A Trial of the Romish Clergys Title to the Church, Text and commentary · Quoted chapter 14

A Trial of the Romish Clergys Title to the Church · Text and commentary · Quoted chapter 14

p. 223A. D.

CHAP. XIIII. That thoſe markes of the Church, which Hereticke aſſigne, be not good markes.

A. W.

This is a verie generall title, implying, as a man would p. 224geſſe, by the words, that you meant to refute all marks, that euer were ſet downe by any Heretickes. But if we ſhould take your meaning, in that ſenſe, your diſcourſe would not anſwer our expectation. Beſides, if all markes aſſigned by heretickes be naught, yours cannot poſſibly be good, which are brought by the grand hereticks of the world, the vowed vaſſals of the great Antichriſt, the Pope of Rome.

A. D. §. 1.

Out of that which in the former chapter, I briefely noted, about the nature of a good marke, we may eaſily gather, that thoſe markes, which ſome heretickes aſſigne, to wit, the true doctrine of faith: and the right vſe of the Sacraments, are no good markes, by which all ſorts of men may come to know, which is the true Church, but are meanes (as Heretickes vſe them) to cast a miſt ouer the whole matter, when as they know, that they can, moſt eaſily, conuert all the Sacraments, and holy words of Scripture, Ad imagines phantaſmatum ſuorum, vntounto their owne imaginations and phantaſticall opinions (as out of Saint Auſtin we may gather, that the manner of heretickes is,) eſpecially when the authoritie of the Church, (which ſhould correct thoſe deprauations and falſe expoſitions) is not firſt, by other markes, knowen and admitted.

A. W.

You would ſeeme to hauehave an eſpeciall gift of making things eaſie: by your markes the Church may eaſily be diſcerned: out of the former Chapter we may eaſily gather. But I thinke it wil prooue to be ſo eaſily gathered, that a weake man may eaſily make you loſe your labour in gathering.

That place of Auſtin doth ſo fit you Papiſts, as if he had ſpoken it of you by name. For to go no farther, then the matter in hand, who euer wreſted the Scriptures, more to their phantaſies, then you Papiſts, who are not aſhamed nor afraid to apply the moſt gracious and comfortable promiſes of our Sauiour Chriſt to his myſtical bodie the Church, to an heape of prophane misbeleeuers, ſo zzBellar. de Eccleſ mil. lib 3. cap. 10.they make outward profeſſion of the Goſpel in obedience to the Pope of Rome? It is enough, by your doctrine, to make a man a true member of the myſticall bodie of the Sonne of God, if he profeſſe, as I before ſaid, though he hauehave no part of the life of Ieſus Chriſt in him.

A. D. §. 2.

The doctrine of faith, therefore (I ſay) and the right vſe of p. 225Sacraments, be not good markes, whereby men may diſcerne which is the true Church.

This I prooue. Firſt, for that by the true doctrine of faith (which they aſſigne for a marke of the Church) either they meane, true doctrine in ſome points onelyonly, or in all. True doctrine in ſome points onelyonly, is no good marke, becauſe the heretickes teach the truth in ſome points. This therefore being not proper to the Church, but agreeing rather to heretickes, can be no good marke of the true Church: becauſe it wanteth the firſt condition of a marke, which is, to be proper, and agreeing onelyonly to the thing, whereof it is a marke. True doctrine alſo in all points, although it be proper (if we ioyne to it the right vſe of Sacraments, with obedience to lawfull Paſtors) and agree onelyonly to the true Church, yet it is no good marke: becauſe it faileth in the ſecond condition, which is requred in a good marke, that is to ſay, it is not apparent or eaſie to be knowen of all thoſe, who ſhould ſeeke out the true Church. As I may eaſily prooue, becauſe to know which companie teacheth the truth in all points, requireth first learning, whereby one may vnderſtand the tearmes, and ſtate of the queſtion, or controuerſie: beſides, iudgement to diſcuſſe and weigh prudently the worth and ſufficiencie of the authorities and reaſons of both parts, that vponupon this pondering of reaſons, he may prudently conclude which is the better part. Moreouer one had need to hauehave a ſupernaturall light of Gods grace and aſſiſtance of his ſpirit, whereby he may diſcerne and ſee thoſe things, which be aboue all naturall rules and reaſons. Ad haec quis idoneus? Who can ſay that himſelfe is ſufficiently furniſhed with theſe helpes? Who can be infallibly ſure, that he hath all theſe, in ſuch ſort, as is requiſite, for obtaining, by his owne induſtrie, true and infallible faith, in all points? Surely, at leaſt, the vnlearned muſt needs confeſſe, that in diuers myſteries, they do not ſo much as vnderſtand the tearmes & ſtate of the queſtion: & much leſſe are they able, to examine ſufficiētly the worth of eueryevery reaſon: neither are all ſuch as can perſwade themſelues, that they are ſingularly inlightened, and immediately taught of Gods ſpirit: neither, if they did thus perſwade themſelues, could they be vnfallibly ſure, that in this their perſwaſion they were not deceiued; ſith it is certaine, that ſome of them, that moſt ſtrongly perſwade themſelues to be thus taught, are in this their perſwaſion p. 226deceiued: neither can the vnlearned ſufficiently know the truth, in euerie particular point, by giuing credit to ſome one, or other learned man, or any companie of the learned: vnleſſe that company be firſt knowen, to be of the Church, and conſequently to be guided in their teaching, by the holy Ghoſt, as I prooued before. So that it is moſt hard or rather vnpoſſible for a man, and eſpecially for an vnlearned man, in all points, Liquidam à tot erroribus diſcernere Li. 3. con. Fauſt. cap. 13.veritatem, to diſcerne the plaine truth from ſo many errours, as S. Auſtin ſaith. It is alſo moſt hard for a man of himſelfe to iudge, which vſe of Sacraments is right, if he be not firſt taught by the Church: ſub this is a principall point of the true doctrine of faith, which is (as I ſaid) verie hard or rather vnpoſſible to be perfectly knowen by a mans owne ſelfe. But to know, firſt, which companie is the true Church: and then, by giuing credit to it, to learne which is the true faith, and which vſe of Sacraments is right, there are not ſo many things required, nor any great difficultie, as ſhall be declared. For the Church is that direct way, which Iſaias ſpeaketh of, when he ſaith: Haec erit vobis directa via, ita vt ſtulti non errent per eam. Iſa. cap. 35.Isa 35This ſhall be to you a direct way, ſo that euen fooles, (to wit ſimple and vnlearned men) may not erre in it.

A. W.

Theſe are the two onelyonly marks, whereby the true Church may be knowen, or to ſpeake more plainely, whereby we may iudge of any companie of men profeſſing Chriſtian Religion, whether they be a true Church of Chriſt or no. For the better vnderſtanding whereof, we muſt know, that howſoeuer we ioyne the Sacraments with the word, in this matter: yet we do not thinke them to be abſolutely of equall neceſſitie with it, to the being of a true Church. The true preaching of the word is ſo ſimply neceſſarie, that wherſoeuer it is, it maketh the Church, in which it is, a true Church of Chriſt: and wherſoeuer it is not, there is no true viſible Church. We denie not, that in time of perſecution, many true Chriſtians may be without opportunitie of meeting together, for the true worſhip of God in hearing his word, and calling vponupon his name, which alwaies accompanieth true preaching, and yet ſtill continue true members of Chriſts myſticall bodie the Church. But we ſay, that theſe men cannot be truly called ſuch a viſible Church of Chriſt p. 227as we now ſeeke for. Yet if theſe men ſhall ordinarily aſſemble themſelues together, to offer vp praier to God, and by mutuall conference to edifie each other in knowledge and obedience: thogh they hauehave no certaine miniſter appointed for the performance of theſe duties: there can no reaſon be alledgd, why they ſhould not be held for a true Church, though not perfect & complete; or why men ſhould not ioine with them, hauing no means to become members of any complete congregation, properly being a Church. The word then, in our opinion, is ſimply neceſſarie: and of it ſelfe ſufficient, (as aaLuther. de Concil. & eccl.Luther truly ſaith) where no other ſigne of a Church can be diſcerned, to conuince a mans conſcience, that there is a true Church, where he findeth the word truly preached. Now the adminiſtration of the Sacraments is not ſo neceſſarie, but that there may be a true Church without it, vponupon occaſion: as bbIoſ. 5. 5.Josh 5:5the Iewes had no circumciſion amongſt them, all the fortie yeares, when they trauelled through the wilderneſſe. The reaſon of this difference is aſſigned to be this: that the word is as it were, the cauſe efficient of the Church, ſo that without it, there can be no Church: but the Sacraments are only ſeals of Gods mercies, and helps for the increaſing of thoſe graces, which are receiued by the miniſterie of the word. Now theſe ſeales and helpes are not requiſite ſimply, to the being of that they ſeale & helpe vsus in, but onelyonly to the better being, and increaſe of them. But if I may be bold, with reuerence of other mens iudgement, to ſpeake my poore opinion, I think this reaſon ſheweth the different neceſſitie of the word, and the Sacraments, rather to the making of particular men true Chriſtians, thē to the giuing of this or that companie the true being of a viſible Church. And therefore (vnderunder correction) I would rather ſay, that the truth of doctrine deliuered in the miniſtery of the word, and praier are abſolutely neceſſary, & the adminiſtration of the Sacraments not ſo altogether: becauſe the former are ſuch parts of Gods ſeruice, as may and muſt alwaies be performed, when the Church is aſſembled, but the Sacraments, neither can alwaies, nor need, at all ſuch meetings, to be adminiſtred. Which we ſpeake not, as if the true vſe of the Sacraments, were not a neceſſarie part of Gods ſeruice, to be done, p. 228vponupon all opportunities, with reuerence and willingneſſe; but for that (as before I noted) there cannot be (at all times) ſuch opportunitie. Yea it may fall out, that in ſome true Church of Chriſt, there ſhall be no occaſion to adminiſter the Sacrament of Baptiſme in many yeares. This then is that, which we hold concerning the markes of a true Church: Firſt, that whereſoeuer we ſee the word of God truly taught, and the Sacraments truly adminiſtred, there we may be ſure, there is a true Church of Chriſt: Secondly, that whereſoeuer the former of theſe is wanting, there is no true Church, whatſoeuer ſhew, or marke otherwiſe there be. Thirdly, that whereſoeuer the word of God is truly preached, and accordingly profeſſed, there is a true Church, though the Sacraments vponupon occaſion as is aforeſaid, be not there adminiſtred: ſo that they be not neglected, vponupon any contempt, or erroneous conceit of their not being neceſſarie.

