Answer to a Popish Pamphlet Called the Touchstone of the Reformed Gospel, Part 2 · Subpart 1 – Subpart 2
1. That there is not in the Church one, and that, an infallable rule for underſtanding the holy Scriptures, and conſerving of Ʋnitie in matters of ſaith.
THis aſſertion of our's (as hee calleth it) is contrary (ſayth hee) to the expreſſe words of our own Bible, which he nameth therafter. To whom I anſwere 1. In generall, that he beginneth with a groſſe cal…mny, affirming that to be our aſſertion which is not, for wee deny not to be in the Church an infallable rule of faith, or for underſtanding the Scriptures, and conſerving unitie in the matters of faith, as our Confeſſion of faith ſhoweth, anno 1581. art. 18. but affirmeth this rule of faith to bee the Scripture it ſelf, which is therfore called the Canon or rule of Scripture, & that the right underſtanding thereof in all matters of faith is to be had frō the ſcripture it ſelf, and that analogie of faith clearlie ſet downe therein or deryved therefra. as Pope Clement ſpeaketh (diſt. 37. cap. 14.) ſaying that we ſhould, Ex ipſis Scripturis ſenſ…m capere veritatis, that is, Take the meaning of the Trueth out of the Scriptures themſelves, which he calleth there, integram & firmam regulam veritatis, or, The full and firme rule of Trueth.
Next for anſwere to him in particulare, he adduceth foure places of Scripture moſt impertinent, which nowiſe maketh againſt any aſſertion of ours, but whereby he only beats the wind, Theſe are 1. Rō. 12. 2. where it is ſaid, Having then gifts according to the grace that is given to us, whether Propheſie according to the proportion of faith. the ſecond is, Phil. 3. 16, which ſayeth, Nevertheleſs whereunto wee hauehave alreadie attayned, let us minde the ſame thing. the third is, Gal. 6. 16. which ſayeth, And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them & merciemercy. the fourth is, 1. Cor. 11. 16. which ſayth, We hauehave no ſuch cuſtom nor the Churches of God. The Firſt, proving only (as their owne Eſtius Profeſſour at Duay ſhoweth) that all the doctrine of Teachers ſhould be ſquared according to the rule and analogie of faith, which wee alſo mayntaine and is contayned in Scripture, the ſecond (as the ſame Eſtius ſhoweth) exhorteth onelie to Chriſtian Unitie and concord, The third (as the ſame Eſtius likewiſe out of Chriſoſtome and Theophylact proveth) that the Apoſtle ſpeaketh not there of the rule of doctrine, but of life, which verſe 15. hee calleth the new creature, or holineſſe, to which he exhorteth them, and as to that which he ſubjoyneth 2. Cor. 10. 15. as Cardinal Cajetan, Catharinus and the ordinary gloſs expoundeth, The Apoſtle (taking the Metaphor from workmē to whom ſeverally as by rule o… line their task is meaſured out) doeth underſtand the limits onelyonly of his Apoſtolicall miſſion and juriſdiction, which was to the Gentiles, of whom the Corinthians were a part, as PETER was to the Jewes ſpeciallie, and as wee ſee Gal. 2. 7. And the fourth (as Eſtius alſo ſhoweth) ſpeaketh onelyonly that the cuſtome of the Church is not to bee contentious.
