Rejoinder to Bristows Reply, Part 1 · Chapter 9 · Section 2 – Section 3
2 About onelyonly scripture.Bristowe.
I said Cyprian would hauehave nothing done in the celebration Fulke.of ye lords supper, & namely in ministring of the cup, but that Christ himselfe did. lib. 2. Ep. 3. Bristow answereth ye he writeth against ye Aquarians which offered water only, wher as Christ offered wine, which was clean against Christs doing. And what is your sacriledge, in robbing of ye church of Christ of the whole cup? is it not cleane contrary, both to his doing & his cōmaundemēt, drinke ye al of this, and such doing as he did for a tradition vntounto vsus, when ye Apostle rehersing yt tradition reherseth drinking of the Lords cup by ye lay, as well as eating of ye bread? As for mingling wine with water, which first was but a custome of sobriety, after grew into a ceremonie, if Cyprian should vrge of necessitie, he might be answered by his owne rule.
Likewise where Chrysostom saith, it was decreed by the Apostles yt in the celebration of the holy misteries, a remembrance should be made of them yt are departed, I said we wil be bold to charge him wt his owne sayings: first Hom de Adam & He…a: satis sufficere, &c. wee thinke it sufficeth ynough whatsoeuer the writings of ye Apostles hauehave taught vsus according to the foresaid rule, insomuch that we count it not all catholike whatsoeuer shall appeare contrary to the rules appointed.
By this Bristow seeth, yt I am a great reader of the doctors. For whosoeuer made this homily (saith he) he took those words out of ye instructions which followeth the Epistle of Pope Celestinus, in the first tome of councels, where the wordes are not, the writings of the Apostles but the writings of ye see apostolike, which are thought sufficient. Whatsoeuer my reading be, for the maker of the Homily, I cannot depose, but I trust he will not deny, but it hath in al printed books gone vnderunder the name of Chrysostom, and it containeth nothing vnworthy the iudgement of Chrysostom. It is therefore more like that Celestinus or whosoeuer gathered that instruction, borrowed those words out of this homily, and from ye writings of the Apostles peruerted them to the writings of the see apostolike, many such borrowing & peruersions are commonly found in those pontifical Epistles. For admit that not Chrysostom, but some later man made that Homily which borrowed such words out of yt Epistle or instruction: Why did he alter them, if hee thought the writings of the apostolike see sufficient, to approue all catholike doctrine? except perhaps his copie had also apostolica scripta, & that copie which Peter Crab followed in gathering the councels is corrupted. Certaine it is, the homily is auncient, and made in the time when the Pelagian heresie begun to spring, which was in the later time of Chrysostom, & therfore I hauehave vsed no fraude, or misdemeanour in citing this saying for Chrysostoms, wherto Bristow maketh no answere, but denyeth the authority. Likewise wher I cite out of Chrysost. in Ge. Ho. 58. Thou seest into how great absurdity they fall which will not follow ye Canon or rule of ye holy scripture, but permit al to their owne cogitations. Bristow answereth nothing, but yt Chrysost. answereth heretikes which said our Lord took not ture flesh: as though his sētēce is not general against al heretiks which go besid the scripture. Thirdly I saide, if we be further vrged, we wil allege yt he writeth in Euang. Iac. Hom. 58. He that vseth not the holy scripture, but clymeth another way that is a by way not allowed is a theese.
To this Bristow replyeth, that I will call Chrysostom a theefe by his owne saying, for vsing tradition, yea verely if he be obstinate: and why not as well as S. Paul, or an Angel accursed, if they bring an other Gospel? Secondly he saith, as though he vseth not scripture, which vseth tradition, or that scripture doth not warrant tradition as 2. Thessa. 2. I aunswere such tradition as is warrāted by scripture we refuse not, but if al your traditions were warrāted by scripture, wher should be your vnwritten verities? Thirdly (saith Bristow) the thing yt he speaketh of, is that Antichrist & Pseudochrists, cannot shewe any commission out of scripture. I answere that proueth the Pope to be Antichrist, who neither for his authoritie, nor for his doctrine, can shewe any commission out of the scripture.
Fourthly I saide, we may bee as bolde with Chrysostome, as he saide he would be with Paul himselfe, in 2. ad Tim. Hom. 2. I will say somwhat more, wee must not be ruled by Paul himselfe, if he speake any thing that is his owne, and any thing that is humaine, but wee must obey the Apostle, when he caryeth Christ speaking in him. Bristow asketh, whether he spake onelyonly by scripture. No verily, but by reuelation he spake to S. Paul, by aud…ble and humaine voyce hee spake to the rest of the Apostles, and whatsoeuer hee spake any way pertaining to our instruction, is committed to writing, and therefore I beleeue not Chrysostom, alledging a tradition of the Apostles which is not founde in their writings.