To diſprooue our doctrine, concerning the markes of the, or rather of a Church, you bring this reaſon.

If true doctrine be a marke of a true Church, then either true doctrine in ſome pointes, or true doctrine in all.

But neither true doctrine in ſome points, nor true doctrine in all, is a marke.

Therefore true Doctrine, is not at all a marke of a true Church.

I denie you Minor. True doctrine in all points is ſo certaine a To the aſſumption.marke of a true Church, that whereſoeuer we finde that, we may be ſure there is a true Church. But becauſe we enquire after ſuch a marke, as may not onelyonly aſſure vsus, which is a true Church, but alſo teach vsus to know euerie true Church: I anſwer more particularly, that true doctrine in ſome pointes, viz. ſuch as are fundamentall, is ſo neceſſarie a marke, as that there is no where any true Church, but where there is ſuch true doctrine; and that there is vndoubtedly a true Church, whereſoeuer that truth is taught and held.

Your Minor you prooue thus, firſt, that true doctrine in ſome points is no good marke.

p. 229That which is not proper to the true Church, but agrees rather Proofe of the Aſſumption.to heretickes, is no good marke of the true Church.

But true doctrine in ſome points onelyonly, is not proper to the true Church, but agreeth rather to heretickes.

Therefore true doctrine in ſome points onelyonly, is no good marke of the true Church.

Againe I denie your minor, taking it in the beſt ſenſe: for if I To the Aſſumption.ſhould take it in the worſt, your whole ſyllogiſme would be nothing to the purpoſe. My anſwer ſhall (I truſt) make both theſe points plaine to eueryevery man. I ſay then, that true doctrine in all the fundamentall points of religion, is proper to the Church: ſo that no hereticks hold all ſuch points, though ſome hauehave held many of them. Or if any companie do hold them all, and yet for ſome error in other points of leſſe moment, be counted, and be hereticall, their hereſie is not ſuch as may make them ceaſe to be members of a true Church, Thus much of your aſſumption in the beſt ſenſe.

By true doctrine in ſome points onelyonly, you may meane that it is not a propertie belonging to the true Church, to beleeue truly ſome points onelyonly, and not all: and this indeed is rather proper to heretickes, then the true Church, becauſe it is the dutie of all true Churches to beleeue all things that the Lord hath taught in the holy Scriptures; whereas hereticks take vp conceits of their owne, which they mingle with the truth of God, either ignorantly or deceitfully. I hauehave reaſon to ſuſpect this meaning, becauſe you thruſt in this word onelyonly. In this ſenſe your concluſion fighteth with a ſhadow. For we do not make it a marke of a true Church to beleeue ſome points onelyonly, but ſay it may be, and is a true Church, though it erre in ſome points, ſo it hold the fundamentall points ſoundly and truly.

This is the proofe of the ſecond part of your minor, that true doctrine in all points is not a good marke of the true Church: and it is thus concluded.

EueryEvery good marke of the true Church is apparent, or eaſie to be knowne of all thoſe who ſhould ſeeke out the true Church.

But true doctrine in all points is not apparent or eaſie to be known of all ſuch as ſhould ſeeke out the true Church.

p. 230Therefore true doctrine in all points, is no good marke of the true Church.

Your maior is falſe. It is not required that eueryevery good marke be To the propoſition.apparent or eaſie: if it may be at all found, though with difficulty and labour, that hardneſſe cannot hinder it from being a good marke. Do not your ſelfe acknowledge afterward, that there is ſome difficultie in learning to know which cōpanie is the true church, and which vſe of ſacraments is right? What elſe meane you, when you ſay, there are not ſo many things required, nor any great difficultie? Indeed (as I doubt not but to make it appeare) there is neuer a one of thoſe foure markes you aſſigne, but asketh great labour, and requires many things to the true and perfect knowledge of it. How then ſhould all foure be apparent or eaſie to be knowne? Yea, I will ſay more; ſome of them are ſuch, if not eueryevery one of them, that a man can neuer come to the certaine knowledge of them by any labour whatſoeuer. And therefore if this be a ſufficient exception againſt the doctrine and ſacraments, why they may not be markes, either you muſt deuiſe ſome eaſier and plainer markes then you hauehave yet propounded, or do propound any where in this treatiſe, or elſe there will be no certaine meanes to know which is a true church of Chriſt, and which is not.

The reſt of your long diſcourſe concerning this firſt proofe, To the Aſſumption.is ſpent in prouing that which no man euer denied, viz. in confirming your minor, that true doctrine in all points is not eaſie to be knowne: which we all grant, and ſo paſſe ouer to the next point of the ſacraments.

It is moſt hard (ſay you) for a man of himſelfe to iudge, which vſe of ſacraments is right. What meane you by ſaying of himſelfe? If he be not first taught by the Church: what needs this by the Church? It is hard indeed for a man of himſelf, without any teaching, to iudge of any ſuch matter: but it is not hard for any man of reaſonable vnderſtanding, to diſcerne by a little teaching, what is right in this point, what wrong. For he may eaſily learne with ſmall helpe, the inſtitution of both the Sacraments out of the Scriptures, wherein all things are ſet downe which belong neceſſarily to the right adminiſtration of them. As for matters p. 231of circumſtance, which appertaine not to the being of the ſacraments, a man ſhall not need to make any ſo great queſtion, whether they be rightly adminiſtred or no, as long as he ſeeth the ſubſtance kept whole & ſound, according to our Sauiors inſtitution: as if the ſacraments were not truly ſacramēts, and ſuch as may be taken, though ſome matters in the adminiſtration of them, be not ſo well ordered as they might and ought to be. That the ſacraments be in all ſubſtantiall points rightly adminiſtred, it is a matter of neceſſitie, whenſoeuer they be adminiſtred: and that may be iudged of, without giuing credit to whatſoeuer the church will teach in that behalfe: which is your teaching by the Church, and on which you ſtill harpe, though very vntuneably.

You fall now from ſimple diſprouing of our marke, by reaſon of the hardneſſe to know what is true doctrine in all points, to procure a diſlike of it, by comparing it with the eaſineſſe of yours: but of this I ſpake ſomewhat before, and muſt ſay more when I come to examine your marks, ſo much commended. In the meane while, I may not forget to ſhew the pooreneſſe of the proofe you alledge for this ſurmiſed eaſineſſe. The matter you vndertake to proue, is, that to know firſt which company is the true Church, and then by giuing credit to it, to learne which is the true faith, and which vſe of ſacraments is right, is a point of no great difficultie. This you would proue by that place of Iſay: This ſhal c Iſa. 35. 8.Isa 35:8be to you a direct way, ſo that euen fooles ſhall not erre in it. But what a weake proofe is this? Firſt, how ſhal I know that the Prophet ſpeaketh here of the Church? You ſay ſo. Would any man diſpute ſo looſly?

If the Church (ſay you) be that direct way I ſay ſpeaketh of, then to know firſt which companie of men is the true Church, and by giuing credit to them, to learne what doctrine, and what vſe of the ſacraments is right, is a point of no great difficultie.

