The Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity — Richard Hooker

The Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity · Richard Hooker

The second Booke: Concerning their first position who vrge reformation in the Church of England; Namely That Scripture is the onelyonly rule of all things which in this life may be done by men.

The matter contained in this second Boooke.

1 AN answere to their first proofe brought out of scripture. Prou. 2.9.

2 To their second. 1 Cor. 10.31.

3 To their third. 1. Tim. 4.5.

4 To their fourth. Rom. 14.23.

5 To their proofes out of Fathers, who dispute negatiuely from the authoritie of holy scripture.

6 To their proofe by the scriptures custome of disputing from diuine authoritie negatiuely.

7 An examination of their opinion concerning the force of arguments taken from humane authoritie for the ordering of mens actions and perswasions.

8 A declaration what the truth is in this matter.

AS that which in the title hath bene proposed for the matter whereof we treat, is onelyonly the Ecclesiasticall lawe whereby we are gouerned; So neither is it my purpose to maintaine any other thing, then that which therein truth and reason shall approue. For concerning the dealings of men who administer gouernment, and vntounto whom the execution of that law belongeth; they hauehave their iudge who sitteth in heauen, and before whose tribunall seate they are accomptable for whatsoeuer abuse or corruption, which (being worthily misliked in this Church) the want eyther of care or of conscience in them hath bred. We are no Patrones of those things therfore; the best defence whereof is speedie redresse & amendment. That which is of God we defend, to the vttermost of that habilitie which he hath giuen: that which is otherwise, let it wither euen in the roote from whence it hath sprung. Wherefore all these abuses being seuered and set apart, which rise from the corruption of men, and not from the lawes themselues: come we to those things which in the very whole intier forme of our Church-politie hauehave bene (as wee perswade our selues) iniuriously blamed, by them who endeuour to ouerthrow the same, and in stead therof to establish a much worse▪ onelyonly through a strong misconceipt they hauehave, that the same is grounded on diuine authoritie. Now whether it be that through an earnest longing desire to see things brought to a peaceable end, I do but imagine the matters whereof we contend, to be fewer then indeed they are; or else for that in truth they are fewer when they come to be discust by reason, then otherwise they seeme, when by heate of contention they are deuided into many slippes, and of eueryevery branch an heape is made: surely as now wee hauehave drawne them together, choosing out those things which are requisite to bee seuerally all discust, and omitting such meane specialties as are likely (without any great labour) to fall afterwardes of themselues; I knowe no cause why either the number or the length of these controuersies should diminish our hope, of seeing them end with concord and louelove on all sides; which of his infinite louelove and goodnes the father of all peace and vnitie graunt. VntoUnto which scope that our endeuour may the more directly tend, it seemeth fittest that first those thinges be examined, which are as seedes from whence the rest that ensue hauehave growne. And of such the most generall is that, wherewith we are here to make our entrance; a question not mooued (I thinke) any where in other Churches, and therefore in ours the more likely to be soone (I trust) determined. The rather for that it hath grown from no other roote, then only a desire to enlarge the necessarie vse of the word of God; which desire hath begotten an error enlarging it further then (as we are perswaded) soundnesse of truth will beare. For whereas God hath left sundry kindes of lawes vntounto men, and by all those lawes the actions of men are in some sort directed:T.C. l. 1. p. 59. & 60. they hold that one onelyonly lawe, the scripture, must be the rule to direct in all thinges, euen so farre as to the taking vp of a rush or strawe. About which point there should not neede any question to growe, and that which is growne might presently ende, if they did yeelde but to these two restraints: the first is, not to extend the actions whereof they speake so lowe as that instance doth import, of taking vp a strawe, but rather keepe themselues at the least within the compasse of morall actions, actions which hauehave in them vice or vertue; the second, not to exact at our hands for eueryevery action the knowledge of some place of scripture out of which we stand bound to deduce it, as by diuerse testimonies they seeke to enforce, but rather as the truth is, so to acknowledge, that it sufficeth if such actions be framed according to the lawe of reason; the generall axiomes, rules, and principles of which lawe being so frequent in holy scripture, there is no let but in that regard, euen out of scripture such duties may be deduced by some kinde of consequence, (as by long circuite of deduction it may be that euen all truth out of any truth may be concluded); howbeit no man bound in such sort to deduce all his actions out of scripture, as if eyther the place be to him vnknowne whereon they may be concluded, or the reference vntounto that place not presently considered of, the action shall in that respect be condemned as vnlawfull. In this we dissent, and this we are presently to examine.

The first pretended proofe of the first position out of scripture. Pro. 2.9. T.C .l. 1. p. 20. I say that the word of God containeth whatsoeuer things can fall into any part of mans life. For so Salomon saith in the 2. chapter of the Prouerbes, My sonne, if thou receiue my words &c. then thou shalt vnderstand iustice, and iudgement, & equitie, and eueryevery goodway.1 In all parts of knowledge rightly so termed, thinges most generall are most strong: Thus it must be, in as much as the certaintie of our perswasion touching particulars, dependeth altogether vponupon the credite of those generalities out of which they growe. Albeit therefore eueryevery cause admit not such infallible euidence of proofe, as leaueth no possibilitie of doubt or scruple behind it; yet they who claime the generall assent of the whole world vntounto that which they teach, and doe not feare to giuegive very hard and heauie sentence vponupon as many as refuse to embrace the same, must hauehave speciall regard that their first foundations and grounds be more then slender probabilities. This whole question which hath bene mooued about the kinde of Church regiment, we could not but for our owne resolutions sake, endeuour to vnrip and sift; following therein as neare as we might, the conduct of that iudiciall method which serueth best for inuention of truth. By meanes whereof hauing found this the head theoreme of all their discourses, who pleade for the chaunge of Ecclesiasticall gouernment in England, namely, That the Scripture of God is in such sort the rule of humane actions, that simply whatsoeuer we doe, and are not by it directed thereunto, the same is sinne; wee hold it necessarie that the proofes hereof be waighed: be they of waight sufficient or otherwise it is not ours to iudge and determine: onelyonly what difficulties there are, which as yet withhold our assent, till we be further and better satisfied, I hope no indifferent amongst them will scorne or refuse to heare. First therefore whereas they alleage that wisedome doth teach men eueryevery good way; and hauehave thereupon inferred, that no way is good in any kind of action, vnlesse wisedome do by scripture leade vntounto it: see they not plainely how they restraine the manifold wayes which wisedome hath to teach men by, vntounto one only way of teaching, which is by scripture? The boundes of wisedome are large, and within them much is contayned. Wisdome was Adams instructor in Paradise: wisdome indued the fathers, who liued before the law, with the knowledge of holy things by the wisedome of the lawe of God, Dauid attained to excell others in vnderstanding; & Salomon likewise to excell Dauid, Psal. 119.95.by the selfe same wisdome of God teaching him many things besides the law. The waies of well-doing are in number euen as many, as are the kindes of voluntarie actions: so that whatsoeuer we do in this world and may do it ill, we shew our selues therein by well doing to be wise▪ Now if wisedome did teach men by scripture not onelyonly all the wayes that are right and good in some certaine kind, according to that of a2. Tim. 3 16. The whole Scripture is giuen by inspiration of God, and is profitable to teach, to improue, to correct, and to instruct in righteousnes, that the man of God may be absolute being made perfect vntounto all good works. He meaneth all and only those good workes, which belong vntounto vsus as we are men of God, and which vntounto saluation are necessary. Or if we vnderstand by men of God, Gods Ministers▪ there is not required in them an vniuersall skill of eueryevery good worke or way, but an habilitie to teach whatsoeuer men are bound to doe that they may be saued. And with this kinde of knowledge the scripture sufficeth to furnish them as touching matter.S. Paule concerning the vse of scripture; but did simply without any maner of exception, restraint, or distinction, teach eueryevery way of doing well; there is no art but scripture should teach it, because eueryevery art doth teach the way how to do some thing or other well. To teach men therefore wisedome professeth, and to teach them eueryevery good way: but not eueryevery good way by one way of teaching. Whatsoeuer either men on earth, or the Angels of heauen do know, it is as a drop of that vnemptiable fountaine of wisdom; which wisdom hath diuersly imparted her treasures vntounto the world. As her waies are of sundry kindes, so her maner of teaching is not meerely one and the same. Some thinges she openeth by the sacred bookes of Scripture; some things by the glorious works of nature: with some things she inspireth them frō aboue by spirituall influence; in some things she leadeth and traineth them onelyonly by worldly experience and practise. We may not so in any one speciall kinde admire her, that we disgrace her in any other; but let all her wayes be according vntounto their place and degree adored.

The second proofe out of Scripture. 1. Cor. 10.31. T.C. l. 1. p. 16. S. Paul saith that whether we eat or drink or whatsoeuer we do, we must do it to the glory of God. But no man can glorifie God in any thing but by obedience; and there is no obedience but in respect of the commaundement and word of God: Therefore is followeth that the word of God directeth a man in all his actions.2 That all things be done to the glory of God, the blessed Apostle (it is true) exhorteth. The glory of God is the admirable excellencie of that vertue diuine, which being made manifest, causeth men and Angels to extoll his greatnes, and in regard thereof to feare him. By beeing glorified, it is not meant that he doth receiue any augmentation of glory at our hands; but his name we glorifie, when we testifie our acknowledgement of his glorie. Which albeit we most effectually do by the vertue of obedience: neuerthelesse it may be perhaps a question, whether S. Paule did meane that wee sinne as oft as euer wee goe about any thing, without an expresse intent and purpose to obey God therein. He saith of himselfe, I do in all things please all men, seeking not mine owne commoditie, but rather the good of many, that they may be saued. Shall it hereupon be thought, that S. Paule did not moue eyther hand or foote, but with expresse intent euen thereby to further the common saluation of men? We moue, we sleepe, wee take the cuppe at the hand of our friend, a number of thinges we oftentimes doe, onelyonly to satisfie some naturall desire, without present expresse and actuall reference vntounto any commaundement of God. VntoUnto his glory euen these thinges are done which we naturally performe, and not onelyonly that which morally and spiritually we doe. For by eueryevery effect proceeding from the most concealed instincts of nature, his power is made manifest. But it doth not therefore follow, that of necessitie we shall sinne, vnlesse we expressely intend this in eueryevery such particular. But be it a thing which requireth no more then onelyonly our generall presupposed willingnesse to please God in all things; or be it a matter wherein wee cannot so glorifie the name of God as we should, without an actuall intent to doe him in that particular some speciall obedience: yet for any thing there is in this sentence alleaged to the contrarie, God may be glorified by obedience, and obeyed by performance of his will, and his will be performed with an actuall intelligent desire to fulfill that lawe which maketh knowne what his will is, although no speciall clause or sentence of scripture bee in eueryevery such action set before mens eyes to warrant it. For scripture is not the onelyonly lawe whereby God hath opened his will touching all thinges that may be done; but there are other kindes of lawes which notifie the will of God, as in the former booke hath beene prooued at large: Nor is there any law of God, whereunto he doth not account our obedience his glory. Doe therefore all thinges vntounto the glory of God (saith the Apostle), be inoffensiue both to the Iewes and Graecians, and the Church of God; euen as I please all men in all thinges, not seeking mine owne commoditie, but manies that they may be saued. In the least thing done disobediently towardes God, or offensiuely against the good of men, whose benefite wee ought to seeke for as for our owne, we plainely shew that we doe not acknowledge God to be such as indeede he is, and consequently that we glorifie him not. This the blessed Apostle teacheth: but doth any Apostle teach, that we cannot glorifie God otherwise, then onelyonly in doing what wee finde that God in Scripture commaundeth vsus to doe? The Churches dispersed amongest the Heathen in the East part of the world, are by the Apostle S. Peter exhorted, to hauehave their conuersation honest amongest the Gentiles, 1. Pet. 2.12.that they which spake euill of them as of euill doers, might by the good workes which they should see, glorifie God in the day of visitation. As long as that which Christians did was good, and no way subiect vntounto iust reproofe; their vertuous conuersation was a meane to worke the Heathens conuersion vntounto Christ. Seeing therefore this had beene a thing altogether impossible, but that Infidels themselues did discerne, in matters of life and conuersation, when beleeuers did well, and when otherwise; when they glorified their heauenly father, and when not: it followeth that some thinges wherein God is glorified, may be some other way knowne, then onelyonly by the sacred Scripture; of which Scripture the Gentiles being vtterly ignorant, did notwithstanding iudge rightly of the qualitie of Christian mens actions.Rom. 2.34. Most certaine it is that nothing but onelyonly sinne, doth dishonour God. So that to glorifie him in all things;1. Cor. 10.32. is to do nothing whereby the name of God may be blasphemed; nothing whereby the saluation of Iew or Grecian or any in the Church of Christ may be let or hindered; nothing wherby his law is transgrest.Rom. 2.23. But the question is, whether onelyonly Scripture do shewe whatsoeuer God is glorified in.

