Gods Effectual Calling, Treatise · Chapter
OF THE MEANES WHEREby God from the beginning hath reuealed both his couenants vntounto Mankind.
Queſtion.
HOW many waies are there, whereby God from the beginning hath reuealed all his will, that is, Kinds or forms of reuelation.the doctrine of both couenants, of works & grace, vntounto mankind?
A. They are two.
Q. Which be they.
A. The firſt is a liuely voice: the ſecond is the Scripture.
Q. What calleſt thou a liuely voice.
A. The firſt meanes of reuelation, whereby God partly by his owne mouth, and partly by men, hath manifeſted VVhat is meant by a liuely voice.the whole doctrine of both couenants to his church, from time to time.
Q. What were the inſtruments of that liuely voice from the beginning?
A. Firſt, God himſelfe ſpake ſometimes by his Sonne in VVhoſe it was.the forme or likenes of man, appearing to the Fathers; ſometimes by his ſpirit inwardly in the heart. Secondly, the liuely voice of Angels was heard: Thirdly, the liuely voice of men, firſt of the Fathers, then of Moſes, and the Prophets; after that, of Iohn the Baptiſt vntil Chriſt. Then lowed Chriſt himſelfe manifeſted in the fleſh. Laſt of all, the liuely voice of the Apoſtles of Chriſt.
Q. This kind of reuelation which was by a liuely voice of al The quality of it.theſe whom you hauehave named, was it by inspiration and altogether free from error?
A. Concerning the liuely voice of God himſelfe, of Chriſt and of the Angels, there is no queſtion: and as concerning men, whoſe liuely voice God hath vſed from the beginning of the world hitherto, in reuealing his wil to his Church, they truly albeit they were ſinfull men, and in part onelyonly regenerate; notwithſtanding in the deliuery of the doctrine of the truth of both couenants, they were ſo extraordinarily gouerned and inſpired with the Holy Spirit of God, that they could by no meanes erre.
Q. Doeſt thou meane then, that all men, as manie as hauehave beene from the beginning of the world hitherto (by whoſe mouth God hath-ſpoken to his Church) were men extraordinary, endued with extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghoſt, & confirmed by miracles.
A. I meane euen ſo: for prophecy in times paſt came not by the will of man, but holy men ſpake as they were moued by the ſpirit of God. 2. Pet. 1. 2.
Q. At what time began this liuely voice in the Church?VVhen it began.
A. It began euen in the firſt creation of man.
Q. How long hath the liuely voice of God and men, who could not erre in deliuering the doctrine of the truth continued Continuance of it.in the Church of God?
A. It hath been from the beginning of the world, euen to the death of the Apoſtles: all which time, there was almoſt no age, wherein at leaſt ſome one holy man of God, was not extraordinarily ſtirred vp; who could not erre in deliuering the doctrine of the truth.
Q. Why doe you ſay almoſt: was there anie intermiſſion at all?
A. Truly there was: but I will name onelyonly ſome more notable intermiſſions, which may be gathered out of the holy ſcriptures. Firſt in the age of the Patriarches it is obſerued, that there was an intermiſſion in Terachs time who was the Father of Abraham: for albeit he retained ſome grounds of truth receiued from his Fathers, notwithſtanding he became an Apoſtata and an Idolater, as is manifeſt by the hiſtorie. Next, there was an intermiſſion alſo, when the people liued in Egypt: for from the death of the Sonnes of Iacob, euen to the departure out of Egypt, Ezechiel teſtifieth Chapter 20. that al the people were fallen frō God to the Idols of the Egyptians. Laſtly, there was an intermiſſion from Malachy the laſt of the Prophets vntil Iohn Baptiſt, in all which time no Prophet was raiſed vp; notwithſtanding the word of God was cōtinued, amongſt the people of ye Iewes by high Prieſts and the ordinary miniſtery, but not without corruptions: ſo that at the comming of Chriſt for the more part, the doctrine of truth was now corrupted.