But the Church is that way he ſpeaketh of.

Therefore to know firſt which company of men is the true church, is a point of no great difficultie.To the propoſition.

Firſt I denie the conſequence of your propoſition. For though p. 232the Church were that way the Prophet ſpeaketh of, yet might it ſtill be an hard matter to know where that way lieth. Put caſe I cannot miſſe when I am in the way; will it follow hereupon, that therefore it is a point of no difficultie to find it?

Secondly I denie your minor alſo: The Church is not that way. To the aſſumption.Was it not meere you ſhould hauehave proued a matter of ſo great importance? Your bare word is a poore proofe; and yet that is all you bring vsus. I omit the error of the tranſlation, and the varietie of tranſlations. There is a note ddEdit. vulgar. apud Vatabl.in the margine of your vulgar edition, as it is printed with Vatablus, that expoundeth the way to be Chriſt. Is not this interpretation of as great credite as your word? Vatablus ſpeaketh much to the ſame purpoſe. The way (ſaith eeVatabl. ad Iſa. 35.Isa 35he) that leadeth to God by Chriſt, ſhall be ſo certain, that euen they who hauehave no skill in trauelling, ſhall not ſtray out of it. Your ffGloſſ. interl. ibi.Gloſſe, by the way, vnderſtands the faith of Chriſt. And ſo doth ggTertul cont. Marcion. lib. 4 cap. 24.Tertullian, who alſo in the tranſlation differeth much from your vulgar. The meaning is (as theſe interpreters hauehave truly ſaid) that the doctrine of the Goſpell is a ſure and plaine way to life euerlaſting: in which way the ſimpleſt ſoule that beleeueth in Ieſus Chriſt, ſhall be ſafely conducted by God ſpiritually into heauen: as the Iſraelites (to which ſtory the Prophet ſeemes to allude) were guided by him corporally into the land of Canaan. This is that which the ſame Prophet ſpeaketh of in hhIſa. 30. 21.Isa 30:21an other place: Thine eares ſhal heare a word behind thee, ſaying, This is the way, walk ye in it. Whereby the gracious direction of God is ſignified, teaching his children by that ſpirit iiIer. 31. 31.Jer 31:31which he giues them, to go forward in the right way that leadeth to euerlaſting life. Who euer expounded theſe places of the Church?

A. D. §. 3.

Secondly I proue the ſame, becauſe when we ſeeke for the true Church, we ſeeke it principally for this end, that by it, as by a neceſſarie and infallible meanes, we may heare and learne of it the true faith in all points, which otherwiſe in itſelfe is hidden, obſcure and vnknowne to vsus: according to that of S. Paul: Animalis homonon 1 Cor. 2.1 Cor 2percipit ea quae ſunt Spiritus Dei: The ſenſuall man doth not perceiue thoſe things which are of the Spirit of God. For ſith none by the onelyonly power of naturall wit (which in vnderſtanding vſeth the helpe of outward ſenſes) can obtaine the ſupernaturall knowledge p. 233of diuine myſteries, which we beleeue by our faith: neither doth the Spirit of God (who as the principall cauſe, infuſeth this gift of faith into our ſoules) ordinarily inſtruct any man in the knowledge of true faith, immediatly by himſelfe alone, or by an Angell ſent from heauen: we muſt needs if we will hauehave true faith, ſeeke firſt for that which it pleaſeth Almightie God to vſe, as the ordinarie inſtrument and as a neceſſary meanes by which men may learne true faith; the which is no other but the preaching and teaching of the true church, according to that ſaying of S. Paul: Quomodo credent ei quem non audierint? quomodo audient ſine praedicante? quomodo Rom. 10.Rom 10praedicabunt niſi mittantur? How ſhall they beleeue him, whom they hauehave not heard? how ſhall they heare without a Preacher? how ſhall they preach, vnleſſe they be ſent? Therefore the true Church, which only hath preachers truly ſent of God, muſt first be found out, that by it we may heare and know which is the true faith. Therefore of the two, the true Church is rather a mark, whereby we may know the true preaching, and conſequently the true doctrine of faith, then contrarie, that (as heretickes ſay) the doctrine ſhould be a marke, whereby all men muſt know, which is the true Church.

A. W.

Belike, as you had good cauſe, you ſuſpected your abilitie, to proue ſimply, that the true preaching of the word in all matters fundamentall, and the right adminiſtration of the ſacraments, are not a good marke of a true Church. And therefore you rather choſe to proue, by way of compariſon, that the true church is rather a marke to know true doctrine, then true doctrine a marke to know the true Church by. For ſo runs your concluſion directly.

If the end of ſeeking the true Church (ſay you) be principally, that we may by it, as a neceſſarie and infallible meanes, learne true doctrine in all points, to which otherwiſe we cannot attaine, then the true Church is rather a marke to know true doctrine, then true doctrine a marke to know the true Church by.

But the end of ſeeking the true Church, is principally that we may by it, as a neceſſarie and infallible meanes, learne true doctrine in all points, which otherwiſe wee cannot attaine to.

p. 234Therefore the true Church is rather a marke to know true doctrine, then true doctrine a marke to know the Church by.

Though the concluſion as I ſaid, be not directly to the queſtion, To the Syllogiſme.which is not comparatiue but ſimple, whether true doctrine be a good mark to diſcerne a true Church by, or no: yet I will take it as it is, and anſwer to the parts of it.

Your maior in the antecedent may hauehave a double meaning: Firſt, that we cannot in any point learne true doctrine but by To the propoſition.the Church; and then I denie the conſequence. For true doctrine in the fundamentall points of Religion may be a good marke of the true Church, though we ſeeke the true Church, becauſe there are many points which we cannot learne without it.

But howſoeuer you vnderſtand the maior, the minor is euidently To the Aſſumption.falſe. Firſt, becauſe the principall end of ſeeking the true Church, is, that we may truly worſhip God in the aſſembly of his children, to his greater glorie, and our farther aſſurance of his louelove to vsus; as we may ſee kkPſal. 42. 1. 2. & 47. 5. 6. & 48. 8. 9. & 84. 1. 2. 10.Ps 42:1Ps 42:2Ps 47:5Ps 47:6Ps 48:8Ps 48:9Ps 84:1Ps 84:2Ps 84:10eueryevery where in the booke of the Pſalmes. Secondly, becauſe we are not to learne of the true Church, as a neceſſarie and infallible meanes, but of the miniſters thereof, who are appointed by God to giuegive vsus knowledge of the meanes of ſaluation, by expounding the word of God to vsus; not to binde vsus to beleefe, by their authoritie.

Your minor you offer to proue in this maner.

If no man without faith can obtaine the ſupernaturall knowledge of diuine mysteries, and faith be not to be had, but by the teaching of the true Church; then the end of ſeeking the true Church, is principally that we may learne by it, as a neceſſarie and infallible meanes, true doctrine in all points, to which otherwiſe we cannot attaine.

But no man without faith can obtaine the ſupernaturall knowledge of diuine myſteries: nor faith be had, but by the teaching of the true Church.

Therefore the end of ſeeking the true Church, is principally that we may by it, as a neceſſary and infallible meanes, learne the true faith in all points, to which otherwiſe we cannot attaine.

p. 235The conſequence of your maior is naught. It doth not follow, To the propoſition.that we ſeeke the true Church, to learne of it as a neceſſary and infallible meanes; becauſe we cannot know the myſteries of Religion without faith, which commeth by the teaching of the true Church: For there may well be teaching and learning, without any ſuch authoritie in the Church that teacheth.

Your minor is very doubtfull, as I will ſhew in anſwering ſeuerally To the Aſſumption.to the parts of it.

Firſt then, whereas you ſay, that no man without faith can obtaine the ſupernaturall knowledge of diuine myſteries: if you meane that a man cannot acknowledge the truth of ſuch myſteries without faith, your minor in that part is true: but if your meaning be, that a man cannot vnderſtand what the meanes of ſaluation appointed by God, are, without faith; I take your minor to be falſe. For though thoſe meanes be indeed ſuch, as no diſcourſe of man euer could deuiſe or thinke on, being vtterly ſupernaturall, yet it is poſſible for a meere naturall man to learne what they are out of the Scriptures, and that without faith: becauſe the Scriptures may be vnderſtood by ſuch helpes of the tongues and arts as humane learning doth affoord vsus; though to the ſauing knowledge thereof, the eſpeciall grace of God be abſolutely neceſſarie.