3 And though meates and drinkes be said to be sanctified by the worde of God, and by prayer: yet neither is this a reason sufficient to prooue,The third scripture prof. 1. Tim. 4.5. And that which S. Paul said of meats & drink… that they are sanctified vntounto vsus by the word of God, the same is to b… vnderstanded of all things els whatsoeuer we hauehave the vse of. T.C. l. 1. p. 20. that by scripture wee must of necessitie be directed in eueryevery light and common thing which is incident into any part of mans life. OnelyOnly it sheweth that vntounto vsus the worde, that is to say, the Gospell of Christ, hauing not deliuered any such difference of thinges cleane and vncleane, as the law of Moses did vntounto the Iewes; there is no cause but that we may vse indifferently all thinges, as long as wee doe not (like swine) take the benefite of them, without a thankefull acknowledgement of his liberalitie and goodnesse, by whose prouidence they are inioyed: and therefore the Apostle gaue warning before hand to take heede of such as should inioyne to abstaine from meates, which God hath created to be receiued with thankes-giuing, by them which beleeue and know the truth. For eueryevery creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be receiued with thankesgiuing, 1. Tim. 4.because it is sanctified by the word of God and praier. The Gospell by not making many thinges vncleane, as the lawe did, hath sanctified those thinges generally to all, which particularly each man vntounto himselfe must sanctifie by a reuerend and holy vse: which will hardly be drawne so farre, as to serue their purpose, who hauehave imagined the word in such sort to sanctifie all thinges, that neither foode can bee tasted, nor rayment put on, nor in the world any thing done, but this deede must needes be sinne in them, which do not first knowe it appointed vntounto them by scripture before they do it.

4 But to come vntounto that which of all other things in scripture is most stood vponupon; that place of S. Paule they say, is of all other most cleare, The fourth Scripture-proofe. Rom. 14.23. T.C. lib. 1, p. 27.where speaking of those thinges which are called indifferent, in the ende he concludeth, that whatsoeuer is not of faith, is sinne. But faith is not but in respect of the worde of God. Therefore whatsoeuer is not done by the worde of God, is sinne. Whereunto wee aunswere, that albeit the name of faith being properly and strictly taken, it must needes hauehave reference vntounto some vttered worde, as the obiect of beliefe: neuerthelesse sith the ground of credite is the credibilitie of thinges credited; and things are made credible, eyther by the knowne condition and qualitie of the vtterer,Psal. 19.8. Apoc. 3.14. or by the manifest likelihood of truth which they hauehave in thēselues; hereupon it riseth,2. Cor. 1.18. that whatsoeuer we are perswaded of, the same we are generally said to beleeue. In which generalitie, the obiect of faith may not so narrowly be restrained, as if the same did extend no further then to the onelyonly scriptures of God.Ioh. 10.38. Though (saith our Sauiour) ye beleeue not me, beleeue my workes; that ye may know and beleeue that the father is in me, and I in him. The other Disciples said vntounto Thomas,Ioh. 20.25. we hauehave seene the Lord; but his aunswere vntounto them was, Except I see in his hands the print of the nailes, and put my finger into them, I will not beleeue. Can there be any thing more plaine, then that which by these two sentences appeareth, namely that there may be a certaine beliefe grounded vponupon other assurance then Scripture; any thing more cleare, then that we are said not onelyonly to beleeue the thinges which we knowe by anothers relation, but euen whatsoeuer we are certainly perswaded of, whether it be by reason, or by sense? For as much therefore as aAnd if any will say, that S. Paule meaneth there a full foreign and perswasion that that which hee doth is well done, I graunt it. But from whence can that spring but from faith? how can wee perswade and assure our selues that wee doe well, but whereas we hauehave the word of God for our warrant? T.C. lib. 1. cap. 27.it is graunted, that S. Paule doth meane nothing else by Fayth, but onelyonly a full perswasion that that which we doe is well done; against which kinde of faith or perswasion, as S. Paule doth count it sinne to enterprise any thing, bWhat also that some euen of those Heathen men hauehave taught, that nothing ought to be done, whereof thou doubtest whether it be right or wrong? Whereby it appeareth, that euen those which had no knowledge of the worde of God, did see much of the equitie of this which the Apostle requireth of a Christian man: and that the chiefest difference is, that where they sent men for the difference of good and euill to the light of reason, in such things the Apostle sendeth them to the Schoole of Christ in his worde, which onelyonly is able through faith to giuegive them assurance and resolution in their doings. T.C. lib. 1. pag. 60.so likewise some of the very Heathen hauehave taught, as Tully, that nothing ought to be done whereof thou doubtest whether it be right or wrōg; wherby it appeareth that euen those which had no knowledge of the word of God, did see much of the equitie of this which the Apostle requireth of a Christian man: I hope we shall not seeme altogether vnnecessarily to doubt of the soundnesse of their opinion, who thinke simply that nothing but onelyonly the word of God, can giuegive vsus assurance in any thing wee are to doe, and resolue vsus that we doe well. For might not the Iewes hauehave beene fully perswaded that they did well to thinke (if they had so thought) that in Christ God the father was, although the onelyonly ground of this their faith, had beene the wonderfull workes they saw him do? Might not, yea did not Thomas fully in the end perswade himselfe, that he did well to thinke that body, which now was raised, to bee the same which had bene crucified? That which gaue Thomas this assurance was his sense;Ioh. 20.29. Thomas because thou hast seene, thou beleeuest, saith our Sauiour. What scripture had Tully for his assurance? Yet I nothing doubt but that they who alleage him, thinke hee did well to set downe in writing a thing so consonant vntounto truth. Finally, wee all beleeue that the Scriptures of God are sacred, and that they hauehave proceeded from God; our selues wee assure that wee doe right well in so beleeuing. Wee hauehave for this point a demonstration sound and infallible. But it is not the worde of God which doth or possibly can assure vsus, that wee doe well to thinke it his worde. For if any one booke of Scripture did giuegive testimonie to all; yet still that Scripture which giueth credite to the rest, would require another Scripture to giuegive credite vntounto it: neither could we euer come vntounto any pause whereon to rest our assurance this way: so that vnlesse besides scripture there were some thing which might assure vsus that we do well, we could not thinke we do well, no not in being assured that scripture is a sacred and holy rule of well doing. On which determination we might be contented to stay our selues without further proceeding herein, but that we are drawne on into larger speech by reason of their so great earnestnes, who beate more and more vponupon these last alleaged words, as being of all other most pregnant. Whereas therefore they still argue, that wheresoeuer faith is wanting, there is sinne, and in eueryevery action not commaunded, faith is wanting;T.C. li. 2. p. 5…. Ergo in eueryevery action not commaunded, there is sinne: I would demaund of them, first for as much as the nature of things indifferent is neither to be commaunded nor forbidden, but left free and arbitrarie; how there can be any thing indifferent, if for want of faith sinne be committed, when any thing not commaunded is done. So that of necessitie they must adde somewhat, and at leastwise thus set it downe: In eueryevery action not commaunded of God, or permitted with approbation, faith is wanting, and for want of faith there is sinne. The next thing we are to enquire is, what those things be which God permitteth with approbation, and how we may know them to be so permitted. When there are vntounto one ende sundrie meanes, as for example, for the sustenance of our bodies many kindes of foode, many sorts of rayment to cloathe our nakednesse, and so in other things of like condition: here the end it selfe being necessary, but not so any one meane thereunto; necessarie that our bodies should be both fed and cloathed, howbeit no one kinde of foode or rayment necessary; therefore we hold these things free in their owne nature and indifferent. The choice is left to our owne discretion, except a principall bond of some higher dutie remoue the indifferencie that such thinges hauehave in themselues. Their indifferencie is remoued, if eyther wee take away our owne libertie, as Anantas did,Act. 5. for whome to hauehave solde or helde his possesions it was indifferent, till his solemne vow and promise vntounto God had strictly bound him one onelyonly way: or if God himselfe hauehave precisely abridged the same, by restraining vsus vntounto, or by barring vsus from, some one or moe things of many, which otherwise were in themselues altogether indifferent. Many fashions of Priestly attire there were, wherof Aaron and his sonnes might hauehave had their free choice without sinne, but that God expressely tied them vntounto one. All meates indifferent vntounto the Iewe,Exod 28.4.43. Leuit. 11. were it not that God by name excepted some, as swines flesh. Impossible therefore it is we should otherwise thinke, then that what thinges God doth neither commaund nor forbid, the same he permitteth with approbation either to be done or left vndone. All thinges are lawfull vntounto mee, saith the Apostle, speaking as it seemeth, in the person of the Christian Gentile for maintenance of libertie in thinges indifferent:1. Cor. 6.12. whereunto his answere is, that neuerthelesse All thinges are not expedient; in thinges indifferent there is a choice, they are not alwayes equally expedient. Now in thinges although not commaunded of God, yet lawfull because they are permitted, the question is, what light shall shewe vsus the conueniencie which one hath aboue another. For answere, their finall determination is, that whereas the Heathen did send men for the difference of good & euill to the light of reason, in such things the Apostle sendeth vsus to the schoole of Christ in his word, which onelyonly is able through faith to giuegive vsus assurance and resolution in our doings. Which word Only, is vtterly without possibilitie of euer being proued. For what if it were true concerning things indifferent, that vnlesse the word of the Lord had determined of the free vse of them, there could hauehave bene no lawfull vse of them at all; which notwithstanding is vntrue, because it is not the Scriptures setting downe such thinges as indifferent, but their not setting downe as necessarie that doth make them to be indifferent: yet this to our present purpose serueth nothing at all. Wee inquire not now whether any thing be free to be vsed, which scripture hath not set downe as free: but concerning things knowne and acknowledged to be indifferent, whether particularly in choosing any one of them before another we sinne, if any thing but scripture direct vsus in this our choice. When many meates are set before me, all are indifferent, none vnlawfull; I take one as most conuenient. If scripture require me so to do, then is not the thing indifferent, because I must do what scripture requireth. They are all indifferent, I might take any, scripture doth not require of me to make any speciall choice of one: I doe notwithstanding make choice of one, my discretion teaching me so to doe. A hard case, that hereupon I should be iustly condemned of sinne. Nor let any man thinke, that following the iudgement of naturall discretion in such cases, we can hauehave no assurance that we please God. For to the author and God of our nature, how shall any operation proceeding in naturall sort bee in that respect vnacceptable? The nature which himselfe hath giuen to worke by, he cannot but be delighted with, when wee exercise the same any way with…ut commaundement of his to the contrarie. My desire is to make this cause so manifest, that if it were possible, no doubt or scruple concerning the same might remaine in any mans cogitation. Some truthes there are, the veritie whereof time doth alter: as it is now true that Christ is risen from the dead; which thing was not true at such time as Christ was liuing on earth, and had not suffered. It would be knowne therefore, whether this which they teach concerning the sinfull staine of all actions not commanded of God, be a truth that doth now appertaine vntounto vsus only, or a perpetuall truth, in such sort that from the first beginning of the world vntounto the last consummation thereof, it neither hath bene, nor can be otherwise. I see not how they can restraine this vntounto any particular time, how they can thinke it true now and not alwaies true, that in eueryevery action not commanded there is for want of faith sinne. Then let them cast backe their eyes vntounto former generations of men, and marke what was done in the prime of the world. Seth, Enoch, Noah, Sem, Abraham, Iob, and the rest that liued before any syllable of the lawe of God was written, did they not sinne as much as we doe in eueryevery action not commaunded? That which God is vntounto vsus by his sacred word, the same he was vntounto them by such like meanes as Eliphas in Iob describeth.Iob. 4.19. If therefore we sinne in eueryevery action which the scripture commaundeth vsus not, it followeth that they did the like in all such actions as were not by reuelation from heauen exacted at their hands. Vnlesse God from heauen did by vision still shew them what to doe, they might do nothing, not eate, not drinke, not sleepe, not moue. Yea but euen as in darkenes candle light may serue to guide mens steps, which to vse in the day were madnes; so when God had once deliuered his lawe in writing, it may bee they are of opinion, that then it must needes bee sinne for men to doe any thing, which was not there commaunded them to do, whatsoeuer they might do before. Let this be graunted, and it shall here upon plainely ensue, either that the light of Scripture once shining in the world, all other light of nature is ther with in such sort drowned, that now we need it not, neither may we longer vse it;Arist. Pol. 1. or if it stand vsus in any stead, yet as Aristotle speaketh of men whom nature hath framed for the state of seruitude, saying They hauehave reason so farre forth as to conceiue when others direct them, but litle or none in directing themselues by themselues, so likewise our naturall capacity and iudgement must serue vsus only for the right vnderstanding of that which the sacred Scripture teacheth. Had the Prophets who succeeded Moses, or the blessed Apostles which followed them, bene setled in this perswasion, neuer would they hauehave taken so great paines in gathering together naturall arguments, thereby to teach the faithfull their duties. To vse vntounto thē any other motiue then Scriptum est, Thus it is written▪ had bene to teach them other grounds of their actions then scripture; which I graunt they alleage commonly, but not only. Only scripture they should hauehave alleaged, had they bene thus perswaded, that so far forth we do sinne, as we do any thing otherwise directed then by …cripture. Saint Augustine was resolute in points of Christianity to credit none, how godly and learned soeuer he were, vnlesse he confirmed his sentence by the Scriptures, or by some reason not contrary to them. August, Ep. 18.Let them therfore with Saint Augustine reiect and condemne that which is not grounded either on the Scripture, or on some reason not contrary to Scripture▪ and we are ready to giuegive them our hands in token of friendly consent with them.