Q. Ought not the liuely voice of God, which is not ſubiect to errour, bee continued in the Church vntil the comming of VVhether a liuely voice not ſubiect to error continues til Chriſt.Chriſt; becauſe you ſaid that this liuely voice did continue in the Church till the comming of the Apoſtles only?
A. The liuely voice of Chriſt continues in the Church, I confeſſe, but not the liuely voice either of God or of extraordinary men, ſuch as were the Fathers, Prophets, and Apoſtles: but only the liuely voice of ordinary men, of paſtours and doctors, who both may erre, & do erre whenſoeuer they depart neuer ſo little, from the preſcript word of the Prophets and Apoſtles.
Q. But God hath giuen a greater meaſure of his holie ſpirit, to his Church which now is vnderunder Chriſt, then euer he gaue to the old Church. Therefore if in the old Church there was a liuelie voice which could not erre, how much more ſhall there be now in the Church of Chriſt a liuelie voice which cannot erre.
A. It is true indeed, that together with this full reuelation, which is cōtained in the writings of the Apoſtles, a more full ſpirit was giuen to the Church of Chriſt, which now is, then was giuen to the the old Church: But hence it followeth not, that either the Church, or the Paſtors and doctors in the Church, are ſo gouerned with that Spirit, that they cannot at all erre in deliuering the truth: For this was the extraordinarie gift of the holy Ghoſt, which was giuen but for a time; but the gift of the Spirit which was giuen to the Church of Chriſt ſince the times of the Apoſtles, is ordinarie and perpetuall, to wit, the gift of ſanctification, illumination, and regeneration.
Q. The Church then which now is, ſeemes to be in a worſe caſe, then the old Church was, which had the liuely voice of God, & of men which could not erre?
A. That doth not follow: for this Scripture of the Prophets and Apoſtles, which nowe the Church hath, doth not erre in doctrine, and containes alſo a moſt full and moſt cleare reuelation of the truth.
Q. Albeit I ſhould graunt the condition of our Church to better then of that old Church which was before Moſes, and which had the tradition and vſe onelyonly of the liuely voice, and that verie imperfect and obſcure: notwithſtanding I ſee not how the Church was not in better caſe, which was after Moſes, euen to the comming of Chriſt, as hauing not onelyonly the vſe of tradition, and of a liuelie voice, but alſo of the Propheticall Scripture, as a light ſhining in a dark place?
A. Truly that Church had both, that is, both the ſound of a liuely voice, and of the Scripture and written word of God; but neither perfect, and abſolute. But this Scripture which our Church alone hath, containes a moſt full and plaine reuelation: for euen one forme or maner and kind of reuelation, which is perfect and full muſt be more excellent, then two which are both imperfect, or which containe an imperfect reuelation of the truth.
Q. But there is no man who would not ſay, it were better with this our Church, if it had ſome liuelie voice which in ſpeaking and anſwering to all controuerſies, might not erre?
A. They hauehave Moſes, the Ptophets and Apoſtles, that is, the writings of Moſes, of the Prophets, and of the Apoſtles, and thoſe truely not onelyonly ſufficient, but moſt perfect: whēce only if they cānot learne the truth by thē, and decide and end all controuerſies, they will not be inſtructed with the liuely voyce of anie extraordinary man: howbeit, as I hauehave ſaid before, the liuely voice was to continue onelyonly ſo long in the Church, as ſome thing was wanting to the full declaration of the myſtery of Chriſt. So that if now there ſhould be any need of the liuely voice either of God, or of ſome extraordinarie man in the Church of Chriſt; that truly ſhould plainely argue, that the reuelation of the truth and myſterie of Chriſt, is not perfect as yet, nor accompliſhed.
Q. You conclude then, that ſince the Apoſtles time there hath beene no liuelie voice heard in the Church, which could not erre.
A. Yea truely.
Q. Whie did a liuelie voice not ſubiect to errour, continue in the Church all that time, which was from Adam to the Apoſtles?
