Three Pillars and Arch-patriarchs of the Popish Synagogues, Treatise 1 · Book 1 · Part 1
THE first Chapter vponupon occasion that this aduersarie, this proclamer, and challenger (he meaneth the B. of Sarum of holy and learned memorie) would hauehave the Scriptures read of all men (presupposing the same to be easie to be vnderstanded) entereth, as by preamble, to treate of the difficultie of the Scriptures, and to proue that they ought not of all men to be read, without an able interpreter or teacher.D. Heskins.
THIS Burgesse for the citie of Rome,D. Fulke. hauing in purpose to make a speake in the Popish Parleament, for the matter of the sacrament of the Masse: and douting least his tale should not be long ynough, if he vttered nothing but that might seeme directly to appertaine to his cause, beginneth with a pretie preamble of eight Chapters long, of the difficultie of the Scriptures, and the vnderstanding of the same. And bicause he hath not aduauntage sufficient of any wordes or writing of the B. of Sarum to inlarge his speach by confuting thereof: he feigneth vntounto him selfe, a monster to fight withall, out of Luthers booke, De seruo arbitrio, who teacheth (as he saith) That the Scriptures of them selues be easie of all men to be vnderstanded, and neede none interpreter, for that we be all taught of God and of his spirite, &c. Of which minde he imagineth his aduersarie to be, In that he would the scriptures to be common to all men. How false & slanderous this his report is of Luther, may sufficiently appeare by that one worde, Theodidacti, taught of God, by which it is most manifest, that Luther affirmeth the scriptures to be easie to be vnderstood, not of all men in generall, but onelyonly of all them that are taught of God, and of his spirite, by which they were indighted. But nowe our Burgesse will make plaine by discussion, that the scriptures be obscure, darke, and hard to be vnderstanded, and for that cause not of all men indifferently to be read, and that by seuen arguments. Although it followeth not, that the scriptures are not to be read, bicause they are hard, but the contrarie; yet let vsus weigh these seuen arguments.
The first: There be many controuersies of the blessed sacrament, therefore there be difficulties in the scriptures. If controuersies raysed by froward maintainers of falshoode, be a proofe of difficultie, there shall nothing be plaine, not only in the scriptures of God, neither in any other writings or sayings of men, no not in such matters as are subiect to our senses, but we shall be brought into an Academicall doubtfulnesse of all things. But what say you M. Heskins? are not the scriptures plaine for the reall presence of Christes body in the Sacrament which you maintaine? Is Hoc est corpus meum, nowe a matter of diffic…ltie? Let all Papistes that hauehave witte beware of your proceding, you hauehave euen now by your first argumēt, cut asunder the synnes & strength of al your cause.
The second: The very disciples of Christ, besides the Iewes, vnderstoode not Christes owne words before they were written. Ioh. 6. Much lesse we the same written. To passe ouer the vngodly difference you make, betweene Christes wordes proceeding out of his owne mouth, and the same writtē by inspiration of his owne holy spirit, call you them the very disciples of Christ, which offended with that speach departed from him, or them that abid the interpretation of them, and tarried still with him? Such disciples as the former were be you, and your sect, which when the scripture serueth not your purpose, accuse it of difficultie and vncertaintie, as the olde Heretiques the Valentinians did: as witnesseth Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 2. But Chrysostome I suppose helpeth you much,Chrys. in. 6. Io…. where hee saith: Quid ergo? est durus? difficilis intellectu, & quem capere non posset eorum imbecillitas plenus formidinis. What then? is this word hard? difficult to be vnderstoode, and such as their weaknesse could not receiue, full of fearefulnes. Here is the name of the words of Chrysostome, but to what purpose? when no doctor more often, or more earnestly exhorteth all Lay men that are Christians, to read the scriptures of God, affirming thē also to be easie to be vnderstood for the most part, and not onelyonly without daunger, but also verie profitable, euen where they be hard to be vnderstoode. I wil rehearse one or two places of a great number.