5 But against this it may be obiected, and is,The first assertion indeuoured to be proued by the vse of taking arguments negatiuely from the authority of Scripture: which kind of disputing is vsuall in the Fathers. that the Fathers do nothing more vsually in their books, then draw arguments from the Scripture negatiuely in reproofe of that which is euill; Scriptures teach it not, auoid it therefore; these disputes with the Fathers are ordinary, neither is it hard to shew that the Prophets themselues hauehave so reasoned. Which arguments being sound and good, it should seeme that it cannot be vnsound or euill to hold still the same assertion against which hitherto we hauehave disputed. For if it stand with reason thus to argue, Such a thing is not taught vsus in Scripture, therefore we may not receiue or allow it; how should it seeme vnreasonable to thinke, that whatsoeuer we may lawfully do, the Scripture by commanding it must make it lawful. But how far such arguments do reach, it shall the better appeare by considering the matter wherein they hauehave bene vrged. First therefore this we constantly deny, that of so many testimonies as they are able to produce for the strength of negatiue arguments, any one doth generally (which is the point in question) condemne either all opinions as false, or all actions as vnlawfull, which the scripture teacheth vsus not. The most that can be collected out of thē is onelyonly, that in some cases a negatiue argument taken from scripture is strong; whereof no man indued with iudgement can doubt. But doth the strength of some negatiue argumen… proue this kind of negatiue argument strong, by force whereof all things are denied which Scripture affirmeth not, or all things which Scripture prescribeth not, condemned▪ The question betweene vsus is concerning matter of action, what things are lawfull or vnlawfull for men to do. The sentences alleaged out of the Fathers, are as peremptory and as large in eueryevery respect for matter of opinion, as of action▪ which argueth that in truth they neuer meant any otherwise to tye the one then the other vntounto scripture, bothe being thereunto equally tyed, as far as each is required in the same kind of necessitie vntounto saluation. If therefore it be not vnlawful to know, and with full perswasion to belieue, much more then scripture alone doth teach; if it be against all sense and reason to condemne the knowledge of so many arts and sciences as are otherwise learned then in holy scripture, notwithstanding the manifest speeches of auncient Catholike fathers, which seeme to close vp within the bosome thereof all manner good and lawfull knowledge▪ wherefore should their words be thought more effectuall, to shew that we may not in deedes and practise, then they are to proue that in speculation and knowledge, we ought not to go any farther then the scripture? Which scripture being giuen to teach matters of beliefe no lesse then of action▪ the Fathers must needs be, and are euen as plaine against credit, besides the relation; as against practise, without the iniunction of the scripture. Saint Augustine hath sayd,August-contr. liter. Petil. li. 3. cap. 6. Whether it be question of Christ, or whether it be question of his Church, or of what thing soeuer the question be; I say not if we, but if an Angell from heauen shall tell vsus any thing beside that you hauehave receiued in the scripture vnderunder the Law and the Gospel, Tertull. de prescrip. aduers.let him be accursed. In like sort Tertullian, We may not giuegive our selues this liberty to bring in any thing of our will, nor choose any thing that other men bring in of their will; we hauehave the Apostles themselues for authors, which themselues brought nothing of their owne wil, T.C. l. 2. p. 8…. Augustine sayth▪ Whether it be question of Christ, or whether it be question of his Church, &c. And least the answerer should restraine the generall saying of Augustine …nto the doctrine of the Gospell▪ so that he would thereby shut out the discipline▪ euen Tertullian himself… before he was embrued with the Heresie of Montanus, g…ueth testimony vntounto the discipline in these words, VVe may not giuegive our selues, &c.but the discipline which they receiued of Christ they deliuered faithfully vntounto the people. In which place, the name of discipline importeth not as they who alleage it would faine hauehave it construed; but as any man who noteth the circumstance of the place, and the occasion of vttering the words, will easily acknowledge; euen the selfe same thing it signifieth which the name of doctrine doth, and as well might the one as the other there hauehave bene vsed.Hieron. contra Heluid. To helpe them farther, doth not Saint Ierome after the selfe same maner dispute, We beleeue it not because we reade it not? Yea, We ought not so much as to knowe the things which the booke of the Lawe containeth not, Hilar. in Psal. 132.sayth Saint Hilarie. Shall we hereupon then conclude that we may not take knowledge of, or giuegive credit vntounto any thing, which sense or experience or report or art doth propose, vnlesse we find the same in scripture? No, it is too plaine that so farre to extend their speeches, is to wrest them against their true intent and meaning. To vrge any thing vponupon the Church, requiring thereunto that religious assent of Christian beliefe, wherewith the words of the holy Prophets are receiued; to vrge any thing as part of that supernaturall and Celestially reuealed truth which God hath taught, and not to shewe it in Scripture, this did the auncient Fathers euermore thinke vnlawfull, impious, execrable. And thus as their speeches were meant, so by vsus they must be restrained. As for those alleaged words of Cyprian, T.C. l. 2. p. 8. Let him heare what Cyprian sayth: The Christian Religion (sayth he) shall find, that &c.The christian religion shall find, that out of this scripture, rules of all doctrines hauehave spr…ng, and that from hence doth spring and hether doth returne whatsoeuer the Ecclesiasticall discipline doth cōteine: surely this place would neuer hauehave bin brought forth in this cause, if it had bene but once read ouer in the author himselfe out of whom it is cited. For the words are vttered concerning that one principall commaundement of louelove, in the honour whereof he speaketh after this sort: Surely this commaundement containeth the Law and the Prophets, and in this one word is the abridgement of al the volumes of scripture. This nature and reason and the authority of thy word O Lord doth proclaime, Ver… hoc mandatum legem complectitur & Prophetas, & in hoc verbo omnium scripturarum volumina coarcta…iur. Hoc natura, hoc ratio▪ hoc, Domin…, verbi tui clamat authoritas, hoc ex ere tuo Iudiuimu…, h…c inuenit consummationem omnis religio. Primum est hoc mandatum & vltimum▪ hoc in libro vitae conscriptum indeficientem & hominibus & Angelis exhibet lectionem. Legat hoc vnum verbum & in hoc mandato meditetur christiana relig…o, & inueniet ex H AC scriptura omnium doctrinarum regulas emanasse, & hinc nasci & huc reuerti quicquid ecclesiastica continet disciplina, & in omnibus irritum esse & friuolum quicquid dilectio non confirmat.this we hauehave heard out of thy mouth, herein the perfection of all religion doth consist. This is the first commandement and the last: thing being written in the booke of life, is (as it were) an euerlasting lesson both to men and Angels. Let Christian religion reade this one word, and meditate vponupon this commaundement, and out of this scripture it shall find the rules of all learning to hauehave sprung, and from hence to hauehave risen, and hither to returne, whatsoeuer the Ecclesiasticall discipline containeth; and that in all things it is vaine and bootelesse which charity confirmeth not. Was this a sentence (trow you) of so great force to proue that Scripture is the onelyonly rule of all the actions of men? Might they not hereby euen as well proue, that one commandement of Scripture is the onelyonly rule of all things, and so exclude the rest of the Scripture, as now they do all meanes besides Scripture? But thus it fareth when too much desire of contradiction causeth our speech rather to passe by number, then to stay for waight. Well, but Tertullian doth in this case speake yet more plainely:Tertul. lib▪ de Monog. T. C. l. 2. p. 81. And in another place Tertullian sayth, that the scripture denieth that which it noteth not. The scripture ▪ sayth he, denieth what it noteth not: which are indeed the words of Tertullian. But what? the scripture reckoneth vp the Kings of Israell, and amongst those Kings Dauid: the scripture reckoneth vp the sonnes of Dauid, and amongst those sonnes Salomon. To proue that amongst the Kings of Israell there was no Dauid but only one, no Salomon but one in the sonnes of Dauid, Tertullians argument will fitly proue. For in as much as the scripture did propose to recken vp all, if there were moe it would hauehave named them. In this case the scripture doth deny the thing it noteth not. Howbeit I could not but thinke that man to do me some peece of manifest iniury, which would hereby fasten vponupon me a generall opinion, as if I did thinke the scripture to deny the very raigne of King Henry the eight, because it no where noteth that any such King did raigne. Tertullians speech is probable concerning such matter as he there speaketh of. There was, saith Tertullian, no second Lamech like to him that had two wiues; the scripture denieth what it noteth not. As therefore it noteth one such to hauehave bene in that age of the world; so had there beene moe, it would by likelihood as well hauehave noted many as one. What infer we now hereupon? There was no second Lamech; the scripture denieth what it noteth not. Were it consonant vntounto reason to diuorce these two sentences, the former of which doth shew how the later is restrained; and not marking the former, to conclude by the later of them, that simply whatsoeuer any man at this day doth thinke true, is by the scripture denied, vnlesse it be there affirmed to be true? I wonder that a cause so weake and feeble hath bene so much persisted in. But to come vntounto those their sentences wherein matters of action are more apparantly touched; the name of Tertullian is as before,T. C. l. …. p. 80. And that in indifferent things it is not enough that they be not against the word, but that they be according to the word, it may appeare by other places, where he sayth, that whatsoeuer, pleaseth, not the Lord, displeaseth him, and with hurt is receiued. lib. 2. ad vxorem. so here againe pretended; who writing vntounto his wife two bookes, and exhorting her in the one to liue a widdow, in case God before her should take