Another place of Chrysostom, I cite in Luke, Chap. 16 saying that ignorance of the scriptures hath bredde heresies: Therefore hee woulde hauehave heresies kept away by knowledge of the scriptures. We would the same (saith Bristowe) but what maketh this for onelyonly scripture to be of authoritie? yes forsooth. If all heresies come through ignorance of the scriptures, that which commeth not through ignorance of the scriptures, is no heresie: And that opinion which is not contained in the scriptures, commeth not of ignorance of the scriptures: therefore he yt knoweth ye scriptures, knoweth all truth.
VntoUnto Leo the great alledging custome and tradition, I oppose his owne saying, for onelyonly Scripture to be sufficient. Ep. 10. They fall into this follie, which, when they be hindred by some obscuritie, to know the truth, hauehave not recourse to the wordes of the Prophets, nor to the writinges of the Apostles, nor to the authorities of the Gospell, but to themselues.
He doth not say (saith Bristowe) that all truethes are expressed in the Scripture. For he blameth the heretike, for not hauing recourse to our common Creede, as though there were any thing in our common Creede, which is not expressed in the Scripture. And if onelyonly Scripture were not sufficient for men to know the truth in any obscuritie, howe could they be blamed for not hauing recourse vntounto them, for yt which they cannot find in them? The words of ye councel of Constantinople ye 6. Act. 18. of Bristows true translation are these: If all men had simply, and without calliditie from the beginning receiued the Gospels preaching, and bene content with the Apostles institutions, the matters verily had beene well a fine, and neither the authors of heresies, nor the fautors of the Priestes, had bene put to the paynes of conflictes: but because the diuell not resting, rayseth vp his squires, therefore Christe also in time conuenient hath raised vp his warriours against them, to wit, the general councels, which to this time hauehave bene holden being sixe in number. So expressely (saith Bristowe) they auouch the authoritie of councels, and you alledge them for only Scriptures. I crie you merciemercy sir: Doe they alledge the authoritie of Councels, as though the preaching of the Gospell, and the institutions of the Apostles in their writings were not sufficient: when they saide before, if men would hauehave bene content with them, there needed no councels? But you adde, that in their wordes, there is no mention at all of Scripture, but onelyonly of preaching and teaching. What I pray you, is the Gospel, which they should preach no scripture? are not the constitutions of the Apostles conteined in their writinges? I know you will answer they are not all contained in their writinges. At leastwise what sworde did these warriers vse against Satan, styrring vpp his squires? doth not the councell say expresly the sworde of the spirit, which is the worde of God contained in the Scriptures? for what other worde doth Saint Paule commend to the Eph. 6. but the holy Scripture which is profitable to reproue all heresies into perfection? 2. Tim. 3.
Against Basil maintaining vnwritten tradition I opposed his owne auctority, De Ver. Fid. in Proem. Morall. We knowe yt we must now and alwaies auoyde eueryevery worde and opinion that is differing from the doctrine of our Lorde. But all is not differing, saith Bristowe, that is not expressed in the Scripture. Neither doe I say so, but all is differing that can not be proued by Scripture. And so saith Basil in his short definition, to the first interrogation. Whether it be lawfull or profitable for a man, to doe or saie any thing which he thinketh to be good, without testimony of the holy Scriptures: He answereth: For as much as our sauiour Christ saith, that the holy Ghost shall not speake of himselfe, what madnes is it that any man should beleeue any thing without the auctority of Gods worde? Here you see, he extendeth the worde of God no farther then the holy Scriptures. Yet Bristowe saith: If I sawe the place, my malice passeth. For the wordes are these. Who can be so madde, that he dare so much as to thinke any thing of him selfe? And it followeth. But because of those things & words that are in vse amongest vsus, some are plainly taught in the holy Scripture some are omitted. Concerning them that are omitted (saith Bristowe) We hauehave this rule, to be subiect to other men for Gods commandement renouncing quite our owne wills. In very deede I abridged the place, and gaue the true sense, because it is large. But if Bristowe vnderstand Basills language, his wordes are these: foreign, &c, Seeing our Lorde Iesus Christ saith of the holy Ghost, for he shall not speake of himselfe, but what things so euer he shall heare, the same shall he speake: and of him selfe: the sonne can doe nothing of himselfe. And againe, I hauehave not spoken of my selfe, but the father which hath sent me, he himselfe hath giuen me a commandement what I shall saie and speake. And I knowe that his commandement is life eternall. Therefore the things which I speake, euen