In Luc. cap. 16. Id que , hortor & hortari non desinam &c. And this I exhort you, and will not cease to exhort you, that you would not only in this place (meaning in the Church) giuegive heede to those things that are said, but also when you shall be at home, you would eueryevery day giuegive your selues to the reading of the holy scriptures. And there followeth a reason, Ne que nunc fieri potest: Neither can it nowe be, I say, it can not be, that any man should obtaine saluation, except hee bee continually conuersant in spirituall reading. And not long after, Etiamsi, non intelligas illic recondita &c. yea, although thou vnderstand not the misteries that are therein hidden, yet of the very reading of them, great holinesse groweth. Finally, In genesim Hom. 9. In diuinis autem scripturis &c. but in the holy scriptures, & in those spirituall and precious stories, neither is it lawfull to suspect any danger, neither is there any great labour, but vnspeakable gaine, onelyonly let vsus bring with chearefulnesse that which lyeth in vsus.
The third: If the scriptures be plaine and easie for eueryevery mā to vnderstand, it was no great benefit that Christ did open his Apostles witts, that they might vnderstand the scriptures, nor that he did interpret Moses and the Prophetes, to the disciples that went to Emaus, wherefore we conclude with S. Peter, that as he witnessing the Epistles of S. Paule be hard: so be the rest of the scriptures hard. O blundering Burgesse! Who did euer affirme that the scriptures were easie to be vnderstād without the spirit of Christ? Or what asse of Acarnania, wold brave out suche a reason? The Apostles could not vnderstand the scriptures sufficiētly to teach all the world, without a singular gift of interpretation, therefore no Christian man may learne by reading the scriptures, howe to knowe God to his eternall saluation, without the same extraordinarie gift. But by your leaue maister speaker, (for the office you take vponupon you, I know not howe you came vntounto it) you misreport S Peter being a Lord of the higher house as you count him, for he saith not that the Epistles of S. Paule be hard, but that among those things which he wrote of the second comming of Christ, some things are hard to be vnderstoode. Wherefore neither his authoritie, nor your reason, will be sufficient to conclude your cause.
The fourth. The Chamberlen could not vnderstand the prophet Esay without an interpreter, therefore the scriptures are not plaine and easie of all men to be vnderstanded. A proper conclusion. There is some difficultie in some scriptures, therefore they are all hard and can not be vnderstoode. We neither affirme that all things in the scriptures are easie to be vnderstanded; nor that they are easie to be vnderstood of all men. But that the children of God by his spirite, are instructed to vnderstand so much in them as is profitable for their saluation, and that nothing necessarie for vsus to knowe, is so obscurely set foorth in one scripture, but it is as plainly set down in an other. Neither do we reiect interpreters, bicause we read the scriptures, but as Chrysostom teacheth, by reading the scripturs, we are made more apt to vnderstād the interpreters. In Euan. Ioan. Hom. 10. The exāple of Philip sent vntounto the Chamberlen doth also declare, howe God wil blesse the reading of the scriptures, whē he is sought in them.
