Conference Between Rainolds and Hart, Chapter 8 (1 of 2)
The eighth chapter. The autoritie 1 of traditions and fathers pretended to proue the Popes supremacie: in vaine; beside the scripture, which is the onelyonly rule of faith. The Fathers, 2 being heard with lawfull exceptions that may be iustly taken against them, 3 doo not proue it. As it is shewed, first, in Fathers of the Church of Rome. By the way, 4 the name of Priest, the Priestly sacrifice of Christians, the Popish sacrifice of Masse-priestes, the proofes brought for the Masse, the substance and ceremonies of it, are laid open. And so it is declared that 5 neither the auncient Bishops of Rome themselues, 6 nor any other Fathers do proue the Popes supremacie.
HART.
The first Diuision.You labour in vaine, if you go about to perswade me that the Popes supremacie can not be proued by scripture. And what iniurious dealing is this, to bring our owne men, Canus, and Father Robert, for the proofe thereof? as though the greatest fauourers of vsus were against vsus.
Rainoldes.
aMatt. 10.24.The scholer is not aboue his maister, nor the seruant aboue his Lord. If Christ my Lord and maister were glad to labor in vaine: why should I disdaine it? Chiefly, sith I may comfort my selfe, as he did, bEsai. 49.4.I hauehave laboured in vaine, I hauehave spent my strength in vaine and for nothing: but yet my duety is with the Lord, and my worke with my God. But what iniurious dealing is it, if I, indeuouring to winne you to the truth, doo bring you the confessions of your own men, who witnesse a truth?
Hart.
A truth? Why? will you graunt vsus that the Popes supremacie came in by tradition: if we will graunt you that it can not be proued by scripture?
Rainoldes.
By tradition? I: if you meane [tradition] as S. c1. Pet. 1.18.Peter doth, where he teacheth Christians, that they are redeemed from their vaine conuersation *Vulg. paterne traditionis.of the tradition of their Fathers.
Hart.
You are disposed to play with your owne fansies. You know my meaning well enough. Will you graunt that it came in by tradition of the Apostles?
Rainoldes.
I should play in déede with your owne fansies, if I should graunt you that.
Hart.
But they, whom you alleaged, doo say that it did so: as your selfe hauehave shewed.
Rainoldes.
But I will proue that they spake no truer in that, then you hauehave doone in the other.
Hart.
But what an iniurie is this, to presse mee with their former wordes of the scripture, whereas your selfe beleeue not the later of tradition?
Rainoldes.
What thinke you of S. Paule? Did hee beleeue those thinges which the heathnish Poets do write of Goddes and Goddesses, Bacchus, Diana, Minerua, Mercurie?
Hart.
He did not. What then?
Rainoldes.
Yet dAct. 17.28.he alleaged them to perswade the Athenians, that in God we liue, and moue, and hauehave our being. What an iniury was that to presse the Athenians with Poets words of God, whereas himselfe beléeued not their wordes of Gods and Goddesses?
Hart.
The Poets might say well, and did, in the former: though in the later they missed.
Rainoldes.
Now, wil you deale as frendly with me, as with S. Paule? His case and mine are coosins.
Hart.
Nay, you in the selfe same sentence of our men cull out a péece of it, and yet an other péece of it you allow not.
Rainoldes.
Euen so did S. Paule. For that which he auouched out of their owne Poets, (the meaning of it is in eHomer. Odyss. lib. 1. Orpheus & Callimachus hymnis in Iouem.sundry, the very wordes in fIn phaenom. foreign.Aratus;) they spake it of Iupiter, who was a wicked man, but thought of them to be God: S. Paule, allowing not their error in the person, culled out their sentence concerning the thing, and proued a truth by it.
Hart.
Well: if you may diuide the sentence of Canus and page missing other sort then I hauehave done.
Rainoldes.
That I wish. For the truth is like vntounto camomill: the more you presse it down, the faster it groweth, and spreadeth fairer, and smelleth sweeter.
Hart.
So much of scripture then. Now to tradition: by which the Popes supremacie may be cléerely proued.
Rainoldes.
By tradition? Why? Do you acknowlege then that it cannot be proued by scripture?
Hart.
I tell you no, once againe. How often must I say it?
Rainoldes.