him vntounto his mercy; and in the other, if she did marry, yet not to ioyne her selfe to an infidel, as in those times some widowes Christian had done for the aduancement of their estate in this present world, he vrgeth very earnestly Saint Paules words, onelyonly in the Lord: whereupon he demaundeth of them that thinke they may do the contrary, what Scripture they can shew where God hath dispensed and graunted licence to do against that which the blessed Apostle so strictly doth inioyne. And because in defence it might perhaps be replied, seeing God doth will that couples which are maried when bothe are infidels, if either party chaunce to be after conuerted vntounto Christianity, this should not make separation betweene them, as long as the vnconuerted was willing to reteine the other on whom the grace of Christ had shined; wherefore then should that let the making of mariage, which doth not dissolue mariage being made? after great reasons shewed why God doth in Conuerts being maried allow continuance with infidels, and yet disallow that the faithfull when they are free should enter into bonds of wedlocke with such, concludeth in the end concerning those women that so mary, They that please not the Lord, do euen thereby offend the Lord, Qua domino non placent, vti que Dominum offendunt▪ vti que Malo se inferunt.they do euen thereby throw themselues into euill: that is to say, while they please him not by marying in him, they do that whereby they incurre his displeasure, they … an offer of themselues into the seruice of that enemy with whose seruants they linke themselues in so neere a bond. What one syllable is there in all this, preiudiciall any way to that which we hold? For the words of Tertullian as they are by them alleaged, are two wayes misunderstood; both in the former part, where that is extended generally to all things in the neuter gender, which he speaketh in the feminine gender of womens persons; and in the later, where receiued with hurt, is put in stead of wilfull incurring that which is euill. And so in summe Tertullian doth neither meane nor say as is pretended, Whatsoeuer pleaseth not the Lord displeaseth him, and with hurt is receiued; but Those women that please not the Lord by their kind of marying, do euen thereby offend the Lord, they do euen thereby throw themselues into euill. Somewhat more shew there is in a second place of Tertullian, which notwithstanding, when we hauehave examined it, will be found as the rest are. The Romaine Emperours custome was at certaine solemne times to bestowe on his souldiers a Donatiue;T. C. l. 2. p. 81. which Donatiue they receiued,And to come yet neerer, Where he disputeth against the wearing of crowne or garland, (which is indifferent of it selfe) to those which obiecting asked, where the scripture saith that a man might not weare a crowne; he answereth by asking where the scripture sayth that they may weare? And vntounto them replying that it is permitted which is not forbidden; he answereth, that it is forbidden which is not permitted. Whereby appeareth, that the argument of the scriptures negatiuely holdeth, not onelyonly in the doctrine and ecclesiasticall discipline, but euen in matters arbitrary and variable by the aduise of the Church. Where it is not inough that they be not forbidden, vnlesse there be some word which doth permit the vse of them: it is not enough that the scripture speaketh not against them, vnlesse it speake for them: and finally where it displeaseth the Lord which pleaseth him not, we must of necessitie hauehave the word of his mouth to declare his pleasure. wearing garlands vponupon their heads. There were in the time of the Emperors Seuerus and Antoninus, many who being souldiers, had bene conuerted vntounto Christ, and notwithstanding continued still in that militarie course of life. In which number, one man there was amongst all the rest, who at such a time comming to the Tribune of the army to receiue his Donatiue, came but with a garland in his hand, and not in such sort as others did. The Tribune offended hereat demaundeth, what this great singularitie should meane. To whom the souldier, Christianus sum, I am a Christian. Many there were so besides him, which yet did otherwise at that time; whereupon grew a question, whether a Christian souldier might herein do as the vnchristian did, and weare …s they wore. Many of them which were very sound in Christian beliefe, did rather commend the zeale of this man, then approue his action. Tertullian was at the same time a Montanist, and an enemy vntounto the Church for condemning that propheticall Spirite, which Monta…s and his followers did boast they had receiued; as if in them Christ had performed his last promise; as if to them he had sent the Spirit that should be their perfecter and finall instructer in the mysteries of Christian truth. Which exulceration of mind made him apt to take all occasions of contradiction. Wherefore in honour of that action, and to gall their minds who did not so much commend it, he wrote his booke De corona militis, not dissembling the stomacke wherewith he wrote it. For first the man he commendeth as one more constant then the rest of his brethren, Who presumed, sayth he, that they might well enough serue two Lords. Tert. de corona militis.Afterwards choller somewhat more rising within him, he addeth, It doth euen remaine that they should also deuise how to rid themselues of his martyrdomes, towards the prophecies of whose holy spirit they hauehave already shewed their disdaine. They mutter that their good and long peace is now in hazard. I doubt not but some of them send the Scriptures before, trusse vp bagge and baggage, make themselues in a readinesse, that they may flye from Citie to Citie. For that is the only point of the Gospell which they are carefull not to forget. I knowe euen their Pastors very well what men they are, in peace Lions, Harts in time of trouble and feare. Now these men, saith Tertullian, They must be aunswered where we do find it written in Scripture that a Christian man may not weare a garland. And as mens speeches vttered in heate of distempered affection, hauehave often times much more egernes then waight; …o he that shall marke the proofes alleaged, and the answers to things obiected in the booke, will now and then perhaps espie the like imbecillity. Such is that argument whereby they that wore on their heads garlands, are charged as transgressors of natures lawe, and guilty of sacrilege against God the Lord of nature, in as much as flowers in such sort worne, can neither be smelt nor seene well by those that weare them▪ and God made flowers sweet and beautifull, that being seene and smelt vntounto, they might so delight. Neither doth Tertullian bewray this weaknes in striking only, but also in repelling their strokes with whom he contendeth. They aske sayth he, What scripture is there which doth teach that we should not be crowned? And what scripture is there which doth teach that we should? For in requiring on the contrary part the aide of scripture, they do giuegive sentence before hand that their part ought also by scripture to be aided. Which answer is of no great force. There is no necessitie, that if I confesse I ought not to do that which the scripture forbiddeth me, I should thereby acknowledge my selfe bound to do nothing which the Scripture commandeth me not. For many inducements besides Scripture may leade me to that, which if scripture be against, they all giuegive place, and are of no value▪ yet otherwise are strong and effectuall to perswade. VVhichWhich thing himselfe well enough vnderstanding, and being not ignorant that Scripture in many things doth neither commaund nor forbid, but vse silence; his resolution in fine is; that in the Church a number of things are strictly obserued▪ whereof no law of scripture maketh mention one way or other; that of things once receiued and confirmed by vse, long vsage is a law sufficient; that in ciuill affaires when there is no other law▪ custome it selfe doth stand for lawe; that in as much as law doth stand vponupon reason, to alleage reason serueth as well as to cite scripture; that whatsoeuer is reasonable, the same is lawfull whosoeuer is author of it; that the authoritie of Custome is great; finally that the custome of Christians was then and had bene a long time not to weare garlands, and therefore that vndoubtedly they did offend, who presumed to violate such a custome by not obseruing that thing, the very inueterate obseruation whereof was a law sufficient to bind all men to obserue it, vnlesse they could shew some higher law, some law of scripture to the cōtrary. This presupposed, it may stand then very well with strength and soundnesse of reason, euen thus to answer; Whereas they aske what scripture forbiddeth them to weare a garland, we are in this case rather to demaund what scripture commandeth them. They cannot here alleage that it is permitted which is not forbidden them: no, that is forbidden them which is not permitted. For long receiued Custome forbidding them to do as they did (if so be it did forbid them) there was no excuse in the world to iustifie their act, vnlesse in the scripture they could shewe some lawe, that did licence them thus to breake a receiued custome. Now whereas in all the bookes of Tertullian besides, there is not so much found as in that one, to proue not onelyonly that we may do, but that we ought to do sundry things which the Scripture commaundeth not; out of that verie booke these sentences are brought to make vsus belieue that Tertullian was of a cleane contrary minde. We cannot therefore hereupon yeeld, we cannot graunt, that hereby is made manifest the argument of Scripture negatiuely to be of force, not only in doctrine and ecclesiasticall discipline, but euen in matters arbitrary. For Tertullian doth plainely hold euen in that booke, that neither the matter which he intreateth of was arbitrary but necessarie, in as much as the receaued custome of the Church did tye and bind them not to weare garlands as the Heathens did; yea and further also he reckoneth vp particularly a number of things, whereof he expresly concludeth; Harum & aliarum eiusmodi disciplinarum si legem expostules scripturarum, nullam inuenies; which is as much as if he had sayd in expresse words, Many things there are which concerne the discipline of the Church and the duties of men, which to abrogate and take away, the scriptures negatiuely vrged may not in any case perswade vsus, but they must be obserued, yea although no scripture be found which requireth any such thing. Tertullian therefore vndoubtedly doth not in this booke shew himselfe to be of the same mind with them by whom his name is pretended.

