , as well as that, it is neceffary for mee to beleeve iJi is on her Authority as well as t SECT: inrJnfaMle lud^e % 4. S ttl 435 SECT: XXIL That all which the Fathers fay of the m- failibility of the Church in her Traditi- ons orCouncels, or in,generall tearmes, is meant by them particularly of the Roman Churchy as wee vnderftand the Roman Church . Muft now take away from our advert faries theyr laft fliift, which is that aU though S, Aujleh and fo many other Fa* thers Ipeak fo often of the infallibiiity of the Traditions of the^hurch, and of the Councels^of the Churchy and of the Churches aurho* rity in general! i yet , (ay they, what js this to the Roman Church y, more then to the Engh'fh which is a part of the Catholique as well as the Roman; (hee only beeing a part ind not the whole Catholiquc Church ? I anfwer , that Mien wee fay the Church is infallible, weefpeake,as An- tiquity vfeth to {peak of the Church : that is , wee (peak of it^as of a flock adhering to theyr true Head-Paftouri indconfequcntly wecfpcake ofthe-Church of Rome in jhis fenfc , as fhee is a Church Catholiquc, that is vriver- jRiUy comprehending allthefheep of Chtiji ^ living in any fiation though never fo farre from Ronre , yet joyned in conMnunion to the Bifbop of Rome , as to her Head-Pa- ftour : For thus the Roman Church ; as comprehending " " ill ^4^^ The^omanChurcfxts allCbLUtchcsvnited to her Coi»munion,. cannot be {hew- ed in any time fince Chrifi , ta have differed in dodrinc from what the vniverfall Church ever taught , or pradi^ ced : If tlherefore the vnivcrfall Church , toUovving Tra- dition be , by the guidance of the fame Tradition infalli- bly (;onduded,. according to the opinion of the Fathers; the Roman Church , ever , treading the very felfe fame ftcpps , muft needs have proceeded as infallibly. Again ^ if the Church reprcfentative be infallibly guided by the Holy Ghoft , as I have proved , the felfe fame muft needs | bettueofthe Roman Church , whoever was joyned I in Communion and vnity of Do(9:rine with every lawful! I , general! Councel which hath been from Chrifts time to 1 this. For it is fo notorious , that our adverfaries cannot 1 deny it , that the Bifiiop of Rome cither by him felfe , or ' by his Legates in his name , bath prefided in euery fuch i Councel , and fubicribed vnto it in the very firft and cheefe place, or at leaft he did fend his confirmation and i ratification of all the ads thercof.Her dodrine hath then : | alwaies agreed with all Lawful! Councels : Iftheyr de- ; crces be infallible Rules as I have proued, then the Ro^ \r man Churches dodrine, euer ruled by them, is infallible, ij And the fame Fathers who fay the dodrine agreeing n with Councels is infallible , alfb by manifeft confequencc t fay , that the dodrine of the R Oman Church is infallible. ' This beeing fo notorious, no wonder if the Fathers many t times promifcuoufly fpcake in the fame manerof the Ro- man Church , and of the Church in gcnerall,and take the one for the other , making no diftincfcion at all. And this they doe both for the reafbns before fayd, asalfo becaufe by die very nameof th^e Church they vnderftood the flock of Cfcri^ governed by S. Fetery and his SuccefTors ; . ■ as our tnfallthle Mge Q. 4 ^.itl 435? theyr Lawful! Paftouf appointed by Chrifi. And, juft as the Apoftle tells vs, thatChrifl didpurchas a Church to himfelfby his bloody So S.Chryfofiom : Lib. 2. de Sacerd: asking, vphy Cbrift did shed his blood? anlwers, That he might ptlrchafe vnto himfelfehii sheepe , the charge of which he cont'^ mitted both to Veter and his fuccejfors. Hence you fee that with him the Church vniverfall, is one, and the felfe fa- Die thing , that the flock of Chrifts flieep, governed by Sf Teters fucceffour the Bifliop of Rome fo S. Cyprian tells vs Epifi: 6^. that the Church is a people "vnited to th^jr Triefty and a flock, adhering to theyr sheepheard. Hence Venerable Bede lib. 2. Hifi. EccL cap. 2. %th Pope Greg : governed the Church in tfjedayesof Mauritius the Emperour. And S. GrC'^ gory lib. 4. DiaU C.40. fayth the Church, refufed Laurence to be her governour when Sywmachm Kv^schotcnFo^c. He vfed the ftyle of S. Irenmlib. 3. c^p. 3. who fayth that to Linus (the luccelTor of 5, Peter) the Apoftlesgave the charge of governing the Church 5 taking the Roman Bifhops charge promiscuoufly for the charge of the vniverfall Church: And S.Hierome Epiji: 58. ad Dantafum* if any one be ioy^ ned to the ChayreofS.TeterMeus ciij)e is of my Religion. And Again Ep: 57. to the fame Pope he /peaketh thus ; To thy Holynes, that is , to the Chayre ofS.Feter I am ioyntd in Com* munion vpon this Rock, ( fo he calleth -S^. Teters Chayre ) I knovQ the Church is built. He is profan^^ whofoever he is > vpho eateth the Lambe out of this houfe.He who is not in the Ark^ of iJo'e shall perish in the deluge. And S Leo Ep:S^.ad Anafl.c. 1 1. flieweth diftindly^howin the church there isfuch fiibor- dinatio of the people to theyrBifliops,ad of thefc to theyr higher Bifliops: ad of all higher Biftiops to the Bilhop of Romej^fc4t by the the charge of the vniverfall church might bt rejerrc(^ to that one chayre of Peter ^fo nothing any where should ^ ^ Vu difagrei Tk^omnChrchis difagreeffom theyr hend.S Hierome again i. ad Tim: 3.raytl;^ thztPope Damafus was Re£lor of th it HatifeofGodv^bich S» Paul called the Pillar and foundation of Truth. And S. Ambrofe in Or atione funek de ebnu fratrh fui SatyriypT2CyCcth his Bro« ther Satyrus for his care in choofing a Cathohke Biftiop by this Rule, that he inquired veh ther they agreed mththe Catholick^Bishofs that h, mth the "Roman Church : So he, taking the Catholick and the Roman for ail one. Hence 5* Cyprian calleththeBifliop of Rome , the Bifihop of the Catholicke Church. Wee kpovp Cornelhu to have been ele&ed by Almighty Cod and Chtijl our L&rdy the Biihop ofthemojl ho-* ly Catholick Chunk Neither are vpee ignorant that there 9Ught to be one God, one Chrift our Lordy one Holy Ghofi, one Bishop in the Catholik^ church. So he lib. 3. Ep: 11. And Again de Vnitate Ecclefu: Doth he confide him jfelfe to be in the Churchy •who forfaket ' the ChayreofFeter ^ vpon which the Church is jounced I Whence it is evident that by the Church he ment the multitude of beleevers adliering to the Chayre ©f the BiChop of Rome. So alfo the moft ancient Pope Anacletnsy not fourscoare yeares after our Saviours deaths Ipoake thusjin the end of his firft Epiftleregiftred among the Decretals and Counceis, The Apofiles hy the cammaurid of our Saviour have appointed that the greater and harder queflions should alwaies be referred to the ApoJtoHcall feat^vpon which Chriji hath built the vniverfaU Church , he himfelft^ faying , Thou art Peter (that is a Rock^) and vpon this Rock I mil build my Church, so hee Hence I have the very ground why the Fathers promifcuoully by the name of the Church, vniverfally vnderftood the Roman Church,, vpon whofe feat the vniver/aJl was built.And this ground is made good by a world of Fathers inCoccius where he treates of the Primacy of the Siftop of Rome»- our tnfallihle ludge % 4. S. it. 45 9 2, That which is for my prefent intent , is to' (hew that the Fathers, and why the Fathers, do take the name oithe Church promiscuoufly for the Roman Churchythou^ they do not name her by that name^ becaufe it was fo no* torious that by the name of the Church they ment no other thing then Chrifts flock vnder theyr true Sheep- heard the Bifliop of Rome : And when it is once notori- oufly known to the hearers what is ment by fuch a word, the vfe of it is fufficiently determinate. So here in En- gland when with one an other wee fay the Parliament did decree or cxamin fiich a thing, wee are known no-« torioully to Ipeak of the Englifli ParliamentiThough the word Parliament he as indifferent to fignify the French Parliament , eipeciallyif Ipoakcn by Freach to Freach in rhe midle of France, as I have further declared Selt'.j^ towards the end. I note ailb that all that I here in the laft; Sedions cited out of the leathers for the infallibility of the Church in her Traditions and Councels, muft needs be fpoaken of no othe^ Church then of fuch an one as did not difclaime froui infallibility ,-But all Churches, but the Roman, difclaimed from infallibility,-Therefore they taught no other church but the Roman to be infallible. If you ask why they muft needs teach no Church to be infallible which difclaimed from beeing fo, I have given you a moft evident reafon thereof Seit: 17. 3. This note fteweth that tho Fathers muft needs ha- ve, in thofc fayings ofthcyrs concerning infallibility ,vn- derftood the Roman Church and could vnderftand no other differing from her. Bui indeed (as I have faid)chcyr very vulgar phrafc of Catholique Church , was known then to be applied to the Roman, taken in the fenfe wee fpoak of. Hence that ouidArian fayd to King V u z The 0 do- 440 ^?e^oman Church is Theodorickj If joti futt Arm^gajles (a Cathoiiquc) ti death , the 'Romans {th^t is the Catholickes) w// poclatme him a Martyr, as witnefFeth Vid;or Vti: de Terfec: Vand: ilb, I. Hence alio Ricemer, an other , did write vnto the Gennenfes. Ifhei^ea Catholique , he is a 'Roman And Greg: ofTours lib, -iJe gloria Martyr: cap* 2j. tellitighow Theodegefilus an Arian King of Portugall ifaide fuch a Mi- racle was a trick of the Romans i he adde this Parenthefis, 'Sor they call the men of our Religion Romans* So he This then was the vulgar old ftile, Thusfpoak Antiquity , if he be one of Chrifis sheepe he is one of S. Feters Succejfors fi^ck, as I fhewed out ofs. Chryfojlome If he be of the Catholike- Church, he is one of the people vnitedto this cheefe Priefi as I (hewed out ofs. Cypri^^w^ If mention be made of one to whom the Cbargeof Governing the Church is given, the Bif- hop of Rome is vnderftood in the vulgar language of the primitiue Church , as I Ihe wed out of Bede , S. Gregor , S. Irineus* If a S. UieromesffonlA. tell you , who were of his Church or Communion , he vnderftands every one joynei totheChayreofS. Peter 5 Fovvpon this Rock, he' knevpeth the Cburchis huilt*l£a S.Leo fpeaketh of one who hath the. charge of the vmverfall Church, he raeaneth the Bifliop "^^ho fitteth in the Chayre afs* Peter. I f a 5. Hierom will fignify a jyamafus Wi(hop oi Komo ^ he will do it by calling him^ The Reitor of the Houfe of God , which is the Church the Villat - Md Foundation of truth, if a S. Ambrofe or his Brother, be to picke out a mong Schifhiatikes a Bifliop who is a true member of the Catholick Church,he will do it by asking, whether he agrees with the Cathalick^Bishop: And he will tell ^ you that in plain tearmes by that name he meanes the 'Ro^ vian Church, And if a S.Cjprian be to fpeak of a Cornelim Bifliop of the Roman Church;^ he will explicate him fclfc Our infallible ludge Q^.