THE TRYING OVT OF THE TRVTH: BEGVNN AND PROSEQVVTED IN CERTAYN Letters or Passages between Iohn Aynsworth and Henry Aynsworth; the one pleading for, the other against the present religion of the Church of Rome. The chief things here handled, are. 1. Of Gods word and scriptures, whither they be a sufficient rule of our faith. 2. Of the Scriptures expounded by the Church; and of unwrit­ten traditions. 3. Of the Church of Rome, whither it be the true Catholike Church, and her sentence to be received, as the cer­tayn truth.

Published for the good of others by E. P. in the yeare 1615.

E. P. to the Christian reader.

CHristian reader, I having had some interest in the con­veyance of the passages here following, and with the cō ­sent of both the writers, taken knowledge of the matter in controversie; was moved, and did resolve to publish it to the view of others. Considering, that the subiect and question han­dled, is very profitable, and the truth therein, necessary to be knowen. And whereas the controverters are so different in iudgment, and yet both of them for conscience sake suffer af­flictiō, being separated frō the Ch: of Engl: the one, to the pra­ctise of a Romane Catholik; the other to a way, thereunto most opposite; and both of them being leaders & men of note, in their so much different religions: it may move a desire to see the thing further prosecuted between them, and provoke a going forward where the stay is. I have without prejudice, but not (as I hope) without the good liking of both parties, (who ech of them seem­ed unto me very willing, that any should read their writings,) put forth these things: hoping that some benefit may come to the readers hereby: whom I wish all of them to follow the Apostles counsel, to try the spirits whether they be of God. His grace be 1. Ioh. 4. with us all, to guide us in the truth, Amen.

E. P.

The occasion and beginning of the passages following.

MR. Iohn Aynsworth whiles he was prisoner in London, had conference with some other priso­ners that differed in religion from him; about the right way of mans justification before God &c: which things he after answered in writing also, with this chal­lenge at the end:

Let who will answer it; I could wish for name sake Mr Hen­ry Aynsworth might see it. If any answer it, let him set to his name, as I set down mine, to stand to all, and then I will deal with him.

Iohn Aynsworth.

This writing was, as he wished, sent to the party by him nominated: who upon the receipt thereof, wrote as foloweth.

To Mr Iohn Aynsworth, prisoner in London, Mercy from God our Father, and the Lord Iesus Christ our hope.

MR. Aynsworth, I received a writing under your hand and name, touching some controversie in religiō: you defēding the faith of the church of Rome that now is, against such as haue forsaken her for de­parting from the ancient faith of the church that was in Rome when Paul wrote thereunto: among whom we are, the witnesses of Iesus Christ. You provoke in the end, who will to answer your writing, but wish for names sake my self mought see it, promising, if any answer it, affixing his name, you then will deal with him. Though I have at this tyme other opposites to an­swer, and affayres important lying upon me, yet vvould I not altogither let passe this occasion offred by your self, whom for nation and name, (& I knovv not vvhither also for neerer alliance,) I regard as is meet, gree­ving for your estate, who are in captivity not so much in body as in soul: from vvhich if I could procure your release I should be glad. The vvay [Page 4] to doe you good, or any that is in like error, I take to be this; that vve begin at the root and ground vvork of our religions, in vvhich if vve can accord, there vvil [...]e more hope of other things. As first, hovv our dif­ferences shalbe tried and composed; vvhether by the verdict of God, or of man? If of God, as I hold; then vvhere this is to be found? vvh [...]ther in the scriptures of the old and nevv testament, or in the vvritings and mouthes of other men? If in holy scriptures, (vvhich is my faith:) then commeth to be considered, vvhat they are, and hovv to be used. My self doe imbrace the vvritings of all the Prophets novv extant, from Moses to Mal [...]chie; vvho vvrote all in Hebrue, the Chaldee in Ezra and Daniel counted therevvith: & of all the Apostles and Evangelists, vvhich vvrote in Greek, as is novv generally received. By all and every of these I offer my faith to be tried, and to make t [...]yall of other faith offred. The use of these, to be vvith all care, and reverence, sobriety, sanctitie, and vvisdome ministred by the holy Ghost. And here may be questioned, in vvhom the faith of a Christiā should rest, vvhither on the Churches sen­tence, vvithout doubt or contradiction: or vvhither he should also have assurance in his owne hart, by Gods vvord and spirit. If the Church be our stay; then are vve to inquire, vvhere and vvhich it is: and so to con­sider the doctrines that it teacheth. Among vvhich this is one princi­pal, (vvhich you treat of in your vvriting,) hovv our synns shalbe for­given, and vve justified in the sight of God. Thus may vve proceed in order: & if you please to begin vvith these grounds, I am vvilling (as my leysure shal serve me) not only to hear vvhat you can say for your religiō, but also to inform you vvhere I see you err. If you like not thus to deal, but vvill insist on the question in hand, I shall not be unvvilling to defēd my Saviours suffrings, as alsufficient for my salvation, and of all that trust in him. That vvhich shalbe prosecuted betvveen us, (if ought be,) I de­sire may be doon in love and meeknes, in simplicitie and sincerity, vvith brevity and perspicuitie: all vvhich I shall labour for, through the grace of God, and exhort you to doe the like. Othervveise from fruitlesse quarrels I shall furcease, & folovv more comfortable meditations. Thus vvish I your farevvell in soule and body. From Amsterdam this 4. of September, 1609.