A. To ſpeake nothing of the will of God, with the which alone we ought to reſt contented; firſt, the condition of the Church did require this continuance: & then the meaſure of the reuelation that then was.
Q. Whie the condition of the Church?
A. Becauſe the viſible Church in all that time, which was from Adam to the Apoſtles, was both in place more ſtreight, as being ſhut vp in one family, or in one nation, & was by reaſon of age weaker, or not ſo wel growne. For the Church before Chriſt (if I may ſo ſpeake) was either as a child, or as a young man.
Q. What then?
A. The liuely voice doth more eaſily reach, or extend it ſelfe to a Church, which is in place more ſtreight, and to the Saints fewer in number: & the church being as yet vnexpert by reaſon of the age of it, and leſſe growne, had neede of the liuely voice of a teacher, none otherwiſe then children hauehave neede of the liuely voice of a maiſter, who as it were ſtammereth with them: but after the comming of Chriſt, when the Church was ſufficiently inſtructed by the liuely voice of Chriſt, and of his Apoſtles, and now come to mans eſtate, there was no more heard anie liuely voice either of God, or of men extraordinarie.
Q. Whie did the meaſure of Reuelation require this?
A. Becauſe all that time, which was from Adam to the Apoſtles, there remained as yet ſome thing more clearely and more manifeſtly to be reuealed; and the reuelation of the doctrine was in ſeuerall ages, made more manifeſt ſtill as pertaining to the ſubſtance of it: and ſo long, as ſome thing remained to be more clearely reuealed, ſo long a liuely voice was to continue; for euerie new reuelation ought firſt to begin with a liuely voice.
Q. Seeing that the laſt and moſt full reuelation was by the liuelie voice of Chriſt and his Apoſtles: hath there euer ſince beene heard anie liuely voice, either of God or of anie extraordinarie man?
A. None at all.
Q. Do you gather by theſe things which you hauehave ſpoken, concerning the cauſes of the continuance of a liuelie voice in the Church, what was the vſe of it heretofore in the Church?
A. Yea truly: for the vſe of it was firſt in reſpect of the Church it ſelfe, to giuegive it inſtruction while it was yet ſo ſmall for place, and ſo young in knowledge: next, in reſpect of reuelation, to deliuer it from time to time more cleerly and euidently vntounto the people.
Q. By this vſe of a liuelie voice, which you hauehave here mentioned, it ſeems that this kind of ruelatiō, which was by a liuely voice, was the more ſimple and the more familiar, and the more imperfect, and therefore the more fit for perſons and things that were of like imperfection?
A. It is euen ſo as you hauehave ſaid.
Q. Hitherto I hauehave heard you ſpeake concerning a liuelie voice: now I would heare ſomething of you concerning the ſubiect of it, what ſay you then was taught all that time by a liuely voice?
A. In al that time, and in eueryevery age the ſelfe ſame, and the whole truth of God was deliuered by a liuely voice.The subiector master of the liuely voice.
Q. Wherefore then, ſaid you, that the perfect manifeſtation of that myſterie of godlineſſe was not accompliſhed till the Apoſtles time?
A. By that fulneſſe & perfection I vnderſtood not the ſubſtance of the doctrine it ſelfe, but the quality, that is, the cleareneſſe of one and the ſame doctrine. For the myſterie of Chriſt was in the Church, and was manifeſted in ſome meaſure from Adam vntounto Chriſt, and the Apoſtles: but if the compariſon be made of times, it may be ſaid to be ſhut & hidden in all ages before the comming of Chriſt.
Q. Was the paritie of the heauenlie doctrine ſufficientlie conſerued and kept, by a liuely voice?
A. The hiſtorie ſhewes plainely that the doctrine deliuered by liuely voice, was often corrupted and adulterated.
Q. How then was it reſtored?
It ſeemed good to God, afterward by new reuelations to reſtore the puritie of his word decayed, to conſerue and keepe it, and to giuegive a more full declaration of it.