Once saying will serue, if you do not vnsay your saying. But here in my iudgement you séeme to vnsay it. For you disclaime the title pretended by scripture, when you claime by tradition.
Hart.
Why so? Might not the same thing both be writen in scripture, and deliuered by word of mouth?
Rainoldes.
It might, & was no dout, as m2. Thess. 2.15.the traditions shew which S. Paule doth mention: which signify the doctrine that hee deliuered nAct. 17.2.out of the scriptures. But you meane a doctrine not writen in the scriptures, when you speake of tradition. For oConcil. Trident. Session. 4.you doo imagin that the gospell of Christ is partly contained *In libris scriptis & sine scripto traditionibus.in writen bookes that is the scriptures; partly in vnwriten things, that is traditions: as pforeign cap. 1. Elias Le…ta in T…bi.the Iewish Rabbines do say, that God by Moses deliuered not only the law, that is writen; but also an vnwriten law, which they call Cabala.
Hart.
Sée: as the Iewish Rabbines. You hauehave inured your mouth to such venemous spéeches·
Rainoldes.
Beware: or els through my side you will wound your freend. For qMartin. Perefino de diuinis, apostolicis, & ecclesiasti…is …raditionibus. part. 2. assert. 1.Bishop Peresius, your chiefest patrone of traditions, doth proue them solemnly by this point of the Iewish Rabbins and the Cabala. Neither is the proofe vnfit, if it be weighed. For as they pretend this ground for the Cabala, that it openeth the hidden meaning of the scriptures: so do you for traditions. And as rMat. 15.3. Mar. 7.13.they in processe of time brought in doctrine contrarie to the scriptures, vnderunder pretense of traditions: so do you with your Cabala. And as Cabalists among the Iewes do call them foreign Elias Leuita in Tisbi.scripture-men (by way of reproch) who cast off traditions and cleaue to scriptures only: so doo traditionists among you reproch vsus with 2Scripturarij. Albert. Pigh. eccl. hier. lib. 1. cap. 2.the same terme. Yea sDubitantij dialog. 2.Lindan, and tDe vi…s, sectis, & dogmat. hae…er. l. 17. haer. 1….Prateolus, doo note it for a speciall heresie. But (to leaue this venemous spéech) it is manifest that you renounce the scripture for proofe of any title, which you lay claime to by tradition. For scripture is writen; tradition, vnwriten. Wherefore, if by tradition you minde to proue the Popes supremacie; you must acknowlege first that it cannot be proued by scripture. If you bee not willing to ackonwlege that: I must debarre you from tradition.
Hart.
Then I will proue it by the Fathers.
Rainoldes.
Nay that you shall not neither: vnlesse you will forgo the scripture.
Hart.
And why so I pray?
Rainoldes.
Because they say, forsooth, that it is held by tradition. So that their euidences make against you, if scripture be your plea for it.
Hart.
That is very false. For by the words, Thou art Peter and vponupon this rocke, in the sixtéenth of Matthew, the first Popes of Rome, most holy martyrs, hauehave proued it: uEpist. prima.Anacletus, xEpist. ad omnes orthodoxos.Alexander the first, yEpist ad omnes ecclesias.Pius the first, zEpist. ad Theophilum.Victor, aEpist. ad Siciliae episcopos.Zepherinus, bEpist. ad episcopos Antiochenae prouinciae.Marcellus, cEpist. ad episcopos Campaniae & Tusciae.Eusebius, dEpist. ad Hispaniarum episcopos.Melchiades, eEpist. ad orientales episcopos.Iulius, & fEpist. ad trium conciliorum Africanorum episcopos.Damasus; and likewise others by other places, as D. gPrinc. doctr. lib. 6. cap. 15.Stapleton alleageth farther. Wherefore that the Fathers tooke it (as you say) to be held by tradition, it is a flat lye.
Rainoldes.
Say you so? Then hLocor. Theolog. lib. 6. cap. 8.Canus, and iRobert. Bellarmin. controue…. … quaest. 5.Father Robert do lye flatly, (but that is no maruell,) who grounding it both on tradition, the one doth cite for witnesses thereof the first Popes of Rome, most holy martyrs, Anacletus, Sixtus the first, Eleutherius, Victor, Sixtus the second, Zepherinus, Marcellus, Melchiades, Marcus, & Iulius: the other not contenting himselfe with particulars, doth alleage in grosse, f…st, the generall Councels; next, the Popes; and last, the Fathers.