The other point, that faith cannot be found but by the teaching of the true Church, may alſo hauehave a double ſenſe. The firſt, that faith cannot be wrought in any mans heart but by the preaching of ſome man authorized to that purpoſe by the true Church: and this as I ſhewed before, is not alwayes true: for faith may be, and hath bene begotten in ſome by llChap. 3.the reading of the Scriptures, where the miniſtery of the word was not to be had; and by the teaching of ordinarie Chriſtians, not ſet apart to preach the Goſpell. The other meaning is this, that faith cannot be attained to, but by our hearkning to the voyce of ſuch a Preacher as we alreadie know to be ſent by the true Church. And this indeed ſpecially fits your purpoſe, but hath no likelihood of truth in it. For they that came to faith by the Apoſtles preaching, did not beleeue them as men autorized for their inſtruction by the true church, p. 236but as being conuinced in their conſciences by the euidence of the truth they deliuered, without any regard or knowledge of their being ſent by the true Church.

This weake minor of yours is vnderpropt in each part with a pillar of the holy Scripture: the former thus.

No ſenſuall man can obtaine the knowledge of diuine mysteries.

EueryEvery man without faith is a ſenſuall man.

Therefore no man without faith can obtaine the knowledge of diuine myſteries.

If by obtaining the knowledge of diuine myſteries, you meane aſſenting To the ſyllogiſme.to the truth of God concerning ſaluation, I grant your whole ſyllogiſme: and in this ſenſe it was needleſſe to proue that part of your minor.

In the other ſenſe, that a man cannot attaine to the knowledge of them but by faith, which the words manifeſtly import, I denie To the propoſition.the maior, for the reaſon before alledged: but whatſoeuer your meaning be, the mm1. Cor. 2. 14. Anſelmus. ibi.1 Cor 2:14Apoſtle ſaith no more, but that a naturall man, without the grace of God, can neither once imagine any ſuch meanes of ſaluation (and other there is none) nor acknowledge thoſe meanes as true and ſufficient. Of the former, the Apoſtle ſpeakes in the ninth verſe, affirming that the means of ſaluation prepared by God for men, are ſuch as neither eye verſ. 9.hath ſeen, nor eare hath heard, nor euer entred into any mans heart. Of the latter is the place alledged by you, where the word ſignifieth verſ. 14.rather an approuing and nnforeign.receiuing, then a perceiuing: and the ſpirituall man, whom he there oppoſeth to the naturall, is ſaid to diſcerne of ſpirituall things, rather by acknowledging the verſ. 15.truth of them, then by vnderſtanding the meaning of the word preached concerning them.

Your tranſlation (which I touched before) where you terme hominem animalem, a ſenſuall man, is ſenſleſſe. For who knowes not, that by a ſenſuall man, we meane a voluptuous man, giuen vp to his pleaſures and ſenſualitie? But the Apoſtle ſpeakes not of ſuch onelyonly, but euen of the wiſeſt and moſt vertuous that euer were amongſt men, without grace: ſo that in his meaning, as well temperate Xenocrates and learned Ariſtotle (called for his knowledge ooNaturae genius.natures darling) vertuous p. 237Socrates and wiſe Solon, as Sardanapalus, Therſites, Nero, and ſuch like, are naturall men: that is, ſuch as hauehave no grace of God, but that ſhadow of it, which remaineth in all men, by nature; and is helped by education and humane learning. It is true, that ppFernel. Phyſiol. lib. 4. c…. 7.Animalis & naturalis, is not all one in nature: yet doth Naturall better expreſſe the Apoſtles meaning, then ſenſuall; and generally, qqAuguſt. de nat. & gra. Sotus de nat. & gra.all writers hauehave made an oppoſition, in this ſenſe, betwixt Nature and Grace, not betwixt Senſualneſſe and Grace: as you may ſee throughout Auſtins, Proſpers, Ieromes, and your owne Schoolemens writings. Neither will it helpe the matter to ſay (as you doe) that Naturall wit in vnderſtanding vſeth the helpe of outward ſenſes. For ſenſuall ſignifieth not him that vſeth his ſenſes, to the vnderſtanding of this or that, but him that is drowned in Senſualitie. Beſides, naturall wit doth not vſe the helpe of the outward ſenſes, alwaies in vnderſtanding; yea, there are many, and the moſt excellent pointes of Philoſophie, in which, Senſe hath nothing to doe, as in the diſcourſe of Reaſon, and the knowledge of Logicke; with all thoſe hard, and worthie Queſtions of the Soule, and of God himſelfe, as farre as they are to be conceiued of, by the light of nature. If you will ſay, that we learne theſe things, partly by reading and hearing: I aunſwer, both that we finde out many things in Philoſophie, of our ſelues by ſtudie, without anie helpe of Senſe (which rather is an hinderance to the ſoule in the ſearch of ſuch pointes,) and alſo, that the knowledge we hauehave of diuine myſteries, is firſt brought to vsus, and continually increaſed in vsus, by the ſame Senſes of ſeeing and hearing: elſe were your Church as good be without thoſe preachers you ſo much brag of.

The other part of your Minor, that faith cannot be had, but by the teaching of the true Church, you prooue, or rather endeauour to prooue in this ſort.

If no man can beleeue without he heare, nor heare without one preach, and no man can preach except he be ſent, then Faith cannot be had, but by the teaching of the true Church.

p. 238But no man can beleeue, without he heare, nor heare without one preach, and no man can preach, without he be ſent.

Therefore faith cannot be had, but by the teaching of the true Church.

I denie the conſequence of your Maior, and affirme that faith may be had without the teaching of the true Church, though To the propoſition.no man can beleeue without he heare, &c. For rrChap. 3.I hauehave ſhewed that ſome countries hauehave bene brought to beleefe without any ſuch teaching by authoritie from the true Church. I alſo referre the Reader to my anſwer to your Minor.

That place of the Apoſtle concerneth not the ordinarie miniſterie To the Aſſumption.of the word, but the knowledge of the means of ſaluation: which (as ſſRom. 10. 14.Rom 10:14the Apoſtle truly ſaith) could neuer hauehave bene thought on by any man, if it had not pleaſed God, to giuegive notice thereof to the world, by men appointed and authoriſed to that purpoſe by himſelfe. But of this place and matter I ſpake ſufficiently before, in this, and ttChap. 3.in a former chapter.

A. D. §. 4.

Thirdly, true faith is included in the true Church, and as it were encloſed in her belly; as Saint Auſtin ſaith, vponupon thoſe words of the Pſalme, Errauerunt ab vtero, loquuti ſunt falſa. In ventre Eccleſiae In Pſal. 57.Ps 57(ſaith he) veritas manet; quiſquis ab hoc ventre ſeparatus fuerit, neceſſe eſt, vt falſa loquatur. Truth remaineth in the belly of the Church, whoſoeuer is ſeparated (to wit by difference in doctrine) from this belly of the Church, muſt needs ſpeake falſe. Therefore like as, if a man had Gold in his belly, we muſt firſt finde the man, before we can come to ſee the gold it ſelfe: ſo we must firſt by other markes, finde out the true Church, which hath the gold of true faith, hidden in her belly, before we come to ſee the gold of true faith it ſelfe. Sith eſpecially, we cannot ſee it, vnleſſe ſhe open her mouth, and deliuer it vntounto vsus, and that we cannot (being ſpiritually blinde) certainely know it to be true, and not counterfeit, but by giuing credit to her teſtimonie of it. According as the ſame Saint Auſtin ſaith, Euangelio non crederem, niſi me Eccleſiae authoritas commouerer. I ſhould not beleeue the Goſpell Lib. con. Ep. Fund. cap. 5.it ſelfe, vnleſſe I were mooued by the authoritie of the Church. For if we had not the teſtimonie of the Church, how ſhould p. 239we hauehave bene infallibly ſure, that there were any Goſpell at all? Or how ſhould we hauehave knowen, that thoſe bookes, which …eare title of the Goſpell, according to Saint Mathew, Marke, Luke, and Iohn, are true Canonicall Scripture; rather then thoſe bookes, which are written in the name of Nicodemus, and Saint Thomas, bearing the ſame title or inſcription of Goſpell?

A. W.

Your third reaſon is thus to be framed.

That which is ſhut vp in the belly of the Church, ſo that we cannot ſee it, vnleſſe ſhe open her mouth, and deliuer it to vsus, nor certainely know it to be true, but by giuing credit to her teſtimonie of it, is not a good marke to know the true Church by.

But true doctrine is ſo ſhut vp in the belly of the Church, that we cannot ſee it, vnleſſe ſhe open her mouth, and deliuer it to vsus, nor certainly know it to be true, but by giuing credit to her teſtimonie of it.

Therefore true doctrine is no good marke to know the true Church by.