The fift. The Apostles them selues vnderstoode not Christe speaking of his passion and resurrection. Iohn. 16. After a while, &c. therfore if the liuely voyce of Christ was dark, much more is the same now written in dead letters, dark & hard to be vnderstanded. The Apostles by speciall dispensation, not yet so wel lightned, that they vnderstood their master, not only at this time, but at many other times also, bewrayed their naturall ignorance, that the grace of God in their illuminatiō in due time afterward, might appeare more glorious. But doth it therefore followe, that the sayings of Christe were hard, or their vnderstanding darke? A blinde man can not see the Sunne, is it therefore a good conclusion, that the Sunne is darke, and not easie to be seene? Howbeit, it is well to be marked, that once againe hee putteth difference betweene the liuely voyce of Christ, and his word written in dead letters, making opposition betweene The liuely voyce in the eare, and the deade: letter in the eye. As though the vnderstanding of the scripture, consisted either in the eare or in the eye, when neither the eye hath seene, nor the eare hath heard, neither hauehave they ascended into the heart of man, such things as God hath prepared for them that louelove him. 1. Cor. 2. Es. 64. But God hath reuealed them vntounto vsus by his spirit, which spirit searcheth out al things, euen the depthes or greatest secretes of God. Neuerthelesse, here is brought in Hieronyme ad Paulinum. Habet nescio quid latentis energiae viua vox &c. The liuely voyce hath I knowe not what hidden vertue, and being vttered frō the mouth of the author, into the eare of the disciple, soundeth more strongly. Wherfore Aeschynes when he was banished at Rhodes, and that Oration of Demosthenes was read, which he made against him, when all men did woonder at it, and praise it sighing he said: What if ye had heard the beast himself sounding out his owne words? This writeth Hieronyme to persuade Paulinꝰ, not only to satisfie him self with his writings, but also to trauel that he might so him, & heare him, whom he had known before only by his writing, & that by the example not only of heathen Philosophers, but also of holy men of the Church, as the next wordes following immediatly do plainely testifie: Haec non dico quod sit in me aliquid tale &c. I say not these things, for that there is in me any such matter, whiche either thou mayest, or art desierous to learne: but bicause thy feruent heate, and desire of learning, ought to be commended euen without vsus. Thy wit is pregnant and commendable without a teacher 3. So farre is it off that Hieronyme meant to compare the word of Christ spoken, with that which is writen, whose force is as great by his spirite in the scriptures, which this dogge calleth the deade letters, as it was in his voyce when it was vttered. But howe impudently the name of Hieronyme is abused against his plain iudgment, wherby he not only alloweth lay men to read the scripturs, but also confesseth that they receiue great fruit therby, may appeare by this one place amōg many, written in Esaiam libro. 4. cap. 11. Frequenter euenit vt homines soeculi. It commeth to passe verie often, that lay men being ignorant of the mysticall sense, are yet fedde with the plaine and simple reading of the scriptures. 33. And in his epistle vpō the same Cōmentarie, he affirmeth, that Ignoratio scripturarum, ignoratio Christi est. Ignorance of scriptures, is the ignorance of Christ. Shortnes will not suffer me to point the places only, to the confusiō of the aduersary: if any dout or would see more, let them reade the places at the full.
The sixt All men hauehave not the gift of knowledge of prophesie, nor of interpretation of tongues, therefore euerie man hath not the vnderstāding of the scripturs, neither be they easie to be vnderstanded of euerie man. First I pray you note, that he maketh interpretatiō of the scriptures and the interpretatiō of tongs al one, secondly, what force is in this reason, all men hauehave not extraordinarie gifts of tongs, of healing, of knowledge, of prophesie, of interpretation of tongues &c. Therefore the scriptures are so harde, as they cannot be vnderstood by the ordinarie gifte of prophesie, which is promised to all the seruaunts of God, young & olde, men and women, vponupon whom his holy spirit is powred. 10.2. Act. 2. I am ashamed to troble the readers with any more words, in answer vntounto such a grosse consequence.
The seuenth, God hath ordeined first Apostles▪ secondly Prophetes, thirdly teachers, &c. Now if the scriptures be easie for euerie mans vnderstanding, then either these states be superfluous, or else euerie man is a teacher and prophete, but this were a great absurditie, therfore the scriptures are hard & full of difficulties. If a yong Sophister had D. Heskins in the scholes at Cambridge, where somtime he hath been a Sophister, he would with one common warde, which is Nego consequentiam, auoyde the pikes of all these seuen arguments. Alas poore man, is there no vnderstāding of the scriptures, but such as may make a man a teacher, & an extraordinarie prophete? are there no degrees of knowledge but either the highest perfection, or the depest ignorance? Will this reason follow? Men may profite in knowledge by reading, therefore teaching is superfluous: or this, teaching is necessarie, therfore reading is vnprofitable. What shall I say to these reasons, but that they are giuen ouer into a reprobate minde, which are so furiously bent to withstand the trueth, that they set not foorth so much as any shadowe of reason.