Answer to a Popish Pamphlet Called the Touchstone of the Reformed Gospel, Part 2 · Subpart 4 – Subpart 6
4. THat apoſtolicall traditions, and ancient cuſtomes of the Church (not found written in the word) are not to be received, nor do obleidge us.
VVHichWhich he ſayeth is expreſly contrary to 2. Theſſ. 21. 5. where the Apoſtle biddeth them, Hold faſt the traditions which they had beene taught, whether by word or Epiſtle. and which traditions by word, he ſayeth are of equall authoritie with what was written, if not more, becauſe firſt named.
I anſwere, Nicephorus and Theodoret on that place, ſhoweth that the Apoſtle ſpeaketh not of divers doctrines of faith, ſome written by him, & others not written, but left to verball tradition, but he ſpeaketh of the ſame doctrines diverſlie onelyonly delivered, to wit, firſt by word when he was preſent with them, & the ſame thereafter by Epiſtle, being abſent from them, even as he ſpeaketh, Philip. 31. ſaying, To writ the ſame things to you, (to wit, which he had preached before) To me indeed is not greevous, but for you it is ſafe, which Bellarmin alſo confirmeth, (lib. 4. de verbo cap. 11.) while he grants, That al things, were writen by the Apoſtles which they preached to the people, or which was neceſſar (ſayeth he) to ſalvation. whence it followeth, that what was not written by the Apoſtle thereafter to the Theſſalonians, was not taught to them before by word, as alſo what was not written by the Apoſtles, that the ſame is not neceſſar to ſalvation, and conſequently that uuwritten doctrinall traditions are not neceſſary to ſalvation, for of ſuch onelyonly is the queſtion, and not of any other ſort of traditions, rituall, hiſtoricall, or explicatory, which doeth not derogate from the perfection of ſcripture.
The ſecond place which he bringeth, is 2. Theſſ. 3. 6. Where the Apoſtle commands, Thē to withdraw themſelves from every brother that walks diſorderly, and not after the tratradition which they received of him, to which I anſwer, that Cardinall Cajetan on the 14. verſe ſhoweth that what he calleth tradition in the 6. verſe, he calleth the ſame, his word by Epiſtle in the 14. verſe, and therfore written.
Aquinas likewiſe on this 6. verſe ſhoweth that the ſame is meaned by tradition, which is meaned, 2 Theſſ. 2. 15. which we have already cleared, to wit, that doctrine which was delyvered both by word and writ, by word firſt, and by writ after, but the moſt ſimple expoſition is this (ſayeth their Eſtius) that the Apoſtle ſpeaketh in generall of the inſtitution of a Chriſtian life, The derection whereof no man can ſay but is ſet downe in ſcripture.
The third place which he bringeth is, 1. Cor. 11. 2. where the Apoſtle praiſeth them that they keeped the traditions which hee had delivered them, whereunto I anſwere, that in that text, ther is not a word of tradition, but as their owne vulgare and Rhemes Tranſlation hath, is, that they keeped his Precepts, where the deceatfulnes of this Pā pleter is to be noted, that to ſeduce the ſimple when hee pleaſeth, hee departeth from the vulgare Tranſlation, which at other times hee ſo magnifieth as onlie authentick, and doeth idolize.
As for the teſtimonie which hee bringeth out of Baſil, where hee ſayeth, Some things we have frō ſcripture other things from the Apoſtles, both which hauehave alike force unto godlineſſis. I anſwer. Firſt, that the moſt learned except againſt this Booke as corrupted, as B. Andrewes ſhoweth (opoſe▪ con…. Peron p. 9.) 2. he ſpeaketh of theſe that were received frō the Apoſtles and not of ſuch as the Romaniſts thēſelves acknowledge not to hauehave ben taught by the Apoſtles, neither by word nor write, as the invocatiō of ſaynts is cōfeſſed to be by their owne Ecksꝰ, Enchird. c. 15. & many more ſuch 3▪ he ſpeaketh not of doctrines of faith neceſſary to ſalvatiō, all which Bellaer. himſelf granteth to be written (l. de verbo c. 11) but of things relating to order & decencie in celebration of holy myſteries, according to that general rule 1. Cor. 14. 40. & the Apoſtles ſpeech, cap. 11. 34. wher he ſayth, The reſt I will ſet in order whē I come, wherby he underſtandeth (ſayth Eſtiꝰ) ſuch things as belong to a worthie, honest, and orderlie celebratiō of holy myſteries, & ſo ſpeaketh alſo Lombard, Aquinas, Cajetan, and the Ieſuite A lapide.