Your freind to use in all Christian dutie Henry Ainsworth.

Vnto this letter, Mr Iohn Aynsworth returned this an­swer.

I Accept with all willingnes (Mr Aynsworth) of your ready of­fer, viz. that we should draw our disputations, and controver­sies to a maine and principall point, and foundation of our reli­gion. For as in the spiritual building faith is a foundation andSpiritualls [Page 5] main pillar, so also in the mysteries and principalls of our faith, thereaedificij fu­dament [...]. be some that as it were transcend through the whole body of contro­versies, and serve therein as Maister-springes, by whose motion and proof all things rest sufficiently satisfyed, and proved to any indiffe­rent judgement. Amongst others, this question by you propounded hath no meane place. For if I square out all the beleife I mainteyn onely by approved, and vnfallible rule; my affertiōs must needs be as invincible as my rule is uncorrigible. Now vnto the point to be de­cided I breifly answer. That a man may elici [...]t a sup [...]rnaturall act of faith many things are required; first there must be motiva evidentis credibilitatis, prudential motives of evident credibilitie, viz. that allPs. [...]. tes­timonia [...] a credibilia facta sunt [...]. nations, and men of principall giftes, zeal and sanctity and [...]dow­ments▪ have beleeved so, that it hath stood inviolable against so many and infinite heresies and persecutiōs, that it is so ancient, so visible, so constant, and vniforme in all essentiall poincts of doctrine: That it hath been sealed and confirmed with the blood of so many glorious Martyrs &c.

Secondly, There must be Ecclesia proponens, the Church pro­poundingII. what is scripture, and what is not scripture, what is un­written word, viz. tradition, and what is not.

Thirdly there must be prima veritas, the first verity, [...]r Gods vera­city,III. that must be ratio formalis, the formal reasō why we doe beleeve.

Fourthly, There must be a supernatural judgment dict [...]ting thatIIII. now it is good, at least generally to beleeve.

Fiftly there must be a supernaturall concour [...] of Gods holy illu­mination,V. and a concourse of his infused habit of faith to determinate the indifferent power of our understanding to beleeve, or not to be­leeve. Out of the progresse of which act, an answer to your que­stion may easily be deduced. For when you ask whither our faith shalbe tryed, by the verdict of God, or of man, I answer you direct­ly enough though with a [...]stinction, viz. That if you vnderstand by what formall motive we shall be tryed in our beleefe, I answer by the verdict of Gods written, and unwritten word: But if you aske who shall determine our faith after a propounding manner, so we say the Church concurreth after the maner of an applying conditiō, tea­ching what is Canonicall, and that which is not autentike. And therefore I will prove, first, That onely the bare text of theI.scripture is not a sufficient rule of our faith.

