Answer to Reynolds Book, Chapter 3
CHAP. 3.
Of Luther preferring his priuate iudgement before all auncient fathers.
HEre againe is repeated an other quarrel about Luther to no purpoſe in the world, but onelyonly to diſcredite him a litle with the ſimple ſorte. For our aduerſaries are ſo waſted and ſpent for good reaſons, that whatſoeuer they light vponupon, though neuer ſo vnfit to frame good arguments of, they handle it with great earneſtnes, like ſeelie fletchers, that hauing no ſtore of ſteles left in theire ſhoppe, are ſaine to make their blots of euerie crooked ſticke. What maketh it againeſt the trueth of our reliligion, if Luther preferred his owne iudgement before the fathers? is our doctrine therefore falſe, and yours true, either in wholl, or in parte? Others deſire to reape great profit of a litle labour: but you are content to take a great deale of paine, for no commoditie at al. I would not herin vouchſafe you an anſwere, but that I hauehave reſpect to the readers weakneſſe, whoe by ſuch ſlaunders may be abuſed. Your title ſheweth plainlie there is in this Chapter no truth to be looked for at your hands:pag. 42. you ſay Luther preferred his priuate iudgement before all auncient fathers and Doctors: wherein you would hauehave men thinke, he was vnmeaſurablie arrogant, and wilfull. But Luthers ſpirit was farre from this inſolent, and immoderate preſumption, as maie by his owne wordes appeare, which you hauehave noted.
For he ſaith not, that he more ſetteth by his owne priuate iudgement, then he doth by al the fathers, and Doctors, as you report,Luth. cont. Regem. Angl. fol. 342. vnius maieſtatis aeter nae verbum, Euangelium. Dei verbū eſt ſuper omnia, &c. but that he ſetteth againſt the ſayings of fathers, of men, of Angels, of Diuells, the word of the onelyonly eternall maieſty, the Goſpell. And againe immediatly he ſaith. The word of God is aboue all, the maieſty of God maketh with me, that I care not though a thouſand Auguſtines and Cyprians ſtood agaynſt me. Gods word is of more authoritie, then all men, or Angels.Is this to ſet his priuate iudgement againſt all the fathers? is this pride? is this preſumption? muſt Gods word, and maieſtie, and Goſpell, yeald to the iudgement of fathers, be they neuer ſo manie? This forſooth is your modeſtie, that though the Lord hath ſpoken it, yet if the fathers ſaie anie thing againſt it, you will not prefere your iudgement, grounded on the ſcriptures, before the auncient fathers. Accurſed be ſuch modeſtie, that doth ſoe great iniurie, and diſhonour vntounto god. This ciuilitie towards men, is treaſon, and blaſphemie towards the lord. Remember what Elihu ſaith.Iob. 32. v. 21.22. I will not now accept the perſon of man, neither wil I give titles to man. For I may not giuegive titles, leſt my maker ſhould take me away ſuddenlie. If this affection was in Luther, as it was, what fault can you finde therin?
You aske of me the reaſon, why I ſo buſilie defend Luther. I aske of you the reaſon, why you ſo continuallie accuſe Luther. If you ſeeke for ſome reaſons to accuſe him, I cannot want better reaſons to defend him, your accuſations being ſo vntrue. That you ſay, we aduance him into the place of Chriſte, or at leaſt among his Apoſtles, belike you imagine that Luther is to vsus as your Pope is to you, whome you more eſteeme, and honour, then Chriſte, and all his Apoſtles. For ſaie they what they will, their ſaying hath litle force or authoritie, if it like not your holie father: but his ſaying muſt preuaile, whatſoeuer they ſaie to the contrarie. You thinke it good reaſon I ſhould giuegive ouer all defenſe of Luther, ſeing he bare extreame hatred, as you ſay, againſt the Sacramentaries: & here you bring in much to that purpoſe, which yet you know is not the matter you tooke in hand. But it is alwaies the propertie of ſuch diſcreet, and worthie writers, whatſoeuer they finde, though from the cauſe, to hale it in by ſome meanes in one place, or other. I anſwere in a word, Luther diſſented bitterlie from Zuinglius, and O Ecolampadius, in the matter of the ſacrament, as it falleth out often times, that ſharpe contentions may ariſe amongſt Godlie and learned men: yet it is no cauſe, why we ſhould not anſwere in Luthers behalfe, when he is wrongfullie charged by you. Therefore you come to ſcanne my defenſe of Luther particularlie,pag. 48. and finde your ſelfe occupied in deuiſing diuers ſenſes of Luthers words, and then diſputing againſt them. Firſt, if all the fathers teach one thing, and bring ſcriptures for them, & Luther the contrarie, & bring ſcriptures for him: whether in this caſe Luther may preferre his iudgement before all the