Rejoinder to Bristows Reply, Part 1 · Chapter 8
CAP. VIII.
To shewe his vanitie in his foresaide rigorous exacting of Bristowe.…ayne scripture, and great promises to bring playne scripture, …nferring place with place so euidently. All the scriptures that he …ledgeth are examined and aunswered. And first concerning the …estion of onelyonly scripture.
First Bristowe (as his common maner is) slandereth Fulke.…e to affirme, that in all matters only euident scripture …ust be brought and heard: which I neuer affirmed, but …at onelyonly scripture is sufficient and of soueraigne au…oritie to teach vsus all doctrine perteyning to religion …d manners, to faith and good workes. Whatsoeuer …erefore is brought and heard, must bee examined by …at touchstone, if it be receiued of Christians. Secondly …e slaundereth me to confesse, that all other euidences …e euident for them, which is an impudent lie, for I ne…r made any such confession. Thus hauing altered the …ate of the controuersie, from that I affirme, to yt which … falsely saith mē to affirme, he taketh vponupon him to an…ere all such scriptures as I hauehave alledged to prooue, yt … al matters, only scripture must be brought & heard. …nd first he quarelleth, yt in all mine answere to ye arti…es, I hauehave cited but one text of scripture, for that pur…se. Where he might more truly say. I had cited none: …r this question of only scriptures authoritie & sufficiencie, was none of the demaunds wherevnto I made answere. Only in ye 4. article & 1. demand, which demādeth what church hath vanquished all heresies in times past, &c. I answere, the true catholike Church, hath alwayes resisted al …lse opiniōs contrary to the word of god, & fought against thē with …e sword of the spirit, which is the word of God, and by the aide … God obteined the victory and triumphed euer thē So did Paul …ercome the Iewes, Act. 18. So did the fathers of the primitiue …urch frō time to time confute heresies by the scriptures, and in …eir writing declare that by thē they are to be confuted &c. To …is Bristow answereth, yt he findeth not yt his argumēts …gainst the Iewes were none but scriptures, wherein he is … be patdoned, because ye quotation is a misse, and hath Act. 18. for 28. in which chapter & 23. ver. S. Luke declareth how he proued the whole doctrin of the gospel out of the law of Moses & the Prophets. Wherefore if Bristow had remēbred this, he might hauehave found yt S. Pauls arguments, were the same against the Iewes of Corinth, which he vsed against ye Iewes of Rome. For what other authority shold be vsed against thē, that denied Christ, & beleue not his Epistles, but the authoritie of ye scriptur…, which they receiued? Wherfore he vsed none other arguments, but taken frō the authoritie of ye scriptures. Also he might find in the same chapter, & last verse, yt Apollo… (who vsed the same arguments yt S. Paul did) proued by the scripturs, that Iesus was Christ. If he will cauill, that it is not said, onelyonly by scriptures, let him accuse S. Luke, which hath omitted other argumēts, necessarie to proue Iesus to be Christ. But read you Act. 13. (saith Brist.) and you shal find yt he vsed against the Iewes, ye testimonie of certaine men, namely of Iohn the Baptist & of his owne disciples. This is as good an argument, to proue yt he confuted them not by the onelyonly authority of Gods word conteined in the scriptures, as if a man wold deny, yt a traytor was apprehended by the onelyonly authoritie of the Prince, because ye constable arested him & the Iustice made his warrāt to ye Iayler to receiue him. Iohn ye Baptist testified nothing of Christ, but yt which was written of him before in the scripture, no more did ye disciples or Apostles of Christ. Besid yt the testimony of the Apostles is not alledged for proofe of any doctrine concerning Christ, but only for witnes of a fact, namely yt Iesus was risen again frō the dead, according to the scriptures. Furthermore Bristow willeth …e to read Act. 4. for ye argument of miracles, where it is said, seing the man also stand with Peter & Iohn, which was healed: The gouernours had nothing to gainsay. A man hauing such daily exercise of conferring of scripture, as Bristow boasteth himself to hauehave, might hauehave alledged twētie places more proper for ye argumēt of miracles. But euen in the same place by him cited, the argument of miracles serueth not to prooue any article of doctrine, not conteined in the scriptures, but to …onfirme the doctrin of the scriptures which was alledged by the Apostles, to prooue Iesus to be Christ.