2. I will prove that the scriptures expounded by theII.Catholike Church, is a true and indeficient rule of our faith.

3. That this rule is onely found in the Romane Catho­ sentence, and not in private mens illuminati­ons, [Page 6] and motions of a private and unseen spirit.

First then to prove that the bare scripture is not a sufficient rule of our beleife, and that many mysteries, and points are to be beleev­ed, that are not expressely taught, or evidently deduced out of the ho­ly scriptures; I frame this Argument Nothing is to be beleeved that is not taught, or gathered out of the written word; but that the Bible is Canonicall, is neyther directly taught, nor by evident consequence deduced out of the same: therefore it is not to be beleeved that the Bible is Canonicall scripture. The Major is the cōmon as­sertion of protestants, but especially I take it a cheife ground and principle of your sect, vide Calvi. de vera Ecclesia reformata pag. 473. Calvin. and the Apologie of the Church of England pag 58. The Minor isThe Apol. approved by Hooker a principall protestāt, in his treatise of Ecclesiast. lawes lib. 1. pag. 84. lib. 2. S. 4. pag. 100. 102: who there writeth thus.Hooker. Of things necessary, the very cheifest thing is to know what bookes wee are bound to beleive holy: which thing is confessed as a thing impossible for the scriptures to teach. And afterwardes he confirmeth thus. For (saith he) if any one book did give testimony of all the rest, yet the scri­pture that gives credit to all the rest, would require another scripture to be credited, neyther could we come to any pause whereon to rest our as­surance this way. So that we see eyther that he holds scripture is not to be beleived and authenticke, or else he requireth the authority of somthing besides scripture to make it authentical. The force of thisHooker. Argument did drive Hooker lib. 3. paragraph the 8. pag. 1 [...]6. Zanchius inZanchius. his confess. [...]. [...]. Brentius in prologo Kemnitij in examine Conc. Tri­dent.Brentius.& Doct. Whitak: contra Stapletonum lib. 2. cap. 4. pag. 298, 30 [...] Whitak: to flie unto the authority of traditions to prove scripture to be scrip­ture. Which if once they graunt, that traditions are sufficient to prove and try the groundwork of our beleife, viz. scripture to be scri­pture; why can they not ground other po [...]its of faith of lesser conse­quence?

2. I prove that the bare and naked word of God cannot be an infallible rule or square of truth: I prove it thus.

That which is difficult and includeth many senses, at least to the ig­norāt, cannot be a certayne rule of faith: But the scriptures are thus: My Anteced: Luther in his preface to the Psalmes acknowledgeth.M. Luther. Tertull. in lib. De praescripti: sayth, Nec periclitor dicere ipsas quoqueTertull.scripturas esse et voluntate dei dispositas, ut haereticis materias submini­strarunt, cum legā opportet haereses esse quae sine scripturis esse non pos­sunt. Where he confesseth that misinterpreting of scripture set the doore open to heresies. S. Peter also sayeth that in S. Pauls Epi­stles2. Pet. 3. there be many things hard to be vnderstood, which the unlear­ned, and unstable deprave as al the rest of the scriptures to their own perdition. And the difficultie thereof made S. Augustin, though a Doctor of incomparable wit and learning in his 12. conf. c. 14. break [Page 7] out in the height of ad [...]i [...]ation, and say; oh wonderfull profoundnessD. Aug. vide Vin­cent. Ly­ran [...]n [...]. lib. 1. [...] ­propha [...]as haer [...]s [...]s. D H [...]r. in cap. 5. ad Galatas. Acts 8. De [...]t 17. [...] Iohn [...]lti­mo. Act. 15. 2. Pet 1. D. Aug. l. 1. de doctr. Christi. c. 21. et lib 1 c. 10. [...]l. 12. c. 18. &c. 12.of thy words, &c. Idem to: 3. lib. 2. De doctrina Christ: c. 6. confess that there was more in the scriptures that he understood not, then of that which he understood. The [...]unuch of the Queen of A [...]thiopia was dayly convers [...]t in the scriptures, yet he confesseth that he could not vnderstand them without a master.