OF ANCIENT CUSTOMES.
Next to traditions, he would hauehave the anciēt cuſtomes of the Church equally to be received, though hee bringes no proofe frō ſcripture or fathers for the ſame. Wherin tho I might anſwere with Cyprian (epiſt. 63.) ſaying, we muſt not taek heed what any hath done before us, or hath thought meete to be done, but what Chriſt hath done, who is before all men, for we muſt not follow the cuſtome of men (ſayeth he) but the truth of God. For as in his 74. ep. to Pompeius he ſayth, Cuſtom without truth, is nothing elſe, but inveterate errour. As alſo ſayth Baſil, ep. 80. We think it not juſt that cuſtome which hath prevailed, be held for a law or rule of true doctrin, but let us ſtād to the deciſiō of divine inſpyred ſcripture.
Yet to convince him, I will inſtance. 9. points of popery to ſhow how farr they reject the Churches ancient cuſtomes, as.
1. Againſt the Popes univerſall Supremacy in matters eccleſiaſtical, that firſt and famous Councell of Nice, convocat by Constantine the firſt Chriſtiā Emperour, anno 325. in the ſix canon thereof it was decreed That the Biſhope of Alexādria ſhould brook the like juriſdiction within his province, as the Biſhope of Rome had in his. which limitatiō of every ones juriſdiction within their own precincts without ſubordination, is ther called foreign, or the anciēt cuſtoms, frō which anciēt cuſtome cōfirmed by ſo famous a general Coūcel, how far the pope hath ſwerved ſince, let any one judge.
2. For the Popes uſurpation of juriſdiction over Princes in temporall thinges, what was the old cuſtome of the Biſhops of Rome, Bellarmin telleth us, (lib. 1. de Concil. cap. 13.) who ſpeaking of that time which was many houndrehs of years after the Apoſtles, ſayth, That at that time the Biſhope of Rome in temporall things was ſubject to the Emperour (ſayeth hee) and becauſe hee acknowledged the Emperour to be his temporall Lord, therefore he made ſupplication to him that he would conveene a Councell, but therafter their owne charter monck authour of Faſciculus temporum, telleth us, That in the time of Boniface the 2. this ancient cuſtome was rejected, for, remarke (ſayth he) that about this time the Popes began to oppoſe thēſelves to the Emperors even in temporall things, farr otherwiſe thē they wer wont of old. And after the 1200, year of god the ſame authour tells us, That Boniface the 8. roſe up to that hight of pride (ſayeth hee) that he called himſelf Lord of the whol world aſwel in temporall as in ſpirituall things. Which thing their Sigebert (in anno 1088.) in his Chronicle calleth not onelie a noveltie, but little farre from Hereſie.
3. For praiers in an unknown tongue, LYRA and AQUINAS (on 1. Cor. 14.) as alſo Caſſander (conſult ar…. 14) freely acknowledge, what was the ancient cuſtome of the primitive Church, ſaying. In the primitive church. Thanks givings and all other cōmon ſervice was performed in the vulgare tongue, but how farre the Roman Church hath ſwerved frō this now, every one knoweth.
4. If wee ask alſo concerning paepall indulgences (depending on purgatorie) what was the ancient cuſtome, their owne Alfonſus à castro will tell us. (lib. 8. adv. Hereſ. tit. indulgentia) That their uſe is onelie of late in the Church. (ſayeth hee) & if wee ask what was the ancient cuſtome then uſed of indulgences, lar. will tell us, (lib. 1. de indulg. c. 8.) ſaying. I confeſſe that the forme of diſpenſing with a number of years or dayes, appointed for pennance, which was of old in uſe, is now cleane left off.
5. Concerning invocation of ſaints, Their owne Eckius (in his Enchrid. cap. 15.) confeſſeth, That there is no warrant for the ſame in the ſcriptures, and that the Apoſtles neither by word nor write left any ſuch thing behind thē to be done, ſo that it was not the Churches cuſtome in the Apoſtles times. But next, to the Apoſtles tymes, if we ask what was the ancient cuſtome of the church herin. Auguſtin wil tell us, (lib. 21 de civit. Dei. cap. 10) That at the celebration of the holie Myſteries the names of the Martyrs and ſaints in their owne order & place are named, but nowiſe invocated, (ſayth he.)