As for the teſtimonies of Fathers which hee bringeth heere, and alongſt this whole Pamphlet, Firſt, I may anſwere to them in generall, not in my words, but in their own Gabriel Biels on the Canon of the Maſſe lect. 41. ſaying, Their authority cōpelleth no mā to aſſent to their ſayings, except (ſayth he) they be grounded on holy Scripture & divine reveltion. Therfore before this be manifest, it is lawfull to controll their ſayings, (ſayeth hee) and to bee of a contrary judgement, wherefore, ſayeth S. Jerom, If I ſay any thing which I ſhall not prove by one of the two Teſtaments, let mee not bee believed. (no word then of traditions) and S. Auguſtin (ſayeth hee) in his 8. Epistle to Jerom speaketh thus, ſaying, This honour is onelie to be given to the holie canonick Scriptures, that whatſoever they ſay, therefore it muſt bee believed to bee true, but as for others, I reade them onelie upon this condition, that however famous the… be for holines or learning, I think it not true therefore, becauſe they hauehave thought ſo, untill I bee otherwiſe perſwaded by canonick Scriptures or probable reaſons that they hauehave not erred from the Trueth. and which is more (ſayeth hee) we ſee that one holie father ſomtimes contradicteth another, as holy Cyprian contradicteth Auguſtin concerning the rebaptiſing of Hereticks & Sciſmaticks, as likewiſe hee contradicteth Ierome concerning Pauls reprehending of Peter, and ſo of many other like examples I might ſpeake (ſayth he.) Theſe are all their owne B…e…s words, and what little reckning Ieſuits make of Fathers or their expoſition of Scripture when they diſagree with them, and jump with thoſe whom they call Calvinists, I will ſhowe by this one inſtance, Maldonat. on Ioh. 6. 62. bringeth Auguſtins expoſition of that place, (which is alſo Beda and Ruperts expoſition) and with it another expoſition whereof hee ſayeth, Hee will not deny that hee hath no other man as Authour thereof, but yet (ſayth he) I wil rather approve it than Auguſtins which of all other is the moſt probable, becauſe that this is more repugnant to the meaning of the Calvinists. But not taking advantage either of Biels words, or of theſe I come in particulare to Vincentius Lyrinenſis words which he bringeth, ſaying, That the line of Propheticall & Apoſtolicall expoſitiō ſhould be directed according to the rule of the Eccleſiasticall & Catholick ſenſe, but he forgets the words of that ancient Authour, both before and after cap. 2. & 35. wher he ſayth before theſe words. That the Scripture is a perfect rule, full, and more than ſufficient for deciſion of al controverſies in points of faith, with which therefore all Eccleſiaſticall and Catholick ſenſe muſt agree, and that onelie muſt be held which hath beene believed ever, every where, and by all. And ſo this teſtimony maketh nothing againſt us, and to which rule and words of Vincentius if wee will apply the points of Poperie, as I hauehave ſhowne by five particulars in anſwere to the Preface, wee ſhall find them quyte contrary and diſagreeable, yea, and to bee onelie meere novelties.
And albeit with Vincentiꝰ, Bellar. (lib. 4. de verbo c. 7. §. ad hunc.) as alſo the Ieſuit S…lmeron in 1. Iohan. 3. diſp. 25. §. 30) affirme That whē he Fathers all of thē, or almoſt all agree in one judge-ment, or in the expoſition of any place of the ſcripture, that then they gi…e a ſure and inevitable argument of Catholick veritie and of a ſure and ſound expoſition of Scripture, yet according to this rule, let tryall be (beſide the former five) but in this one point of poperie, to wit, The Virgin Mari's conception without ſinne (decreed in the Councell of Trent, decreto 5. Seſs. 5.) whether it bee of Catholick veritie or not, and (I hope) it ſhall be found but a lurd errour and a blafphemous noveltie. And that they go cloſs and croſſe againſt the unanimous expoſitiō of Scripture which all the Fathers give and agree therin. For example Rom. 5. 12. It is ſaid of Adam. In whō all have ſinned. from which text all the holie fathers with one mouth (ſayeth their Biſhop Canus loc. theol. lib. 7. cap. 1. affirmeth the bleſſed virgin to have been conceived in originall ſinne, of whome he citeth 18. & their words in particular, The like doth Cardinall cajetan in his treatiſe concerning this matter which he wrote to Pope Ieo the tenth (…om. 2. opuſc. tract. 1. cap. 5.) The like alſo doeth the maſter of ſentences witneſſe, lib. 3. diſt. 3. ſaying, It may be truely ſaid, & we muſt believe according to the unanimous teſtimonies of the holy fathers, that the fleſh which Chriſt tooke was formerly ſubject to ſinne, as the reſt of the Virgins fleſh, but was ſanctified & made pure by the operation of the Holy Ghoſt, therefore Bernard in his 174. Epiſtle to the channons of Lions, having diſputed that point Learnedly, Concludes, that Chriſt onelyonly being excepted, of all others that have been borne of Adam, it may be ſaid, which humbly and truly (ſayeth he) David ſayeth of himſelfe, I was ſhapen in iniquity and in ſinne did my mother conceive me, and therefore in the ſame place he calleth the feaſt of her conception without ſin, a preſumptious noveltie, the mother of raſhnes, the ſiſter of ſuperſtition, and daughter of inconſtancie. & whoſoever denyeth that all others without exception, (except Chriſt) are conceived in ſin, he is found (ſayeth Auguſtin lib. 5. con…. Iulian. cap. 9.) to be a deteſtable heretick, becauſe herby (as Salmeron teſtifies in Rom. 5. diſp. 49.) Aquinas ſayeth, that this were to equal the virgin Mary with Chriſt himſelfe.