Q. Was the puritie of doctrine ſufficientlie preſerued and kept ſo?
A. Not ſo verily: and therefore it ſeemed good to God, at length to adde hereunto the written word.
Q. Are there no other cauſes of writing the holie Scriptures?
A. There are: for firſt the condition of the Church required, that the Scripture ſhould be added vntounto the liuely voice: and next, the meaſure alſo of reuelation.
Q. Why the condition of the Church?
A. Becauſe at length, in Moſes time, the Church began to be both in place more large, as being ſpred throughout a whole nation, and to grow greater and riper in yeares: for the time from Moſes vntounto Chriſt, was as it were, the time of the midde age, or young yeares of the Church.
Q. What then?
A. The written word therefore was firſt in reſpect both of place, and ripeneſſe of age: for both a whole nation is more eaſily taught by writing then by voice: and the age which is more ripe, is more capable of that doctrine which is deliuered by writing, that is, by that kind of reuelation which is not ſo familiar and ſimple: and by writing doth more eaſily conceiue any mans meaning.
Q. Why doth the meaſure of reuelation require the written word?
A. Becauſe whereas before Moſes, the reuelation of the myſterie of godlineſſe was ſmall and very obſcure, it ſeemed not good to the Lord to cauſe it ſtraight waies to be written, to the intent it might be kept for poſteritie. But when in Moſes time the Reuelation began to bee much more cleare then before, then it ſeemed good vntounto God to commit it to writing, to the intent it might be reſerued, and remain for thoſe which ſhould come after. For that which is more perfect and full, that wee are to write, to this end, that it may remaine both for vsus and our poſterity; but that which is more imperfect, that we doe not eſteeme worthy the writing, or to be reſerued vntounto poſterity.
Q. Before you go anie further, I would hauehave you declaare vntounto me the ages of the Church, where of you hauehave ſo oft made mention?
A. I will ſo do.
Q. How manie ages then, ſay you, are there of the Church?
A. Three: the firſt was from Adam vntounto Moſes, which was the infancy and childhood of the Church: the ſecond from Moſes vntounto Chriſt, which was the youth or middle age of the Church: the third, from Chriſt and his Apoſtles, euen vntounto the end, which may be called the ripe age of the Church, if it be compared with the ages paſt: for otherwiſe we are not men growne vntill we bee gathered together with Chriſt our head in heauen.
Q. Do you meane then, that God had reſpect alwaies of theſe three ages, in his proceedings with his Church?
A. I meane ſo indeed: for (that I may ſo ſpeake) hee hath tempered theſe three things proportionally to theſe three ages of the Church: to wit, firſt the meaſure of reuelation: ſecondly, his holy Spirit: thirdly, the manner of reuelation.
Q. Declare I pray you more particularlie what you hauehave ſaid?
A. To the infancie and childhood of the Church, he gaue the leaſt meaſure of reuelation to wit, firſt, the firſt principles of religion onelyonly. Secondly, the leaſt meaſure of the holy Spirit, to wit, that which was proportionable to the reuelation. Thirdly, one onelyonly kind of reuelation, which was by liuely voice, as being the moſt fit for the inſtruction of infants, and of ſuch as were weake in the faith.
Q. I vnderſtand what you ſaie concerning the firſt age of the Church: now I would hauehave you ſpeake concerning the middle age, which you call the youth of it, and to applie theſe three things mentioned to it in like manner?
To the middle age of the Church he gaue firſt a greater meaſure of reuelation. Secondly (ſo to ſpeake) a greater portion of the holy Spirit. Thirdly, a double kind of reuelation, the liuely voice, and the Scripture. The liuely voice I ſay, becauſe as yet it was but weake: and the written word; becauſe it was in age better growne, and ſo more capable in ſome ſort of the word written: for God hath tempered theſe two kinds of reuelations together, and of both hath made a middle kind of reuelation, according to the time and age which wee call the middle, and as it were the temperate age.