The second text of scripture is, in the boke of Pur. 6. where I say, that other persuasion then such as is groūded vponupon hearing of Gods word, will neuer of Christians be counted for true beleefe, so long as the 10. cap. to the R…m. remaineth in the Canon of the Bible. To this Bristow answereth, yt the word of God is not only in writing, but in preaching, of such as be sent. And therefore wee account it the word of God, which we heare of the Church of God, either in her coū cels, or in her doctors, or any other. For so said God to thé, he that heareth you, heareth me. I answere yt I spake not of the word of God only in writing, but in preaching, in councels or doctors, or howsocuer it be the word of God, but I say, the only scriptures are a sufficient warant for me & eueryevery Christian to try what is the word of God, & what is the word of man. For he yt cōmanded vsus to heare ye Apostles & ministers, willeth vsus not to beleue any doctrin which they teach, if they hauehave not the warrant of holy scripture to proue vntounto vsus, yt it is the doctrin of God. For since god gaue his word in writing, al spirits & prophets, signes & miracles were to be tryed thereby. Deut. 13.
The third text Gal. 1. which S. Paul spéaketh of preaching, Bristow saith I alledge it of writing, & of onelyonly writing. In these words: Pur. 449. It vexeth you at the verie hart, that we require the authoritie of holy scriptures to confirme your doctrine, hauing a plaine cōmandement out of the word of God, that if any man teach otherwise thē the word of God alloweth, he is accursed? First he chargeth me wt falsification by changing. But what change I hauehave made, let the Lorde God iudge. Indeed I hauehave drawne mine argument from the worde of God, to the holy scriptures, because they are ye only certeine assurance of ye word of God. For how can I knowe certainely what S. Paul preached to ye Romaines, and other Churches, but by the scriptures, both of the old testament and the new, which he affirmeth to be able to make a man wise vntounto saluation 2. Tim. 3? yea wherefore was the newe Testament written, but to assure vsus, what is the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles?
Therefore accursed be he, that saith the newe Testiment is vnperfect, and doeth not contayne in writing al pointes of the Gospell, that Christians are bound to beleeue to their saluation. But the scripture saith not, that the Apostles did write al that they taught, saith Bristow: yes verily, and that I prooue by this argument. The scripture testifieth, that all which the Apostles taught, was first taught of Christ himself before thē, Heb. 2. but whatsoeuer Christ taught, is written in the Gospel, Luk. 1. Act. 5. Iohn. 20. &c. therefore whatsoeuer the Ap… stles taught, is written. And therfore the Church pretending the Apostles tradition, receiued by preaching, i… bound to bring forth ye Apostles writing or other holy scriptures, giuen by the same spirit. The fourth text i… 2. Tim. 3. which I alledge in these words (saith Bristow) Purg. 410. All goodworkes are taught by the scriptures: which are able to make the man of God perfect and prepared to all good workes. First he taketh exception, that these are not the wordes of S. Paul. Indeede my wordes are an argument against prayers for the dead grounded vponupon the scripture which Bristowe suppresseth: But supposing that Saint Paul had saide so, what a fonde reasoning is this (saith Bristo…) because one euidence proueth all, therefore I can not hauehave any other euidence, but that onelyonly? Sir, if one euidence prooue all, that which is not prooued by that euidence, is not prooued at all. But if to prooue that which is prooued alreadie, by that one euidence, you hauehave other good euidence, no man letteth you to vse them. Wherefore this is no fond kinde of resoning (Maister Br…stow) but such as the best Logicians do teach. All good workes are taught by the scriptures: therefore that which is not taught by the scriptures, is no good worke. But nowe S. Paul saith not, that all good workes are taught by the scripture, saith Bristowe. Hee saith the scriptures are profitable, he saith not, are able or sufficient to teach all good works. Againe he speaketh only of the worke of an Euangelist, and not of all good workes. To this I aunswere that immediately before Paul saide, The scriptures are able to make Timothie wise vntounto saluation, through faith in Christ Iesu: but no man can bee wise vntounto saluation, but he yt knoweth all good workes meete for a Christian man to doe: therefore all good workes meete for a Christian man to do, may be learned by the scripture. And euen in this very text, where he saith, Al the scripture inspired of God is profitable to teaching of trueth, to disprouing of falshoode, to correcting of vices, to instructing in righteousnes, that the man of God that is the Euangelist, be perfect, furnished to euerie good worke▪ although you restraine euerie worke to the only worke of an Euangelist, yet that I saide, is necessarily concluded thereof. For it is some part of an Euangelists worke to giuegive example in all good workes, that are meet to be done by other men: but by the scripture he may be perfectly furnished &c. therefore all good workes are taught by the scripture. Againe, when all the office of an Euangelist, which consisteth in teaching, disputing, correcting, instructing in righteousnes, may be perfectly furnisht at the scriptures: what can be more playne to prooue, that nothing ought to bee taught for truth, disprooued for error, corrected for vice, instructed for righteousnesse, but that which is taught, disproued, corrected, instructed out of ye holy scriptures? Seeing therfore, that prayers and oblations are to be made for the dead, is not taught by the scripture, it is no trueth. To deny prayer to be profitable for the deade, is not disproued by the scripture, therefore it is no error. To omit prayer for ye dead is not corrected in ye scripture, therfore it is no vice. Mē are not instructed in ye scripture to pray for the dead, therefore it is no worke of righteousnes.