as the father hath said vntounto me, so I speake. Who is come into so greate madnes, yt he dare of him selfe take vponupon him any thing foreign euen vntounto knowledge? which hath neede of the holy and good spirite as a guide that he may de directed into the waie of truth, both in minde and speache, and deede, but walketh blinde and in darknes without the sonne of righteousnes, yea our Lorde Iesus Christ, him which giueth light with his commandements as it were with beames? For the commandement of the Lorde saith he is bright, lightning the eies. Seeing then that of such things as we hauehave in vse, some are vnderunder the com mandement of God prescribed in the holy Scripture, & some are not spoken of concerning those that are written, no liberty at all is giuen to any man, neither to do any thing of those that are forbidden, nor to omit ought of those things which are prescribed. Seeing the Lorde hath once charged and saide: thou shalt keepe the worde which I command thee this daie: thou shalt not adde vntounto it, neither shalt thou take from it. For there is a terrible expectation of iudgment and zeale of fyer, which shall deuoure all those which shalbe bolde to do any such thing. And concerning those things, which are not spoken of, the Apostle Paule hath set vsus a rule saying: all things are lawfull for me, but all things are not expedient. All things are lawfull for me, but all things do not edify, Let no man seek his own profit but eueryevery one an other mans. So that in eueryevery matter, it is necessary to be subiect to God, according to his commandement. For it is written, be ye subiect one to an other in the feare of Christ.
And our Lord saith, he that will among you be great, let him be least of all, and seruant of all, that is to say, estraunged from his owne will, according to the imitation of our Lorde himselfe, which saith: I came downe from heauen, not that I should doe mine owne will, but the will of my father which hath sent me, Where hath Bristowe, that we should be subiect to other men in such thinges, as are omitted by Scripture; therefore not my malice, but his ignorance passeth, and that willful also, although he follow the old barbarous translation of Basil when he may hauehave a better. An other place of Basil I cited in his Moral. defin. 26. EueryEvery word or deed must be confirmed by the testimony of holy Scripture for the persuasion of good men, & the confusion of wicked men. Bristow saith, he admonisheth his monkes being students in diuinity, to be so perfect in the Scriptures, yt they may hauehave a text redy, at eueryevery need as when we bidde them, cast all away that is not written, they hauehave this text ready, where Saint Paule biddeth vsus the contrary. To holde the traditions which we hauehave learned, whether it be by his Scripture, or by his worde of mouth. 2. Thess. 2. And doth Paule bidde them holde such doctrine as was not to be proued out of the Scriptures? did hee preach any such doctrine among the Thessalonians, when those to whom he preached daily, searched the Scriptures, tosee if those thinges were euen so. Act. 17. And where I pray you, did you heare any tradition by worde of Saint Paules mouth, that you may obiect it to vsus? we doubt not but whatsoeuer he preached was as true, as that he did put in writing, if you can assure vsus of it: but seeing that is impossible, and it is certaine he preached no doctrine but such as he committed to writing, Basills rule must still stande in force, that eueryevery worde and deede must hauehave confirmation of holy scripture, or else it is not good, for all good workes are taught in the Scripture, and all true doctrine may be found in them. 1. Tim. 3.
Now commeth Bristowe, to answere such things as I obiect out of Augustine against vnwritten traditions: which he digesteth into three sorts. The first are quotations of 11. or 12. places in which he preferreth the autority of the canonicall Scripture, before all writinges of Catholike Doctours of Bishops, of Councels, before all customes and traditions.
But this Bristow denieth to be the question, but whether nothing but Scripture be of authoritie: I aunswere, those places proue that nothing is of infallible veritie, but the scriptures, therfore they proue that they only are of irrefragable authoritie.
The second sorte of places are about this question, who hath the true Church. Of which question I affirme, that S. Augustine would hauehave the Church sought only in the Scriptures. And he…e he biddeth me reade his first demande, likewise I wil send him to mine answer vntounto ye same. At length he confesseth, that Augustine is content in that question, to set aside all other authorities, to trie it by the Scriptures: But that nothing els is good authoritie in that question, that he neuer sayeth. Neither doe we say it, or refuse any authoritie, that is agreeable to the Scriptures. And as that one question, which was betweene S. Augustine, and the Donatistes was determinable by the onelyonly authorititie of Scriptures, so are all questions that are betweene the Church of all times, and all heretikes.