Q. You hauehave ſpoken of the firſt & ſecond age of the Church, now I pray you ſpeake of the third.
A. To the third age of the Church (which I call the manly or ripe age) he gaue firſt a full meaſure of reuelation. Secondly, a moſt plentifull effuſion of the holy Ghoſt. Thirdly, both thoſe kinds of reuelation, and that now truly containing a full and perfect reuelation; hee taught it by liuely voice for a certaine time: & after this, he added the writings of the Apoſtles. And when as the myſtery of our ſaluation was fully reuealed by that liuely voice firſt, and then that full reuelation was written, euer ſince there hath beene no more vſe of the liuely voice of any extraordinarie Prophet or Apoſtle. But the Scriptures written firſt by the Prophets, and after by the Apoſtles, remained only without any liuely voice, which could not erre.
Q. Where muſt wee begin to count the third age of the Church?
A. Not ſo much from the comming of Chriſt, and the ſending of his Apoſtles to all nations, as from that time when the Apoſtles ceaſed to ſpeake with liuely voice aſwel to the Iewes as to the Gentiles: for euen then the Church catholick came to mans eſtate & full growth, and then the Church began to vnderſtand and to learne the wil of God by the written word, as being a more accurate and perfect manner of reuelation. The time then which was frō the cōming of Chriſt vntil the death of the Apoſtles, was as it were a paſſage from the middle age of the church, vntounto the ful growth & ripenes of the ſame.
Q. I vnderſtand what you ſay cōcerning the cauſes of additiō of the written word to the liuely voice, & of the ſeuerall ages of the Church: now I would hauehave you speake ſome thing concerning the ſcripture, or of the writing of Gods word.
A. I will do ſo.
Q. What then call you writing or Scripture?
A. I call ſcripture or writing the ſecond kind of reuelation, whereby God either by himſelfe, or by the meanes of men extraordinarily reuealed thoſe things, which already had beene deliuered by liuely voice before, to wit, in that firſt kind of reuelation.
Q. Who then were they, who euer ſince the beginning hauehave written?
A. Firſt, God himſelfe, next, men Moſes, the Prophets, and the Apoſtles.
Q. This kind of reuelation which was by writing, was it not ſubiect to error, like as that kind which was by a liuely voice?
A. No truly: for concerning that which God himſelfe did write, there is no queſtion: and touching men, they were ſo extraordinarily inſpired and gouerned by the ſpirit of God, that in writing they could not erre at all.
Q. When began it then to be written?
A. In Moſes time.
Q. How long did the word written continue in the Church?
A. The ſcripture or the act of writing continued from Moſes, euen to the Apoſtles: all which time there was almoſt no age wherein extraordinarily ſome one was not ſtirred vp, who in deliuering the doctrine of truth by writing, could not erre.
Q. You thinke otherwiſe of the ſcripture it ſelfe, then of the act of writing?
A. I do ſo: for the ſcripture it ſelf or that which is now written by Moſes, the Prophets, and Apoſtles yet continues in the Church, and ſhall continue vntounto the ſecond comming of Chriſt.
Q. Was there any intermiſſion of writing the word from Moſes vntounto the Apoſtles?
A. There was: for it appeareth in all that time, which was frō Malachy to Iohn the Baptiſt none was ſtirred vp, either Prophet, or writer inſpired by God: for the books of the Machabees be not giuen by inſpiration, as we ſhal ſhew hereafter.
Q. You ſaid that writing continued in the Church vntil the time of the Apoſtles, ought it not then to continue euen vntounto the end?
A. Like as ſince the Apoſtles time there is no liuely voice heard in the Church, which can be ſaid to be ſo goned by the holy Ghoſt, that it can not erre at all: So ſince the Apoſtles, nothing is written in the church, which may worthily be called or ſaid to be giuen by inſpiration.