Hart.
Yet more of Canus and Father Robert? I take not their defense vponupon me: and why againe doo you tell me of them?
Rainoldes.
That you may sée how *Iudg. 7.33.the Lord doth sheath the swordes of Madianites in their own sides, to the confusion of them who pitch their campe against Israel. For the same Popes which are alleaged by Canus to prooue that their supremacie is an vnwritten truth; the verie same Popes are alleaged by Stapleton to prooue that it is writen: euen Anacletus, Victor, Zepherinus, Marcellus, Melchiades, and Iulius. Yea, and that is more, the very same epistles of theirs are alleaged by Stapleton, which by Canus. If rightly by Canus: how may we trust Stapleton? If rightly by Stapleton; how may wee trust Canus? If rightly by them both: what trimme Popes are they, who with one breath doo say that the same thing is both writen and vnwriten? Yet Father Robert dealeth wiselyer, and like a Iesuite: who séeing the danger of naming speciall men and places, doth shrowd himselfe in the generall of Councels, Popes, and Fathers. As if an horse-stealer being to giuegive account of whom and where he got his horses, should say that he bought them of incorporations, horse-coursers, and honest men within Christendom.
Hart.
Will you leaue your roauing, and come vntounto the marke now?
Rainoldes.
It is a roauing marke we shote at: and I am come néerer it, then you would hauehave me. But what shall be your next ba…?
Hart.
I told you, that I would proue it next by the Fathers. It agreeth very well with your spirit, that you should call this a bolt.
Rainoldes.
Well enough as you shoote it. For although the Lord hath planted the writings of the Fathers, as trees; in his Church, as in a Paradise; whereof there may be made good shaftes; blessed is the man that hath his quiuer full of them, they shall not be confounded but they shall destroy their enimies in the gate: yet not all the shaftes, which you do vse of theirs, are good; kStapleton, Torrensis, Canisius, & the rest of the Popish Rabbins.your fletchers (at whose handes you take them vponupon trust) doo marre them in the making, that I may iustly call them rather bolts of Papistes, then shafts of the Fathers. Who, if they were aliue, might say to you in like sorte, as did a Poet to Fidentinus:
This booke (Sir Fidentinus) which thou doost reade, is mine:
But thou, by reading it amisse, beginst to make it thine.
Hart.
Will you promise then to yelde vntounto the Popes supremacie, if I proue it by the sayings and iudgement of the Fathers alleaged and applyed rightly.
Rainoldes.
I truly. But I must doo it with a protestation, for my defense against such quarrelers, as Bishop Iewell fell vponupon.
Hart.
With what protestation?
Rainoldes.
With this, that I promise to yéelde vntounto the Popes supremacie, if you can proue it by the Fathers; not beca…e I thinke that proofe to be sufficient of doubtfull matters in religion, but because I know you are not able so to proue it.
Hart.
Whether I be able or no so to proue it, the thing it selfe will shew. But if you thinke not that a sufficient proofe, why saide you that the writinges of Fathers are as trees, whereof there may be made good shaftes, such as shall destroy their enimies in the gate; yea that the man is blessed who hath his quiuer full of them?
Rainoldes.
It is writen in the Psalmes, lPsal. 127. vers. 2.Except the Lord keepe the citie, the keeper watcheth in vaine. By the which wordes the Prophet séemeth to hauehave thought, that the warde and watch of men is not sufficient for the defense of cities, vnlesse the Lord assist them with his watch and ward. How say? is not this true?
Hart.
So. What of that?
Rainoldes.
