The Sovereign Judge of Controversies in Matters of Religion, Chapter 15
CHAP. 15.
The verifying of the second meanes of Nullity against the eight allegation by declaring the impertinasy thereof.
THe last point remaineth to be cleared, to wit, whether the vncertainty of humane iudgement canne cause that God speaking in the Scripture should not bee fit to be our Iudge, since a man cannot know, neither who hath, nor whether he himselfe hath the holy spirit, or not, And here first of all could wee answere that touching the matter in hand, the question is not whether wee canne know immediately, or as the Schoole speaketh à priori, who hath the holy Ghost: but onelyonly who speaketh according to the Scriptures, which being resolued, by conferring the Scriptures, with that which is proposed, wee may easily conclude, if passion and malice darken not the vnderstanding who proposeth the words of the holy Ghost, and by this meanes discerne à posteriori as they say who hath the spirit, seeing that in regard of Pastors and Doctors none preach the word of the spirit but those to whom the spirit hath suggested them, how wicked and detestable soever otherwise they may bee. So that the question is brought to matter of fact, to witte; who proposeth that which is contained in the Scripture, which question is cleared in examining the Doctrine proposed by the Scripture; as the proportion of a building is knowne by applying of the square and levell. For example, the Iewes of Boerea did not directly and à priori inquire whether Saint Paul when hee preached vntounto them was inspired of the holy spirit, or no; it had beene an impossible thing for them, seeing it is the property of God alone to bee the searcher of hearts. But they made inquirie for all that whether Saint Paul did speake according to the Scriptures, and hauing by conferring of Saint Pauls doctrine with the Scriptures, discovered the conformity, and how they answered the one to the other, they judged truly, & as indeed it was, to wit, that Saint Paul spake not of himselfe, but by the holy spirit. Yea the Ancients themselues, hauing to do with heretickes who made shew to hold the Scripture for their rule, hauehave not refused to dispute before a Pagan Iudge, who although by reason of his vnbeliefe hee was not capable to judge whether of two parties maintained the truth, pronounced neverthelesse and very happily which of the two concluded most conformably to the Scripture, which both the one and the other alleaged for their purpose, but the same sufficeth vsus at this day in our controversies: for if it be apparant who speake according to the Scriptures, no man who maketh profession of Christianity doubting of the Scripture, the conclusion will bee plaine and evident, that whosoever hee be, speakes according to truth, and by the spirit of truth: There is much difference betweene beleeuing the Principles of Christian Religion, and judging who teach most conformably to those principles. To the first, faith and the illumination of the holy spirit, are absolutely necessary: for the second, common sense is sufficient. To beleeue that the Scripture is true, when it teacheth vsus that there is but one God, that the Father is God, the Sonne God, and the holy Ghost also, that the Father is not the Sonne nor the holy Ghost, neither the one nor the other, for this faith onelyonly is required. But to inferre from thence that the nature of God is one in number, that the persons of the Trinity are distinct, yet not divided, that they communicate in one and the same nature, for this I say common sense alone sufficeth, which cannot deny the consequent, the truth of the antecedent once granted, which without all doubt cannot bee comprehended but by faith. It is then in vaine to aske who shall judge of the consequences, as if a man hauing learned in a historie how many companies and how many souldiers in every company were in an army, how many troopes of horse, and how many horsemen in every troope, one should demand who shall judge whether the number of the souldiers of which the army did consist be rightly collected frō thence: In like manner if we can proue by the Scripture that, that which Christ gaue to his disciples, was bread broken, and if wee proue by the same Scripture that the body of Christ is not broken in the Eucharist, and that yet much lesse the bread brokē is Christs body, to demād here who shall judge whether a man may inferre from hence that the Lord gaue not vsus externally his own body in the Eucharist is all one as to aske, who hath common sense. Likewise, when the Apostle sayth, that wee are saued by grace, through faith, and that not of our selues, Eph. 2. 8▪ 9.it is the gift of God, not of workes least any man should Boast, If it bee asked here who shall judge, whether it can be gathered from hence, that wee are not saved by the merit of our workes, but by faith, wholly relying vponupon this grace, without hauing merited it our selues by any workes of ours? is not this to aske how a man might know that hee is in his senses? But if the consequence bee so obscure, that it is harde to judge of it, this is an argument that there is no consequence at all: the nature of which is such, that in a manner it forceth our vnderstanding to yeeld vntounto it, and to allow of it, albeit we had studied in no other logicke then that of nature.