The 5. & 6. texts, I alledge together Pur. 434. Search the Scriptures, and trie the spirites, to proue that the certeintie of trueth in vnderstanding the Scriptures, is not to be had but by the spirite, and the spirites are not tried but by the Scriptures. Against this conference Bristow saieth, Who euer alledged Scripture more blindly? And why so I pray you? because Christ saieth in the same place, that Iohn did beare witnesse to the truth. My workes doe beare witnesse of me: Also, My father who hath sent mee, hee hath giuen witnesse of mee. In dèed, … Bristowe could proue, that Iohn Baptist, Christes miracles, or God his father, did testifie any thing of him, which was not before contained in ye Scriptures, neither had Christ giuen a perfect rule to find him in the scriptures, neither is that sentence able to proue that Christ may be sufficiently learned out of the holy Scripture. But if the testimonie of Iohn, of the workes of God the father, do all confirme the Scriptures, who euer alledged scripture more blindly then Bristow, to proue that Christ may not be learned sufficiently out of the newe Testament, & the old, when Christ sendeth the Iewes to the old Testament, as a sufficient witnesse of him?
Concerning the triall of spirits, Bristow biddeth me looke in the text: by this we knowe a spirit of trueth & a spirite of error namely by hearing or not hearing of the Apostles. I like it very well. For where shall wee heare the Apostles speaking, but in their writings & in the other holy writings, according to which they spake all, that they taught. Wherfore here is no tryall of the spirites, but by the scriptures. And where he sayeth the Romanes doe moste manifestly continue in that they heard of the Apostles, because no man can name yt time, the noueltie, the seducer, that they went after, although it were true, that no man could in any point shew (as he sayeth) yet the argument is naught, seeing it is proued by the Apostles writings, that they holde many things, not onelyonly beside, but also contrary to the doctrine of the Apostles.
The 7. text i…, Pur. 285. The worde of the Lord is a light vntounto our steppes, and a lanterne vntounto our feere, therefore wee will not walke in the darknesse of man… traditions. The faithfull testimonie of Gods word, only giueth true light vntounto the eyes. But the Prophet (sayeth Bristow) neither hath the worde only, nor saith that Gods word, is not but in writing, for S. Paul referreth that text to the preaching of the Apostles. To the fi…st quarrell, I aunswere, that I alledge not the wordes of the Prophet, but his meaning, which Bristowe cannot denye to be the onelyonly worde of God that giueth …ue light to the eyes. That Gods worde is not but in …riting, I neuer sayde or thought: but that there is no …erteintie of Gods worde, but in the Scripture, I affirme: …nd that the Apostles preached nothing but that which …as before conteined (though not so clearely) in ye lawe …nd the Prophets.