6 But sith the sacred scriptures themselues affoord oftentimes such arguments as are taken from diuine authoritie both one way and other,The first assertion endeuoured to be confirmed by the scriptures custome of disputing frō diuine authority negatiuely. 1. Iohn. 2.5▪ God is light, and there is in him no darknesse at all. Hebr. 6.18. It is imposble that God should lye. Num. 23.19. God is not as man that he should lye. The Lord hath commaunded, therefore it must be; And againe in like sort, He hath not, therefore it must not be; some certainty concerning this point seemeth requisite to be set downe. God himselfe can neither possibly erre, nor leade into error. For this cause his testimonies, whatsoeuer he affirmeth, are alwaies truth and most infallible certainty. Yea further, because the things that proceed frō him are perfect without any manner of defect or maime; it cannot be but that the words of his mouth are absolute, & lacke nothing which they should hauehave, for performance of that thing whereunto they tend. Wherupon it followeth, that the end being knowne wherunto he directeth his speech, the argumēt euen negatiuely is euermore strōg & forcible, cōcerning those things that are apparātly requisit vntounto the same ende. As for example,T. C. l. 2. p. 48▪ It is …er hard to shew that the Prophets hauehave reasoned negatiuely. A… whe… in the person of the Lord the Prophet sayth▪ Whereof I hauehave not spoken▪ Ieremie 19.5. and▪ Wh…ch neuer entered into my heart▪ Ier…mie 7.31.32. and where he condemne…h them because▪ They hauehave not asked counsell at the mouth of the Lord, Esay. 30 2. And it may be shewed▪ that the same kind of argument hath bene vsed, in things which are not of the substance of saluation or damnation, and whereof there was no commaund…ment to the contrary (as in the former there was▪ Leuit. 18.21. & 20.3. Deut. 17.16.) In Iosua the children of Israel are charged by the Prophet that they asked not counsell of the… mouth of the Lord when they entered into couenant with the Gabeonites, Iosh. 9.14. And yet that couenant was not made contrarie vntounto anie commaundement of God. Moreouer we reade that when Dauid had taken this counsell to build a temple vntounto the Lord, albeit the Lord had reuealed before in his word that there should be such a standing place▪ where the Arke of the couenant and the seruice should hauehave a certaine abiding▪ and albeit there was no word of God which …orbad Dauid to build the Temple: yet the Lord (with commendation of his good affection and zeale hee had to the aduancement of his glorie) concludeth against Dauid… resolution to build the Temple, with this reason▪ namely that he had giuen no commandement of this who should build it. 1. Chr. 17.6. God intending to set downe sundry times that which in Angels is most excellent, hath not any where spoken so highly of them as he hath of our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ; therefore they are not in dignitie equall vntounto him. It is the Apostle Saint Paules argument. The purpose of God was to teach his people, both vntounto whom they should offer sacrifice▪ and what sacrifice was to be offered. To burne their sonnes in fire vntounto Baal hee did not commaund them, he spake no such thing▪ neither came it into his mind: therefore this they ought not to hauehave done. VVhichWhich argument the Prophet Ieremie vseth more then once, as being so effectuall and strong, that although the thing hee reproueth were not onelyonly not commaunded but forbidden them, and that expresly;Leuit. 18.21. & 20.3. Deut. 28.10. yet the Prophet chooseth rather to charge them with the fault of making a lawe vntounto themselues, then with the crime of transgressing a lawe which God had made. For when the Lord hath once himselfe precisely set downe a forme of executing that wherein we are to serue him, the fault appeareth greater to do that which we are not, then not to do that which we are commaunded. In this we seeme to charge the Lawe of God with hardnesse onelyonly▪ in that with foolishnesse; in this we shew our selues weake and vnapt to be doers of his will, in that we take vponupon vsus to be controllers of his wisedome; in this we faile to performe the thing which God seeth meete, conuenient and good, in that we presume to see what is meete and conuenient better then God himselfe. In those actions therefore the whole forme whereof God hath of purpose set downe to be obserued, we may not otherwise do then exactly as he hath prescribed; in such things negatiue arguments are strong. Againe, with a negatiue argument Dauid is pressed concerning the purpose he had to build a Temple vntounto the Lord; Thus sayth the Lord, thou shalt not build me an house to dwell in.1. Chro. 17, …. Wheresoeuer I hauehave walked with all Israell, spake I one word to any of the Iudges of Israel, whom I commaunded to feed my people, saying▪ Why hauehave ye not built me an house? The Iewes vrged with a negatiue argument touching the ayde which they sought at the hands of the King of AEgypt, Woe to those rebellious children (sayth the Lord) which walke forth to go downe into AEgypt, Esay. 30.1and hauehave not asked counsell at my mouth, to strengthen themselues with the strength of Pharao. Finally, the league of Ioshua with the Gabeonites is likewise with a negatiue argument touched. It was not as it should be: And why? The Lord gaue them not that aduise; They sought not counsell at the mouth of the Lord. By the vertue of which examples▪ Iosh. 9.14.if any man should suppose the force of negatiue arguments approued, when they are taken from Scripture in such sort as we in this question are pressed therewith, they greatly deceiue themselues. For vntounto which of all these was it said, that they had done amisse in purposing to do, or in doing any thing at all which the Scripture commanded them not? Our question is, whether all be sinne which is done without direction by scripture, and not whether the Israelites did at any time amisse by following their owne minds, without asking counsell of God. No, it was that peoples singular priuiledge, a fauour which God vouchfafed them aboue the rest of the world, that in the affaires of their estate, which were not determinable one way or other by the scripture, himselfe gaue them extraordinarily direction and counsell as oft as they sought it at his hands. Thus God did first by speech vntounto Moses; after by Vrim and Thummim vntounto Priests; lastly by dreames and visions vntounto Prophets, from whom in such cases they were to receiue the aunswere of God. Concerning Iosua therefore thus spake the Lord vntounto Moses saying,Num. 27.21. He shall stand before Eleazar the Priest, who shall aske counsell for him by the iudgement of Vrim before the Lord: whereof had Iosua bene mindfull, the fraud of the Gabeonites could not so smoothly hauehave past vnespied till there was no helpe. The Iewes had Prophets to hauehave resolued them from the mouth of God himselfe, whether Egyptian aides should profite them yea or no: but they thought themselues wise enough, and him vnworthy to be of their Counsell. In this respect therfore was their reproofe, though sharpe, yet iust, albeit there had bene no charge precisely geuen them that they should alwayes take heed of Egypt. But as for Dauid, to thinke that he did euill in determining to build God a Temple, because there was in scripture no commandement that he should build it, were very iniurious: the purpose of his hart was religious and godly,1. Chron. 17. the act most worthy of honour and renowne; neither could Nathan choose but admire his vertuous intent, exhort him to go forward, and beseech God to prosper him therein. But God saw the endlesse troubles which Dauid should be subiect vntounto during the whole time of his regiment, and therefore gaue charge to differre so good a worke till the dayes of tranquilitie and peace, wherein it might without interruption be performed. Dauid supposed that it could not stand with the duty which he owed vntounto God, to set himselfe in an house of Cedar trees, and to behold the Arke of the Lords Couenant vnsetled. This opinion the Lord abateth, by causing Nathan to shew him plainely, that it should be no more imputed vntounto him for a fault, then it had bene vntounto the Iudges of Israell before him, his case being the same which theirs was, their times not more vnquiet then his, nor more vnfit for such an action. Wherefore concerning the force of negatiue arguments so taken from the authority of Scripture as by vsus they are denied,T. C. l. …. p. 50. M. Harding reprocheth the B. of Salisbury with this kind of reasoning: vntounto whom the B. answereth, The argument of authority negatiuely, is taken to be good, whensoeuer proofe is taken of Gods word, and is vsed not onelyonly by vsus, but also by many of the Catholique Fathers. A litle after he sheweth the reason why the argument of authority of the scripture negatiuely is good, namely for that the word of God is perfect. In another place vntounto M. Harding casting him in the teeth with negatiue arguments, be alleageth places out of Iren…us, Chrysostom, Leo, which reasoned negatiuely of the authoritie of the Scriptures. The places which he alleageth be very full and plaine in generality, without any such restraint as the Answerer imagineth, as they are there to be seene. … Vell. Patere. Iugurtha as Marius sub codem Africano militantes, in ijsdem castris didicere qua postea in contrarijs facere…t. there is in all this lesse then nothing. And touching that which vntounto this purpose is borrowed frō the controuersies sometime handled betweene M. Harding, and the worthiest Diuine that Christendome hath bred for the space of some hūdreds of yeres, who being brought vp together in one Vniuersitie, it fell out in them which was spoken of two others, They learned in the same, that which in contrary Cāps they did practise: Of these two the one obiecting that with vsus arguments taken from authority negatiuely are ouer common, the Bishops answer hereunto is, that This kind of argument is thought to be good, Art. 1. Diuis. 29.whensoeuer proofe is taken of Gods word, and is vsed not only by vsus, but also by Saint Paul, Gal. 3.and by many of the Catholique Fathers. Saint Paule saith, God said not vntounto Abraham, In thy seeds all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, but in thy seed which is Christ, and thereof he thought he made a good argument. Likewise sayth Origen, The bread which the Lord gaue vntounto his disciples, saying vntounto them, Take and eate, he differred not, Orig. in. Leuitho. 5.nor commanded to be reserued till the next day. Such arguments Origen and other learned Fathers thought to stand for good, whatsoeuer misliking Maister Harding hath found in thē. This kind of proofe is thought to hold in Gods commaundements, for that they be full and perfect, and God hath specially charged vsus, that we should neither put to them, nor take fro them: and therefore it seemeth good vntounto them that hauehave learned of Christ, Vnus est magister vester Christus, & hauehave heard the voyce of God the Father from heauen, Math. 23.Math. 17.Ipsum au…ite. But vntounto them that adde to the word of God what them listeth, and make Gods will subiect vntounto their will, and breake Gods commaundements for their owne traditions sake, vntounto them is seemeth not good. Againe, the English Apologie alleaging the example of the Greekes how they hauehave neither priuate Masses, nor mangled Sacraments,Desen. par. 5. ca. 15. diuis. …. nor Purgatories, nor pardons; it pleaseth Maister Harding to iest out the matter, to vse the helpe of his wits where strength of truth failed him, & to answer with scoffing at negatiues. The Bishops defence in this case is, The auncient learned Fathers hauing to deale with impudent heretiques, that in defence of their errors auouched the iudgement of all the old Bishops and Doctors that had bene before them, and the generall consent of the primitiue and whole vniuersall Church, and that with as good regard of truth, and as faithfully as you do now; the better to discouer the shamelesse boldnes & nakednes of their doctrine, were oftentimes likewise forced to vse the negatiue, & so to driue the same heretiques as we do you, to proue their affirmatiues, which thing to do it was neuer possible. The ancient father Irenaeus thus stayed himselfe, as we do by the negatiue, Hoc neque Prophetae praedicauerunt, néque Dominus docuit, néque Apostoli tradiderunt, Lib. 1. cap. 1…This thing neither did the Prophets publish, nor our Lord teach, nor the Apostles deliuer. By a like negatiue Chrysostome saith, This tree neither Paule planted, De incomp. nat. Dei hom. 3.nor Apollo watered, nor God increased. In like sort Leo saith, What needeth it to beleeue that thing that neither the Lawe hath taught, nor the Prophets hauehave spoken, Epist. 9…. ca. 12nor the Gospell hath preached, nor the Apostles hauehave deliuered? And againe, How are the new deuises brought in that our Fathers neuer knew? S. Augustine hauing reekoned vp a great number of the Bishops of Rome, by a generall negatiue saith thus, In all this order of succession of Bishops, Epist. 97. ca. 3. Epist. 16…. Lib. 4. ep. 32.there is not one Bishop found that was a Donatist▪ Saint Gregory being himselfe a Bishop of Rome, and writing against the title of vniuersall Bishop, saith thus, None of all my predecessors euer consented to vse this vngodly title, No Bishop of Rome euer tooke vponupon him this name of Singularity. By such negatiues, M. Harding, we reproue the vanity and nouelty of your religion; we tell you none of the catholique ancient learned Fathers either Greeke or Latine euer vsed either your priuate Masse, or your halfe communion, or your barbarous vnknowne prayers. Paule neuer planted them, Apollo neuer watered them, God neuer increased them, they are of your selues, they are not of God. In all this there is not a syllable which any way crosseth vsus. For cōcerning arguments negatiue euen taken from humane authority…, they are here proued to be in some cases very strong and forcible. They are not in our estimation idle reproofes, when the authors of needlesse innouations are opposed with such negatiues, as that of Leo, How are these new deuises brought in which our fathers neuer knew? When their graue and reuerend superiours do recken vp vntounto them, as Augustine did vntounto the Donatists, large Catalogues of Fathers wondered at for their wisdome, piety, and learning, amongst whom for so many ages before vsus, no one did euer so thinke of the Churches affaires, as now the world doth begin to be perswaded; surely by vsus they are not taught to take exception hereat, because such arguments are negatiue. Much lesse when the like are taken from the sacred authority of Scripture, if the matter it selfe do beare them. For in truth the question is not, whether an argument from scripture negatiuely may be good, but whether it be so generally good, that in all actions men may vrge it. The fathers I graunt do vse very generall and large tearmes, euen as Hiero the King did in speaking of Archimedes, From henceforward whatsoeuer Archimedes speaketh, it must be belieued. His meaning was not that Archimedes could simply in nothing be deceiued, but that he had in such sort approued his skill, that he seemed worthy of credit for euer after in matters appertaining vntounto the science he was skilfull in. In speaking thus largely it is presumed, that mens speeches will be taken according to the matter whereof they speake. Let any man therefore that carieth indifferency of iudgement, peruse the Bishops speeches, and consider well of those negatiues concerning scripture, which he produceth out of Irenaeus, Chrysostome, & Leo; which three are chosen from amongst the residue, because the sentences of the others (euen as one of theirs also) do make for defence of negatiue arguments taken from humane authority,Their opinion cōcerning the force of arguments taken from humane authority for the ordering of mens actiō … or perswasiōs. and not from diuine onelyonly. They mention no more restraint in the one then in the other: yet I thinke themselues will not hereby iudge, that the Fathers tooke both to be strong, without restraint vntounto any speciall kind of matter wherein they held such arguments forcible. Nor doth the Bishop either say or proue any more, then that an argument in some kinds of matter may be good, although taken negatiuely from Scripture.