Your Minor is falſe, in both parts of it. Firſt, it is vntrue, To the Aſſumption. Part. 1.that true doctrine is ſo ſhut vp in the belly of the Church: yea many a true Church may hold ſome errors, and many an hereticall Church ſome truth; onelyonly the fundamentall points are neceſſarie to the being of a true Church. Secondly though true doctrine be in the belly of the Church, as indeed there is no true Church, in which it is not: yet is it not ſo ſhut vp in it, as you imagine. For it is firſt and principally in the Scriptures, where it may be found without any ſuch authoritie of the Church, as you dreame of: yea I hauehave ſhewed, that the Apoſtles themſelues did not beget faith in the hearts of them, to whom they preached, by any authoritie of the Church, but by euidence of the truth it ſelfe, which they taught. Concerning your proofe from uuAuguſt. in Pſalm. 57.Ps 57Auſtins authoritie; I firſt anſwer, that he expoundeth not that place according to the literal meaning of the Prophet, who ſpeaketh not of any belly of the Church, but ſaith that thoſe lewd men, of whom he ſpeaketh, hauehave alwaies bene giuen to naughtineſſe, from their mothers wombe. Theſe wicked ones xxVatablus ibi,(ſaith Vatablus) hauehave gone aſtray euer ſince, they came forth of the womb, they p. 240they hauehave erred, euer ſince they were borne. Yea Auſtin himſelfe, as your yyAuguſt. in Gloſſ. interlin.Gloſſe ſaith, ſometimes expoundeth it otherwiſe then here: God (ſaith Auſtin (foreknew ſinners, euen from the wombe: as he ſaid to Rebecca. So doth zzHieron. ad Pſal. 57. &Ps 57Ierome alſo vnderſtand it; ſo aaTheodoret. ibi.Theodoret. But let vsus take it, as Saint Auſtin doth here myſtically expound it: what will you prooue by it? That truth is ſo ſhut vp in the belly of the Church, that we cannot ſee it, vnleſſe ſhe deliuer it by her mouth? There is no ſuch word in him, no ſuch thing to be gathered out of him. His concluſion is, that therefore they, which differ from the true Church in doctrine, are in error: which is certainly true, concerning fundamentall points, and verie probable, in all other points whatſoeuer.

The other part of your Minor is, that true doctrine is ſo ſhut vp 2. Part.within the Church, that we cannot certainly know it to be true, but by giuing credit to her teſtimonie of it. For the diſproouing whereof, it ſhall be ſufficient, to call to minde that, which I hauehave often anſwered, concerning thoſe who beleeued by the Apoſtles miniſterie, without any conſideration or thought of their being ſent by the true Church: but onelyonly being conuinced by the manifeſt truth of that which they deliuered, concerning forgiueneſſe of ſinne by our Sauiour Ieſus Chriſt.

Your proofe out of Auſtin is inſufficient, as it may appeare in this ſort.

If Auſtin ſay, that he ſhould not beleeue the Goſpell, vnleſſe he were mooued by the authoritie of the Church, then true doctrine is ſo ſhut vp within the Church, that we cannot certainly know it to be true, but by giuing credit to her teſtimonie of it.

But Auſtin ſaith ſo.

Therefore true doctrine is ſo ſhut vp in the Church, that we cannot certainly know it to be true, but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it.

I denie the conſequence of your Maior. Firſt, becauſe (as To the propoſition.bbAuguſt. cont. Creſcon. lib. 2. cap. 31.Auſtin himſelfe ſaith of Cyprian) we are not bound by the authoritie of Auſtins iudgement, as if his writings were Canonicall. We do Cyprian no wrong (ſaith Auſtin) when we diſtinguiſh his p. 241writings whatſoeuer they be, from the Canonicall authoritie of the diuine Scriptures. And againe, I take not Cyprians writings for Canonicall, but conſider of them according to the Canonicall: and allow of that, with his commendation, which agreeth to Scripture, but, by his leaue, refuſe that which diſagreeth from Scripture. This minde carried ccAuguſt. ad Fortun. epiſt. 111.Auſtin to other mens writings, this minde he deſired other men ſhould carrie to his. Secondly, I denie the ſame conſequence, becauſe Auſtin might be mooued, by the authoritie of the Church, to acknowledge the Goſpell for true, and yet, without the ſame authoritie, learne out of the Goſpell ſo acknowledged, which is true doctrine, which falſe.

Concerning Auſtins teſtimonie, firſt, it is manifeſt, that he To the Aſſumption.deliuereth not a rule, for all men to follow, as if by ſhould not beleeue he meant, that a man ought not to beleeue the Goſpell; nor ſheweth an impoſſibilitie of beleeuing it, vnleſſe a man be moued, by the authoritie of the Church: but at the moſt, declareth, that the authoritie of the Church, preuailed with him ſo farre, as to make him acknowledge the Goſpell for true, which elſe he had either not knowne, or doubted of. Secondly, it is obſerued according to the reſt of his writings, that the Latine word he vſeth, in the African dialect, ſignifieth Had not beleeued: ſo that the ſenſe is, I had not beleeued the Goſpell, as the truth of God, if the authoritie of the Church, had not moued me thereunto. The firſt motiue was the authoritie, that is, the learning, conſent, holineſſe of ſo many worthie men, as from time to time had held, and did hold the Goſpell, to be the truth of God. VponUpon this ground Auſtin gaue himſelfe to the ſtudie of the Scriptures, and by the euidence of truth deliuered in it, diſcerned that it was the word of God, according to the report and reputation commonly held of it. This ſenſe agreeth with Auſtins purpoſe, who to refute the Manichees, that tooke their maſter Manes for the Apoſtle of Chriſt, thus reaſoneth againſt them. I beleeue not (ſaith Auſtin) that he is Chriſts Apoſtle, and then demaundeth of the Manichee what courſe he would take to prooue it to him. Perhaps (ſaith he) you will read the Goſpell to me, and aſſay to prooue Manichaeus perſon out of it: But what p. 242if you ſhould light vponupon one, that doth not yet beleeue the Goſpell? Then follow the words alledged by you, I truly had not beleeued the Goſpell, if the authoritie of the Church had not moued me. This is yet more cleare, by that which Auſtin writeth afterward. Firſt (ſaith he) we beleeue, that which yet we cannot diſcerne, that being made ſtronger in faith, we may attaine to the vnderſtanding of that we do beleeue, not men now, but God himſelfe, confirming & enlightening our minde within. But howſoeuer we vnderſtand it, Auſtin ſpeaketh not of true doctrine ſhut vp in the Church, ſo that it cannot be knowne to be true, but by giuing credit to the Churches teſtimonie, which is the point in queſtion: but onelyonly of acknowledging the Goſpell, to be the word of God. Now the ſame Church, or partie, which aſſureth vsus, that the Goſpell is true, may notwithſtanding erre in the meaning of ſome points in it; and a man may diſcerne theſe errours, by the light, which ſhineth in the Scriptures, thus acknowledged.

Firſt it is here confeſſed by your ſelfe, that Auſtins ſpeach is not of all fundamentall points of true doctrine, but onelyonly, (as I ſaid) of knowing the Scripture to be the word of God: for ſo onelyonly you reaſon out of it, and thereby ſhew plainly to all, that will ſee, that it cannot prooue the matter, for which you brought it. Secondly you proceed farther to prooue the point by an other reaſon, but faultie like the former.

If (ſay you) without the teſtimonie of the Church, we could not hauehave bene infallibly ſure, that there is any Goſpell at all, nor hauehave knowne that the Goſpels of Matthew, Marke, Luke, and Iohn, are true Canonicall Scripture, rather then thoſe of Nicodemus and Saint Thomas; then we cannot know true doctrine to be true, but by giuing credit to the Churches teſtimonie of it.

But we could not hauehave knowne thoſe things without the teſtimonie of the Church.

Therefore we cannot know true doctrine to be true, but by giuing credit to the Churches teſtimonie of it.

A man that is ſo full of his compound ſyllogiſmes, as you To the propoſition.are, might learne to make better conſequences in his Maior, p. 243then you commonly bring vsus. Let vsus grant you, that we could not know that there is any Goſpell, or which is the Goſpell, without the teſtimonie of the Church. All that will follow thereupon, is this, that we cannot know theſe two points of doctrine to be true, without giuing credit to the teſtimonie of the Church. Yea if I were diſpoſed to trouble you, I would yet farther denie your ſaid conſequence, becauſe though we cannot know theſe matters, without the Churches teſtimonie: yet we might know them without reſting vponupon the Churches authoritie. For the teſtimonie of the Church may be had by the miniſterie thereof, without any ſuch abſolute authoritie of enioyning beleefe, or giuing credit to that ſhe affirmeth, as an vndoubted truth.

