The Ancient Doctrine of the Church of England, Part 1 · Section 14
Concerning our adverſaries their blaſphemous exceptions againſt the Scripture; Spectacles, Chap. 14. à page 447. uſ que ad 463.
THough Catholikes hold for moſt certaine, that the Scripture is not the ſole rule of faith, nor that out of it alone all controverſies can be decided, as for example in particular, which bookes be Canonicall Scripture, which not: yet for moſt things now a dayes in controverſie, many Catholikes have offered to trie the matter onelyonly by Scripture.
Though Catholikes ground many points upon tradition and practice of the Church: yet they ground others upon plaine and expreſſe authority of Scripture, from which, Proteſtants are faine to flie, running to this or that corner of I know not what figurative, or tropicall interpretation.
Though the Pope queſtion not, much leſſe condemne Scriptures of obſcurity and inſufficiency: yet his Apoſtles and Evangeliſts have left ſome things in writing, of which ſome are hard even by the judgment of Scripture it ſelfe, for ſo ſaith Saint Peter of the Epiſtle of Saint Paul, which ſaith he, the unlearned and unconſtant doe abuſe as they doe other Scriptures, to their owne perdition.
If any condemne the Scripture of inſufficiency, it is St. John in ſaying, that all things are not written, and St. Paul in willing the Theſſalonians to hold the traditions which they had learned, whether by ſpeech or letter.
Whereas the Knight chargeth us with ranking the Bible in the firſt place of prohibited bookes: wee ſay it is falſe; for it is not in the Catalogue of ſuch bookes: onelyonly in the rules which concernes the Index there is mentioned, how the free uſe of vulgar tranſlations is not to be permitted; but for the Latine vulgar tranſlation there is no manner of reſtraint, though if there had beene, we might very well have warranted it by the authority of St. Jerome, who did no way admit ſuch free uſe even of the Latine Bibles.
It is no ſuch crime to forbid the reading of Scripture to ſome ſort of people, as may appeare by the teſtimony of this holy Father, who in the ſame place ſaith moreover, that the beginning of Geneſis, and the beginning and end of Ezekiel were not to be read by the Iewes, till they came to thirties yeare of age.
A kinde of forbidding of reading the Scripture is no derogation, but a great commendation of it, for they are forbidden to be read out of reverence and honour due unto them, and in regard of the danger which may come by them, not of themſelves, but in regard of the weakeneſſe of the Reader for want of neceſſary learning and humility.
For Cornelius Agrippa, it maketh no more matter what he ſaith, then what the Knight ſaith, for it is but aske my brother if I be a theefe.
Not to anſwer the places objected by the Knight, out of Lindan, Leſſius, Turrian, and Pighius, I ſay in generall, that thoſe things are ſpoken not of the Scripture, as it is in it ſelfe, that is, conſiſting of both words and meaning, but of bare words and letters only, which Haeretikes ſtill do, and ever have abuſed, as the Devill himſelfe did to our Saviour; and in this ſenſe it is a wood of theeves.
Our Authors ſay no more then St. Jerome doth in effect; Marcion, Baſilides, and other plagues of Haeretikes have not the Goſpell of God,Comment. in 1. ad Gal. becauſe they have not the Holy Ghoſt, without whom it becommeth the Goſpell of man which is taught; nor let us thinke that the Goſpell conſiſteth in the words of Scripture, but in the ſenſe; not in the ſuperficies or barke, but in the pith; not in the leaves of ſpeech, but in the roote of reaſon: ſo that if the Knight will ſay any more of this matter, he muſt undertake the quarrell againſt St. Ierome.
Leſſius in particular, whom the Knight moſt up braideth to us, is farre from ſaying that the Scripture is uncertaine in it ſelfe; that is, that the doctrine thereof is doubtfull, but onelyonly that our rule will be uncertaine, or rather wee uncertaine of the rule, becauſe wee cannot know the Scripture by it ſelfe.
It is not all one to ſay that Scripture alone is no ſufficient Rule, and to ſay it is imperfect. For although the Knight imagineth, that the All-ſufficiencie, or containing of all things expreſſely, is a neceſſarie point of perfection, hee is deceived; for then would it follow, that the Goſpell of Saint Matthew, Saint Marke, and other particular Bookes ſhould be imperfect, and eſpecially that of Saint John, wherein hee ſaith expreſſely, that all things are not written.