^.S. ll ; 44^ in current language , by calling him Bishop of the CatholU que Church J he beeing notorioully known to be tha| one 3ishcf which mujl be at all times in the Church , and no m^n can con-fide that he is in the CathoUque Church x^ho forfak^th the Chajre ofs. Feter. You need not then wonder to hearc mee fay that by thofe who are in the Catholique Church , wee mean thofe who have not forfakenjbut cleaue faft to the Chayre o{ S. Peter, for on this Afofiolicall feat Chrifl hath built the vniverfall Church as the moft ancient Anacle^ tush^th tould you. Hence a S. Auflen ( Bpijl: 162. ) will tell Cccilian , that he needs not fear the confpiring mul- titude of African Bifliops as long as he communicated with Melchiades\bc Pope, Hence Optatus 1.2* contra Terme^ nian: will thruft the Donatifts out of the number of Ca- tholiques ^becaufe thej communicate d not vpith the Roman Church : and he himfeife will adhere to Sericius the Pop^ 10 whom all the world was vnited. All the world then were Papifts 3 and thofe counted Heretikes who refufcd to be fo. And in this fenle not to be a Papift , that is not to be one vnited in Communion to the Pope , was the felfe fame as not to be Catholick ; for all the Catholique world wa& vnited to the Pope or Head-paftour ofchrip flock. 4^ Befides all this , you muft know , that the Fathers did not alwayes forget to expreffe themfelves concerning the infallibility of the Church of Rome byname, or as iignificantly as if they had put that name. In my i^^Se&r^ J», 7. 1 cited S. Aujlens words at large to prove that God hath left fome fuch authority vnto vs ^ that by ^^, as hj d> well ajfured fleppe wee may be lifted vp to God : and hence he cocludeth that no ma Ihould doubt to be take himfeife ta the lappe of thcRoma church for this church you will find ifif words evidently to defcnbe. Read the and you cannot The %pman Church is I deny ft/^Again VfaL in Partem Donati he fpcaketh thus of 1 1^ S • ?/tef$ Chayre. Shee is that Rock Vffhlch the proude gates o[ I ^ t] Hell cannot vanquish. And S. Cyprian Ep: 55. n. 6. They are ' ^ fo bould as to carry letters from prophane Schifmatikcs to the ^ Chayre c?/ Peter and the principall Church whence Friefilj v-* A nity rofe j not conftdering the Romans to be them , whofe faith \ { the Apeftie beeing the Commender there of ) vfas pray fed y to ^i vphom misbeleefe cannot have accej[e. And S. Hierom Apologia \ Mver : Ruff. I. 3* cap.^. Know you that the Roman faith com^^ \ tneuded by the Apoftles mouthy will receive no fuch deceits , nor .\ can pofibly be changed though an Angel taught otherwtfe* Our \ adverfaries commonly receive the Sixt penerall Synod ! celebrated A. ^80. in which, after the Epiftle of Agatho \ the Pope had been read. (Ad; 4,) it was confirmed by ( the/c words (Ad : 8.) This is the true Rule of faith which the ' Apojlolicall church of Chrijl hath vigor ovflj held and jiill ^- fendethi which Church shall never be proved to have erred from th e ?ath of Apojlolicall Tradition: (And that you may know this was to hould true for ever, the Councel addeth) cording to the divine promis of our lord and Saviour ^ I have prayed for thee that thy faith maynotfailey Here you have the very phrafe wee now vfe of impolEbility of erring grounded in the divine promife. What is this called but Infallibiliiy ? The fame divine promife is iuft /b applied to S. Peters Succeflbrs by S. Leo. Serm : 3. in Anniver: fu^e Ajfum: If wee will fpeake with Antiquity, here is fromifio a manifeft promife that thePaftour of theChurch S. Peters SuccefTor proceeding as Vniverfal Paftor,or de- fining in a Councel neither ihall nor can fail , for which promiffe D. Tern Seit: 27. calieth to earneftly. 5. By this time my Reader will fee how exceeding litlereafbn our adverfaries have to take for aftrong ar- gument i' 6ur infaHihle lud^eQ^, 12. 44^ gumcntagainft infallibility the deep filenceof Antiqui-t ty ( as they fpeake ) in this point j whereas in a very ihort time , with my fmale reading , have been able fo to weary out my Reader with the plentiful! Authorities of Antiquity , that he will eafily remember hereafter what juft indignatio ouglrt to be conceived againft this grofle falfity^ SECT: XXIIL 5*0^^ things J^ery necejfary fir the ea/ter anfr er^^ ing our adloerprtes ohjeSiions • P Efore I begin any one of our advcrfarie$ 11 Objedions I muft ( to take avvay all preju* dice)intreat my Reader in the whole read* ili ing of this next Sedion to note , F/r/? how infallibly all the Qiriftian world , except (ome few So* einians ) affitme them felves to beleeve all things contey- fied in thofe Bookes which they hould canonicall Scrip** tuie. and yet I will vndertake that any judicious man in the worlds who with a calme iober, and disintcrrefled mind (hall attentively ponder on the one fide what they obied againft the infallibility of the Church and then on the other fide, all thofe exceeding nrany places of Scrlp"* ture which feeme fo manifeftly contrary to one an other^ that the greateft witts that ever yet were could never clear them fo , but ftill the difficulty which remained is fo very great that no full fatisfadion would ever be recei- ved if oaens wills were bent as relolutely to receive no * ™ " ' anfwcr 444 The^omanlChurchk anfWer but a manifeft one againft the infallibility of fcrip* ture as the wills of Proteftants are bent to tcjcd: all wee can fay in anRver to their obiedions againft infaUibility of the Church > vnles our anfwers be more manifeftly e-* videntthen the Noone-funn-fliine : Wherefore in this matter due refped: to divine authority maketh vs always fo farre fubmitt our vnderftandings^by force of our will, that , if the contrary be not ( as I may fay ) more then e- vident , wee are relblved to yeiJd no affent vnto it. Any man who fhould ponder this on the one fide, and then with due attention confider on the other fide how very few the obiedions againft the infallibility of the Church be , in comparifbn of the obiedions againft the infallible lity of Scripture , and with how much Iweat and labour thefe be fcarce folved at laft ? where as the others be an- Rveredfo that nothing like evidence can be brought a gainft them , efpecially if men would come to look vpon thefe obiedions , as vpon fo many weak difficulties of human reafbn againft an Authority , which fo ftrongly can prove her participation of divine verity , having for the evidence thereof twelfue ftrong texts of Scripture related 5^ir5: 14. ly. So many invincible reafons related S: l 6* So many vnanfvverable teftimonies of Holy Fathers as have been related thefe four laft Sedions , He ( I fay ) who would thus on both fides confider the matter,would find it even impofEblefor him in his confcience to deny that the obiedions againft the infallibility of the Church be anywife either fb many in Number or foinfuperable to human capacity as the obiedions be which may be . made againft the infallibility of Scripture* 2. And becaufe this oblervatio ad note is of great mo- ment to make the Proteftant reader lee , that it i\ more - ..... j^.^ our Infallible ludge Q^^. S. 12. 44 1 his own prejudice againft the Churchs infallibility ^whicli I ftands in his light, then any fohd rcafon I will alledge ' an objedion or two, which poor weake human reafon , moueth againft the divine infallibility of all ihat is cotey- ! ned in vndoubted Scripture. Wee need not go farreto ' find the{eobjedions» Even in the firft Chapter of the firft Ghofpel ifind a dirficulty fb great, that though I haue (as I fully thinke) moft cftetully lought fatisfidion concerning it , in thirty or more ot the bell interpreters , yet I could find no anfwer hatfe fo iatisfidory , as I,with my poore ability , hope to give to the very ftrongeft ob- jedion that I could ever yet fee made againft the infalli- bility ofthe Church, taking the Church in the fence which I explicated S^ct. 18. The objedion is this , which you may touch with your fingers. It is faid Mat: i.v. 17. All the generations from Abrahamr^? David are fourteenege^ nerationS j andfromD3,v\d vntill the carrying a way into Ba^ bilon arefourteene generations : and from the carrying a way intoBabtlon vnto Chrift are fourteene generations. This is the infallible Text. Now take your fingers, and count with as great infallibility , as you can count , fourteene names fet down in fayre print before your eyes. In the firft fourteene you will find Abraham to be the firft and David to be the laft.Thefe you muft not count over again in thefecond fourteene. So that Salomon is the firft ofthe fecond fourteene , and lecbmiias is the laft and as David was not to be counted in the fecond fourteene , becaufe he was already once counted in the firft , fo alfb lechoni.^s . muft not be counted once more in the thirdfourtcen, be- caufe he hath been onc^ before counted in thefecond fourteene i v/hence it followeth that the firft in the third iburteene hSalathiel the Sonne oilechonias , and the laft Xx ii^uft 44d T%e ^omdn ChurcJxU muft needs he^ Cbrift himfelfejfo that you muft find twelve more generations between Sdlathiel the firft and Chrifi th« laft, or elfe ( fayth human reafon ) infallibly you have not fourteen generations as S.Matthew fayth , you have. It is a.ftnallabourHfor you to fee whether you have tweluc more, or no ? Lay every feverall finger vpon every fevc-« rail name,and if you have tenne fingers two names muft remaine vntouched , or elte you will not have twelue. I touched my thumbe vpon the name ofsalathiel , whom I have proved to be the firil of the laft fourteen , thent tpuched the name oiztnobabel with.my fore-finger , and thus having touched al L my tenne fingers at the tene foU lawing names' >.I could not poffibly fee any more names^ to touch but the name of iQfeph. When reafon tould mec that ieemed to the very eye to be a demonftration that SaUthiel , who was the firft of this laft fourteene, having, but eleven more following him^to Christy could not (witb; C|;rf/?) make vp the laft fourteen. How then, if this be infallibly true , cometh that al/b to be infallibly truc> which S, Matthew fayth contrary to this, calling thefc laft. thirteen generations as clearly fourteene as he called the. former. 