This Minor, as the former in this chapter, conſiſteth of two To the aſſumption. Part. 1.parts, and is falſe in both of them, as I will ſhew particularly. Firſt you ſay, that without the teſtimonie of the Church, we could not hauehave bene infallibly ſure, that there is any Goſpell. Your meaning is, that we could not hauehave knowne this certainely, but by giuing credit to the report of the Church, as a certaine truth. Firſt, for the doctrine of the Goſpell to ſaluation, it hath bene had, and may be had without any teſtimonie of the Church at all: taking the teſtimonie of the Church as you do, for the preaching of men publickly authoriſed to this dutie, by a companie of men ſo qualified, as you before deſcribe your Church. I ſhall need no better proofe, then to put you in minde againe of thoſe nations, many and great, who attained to faith and ſaluation, by the teaching of the Apoſtles ſeuerally, without any ſuch argument of the Churches abſolute authority. Secondly taking the Goſpell, for the 4. bookes of the Euangeliſts, I anſwer, that there may be true faith & true Churches, without the knowledge of thoſe bookes, yea without the verie being of them: as it is manifeſt by the former example, many thouſands being conuerted, and many Churches ſetled, without the knowledge, and before the publiſhing, or penning of them. But to come to the verie point, I anſwer further, that it is a groſſe abſurditie to make men beleeue, that there can be no certaine knowledge had, that there is any Goſpell, but by giuing credit to the p. 244Church: whereas no man can know, that there is any ſuch authoritie in the Church, or any Church at all, but by the authoritie of the Scripture. It is more then ridiculous for me to beleeue, that there is a companie of men infallibly taught of God, which is the truth, with authority to enioyne obedience to all men, in whatſoeuer they will teach, if I hauehave no better proofe of it, then their owne word. For ſince God hath indued man with reaſon, it is both ſimpleneſſe and ſinne for him, to beleeue that, which is vtterly againſt the light of reaſon, if he hauehave no warrant from God ſo to do. But warrant he can hauehave none, to beleeue ſuch a conceit of any company, but from the ſcriptures; as it is euident by your own ddChap. 5.courſe, who make a place of ſcripture the ground of your whole diſputation. Therefore whereas you teach men firſt to know the Church, and then by the Church, the Scriptures; we ſay this courſe is vtterly vnwarrantable, hauing no foundation, either in reaſon or reuelation. Yea contrariwiſe we truly affirme, that the Scripture muſt firſt be knowne, at the leaſt in that point, of the authoritie of the Church; and then the Church by the Scripture. And this is Auſtins iudgement directly. Let vsus not heare (ſaith eeAuguſt. de vnit. Eccleſ. cap. 3.Eccl 3he) this I ſay, this you ſay, but let vsus heare, this ſaith the Lord. There are the Lords bookes, to the authoritie of which both of vsus conſent, both of vsus giuegive credit, both of vsus yeeld obedience: there let vsus ſeek the Church, there let vsus diſcuſſe our question. And afterward, I will not hauehave the Church to be ſhewed by mens doctrines, but by the Oracles of God. And againe, ffChap. 16.Let vsus ſeeke the Church in the Canonicall Scriptures. The like ſpeeches are euerie where in that booke. Whether we be ſchiſmaticks, or you (ſaith the ſame ggAuguſt. cont. lib. Petil. lib. 2. cap. 85.Auſtin) let neither you, nor me, but Chriſt be asked, that he may ſhew vsus his Church. But where ſhall we know, what our Sauiour ſaith concerning his Church, and how he would hauehave it knowne, but in the Scriptures? Yet I denie not that the miniſterie of men is neceſſarie to giuegive notice, that there are certaine bookes, in which it hath pleaſed God, to reueale the meanes of ſaluation to mankinde; though I acknowledge not any authority in the Church, whereby men ſhould be bound to beleeue this their report, when as yet they are ignorant, that there is any ſuch Church. p. 245You will ſay then, what ſhall we doe? or how ſhall we know that there is any Goſpell? If you will giuegive me leaue, I will ſhew you what courſe is to be takē. When you vnderſtand that there hath bin, and is ſtill an opinion, that there are certaine bookes written by Gods authoritie and appointment, to teach men the way to ſaluation, do as any reaſonable man would do, in a matter of ſuch importance. Get the bookes, reade and ſtudie them, with a true deſire to ſee whether they be ſuch as they are reported to be, or no. And becauſe thou knoweſt by nature that there is a God, and that he onelyonly is all-ſufficient to diſcouer the truth of his owne purpoſe, touching the eſtate of his creature, call vponupon him, though in ignorance and weakneſſe, that it would pleaſe him to direct thee in this enquiry after the means of thy ſaluation or happineſſe. This done, thou ſhalt be ſure to find, by the euidence of truth manifeſted in thoſe bookes, that they are ſent from God, and not deuiſed by man. If thou liue in ſuch a place as affoordeth the interpretation of theſe bookes by the miniſtery of men, vſe that ſingular bleſſing of God with reuerence and care to vnderſtand, and thou ſhalt by the mercifull teaching of God, acknowledge theſe books to be the word of God, ordained for the ſaluation of thy ſelfe and other. This (will ſome man ſay) may perhaps breed a perſwaſion, that theſe bookes are from God, but how ſhall we come to be infallibly ſure of it? How elſe, but by the worke of the ſpirit of God in thy heart? What (ſay you) muſt we runne to reuelations? hh1. Cor. 2. 10.1 Cor 2:10Who knowes the ſecrets of God, but the ſpirit of God? The truth it ſelfe diſcerned by that light which the ſpirit kindleth in our hearts, worketh aſſurance of beleefe; to which the teſtimonie of the ſpirit is added for our further confirmation. Neither is this any other reuelation, then you Papiſts require in this caſe. For according to your doctrine, no man can be perſwaded infallibly of the truth of the Scripture, either for the text, or the interpretation, but by the eſpeciall teaching of the ſpirit: otherwiſe he hath not faith, but opinion of theſe matters. iiSee my anſwer to 12. art. part. 1. art. 3.OnelyOnly herein ſtands the difference betwixt vsus, that you ſay, the argument whereby the ſpirit perſwades vsus to acknowledge the Scripture, is the authoritie of the Church: we affirme it is the euidence of truth, p. 246which he makes vsus to diſcerne, by our vnderſtanding enlightened, and to approue by our will thereto inclined, through his mightie and gracious worke vponupon our ſoules.

The ſecond part of your minor, is, that we could not hauehave Part. 2.knowne the Gospels of the foure Euangeliſts to be canonicall Scripture, rather then thoſe of Nicodemus and Thomas, if we had not the teſtimonie of the Church. Of the falſneſſe of which opinion, I ſhall need to ſay little, becauſe it is refuted in my anſwer to the former part. For this knowledge is not bred in vsus by reſting vponupon the Churches authoritie, but by yeelding to the euidence of the truth, diſcouered to our hearts by the teaching of the holy Ghoſt. Concerning the authoritie of the Church in this point, it were a preſumptuous and vnreaſonable thing for any man (without very good proof, or great likelihood of reaſon) to deny or doubt of that which hath bin auouched ſo many yeares by the whole Chriſtian world. But to make queſtion of the bookes of Scripture, whether they be the word of God or no, and to denie that there is any meanes to know them for ſuch, but the authoritie of the Church, is the next way to open a gap to Atheiſme, & to lay open Religion to the ſcorne of the world. Can I not know the Scripture to be of God, but by the authoritie of the Church? How ſhal I then know it at all, ſince it is not reaſonable to beleeue there is any Church that hath ſuch authoritie, but by the warrant of the Scripture? They do all they can, to turne reaſonable creatures into beaſts, who teach vsus, that we muſt beleeue the Church cannot erre, becauſe the Scripture ſaith ſo: and yet denie that we can know there is any Scripture but by beleeuing it, becauſe the Church ſaith ſo. This is to dance in a circle, as if a man were coniured, that he could not get out of it. How ſhall I know there is a Church? by the Scripture. How ſhall I know there are any Scriptures? by the Church. Would your proud Clergie thus make fooles of Chriſtian men, if they did not deſpiſe them, as voyd of all reaſon? I wonder how your Pope, Cardinals, Biſhops, and the reſt of your Cleargie, can for beare laughing when they looke one vponupon another, and remember how they coſen, and (if I may vſe the word in a matter of ſuch importance) gull the world with ſuch palpable p. 247fooleries. But kkReuel. 17. 2Rev 17:2your ſtrumpet of Babylon hath made the Kings of the earth, and all nations drunke with the cup of her fornications, exalting her ſelfe aboue all that is called God, and making her ſelfe llGloſs. ad extra. Ioan. 22. de verb. ſignif. cap. quum inter.the God of her ſlauiſh vaſſals. But the Lord is iuſt, who (according to mm2. Theſſ 2. a 12 Thess 2the Apoſtles prophefie) hath ſent the world ſtrong deluſions, that they ſhould beleeue lies, that all they might be damned which beleeued not the truth, but had pleaſure in vnrighteouſneſſe. And certainly if there were not a great meaſure of 12. blindneſſe and ſottiſhneſſe in the hearts of men, that Gods purpoſe might take effect, it were vnpoſſible that reaſonable men ſhould ſo be lead by the noſe to errour and deſtruction.