Were the Scripture perfect in the Knights ſenſe, yet would it not then be a ſufficient rule of Faith of it ſelfe alone; for it would ſtill be a booke or writing, the very nature whereof, doth not ſuffer it to be the ſole rule of Faith, or judge of Controverſies; for a Iudge muſt be able to ſpeake, to heare, and to anſwer, whereas, the nature of a Booke is, as it were, to leave it ſelfe to be read, and expounded by men.
No Catholike declineth the triall of Scripture, in regard of imperfection, but onelyonly in regard that it being a written Word; no Heretike can be convinced by it, as I ſhewed you even now out of Tertullian, who ſaith, It is loſt labour to diſpute with an Heretike out of Scripture.
Let any man by the effects, judge who reverence the Scripture moſt, Catholikes or Proteſtants: let him compare the labours of the one in tranſlating and expounding Scriptures, with the labour of the other, and hee ſhall find the truth of this matter.
In admitting any triall with Proteſtants by Scriptures, De praeſcript. c. 15. Non eſſe admittendos haereticos ad ineundam de ſcripturis provocationem, quos ſine ſcripturis probamus ad ſcripturas non pertinere. Vos qui eſtis? quando & unde veniſtis? quid in meo agitis non mei. Quo denique Marcion jure ſylva… meas caediswee condeſcend more to their infirmitie than wee need, or they can of right challenge. For wee acknowledge that ſaying of Tertullian moſt true, that Heretikes are not to be admitted to the Scriptures, to whom the Scripture in no wiſe belongeth; who are you, when, and whence are you come? What do you in my ground, you that are not mine? By what right, ô Marcion, doſt thou fell my wood? By what leave, ô Valentine, doſt thou turne my fountaines? By what authoritie, ô Apelles, doſt thou remove my bounds? &c. This is Tertullians diſcourſe and words, where it is but changing the names of Marcion, Valentine, and Apelles, into Luther, Calvin, and Beza; and it will fit as well, as if it were made for them.
You muſt first ſhew your ſelves owners of the Land, before you can claime the writings and evidences belonging to it, and which make good the Title.
The Hammer.
VVHereas many other things argue, that our Adverſaries maintaine a deſperate cauſe: ſo eſpecially their excepting againſt the holy Scriptures of God, and refuſing to be tried by them in the points of difference betweene us and them. For what was the reaſon why the Manichees called in queſtion the authoritie of the Goſpell of Saint Matthew, Aug. l. 28. cont. Fauſt. cap. 2.and the Acts of the Apoſtles? Deſperation; becauſe by thoſe writings they were convinced of blaſphemous Errour. What was the reaſon why the Ebionites rejected all Saint Pauls Epiſtles? Deſperation;Irenaeus, l. 8. cap. 26. becauſe by them their hereſie was moſt apparantly confuted.Iren. l. 3. c. 2. Cum ex ſcriptur is arguuntur in accuſationem convertuntur ipſarum ſcripturarum, quaſi non recte habeant, nec ſint ex authoritate nec poſsit ex iis inveniri veritas ab his, qui ignorunt traditionem. Tertul. praeſc. adverſ. haeret. What was the reaſon why the Gnoſticks and Valentinians diſparage the Scriptures, ſaying, that They were not of authoritie, and the truth could not be found out of them by thoſe who were ignorant of Tradition? Deſperation. What was the cauſe why Papias, and the Millenaries preferred word of mouth before Scriptures, and pretended foreign, unwritten tradition for many of their fables? Deſperation. What was the reaſon why the Heretikes in Tertullians daies refuſed to examine their Doctrines by the touchſtone of the Scriptures, ſaying, More things were required than the Apostles had left in writing, for that either the Apoſtles knew not all, or delivered not all to all. In like manner, wee can impute it to nothing elſe but diffidence, and diſtruſt of their cauſe; that Lyndan, Turrian, Leſsius, and Pighius ſpeake ſo diſgracefully of holy Scriptures as they doe, terming them dead Characters; a dead and killing Letter, a ſhell without a kirnell, a leaden rule, a boot for any foot, a noſe of wax, Sybils Propheſies, Sphinx his riddles, a wood of Thieves, a ſhop of Heretikes, imperfect, doubtfull, obſcure, full of perplexities. If they ſhould beſtow the like ſcandalous Epithets upon the Kings Letters patents, or the Popes Buls or Briefes, they would bee ſoone put into the Inquiſition, or brought into ſome Court of Judicature, and there have either their tongues or their eares cut, or their fore-heads branded: yet the Ieſuit is ſo farre from condemning theſe blaſphemous ſpeeches in his fellow-Jeſuits and Romaniſts, that hee deviſeth excuſes for them, and ſowes figleaves together, to cover theſe their Pudenda: which I will plucke off one after another, in my anſwer to his particular exceptions againſt the Knight.