3t Again 5.L«iE^^Tetting down the. genealogy of Chrijl fayth cap. 3, v. 35: 3^. SaUh which was the (one ofCainan^ 'which{C'2L\i\2in)was the Sonne of ArphaxaLknd all the Greek. Copies of the new teftament read thu$,^ conformable ta. all the Greek Copies of the ould teftament Gm: 11. -r/.iio. Yet if you turne to this place in Gencfis, tranllaced faith-- fully by our vulgar, and your owne Bible you (hall noti. finde that Cainan was the Sonne of Arpbaxad , as S Luh^. fayth; but you fhali finde thc/e words^ And Arphaxad Ihei , fi^u^aniilnrtjjjeam and bemSaUb whQXCd^^i^Salab^ was. our Infallihk fudge. Q^. 4. 5". i f. 447 the Sonne ofCainan according to Luke and not the Sojine of Arphaxad.lf you fay this Salah V72LsArphaxads Son^ ne hccsiuCc Arphaxadw2LS his grand-father I pray note that Arphaxad is fayd to have begot him, when he was five ancl thirty years ould, whereas if you mark , even that Chapter of Gencfis,you fhall fee no one there mentioned who had a Sonne before thirty years ould for as in thofe daye* they hved very long, fo it was long before they v/ed then to marry. Again there is yet a farre greater difficulty that the Greek Cppie oftLe ould teftame nt , which S. Luke I followed, readeth thus And Arphaxad lived five and thirty year es and hgat Cainan/ Co thtity iC Arphaxad were Grand father to Salah becaufe he begot his/ather CainanyWhc he himfelfe was five and thirty yeares ould (in which year of his ^ge your Bible and ours fay he begat Salah) thus Salah his grad child adc^i«4 hisFathermuft be born tlie fame year, which/ayth reafo,is infallibly falfe.No'w if you fayC^/Wi^ to be omitted according to forae greekCopies in the ould teftamet yet what will you (ky to all theCopies of the new teftamcnt which moft vnanimoufly put him down. Heere venerable "B^^f^ profefleth himfelfe to admire that which his dulnes cannot vnderftand. And indeed I think nO manvnderftandsit. AndReafonismore gravelled and quite non-plu/Ted at an other contradidion, which /ee- meth to her vnavoidablc. Turne in your Bible to the Kings cap. 8. v. 26. There you read Tvrd and twenty yeers ould was AhazJa when he began toreigne andhs reigned ons year in lerufalem^ and his Mothers name was Athaliath. Now turne to Chron: z.cap. 22.v. 2. And fee if a very different iflory be not alfo true Scripture. For thus you fhall read, I ]*ortj and two yeares ould was Ahaua when he began to reigne f and he reigned one year in hrufdehis Uothers nitr^re was Atha- ■ " , Xx Z liaih 484 The^oman Church is \ n^ffc.Againft the infallibility then of Scripture reafon co- ceiveth her felfe to have this infaihbie demonftration:Na one is infallible in fpeach who fpeaketh two things quite conrrary one to an other; but thefe two (peaches be quite contrary, when of the fame man one affirmeth He began t& reigne when he vdds two and tmntj year on!d and an other af* firmes that he vcasfvurty two jeers (?«/rfjThere fore the Scrip- ture is not infailibie in fpeech. 4* Here by the way refled (deer reader) how de- monftratively falfe it is which our adverfaries fay , that by the only knowledge of Scripture a man may' clearly be inftruded in all fundamental or neceffary pointsrnoW I aske, w^hether any point be with you more fiindamen- tall or more neceffary then this; The Scripture U infalllblet But this point is fo farre from beeing clearly deduced out of the reading of the Scripture , that he , who fliall read thefe three places, fliall fee with his eyes that thefe places alone make this verity more obfcure then anyplace of Scripture makes the contrary evident^ For reafon, left to her felfe, will fooner fhift off any place you can cite for the evidence of the Scripturcji infallibility, then you fliall be able to Ihif off the places cited. I do not put the and wer to thofe three places, that the reader may,by his ow^n cxperience,fee how true it is that a^l that concerns nece- ffary points is not clear in Scripture; for what point more neceflary then that the Scripture is infallible , and w^hat point hath iuch vnanfwerable difficulty as thefe be? If you could but bring halfe fb cleara demonflration againft the infallibility of the Church, how would you triumph? All that could be faid by vs v^^ould never flitisfy you. And yet here you mril be fatisfied , or grajit Scripture in it felfe not to be irialiible. What fondnes theo, for incompara- our infallthle ludge. Q. 4. 5". if. 449 blc weaker objeftions, to ftad outfo pernicioufly againfl: the infallibility of the Church. Note this and you will foone note your own prcpofterous dealing. J. Secondly I muft let down here a note which, ac- cordingto good method , fbme might have expc<9'ed in the beginning of this qucftion of infallibility ^ But had it been put down there, it might have been {ubje(fi: to have bee n forgotten before wjefhould have com^ to mike cheife vfe of it, which is to be done in this next SedioUt Th'S Iccond note then is this , tha: my Reader muft be made capable of what kind of infil ibility v/ec (peak, when wee fay; the Churchy in her traditions y and Aefinitionsy i$ infallible 'yov t[i\t thefe traditions and definitions deliver infallible verities vnto vs.Thispoint is learnedly declared by our learned Country man Bacon in an.tlyfifiiei Dljp: 3. cap. 7. citing divers (biid Devines for this do(^rine. Wee fay then , that our ad of faith, by which wee belceve the Church, propofing any thing to vs by her Traditions or definitions, is infallible in this fcnfe; that this Ad of taith is begot by fuch caufes as do fecure it from all kind of er- rour: fo that the vnderftanding, which is informed , or tuade knowing by tSis adt ^ ought to adhere fo ftrongly to what fuch an Ad affirmetji to be true, that though an Angel from heaven (hould f^y the contrary , this rnder- ftanding would never be brought to affent to him. So firme adhelion flowcth from an ad fecured Co well from crrour by the cauieswhich did produce it,T (ay with great yefledion that this vnderftanding by this ad is fo afFeded that the party muld no' be brought by the preaching of an Angel to beleeve the contrary , and I did not fiy that it could not be brought. For though the nature of evident knowledge >flievving that a thing is fo makcth that the P^^7 The%omanChiirchts party cannot a^ent to the contrary ; yet this iofallible ad ot taitb> only maketha man fo affeded that he mil notceafe from adhering fb ftrongly to what he beleeveth,. as long as this ad renuyneth vnretraded. This firncienes of adhc- fion (pringeth from the great value and efteeme which wee put (deierv^diy) vpon the caules moving him to this affent. And this is the true xeafbn why you will by no mcanes be brought to doubt of the infallibility of the Scripture by any ftrong objcdion that your naturall rea- Ibnmaketh, when fliee fuggefteth fiich objedions as I iuft now framed Meere pertinacioufnes alio and a falfe faniy of the valueof the caufes by which even Heretikes pretend to be moved to theyr errours , makcth many ra- ther loofe theyr lives , then forfake to ftick clofe to what they imagin to be Gods word ; fhallnot then a prudent efteeme, loiidiy grounded concerning the devine autho*- rity moving to the beleefe of thefe and thefe points, be able to make a man adhere fo clofe ly to them as I faid*^ when then my vnderftanding hath Motives, though not wholy infallible , yet fuch as caufe a moft prudent alTent that God hath fald fuch a things and this is made fo eviden- tly credible vnto mee, that in prudence I cannot think it to be otherwife, and Heaven,is aHb by moft highly valua- ^ ble promiies, ofJered mee, if I wiil aflent to this with that refped which is due to Gods word,and Hell on the con- trary is threatned vnto mee by moft truly formidable mc- tiaces, if I will not affent to this verity as to a Verity affir- med by God ] am I not rather ftark mad , then impru- dent only if I will not bend my vndcrftandingby force of my will to adhece with all its power, to this verity, as to a Verity affirmed by God, and efteeme it as fuch a Ve- arity ought tO-be eftcemed^ Whereiore , as it is a blafphe- mous our infitBhk Indge Q. 4.S^.if. 4^ mous inpiety to IxxCpeA that the very leaft danger of fal- fity can be in a thing affirmed by God^fo^becaule the rcai- £bns I alledged make mee carry my felfe fb towards that (\vhich is thus propofed to mee to beleeve) as towar ds a Verity teveled by God , thc^ felfe fame, reafonsdo make mee confequently more wilhng to deny anynaturall evi- dence, that I can have,the to give way to the entertayn* mentof any fufpicion offalHbiiity in this vvhichi have received as Gods own word as indeed itisSee S^fi: mm: 6. 6» Now that which I mainly inflft v.pon is this,.fuch an infallibility of adhefion as this ad is^cannotbe lyable, or any way fubjed to vncertainty , no more then the in?- fallibility of that man whome God had fully refolvcd lo to guide , and dired > in all that hefhould fay or write, that he would never permitt him to (ay or write the leaft falfity, although this Manjievcr knew nor. fufpeded him (elfe to have this privilcdge, luft To,. though, wee neither : feel, nor by evidence know the infallibility of our affent,. our ad ofaffentwill be infallible, if God really concurre vnto it by fuch. principles as are no way lyable to errour. All the difficulty then iiv proving this our ajfent to be ia- fallible, conCftcth in this ^ whether or no wee can prove that God cone urreth to this afltnt by fuch principles as are no way lyable. to errour ? To prove this wee muft prove that our alTent hath for its objed not only an ap»~ parent Revelation, but alfo a revelation certainly truc^ and not only true,cafually (by our hitting by chauncc vpon fuch an.objcd as is truly revealed by God) but it muft be of liich a nature that it cannot, in thefc circuna- ftances guide mee to affcnt to any thing but that whicl^ «nnoit butbe.ttuel^ reyealcd. This dhcn I prove thus*. Althoiih 45 i T/;^ ^oman Church is Although there might be imagined (uch circumftanccs ia which God could let mee have all the motives which fl> powerfully move to beleeve that fuch and fuch a, point is revealed by God,although this were net (b,-yet (iippofing that the divine Providence hath refolved never toper- mitt (in the circumftancesin which men now live) any falfitytobe commended toourbeleefe by fo powerfull motives as thefe be to witt miracles, full report of millios and millions teaching vniformely the:^pie points to ha- ve been delivered down to them, by millions atttfting that they received them as delivered from the Apoltles, and thus going vp vntill wee come to therh who teftity cjiat with theyr own earcs they heard all thefe points de- livered by them and did lee the work worlds of miracles in confirmation of them , that they did hear thofe fimple' men refute all Philofophers, fpeake all languages, tell the very lecretes of the heart, foretell things to come without ever milling &c. fuppofinglfay that the divine Provi-^ dence is refolved never to lett any falfity cloake herlelfc with thefe powerfull motives , thefe motives muft needs be the certain Liveries of truth, and that which cometh vcffted in them, cannot be any thing but truth. And this houldeth good whether I be or be not afTured , that the divine Provideuce is refolved never to permitt anyfal- £ty to be thus recommended to vs. For it is not our kno- wing that no falfity will ever be permitted by God to be thus recommended to vs, which is the caufe why no fal- fity can be thus recommended : but it is meerly theex- trinfecall will of God, determining to provide fo for our fure guidance to that end , for which he created vs, that hence he comes to refolve not to permitt at any time,any ' falfity to bcfo powerfully recommended vntovs asit- ihould m InfaUihle ludge Q. 4. 