That is an answere to your question. For the Prophet adding how mvers. 3.God doth blesse men in giuing them children, saith, nvers. 4.they are as arrowes in the hand of a strong man: overs. 5.9.blessed is the man that hath his quiuer full of them; they shall not be confounded, but they shall destroy their enimies in the gate. If this be truly spoken of children well nurtured, who yet are not sufficient to defend a citie without the Lordes assistance: why might it not be spoken of Fathers well vsed, and yet they not suffice to decide a controuersie without the worde of God? For though I acknowledge there is good wood in them to make shaftes for the Lordes warres: yet is not all their wood such; some of it is knottie, some lithy, …ome crooked. And the best arrowes, which are made thereof, vnlesse they hauehave heades of stronger mettall, then them selues, out of the Lords armorie: they are not sharpe enough to pearce into the harte of the kinges enimies, as are pPsal. 45.5.the arrowes of our Salomon. Wherefore as of your part, qLuk. 16.31.if you hearken not to Moses and the Prophetes, I hauehave no greate hope that Fathers will perswade you, though they should rise from the dead: so for my selfe I will assure you, that neither dead nor quicke, Fathers nor children, shall perswade me any thing in matters of religion, which they can not proue by Moses and the Prophetes. For, rAct. 26.22.the Apostles preached not any thing, but that, which the Prophetes and Moses saide should come to passe. And if a Father, if a Saint, s…al. 1.8.if an Angell from heauen preach beside that which the Apostles preached, let him be accursed. This lesson I hauehave learned of Paul the Apostle: and I subscribe vntounto it. If you can like it better out of a Fathers mouth, learne it of S. Austin. tCont. liter. Petilian. Dona…ist. lib. 3. cap. 6.Who writing against the Donatists, which could not proue by scripture their erroneous doctrine, doth presse them with the same sentence, and teach al Christians the same lesson: whether it be of Christ, or of his Church, or of any thing els whatsoeuer pertaining to our faith and life, I will not say, if we, but if an Angel from heauen shall preach to you besides that which you hauehave receyued in the scriptures of the law and the Gospel (that is to say, the olde and new testament,) let him be accursed.
Hart.
You mistake the meaning of S. Austins wordes. For they are thus in Latin: Proinde, siue de Christo, siue de eius ecclesia, siue d… quacunque alia re, quae pertinet ad fidem vitamque nostram-
Rainoldes.
I hauehave the right meaning of these wordes, I trow; for they are plaine of all thinges that doo concerne our faith and life.
Hart.
I: but heare the rest. Non dicam, si nos, nequaquam comparandi ei qui dixit, licet nos, sed …mnino quod sequutus adiecit, si angelus-
Rainoldes.
Neither doo I mistake these. For he alludeth to the wordes of Paul to the Galatians.
Hart.
But you mistake the meaning of that which doth follow, Si angelus de coelo vobis annuntiauerit praeterqàum quod in scripturis legalibus & euangelicis accepistis, anathema sit.
Rainoldes.
Why? doth he not meane the old & new testamēt (as we call them) by the scrip…ures of the law and the gospell?
Hart.
Yes: but your errour is in the worde praeterquàm, by which he meaneth contra quàm; not beside that, but against that. For there are sundrie thinges of faith and life to be preached beside them in the scriptures of the law and the gospell, but not against them. Wherefore if it were so that the Popes supremacie could not be proued by scriptures: yet the proofe of it by the Fathers might be good. For it were not against the scriptures; although it were beside the scriptures.
Rainoldes.
Praeterquàm; id est contra quàm: beside that which you hauehave receyued in the scriptures, that is, against that. This is your uAnnotat. in som. 7. August. script. … Grauio, probat. a Molano & Theologis Louan.Louanists glose-
Hart.
Nay, it is S. Austins: as you may perceiue by his own wordes in an other place, touching the same matter, xTractat. 98. …n Ioha…n…m.where he saith thus. The Apostle did not say, If any man preach vntounto you more then you hauehave receyued, but, beside that you hauehave receyued. For if he should say that, he should be preiudiciall to him selfe, who desired to come to the Thessalonians y1. Thess. 3.10.that he might supply that which was wanting to their faith. Now he, that supplyeth, addeth that which was wanting; taketh not away that which was, and so forth. Whereby S. Austin sheweth that we may preach more then the scripture hath: but not beside it, that is to say, against it.
Rainoldes.