To the firſt. It is true, that ſome Roman writers of late have made an aſſay to prove ſome of their Popiſh doctrines out of Scripture: but with no better ſucceſſe than Horantius had in undertaking to refute Calvin his Inſtitutions, as appeareth by Pilkington his Parallels. If the Scriptures were ſo firme for our Adverſaries, why are not they as firm for them? why doth the Ieſſuit in the fore-front of this Section, bid, as it were, defiance to them, profeſſing in plaine termes, that The Scripture is not the ſole rule of Faith; nor that out of it alone, all Controverſies can be decided. Doubtleſſe, any indifferent Reader will conceive, that the Scriptures make moſt for them who ſtand moſt for their authoritie, and perfection, as all the reformed Divines doe, not onelyonly affirming, but alſo confirming, that the Scripture is not only a moſt perfect, but the only infallible rule of faith:Ep. 112. Si divinarum Scripturarum earum ſcilicet quae in Eccleſiâ Cano. nicae nominantur, perſpicuâ firmatur authoritate, ſi…e ullâ dubitatione credendum eſt: aliis verò teſtibus vel teſtimoniis quibus aliquid credendum eſſe ſuadetur, tibi credere vel non credere liceat, quantum ei momenti ad faciendam fidem vel habere, vel non habere perpenderis. Ep. 97 Solis iis Scripturarum libris qui jam Canoniti appellantur, didici hunc timorem honoremque deferre, ut nullum earum authorem ſcribendo aliquid erraſſe firmiſsimè credam. lib. de Nat. & Grat c. 61. Me in hujuſmodi quorumlibet Scriptis hominum liberum, quia ſolis Canonicis debeo ſine recuſatione conſenſum, l. 11. c. 5. & Ep. 48. every article of divine faith muſt be grounded upon a certaine and infallible ground to us, but there is no certaine and infallible ground to us of ſupernaturall truth but Scripture, as is abundantly proved by Saint Auſtine; If any thing be confirmed by perſpicuous authority of Canonicall Scriptures, we muſt without any doubt or haeſitation beleeve it, but to other witneſſes or teſtimonies, we may give credit as we ſee cauſe, and in his 97. Epiſtle to St. Ierome, I have learned to yeeld that honour and reverence onelyonly to the Canonicall Scriptures, that I most firmely beleeve, that no Author of them could erre in any thing he wrot: and in his booke de natura & gratia, I profeſſe my ſelfe free in all ſuch writings of men, becauſe I owe abſolute conſent without any demurre or ſtaggering onelyonly to the Canonicall bookes of Scripture. To the ſame purpoſe he writeth againſt Fauſtus the Manichee l. 11. c. 5. and ep. 48. But what neede I preſſe St. Auſtine when the evident letter of Scripture is for this truth, Titus, 1.2. Rom. 3.4. God cannot lie, and let God be true and every man a lier that is ſubject to error and falſehood. Againe, the Scriptures are ſufficient to inſtruct us in all points neceſſary to ſalvation: therefore every article of divine faith is evidently grounded upon Scripture. The Antecedent I thus prove, 2 Tim. 3.15.16. whatſoever is profitable for doctrine, for reproofe, for correction, for inſtruction in righteouſneſſe, in ſuch ſort that it is able to make a man wiſe unto ſalvation, and perfect to every good worke, is ſufficient to inſtruct in all points of ſalvation: but the Scripture is ſo profitable, that it is able to make wiſe unto ſalvation and perfect to every good worke: Ergo, It is ſufficient to inſtruct in all points neceſſary to ſalvation. The major is evident ex terminis: the minor is the letter of the text; and that the adverſary may not except that this is my collection onelyonly,L. 3. Adverſ. haer. c. 1. Non per alios diſpo ſitionem ſalutis noſtrae cognovimus quam per cos per quos evangelium ad nos pervenit, quod quidem tunc preconiaverunt, poſtea per Dei