Q. What then do you think of ſo many writings of godly and learned men, which hauehave been publiſhed ſince the times of the Apoſtles from time to time, to the great good and profit of the Church?
A. Verely I thinke of the writings of Paſtors and Doctors in the Church, as I think of their preaching, to wit, that both be ſubiect to errour, and neither is ſo gouerned by the holy Ghoſt, but that in deliuering the truth of God they may erre.
Q. It ſeemeth then that the condition of the Church, which is ſince the time of the Apoſtles, is not ſo good as hauing neither the liuely voice (as is afore ſaid) nor the writings, as now you ſpeak, of thoſe very mē who in deliuering the truth cannot erre?
A. It hath the ſcriptures of the prophets and Apoſtles, which as pertaining to the ſubſtance of reuelation is full; and as touching the kind & forme of reuelation, it is giuē by inſpiration & not ſubiect to error: out of the which ſcripture, whoſoeuer do not learne all things which are neceſſary to faith and ſaluation, aſſuredly ſuch would not receiue from the mouth of God himſelf, openly ſpeaking in an audible and intelligible voice, the doctrine and inſtructon of faith and ſaluation.
Q. Wherefore did the Lord ſo continue to record his will by The cauſe of the continuance of▪ writing Gods word.writing in the Church all that time, which was from Moſes to the Apoſtles?
A. There are the ſame cauſes of the continuance thereof, as are of the addition of the liuely voice vntounto writing: For both the condition of the church and the meaſure of reuelation required the ſame.
Q. Why the condition of the Church?
A. Becauſe the church continually increaſed and grew, as in number ſo in knowledge.
Q. What then?
A. The greater number and riper knowledge do require this, that the word be written.
Q. Why the meaſure of reuelation?
A. Becauſe the reuelation of the doctrine of ſaluation, was from time to time made more cleare and manifeſt, euen vntounto the times of Chriſt & of his Apoſtles; at which time it was in the end compleate and perfected. For it was meete that eueryevery reuelation manifeſted more cleerely & fully, ſhould be recorded in writing, to this end, that it might be ſurely kept and deliuered to poſterities.
Q. Can ye gather by theſe things the vſe of the continuance The vſe of writing.of ſcripture in the Church of God.
A. Yea truly.
Q. What is then the vſe of it?
A. To paſſe by the conſeruation of the purity of doctrine, the firſt vſe was in reſpect of the Church, for the inſtructiō thereof, as being now in place more ample & large, & in knowledge more perfect. Secondly, it was in reſpect of the reuelation of the doctrine it ſelfe, that it might cō prehend and keepe it more fully and cleerely.
Q. By this vſe of ſcripture or writing which you giuegive, it ſeemes that this kind of reuelation which is by writing, is ſomewhat more perfect & high, as that which is beſt agreeing & fitting to perſons and things that are more perfect?
A. It is euen ſo.
Q. Thus far then forwriting or ſcripture: now I would hauehave you declare ſomething vntounto me concerning the ſubiect of this writing, & of the matter it ſelfe which is written?
A. As touching the ſubſtance the very ſame is written which was before deliuered by the liuely voice.
Q. I pray you ſpeak in order vntounto me of the ſubiect or argument in ſcripture, written first by God himſelf: ſecondly, by mē, by Moſes, the Prophets and Apoſtles?
A. I will do ſo.
Q. What then hath God written?
A. The ſum of the doctrine of the couenant of works, & of the law, euen the very ſame which he had deliuered firſt by a liuely voice to the Fathers, and to Moſes.
Q. What hath Moſes written?
A. All the celeſtiall doctrine, which he had receiued partly of the fathers by tradition, partly of God himſelfe, Moſes bookswho ſpake mouth to mouth with him; for ſo the ſcripture ſpeaketh: partly he had learned of the holy Ghoſt by an inward inſpiration; & to ſpeake in a word, whatſoeuer had happened to him, and to all the people in his life time, for the ſpace of 100. and 20. yeares, all theſe things he committed to writing and gaue to the people.