And yet notwithſtanding of ſo cleare a place of ſcripture, ſo unanimouſly expounded by all the ancient fathers, which Billarmin & Salmeron calleth a ſure & inevitable argument of catholick verity, and ſoundexpoſition of ſcripture.
Yet for al this (ſayeth Bellarmin cō tradicting himſelfe, lib. 4. de amiſſa gratia cap. 15. §. ab hac) ſeing the Councell of Trent hath decreed the contrary, as likewiſe Pope Sextus 4. and Pius 5. they are not to be accounted catholicks that eſteemes this an errour, and conſequently all the ancient fathers, are not to be accounted Catholicks, nor Cardinal Cajetan, biſhop Canus nor ther maſter of ſentences, and canonized Aquinas, and many more beſides.
VVee ſee then howſoever they pretend traditiō, or the unanimous conſent of fathers to be the rule of faith, or expoſition of the ſcripture, yet when they pleaſe, and findeth the ſame diſpleaſing to them, they vilyfie and rejects the ſame, therefore thus ſayeth the Ieſuit Valentia, in the laſt chapter of the 5. booke of his analyſis, that any by gone tradition without the authority of the preſent Church is not a ſufficient …udge …f controverſies of faith. So alſo ſpeakes Cardinall Cajetan in the begining of his comentars on Geneſis, as alſo Baronius tom. 1. annal. anno 34. num. 213.
And if we will conſider what certainty, or rather what fluctuating uncertantie is in the moderne ſenſe, or expoſition that the preſent Roman Church now puts upon ſcripture, whereon to build their faith, Let Cardinall Cuſanus words teſtyfie (epiſt. 2. ad Bohemos pag. 833. and 838.) who ſayeth, That one time the Church iuterprets the Scripture one way, and at another tyme another way, and that the underſtanding of the ſcripture, muſt follow her practiſe, & when ſhe changeth her judgement, God alſo changeth his, then which, I know not what can be grearer blaſphemy.
Next, for anſwere to that teſtimonie which he brings out of Tertullian, where he ſayth, we admit not our Adverſaries to diſpute out of ſcripture, till thy can ſhow who their anceſſors were, and from whom they received th… ſcriptures. Theſe words of Tertullian makes no wayes againſt us, whereby he denieth not that the ſcripture is the rule of faith, or of diſputes concerning the ſame, as he ſhoweth, againſt hermogenes, cap. 22. ſaying, let theſe of Hermogenes ſhop ſhow that it is written, and if it be not written let them feare that woe which is allotted to ſuch as adde or take away. but he ſhoweth only, that Apoſtolicall churches (& not Rome only) which were founded by them, and to that time had keeped the truth which they had delivered in the ſcriptures, committed to them, could only lay beſt claym to them, which hereticks who diſſented from theſe ſcriptures and apoſtolical churches of theſe primitive times could not do.
As for Ireneus, whom only he citeth, but not his words, he hath nothing in that place that favoureth tradition, as an unwritten rule of faith, for ſo he ſhould not agree with himſelfe, who ſayeth lib. 3. cap. 2. that theſe things which are to be ſhown in the ſcriptures, can not be made manifeſt but by the ſcriptures themſelves, and lib. 3. cap. 1. That the ſcriptures is that which is the foundation and pillar of our faith, and not tradition or any unwritten rule.
Tertullian alſo that he is of the ſame mynd, I have ſhown out of the for…cited teſtimonie, concerning Hermogenes, and who in that ſame 22. Chapter. ſayeth, that he adoreth the fullnes of ſcripture.
Chriſoſtome alſo, hom. 3. in. 2. cor. calles it a moſt exact rule and ballance, which it could not be, if either it wer A partiall rule onelyonly (as Bellarmin calleth it) or that tradition were the rule of faith.
A…guſtin alſo de bono viduitatis, cap 1. calleth it, a fixed and ſure rule, in oppoſition (as it were) to unſure tradition.
Yea Bellarmin himſelfe (lib. 1. de verbo, cap. 2.) haveing ſhowne that the rule of our faith ſhould have theſe two properties firſt, that it ſhould be moſt ſure (which tradition can not be, luke 1. 4. (2. pet▪ 1. 19.) and 2. moſt known, he concludeth, that the ſcripture is the moſt ſure and beſt knowne rule both of faith and manners.