volun tatem nobis in Scripturis tradiderunt fundamentum & columnam fidei noſtrae futuram. Aug. l. 3. cont. Lit. Petil. c. 6. Sive de Chrlſto ſive de ejus eccleſia, ſive de quacunque re quae pertinet ad fidem vitam que noſtram, non dicom ſi nos, nequaquam comparandi ei quid dixit ſi nos, ſed omnino quod ſeturus adjecit, ſi Angelus de Coelo vobis annunciaverit praeterquam quod in Scripturis Legalibus & Evangelicis accepiſtis, anathema ſit. I will produce to him impregnable teſtimonies of the ancient Fathers. Irenaeus, We have not knowne by others, the meanes which God hath appointed for our ſalvation, then by thoſe by whom the Goſpell came unto us, which at the firſt the Apostles preached by word of mouth, but afterwards by the will of God, delivered in writing to be the foundation and pillar of our faith. The ſecond is Saint Auſtine, Whether concerning Chriſt, or concerning his Church, or concerning any thing that pertaineth to our faith and life, I will not ſay, if we but even as he going forward addeth, if an Angell from Heaven ſhall preach unto you any thing but what you have received in the Scriptures of the law and the Goſpell, accurſed be hee. Yea but the Ieſuit objecteth againſt us and theſe Holy Fathers, that by the Scriptures we cannot prove, which bookes of Scripture are Canonicall, and which are not. I anſwere: firſt, our queſtion here, is not of the principles of Divinity, but of Theologicall concluſions. Now that Scripture is the word of God, and that theſe bookes are Canonicall Scriptures, are principles in Divinity, and therefore not to be proved (according to the rule of the great Philoſopher) in the ſame ſcience: It is ſufficient to make good our Tenet, that the Canonicall Scriptures being preſuppoſed as principles, every concluſion de fide, may be deduced out of them. Secondly, that ſuch bookes of Holy Scriptures are Canonicall, and the reſt which are knowne by the name of Apochrypha, are not Canonicall, is proved by arguments and teſtimonies drawne out of Scripture it ſelfe, by Whitaker, Diſputatione de ſacrâ Scripturâ, controverſiâ primâ; by Reynolds moſt copiouſly in his Cenſura librorum Apochryphorum. Thirdly, I retorte the Ieſuits argument againſt himſelfe, when they teach tradition is part of Gods word, how prove they it to be ſo? by Scripture, or Tradition? by Scripture they cannot prove, that unwritten traditions are Gods word: if they prove it by Tradition, then they begge the point in queſtion, and prove idem per idem.
To the ſecond. The Romaniſts ground ſome doctrines of their faith upon the letter of Scripture, but it is that letter which killeth, as for example; they ground their carnall preſence of Chriſt in the Sacrament, upon thoſe words in the ſixt of St. Iohn; unleſſe yee eate the fleſh of the Sonne of God and drinke his blood, you have no life in you: which words, if you take according to the letter, this letter killeth, ſaith Origen; but it is the ſpirit ſaith our Saviour, that quickeneth, the fleſh profiteth nothing, the words which I ſpeake unto you, they are ſpirit, and they are life, Iohn, 6.63. He that pierceth the barke, and commeth to the ſap, runneth not from the tree of life, but rather runneth to it: ſo doe we when we leave the barke of the letter upon neceſſary occaſions, and pierce into the heart, and draw out the ſap of the ſpirituall meaning. To preſſe the letter of Scripture againſt the ſpirituall meaning and analogie of faith, is not onelyonly Iewiſh but Haereticall. For example, The Anthropomorphites ground their haereſie upon plaine and expreſſe words of Scripture: from which to uſe the Ieſuits owne words, All Orthodox Divines are faine to flie to figurative and tropicall interpretations.