The second part of my Antecedent viz. that the scripture hath ma­ny senses litterall; many senses spirituall; of whose manifold, deepe and mysticall sense, the ignorant reader cannot be possest. And there­fore since in the old law when any difficulty happened, the Preist was to decyde it; and therefore with a farre greater interest is the Preist of the new law that hath that spirit of interpretation redoubled, and ratification of his doctrine assigned and confirmed by Christ Jesus himselfe. is to expound the hidden senses of scripture. And therefore S. John vltim [...]: [...] bids S. Peter and his successors feed his flock with the spirit of interpretation, which is the food to a reasonable flock and fold. This made the Apostles when they were to decyde the controversies about the cessatiō of the ceremonies of the old law, not to repaire vnto their private spirits interpretation, but to a coun­sell gathered in Hierusalem, where S. Peter was head: where all was concluded with Visum est Spiritui sancto et nobis, It seemes good vnto the holy ghost and vnto vs. And therefore let S. Peter himself conclude. That no prophe [...]i [...] of scripture, that is no interpretation (as the holy fathers interpret) is made by a private Spirit inter­pretation.

Thirdly I argue, and by my argument I break the force of a pre­tended answer thus: Not onely scriptures by themselves are not suf­ficient to prove what is Canonicall and what is not, but also that scriptures helped by private mens interpretation are not sufficient to prove the same. For they doe not onely allow of private lear­ned mens interpretation, but the poorest handycrafts man, or the sillpest huswife that is, they doc allow to interpret the hardest places of scripture, to shoulder the vniforme consent of all the fathers, Doc­tors, and schoolemen, with some fond toyes of their owne braine, and invention; yea to give their glosse of those places of S. Paul where he speakes of justification, and predestination; whereas they should [...]y Oh altit ido sapientiae et scientiae Dei: quā incōprehensibilia sunt ju­dicia ejus [...] When as they should rather rely on the auncient Fathers exposition. S. Hierome in his old yeares went as farre as Al [...]ran­dria to heare Didimus. S. Hier. ad Paul: Epist: 103. c. 5. 67. vsed such hard discipline, retirement into the desert, abstinēce, for▪ obtey [...]ing the t [...]ue interpretation of the holy scripture. How should we beleeve each private handycrafts manns censure, and his silly interpretation a­gainst the vniforme consent of the holy Fathers; against the stre [...]me of the learned of all ages; But admit they should have i [...] war [...]ly that speaking spirit to satisfy themselves, how should a man be perswaded they [Page 8] it to be a lanterne unto others stepps▪ Nay how will they prove against their adversaries, that they also have not that motion of the spirit? and though we should graunt they be illuminated in the truth of one [...]ysterie, how shall we know with like certainty all other different mysteries. But you will answer out of the 1. Cor. 2. Spiri­tualis [...] Cor. 2.autem homo judicat omnia, ipse autem a neminejudicatur: a spi­rituall man judgeth all things and he is judged of none. To which I an­swer, admit that a spirituall man knoweth something, yet it doth not follow that his supernaturall ins [...]ts extendeth it self to all things, but onely to the knowledge of those for the obteyning of which that illumination was inspired. For Deliseus that had a redoubled spirit of Elias sayth, Domi [...] ▪ celavit hoc a me et non indicavit mihi: Our Lord did hide this from me, and did not shew it: why then may not these simple soules rather feare that their private spirits defect in the4. R [...]g. 4. declaration of some mysteries, rather then the redoubled Prophet confesse [...]s ignorance in some things. Yet let us graunt that some few men should fully comprehend and penetrate the mysteries of our beleefe, yet for a twofold reason we den [...] to give unto them a defini­tive sentence and censure of matters of faith. First in that we are not so certified who these particular men be that have these especiall illu­minations and illustrations, and therefore we are to preferr the de­finitive assertion of the Popes holynesse and his counsell, before un­certainty of mens inventions.

2. Since that the effects of this particular illumination, and as­sistance of the Holy Ghost, is not manifested and warranted by any extraordinary workes or miracles or the like in the: it were to make a desperate tender of Gods truth, to point this or that man whole vinp [...]ore of any controversy, in that many other men in the pre­tence of some few mens illuminatiōs, might challenge unto thēselves the like prerogatives of interpretation.