T. C. l. 1. p. 25. When the question is of the authority of a man, it holdeth neither affirmatiuely nor negatiuely. The reason is, because the infirmitie of man can neither attaine to the perfection of any thing whereby he might speake all things that are to be spoken of it; neither yet be free from error in those things which he speaketh or giueth out. And therefore this argument neither affirmatiuely nor negatiuely compelleth the hearer, but only induceth him to some liking or disliking of that for which it is brought, and is rather for an Orator to perswade the simpler sort, then for a disputer to enforce him that is learned.7 An earnest desire to draw all things vntounto the determination of bare and naked Scripture, hath caused here much paines to be taken in abating the estimation and credite of man. Which if we labour to maintaine as farre as truth and reason will beare, let not any thinke that we trauaile about a matter not greatly needful. For the scope of all their pleading against mans authoritie is, to ouerthrowe such orders, lawes, and constitutions in the Church, as depending thereupon if they should therefore be taken away, would peradueture leaue neither face nor memory of Church to continue long in the world, the world especially being such as now it is. That which they hauehave in this case spoken, I would for breuities sake let passe, but that the drift of their speech being so dangerous, their words are not to be neglected. Wherefore to say that simply an argument taken from mans authority doth hold no way, neither affirmatiuely nor negatiuely, is hard. By a mans authority we here vnderstād, the force which his word hath for the assurance of anothers mind that buildeth vponupon it; as the Apostle somewhat did vponupon their report of the house of Cloe, 1. Cor. 1.11.and the Samaritanes in a matter of farre greater moment vponupon the report of a simple woman. For so it is sayd in Saint Iohns Gospell,Iohn. 4.35. Many of the Samaritans of that City belieued in him for the saying of the woman, which testified, He hath told me all things that euer▪ I did. The strength of mans authority is affirmatiuely such, that the waightiest affaires in the world depend ther…on. In iudgement and iustice are not herevpon proceedings grounded?Deut. 19.15. Sayth not the law that in the mouth of two or three witnesses eueryevery word shalbe confirmed? This the law of God would not say,Mat. 18.16. if there were in a mans testimony no force at all to prooue any thing. And if it be admitted that in matter of fact there is some credite to be giuen to the testimonie of man, but not in matter of opinion and iudgement; we see the contrary both acknowledged and vniuersally practised also throughout the world. The sentences of wise and expert men were neuer but highly esteemed. Let the title of a mans right be called in question; are we not bold to relie and build vponupon the iudgement of such as are famous for their skill in the lawes of this land? In matter of state, the waight many times of some one mans authority is thought reason sufficient, euen to sway ouer whole nations. And this not onelyonly with the simpler sort; but the learneder and wiser we are, the more such arguments in some cases preuaile with vsus. The reason why the simpler sort are mooued with authority, is the conscience of their owne ignorance; whereby it commeth to passe, that hauing learned men in admiration, they rather feare to dislike them, then know wherefore they should allow and follow their iudgements. Contrariwise with them that are skilfull, authority is much more strong and forcible; because they only are able to discerne how iust cause there is, why to some mens authority so much should be attributed. For which cause the name of Hippocrates (no doubt) were more effectuall to perswade euen such men as Galen himselfe, then to moue a silly Empiricke. So that the very selfe same argument in this kind which doth but induce the vulga… sort to like, may constraine the wiser to yeeld. And therefore not Orators only with the people, but euen the very profoundest disputers in all faculties hauehave hereby often with the best learned preuailed most. As for arguments taken from humaine authority and that negatiuely; for example sake, if we should thinke the assembling of the people of God together by the sound of a bell, the presenting of infants at the holy font by such as commonly we call their Godfathers, or any other the like receiued custome to be impious, because some men of whom we thinke very reuerendly, hauehave in their bookes and writings no where mentioned nor taught that such things should be in the Church; this reasoning were subiect vntounto iust reproofe, it were but feeble, weake and vnsound. Notwithstanding euen negatiuely an argument from humaine authority may be strong, as namely thus; The Chronicles of England mention no moe then onelyonly sixe kings bearing the name of Edward, since the time of the last conquest; therefore it cannot be there should be moe. So that if the question be of the authority of a mans testimony, we cannot simply auouch, either that affirmatiuely it doth not any way hold, or that it hath only force to induce the simpler sort, and not to constraine men of vnderstanding and ripe iudgement to yeeld assent, or that negatiuely it hath in it no strength at all. For vntounto e…uery of these the contrary is most plaine. Neither doth that which is alleaged concerning the infirmitie of men, ouerthrow or disproue this. Men are blinded with ignorance and errour; many things may escape them, and in many things they may bee deceiued; yea those things which they do knowe, they may either forget, or vponupon sundry indirect considerations let passe; and although themselues do not erre, yet may they through malice or vanity, euen of purpose deceiue others. Howbeit infinite cases there are wherein all these impediments and lets are so manifestly excluded, that there is no shew or colour whereby any such exception may be taken, but that the testimony of man will stand as a ground of infallible assurance. That there is a City of Rome, that Pius Quintus and Gregory the 13. and others hauehave beene Popes of Rome, I suppose we are certainely enough perswaded. The ground of our perswasion, who neuer saw the place nor persons before named, can be nothing but mans testimony. Will any man here notwithstanding alleage those mentioned humaine infirmities, as reasons why these things should be mistrusted or doubted of? Yea that which is more, vtterly to infringe the force and strength of mans testimony, were to shake the very fortresse of Gods truth. For whatsoeuer we beleeue concerning saluation by Christ, although the scripture be therein the ground of our beliefe; yet the authority of man is if we marke it the key, which openeth the dore of entrance into the knowledge of the scripture. The scripture could not teach vsus the things that are of God, vnlesse we did credite men who hauehave taught vsus that the words of Scripture do signifie those things. Some way therefore, notwithstanding mans infirmitie, yet his authority may enforce assent.T. C. l. 1. p. 10. Although that kind of argument of authoritie of men is good, neither in humaine nor diuine sciences; yet it hath some small force in humaine sciences, for as much as naturally, & in that he is a man, he may come to some ripenes of iudgement in those sciences; which in diuine matters hath no force at all, as of him which naturally, and as he is a man, can no more iudge of them shew a blind man of colours. Yea so farre is it from drawing credit if it be barely spoken without reason and testimony of scripture, that it carieth also a suspition of vntruth whatsoeuer proceedeth from him, which the Apostle did well note when to signifie a thing corruptly spoken and against the truth, he saith, that it is spoken according vntounto man. Rom. 3. He saith not as a wicked and lying man, but simply as a man. And although this corruption be reformed in many; yet for so much as in whome the knowledge of the truth is most aduanced, there remaineth both ignorance and disordered affections (whereof either of them turneth him from speaking of the truth;) no mans authority, with the Church especially, and those that are called and perswaded of the authority of the word of God, can bring any assurance vntounto the conscience. VponUpon better aduise and deliberation so much is perceiued, and at the length confest, that arguments taken from the authority of men may not onelyonly so farre forth as hath bene declared, but further also be of some force in humaine sciences; which force be it neuer so smal, doth shew that they are not vtterly naught. But in matters diuine it is still maintained stifly, that they hauehave no manner force at all. Howbeit the very selfe same reasō, which causeth to yeeld that they are of some force in the one, will at the length constraine also to acknowledge, that they are not in the other altogether vnforcible. For if the naturall strength of mans wit may by experience and study attaine vntounto such ripenes in the knowledge of things humaine, that men in this respect may presume to build somewhat vponupon their iudgement; what reason hauehave we to thinke but that euen in matters diuine, the like wits furnisht with necessary helpes, exercised in scripture with like diligence, and assisted with the grace of almighty God, may growe vntounto so much perfection of knowledge, that men shall hauehave iust cause, when any thing pertinent vntounto faith and religion is doubted of, the more willingly to incline their mindes towards that which the sentence of so graue, wise, and learned in that faculty shal iudge most sound. For the controuersie is of the waight of such mens iudgements. Let it therefore be suspected, let it be taken as grosse, corrupt, repugnant vntounto the truth, whatsoeuer concerning things diuine aboue nature shall at any time be spoken as out of the mouthes of meere naturall men, which hauehave not the eyes wherwith heauenly thinges are discerned. For this we contend not. But whom God hath indued with principall giftes to aspire vntounto knowledge by, whose exercises, labours, and diuine studies he hath so bles…, that the world for their great and rare skill that way, hath them in singular admiration; may wee reiect euen their iudgement likewise, as being vtterly of no moment? For mine owne part I dare not so lightly esteeme of the Church, and of the principall pillars therein. The truth is, that the minde of man desireth euermore to knowe the truth according to the most infallible certaintie which the nature of thinges can yeeld. The greatest assurance generally with all men, is that which we hauehave by plaine aspect and intuitiue beholding. Where we cannot attaine vntounto this; there what appeareth to bee true by strong and inuincible demonstration, such as wherein it is not by any way possible to be deceiued, thereunto the minde doth necessarily assent, neither is it in the choice thereof to do otherwise. And in case these bothe do faile; then which way greatest probabilitie leadeth, thither the mind doth euermore incline. Scripture with Christiā men being receiued as the word of God, that for which we hauehave probable, yea that which we hauehave necessary reason for, yea that which wee see with our eyes is not thought so sure, as that which the scripture of God teacheth; because wee hold that his speech reuealeth there what himselfe seeth, & therefore the strongest proofe of all, and the most necessarily assented vntounto by vsus (which do thus receiue the scripture,) is the scripture. Now it is not required or can bee exacted at our handes, that we should yeeld vntounto any thing other assent, then such as doth answere the euidence which is to be had of that we assent vntounto. For which cause euen in matters diuine, concerning some thinges we may lawfully doubt and suspend our iudgement, inclining neither to one side or other, as namely touching the time of the fall both of man and Angels; of some thinges we may very well retaine an opinion that they are probable & not vnlikely to be true, as whē we hold that men hauehave their soules rather by creation then propagation, or that the mother of our Lord liued alwaies in the state of virginitie as well after his birth as before (for of these two, the one her virginitie before, is a thing which of necessitie we must belieue; the other her continuance in the same state alwaies, hath more likelihood of truth then the contrary;) finally in all things then are our consciences best resolued, and in most agreeable sort vntounto God and nature fe…ed, when they are so farre perswaded as those groundes of perswasion which are to be had will beare. Which thing I doe so much the rather set downe, for that I see how a number of soules are, for want of right informatiō in this point, oftentimes grieuously vexed. When bare and vnbuilded conclusions are put into their mindes, they finding not themselues to hauehave therof any great certaintie, imagine that this proceedeth only from lacke of faith, and that the spirite of God doth not worke in them, as it doth in true beleeuers; by this meanes their hearts are much troubled, they fall into anguish & perplexitie: wheras the truth is, that how bold and confident soeuer we may be in words, when it commeth to the point of triall, such as the euidence is which the truth hath eyther in it selfe or through proofe, such is the hearts assent thereunto, neither can it bee stronger, being grounded as it should be. I grant that proofe deriued frō the authoritie of mans iudgement, is not able to worke that assurance which doth grow by a stronger proofe; and therfore although ten thousand generall Councels would set downe one & the same definitiue sentence concerning any point of religion whatsoeuer, yet one demonstratiue reason