5. 2 il 4fj fliould be by thefe Motives of Credibility which he fet-» teth a part for his peculiar vfe of delivering the Verities of our faith vnto vs as wee fet the vfe of our Scales a part for ratifying only fuch things as wee intend to acknow-* ledg for our owne true deeds* 7- If you ask of mee, how I can prove that God hath refolved neverto permitt any faifity to be recoonmended- by thofe motives , by which the Verities of our faith are recommended? I anfwer that firft, the motives , which recommended the verities of our faith, do convince that which is fo recomaiended, to be morally certain : as the full report of all men from all parts of England make it morally certain that there is liichaCitty as London to thofewho never came neer London by a hundred miles. How much then v/ould it misbefeeme the divine verity ad Goodnes to cocurre to the making of a faifity fo cre- dible as it is credible to all men that there is fuch a Cittic as Lodon ? But Secondly it would farre more misbefeeme him to makenoleffe alTured offers of Heaven to ihofe who would beleeve a Lie thus rccommended,and threa* ten Hell vnto them without they would imbrace fiich a Lie, even for a verity revealed by God , which threats were as certaintly to be feared as London is certaintly to be beleeved to be in England by thofe who have not feen London* Thirdly it is evident that God can impofe an obligation vpon man to follow the true Religion as ameanes neceffary to obteynhis Salvation, which reli- gion may propofe lome Verities to be beleeved as devinc and as things revealed by God: Now fuppofing our na-» ture and prefent condition, (I may bouldiy Gyjcithcr that belcefe which is recommended by fuch motives as curs arejrauft be this ciueRcligions cr you cannot affignc vnto 454 Tk^manC^wch^is mee atty other kind of beleefe,recommcded hy any other kind of motives, which can make it feeme Co credible to mee as our Religion, It is impolEble that a meer lie Ihould be fo much more credible then Gods true word , as our religion is aWolutely more credible the any falfe beleefe j for this would breed a notable difparagement and difeC« teeme of the devinc Authority , making it of lefTe credit then a Lie. How can that God, who hath a ferious will to oblige vs to imbrace that beleefe as deuine,which is the only true way appointed by him to lead vs to heaven, ha- ve a will alio diredly deftrudive of this will? that is, how can he have a will to permitt the Lyes,oppofit to what he ivould have vs beieeve , to be in all reafon made more credible by the motives which recommend theai, then thofe Verities arc which according to reafon he would have vs embrace, not only for Verities , but for Verities affirmed by him^ that is , for infallible Verities ? So that you fee at laft wee have brought it to a plain contradic- tion to fay , that (fuppofing our nature and the prefent circumftances appointed de faiio by the divine providen- ce ) our Religion recommended by the forefaid motives Ihould be faHe in this prefent ftate , whatfoever it might have been in fbme other ftate , which God could have chofcn if he would have had na providence con- cerning vs:to which providence I confeffe nothing could oblige him. S» Suppofing then no more then what is evident both by Scripture and reafon , that God is refolved to have a providence over vs,and to bring vs to the end for which he made vs by the beleefe offeverall Verities which he bath revealedj it is impoffible that as long as he hath this mil, he ftiould not alfo have a wiU to recommend to our _ beleefe our tnfalUle Judge. 2. 4. S. l 455 beleefc thefe verities (which he would have vs bcleeve)by (ueh motives, as no lye can come recommended by him as long as he ftill intends to vfe this providence towards vs. The ads then of our faith are infallible, becau/e real- ly (whether the party who beleeveth knoweth it or no) th^leads proceed fromiuch caufes as are vncapablc (in thefe prefent circumftances)of recommending any thing that is falle; But they ftill recommend that which is atte(- ted not by any apparent, but by a moft true revelation made by Chrifis Apofties to the Church i which Church alfb is, by the like motives, recommended, as infallible, and wee evidently , by our very fenies , know w hat this Church certainly teacheth: whereas,though all which the Scripture faith bee infallible , yet wee have not only no infallibility , but even no very probable certainty of our vnderftanding the Scripture in the true fenfe in many neceffary points, except it be by theinftrudion of the Church,* as hath fully been fliewed Seit: 9. Now befides thefe exterior principles of our afl fentjby which I fay wee beleeve with an infallible beleefe the articles of our faith , wee mufl here note that the af^ fent it lelfe is never produced (even by thofe who have the Habit of true faith) vnles it be by the fiipernaturall illumination pf God, elevating vs to all that hath imme- diate relation to the Supernaturall ftate of Heavenly glo- ry, whence 5. P4«/ teacheth vs that in order to atteync this high flate me are not fufficient of our felves to think, any tkingM of our felves but our fu^ciency is from God 2. Cor: 3, jf.bvery time that a true beleever exercileth an ad of true taith, God, of his*infinite goodnes, afFordeth this fuper- natutall light infufing it vnto the vnderftanding to eleva- te it 5 and inable it , to produce the fupernaturall ad oi - . Yy ^ £uth. 456 The%pmdn Church is faith. Yet when a man hath not this fupernaturall affifw tance in his ad, he cannot tell , be he never fo karned. This all may know, that God doth never give this fuper- naturall help to beleeve anything, which is not really ilelivered by a true revelation made to the Apoftles, cthcrwife he might be laid to givefupernaturall aid to be- leeve a Lie. ID. Out of all this difcourfe^that appeared! to be true, ivhich wee moft defire to be noted, that our ads of faith may be moft truely infallible and are proved to be fo,be- eaufe they proceed from Caufes lb determining to that only which is true , that they cannot detcrmin our aflent to any falfity and that all this happeneth thus although wee cannot evidently know when wee beleeve infaUibly. SECT: XXIIII. ^^enty OhjeSlions ofan Vnherfity managainji the tnfallihility of the Qhurch ^ and alfo /ome others are fohed . » i*J8^V^St F T E R I had refolved on this trcatife I ^^Q^^^did read in the preface of an Vniverfity i^^^g^f^ man to a work o^ lohn Daille , fet forth to pW ra i ES excufe the reformedChurches fromSchif- '^"^^■^^ mes > twenty objedions vrged with Co great confidence againft the infallibility of the Church that at the end of hisPreface he promifeth to turnePapift ifluch objcdions be pundually anfwered;but with all he (Would have yet one argument more foivcd.I (hall indea- ^ . ^ . ^^^^ eurlnfallihkludge Q. 4. S. 24^ 457 vcfur to give him a litle more large fatisfadion then h^ requireth. For I will alfo returne him anlwer to all that concerns this point cither in this or any other part of bis Preface. 2. Firft then P. 22. he would overthrow all wee have faid of the Churches beeing our ludge in Gontro- . verfies becaufc fo litie is faid againft Hcretikes , for de- »ying^this, by S. Epi^hmtu and 5* Aufteny to which I have abundantly anfwered Sell : 2. As alio he would have vs condemned by the filence of rm«///;^w, which I have anf- wered Seft: 20. 1^.9. fine and by the like filence of Vincent Lerinen which I have anfwered sed: 7* What you adde of Optatus and S. Aufien , who found againft theyr adverfa- ries no ludge vpon earth (as yon /ay) but Scripture, you muft note thatthey fpoak asthey did^not becaufe the faith- full people were not provided of an other infallible ludge but becaufe thofe contentious fellowes againft whom they fpoak did (as O^tatm intimateth)make no account of the / Churches contrary Judgment as the lewes make noc ac- count of our new teftament: Wherefore as, when Doc- tors or Fathers difpute againft lewes , they do not ftand prefEng them with the authority of the new teftament, though they themfelves hould^ it of infalhble authority (becaufe the know the lewes fcofFatfuch authorities) Co S. Auften here, and formerly cited by you, as alfo OptattUj did not ftand preiSng theyr adverfarics with the Autho- rity of the Church , which they them felves held infalli- ble becaufe they knew thofe Heretikes would as much fcofFat them as the Icwes would fcoffat thofe who fhould preffe the Authority of the new teftament,and as you v/e to fcofFat vs if wee only cite the Councel of Trent againft y^^! !!?^ ^; who clearly bouldthe ' Church 458 The^omm Qhurch is ♦ Ghurcfi our infallible ludge, do not take anjr text oftbc Councet of Trent for my argument to pro ve thisj^thougfi j |! I hould that Counsel infallible. 3. Again you objed 5. P4«/5 making no mentionof this ludge in his Epiftle to the Romans : in which I am fare he doth not alio tell them that the Scripture only muft be taken for ludge^ nor doth he warne them to ta^ ke great heed of the Bifliops af that cittie who in time would vlurp a ludicative authority which fliould be the bane of Chriftendome, as D. F^r«^fpeakes, and make all theyr errours incurable, as you both fpeake , whicb newei rvould have been worth ail the refi of his Epifile^in the ludg-* ment of thofe who pafle theyr iudgment with that pro-» phane Liberty that you do here. The truth is that this Judgment feat concerned no more the Romans, then all the world. 