To the third. Firſt, Saint Peter ſaith not, foreign but foreign, not in which Epiſtles of St. Paul, but in which points and heads of doctrine many things are hard to be underſtood. Secondly, though ſome points be hard to be underſtood in themſelves, or are obſcurely ſet downe in Scripture, it followeth not from thence, that all things neceſſary to ſalvation are not plainely delivered therein. For, as before I proved out of Saint Auſtine and Saint Chryſoſtome, Among thuſe things which are plainly delivered in Scriptures, all ſuch points are found as containe faith and manners, all things that are neceſſarie are manifest. Thirdly, thoſe things which are obſcurely ſet downe in Saint Pauls Epiſtles, may be, and are elſewhere in holy Scriptures more perſpicuouſly delivered. Laſtly, Saint Peter ſaith not, that thoſe things are hard to be underſtood ſimply, and to all men; but to the ignorant and unſtable, who wreſt all Scripture to their owne deſtruction. Among which number, the Ieſuit muſt reckon himſelfe and his aſſociates, before they can fit this text to their purpoſe.
To the fourth. Firſt, this paſſage out of Saint Iohn hath beene diſcuſſed before, and cleered; where I ſhewed, that it maketh nothing againſt, but ſtrongly for the ſufficiencie of Scripture, to inſtruct in all points neceſſarie to ſalvation. For, though all Chriſts ſpeeches and actions are not regiſtred by the Evangeliſt, yet as Saint Auſtine rightly inferreth out of the words following, (haec ſcripta ſunt ut credatis & credentes vitam aeternam habeatis.) 2 Theſſ. 2.15.electa ſunt quae ſaluti credentium ſufficerent: Such things were made choice of to be written, Ver. 2. And Paul as his manner was, went unto them of Theſſalonica, and three Sabbath dayes reaſoned with them out of the Scriptures.as might ſuffice for the ſalvation of all Beleevers. Neither is that text of Saint Paul any whit derogatorie to the perfection of Scriptures: for whatſoever hee meanes by Tradition (per Sermonem) taught by word of mouth, it is certaine out of the ſeventeenth of the Acts, that all Saint Pauls ſpeech and diſcourſe to the Theſſaloinans, whereunto the words have reference were out of Scripture. Secondly, the words themſelves, Tenete traditiones quas dediciſtis ſive per ſermonem, ſive per Epiſtolam; import not that the Apoſtle delivered divers things to them in writing by an Epiſtle, and without writing, by word of mouth: but that he preached to them, and taught them the Chriſtian doctrine both wayes, by Letters, and by ſpeech: and that they ſhould have as much care of his writings, as of thoſe things hee ſpake to them in preſence. Thirdly, admit they were different things which hee ſpake to them, and which hee wrote: all that can be from thence inferred, is but this, that all points of ſaving Doctrine are not written in this Epiſtle of Saint Paul to the Theſſalonians: which may be granted without any prejudice to our Tenet. For thoſe things that are not written in that Epiſtle, might be, and undoubtedly are written in other of his Epiſtles, or other bookes of holy Scripture.
To the fift. Saint Ierome is not againſt the free uſe of Scripture in the vulgar tongue, for hee himſelfe tranſlated the Scriptures into the vulgar tongue of the Dalmatians; hee dedicates his Commentarie upon Scripture to Lay-perſons, yea many of them to women: whom he exhorteth,Haec monilia in pectore, haec in auribus hereant. to account them as their chiefe casket of Iewels; let theſe Iewels hang upon your neckes, and in your eares, Epiſt. ad Demetriad: wherein hee much commendeth the Husbandmen about Bethlem, for being ſo perfect in Scriptures, that They had the Pſalmes of David by heart, and ſang them as they followed the Plow. Arator ſtivam tenens cantat Davidicum melos: he inſtructeth Laeta a religious Matron, how to bring up her daughter in the knowledge of the Scriptures, and what method to obſerve in the reading thereof, Progemmis & ſerico divinos codices amet, In ſteed of ſilks and precious ſtones, let her handle the books of holy Scripture: let her first learne the Pſalter, &c.diſcat primo Pſalterium his ſe Canticis avocet, & in Proverbiis Salomonis erudiatur ad vitam. In Eccleſiaste conſueſcat quae mundi ſunt calcare. In Iob virtutis & patientiae exempla ſectetur. Ad evangelia tranſeat nunquam eapoſitura de manibus, &c. Neither are the words you quote out of him, againſt the free uſe of the Scripture, but againſt the practiſe of ſome forward perſons, who, Lapwing-like, offer to flye with a piece of the ſhell on their head, taking upon them to expound holy Scriptures to others, which they underſtand not themſelves, and to teach that which they never learned, docent quod nunquam didicorunt.