A. D. §. 5.

Fourthly, if the true doctrine of faith, in all particular points, muſt be foreknowne as a marke, whereby to know the true Church, then (contrarie to that which hath bin proued) the authoritie of the Church ſhould not be a neceſſarie meanes whereby men muſt come to the knowledge of the true faith. For if before we come to know which is the true Church, we muſt by an other meanes, hauehave knowne which is the true faith; what need then is there, for getting true faith already had, to ſeeke or bring in the authoritie of the ſame Church?

A. W.

This fourth reaſon and the next, labour to proue that part of your firſt aſſumptiō in this Chapter, which we deny not, that the true doctrine of faith in eueryevery particular point, is not a good marke of the Church. It would therefore be but loſt labour to ſpend much time in the examining of them; yet ſomewhat I muſt ſay, and firſt to the former.

If the true doctrine of faith in all particular points, muſt be foreknowne, as a marke to know the true Church by: then is not the autoritie of the true Church a neceſſary meanes to know the true doctrine of faith by.

But the authoritie of the true Church is a neceſſary meanes to know the true faith by.

Therefore the true doctrine of faith muſt not be foreknowne in all particular points, as a marke to know the true Church by.

Your concluſion is no more then we grant; the conſequence p. 248To the Syllogiſme.of your maior, about which you take ſome paines, needs not your helpe for the proofe of it. Your minor is falſe. That which you brought before to prooue it, before was anſwered.

A. D. §. 6.

Fiftly, if before we giuegive abſolute and vndoubted credit to the true Church, we muſt examine and iudge whether eueryevery particular point of doctrine which it holdeth, be the truth, with authoritie to accept that onelyonly which we like, or which ſeemeth in our conceit right and conformable to Scripture, and to reiect whatſoeuer we miſlike, or which in our priuate iudgement ſeemeth not ſo right and conformable: then we make our ſelues examiners and iudges ouer the church; and conſequently we preferre our liking or diſliking, our iudgement and cenſure of the interpretation and ſenſe of Scripture, before the iudgement and cenſure of the Church of God. But it is abſurd both in reaſon and religion, to preferre the iudgement of any priuate man (be he neuer ſo wittie and learned, or neuer ſo ſtrongly perſwaded in his owne minde, that he is taught by the Spirit) before the iudgement and definitiue ſentence of the Church of God; the which is a companie of men, many of which, both are, and alwayes hauehave bene, vertuous, wiſe and learned, and (which is chiefe) is ſuch a companie, as according to the abſolute and infallible promiſes of our Sauiour, hath vndoubtedly the holy ſpirit among them, guiding them and teaching them all truth, and not permitting them to erre, as before hath bin proued.

A. W.

There is the ſame fault in this fift argument which was in the former, that it is brought to proue a propoſition, which we denie not.

If before we giuegive abſolute credit to the Church, we must iudge whether eueryevery particular point it holdeth be true or no, then we may make our ſelues iudges ouer the true Church.

But we may not make our ſelues iudges ouer the true Church.

Therefore we muſt not iudge whether eueryevery particular point the Church holdeth, be true or no, before we giuegive abſolute credit to the Church.

This concluſion ſuppoſeth that which can neuer be proued, To the ſyllogiſme.that we are, firſt or laſt, to giuegive abſolute credit to the Church: whereof in this Chapter there is no queſtion. The point p. 249you vndertake to diſproue, is, that the true doctrine of faith, in eueryevery particular point, is a good marke of a true Church. This therfore you ſhould hauehave concluded, though indeed it make nothing againſt our opinion, who require not for a marke of the true Church, truth of doctrine in eueryevery point, but in all points fundamentall.

Your propoſition is deceitfully propounded, as if we granted Of the ſyllogiſme.a companie to be the true Church, and yet would take vponupon vsus to receiue and reiect what we liſt: whereas we hold that we cannot acknowledge any true Church, but we muſt withall yeeld, that it maintaineth all ſubſtantiall points of Religion, from which we may not vary. Secondly, for a man to make himſelfe iudge ouer the Church, is to take authoritie vponupon him to cenſure, reproue and condemne the Church: wheras all that we deſire, is, that it may be free for vsus to diſcerne that the doctrine held by this or that Church, is agreeable to the Scriptures, before we acknowledge it to be a true Church.

It is meere abſurd and vnreaſonable, to prefer any priuate To the Aſſumption.mans iudgement before the definitiue ſentence of the church of God. But it is agreeable both to reaſon and Religion, that eueryevery priuate man, whoſe ſaluation lieth vponupon his true or falſe beleeuing, ſhould conſider whether that which he is enioyned by men to beleeue, be warrantable by the word of God or no. nnMat. 15. 14.Matt 15:14The Scribes and Phariſes were the leaders of the people in the matters of Religion, yet were they blinde guides: and the blind people, by depending vponupon their iudgement, were caried headlong into the ſame pit of deſtruction with them. Were not the men of Beroea commended ooAct. 17. 11.Acts 17:11by the holy Ghoſt, for ſearching the Scriptures, that they might ſee whether the doctrine deliuered by Paul were agreeable thereto or no? And yet ſhall it be a fault in vsus to enquire of the ſame Scripture, concerning the doctrine of your Apoſtaticall ſynagogue? I ſay farther, it is againſt reaſon and Religion, to prefer any one mans iudgement before the definitiue ſentence of many wiſe, vertuous and learned men; ſuch as the Church hath vſually ſome amongſt the members thereof. But it is moſt reaſonable and religious, to prefer the truth of God manifeſted by one ſimple man, p. 250before the contrary determination of all that euer hauehave bin, or ſhal be of the Church, though neuer ſo wiſe, vertuous and learned. This is that which we teach concerning this matter: Firſt, that no man is bound to take any thing for a matter of faith, but that which is proued to him by the Scriptures, the rule of faith. Secondly, that no man is to condemne any thing held by the Church, vnleſſe he hauehave euident proofe on his ſide out of the Scriptures. Thirdly, that eueryevery man, in matters not determinable by Scripture (none of which are neceſſarie to ſaluation) ſhould yeeld to the iudgement of the Church, whereof he is a member; and eueryevery Church to the iudgement of the Chriſtian Churches other where, vnleſſe there be ſome good reaſon to the contrary. It is very poſſible for wiſe, vertuous and learned men to erre (for your priuiledge of not erring hath bin found to be counterfait) who oftentimes follow the opinion of ſome one man, whoſe learning and pietie they cannot chuſe but admire. ppSotus de nat. & grat. lib. 3. cap. 4.Domingo à Soto affoords vsus an example of this matter, where hauing alledged a ſentence out of Auſtin, he addeth theſe words: By reaſon of this ſaying of Auſtin (quoth Soto) all the Fathers afterward, and the whole multitude of Diuines hauehave by good right deliuered it as a truth, that the glorious Ʋirgin neuer committed any actuall ſinne; though Chryſostome, auncienter then he, were of another opinion. Let it be then vnlawfull, as it is, for a priuate man to prefer his owne opinion before the iudgement of a whole Church; and in this ſenſe I graunt your minor: yet is it not vnlawfull for him to examine what any or all Churches teach, or to diſſent from it, if he hauehave the Scripture for his warrant.

A. D. §. 7.

But you may perhaps ſay, that in Scripture we are willed, not to 1. Iohn. 4.1 John 4beleeue eueryevery priuate ſpirit, but to trie ſpirits, whether they be of God or no: and that therefore we muſt examine and trie the spirit of the Church, by looking into eueryevery particular point of doctrine which it teacheth.

I anſwer: that in that place of Scripture, it is not meant, that it belongeth to eueryevery particular man to trie all ſpirits; but in generall the Scripture giueth the Church warning, not to accept eueryevery one that boaſteth himſelfe to hauehave the Spirit, and willeth that they p. 251ſhould trie thoſe ſpirits: not that eueryevery ſimple or priuate man ſhould take vponupon him to trie them, but that thoſe of the Church, to whom the office of trying ſpirits doth appertaine, to wit, the Doctors and Paſtors, which Almightie God hath put in his Church of purpoſe, Vt non circumferamur omni vento doctrinae, that we may not Epheſ. 4.Eph 4be caried away with eueryevery wind of doctrine: and Vt non ſimus paruuli fluctuantes, that we may not be little ones, wauering with euerie blaſt of thoſe that boaſt themſelues to be ſingularly taught by the ſpirit. So that this trying of ſpirits, is onelyonly meant of thoſe ſpirits, of which men may well doubt, whether they be of God or no: and then alſo this triall belongeth to the Paſtors of the true church. But when it is certaine that the ſpirit is of God, we neither neede, nor ought doubtfully to examine, or preſumptuouſly to iudge of it, but ſubmitting obediently the iudgement of our owne ſenſe and reaſon, we must beleeue the teaching of it in eueryevery point. Now it is moſt certaine, that the ſpirit of the true viſible Church, is of God, as out of holy Scripture hath bene moſt euidently prooued. And therefore our onelyonly care ſhould be to ſeeke out thoſe markes, by which all men may know, which particular companie of men is the true Church of Chriſt: whoſe doctrine, we neither need, nor lawfully may examine and trie in doubtfull manner, but muſt obediently and vndoubtfully in all points beleeue, as the onelyonly aſſured and infallible truth.