5, P^«/ twice taught the infallibility of the Church to all the world in the texts I cited r ^tiy.n: n: i8* That then, which no more concerned the Romans < then all the world was not in reaion to be intimated to them in particular. What you adde next of the dcepe fi* lence of the Fathers and Hiftorians about this point,mufl: needs turn to confound your ignorance when you fliall have read all I faid Se3: 18. 19. 20. 2i. 22. Your enfving difcdurfe (for as much as concerns our dodrine of infal- libility) hath had its full anfwer in my laft Sedion , by which you will fee that when any thing is beleeved, which is not truely revealed, the Ad of faith can never be in- fallible, and Co no ad of faith concerning Proteftantifme can be infallible. Neither are wee infallible becaufe the Ads of our faith are infallible,no more then all thofe who beleeved Chrtjl himfelfe or his Apoftles were infallible. They are indeed infallibly :guidcd but if they leave off. ' ' " ' ' beeing ourhfaUthle lud^e.Q^. if 4 fcecing thus guided , and will be come guides , they \yill foone bewray theyr own fallibility. What next concerns infallibility, be your twenty Objections put by way of queftions, as fbme ofthcm indeed are. 4. Objedion i. You ask whether there be any infal- lible ludgevpon Earth! I have given you a full anjSver 5, OB; 2. whether the Church be that iudge? and why not rather fome of tfaofe tenne things named by chilling : I have Quefi.'^. initlo.giYcn reafons fiifficient for any reafonable Man, who muft not think that in this our laft age he is borne foon enough , by a thoufand and fix hundred yeares to teach the Church that which no one parilh of the Church can ever be proved to have held# The very citingScripture for tenne levcrall Iudges(as you fsLY Chilling : doth) flieweth clearly how infinitly ftiort pf folid proofe all other ludges ComifEons fall in compari- fon of what wee have alledged for the Churches Autho- rity in this pojnt through the whole third Queftion. - 6* OB: 3.whether the Roman Church be this ludge? Yes. See all my proofes from Seit: ly.to my laft Sed:ion. 7. OB: 4. Whether the infallibility of this Church,be in the head (the Pope) or in the body^ and whether in the body diffiifive or colledive All this I have anfwered Sell: 18. w. I. 2. 3* for as much as concerns thepradicali dutie of any Cathdlike. Schoole fpeculations(or Devines private opinions) have nothing to doe with neceffary faith. 8. OB; Here your queftions turnc to objedions,' ^hich conteyne in generall the difficulties concerning thofc perfons who ought to have theyr free votes in a CounceU Concerning this point I have faid fomething- ' - - ~ - Selt: xS. ^. 3* by which the Laicks and inferiour CIcrgf are fufficiently excluded,though thefe Clergy mens votes as Confuitive , or for advife fake be moft laudably dc-^ manded. when they be eminent devincSjAnd, for the comfort of the weaker, theyr fubfcription$ may be of very good vfe ad fervice to overwheimeHeretikes by fuch authority as they vfe to fear moft, who flight any men* tion of more then human authority in Councels. And be* caufe amongft all thefe inferior Clergy men you think the Cbof'^epifcopi to be moft regarded , I will eafcly facisfy yoa concerning theyr fmak right topafle a deciuve voice ia generall Councels;, If you have either the Councels or the Summe of the hy Carranzaa you fhallfind in the decrees of IPo^c Damafus^ as ancient as he his, howbceing asked (Epift:4-) Whether thcChor-eftfcopi were any thing in the Church of God or nothing ? and what authority they had in the Church? and he aniwereth That they were nothing in the church of God, in which thej had no authority, and that theyr injiitution was wicked , and too too badde , and contrary to the Sacred Canons and the Peace of the whole Church. And there- fore he defined that all was vain and void that they had done in the Eplfcopallfunllton. And that, forthofecaufes, thejwere forbidden both by the Sacred Seat {o^ Rome) and by all the Bishops of the world. It foUoweih How that in the Primitive Church thefe Chor^epifcopi did feeme neceffarjforthe peculiar care they had over the voor^and though by Ordination they were tnly Priejls they prefumed at lajl to exercife many things belon^ ging to Bishops to confecrate fubdeacons , and deacons &c. But xheyr ambition was fbone curbed by the Church,- And Bifhops were feverely forbidden to lay any part of theyr £piicopall fundio vpon them. I fay then that only Biftops have right in a generall CounceLForof thee Prelates our Infallihle ludgeQ. 4. S.l^. 4^1 only it was laid ne that mil not heare the church let him be vnto thee as a publican or Heathen. To them only it was faid Go and teach all ^ations^ and toe I am mthyou vntill the end vf the mrld.To them all thofeipeciall promifes of devine afliftance were made which I vs}^ed se{t: i^.n: 17. None ofthefe are direded to Laikesor inferior Clergy, men,, who fiicceded the difciples and not the Apoftles. 9* OB ; 6^ Whether thefe BiChops affembled (with tlieyr Head and cheefe Paftour) be fo abfblutely infalli- ble that they cannot determin falfely in point of faith let them do what they will? I anfwer , that, as I Ihewed Seit: 19. w. I. 2. they are to regulate themfelves according to Scripture ad traditio, difcufling carefully what hath been revealed to the Church by thefe meanes, concerning the points which they treat o£ See the place I cited and you will fee how notorioufly manifeft theyr proceedings muft: needs be,-but they muft be the iudges, and not wee, that they have done theyr duty in regulating themfelves accor- ding to thofe two infallible rules yet wee arefecured that ^ they have done theyr dutie both by the notorious publi- city of the fad and by theyr fubfcriptions to the legall carriage of all that cflentially concernesthe Beeingofa true Councel; and alio by feeing no confiderable part of the Church difFufed, refufe theyr decrees. Fear not you to do, what you fee all the Church do, with fb vniverfall a confent: neither will I preiTe you to confent, vntill you iirft fee this generall confent go before you. Were there any notorious negled of legall proceeding to the intro- ducing of errour, the whole Church reprefentative and diffufive, would never be permitted by God , to fiibmitt cheerfully therevnto. I might ask how (hall I know the Scripture writers did theyr dutie in obeying devine inf- Zz piration 46t \[he^oman Church is I piration? If they did not; a dieu all faith. > I 10. OB: 7. How flialllknow when they detcrmid j r aright? what is required to a Synodicall Conftitution? \ M\ift all concurre in the vote,or will the maior part fervc the turnc? I anlwer you fhall know all thefe things to ha- | ve been done as they fliould be , byfeeingthat all have i" fubfcribcd to the Councel as proceeding legally in her \\ Conftitutions , which alfb you may ftay to fee accepted i' fcy the Church for lawful! decrees. When you fee this il done,without any confiderable contradidion,! hope you j will think you may prudently fubmitt , and cannot but i imprudently ftand out any longer. And for. your particui^ jt lar wee will codefccnd to you to ftand out to long.When |' you are to bee io leading a man of whole Provinces^ that v your fubmiflion would be required before any of thcyrs, p it will be a longer work to tell you all belonging to your 'I duty.W hat belongs to you at prefent I have tould you in .0 order to pradice. The conftant pradice of the Church hath fufficiently informed the leading men Governours !C( of the Church how they are to procceed in doing that which fo many ages have pradiced before them. tlu 11. OB: 8. What makes a generall Councel i muft ki all the Bilhops of the world be called ? I anlwer that ma?" > 1 kes a generall Councel which bath , ever fince the primi^ \ a I tive Church, ferved to makeaU the generall Counccls\ ):l which have been made. Lookeon the firft Councel ia '?i the Apoftles time and you will find not all the Apoftles but only Veter , l^mes , lohn , ?auI , and Barnaby prefent^ See Baron: Am^i.And yet theyr Decrees (ent to all Chur- r ches did beare this preface. It hath fecmedgood to theHoly \ Ghojt and vs. In the fower firft Counccls (which your En- glifh Church admittftb ) the fourth part of the Bifliops. t ■ ^ wSs Vur infallihk fudge Q^. 4. S. 24; 4^5 was never prefent , and in the^Councels kept in the Eafli few Bifhops appeared from the weft, and to the Councels kept in the weft few Bifhops came commonly from the Eaft, The practice of the Church ( the beft interpreter of divine Lawes ) teaceth that it fufficeth that all who can conveniently be called andfummoned doe appear, and that fuch a competent number appear and fet in Coun- celasthofe ( who are afTembled togeather with theyr head ) judge fufficient on the one fide ; and on the other fide that thofe. who be not prefcnt,knovving well enough ( as wee fee by experience of the appearance made in Parliament how all men know how great or litle it is) thofe I fay knowing how great or litle the appearance of Bifhops is in the Councel , fay nothing againft it y but fi- Icntly confent to permitt them to proceed as a fiifficient Repf efentative of the Church and accordingly admitc of theyr Decrees when they arc made, 12. OB: 9. Whether it be a Lawful! Councel if all come not who are called. I have made my anfwer alrea- dy that it is fufficient that a lufficict number comcth^that is a number approved for fufficient by the Church in the manner I now expreffed. 13. OB: 10. Who muft call the general! Councel ? The Pope,or Chriftian Kings and Emperours ? And how fhall I be affured which of them muft? I anfiver that it is e- vident out of Scripture that there is no divine Inftitution fcy which cither Emperous Or Kings be afTured to be ftill found in the V7orId jor that ( when they have that dig- nity) they be, by divine inftitution , invcfted with a po- wer to call Councels. Wee ^eek for this divine inftitution. This wee will not admitt vntill it can be fhewcd in Scrip- ture or tradition. The fad of calling fliewcth not divi- 464 The%omcm Church is ne inftitution.Sccondly as for the Prelates of the Church wee can fliew divine inftitution. Ait. 20. zS.Bishops placect bj the Holy Ghofi over all the flock f^^d> orgoverne the Church (ifGoL And 4. 