To the ſixt. This practiſe of the Iewes concludeth nothing at all, but that thoſe paſſages of Scripture above mentioned are very difficult, and ſubject to miſconſtruction; and therefore require a diſcreet Reader of ripe yeares, and judgement. Whether this their practiſe be commendable or no, in reſtraining all before they arrive to thirty, from reading thoſe paſſages of Scripture, I diſpute not: but this is certaine, that even this cuſtome of theirs which the Ieſuit brings againſt us, makes for us; for they permitted all men before thirty, to reade all other chapters of holy Scriptures, and after thirty, theſe alſo.
To the ſeventh. The honour the Papiſts doe the Scriptures, in prohibiting them to be read, is like the favour ſhe did her Paramour in the Poet, Quae prae amore excluſit foras, which out of pure love thruſt him out of doores. The greateſt honour wee can doe Gods holy Oracles, is diligently to reade them, attentively to heare them, humbly to obey them, and daily to ſearch them, as the deeds and evidences of our ſalvation;Ioh. 5.39. according to the Precept of our bleſſed Saviour, Search the Scriptures, for in them yee thinke yee have eternall life, and they are they which teſtifie of mee. As for the Ieſuits reaſon, drawne from the weakneſſe of the Readers, it is very weake, and of no force at all.Pſal. 19 7. Prov. 1.4. Firſt, becauſe the Scriptures were written to give knowledge to the ſimple, and wiſedome to the unlearned. Secondly, becauſe if this his reaſon were good, their Church ſhould prohibit all other bookes as well as Scriptures, or rather much more than Scriptures, in regard there are errours in them, but none in Scriptures: and God hath promiſed a ſpeciall bleſſing to thoſe, who in obedience to his ordinance, diligently reade and ſtudy the holy Scriptures, which hee hath not to thoſe that reade other books.
To the eight. This Proverb might moſt rightly have beene applied to the Ieſuit in the former Section, when he, a Ieſuit, produced Oliverius Manerius a Jeſuit, againſt Henry Buxhorne, Deane of Tyelmond, then hee ſaid in effect, Aske my brother Jeſuit if I be a thiefe, or rather a ſlanderer. But it no way fitteth Cornelius Agrippa, and the Knight, the one being a zealous Proteſtant, the other a profeſſed Papiſt, though diſcovering, and ingeniouſly confeſſing divers abuſes in the Papacie. If hee were as the Ieſuit ſayes, a Magician, becauſe hee wrote of Art-magicke; what were Pope Hildebrand and Sylvester, who not onelyonly ſtudied, but alſo practiſed the black-Art, as Benocardinalis, Platina, and others write.