He sheweth nothing lesse: as any man that readeth his discourse, may see. For, that which he speaketh of more, and of wanting, is not meant of scripture, that is, the worde writen; but of the worde preached & deliuered by mouth. Wherein he declareth that the Apostles maner of instructing men, was, z1. Cor. 3.2. Hebr. 5.12. & 6.1.to feede them first with milke, not with strong meat. So, that which was wanting to the Thessalonians, was stronger doctrine of the faith: that which they had, was easier. Wherof though in the one he taught them more then in the other: yet no more in either, then aAct. 26.22.the scripture hath. And thus S. Austins more to be no more then scripture: himselfe maketh manifest by the example also which he giueth of it. For the doctrine of the manhead of Christ, he calleth milke; of the Godhead, strong meat. Now they who are taught to know him to be God, learne more then they had learned when they receaued him as man. But they learne no more then the scripture hath, bIoh. 1.15. Rom. 9.5. 1. Tim. 3.16.which teacheth him both God and man. Wherefore, that S. Austin condemning all who preach ought beside the scriptures of the law & the gospell, meant, that more then scriptures may be preached, but nought against them: it is not S Austins glose, but your Louanists, and in truth repugnant to S. Austins text. For cContr. liter. Petilian. Donanatist. lib. 3. c. 6.in the same place S. Austin making mention how the Donatists hated him for preaching of the truth and confuting their heresie; *Quasi no… mā dauerim…s tanto ante Prophe… ▪ & Apostolis, vt in libris suis nulla testimonia ponerent quib…s pars Donati ecclesia Christi esse doceatur.as though (saith he) we had commanded the Prophets and Apostles who were so long before vsus, that they in their bookes should set downe no testimonies whereby the Donatists might be proued to be the church of Christ. Which words doo shew plainly, yt as by the scriptures of the law & the gospel he signified the bookes of the Prophetes & Apostles: so by condemning all that is beside the scriptures, he meant, not, all that is against, but, all that is not in the scriptures. And that this was his meaning, he sheweth yet more plainely by willing them to proue their doctrine by the testament: which your Louan dAnnot in Tom. 7. Aug. Contraliter. Petilian. lib. 1. cap. 23.Doctors (the greater shame for them to wrest S. Austins wordes against his sense) doo note also. For, as amongst men the testament doth open the will of the testa…or: so did S. Austin thinke that the controuersie betwixt the Donatists and the Church should be decided by the Scriptures, which Christ hath left to Christians as his will and testament. For, eOptatus lib. … contra Parmenian. Donatist.Christ hath dealt with vsus, as an earthly Father is wont with his children: who, fearing least they should fall out after his decease, doth set downe his will in writing vnderunder witnesses, & if there arise debate amongst the brethren, they go to the testament. He, whose word must end our controuersie, is Christ. Let his wil be sought in his testament, saith Optatus. Which reason of Optatus S. fAug. in Psal. 31. …xpo…it. 2.Austin vrging against ye Donatists, as he doth other often: we are brethrē, (saith he to them:) why doo we striue? Our father died not vntestate: he made a testament, & so died. Men do striue about the goods of the dead, till the testament be brought foorth: when that is brought, they yeeld to hauehave it opened, & read. The iudge doth hearken, the counsellours be silent, the cryer biddeth peace, all the people is attentiue, that the wordes of the dead man may be read & heard. He lyeth voide of life & feeling, in his graue, and his words preuaile: Christ doth sit in heauen, and is his testament gainesaied? Open it: let vsus reade: we are brethren: why do we striue? Let our mindes be pacified. Our father hath not left vsus without a testament. He that made the testament is liuing for euer. He doth heare our words: he doth know his owne word. Let vsus reade: why doo we striue? Were not this a séely spéech of S. Austin, if hee had meant, as you say, that all the Lords will is not declared in his testament: that thinges beside his owne worde may be proued by mens words? Let him be accursed who preacheth any point of faith, or life beside the scriptures. True: beside ye scriptures, yt is against the scriptures, say your Louan Doctours. Sée what skil can doo. If they were Doctours of ye Arches, we should hauehave ioly law. For a coosining marchant might claime a thousand pound of a dead mans goods, who had bequeathed him a legacy of twētie grotes: & they might adiudge it him with good consciences, as not against the testament, though beside the testament. Nay, they might do this with so much better reason, then they doo the other; by how much the testament of God is more perfit, thē any mans can be: and that which Christ bequeathed the Pope, is farre lesse in comparison of the supremacie, then twentie grotes of a thousand poundes. Wherfore, say the Doctors of Louan what they li…t, (perhaps they speake for their fée:) S. Austin meant plainely, that, sith the Donatists claimed the inheritaunce of Christ to them selues, they must proue their title by his will and testament. Which if they could not doo, or rather séeing that they could not: he pronounceth of them they had no right vntounto▪ it. And thereupon he commeth to the generall sentence of the heauenly iudge, denouncing them accursed, who, in any point, either of faith, or life, doo preach beside that which is deliuered in the scriptures of the law and the gospel. Wherein if [beside] do signifie [against:] then all (in this respect) is against a testament, which is beside a testament.