alleaged, or one manifest testimonie cited from the mouth of God himself to the contrary, could not choose but ouerweigh them all; in as much as for them to hauehave bene deceiued, it is not impossible; it is, that demonstratiue reason or testimonie diuine should deceiue. Howbeit in defect of proofe infallible, because the minde doth rather follow probable perswasions, then approue the things that hauehave in them no likelihood of truth at all; surely if a question cōcerning matter of doctrine were proposed, and on the one side no kind of proofe appearing, there should on the other be alleaged and shewed that so a number of the learnedest diuines in the world hauehave euer thought; although it did not appeare what reason or what scripture led them to be of that iudgement, yet to their very bare iudgement somewhat a reasonable man would attribute, notwithstanding the common imbecilities which are incident into our nature. And whereas it is thought, that especially with the Church, and those that are called & perswaded of thauthority of the word of God, mans authoritie with them especially should not preuaile; it must & doth preuaile euen with them, yea with them especially as far as equitie requireth, & farther we maintain it not. For men to be tyed & led by authoritie, as it were with a kind of captiuity of iudgement,T. C. l. 2. p. 21. Of diuers sentences of the fathers themselues (wherby some hauehave likened them to brute beastes without reason, which suffer themselues to be led by the iudgement and authority of others▪ some hauehave preferred the iudgemēt of ou… simple rude man alleaging reason vntounto companies of learned men) I will content my selfe at this time with two or three sentences. Irenaeus saith, whatsoeuer is to be shewed in the scripture, canne, bee shewed but out of the scriptures themselues▪ lib. 3… cap. 12. Ierome saith. No man be he neuer so holy or eloquent, hath any authoritie after the Apostles in Ps. 86. Augustine saith, that he will beleeue none, how godly and learned soeuer he be, vnlesse he confirme his sentence by the scriptures, or by some reason not contrary to them Epist. 18. And in another place, Heare this, the Lord saith, heare not this, Donatus saith, Rogatus saith, Vincentius saith, Hylarius saith, Ambrose saith, Augustine saith, but hearken to this the Lord saith, Epist. 48. And againe hauing to do with an Arrian, he affirmeth that neither he ought to bring forth the councell of Nice, nor the other the councell of Arimine, thereby to bring preiudice each to other; neither ought the Arrian to be holden by the authoritie of the one, nor himselfe by the authoritie of the other, but by the scriptures which are witnesses proper to neither, but common to both▪ matter with matter, cause with cause, reason with reason ought to be debated. contra Maxim. Arian. 3.14. ca. And in an other place against Petilian the Donatist he saith, Let not these wordes be heard betweene vsus, I say, you say, let vsus heare this, Thus saith the Lord. And by and by speaking of the scriptures he saith, There let vsus seeke the Church, there let vsus try the cause. De vnita. Eccles. cap. 3. Hereby it is manifest, that the argument of the authoritie of man affirmatiuely is nothing worth. and though there be reason to the contrary, not to listen vntounto it, but to follow like beastes the first in the heard, they know not nor care not whether, this were brutish. Againe that authoritie of men should preuaile with men either against or aboue reason, is no part of our beliefe. Companies of learned men be they neuer so great and reuerend, are to yeeld vntounto reason; the waight whereof is no whit preiudiced by the simplicitie of his person which doth alleage it, but being found to be sound and good, the bare opinion of men to the contrary, must of necessitie stoope and giuegive place. Irenaeus writing against Marcion, which held one God author of the old Testament, and another of the new, to proue that the Apostles preached the same God which was knowne before to the Iewes, hee copiously alleageth sundry their sermons and speeches vttered concerning that matter, and recorded in Scripture. And least any should be wearied with such store of allegations, in the ende hee concludeth. While we labour for these demonstrations out of Scripture, and doe summarily declare the thinges which many wayes hauehave beene spoken, bee contented quietly to heare, and doe not thinke my speech tedious: Quoniam ostensiones quae sunt in scripturis non possunt ostendi nisi ex ipsis scripturis; Because demonstrations that are in scripture, may not otherwise be shewed, then by citing them out of the scriptures themselues where they are. Which wordes make so little vntounto the purpose, that they seeme as it were offended at him which hath called them thus solemnely foorth to say nothing. And concerning the verdict of Ierome, If no man, be he neuer so well learned, hauehave after the Apostles any authoritie to publish new doctrine as from heauen, and to require the worldes assent as vntounto truth receiued by propheticall reuelation; doth this preiudice the credite of learned mens iudgements in opening that truth, which by being conuersant in the Apostles writinges, they hauehave themselues from thence learned? Saint Augustine exhorteth not to heare men, but to hearken what God speaketh. His purpose is not (I thinke) that wee should stop our eares against his owne exhortation, and therefore hee cannot meane simply that audience should altogether bee denied vntounto men; but eyther that if men speake one thing and God himselfe teach an other, then hee, not they to bee obeyed; or if they both speake the same thing, yet then also mans speech vnworthy of hearing, not simply, but in comparison of that which proceedeth from the mouth of God. Yea but wee doubt what the will of God is. Are wee in this case forbidden to heare what men of iudgement thinke it to be? If not, then this allegation also might very well hauehave beene spared. In that auncient strife which was betweene the Catholique fathers and Arrians, Donatistes, and others of like peruerse and frowarde disposition, as long as to fathers or Councells alleaged on the one side, the like by the contrarie side were opposed, impossible it was that euer the question should by this meane growe vntounto any issue or ende. The scripture they both beleeued, the scripture they knew could not giuegive sentence on both sides, by scripture the controuersie betweene them was such as might be determined. In this case what madnesse was it with such kindes of proofes to nourish their contention, when there were such effectuall meanes to end all controuersie that was betweene them? Hereby therefore it doth not as yet appeare, that an argument of authoritie of man affirmatiuely is in matters diuine nothing worth. Which opinion being once inserted into the mindes of the vulgar sort, what it may growe vntounto God knoweth. Thus much wee see, it hath alreadie made thousandes so headstrong euen in grosse and palpable errors, that a man whose capacitie will scarce serue him to vtter fiue wordes in sensible manner, blusheth not in any doubt concerning matter of scripture to think his owne bare Yea as good as the Nay of all the wise, graue, and learned iudgements that are in the whole world. Which insolencie must be represt, or it will be the very bane of Christian religion. Our Lordes Disciples marking what speech hee vttered vntounto them, and at the same time calling to minde a common opinion held by the Scribes, betweene which opinion and the wordes of their Maister, it seemed vntounto them that there was some contradiction, which they could not themselues aunswere with full satisfaction of their owne mindes; the doubt they propose to our Sauiour saying, Why then say the Scribes that Elias must first come? They knew that the Scribes did erre greatly▪ Matth. 17.10.and that many waies euen in matters of their owne profession. They notwithstanding thought the iudgement of the very Scribes in matters diuine to bee of some value; some probabilitie they thought there was that Elias should come, in as much as the Scribes said it. Now no truth can contradict any truth; desirous therefore they were to be taught, how bothe might stand together, that which they knew▪ could not be false, because Christ spake it; and this which to them did seeme true, onelyonly because the Scribes had said it. For the scripture from whence the Scribes did gather it, was not then in their heads. Wee doe not finde that our Sauiour reprooued them of error, for thinking the iudgement of Scribes to be worth the obiecting, for esteeming it to be of any moment or value in matters concerning God. We cannot therefore be perswaded that the will of God is, we should so farre reiect the authoritie of men, as to recken it nothing. No, it may be a question, whether they that vrge vsus vntounto this, be themselues so perswaded indeede. Men do sometimes bewray that by deedes, which to confesse they are hardly drawne. Marke then if this be not generall with all men for the most part. When the iudgements of learned men are alleaged against them; what do they but eyther eleuate their credite, or oppose vntounto them the iudgements of others as learned? Which thing doth argue that all men acknowledge in them some force and waight, for which they are loath the cause they maintaine should be so much weakened as their testimony is auaileable. Againe what reason is there why alleaging testimonies as proofes, men giuegive them some title of credite, honour, and estimation whom they alleage, vnlesse before hand it be sufficiently knowne who they are; what reason hereof but only a common in grafted perswasion, that in some men there may be found such qualities as are able to counteruaile those exceptions which might be taken against them, and that such mens authoritie is not lightly to be shaken off? Shall I adde further, that the force of arguments drawne from the authoritie of scripture it selfe, as scriptures commonly are alleaged, shall (being sifted) be found to depende vponupon the strength of this so much despised and debased authoritie of man? Surely it doth, and that oftner then we are aware of. For although scripture be of God, and therefore the proofe which is taken from thence must needes be of all other most inuincible; yet this strength it hath not, vnlesse it auouch the selfe same thing for which it is brought. If there be eyther vndeniable apparance that so it doth, or reason such as cannot deceiue, then scripture-proofe (no doubt) in strength and value exceedeth all. But for the most part, euen such as are readiest to cite for one thing fiue hundred sentences of holy scripture; what warrant hauehave they, that any one of them doth meane the thing for which it is alleaged? Is not their surest ground most commonly, eyther some probable coniecture of their owne, or the iudgement of others taking those Scriptures as they doe? Which notwithstanding to meane otherwise then they take them, it is not still altogether imposible. So that now and then they ground themselues on humane authoritie, euen when they most pretend diuine. Thus it fareth euen cleane throughout the whole controuersie about that discipline which is so earnestly vrged and laboured for. Scriptures are plentifully alleaged to proue, that the whole Christian worlde for euer ought to embrace it. Hereupon men terme it The discipline of God. Howbeit examine, sift, and resolue their alleaged proofes, till you come to the very roote from whence they spring, the heart wherein their strength lyeth; and it shall clearely appeare vntounto any man of iudgement, that the most which can be inferred vponupon such plentie of diuine testimonies is onelyonly this, That some thinges which they maintaine, as far as some men can probably coniecture, doe seeme to hauehave bene out of scripture not absurdly gathered. Is this a warrant sufficient for any mans conscience to builde such proceedinges vponupon,T. C. l. 2.21. If at any time it happened vntounto Augustine (as it did against the Donatists and others) to alleage the authority of the auncient Fathers which had bin before him; yet this was not done before he had laid a sure foundation of his cause in the scriptures, and that also being prouoked by the aduersaries of the truth, who bare themselues high of some counsell, or of some man of name that had fauoured that part. as hauehave beene and are put in vre for the stablishment of that cause? But to conclude, I would gladly vnderstand how it commeth to passe, that they which so peremptorily doe maintaine that humane authoritie is nothing worth, are in the cause which they fauour so carefull to hauehave the common sort of men perswaded, that the wisest, the godliest, and the best learned in all Christendome are that way giuen, seeing they iudge this to make nothing in the world for them. Againe how commeth it to passe, they cannot abide that authoritie should be alleaged on the other side, if there be no force at all in authorities on one side or other? Wherefore labour they to strip their aduersaries of such furniture as doth not helpe? Why take they such needlesse paines to furnish also their owne cause with the like? If it be voyd and to no purpose that the names of men are so frequent in their bookes; what did moue them to bring them in, or doth to suffer them there remaining? Ignorant I am not how this is salued, They do it not but after the truth made manifest first by reason or by scripture, they doe it not but to controule the enemies of the truth, who beare themselues bold vponupon humane authority, making not for them but against them rather. Which answeres are nothing. For in what place or vponupon what consideration soeuer it be they doe it, were it in their owne opinion of no force being done, they would vndoubtedly refraine to doe it.