6. For having Images in Churches, what was the ancient cuſtome, is to be ſeene in that epiſtle of Epiphaniꝰ to the patriarch of Ieruſalem, tranſlated by Ierome, and inſert in his works, where it is ſaid, that this was againſt the cuſtome of Chriſtian religion, and therefore prohibited alſo in that famous Councell of Eliberis & 36. canon thereof, which made their owne Nicolaus Clemangis (lib. de non celeb. non inſtit.) to ſay, Of old the whole univerſall Church did decree for their cauſe who were converted from gentilſme to the faith, that no images ſhould be ſet up in Churches, but how farre the now Roman Church hath ſwerved frō this Ancient Cuſtome, everie one knoweth.
7. Concerning adoration of images, what was the ancient cuſtome in the primitive, yea, in the weſterne and Roman Church, Pope Gregorie in his Epiſtle to Serenus Biſhope of Marſils, ſhoweth (lib. 9. epiſtle 9.) forbidding any adoratiō of ſuch. As alſo that decree of that Councel of Frankford, convocat by Charles the great, at which the Legats of the Biſhope of Rome were preſent▪ Wherein all ſort of religious adoration of images was condemned and forbiddē, as not onlie contrary to Scripture, but alſo to the doctrine of the ancient Fathers and cuſtome of the then Roman Church, as Caſſander relateth (conſult. art. 21.) and may be ſeene in Baronius his annals. (Tom. 9. in anno 794▪ but how farre contrary to this ancient cuſtome the doctrine and practiſe of the Roman Church now is, is notour to all.
8. Concerning the giving of the Cup to the people, what was the ancient cuſtome of the Church, the verie Act of the Councell of Conſtance which decreed the contrary, doth clearelie confeſſe; to wit, That as Chriſt inſtituted this venerable ſacrament in both kinds of bread & wine and gaue it to his Diſciples, ſo alſo (ſay they) in the primitive Church, the ſame was received by the faithfull in both kinds, and it is ſufficiently certaine (ſayeth their Caſſander conſult. art. 22.) that the univerſall Church of Chriſt to this day did celebráte the ſacrament in both kinds, and the Weſterne or Roman Church more then a thouſand years after CHRIST (ſayeth hee) gaue the ſame in both kinds of bread & wine to all the members of the Church of Chriſt, as is manifeſt out of the innumerable teſtimonies both of Greeke & latine Fathers. But how farre the now Roman Church hath ſwerved frō this anciēt cuſtom, and her owne ancient practiſe, is likewiſe more thā clear & evident.
9. laſtly Concerning their ſolitary Maſſes, wherein the Prieſt onlie communicateth, if we ask if this was the Ancient Cuſtome of the Church, their very canon of the Maſſe will tell us the contrary, as their Caſſander obſerveth (conſuit. art. 24.) wherein the Prieſt praieth not only for himſelf, but alſo for all thē who do communicate with him, ſaying, Be mercifull to as many of us as baue beene partakers of this Altar. And chieflie in his prayer after communicating, ſaying, That which wee have receaved with our mouth, grant Lord, that we may hauehave received the ſame with a pure mynd. And of a temporall benefite it may bee unto us an everlaſting remedie. Thus in nine maine points of Popery we ſee how they hauehave ſwerved wyde from the ancient cuſtome of the Catholick Church.
5. THat a man by his owne private▪ spirit may rightly underſtand, and interpret Scripture.
VVHichWhich he ſayeth is contrary to 1. Cor. 11. 8. Wher the Apoſtle ſpeaking of the diverſitie of gifts, ſayeth, That to another is given the gift of prophecie or interpretation of ſcripture, as alſo which is contrary to 2. Pet. 1. 20. wher its ſaid, That no prophecie of Scripture is of private interpretation, as alſo is contrary to 1. Iohn 4. 1. where the Apoſtle biddeth Try the spirits whether they bee of God.