1.phe: Not Lay magiftates but only ecclefi* afticall are faid to he given vs by Chrift for the work of the mlnifiery ) for the edifying the Body of Chriji y that heme forth wee may not be carried about with every wind ofdodrin ; &C4. Thirdly the Emperour is not by divine inftitution Lord of the Chriftian vi^orld no nor of any confiderable part of it, wherefore feeing that a motive power is ao motive power any further then it can or ought to be able to Move;the Emperiall power whichneither can nor ought to move further then it reigneth, cannot confequently command any further then his territory at the vttermoft. The Power of the cheefe Paftor of the vniverfall Churck Is coextended to the vniverfall Church. All BiChops of the vniverfall Church beeing to be moved muft be moved by^ fuch a power as this is. If Emperours called councels ^ it was not by any Ecclefiafticall calling (fuch an one as the Pope called them by at the very felfe fame time) but the Emperors calling, was only politicall , proceeding froa^ a temporall power , fubferving to the EcclefiafticalJ, and not able to force the m by cenfure in cafe of refufing to \come, as the Ecclefiafticall power could y which power i^nplored the Emperiall afliftanceto con curre with her, only for the more eflfeduall executi5. Perhaps fometimes Emperors might venture to call depend entJy of the ra- tification ofthe fupreme Paftor , which they prefumed would beeafely obteyned in (oiuft neteflities as then feemed to preflefor afpeedy remedy. If Emperors or Kings were prefcnt in Councel? it was only by thcyr pre- fence and good Countenance to honor ; encourage and fimbor our Infallihle ludge Q^. $. 24* 4^^ further the proceedings of the Councel, and not to palTe theyr vote in points of beleefe. 14. OB; 1 1. How farre be the Councclls determina^' tios infallible? Whether in matters of fad as well as faith? lanfwer that they be infallible only in matters of faith* Matters of fad have no ground for theyr having been done fo, or not done fo, either in Scripture or Tradition^ Wherefore concerning matters of fad the Church rules iier lelfe by no former revelation , and fliee pretends to no new Revelations, but only to declare clearly what Ihee finds to have before been revealed. The infaUibility was thus promiledto the Church He shdl UAchjouall tblngi And fuggeji all things vchat foever I shall fay vnto jou. Things of fad arefaid andteftified only by men therefore not obieds of faith. ' I J. OB : I2. Whether in thefe matters of faith the Church be infallible in fundamentalls onlyManfvver that in all the Authorities which I cited for the infallibility of the Church out of Scripture Seit : 14. n. 3. &c. and i j*. I fhewed that they are ^roundleflyrcftreyned to only fun- damentalls in the fenleyou mean.The fame was proved fey my Reafons Seil: 1 60^ 16^ OBr 13.H0W fliall I infallibly know what points are fundamentall what not? I anfwer This queftion may pofe thofe who will be reftrayning the general! promifes^ of infallible affiftance made to the Church to fundaraen* tall points only^that is vnto th^y themfelves know not what. But to vs Catholikes all is fundamentall which is made appeare to be propofed to vs by the Church as a Yeritie revealed by God, whether it be in a matter mora or lefTe importing of its own naturev ij. OB : 14. How Ihalll know in time of Schifirre^l whea 'i^6S The\omm Church is when there be two Popes or more , which of thefe is Si Veters true SucceflburM anfwcr that this queftion,as expli- cated by you> is put very vnskilfully. For you pafle frotn arguing againll the infallibility of a Pope , as defining with a Councel, to argue againft thofe Devines who de»- liver not the Churches beleefe, buc ^heyr private opinion to be that the Pope (hould beheld infallible out of a Co- uncel; concerning which opinion , I have (hewed it all ready to be impertinent to our purpofe. Your Obiedion againft vs ^ fliould be put thus. The Church (with vs) is held to be the Pope defining with a Gouncel,But in time of fchifmes , where there be more pretended Popes, wee do not afTuredly know that he who defines with the Co« uncel is the true Pope, or Succeffor of 5. Veter.knA then I anfwer thus , If before the calling and meeting of the Councel there be more then one pretending to bePopes, that he fliall ever be efteemed the right Pope , to whom the Prelates of the Church lhall vnanimoufly obey when he calleth them to meete in a generall Coiicel,and in this Councel to prefide over them» To have two fuch Popes (as thefe are) at one time , is impoffible. And this is the only time in which a Pope defineth with a Lawfull Co- unceL What you fay of Popes not defining in fuch a Councel, is not our Cafe.Putt mee a Pope defining with a Lawfull Councel , and then prove him fallible if you can. Whether the Popes definitions out of a Councel be fallible or infallible, niaketh nothing'to this purpofe. Only this is evident,if they be infallible out ofaCouncel, they be infallible in a Councel in all opinions. I adde Bell arm: itb.z. deComilijs cap. 19. that Although a Councel with out a Pope cannot define any article of fatrh, yet in time of Schifme , it can iudge which is true mr InfaHthk ludge (X^^.S.M- aSt Pope ] and provide the Church of a true Paftor I if (hec had noncjwho thus provided by the Councels authority; may diffolve the Councel it he pleafeth, or if he pleafe to have them remeyn afTembled , they remeyn Co , now by his authority , and can define as well as other Councels called by the Pope. In that meeting in which the Pope was to be chofen , or declared the vndoubted Pope, the Prelates of the Church might , and ought to meete vpon theyr own authority and iSTemble them felves. 18. OB; ij.Suppole all agree on the Pope and a generall Councel meet, how fhall I be fure that he ^ who is accounted Pope, is fo indeed? for Simonie makes him cone,- and that he was not Simonicali is impoffible for mce to know ? and then you labour to prove that Shctm ^«r^i5 was notorioufly Simoniacall which maketh no- thing to our purpofe : Neither foUoweth it from hence that thofe, who, beeing made Cardinalls by him , came after wards to be Popes^ were no true Popes. For you arc too ignorant to treat of thefe matters , if you know not that a man may be a true Pope, who never was a Cardi-» nail To that which is pertinent, lanfwer, that though he, whofe eledion to the Popedome is Simonicali, may be depofed, as having obteyned that dignity vnlawfully yet, as all lurifts fay The Crowndnce ohte^jnedfu^flieth aU d€^ pits, So I may farre better fay, that this deted beeing oiw ly againft Ecclefiafticall Lawes, may be fiipplied fb, that of an illegall Pope, he may be after ward made a La^vfull one* For in the Church difFufive there ispowerto have this man Pope ifthey will 5 and that they will they teftify when they obey his Summons calling all Bifhops to a: CounceU and permitting him, as theyr head, to prefidCp. *ad fupreme Paftonr to tJe&ie in the Com^ccltLafHy 4^ TJ?e(^oman Church is by the Churches a when he gave orders did not intend to give them thofe orders (and whether he did or no God only knowes) then they be no Bifhops, I an{wer that If they be Bifhops I am bound to admitt theyr decrees , and as he Ihould iinne damnably^who would not honor fuch a man held by all men to be his true Father, becaufe it is impot fible for him to know that his Mother did not ly when Ihee faid fo , or to know whether it be not the divel in his Fathers fliape, fo Ifhould finne damnably in not acknow- ledging, by due Obedience thele to be true Fathers of Gods people who are efteemed fo by all the world vpon farre better ground then fuch a man is efteemed your Fa- ther For firft thofe who ordeyne Bifliops or Priefts be for themoft part men moft eminent in the Church. How is it then morally poflible , that many fuch men fhould iuft happen , in fo many feverall places of the world , iuft to be the Ordeyners of iuft fuch Biflihops, as fhould be in the Ghurch iuft at that time, (which commonly is not a bove once in a hundred yeares) when a Councel is called. Again there be more then three thoufand Bifliops at a ti»* me in the'Church fas witneffeth Alb: : Kubric : jf. de ft^tu omnltm) out or which number wee fee that it is very rare for more then three hundred to be aflembled at a Counceljwhich is but every tenthBifliop,now morally im- poffible is it that iuft every tenth Bifliop fhould happen' iuft to be thatBifhop who goethto the Councel from this mr infallthle ludge. Q. 4. S. 24T 4^^ this part of the world^where in an age no one Bifliopwas ever heard of to be thus invalid]y ordeyned) and that iuft at the fame time there Ihould come from an otherpart of the World (where (uch an abominable ordination is as vnheard of as in this part) an other Bifliop^vvhofe ill hap- pe it was to be thus ordeyned And thus from a thirds fourth fifth fixt part of theworlde, iuft fuch Bilhops Ihould come in a number fulBcient to make the number ot other true Bifhops vnfiifficient for a trueCouncel.Sure- ly this is a thing farrc more morally impoffible then th^t the Common wealth of England fliould ever happen to have a tail Parliament of Knights andBurghoi^s freely chofen > to the number of three hundred who fhouid not only be dl of them Baftards 9 but aUb all of them called lohn. This I prove evidently ; becaufc to conferre holy orders or baptize without a due intention -, is not only a Sinne moft abominable arfd damnable , but it is fuch a Sinne as bringerh with it neitlier pleafure nor proffitt nor any thing which may the leaft intice any ordinary man ^much) lel]^ Bilhops and Priefts to committ a finne Co hi- deous:ad fo vnprofitablewherefore fro Chrifis time to this I do not think that the moft knowing man vpon earth 4,0th know to produce fix examples ot the committing of this finne. But on the other fide no man knowcth /o litle , but he hath knowledge enough to tell him ^ with out any rafli iudgement ^ that it is an ordinary thing in every County and Citty of England to find diversknown Baftards , and that the number of the vnkownis tenne times as great. And again the name of lohn is the moft common of all names : wherefore confidcring the nature of thingSjit is farre fro all impoffibility that many of thefc Baftards fhould be called by this name And thcyr Baftar- A a a diimie The%oman Church ts difoe not beeing known,the eledion may fall vpon theni iu this County; and what happentth in this County majr fiappe in an other,and fo in all at once. Weaker farre thea this is your argument And yet how fecure would all mca think England from all mircry> if wee were all folly affo. red that no