To the ninth. The Ieſuit will not ſtand anſwering every one ſeverally, becauſe hee dare not keepe that ſtation for feare of Gun-ſhot. For the anſwer hee giveth in generall, it is falſe and abſurd, if not impious: falſe, becauſe it is certaine, that thoſe ſimilitudes cannot be applied to the letter onelyonly, without the meaning; nor doe the Heretikes now a dayes, nor did the Devill himſelfe alleage onelyonly the letter and ſyllables of Scripture, but the meaning alſo,2 Pet. 4.16. though perverting and wreſting it to an evill end, and drawing falſe concluſions from it. Hee that calleth the Scriptures Sybils Prophecies blaſphemouſly carpeth at the obſcuritie of the meaning: and Pighius, who compared it to a noſe of wax, impiouſly taxeth the diverſitie of ſenſes, and interpretations which the Scripture is ſubject unto in it ſelfe. Laſtly, the Ieſuit taketh himſelfe by the noſe, in ſaying, Heretikes in all Controverſies run to the letter of the Scriptures, leaving the true ſenſe, and ſpirituall meaning: for ſo doe the Romaniſts apparantly, namely, in the Controverſie of Supremacie, Ecce duo gladii; Loe here two ſwords: therefore the Pope hath the temporall and ſpirituall Sword at command. Peter, riſe up, kill and eate: therefore the Pope hath power to put Princes to death. In the queſtion about the number of Sacraments, they alleage the letter of that text in the vulgar tranſlation, Hoc eſt magnum Sacramentum, to prove marriage a Sacrament; whereas the Apoſtle in the ſame place ſaith, that hee ſpeaketh not of corporall marriage of a man and his wife: but of the ſpirituall marriage of Chriſt and his Church. Likewiſe in the Controverſie about the reall preſence, they run to the letter, Except yee eate the fleſh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his blood: though Chriſt in the ſame place expounding himſelfe, ſaith, The words which I have ſpoken unto you, are ſpirit and life: the like may be obſerved in other Controverſies. For anſwer to all which texts, wee tell him out of Saint Ierome, whom himſelfe quoteth in the next Paragraph; That the Goſpell conſiſteth not in the words of Scripture, but in the ſenſe: not in the ſuperſicies or barke, but in the pith: not in the leaves of ſpeech, but in the root of reaſon.
To the tenth. How neere neighbours the Romaniſts are to Marcion, who denied, or by conſequence, overthrew the truth of Chriſts humaine nature; as the Papiſts doe in the Sacrament, vailing him under the outſide, or accidents of a round water; and what affinitie the Ieſuit hath with the reſt of the ancient Heretikes, the Knight ſhewed him before in his ſeventh Section: and if hee deſire to know more of his pedegree from them, I referre him to an Appendix to Whitakers anſwer to Sanders his Demonſtration, page 801. As for the aſperſion of old Hereſies, which hee caſts upon us, they are waſhed away by Biſhop Morton, and Doctor Field, in their Treatiſes of the Church, Ad notam ſextam. But why hee denies that wee have the Spirit, arrogating it onelyonly to himſelfe, I ſee no reaſon but the pride of his owne ſpirit, together with the malice of the evill ſpirit, who ſuggeſted unto him this uncharitable cenſure of us.
To the eleventh. The Scripture is a Light, Pſal. 119. and the nature of a light is, firſt to diſcover it ſelfe, and then all things elſe: therefore Calvin to his fond queſtion, how know you Scripture to be Scripture? anſwereth acutely by retortion, how know you the Sun to be the Sun? If hee ſay, by his bright luſtre and beames; wee ſay the ſame of holy Scripture, that it is diſcerned by its owne light. Which, if the Papiſts ſee hot, the fault ought not to be laid upon the Sunbeames, but upon their Owles eyes.
To the twelfth. That rule which needeth any thing to be added to it, is imperfect: but all Papiſts teach, that to the written Word unwritten Traditions muſt bee added to make a compleat and perfect rule of Faith: all Papiſts therefore teach, the Scripture alone to be an imperfect Rule. We on the contrary ſtand for the perfection of Scripture, and conſtantly and unanimouſly defend that not onelyonly the whole Scripture is perfect, but that every part alſo hath its owne perfection, but not the perfection of the whole. Becauſe the eyes have not the perfection of the whole head; or the head, the perfection of the whole body; a man cannot conclude, that the eye, or the head is imperfect: no more can the Ieſuit conclude that the Goſpell of Saint Matthew, Saint Marke, or Saint Iohn are therefore imperfect, becauſe they containe not in them all doctrines in particular neceſſary to ſalvation. It is ſufficient that they together with the reſt, perfectly inſtruct us in all points of faith: by themſelves they perfectly informe us ſo farre as the Holy Ghoſt intendeth, that we ſhould be informed by each of them in particular, and this is their perfection, that they have no defect in matter or forme, and that they concurre with the reſt of the bookes of Scripture, to the maine end of the Holy Ghoſt in committing the word of God in writing, for the infallible and perfect inſtruction of the Church, and every faithfull ſoule in all Doctrines needfull to ſalvation.