8 But to the end it may more plainely appeare, what we are to iudge of their sentences, and of the cause it selfe wherein they are alleaged;A declaration what the truth is in this ma… ter. first it may not well be denied, that all actions of men endued with the vse of reason are generally eyther good or euill. For although it be granted that no action is properly tearmed good or euill, vnlesse it be voluntarie; yet this can be no let to our former assertion, that all actions of men indued with the vse of reason are generally either good or euill; because euen those thinges are done voluntarily by vsus, which other creatures do naturally, in as much as wee might stay our doing of them if wee would. Beastes naturally doe take their foode and rest, when it offereth it selfe vntounto them. If men did so too, and could not do otherwise of themselues; there were no place for any such reproofe as that of our Sauiour Christ vntounto his disciples, could ye not watch with me one houre? Math. 26.40.That which is voluntarily performed in things tending to the end, if it be well done, must needes be done with deliberate consideration of some reasonable cause, wherefore wee rather should do it thē not. Wherupō it seemeth that in such actions only those are said to be good or euil, which are capable of deliberatiō: so y^t many things being hourely done by men, wherein they need not vse with themselues any manner of consultation at all, it may perhaps hereby seeme that well or ill doing belongeth onelyonly to our waightier affaires, and to those deeds which are of so great importance that they require aduise. But thus to determine were perilous, and peraduenture vnsound also. I do rather incline to thinke, that seeing all the vnforced actiōs of mē are volūtary; & al volūtary actiōs tēding to the end hauehave choice; & al choise presupposeth the knowledge of some cause wherfore we make it: wher the reasonable cause of such actiōs so readily offereth it self, that it needeth not to be sought for; in those things though we do not deliberat, yet they are of their nature apt to be deliberated on, in regard of the wil which may encline either way, and would not any one way bend it self, if there were not some apparent motiue to lead it. Deliberatiō actuall we vse, when there is doubt what we should incline our willes vntounto. Where no doubt is, deliberation is not excluded as impertinent vntounto the thing, but as needlesse in regard of the agent, which seeth already what to resolue vponupon. It hath no apparent absurditie therefore in it to thinke, that all actions of men indued with the vse of reason, are generally either good or euill. Whatsoeuer is good; the same is also approued of God: and according vntounto the sundrie degrees of goodnesse, the kindes of diuine approbation are in like sort multiplyed. Some things are good, yet in so meane a degree of goodnesse, that men are only nor disproued nor disalowed of God for them. No man hateth his owne flesh. If ye doe good vntounto them that doe so to you, the very Publicans themselues doe as much. They are worse then Infidels that hauehave no care to prouide for their owne.Ephes. 5.29. Matth. 5.46. 1. Tim. 5.8. In actions of this sorte, the very light of nature alone may discouer that which is so farre forth in the sight of God allowable. Some thinges in such sorte are allowed, that they be also required as necessary vntounto saluation, by way of direct immediate and proper necessitie finall; so that without performance of them we cannot by ordinary course be saued, not by any means be excluded from life obseruing them. In actions of this kind, our chiefest direction is from scripture, for nature is no sufficient teacher what we should do that we may attaine vntounto life euerlasting. The vnsufficiencie of the light of nature, is by the light of scripture so fully and so perfectly herein supplied, that further light then this hath added there doth not neede vntounto that ende. Finally some thinges although not so required of necessitie, that to leaue them vndone excludeth from saluation, are notwithstanding of so great dignitie and acceptation with God, that most ample rewarde in heauen is laide vp for them. Hereof we hauehave no commandement either in nature or scripture which doth exact them at our handes:Matth. 10.42. yet those motiues there are in bothe, which drawe most effectually our mindes vntounto them. In this kind there is not the least action but it doth somewhat make to the accessory augmentation of our blisse. For which cause our Sauiour doth plainely witnesse, that there shall not bee as much as a cup of colde water bestowed for his sake without reward. Herevpon dependeth whatsoeuer difference there is betweene the states of Saints in glory: hither we referre whatsoeuer belongeth vntounto the highest perfection of man by way of seruice towards God:Act. 4.31. 1. Thes. 2.7.9. hereunto that feruor and first louelove of Christians did bend it selfe, causing them to sell their possessions, and lay downe the price at the blessed Apostles feet: hereat S. Paul vndoubtedly did a…me, in so far abridging his owne libertie, and exceeding that which the bond of necessarie and enioyned dutie tied him vntounto. Wherfore seeing that in all these seuerall kindes of actions, there can be nothing possibly euill which God approueth; and that he approueth much more then he doth commaund; and that his very commandements in some kinde, as namely his precepts comprehended in the law of nature, may be otherwise known then onelyonly by scripture; and that to do them, howsoeuer we know them, must needs▪ be acceptable in his sight▪ let them with whom we hauehave hitherto disputed consider wel, how it can stand with reasō to make the bare mādate of sacred scripture the only rule of all good and euill in the actions of mortall men. The testimonies of God are true, the testimonies of God are perfect, the testimonies of God are all sufficient vntounto that end for which they were giuen. Therfore accordingly we do receiue them; we do not think that in thē God hath omitted any thing needful vntounto his purpose, & left his intent to be accomplished by our diuisings. What the scripture purposeth, the same in all points it doth performe. Howbeit, that here we swerue not in iudgement, one thing especially we must obserue, namely that the absolute perfection of scripture is seene by relatiō vntounto that end wherto it tendeth. And euen hereby it commeth to passe, that first such as imagine the generall and maine drift of the body of sacred scripture not to be so large as it is▪ nor that God did thereby intend to deliuer, as in truth he doth, a full instruction in al things vntounto saluatiō necessary, the knowledge wherof man by nature could not otherwise in this life attaine vntounto: they are by this very mean induced, either still to looke for new reuelations from heauen, or else daungerously to ad to the word of God vncertaine tradition, that so the doctrine of mans saluation may be compleate, which doctrine we constantly hold in all respectes without any such thing added to be so cōpleat, that we vtterly refuse as much as once to acquaint our selues with any thing further. Whatsoeuer to make vp the doctrine of mans saluation is added, as in supply of the scriptures vnsufficiencie, we reiec… it. Scripture purposing this, hath perfectly and fully done it. Againe the scope and purpose of God in deliuering the holy scripture, such as do take more largely thē behoueth, they on the contrary side racking & stretching it further thē by him was meant, are drawn into sundry as great incōueniences. These pretēding the scriptures perfection, inferre therupon, that in scripture all things lawfull to be done must needs be contained. We count those things perfect which want nothing requisite for the end wherto they were instituted. As therfore God created eueryevery part and particle of man exactly perfect, that is to say▪ in all pointes sufficient vntounto that vse for which he appointed it; so the scripture, yea eueryevery sentence thereof is perfect, & wanteth nothing requisite vntounto that purpose for which God deliuered the same. So that if hereupon wee conclude, that because the scripture is perfect, therfore all things lawful to be done are comprehended in the scripture▪ we may euen as wel conclude so of eueryevery sentence, as of the whole sum and body therof, vnlesse we first of all proue that it was the drift,T. C. l. 2. p. 6. Where this doctrine is accused of bringing men to despaire, it hath wrong. For when doubting it the way to dispaire, against which this doctrine offereth the remedie; it must needs be that it bringeth comfort and …y to the conscienc… of man. scope and purpose of almightie God in holy scripture, to comprise all things which man may practise. But admit this, and marke▪ I beseech you, what would follow▪ God in deliuering scripture to his Church, should cleane hauehave abrogated amongst them the law of nature; which is an infallible knowledge imprinted in the mindes of all the children of men, whereby both generall principles f… directing of humane actions are comprehended, and conclusions deriued from them; vponupon which conclusions groweth in particularitie the choise of good and euill in the daily affaires of this life. Admit this; and what shall the scripture be but a snare and a torment to weake consciences, filling thē with infinite perplexities, scrupulosities, doubts insoluble, and extreame despaires? Not that the scripture it selfe doth cause any such thing, (for it tendeth to the cleane contrarie, and the fruite thereof is resolute assurance and certaintie in that it teacheth:) but the necessities of this life vrging men to doe that which the light of nature, common discretion and iudgement of it selfe directeth them vntounto▪ on the other side this doctrine teaching them that so to doe were to sinne against their owne soules, and that they put forth their hands to iniquitie, whatsoeuer they go about and hauehave not first the sacred scripture of God for direction; how can it choose but bring the simple a thousand times to their wits end; how can it choose but vexe and amaze them? For in eueryevery action of commō life to find out some sentence clearly and infallibly setting before our eyes what wee ought to doe, (seeme wee in scripture neuer so expert) would trouble vsus more then wee are aware. In weake and tender mindes wee little knowe what miserie this strict opinion would breede, besides the stoppes it would make in the whole course of all mens liues and actions. Make all thinges sinne which we doe by direction of natures light, & by the rule of common discretiō without thinking at all vpō scripture; admit this position, and parents shall cause their children to sinne, as oft as they cause them to do any thing, before they come to yeares of capacitie and be ripe for knowledge in the scripture. Admit this, and it shall not be with masters, as it was with him in the Gospell; but seruants being commaunded to goe shall stand still, till they hauehave their errand warranted vntounto them by scripture. Which as it standeth with Christian dutie in some cases, so in common affaires to require it,Due. 7.8. were most vnfit. Two opinions therefore there are concerning sufficiencie of holy scripture, each extreamly opposite vntounto the other, & bothe repugnant vntounto truth. The schooles of Rome teach scripture to be so vnsufficient, as if, except traditions were added, it did not conteine all reuealed and supernaturall truth, which absolutely is necessary for the children of men in this life to know that they may in the next be saued. Others iustly condemning this opinion, growe likewise vntounto a dangerous extremitie, as if scripture did not only containe all thinges in that kinde necessary, but all thinges simply, and in such sorte that to doe any thing according to any other lawe, were not onelyonly vnnecessary, but euen opposite vntounto saluation, vnlawfull and sinfull. Whatsoeuer is spoken of God, or thinges appertaining to God, otherwise then as the truth is; though it seeme an honour, it is an iniurie. And as incredible praises giuen vntounto men, doe often abate and impaire the credit of their deserued commendation; so we must likewise take great heed, least in attributing vntounto scripture more then it can hauehave, the incredibilitie of that do cause euen those thinges which indeed it hath most aboundantly, to be lesse reuerendly esteemed. I therefore leaue it to themselues to consider, whether they hauehave in this first point or not ouershot themselues; which God doth knowe is quickly done, euen when our meaning is most sincere, as I am verily perswaded theirs in this case was.

The Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, Book 2

p. 95The second Booke: Concerning their first position who vrge reformation in the Church of England; Namely That Scripture is the onelyonly rule of all things which in this life may be done by men.

The matter contained in this second Boooke.

The second Booke: Concerning their first position who vrge reformation in the Church of England; Namely That Scripture is the onelyonly rule of all things which in this life may be done by men.