mifery fliQuld fall vpon this Nation vntiHrwee: did chaunce to havcafrec Parliament,confiftihg ofthrce liundred me,n,of which every one fliould be a Ballard and CLvery one calied lohn? It is great want of folicfity in iud» gemcut in fo many fharpc witted men.to eftceme fo mucfc inch a weak argument.And this is true prefcinding; from: all fpeciall providence ofallmightyGod over his Churchj; but the leaft thpught of that proviaencemakcth this light obicdion vaniih into fmoake, and togcather with it the oext ObiecSi-ionAFor bow eafily couid God putt icteffica-^ cioufly in. the minds of true B^ops to meete in a- fofficiefe Dumber and when I fee theChurch VniverHill admitfiiclk aCouncei to be ai^ue one.1 Hcacc know that it had 2l lufiicient number of true Bifliops, 3Q. OB 17, How (hall I know that the Pope andl Bifliops affembled arc Cliriftians &c. Here you difcourfe: iuft as before, and the fame anfweranfWereth you to the* folL Yet for a further anfwcr to. both twill (hew how wife your argument is by framing iuft an other like to it thus.OChriftias how doe you infallibly know that in thcfe Sixtene ages fince the Age of writing of the Bible the Di- vel in fomc one Age did not inticc as many men as were (iifflcient to corrupt the Bible for I cannot fee but that the. Divel might eafely make fo many promifes farre more inticing then any ordinary motive which fliould i^oue men to baptize a child in a falfe forme or with wat «fduj6 iut^ntion with fuch promifes then the diuel might ijjti^ inticc thofc who did write out the Bible ^ to mite falfe,! iufl: infuchand fuch places as he ftiould fuggefte to them fo that in the fpace of a few ages , the multitude of the falfe Copies made them pafle for the only true onesj And how know wee infallibly that this might not have ben done much after that age in which the divel incited the Tyrants to force all Chriftians to give vp theyr Bi- bles to be burnt, by which meanes the true Copies grow- ing fcarce^falfe ones might poflibly be broughtinto com- mon vfe by the malice ot the divel as hath been faid. And- this exemple def eateth alfo your nextobiedion,Doth the divine Providence Sleepe in this maner? 21. OB; 18. How fliall wee know certainly that thcfc are the determinations of the Councel? falfe Canons may be foifted in and falifc Copies may be vented, I anfwec- that what hath, or hath not been decreed by a Councelj, may as well, and farre better be known certcynly , thecb what hath been decreed by one of our Parliaments, For Councels be fo much more notifyed to all , becaufe they be the Parliaments not of one,but of all Catholike nation and fo theyr deeds are more publike. Now how intole* rable a cavellerwere h« in aCommonwealth, who (hould plead the not obliging of Parliamentary decrees, by rea- son of the impoJflibility to know for certeyn what was de- creed? and which were the true Copies of the true de-- crees ? You would petfwade vs that wee cannot be fure of that of which wee (ee by dayly experience wee may be made as fore as wee would wiCh. The decrees of Coun- cels are publikely read, in the Councel publikely fubfcri* bed , and (ealed by the Counsel The Originall of riiefc fobfcriptions carefully preicrved,the Copies firft /et forth before diverfe witneflcs arc conferred with the Origina 1 Aaa z with 47^ "The^omanQhrnchU with a publike teftimony (as you may fee at thecnd^o^ any Bvii\) that it Agreeth mth the OrtginalL Thofc, who in^ great Number were preienc, at the making o£the decreeSv do own them^no one intheChurcb difclaimes from them and in cafe any fnould iatisfadion would prefently be gi- ven. Our very adverfa ryes write againft vs for decreeing fuch-and fuch things. The fadt is never denyed, but ever: defended. If in any preffe^a falfe Copie (bould be let forth you will have prohibition after prohibition^ and penalty added to penalty, vntill thofe Copiesbe fupprefled 5 and: all bookes would be noting , and notifying this forgery ^ As wee lee in our Church by dayly experience in matters of lefTe coafequence , as in letting forth; the decrees o£^ Cardinals^ the Decifions of that Roman Court called: the Kota, or aiiy other thing of this nature.Thefe eviden- ces make every one know thefe decrees with.an. vnquefr- tionabie crfrdibility, which;, when wee have, wse arefuf*. ficientiy iurniftied (for as much a$ concerns the propo- fing of the objed: to embrace with our will thefe decrees. AS proceeding from the Holy Ghoft , and teaching Yeri*- ries revealed by Gpd ^ vpon which wee immoveably fiiC; our vnderftanding , and wee are rcfoived by our will to:^ j|x it lo firmeiy,becaufe (by Gods Grace) wee.have a will, to proceed prudently in io important an affaire as thc: fa'vation of our Soui to which Heaven is offered if flicc- will fubmkt to beleeve what God thusreveeleth^ AndH^ll is threatned if fliee will rot thus fubmitt.And this offer ad threats be as prudently to be regarded as certain ^ as En* flifh men prudetly be|ive that there is liich a cytty as Lo-~ pn.Nothing then which ts not moft rational! is lequiredi of vs it beeing moft manifeftly made credible, that this is. the, tms. cgmmafld of Gpd M^dde thereforeis thatSoul^^, ourlnfaUihleMge.Q^^ S. 24- m which will not fubmitt. See what I faid in the fo""" Sec, tion from the fifth number to the end. And alfo what! fuUy cxpreffed Se^: i6. n: 6. For that which you adde of forging a Canon of the Councel of Nice I doubt not but youmly twenty times have met with a fatisfadory anf- were there vnto. See Baronius or Spondam An: n. 13. Tell mee do forged Scriptures make the true Bookes oJ Scripture to Become fallible? ^ , ^ , 22. OB: 19. How (halll be aflured of the meaning of the true decrees when I now know them? For lear- ned men have been of contrary opinions about the mea- piogofthem. lanfwer, that toeafeyour tct^^r Con^U cece. wee will permitt you not togivcyour affenttoany of which you are not in Confcience mamfeftly Saded that thi . and only this , is the true "jeanm? of Fu h a Councel : fo that you be ready prepared m mmd aid heart to fubmitt to the true meamng . when you (hall come manifeftly to know it. To more then this wee prel^ BO bod^: only let not people faine thattheydoe no know whauheyknow, oreafily may know »f^hey w.U: you S Sve that Councels vfe to be alTcbled againft fuch ri fuch known opinions of Seftaries tagamft thele they &a«^^theyr decreesfo cMy.that the Sedaries themfe tnno find impudency enough to deny theyr opinions to TeXrly condemned . and the contrary clearly defined Wherefore wee fee by experience tbey never fo much a* Srtodothisi But all theyr forces are bent to cry dowa ^rvSifythea^thority.bywhichthey w^^^^ <^of^^-f' c 1 LLr oafTaees in Counce s may be found to be ot UicklXrity . furtto 4ccUred , WM hould no man an 474 ^he%oman Church is' .^cn arc moft inclined to conceive them to be ftoakcn: Hence appearcth the great benefitt it is to have a li- ving ludgc , to whom all that is doubtfull may be referred and a clearc declaration procured , as it is expretty noted in the very end oftheCouncel of Trent. 23. pB:2o. Whatneceffity of an infallible ludgett x\\ ? I anfwer firft , who afTured you that God would live no prerogatiucto his Church which is not precifely ne- ccflary br her very rreferuation ? D. tern pr&ffeth fuch aludgcwouWbc ofhngular benefitt for the keeping of vmty in the Church, and the ending all Controverfel See what I ^d 5.jf: 18. «. 2. 1 have alfb Ihewed the great Z'^lt^^A^'^^^V'^^^^^^^^ True it is during the moftbloody perfecut.on of tbefirft 300. yeares the Chriftian world could not enioy this benefitt : But I pray note what5 Ii?i.rrayth Pr*/.r : Infuam Canonumcrilelhl nem ; where having obfcrved what I now fayd of the t>er fecutions hindering the keeping of Councels. headdeth that bence Chufitamtj ms tome in to diverfe Herefies , hcaufe Ucenfew^notiwcntotbeBlshopsto meet in Councels vntili the tme oftheforefajd Empcroar ( Conftantine:)And yet for thcfirft three hundred y^res Tradition of all points ne- ceiTary could not but beefo freO, as to make a*Srre leffe jiecefH^ of Councels then afterward when Herefies hal fooppo/ed the firft Traditions. But an infinite number fticking clofe to thofe traditions were not only fa ved but were glorious Martyrs in thofe firft three Ages. 24. Thus having anfwered your twenty Queftions pemnent to the point of Infallibility Icomc to^veyou famfaa-on m an objedion wholy impertinent to fhis pur- pole. For It concerncs not anj| article define* by our Church, but private opinions cffcoic private divines in our tnfaWhleludge.Q,4.S. 24 475 ©ur Church,whofc opinions (though never fo erroneous ) oueht not to hinder your converlion if you were in cat- ncft. Yet even in this I hope to give you ^tistaarion. Your objeaion then is P. 16. out of D. Tajlory endea- voring to prove our inconfiftency with civil government , becaufe fome of our Divines teach , that that which one or two or fome few of our Dodours fay is lawfull , may. in our judgements , be done without mortall finne : But not only one. but many of our Dodours fay tis lawtull to murderordepofeafupreme Magiftrate that is guilty ot Herefy , or fufpe«aed of it : therefore Cavete Vmctfes Con- dufmemy fay you j but according to truer Log'*f<: fliould fay Cavete Pmcipes Herefm. I anlwer firlt, this ob- iedion maketh nothing againft our faith , but againlt pri- vate opinions of private Divines , which opinions he who will pradice muft exped publike execution , which is lo terrible , that it fccures Princes more then any preachers frighting them with feare ofSinne. Secondly I do nothing doubt but even thofc Divines would fo Umitt , and rel- traine theyr loofe opinion to {uch peculiar circumitances, as would prefcntly cleat , even theyr opinion from beeing the leaftinconfiftent with the prefem government , beli- des our chcerfuU willingnes to take any path , and enter into any Bond , obliging vs to the loffe of all that in this world can be loft, if ever wee fo much as attempt the put- ting this opinion in pradicc , which cheerful! wiUingncs I am fure you will find in any Roman Catho ike trend you have or can have in England. But I dare boul- dly fay ,that thofc very Doftm never intended to Ipea^ ot the lawfulnes of murdering an BcreticaU King , or Go- vernor in a Country where that which ihey call Herely , iid akcady over whelcae tlw whoic 1% nothing 4/6 T^ef^joManClmchis of thc^r other many Reftri^ios«A$ that the Herely offiick a Prince if he lives will certainly ruins his country. That his country will certainly bcpre(ervcd by his death and no other way# And that for certain by killing him no very great inconveniences will follow. All tbcfe and other Rcttiidions even thofe Authors will require. zy. Again Proteftants, and thofe whom they own for thcyr Bretheren , have farre more loofe principles thenthefe are, vttcred even by theyr prime Apoftlesof thcyr Reformation.You own the WicclefBans for Brethc- tcn; they all beleeve that every Magiftrate doth truly for j feitt his authority by finning. You own luthir for your ^ pricpe Patriarch , and Calvin for his (econd : the firft is no- i torioufly known to have preached rebellion , and to ha- j ye faid that the Ghojpel is not Ghojpel except it he divulged W/Vfe timults: and Calvin Cpc^ikcs thus cap. 6. in Daniel, v. 2 j*. Earthly Princes doe bereave themfelves of authority , when they ereH themfelves againft God , and , me mufl rather fpitt in theyr faces then obey them. See Bex^a de lure Magifiram tuum in fubditos; to (ay nothing of a world of others which might be cited whom you hould not to have erred fun- damentally in true Religion , and confequcntly thcfe theyr crrours not to be damnable. And The author of the end t9 Canfrot^^r^w hath lately in his Preface Chewed in particu- lar how in every place but England your new Reforme was biought in by rebellion. Artd D. Terne §. i6. fayth Thofe Chmhes had but tumultuary Reformations. 