To the thirteenth. Although many Proteſtants have written de Scripturâ judice, and they have warrant our of Scripture ſo to ſtile it; (the words which I have ſpoken they ſhall judge you) yet in propriety of ſpeech, which eſpecially ought to be uſed in ſtating queſtions, the Scripture is rather to be termed a rule and law, or ſentence of the judge, then the judge himſelfe: the ſupreame and infallible judge of all controverſies, we teach to be the Holy Ghoſt, ſpeaking to us out of Scriptures, and the ſubordinate or inferior Judge the conſencient authority of the Catholique Church.
To the fourteenth. The Ieſuit ſhewed no ſuch thing, nor can ſhew out of Tertullian, De praeſcrip adverſ. haeret. c. 17.who convinced the greater part of Haeretikes in his time by Scripture, as appeareth in his writings. In the place which the Ieſuit quoteth, he hath no ſuch words as he alleageth out of him: viz. that there is no good to be done with Haeretikes by Scriptures. He ſaith indeede in that place, that it was but in vaine to conferre with a certaine kinde of Haeretikes by Scriptures alone, quia iſta haereſis non recipit quaſdam Scripturas, et ſi recipit, non recipit integras et ſi aliquatenus integras praeſtat, &c. That is, This haereſie admits not of certaine Scriptures, or not intire, or if in ſome ſort in ire, it perverts them by diviſing divers interpretations. In which words he no way diſparageth the holy Scriptures, or derogateth from their perfection: but diſcovereth the wicked practiſe of Haeretikes, and their evaſions and tergiverſations, when they are moſt evidently convinced by Scriptures. Will you ſay that if a Bedlam or willfull malefactor either by puffing out the Candle, or ſhutting his eyes, or looking another way, will not reade or ſee the evidence that is brought againſt him, that therfore the evidence is not able to convince him?
To the fifteenth. Though it were granted the Ieſuit, that the Papiſts have written more upon the Scriptures then Proteſtants, it will not from thence follow, that they more reverence or honour the Scripture: ſithence in their very Commentaries upon Scripture, they derrogate from the authority, ſufficiency, and perfection of them, by refuſing to referre all points of faith in controverſie to their deciſion: by reſolving their faith laſt of all not into them, but into the Church: by teaching, that they are obſcure even in points neceſſary to ſalvation; and that unwritten Traditions are equally to be reverenced with them. Secondly, compare men with men, and oportunities with oportunities; it may eaſily be proved that the Proteſtants in their preaching, and writings upon Scripture, have beene farre more laborious then the Papiſts. Name me one Papiſt who Preached ſo often, and wrote ſo accurately upon the Holy Scriptures, as Calvin. I grant their bookes exceede in bulke and number, becauſe they have a hundred to one, and they abound with leiſure, and meanes, having many thouſands maintained in their monaſteries, who are not charged as our Divines are, with care of ſoules, and perpetuall labours in their Paſtorall function.
To the ſixteenth. If it were ſufficient to bandy ſentences without proofe, and words without reaſons, how eaſily could we ſay, mutato nomine de te fabula narratur. It is but changing the names of Marcion, Valentine and Apelles, into Bellarmine Valentia and Leſsius, or if you will, into Iohn Flood, and it will fit as well as if it were made for him. How proves he that Papiſts are in the Church, and Proteſtants out of it? He ſhall never prove but that we have as good title, and much better, to the Holy Scriptures, the deedes and evidences of our ſalvation then they.
To the ſeventeenth. Poſſeſſion of a land, proveth not neceſſarily a right to the writings, and evidences belonging unto it. For poſſeſſion may be got by violent uſurpation, or intruſion; but on the contrary, the writings and evidences left by the diſpoſer and bequeather of the land, being examined, will ſhew who hath the true title to the land, that is, the Church. By theſe deedes and evidences, we offer to be tried, but they refuſe the triall, pretending I know not what nuncupatory will by word of mouth, and diſparaging theſe writings, and evidences as uncertaine, ambiguus and unperfect, as the Knight hath made good againſt him in this Section.