Last of all, you alledge and saye against Iudas Ma…abaeus, saith Bristowe, Pur. 210. In the law not so much …s one pinne of the tabernacle was omitted, lest any …hing might be left to the will of man to deuise in the worship of God. You shall not doe, sayth the Lorde, what seemeth good in your owne eyes, but that which I commaunde you, that onelyonly shall you do without adding any thing to it, or taking any thing away from it. After a fonde quarrell of the quotation omitted by the printer, and his coniecture thereupon: Moses sayeth not (saith Bristowe) That onelyonly which I doe write, but that onelyonly which I commaund. And so our sauiour Christe commaundeth the Iewes accordingly. The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses chaire: and therefore whatsoeuer they commaund you, obserue it. I aske no better, wee must obserue that only which God cōmandeth, whether Moses or any other of ye Prophets, apostles, or Euangelists hauehave written it, whether ye Scribes or Pharisees, pastors or teachers do preach it. But where shal we finde yt which God hath cōmaunded? but in ye law & ye prophets, in ye writings of ye apostles & euangelists, which are able to make vsus wise to saluation, which are profitable to make yt man of god perfect, prepared to al good works.
As for ye pinnes saith Bristow, you may see in the doctors, they were not for that cause you imagine, of leauing nothing to mans deuise in yt worship of God. For how say you then by Dauid & Salomon, who changed not only a pinne, but all the pinnes & the whole tabernacle into the temple, & ordeined musicall instruments, and manye other thinges for the worship of God, that the lawe did not mention. I aunswere, whatsoeuer Dauid and Salomon chaunged and ordeyned, they did not by the deuise of man, but by reuelation from God, who had ordeined them to doe it. But mine error is (sayeth Bristow) because I do not distinguish betwene men that hauehave onelyonly their owne humaine spirites, and men that hauehave the spirite of God, as Moses, the Prophe… and Apostles, and the catholike Church. I were in deed… in a grosse errour, if I could not distinguish the spirite of God from the spirite of man. But Bristowe erreth because he confoundeth men that were specially chosen, to receiue the worde of God by reuelation, and the same to preach and write, as the Prophets and Apostles: with the Church, which consisteth of men hauing the spirite of adoption: but for the certeintie of trueth, buylded vponupon ye foundation of the Prophets & Apostles, or else erring if they depart from that foundation.
The digression he maketh to the vnlearned brother, because I knowe not the treatise against which he writeth, I omitt. But where he returneth to admonish mee, his fellowe Fulke, as he calleth mee, to looke better to my Logike, concerning mine argument ab authoritate n… ga…iu…, I do him to witt, that, God I thanke, I am not to learne Logike, nor the force of an argument of authoritie negatiuely, of him. The argument that angreth him, is this: All true doctrine is taught in the Scriptures: Purgatorie is not taught in the scriptures: therefore Purgatorie is no true doctrine. Here are two faultes sayeth Bristowe, one because the maior is false, the other supposing the maior were true, yet cannot the argument be opposed to our arguments of traditions, councels, fathers. I will first proue the maior. That whereby the man of God may be made perfect, furnished to all good workes, is taught in the Scriptures. 2. Tim. 3. All true doctrine is that whereby the man of God may be made perfect, prepared to all good workes: Therefore all true doctrine…s taught by the scriptures.
Againe: That which is able to make a man wise to saluation, teacheth all true doctrine needefull to saluation (for of other truethes we speake not) but the scriptures are able to make a man wise vntounto saluation: ergo … Scripture teacheth all true doctrine. And concer…g the seconde fault, which supposeth the maior & mi… were true, yet denyeth the argument. I woulde …sh you fellowe Bristowe to looke better to your …gike, howe an argument that is true in matter and …rme, may not be opposed against you. But you …ing a wittie example, if you prooue a doctrine vntounto …c… out of the olde testament, and I oppose therunto …y negatiue argument, and saye: All true doctrine …aught in the newe Testament, that doctrine is not …ght in the newe testament, therefore that doctrine …o true doctrine. You aske mee, whether this be well …posed of mee. I aunswere, no: neither woulde I euer …pose such an argument against you, which though it … true in forme, yet it is manifestly false in matter.
…r if you suppose the maior to be true (as you say that …olde it, and must holde it especially if you say so) then …he minor vtterly false: for then no doctrine is taught … the olde testament, but the same is taught also in … newe Testament. Wherefore this example prooueth …t, but that mine argument ab authoritate negatiuè is …ghtly opposed against traditions, councels, fathers, & …ch like, as auouch any doctrine for true, which is not …ght in the Scriptures, in which all trueth is taught.