The Donatistes helde that the Church was perished out of all partes of the world, except Affrica, as the Papistes holde, that it is perished out of all partes except a peece of Europa. Saint Augustine by the Scripture proueth, the continuance in the Churche dispersed ouer all the worlde, and that we holde against the Romishe synagogue of Popish Donatistes, who hauehave separated them selues from the Catholike Church, into the function of an Italian Priest, as the other did of an Affrican. But Bristowe sayeth, I am as blinde as a beetle, in saying that the Papistes did separate themselues from our Church, seeing it is certain, that Luther did separate him selfe from the Popish Church. The like might be said to all them that forsoke the fellowship of any heretikes, to come vntounto the Churche of God.
But Bristow is as madde as a marche Hare, that bragging so much of the title of ye church, he is driuen to trie it only by the Scriptures, as Augustine calleth vponupon the Donatists. The other places which I aledge out of Aug, (saith Bristowe) are about al questions with heretikes, whatsoeuer. As that he would oppresse the Arrian Maximinus with the authoritie of the Nicene councel. Lib. 3. Cap. 14. Bristowe asketh, whether he might not presse them with the authoritie thereof, as he doth the Donatistes? But aske Augustine him selfe who saith, he ought not in that case, that he charged the Donatistes, which it was by their own concession, because they allowed it. But he saith in the same place, the Fathers of the Nicene councell ratified Homousion, that is, equalitie of the sonne with the father, Veritatis autoritate, & autoritatis veritate, by authoritie of trueth, and by trueth of authoritie. This truth of authoritie, Bristowe will hauehave to be the authoritie of the Nicene councell, as though the councel could not erre: but then what needed ye authoritie of trueth? In deede where the councel decreeth with the trueth, it is the trueth of authoritie, for other authoritie a Councell hath not, but of trueth: to declare trueth, and not to make trueth, for if it declare errour, as the councell of Arimine did, it hath no trueth of authoritie, because it hath no authoritie of trueth. Moreouer Bristow saith, I translate falsely these wordes, Nec ego huius autoritate, nec tuillius detineris. Neither am I bounden to the authoritie of the one, nor thou of the other. Whereas it should be: Neither doth the authoritie of the one hold me, nor of the other holde thee. There is greate difference betweene, beeing holden, and beeing bound. To the bare authoritie of the councell of Nice, Maximinus was no more bounden, then Augustine to the bare authoritie of Ariminum. It was the trueth of Nice, that the Arrian was bounde vntounto, and the falshod of Ariminum, that Augustine was not holden with vsus. But after the example of Augustine (saith Bristowe) we will not alledge the councell of Trent, as our proper witnesses to our side, but the authoritie of Scriptures common to both. Witnesse hereof, Bristowes motiues, where he would ouerthrowe vsus by the bare name of Catholike, and heretike, &c. Againe he saith, that we make challenge of 600. yeares also. And what then? Witnesses of trueth we take wheresoeuer they be, but authoritie of trueth onelyonly out of the Scriptures. Where I said, that Augustine, setting all other persuasions aside, prouoketh onelyonly to the Scriptures, to trie the faith and doctrine of the Churche: Bristowe answereth: Howe true that is, appeareth in the same booke, De Vnitate Eccle. which you cite. For when he hath proued against the Donatistes, the Church to be his, he saith expressely, that to be inough also, for all other questions. Sufficit nobis: It is inough for vsus that we hauehave that Church, which is pointed too, by most manifest testimonies of the holy and Canonicall Scriptures. De Vnit Eccle. Cap. 19. Doth he say expressely, it is inough for all other questions? I must needes say expressely you lie. For the onelyonly question, being how the Donatistes should be receiued, if they would come to the Catholike Church, as though they were the true Church, because baptisme giuen among them was not repeated in the Catholike Church, Augustine after much concertation saith. Quapropter cum dicatur haereticis, &c. Wherfore seeing it is said to the heretiks: Rightousnes is wanting to you, which without charitie, and the bonde of peace, no man can hauehave, & seeing they thēselues confesse, that many hauehave baptisme, which hauehave not righteousnesse, and if they would not confesse it, the holy Scripture conuinceth them, I maruell howe they thinke, when we wil not baptise them again, hauing not their own, but the baptisme of Christ, that we do so, as though we iudged nothing to be now wanting to thē & that because baptisme is not giuen to them in the Catholike Church, which they are founde to hauehave already, they thinke they receiue nothing there, where they receiue yt without which, yt which they hauehave, auaileth them to their destruction, and not to their saluation. Which if they wil not vnderstand, it is sufficient for vsus, yt we holde yt Church, which is shewed forth by most manifest testimonies of the holy and canonical Scriptures. Where he speaketh not of the authortie of ye Church to determine questions, but sheweth it is sufficiēt to hauehave proued by ye Scriptures, that they are the true Church, although the Heretikes will not vnderstand how baptisme being ministred out of the Church, hath not effect, but in the true Church, for if it be manifest by the Scriptures that Augustine holdeth the true Church, that last question of theirs, how they should be receiued, though it be not resolued, yet can not disprooue them to be the true Church, nor proue the Donatists to be the Church, seeing there can be but one.