Q. Did Moſes then write what ſoeuer true doctrine was deliuered from the beginning of the world to that time?
A. Moſes omitted no point of true doctrine, which at any time had bene deliuered concerning either faith or manners: for from the beginning vntil that very time one and the ſame doctrine of truth, as touching the ſubſtance, was taught full and whole, in all ages. The difference only was in the meaſure of the reuelation of it, that it is accidentall & Moſes deliuered this doctrine fully and wholy by liuely voice more cleerely and manifeſtly then euer before: then after this, it was recorded in writing.
Q. What did the Prophets write, who followed Moſes euerie one in their time, and order?
A. The ſame and all, as touching the ſubſtance, which Moſes had written before; the difference only was herein: that eueryevery one by reuelation did adde a more cleare & manifeſt interpretation, as the bright morning ſtarre did approch more neere.
Q. What hauehave the Apoſtles written after the Prophets.
A. All and the ſame, which from the beginning of the world in al ages before them was both by liuely & audible voice deliuered and written; they firſt alſo by a liuely voice deliuered the ſame, and after committed it to writing.
Q. Doe you then make no difference betwixt the writings of the Prophets and of the Apoſtles?
A. In the matter and ſubſtance none; in the clearenes and perſpicuity thereof, very great: for the ſcripture of the Apoſtles conteineth the ſame reuelation of the myſtery which was declared from the beginning of the world, but moſt fully and moſt clearely.
Q. I hauehave heard you ſpeake concerning both kinds of reuelation, conſidered without compariſon: now I would hauehave you to compare together the liuely voice & writing, that by compariſon it may appeare whether is of greater dignity & authority.
A. I will compare them together, the liuely voice and ſcripture are compared either in reſpect of ſubſtance and matter is ſelfe, which is reuealed by theſe meanes, or in reſpect of the kinds of ye reuelatiō of it. If cōpariſon be made in regard of the matter or ſubſtance, they muſt needes be both equall & alike, ſeeing that the matter in either is one and the ſame: but if you compare the kinds of reuclation together, it cānot truly be denied but that the firſt & better place is due to the liuely voice, ſeeing that the liuely voice is both in reſpect of time more auncient, & was before the organs or inſtruments thereof (for the mouth is an inſtrument more worthy & to be preferred before the hand) and is a kind of teaching more familiar & more fit for the capacity of ſuch, as are more rude & ignorant. Albeit alſo in ſome reſpects writing is to be preferred before the liuely voice: For it is a more perfect & accurate kind of reuelation, fit to inſtruct thoſe that are more perfect, & to keepe the truth more firmely. In the meane while it cā not be denied, but yt in other reſpects they are both alike, for they hauehave both ſpoken, & written the ſame thing, & in the ſame manner, to wit, as being guided & moued by the holy Ghoſt & inſpired of God, 2. Pet. 1. 21. 2. Tim. 3. 16. To conclude, ſeeing that now the liuely voice, by the wil of God hath ceaſed, and in the place of it the ſcripture hath ſucceeded; ſo that whole dignity of the liuely voice before mentioned, is and ought worthily to be aſcribed and referred vntounto the ſcripture, or written word of God.
Q Doe you meane then that the Prophetical & Apoſtolical ſcripture ought to be now in as great account with vsus, as the liuelie voice of God himſelfe, and of extraordinarie men was in times paſt?
A. I meane ſo, and in his kinde of reuelation alone I willingly reſt, as in that which came by inſpiratiō from God, ſo long, vntill I ſhall heare at his glorious comming that liuely and moſt ſweete voice of Chriſt my Sauiour; when he ſhall ſay to them, who ſhall be at his right hand, Come ye bleſſed of my Father, inherit the kingdome, prepared for you from the beginning of the world. To whom be all praiſe for euer Amen.
To God only wiſe be praiſe through Jeſus Christ for euer, Amen.
End of the text · Robert Rollock, Gods Effectual Calling (1603)