fathers? This is not the caſe. M. R. that Luther ment: you muſt therefore proceade further yet in your ſuppoſe. Next then you put caſe, If a thouſand Auguſtines, & Churches teache ſome doctrine, citing no text for it, and Luther bring ſome text of ſcripture after his ſenſe, againſt the ſame: the matter is not in citing textes, but in deliuering the doctrine, that is approoued by the text. Then leaue your childiſh trifling, and take Luther as he meant. If Auguſtine, or Cyprian, or any other father maintaine any thing againſt Gods word, Luther, or any other miniſter of Chriſt, may in ſuch caſe preferre his iudgement, warranted by the word of God, before theirs. If you denie this, you are not worthie to be called a Chriſtian: and yet cloſelie you doe denie it, in that you reprooue Luther, and condemne him for ſaying the ſame. And where you ſaie, I can bring no inſtance that euer the auncient fathers did ſo, hauehave you forgotten what fell out in the Councell of Nice, Socrat. l. 1. c. 11.when the fathers agreeing to diſſolue the marriage of miniſters, were withſtood by Paphnutius, One man maintaining the trueth of Gods word may lawfully diſſent from others, although neuer ſo many. August. cont. petil. l. 3. c. 6.and yealded in the ende? Here one Paphnutius iudgment was preferred before al the other three hundred fathers. And ſo often times the iudgement of many hath beene corrected by one. S. Aug. ſaith, whether of Chriſte, or of his Church, or of any other thing, that appertayneth to our faith, and life, I will not ſay we, not to be compared to him that ſayd, though we, but as he added: If an Angell from heauen ſhall preach any thing beſides that ye hauehave receiued in the legall and Euangelicall ſcriptures, lette him be accurſed. If we maie accurſe them, how many, and whoſoeuer they be, that teach contrary to the Propheticall, and Apoſtolicall ſcriptures, then may we preferre our iudgement in ſuch caſes before them. Saint Auguſtines words you ſee, are very ſharpe, but he learned thus to ſpeake of the Apoſtle him ſelfe.Auguſt. epi. 19. In an other place Saint Auguſtine ſaith; For all theſe (fathers) yea aboue all theſe, the Apoſtle Paul offereth himſelfe: I flee to him, I appeale to him from all writers, that thinke otherwiſe. This was S. Auguſtine bolde to write, euen to S. Ierome, and feared not any ſuſpicion either of arrogancie or hereſie for the ſame: ſuch accoumpte then muſt be made of the trueth, that we muſt ſtand with it againſt al the world, and not for reuerence of mens perſons giuegive it ouer, or betraie it, or be afraid to defend it. If this be ſo, as you will not, I am ſure, for ſhame or feare denie openlie, then hauehave you nothing to burthen Luther in this behalfe.
When you ſay, Though the fathers in the Councells of Nice, Epheſus, Chalcedon, had alleadged no direct and euident place against Arius, Nestorius, Eutyches, yet the Christian people were bound to beleeue them, grounding them ſelues onelie vponupon the catholike and vniuerſall faith of the Churches before them, it is boldly, and bluntlie ſpoken. Theſe godly and catholike fathers aſſembled in Councel againſt thoſe heritikes, confuted them by the authoritie of Gods word, and as it were cut the throte of their hereſies, with the ſworde of the ſpirit. This was onelie the weapon then vſed, and with this they preuayled,The councels and fathers confuted all Heretikes by the ſcriptures. as likwiſe hauehave all other godlie councels euer done againſt all heretikes, and enemies of the trueth. For in Religion there is no trueth, but grounded vppon ſcriptures: no errour or hereſie, but repugnant to ſcriptures: no heretikes, but refuted by ſcriptures. They dealt not againſt the heretikes, as you imagine, omitting ſcriptures, and grounding vponupon the faith of Churches: but they prooued their faith to be grounded vppon the ſcriptures. So Cyprian, a wiſe and Catholike Biſhop writeth, that in controuerſies of Religion, we muſt hauehave recourſe to the origine of trueth, Cypria. de vnit. Eccleſ. & in Epiſt. ad Pompei.whereby he meaneth the ſcriptures, and that the cauſe of hereſie is. for that the head is not ſought: which he declareth, further adding, that the doctrine of the heauenlie Maſter is not kept. And therefore, if thoſe fathers had obiected nothing, but the common beliefe of the Churches, againſt thoſe heretikes, they had taken a wrong courſe, and ſhould neuer thus hauehave ſtopped their mouthes. But they had a ſurer waie to conuince heretikes, then you hauehave: whoe being of all heretikes the greateſt, would take awaie all means of confuting heretikes, that ſo your ſelues might not be eſpied, or not controlled.