Where out of this Booke Cap. 16. I shewe, that Augustine declareth, first that Heretikes must be confuted only by Scriptures, secondly that neither councells, succession of Bishoppes vniuersality, miracles, visions, dreames nor reuelations, are the notes to trie the Catholike Church, but only the Scriptures: Bristowe saith, they are notes with the Scripture, as he hath shewed in his demaund, I answere whatsoeuer agreeth wt the Scripture, may well be receiued. But the Scripture without all these is sufficient, to trie the Church as Augustine sheweth, & therefore all the rest of Bristowes motiues, might be spared, if he durst ioyne issue vponupon the Scripture only, as Augustine doth, but that he dare not do. He hath a great quarrell of Augustine, for translating manifestatur is proued, as though Augustine saide, that true miracles and visions lacke waight and fashion of iust probation. If you call true miracles, that are done indeede and not counterfeited, I say that all such make no iust probation. For God tempteth his Church by such, to see if they will forsake his commandement. Deut. 13. But those that be true miracles indeede, are ioyned with the truth of doctrine, which being tryed by the worde of God to be such, confirme it or prepare mens mindes vntounto it, of themselues neuer sufficient to auouch true doctrine, without Gods worde: and therefore I will stil t…nslate, manifestatur is manifestly prooued or shewed, which is alone.
Moreouer out of Augustine Cont. Epist. sundam. Cap. 4. I shewed, that though consent, and vniuersality, antiquity, succession, be good confirmation, when they are ioyned with truth: yet when trueth is seuered from them, it is more to be regarded then they all. Bristowe saith, that Augustine graunteth not that the truth can be separated from them. Yes verily, or else he should hauehave stood vponupon that poynt only, that truth can not be seuered from those markes, which vndoubtedly the Catholique Church had, and the Manichees wanted. And although he saide, the Church had most syncere wisdom, yet he saith not, that wheresoeuer was antiquity, succession, &c. there must needs be the most syncere wisdome.
Lastly out of the booke De Pastoribus Cap. 14. I affirmed, that mans auctority is too weake to carry away so waighty a matter, as was in question, vsing the wordes of Augustine: Auferantur chartae humanae, &c. Let mens papers be remoued, let the voices of God be heard, shewe me one place of Scripture for Donatus side, &c. Bristowe rehearsing the saying more at large as I did, Ar. 14. asketh what maketh all this for Fulke? vnlesse hee thinketh he hath any vantage in his owne false translation of Acta, turning it decrees. Surely whether the worde be well or ill translated, I seeke no vantage therof, and yet if I should change my translations, I would rather call Acta actes of the Court or recordes, then Courtrolles as you doe. But eueryevery man may see, what vantage you clasp at, among ignorant persons, by your false translation of Chartae humanae mens Court papers, as though the worde of Augustine were not generall to remoue all mens writings, and to vrge only the Scripture. But the Church beginning at Hierusalem & spreading ouer all Nations, to the very last time, which Augustine in all places proueth against the Donatists, maketh much against vsus in Bristowes opinion. Nay rather against the Papists, which restraine the Church into the Romishe rable, which we affirme, both is and was alwaies, scattered ouer al the world, although greater in number at some times then at other some, seeing that Mahomet hath infected a greate part of the worlde, and yet among the Mahometists we doubt not but Christ hath his members, that neuer bowed their knee either to Mahomet of Mecha, or to the Pope of Rome.
3 About certaine traditions.Bristowe.
The oblations Pro natalitiis spoken of before Cap. 6. Par. 1. 5. I saide those oblations, with other superstitions Fulke.fathered vponupon tradition of the Apostles, by the Nicen, & other councels, as Rhenanus witnesseth, are abrogated.
Bristowe answereth that he speaketh neuer a worde of any other traditions. Yet Bristowe confesseth him selfe, that many of them are abrogated. Cap. 6. Par. 1. 4. & 5.