But what ſhall I ſpeake of a Cardinall, when a Pope, to wit Clement in his firſt booke of recognitions, cited, diſt. 37. cap. relatum calleth the ſcripture a firm and ſound rule of faith.
Baſill alſo hom. 13. in Geneſis ſayeth, thes things which may ſeem to be ambiguous and obſcure in ſome places of the holy ſcripture, muſt be explained by theſe which elſwhere are more plaine and manifeſt.
Auguſtin likewiſe, cont. Creſcon. Lib. 2. cap. 31. ſpeaking of an epiſtle of Ciprians, I am not bound (ſayeth he) to the authority of this epiſtle, becauſe I account not Ciprians writting, as canonicall, but I examine them by theſe that are canonicall, and that which is agreable in them to the authority of divine ſcriptures, I receive, and that which is not agreeable, I refuſe. Heer then we ſee that Auguſtin would have the ſcriptures only to be the rule of faith, and of divine authoritie.
2 THat in matters of faith we must not relye on the judge-ment of the Church or her Pastours.
VVHichWhich he ſayeth is contrary to Math. 23. 2. Where the jewiſh people are commanded by Chriſt, To obſerue all whatſoever the Scribes and Phariſees did bidd thē obſerue, not only (ſayeth hee) in ſome principall matters, but in all whatſoever without diſtinction or limitation. For anſwere to whom, I can not admire enough the mans impudencie or ignorance, ſeing Firſt, our Saviour himſelf ſhoweth the contrary, where, Math. 16. 6. 12. lie biddeth his diſciples and others, Beware of their leaven, which be expoundeth to be their falſe doctrine. 2. The Authour of the ordinarie gloſs (with whom agreeth Lyra) on Deut. 17. 10 ſayeth, Note, that the Lord requireth, that whatſoever the Prieſt doth teach thee according to the Law do thou, becauſe otherwiſe thou art not to obey them. Ferus alſo a ſpaniſh Frier and Preacher at Mentz. on this place ſpeaketh thus, Chriſt would not that they ſhould receive all the doctrines of the Phariſees (ſayeth hee) but ſo farre only as they agreed with Gods Law, elſe they ſhould hauehave admitted all the falſe gloſſes which our Saviour refuteth, Math. 5. from verſe 21. to the end. To this alſo agreeth the Ieſuite Maldonat upon this place, And that Chriſt spake not of their owne doctrine, but of Moſes doctrine and the Law which they were to deliver. The publication onlie being theirs, but the doctrine the Lords; as we ſee Math. 28. 19.
The next place which hee bringeth is Luke 10. 16. where our Saviour ſayeth to his Apoſtles, Hee that heareth you heareth me. To which my former anſwer may ſuffice. Therefore alſo ſayeth Ferus, It is heerby evident that the Apoſtles, themſelves, were to be heard in ſo farre only as they were Apostles, that is. Did Chriſts meſſage, and preached and taught what he commanded them, but if they ſhould teach otherwiſe, or any doctrine contrarie to Chriſts, then they were not Apostles, but ſeducers (ſayeth he) and therefore not to bee heard.
His third place is Math. 16. 19. where our Saviour ſayeth to Peter, What ſoever thou ſhall bind on earth, ſhall be bound in heaven, &c. giving us to understand (ſayeth he) that not onlie the bands of ſinnes, but all other knots & difficulties in matters of faith are to be looſed by S. Peter and his ſucceſſours. To whom I anſwere 1. Their own Cardinall Cuſanus ſpeaketh thus de concord. Cathol. lib. 2. cap. 13. There was nothing ſaid to Peter, which was not ſaid to all the reſt Likewiſe, for as it was ſaid to Peter, whatſoever thou ſhall bind on earth, &c. was it not ſaid alſo to all the rest, whatſoever yee bind on earth, &…. (ſayeth he) whence it will follow that all knots and difficulties in matters of faith are to be looſed by the ſucceſſours of all the reſt of the Apoſtles whereſoever, aſwell as by S. Peter's pretended ſucceſſours. Next if by looſing the ſolving of all doubts and difficulties in matters of faith bee meaned, then by binding (which is cōtrar to looſing) the making of knots & difficulties in matters of faith muſt be meaned, whernone were before, which is abſurd to affirme. And which when Peter's ſucceſſours doth on earth, God muſt alſo do the ſame in heaven. As Cardinall Cuſanus ſayth Epiſt. 2. ad Bohemos, p, 838. That when the Church changeth her judgement, God alſo changeth his. Which is open blaſphemy.