Hart.
S. Austin, and Optatus, against the Donatists, doo speake reason: that, vnlesse they can proue their right by Christes testament, they may not shut the Catholikes out from his inheritance, and claime his goods vntounto them selues. For it is meete that the will of the testator should be kept. But a learned lawier, one gAnnot. in Optat. lib. 5.Francis Baldwin, who hath set foorth Optatus, and writen notes vponupon him, doth shew that a testament may be either nuncupatiuum (as he calleth it) or scriptum; either set down in writing, or vttered by word of mouth. What say you to testamentum nuncupatiuum?
Rainoldes.
I graunt that hL. Heredes. Dig. Qui testamentum facere possunt.a testament may be made without writing, so that it be done before a solemne number of witnesses. But the testament of Christ is writen, I hope: and so doo both Optatus and Austin speake of it. Wherefore your learned Lawier may kéepe that law in st…re, vntill his client néede it.
Hart.
As who say the testament of Christ might not be writen in part, though not in whole. Which is Baldwins meaning, as it appéereth by the place, not of Optatus, but of Austin, whereto he applieth it.
Rainoldes.
But if Baldwin meant so, Baldwin should hauehave remembred that a testament so made is not testamentum nuncupatiuum (for iL. Hac consul…sima. §. per nuncupationē. Cod. dete…tamentis.that is vnwriten, as the very kIn…titut. lib. 2. tit. 10. §. Sed haec quidem.rudiments of the law might teach him,) but imperfectum rather; though writen, yet vnperfit. And I trust you will not say, that the testament of Christ is vnperfit. Sure Optatus would not.
Hart.
Nor I sir, though you would faine imply as though I said so. For if Christ would hauehave his will, in part writen, in part deliuered by word of mouth: ioyne them both togither, they make a perfit testament.
Rainoldes.
Then the writen testament of Christ is vnperfit. It will be gay and perfit with your traditions patched to it. But Optatus thought that his writen testament is perfit of it selfe. Which shaketh all the frame of Popery in péeces. And this is that Optatus, lContr. epist. Parm. lib. 1. De vnit. eccles. cap. 16. De doctr. Christ. lib. 3. cap. 40.of whom S. Austin speaketh as of a worthy Catholike Bishop equall to Ambrose and Cyprian; of whom mAd Mon. l. 2.Fulgentius speaketh as of a holy faithfull interpretor of Paule like to Austin and Ambrose; of whom nEdmund. Cam…pian. Rat. 5.your great Champion doth vaunt so gloriously, that he, nor he onelyonly, but the rest of the *Patres tam sunt nostri, quam Gregori…i ipse decimus tortius.Fathers are of your religion as surely and fully as the Pope himselfe, Pope Gregorie the thirteenth: whereas in very truth not one of them is so. For Gregorie the thirteenth is of your religiō in the Popes supremacie, ye chiefest point of Poperie: as oPublished in the yeare of Christ 1572. Reg. cancellar. Apost.his rules of Chancery for re…eru ations and prouisions, pOn maunday-Thursday in the yeare 1575. Liter. processus Grego. decimi tert. le…t. die Coen. Dom.his accursing of all that appeale from Popes to Councels, qBulla confirmat. priuileg. ord. Minor. de obseruant. Non-obstantibus &c. and in other buls commonly. Ecloge bullar. & motuproprior. Greg. decimit…rt.his bulles against decrees of Councels both prouinciall and generall, doo shew. From which abomination how farre the Fathers were, it shall appéere when you alleage them. But Optatus is so plaine against your religion, in the point of scriptures and their sufficiencie to decide all controuersies: that your chalenger (if he read him, and not beleeued▪ common-place-bookes of Canisius and other broakers) might hauehave blushed to boast of him. For those things, which rEdmund Campian. Ration. 5.he citeth out of Optatus, do not as much as rase the skinne of our religion, though they séeme to weake eye sightes. But this, of scriptures onelyonly, doth breake the necke of yours: and it is so cléerely the iudgement of Optatus, that your owne sAnnot▪ in Optat. lib. 5.Baldwin, (in his Annotations) is faine to say of him, he vsed that comparison of a testament not so warily.