As for Heluidius, Ambroſe. Epiſt. 81. & 79. Hieron. cont. Heluid.who denied the bleſſed virgine to hauehave remained a virgine afterward, the fathers Ierome and Ambroſe, alleadged againſt him not tradition onelyonly, but the ſcriptures eſpeciallie: although what Saint Baſill hath written of this wholl matter, you maie reade in his ſermon of the Natiuitie, wherein he is not affraied plainlie to affirme, that after ſhe had borne our ſauiour Christ, Baſil. de Chriſti …tiuit.whither ſhe married againe, or remained a virgine ſtill, belongeth longeth nothing to the myſterie of faith.
Againe you imagine a third ſenſe of Luthers wordes,Pag. 51. by ſuppoſing a thing impoſſible, that if all Churches and fathers teach againſt Scripture, & Luther with Scripture, then Luther maie thinke him-ſelfe a better man then they al. What Luthers meaning was, you hauehave heard, and therefore it skilleth not what you ſuppoſe further. Indeed M. R. as you ſaie, the Church falleth not from Chriſt to Apoſtaſie: but this is true as well of the Church in the olde Teſtament, as in the newe. yet as the viſible Churches of the Iewes fell awaie from God, and became open enemies vntounto our ſauiour Chriſt: ſo it might come to paſſe ſince Chriſt, that the particular Churches and congregations did corrupte the doctrine of the Goſepll, and ſlid into that Apoſtaſie, which the Scriptures foreſaid ſhould ouerſpread the Churches afterward.1. Tim. 4.1. 2. Theſ. 2.3. But the Catholike Church, which is the number of Gods elect, can no more fall awaie from Chriſte into Apoſtaſie, then the courſe of heauen can be chaunged. For it ſtandeth vponupon Chriſt the rocke: and hell gates ſhall not be hable to caſt it downe.
Here againe you come in with Luthers opinion of the ſacrament,pag. 52. wherein as he diſſented from vsus & the truth verie much, ſo your popiſh Tranſſubſtantiation, then which was neuer a more impious, and abſurd hereſie maintained in the Church, he vtterlie abhorred. And what though herein Luther ſomthing ſwarued from the truth? might he not therefore, being in other cauſes aſſured thereof out of the word of God, reiect the opinions of ſuch as diſſented from the ſame? By this reaſon no man in defenſe of Gods trueth may chalenge, or bid defiance to the aduerſaries thereof, ſeeing they hauehave no priuiledge or Charter graunted to them, but that them ſelues maie alſo be deceiued. Luther was an excellent man, and a worthie ſeruante of Chriſt, whoſe Miniſterie eſpeciallie it pleaſed the Lord to vſe, in reuealing to theſe times that ſonne of perdition, whoe ſitteth in the Temple of God, and aduaunceth him ſelfe aboue God yet was Luther a man, and therefore no maruaile if he were not exempted altogether from ignorance, and infirmitie. And what miſerable peruerſnes is it in you, that being not able to maintaine your owne hereſies againſt Luther, will thinke to eſcape in the iudgement of men, from beeing condemned, becauſe Luther him ſelfe in one pointe of doctrine erred? Maie no man conuince error, but ſuch a one, as is free from erring at all him ſelfe? the ſcriptures are left vntounto vsus, to be our rule of trueth: by them muſt all doctrine be ſquared, and directed, they ſit in the hieſt ſeate of indgement to giuegive ſentence in euerie cauſe. With them did Luther cut downe your errours: of them hauehave we learned to thinke of the ſacrament otherwiſe then Luther did: to them doe we ſubmit our ſelues in euerie thing we teach, and are contented that our wholl Religion be tried by them: ſo that if you, or anie other can ſhewe wherein we diſagree from them, we are readie, and willing to be reformed. But one error of Luther cannot ſerue to excuſe infinite errors in the popiſh Church. Thus hauehave you my anſwere, as plainlie as I could deuiſe, in this matter: which though you hauehave handled at large, as became a man of your learning, leaſure, and diſcretion, yet in the end, you caſt it awaie from you as not worthy to hauehave any time beſtowed about it. Now therfore I truſt herafter you wilbe better occupied.