260 Having now complied with yourdcfire I might claime the performance of your promife, but I know Gods grace muft rather be earneftly beggedithenyou ear- neftlyprefled. Lay prejudice a fide , with other human re/pe<^s, and pray humbly to know the truth : and then by our infallible ludge Q. 4. 5. 14J 4 7T by Gods grace 5 that may be done without which you will be eternally vndone, THE LAST SECTION. The %oman Church haVmg been prol^edto he our infallible ludge , all J?nder paine of damna- tion are bound to fubmitt to her ludgement. N my firft Queftion I proved (n. 1 .) that there muft be fbme certain and allured meanes to end all cotroverfies or doubts which either be or can be in Religion* And ( n.3.) I proved that all muft needs agree in this , that our vnderftandingmuft be bound , vnder pain of damnation , to fubmitt itfelfe to that in- fallible ludge or Rule appointed by God to decide all neceflfary controverfies. Now , becaufe all faith elTenti-* ally confifteth in the inward vndcrftanding (which is the very feat of true or falfe faith ) God, who looketH in to our interior Soule , exadteth to fee in that a ready imbracirig of that faith without which no Salvation is ta be had : And therefore, as I faid, he fliouldnot ferioufly defire our Salvatio vnlefle hee defired that wee interior- ly fliould yield , full aflTent to this one , and only faving fai thjof which faith the Apoftle faid that mth out it it was impopble to pleafe Gody and S. MmI^j lie vpho doth notbeleeve shall be damned. A falfe faith, taking the beleefe of a lye for a divine verity can help to fave no body. All then, to Bbb plcafe 47^ Tk^oman Church Is flcafc God , and to be faved muft have true faith which cflentially confifting in the interior ludgement , God would have this ludgement readily to ftibmitt to the di- redion , or determination of that infallible ludge which was appointed by him as the only meanes to bring vs ai- fiiiiediy to this one true faith. I earneftly intreat the Rea- der to readc the proofe of all this in the place above cited And Se£t. 16. n* 10. ^. All this interior fubmilEon of vnderftanding , to- be due even to all that is faid in the Bible , and that even vnderpainof damnation, willcafily be granted by any Sedary , houiding the Bible to be that only Rule and di- icdion which God hath given every one , as the only^ jneanes to bring him afluredly to the true faith; Wee Ca* tholikes do no leffe readily then they , (ubmitt to the Bi- ble as to Gods word: but from the beginning to the end- ing of the fecond Queftioii, wee have brought a world orevident and moft convincing reafbns proving that the Scripture , by it felfe alone , cannot be the only me- anes appointed vs by God to bring vs to the affured knowledge of the true Faith neceflary to Salvation; nei- ther can it by it felfc alone, end and decide all controver- fies about fiich matters of beleefe and pradice as are wholy neceflary to Salvation; This I have Ihewed in above four and twenty particular points: Whence it fol- loweth that God hath apointed fome other meanes for our certain and affured guidance in allthefc things* This other meanes I have proved, through all my third qucC* tion , to be the infallible diredion of the Church , and then I paffed to (hew at large (through all my fourth. Queftion) that this Church, whofe diredion is infaUible taking the Roman Church as conteyning onr tnfallihle ludge 2- 4- S.iC 479 conteyningall that whole flock oi Chrtfis fhecpc adhering 16 the Biftiop of Rome,as to theyr head Paftour, in what place of the world lb ever they live. I have flic wed the Traditions of this Church to be infallible. I have (hewed the decrees or definitions fet forth in any lawflill Gene- rall Councell of this Church to be infallible. Nothing of this I have fiippofed, but every particular, here fpecified> I largely proved: fo that I do not here , without havirtg firft given full proof, Suppofc this Roman Church to be infallible, 3. This then fuppofed,-! do not fee how our very acJ-' verfaries (convinced of the former points) can deny that iill fubmillion , interior, and exterior , mufl:ofnecefIity be yielded to this Church, whofe diredions be infallible, and fecured by the afliftance of the Holy Ghoft fi:om all kind of errour: for, on tlie one fide, there cannot be ima- gined the leaft fear of falling into any errour,by following our guide, who is proved to be fecured from leading in«* to errour,and on the other fide, this fecurity from errour> proceeding from the promifed aifiilancc of the Holy Ghofl , given to the Church purpofely to dired all her childrcn,in all points of that faith which God exadeth of all to pleafe him , and to work iheyr Salvation by it^ and this diredionbeeing alfb the only fafe and fecure meanes which he hath given vs to this end,- it is manifefl that wee finne damnably if wee refufe to follow it, Tirjt becaufe it is a damnable Sinne not to fubmitt to that order of go- vernment which the devine providence hath by his wiC dome and alfo his Sovereignc Authority appointed vnto all for theyr diredion: For (as wee at large flicwed out of S» Auften Seit : 21. 5.) if God fliould give a man Com- miffion to dired vs in fuch points, vnto which he would Bbb 2 have 1 If Bo The %oman Church is | lave all to confbrrac , he who (hould refiife to (ubmitt to i| ! the diredion of this man, fliould be guilty of damnaBle J ^ difobedience , not fo much towards this man, as towards u ^ God who gave that Commiflionto this man:fo God (ac- 1 1 cording to what hath been proued) having given Com- " k miflion to the Church to decide and determine all our )j C^trovcrfies in faith , and to dired vs in all things ne- , k cenary to Salvadon , as well in beleefe, as pradice 5 to i ftand out againft the Church, and not to fubmitt to this 1 order appointed by God, is a moft damnable finne of re« j J fradary difobedience. |i ^ 4. Secondly wee have no ftrider obligation impofed \ \ by the Law of Chmtj towards our own fclves , then to i procure that laft end for which wee were craeted , to wit c the eternall Salvation of our ownSoules: Wee are fure. : \ this cannot be done , but by pleafing God, who is not i pleafed but by our profeffion of that only one true faith, ] of which it is faid without faith it is imfoftble to fleafe God : i Hebr: And he (who with this true faith) beleeveth nor, [ 1 shall be damned. Harl^»i6.v. i6# Hethen, who will not ( take paines and care to fee himfelfe fecurely fetle.d in this j < true faith (fo wholy neceiTary to Salvation) is damnably ^ ) guilty of vncharitablenes towards his o^vnSoul; whofc 1 greateft ad eternall good he negiedeth to procure,by ne- gleding to procure the oly mcanes of true faith,by which ' i it ca only be titceyned. And let no body fay this Meancs is J too hard to be procured by mce ; for I am no fchoUcr but I a poor igoorat creaturcThis will not excufc you forGod J knew well enough, that the farr greater part of thofe,wha I he created for eternallSalvation and obliged to work the I fame withfeare and trembling , and for whom he did^ I (bedding the Laft droppc of his blood lb to purchafc a I greater I our trfallihleludge. ^.4. 5. 24. 481 greater plenty of graces for them ; this God, I fay, knew well enough t that the greater part of thofe , for which he did and fuffercd fo much , were poore ignorant people: and therefore he had been no earneft Louer of Soulcs , if he had notordeyned fome meanes (b eafy , even to the ignorant, that they thereby, might cfFeduaily be brought to that true faith, which he fo rigoroufly exa(9;e£h of all vnder pain of damnation. This meanes , and this only meancs, I have proved at large to be the infallible gui- dance and diredion of the Church,whofe traditions and 'decrees in all points necelTary are fo inculcated by every , preacher andCatechift of this Church, that it is impoffiblc for any one, defirous of inftru^lion, to live in ignorance • of themj impoflible to live according to them and not to be faved. .itor this Commandement vphich I command thee this ■ iU] , u not hidikn from thee , neither is itfarro of: It is not in JSeaveriitbat thou shguldeft faj who shall go vpfor vs to heave, and bring it down vnto vs , that wee may hear it , and do it* neither is it beyond the Se^ that thou shouldeft fay who shall go §ver the feafor vs and bring it vnto vs , that we^ may hear ff, Mddoit. But theword is very nigh vnto thee. Deutr: 30, ii^ Wee cxad not the knowledge of Greek,and Hebrew, ad ^thc vfe of neere twenty Rules more as I have (hewed our •adverfaries to doSeB: 7. n. 6. But wee exad only the fol- lowing this fo know diredion of theChurch^^ rvayjo direit that nofoole can erre in it. And wee having fo* ground edly feen that this is the diredion given vs by God to folIo\^, wee do not proceed blindly by following it with all fub- mifEon , but no blindnes is greater then in an vnkovvn way, through which of nececelBty wee muft paffc at our cternall perill if wee milTe torefofe the following of an in- Mible guide provided tor vs and offered to vs m this paffagc 4Sz T/>e (^oman Church ts palTagc and rather to yceld our fclvcs over to a confeflcd fallible dire