Hart.
Not so warily, as Austin doth. For Austin vseth it, when he will proue out of the scriptures that the Church is catholike: which was one of the pointes of their controuersie with the Donatists.
Rainoldes.
But in handling that point he maketh it a generall rule, that, whether it be of Christ, or of his church, or of any thing else whatsoeuer pertaining to our faith and life, nothing must be preached beside the scriptures, that is, the testament.
Hart.
But in an other point of their controuersie, touching baptisme, S. tDe baptism. contra Donatist. lib. 4. cap. 6.Austin doth alleage not so much the scripture, as the tradition of the Apostles.
Rainoldes.
Not so much the scripture. He doth the scripture then: though he alleageth also the custome of the Church deliuered by the Apostles. But what is that against the testament?
Hart.
Nay, beside the testament, which is the word writen, he doth commend vnwriten traditions in other places. Which proueth that he thought not the testament sufficient to decide all controuersies.
Rainoldes.
Now S. Austin findeth fauour at your hands, who make him say and vnsay the same. But where vnsaith hée that of the sufficiencie of scripture?
Hart.
You may sée in the uConfess. August. lib. 1. c. 8.Augustinian confession of Torrensis, in the chapter of Traditions.
Rainoldes.
But I would sée it in S. Austin. Torrensis is a Iesuit, whom we hauehave taken oft in lyes. I cannot trust him.
Hart.
Why? He alleageth S. Austins owne wordes. As in xDe bapt. co… tr. Donatist. lib. 5. cap. 26.the first place, (which bringeth in S. Cyprian too,) Quod autem nos admonet Cyprianus vt ad fontem rec…rramus, id est, Apostolicam traditionem, & inde canalem in nostra tempora dirigamus, optimum est & sine dubitatione faciendum. That is to say; whereas Cyprian warneth vsus that we should go to the coondit head, which is the tradition of the Apostles, and thence direct the pipe to our owne times: that is best and to be done out of all dout. These are S. Austins owne wordes.
Rainoldes.
S. Austins owne wordes in déede. But what doth folow in S. Austin? Traditum est ergo nobis (sicut ipse commemorat) ab Apostolis, quòd sit vnus deus, & Christus vnus, & vna spes, & fides vna, & vna ecclesia, & baptisma vnum. That is to say: It is deliuered therefore to vsus by the Apostles (as Cyprian himselfe rehearseth) that there is one God, and one Christ, and one hope, and one faith, and one church, and one baptisme. These are S. Austins owne wordes, and grounded on S. yEpist. 74. ad …ompeium.Cyprian too. So that he, and Cyprian, meant by [tradition] that, which is deliuered: and that to be deliuered, which is writen in the scriptures. For this selfe same thing, whereof they speake, is writen in the epistle of …ph. 4.4.Paule to the Ephesians. Wherefore, their traditiō is tradition writen, that is to say, scripture: and not vnwriten stuffe, as your Iesuit would hauehave it. Yea Cyprian is so plaine for controuersies to be decided by this tradition onelyonly, that in the same epistle (whence Austin citeth this) to the words of Stephanus, Traditum est, it is deliuered, vnde est ista traditio, faith he, whence is this tradition? Doth it come from the authoritie of the Lord and the gospell, or from the commaundements and epistles of the Apostles? For that we must doo those things which are writen, God doth witnesse saying to Ioshua, aIos. 1.8.Let not this booke of the law depart out of thy mouth: but meditate in it day and night, that thou maiest obserue to performe all thinges which are writen therein. And likewise the Lorde sending his Apostles willed them that bMatt. 28.20.the nations should bee baptized, and taught to obserue all things which he had commaunded. Wherefore if this thing (of the which Stephanus saith, it is deliuered,) be commaunded in the gospell, or contained in the epistles or actes of the Apostles: let this diuine and holy tradition be obserued. Sée you not how Cyprian thought, that all, which Christ commanded to be taught, is writen? How hee meant this writen doctrine by tradition? How his words of this tradition are approued by Austin? What conscience had your Iesuit to alleage that for traditions beside scriptures, which they so plainely meant of the scriptures them selues?