Run from Rome, Chapter 14
CHAP. XIIII.
Of ſome other Arguments of Bellarmine to the ſame purpoſe.
LET vsus ſee if Bellarmines fourth reaſon be any better then the former.
That which the Apoſtle commanded the Theſſalonians to Bellar. ubi ſupra Sect. tertium.keepe, 2. Theſſ. 2. 15. is contained in tradition: for it was not written, but deliuered by word of mouth.
That which the Apoſtle commanded the Theſſalouians to keepe, was a ſauing faith.
Therefore ſome ſauing truth is contained in tradition.
There is no end of Bellarmines begging. We muſt deny as before, that whatſoeuer the Apoſtles taught is recorded and come to poſteritie.
To the propoſition I anſwer in particular, that being vnderſtood of that time when the Apoſtle writ that Epiſtle, it is true: he had then deliuered ſome things by word of mouth, and not written them: and thoſe hee commandeth them to keepe. But what proofe can Bellarmine make, that thoſe things were not written afterwards?
The aſſumption is not eaſily to be proued, that thoſe things were ſauing truth. Why doth not Bellarmine tell vsus what they were? Me thinks he dareth not ſo much as gueſſe at them: otherwiſe he would let vsus know at the leaſt, what his Catholickes worthily take them to be. Would any man dally thus in a matter of faith, to bee beleeued vponupon paine of damnation?
Bellarmine will make amends for the want of weight in his reaſons, by the number of them: and he propoundeth his fift thus to bee deliuered.Bellar. ubi ſupra ſect. quaitam.
That which was committed to Timothy, 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2. is contained in tradition.
That which was there committed to Timothy, is a ſauing 1. Tim. 6. 20. 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2.truth.
Therefore ſome ſauing truth is contained in tradition.
Here he beggeth againe as before: but wee cannot grant, that whatſoeuer the Apoſtles preached, is remaining vponupon record to poſteritie.
If that were granted: yet ſhould I thinke the propoſition no ſufficient warrant for an Article of faith. Therefore Bellarmine offereth proofe of it on this maner:
That which Timothy had heard of Saint Paul, 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2, and was to deliuer to faithfull men able to teach other alſo, that is contained in tradition.
But that which was committed to Timothy, 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2, he had heard of Saint Paul, and was to deliuer to faithfull men able to teach other alſo.
Therefore that which was committed to Timothy, 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2, is contained in tradition.
Leaſt wee ſhould deny the firſt part or Propoſition of this Syllogiſme, becauſe the things ſo delivered, and given in charge by the Apoſtle, might be matter for the preſent vſe of the Church, and ſuch as needed not to be alwayes knowne, Bellarmine telleth us, that by thoſe things ſo heard, and ſo to be committed, the vnderſtanding of the ſenſe of the ſcriptures, and other doctrine is ſignified: ſo that the whole force of his Argument lyeth in this interpretation, which he never offereth to proue. Therefore vnleſſe we will take his bare word for proofe, wee are as farre to ſeeke, as we were before. Now that we hauehave no reaſon to doe ſo, I thinke it may appeare by thoſe things, which I will now propound to the conſideration of all reaſonable men.
Firſt then, I would know o… Bellarmine whether by Vnderſtanding of the ſenſe, he meane generall rules for the vnderſtanding of it, or the ſenſe of particular places? Secondly, I demaund whether he deliuered to him the ſenſe o… eueryevery place of Scripture, or of ſome onelyonly? Whether he anſwer this or that; I aske thirdly: what is become of thoſe rules and expoſitions? How will he proue to vsus, that they hauehave beene continued from time to time till now? If they hauehave not beene continued, what hauehave wee to do with them, who diſpute onelyonly of ſuch traditions as are in the poſſeſſion, and vſe of the preſent Church?
Fourthly, is it likely, euen in Bellarmines iudgement, that Saint Paul would take vponupon him to inſtruct Timothy in the ſenſe of any place of Scripture, when as the office of interpreting the Scripture is committed by the Councell of Trent to the Church, that is (as Bellarmine expoundeth it) to Peter and his ſucceſſours? Did he meane ambitiouſly to vſurpe Peters office, or to ſend him to Peter or his ſucceſſours, to learne of them whether the interpretation he had giuen were true or no. Touching the ſecond part of the firſt Syllogiſme, that Thoſe thinges which were committed to Timothy, were ſauing truths: Bellarmine ſaith nothing: which argueth that he knew not what to ſay. What reaſon hauehave we then to imagine that they were ſauing truths, or that this argument concludeth any thing for the doctrine of the Councell of Trent concering traditions?
There is yet one argument more in the ſame fift chapter, thus to be concluded.
Thoſe things which Iohn had to write, 2. Ioh. 11, and Bellar. ubi ſupra Sect. ultimum teſtimonium.3. Ioh. 14. are contained in tradition; for he ſaith, he would not write them.
But thoſe things which he had then to write, were ſauing truths taught by the Apoſtles.
Therefore ſome ſauing truths taught by the Apostles are contained in tradition.
I am inforced here alſo to repeate my former anſwer: duplicate page duplicate page that Bella…mine ſtill takes it for granted, that whatſoeuer the Apoſtles taught is continued to poſteritie; which we denie: and no papiſt can proue.
His aſſumption or minor is to weake to beare vp the weight of an Article of faith, vnleſſe he be able to …ll … certainly what the things were which the Apoſtle would not write: and to whom hee did, or at the leaſt, that hee did afterward deliuer them to ſome body, from whom the Church hath receiued them. Till we know what they were, how ſhall we be ſure they were part of the ſauing truth?