For anſwere to whom, 1. We diſclaime any ſuch Aſſertion as the harmonie of confeſsions witneſſeth, and ours in particulare 1581. art. 20. And ſo the places which hee adduceth maketh no wiſe againſt us. For we put a diſtinction between a private man & a private ſpirit, and of a private man we ſay, that ſomtimes ſuch a mā may hauehave more knowledge of the true meaning of ſcripture, that publick perſons, as ignorant Biſhops, ſuch as their owne Stella (on Luke 6. p. 184) telleth wer at the late Councell of Trent, yea, then Popes themſelves who pretend infallibilitie, of whom their owne Alfonſus à Caſtro ſpeaketh thus (lib. 1. adv. hereſ. cap. 4.) Seing it is certain that many of them were ſo unlearned (ſayeth hee) that they were altogether ignorant of the grāmer, how could thy then interpret Scripture? (ſayth he) But wee ſay, that ſuch knowledge private men hauehave not from their owne private ſpirit, but from the ſpirit of God ſpeaking in his word, comparing Scripture with Scripture, & obſcurer places with playner, and with David pſal. 119. …8. uſing prayer for illumination, and ſuch other meanes as conduce to that end, and that this is not onelyonly our doctrine, but the doctrine alſo of moſt famous Romaniſts, wee may ſee in Panormitan, (cap. Significaſti, de electione) and in Gerſon, (parte 1. de examinatione doctrinarum.) who ſay, That one private mans opinion is to be preferred, even to the Popes & a whole Councell, if that private man be moved by better authoritie of the old & new Teſtament, the practiſe wherof Gratian ſhoweth (36. q. 2. c. ultimo) That Ierome by authority of the ſcripture withſtood a whole Councell, and had his judgement preferred before them, as Paphuntius alſo had done before in the Councell of Nice in the matter of Prieſts marriage.
6. THat Peter's Faith failled.
VVHichWhich is contrary (ſayeth hee) to Luke 22. 32. where Chriſt ſayeth to PETER, I prayed for thee, that thy faith faill not. To whom I anſwere firſt, That wee hold no ſuch Aſſertion contrary to this Text, which ſpeaketh of Peters owne particulare ſaving grace of faith, which never failed, and not of his infallibilitie of profeſſiō, wherein he failed when after this he denyed his Maſter. 2. If hee would hauehave Peters infallibilitie to be grounded on theſe words, There is no doubt (ſayeth their owne Carthuſian) But he prayed there for all other his Apoſtles, having alſo ſaid, Satan hath deſired to vinnow you. 3. The expoſition of the pariſian Doctors, as Gerſon, Almain, Alfonſus alſo à Castro, and Pope Adrian the 6. is. That in the perſon of Peter (as a figure) the Lord prayed for his univerſall Church, as Bellarmin acknowledgeth (lib. 4. de pont. cap. 3.) and therefore it inferreth no more infallibilitie of Peter in particular, than it doth of the whole Church in generall, and the members therof. And giving that it inferreth onlie Peters infallibilitie, who was an Apoſtle and Pen-man of ſcripture, yet it inferres nothing of the popes infallibilitie as his pretended Succeſſour, this being perſonal to him, but not tranſmitted to others.
His next Teſtimony that he bringeth is Math. 16. 18. where our Saviour ſayeth, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I wil build my Church. To which I ſhall anſwere in their owne Cardinall Cuſanus words (lib. 2. de cōcord. Cath. cap. 13. whō Ferus alſo on this place followeth, and both of thē the ſtreame of ancient Fathers) who ſpeaketh thus, Tho it was ſaid to Peter, upon this rock I will build my Church yet by the rock (ſayeth he) wee underſtand Christ himſelf whom he confeſſeth, & if Peter were to be underſtood by this rock as a groundſtone of the Church, are not the other Apoſtles (according to S. Ierome) groundſtones (ſayeth hee?)
His third place of ſcripture which he bringeth is, Math. 23. 2. to which I hauehave already anſwered in the ſecond Aſſertion, but cannot paſſe by this, that he matcheth the Pope ſitting in Peters Chayre, with the Scribes and Phariſees Chriſts greateſt enemies, ſitting in Moſes Chayre, and indeed heerein they fitly agree.
The laſt place which he bringeth is, Iohn 11. 49. where ſpeaking of Caiphas words, it is ſaid, That hee ſpake not this of himſelf, but being High-Priest that yeare, he prophecied that Jeſus ſhould die for the Nation, which (hee ſayeth) the High Prieſt ſpake-truly-ſpeaking out of Moſes Chayre, which Chriſt commanded to be heard and obeyed, touching matters of faith. To whom I anſwere firſt, That his alleadged ſpeaking trulie in this point, cannot be attribute to the Chaire of Moſes, nor to him as High-Prieſt who ſate therin, for then he had not erred ſo groſlie there-after in it, when he pronunced Chriſt to be a blaſphemer. But 2. Cardinal Tolet anſweres for us clearly, ſaying, Remarke that Caiphas ſentence in that ſenſe, which he conceived it, was both wicked and falſe. Falſe, becauſe it was neither lawfull nor expedient to kill an innocent mā for the tēporall ſafety of a Republick, And Wiked, becauſe it was againſt juſtice to kil an innocēt, therſore Caiphas (ſayth he) ſinned moſt grievouſlie therein, and all who conſented with him. Let any then conſider how this maketh for the Popes infallibilitie.