A. W.

For the better ſtrengthening of your minor, you aſſay to make, and anſwer an argument, which our Diuines vſe to alledge againſt it: and this it is.

They that are willed in Scripture not to beleeue eueryevery ſpirit, but to trie the ſpirits, whether they be of God or no, may iudge whether eueryevery particular point the Church holdeth, be true or no.

But eueryevery Chriſtian is willed in Scripture not to beleeue euerie ſpirit, but to trie the ſpirits, whether they be of God or no.

Therefore eueryevery Chriſtian may iudge whether eueryevery particular point the Church holdeth, be true or no.

The Aſſumption of this Syllogiſme, we proue by qq1. Ioh. 4. 1.1 John 4:1that place of Iohn, Dearly beloued, beleeue not eueryevery ſpirit, but trie the ſpirits p. 252whether they are of God. To this our proofe, you anſwer two wayes: Firſt concerning the ſpirits to be tried; then concerning them that are to make triall. Of the former, your anſwer is, that this trying of ſpirits is onelyonly meant of thoſe ſpirits, of which men may well doubt whether they be of God or no. Firſt, this anſwer cannot be warranted by the text, which is generall: Trie the ſpirits, that is, all ſpirits that come to preach vntounto you, if we apply it to the teachers, rather then to the doctrine they deliuer. And ſurely if the Apoſtle had meant as you expound him, he would not hauehave ſaid, Trie the ſpirits, but trie ſome of them. Beleeue not eueryevery ſpirit, but trie thoſe of which you may well doubt: but he ſaith generally the ſpirits. Secondly, what may we imagine to be a cauſe of doubting? If want of lawfull ſending, which is the great point you alwayes vrge; either we muſt know the ſpirits we may doubt of, to be vnlawfully ſent, and then (by your doctrine) we muſt vtterly reiect them without any farther triall: or elſe the triall we are to make, if we doubt, is whether they be lawfully ſent or no: for till that appeare, we may not heare them. But our Apoſtle appointeth vsus to make triall by their doctrine. Thirdly, the reaſon and end of this exhortation, is, that we might take heede of falſe Prophets and falſe Apoſtles, which were crept into the Church. Many falſe Prophets were ſtirred vp by the diuell, faining that they had Apoſtolicall doctrine to deliuer. Therefore (ſaith rrDidym. Alex. ad 1. Ioan. 4.1 John 4Didymus) the gift of diſcerning ſpirits is neceſſary. Now theſe falſe apoſtles were not ſuch as came without any calling; for the diuell muſt needs hauehave knowne, if he had bene then acquainted with your doctrine, that it was not poſſible for him to preuaile by men not authoriſed by the Church; but as the Apoſtle teacheth vsus, they were ſuch, as had gone frō amongſt the true Chriſtiās, not by ſchiſme, in refuſing communion with them, ſo much as by hereſie, in departing from the truth of doctrine, in maine points of religion. Fourthly, falſe teachers do ſo nearely reſemble true, and ſſMat. 7. 15.Matt 7:15come (many times) with ſuch ſhew of holineſſe, that a man cannot tell whom he ſhould truſt or ſuſpect, but as he findes his doctrine to be ſutable, or contrarie to the word of God. Therefore Ferus a writer of your owne, and one of no p. 253meane account, vnderſtandeth by ſpirit, doctrine. The Apoſtle warnes vsus (ſaith ttFerus ad 1. Ioan 4. 1.1 John 4:1Ferus) that we beleeue not eueryevery ſpirit, that is, eueryevery doctrine and perſwaſion. To which purpoſe he alledgeth alſo that of Saint Paul, uu1. Theſs 5. 211 Thess 5:21Trie all things, hold faſt that which is good: alledged by xxThomas ad 1. Ioan. 4.1 John 4Thomas, in the ſame matter. To make this your anſwer the more likely, you tell vsus, that when it is certaine that the ſpirit is of God, we neither need, nor ought doubtfully to examine, or preſumptuouſly to iudge of it: as if we thought any ſuch doubtfull or preſumptuous courſe lawfull. Yet in this caſe there is a difference to be obſerued: If we know the preacher to be ſent of God, in ſuch ſort, as the Apoſtles were, that he cannot erre, then eueryevery leaſt doubt of that which he deliuereth, is preſumption and ſinne. But otherwiſe, though it appeare to vsus, that he be authoriſed by God, we may ſafely take liberty to examine whatſoeuer he teacheth, without any preſumption to iudge, or needleſſe doubting of that he deliuereth. In a word, if we heare ſuch a man, it is our dutie not to ſuſpect his doctrine, but where we hauehave ſome good apparence of Scripture for our ſuſpicion. In which caſe we are to ſearch the word of God, and to open our doubts to him, that we may be ſatisfied. If the matter be ſuch, as we cannot clearely prooue to be falſe by Scripture, we are with all reuerence and humilitie, to ſuſpect our owne iudgement, rather then his, whom God hath appointed and authoriſed to be our teacher: ſo farre muſt we be from preſumption.

Your ſecond exception is againſt them, that are to trie the ſpirits, who are not (ſay you) euerie ſimple or priuate man, but the Paſtors of the Church, to whom the office of trying ſpirits doth appertaine; as being put by God in his Church of purpoſe, that we may not be carried away with euerie winde of doctrine. That this exhortation belongeth to all Chriſtians, it may appeare by theſe reaſons. Firſt, we hauehave the like generall admonitions in other places of Scripture to all Chriſtians, not onelyonly to Paſtors and Doctors. yyMat. 7. 15.Matt 7:15Beware of falſe Prophets (ſaith our Sauiour to all men) which come to you in ſheeps cloathing. Trie all things (ſaith zz1. Theſſ. 5. 211 Thess 5:21the Apoſtle) and hold faſt that which is good: which latter place, as before I noted, is brought by aaVhi ſupra.Thomas of Aquin p. 254and Ferus, to expound this text of Saint Iohn. Secondly, the whole Epiſtle is written to all in generall, without any particular inſtruction, or exhortation to this or that kinde of Chriſtians, as teachers, learners, maſters, ſeruants, or ſuch like. Thirdly, it is bb1. Pet. 2. 18. & 3. 1. 7 Epheſ. 5. 22. 25 Col. 3. 18. 19.1 Pet 2:181 Pet 3:11 Pet 3:7Eph 5:22Eph 5:25Col 3:18Col 3:19the courſe of the Apoſtles, where they deſcend from generals to particulars, to giuegive ſome ſpeciall notice of that change by naming ſeuerally the eſtates, to which they ſpeake, and not continuing onelyonly the common titles of beloued or brethren, as the Apoſtle in this place doth. Fourthly, himſelfe profeſſeth, that his Epiſtle is written in generall to all men, yea euen to young men and babes in Chriſt. Neither doth he, in this exhortation, reſtraine his words to them, that are teachers. Fiftly, if it be not lawfull for priuate men to trie the ſpirits, then are they to receiue whatſoeuer is taught by any particular Doctor or Paſtor; and ſo be bound to beleeue meere contradictions, if it fall out, as ſometimes it doth, that one man preach contrarie to that, which an other hath taught. Sixtly, the Lord hath imparted the ſcriptures, and enioyned the ſearch of them, as well to priuate men, as to Paſtors and Doctors. Seuenthly, and laſt, blinde people ſhall periſh euerlaſtingly, with their blinde guides: and therefore it cannot be, but that God hath giuen Holkot. in 2. q. 4. ad r. arg. princip.them libertie to trie the ſpirits, that they that will not, may hauehave no excuſe for their erring, but be iuſtly damned.

The place you bring out of the epiſtle to the ccEpheſ. 4. 14.Eph 4:14Epheſians, doth not prooue that Paſtors & Doctors only are to examine ſpirits, though this belong in ſpeciall ſort to them, ddAct. 20. 28.Acts 20:28whom the holy Ghoſt hath made ouerſeers of the flocke of Chriſt. Gods end, in appointing them, is, that we ſhould not be carried away with eueryevery blaſt of doctrine: but we muſt needs be ſo carried, if we receiue without choiſe, whatſoeuer is deliuered. They are helpers of our faith, not Lords ouer it. Their dutie it is, to teach vsus, how to diſcerne of true doctrine, and to perſwade vsus to embrace it, not to enforce vsus to giuegive credit to all they ſay. Thus hauehave I anſwered all thoſe arguments, that you thought good to propound: all which notwithſtanding, our concluſion ſtandeth ſound and firme, that true doctrine in points fundamentall, is a certaine, and neceſſarie marke of a true Church of Chriſt.