Fourthly I argue, that which by the [...]ights and lanterns of your [...] have ben wrōged in the highest degree to bolster vp heresies, cannot be a true and indeficient rule of faith. For what more frequēt with [...]eretickes, then at their fingers ends to [...]ite places of scripture to back their heresies: as the Arians, Pelagians, Luther ās, and Sa­cramentaries. The Lutherans and Calvinists both disagreeing in a maine point of the real presence, the one holding Christs pretious ha­vy and blood to be really and corporall in the Sacrament, though with a certayn companation; and the other holding Christ to be pre­sent with a signification onely: and yet both cite scripture, both of thē yet [...]ing scripture for scripture. John Knell of Kent led with thisFox Acts p. 398. private spirit, denyed Christ to have tooken flesh of our B. Lady. William Cowbridge sayes, Bishops have no more authority then Priests pag. [...]70▪ and yet by and by led [...] vp the selfe same spirit sayd, that Christs name was a filthy name. Alanus Copus. Dialog. 6, c. 17. John Mesel denyed the holy Ghost to proceed from the Father, pag. [Page 9] 1151. Frith the excellent Martyr of John For, pag. 942 943 944▪ affirmeth the reall presence to be no Article of beleefe, affirmative or negative. John of Teurbury, that the Iewes of good zeale did put Christ to death: pag. 9 [...]5.

Fiftly and lastly Iargue, many mysteries of our faith are belee­vedV. that are not [...] declared in the word of God, nor so infalli­blie (prescinding from all traditions of the catholike church) deduced thence, so that they are sufficient to make one beleeve that wit [...] so firme an act, as our faith requireth: therefore that which makes those mysteries worthy of constāt beleefe is a rule of faith, as wel as the written word, whither they be traditions Divine or Apostolicall. My antecedent may castly without all just contradiction be proued, in that till Moses, the virtuous steps, and perfect acts of Noe, Abra­ham, Melchisedech was guided without the helpe of any written word, by the hand of tradition, derived from mouth to mouth from man to man: yea after the wittē word it appeares by Erod. 14. Nar­rabisExod. 14.filio tuo in illa die dicens hoc est quod fecit Dominus, &c Deut. 32. Interroga patrem tuum et annuntiabit tibi, majores et dicent tibi. Iob. 8. Interroga generationem pristinam, et diligenter investiga memoriam pa­trum. And not onely they of the old law, but also they of the newe, even after the cōming of our Saviour, were without a written word; the Apostles and disciples being busied in preaching and instructing viva voce. Besides, many things we beleeve though we have not the warrant of a written word for it: viz. that there was a remedie for women children, as well as for men to purge them of originall sin; and something to be used to men children if they were ready to [...]y be­fore the 8. day, which was the prefixt time of circumcision: and that such a parcell of writing was scripture, and such not. Moreover wee beleeve constantly against the condemned heresy of Delvidius; yea and against (as it were) the seeming letter of the scripture where it is sayd that Joseph knew not our blessed Lady til she brought forth her first sonne; Now every one knowes the phrase of the Hebrue word2. Mat. know, as Abraham knew Sara, and yet we f [...]nly beleeve according to the prescript of the church, that she was a perpetual Oirgin ante partum, in partu, et post partū Besides the equallitie of three persons, and their processions, to Nestorius will not easily be proved, or to an Arian if you stand onely to a writtē word, for he will cite scripture for himselfe, Pater major est me; and if you say that is to be vnderstoodD. Hyllar▪ in l. contra Constant. introducit Aria: sic loquentē. No [...] verba quae [...]pta non [...]unt. onely in regard of his humanity, and not in regard of his divinity, he will bid you prove that by the written word; and what place of scrip­ture soever you shal bring, he wil answer it with an other to his own purpose; The like will the Annaba [...]tist doe about the baptisting of in­fants: How will you without tradition prove the procession of the ho­ly Ghost from God the Father, and the Sonne, as from one onely fountayne? How wil they justify the not keeping of the Sunday on Saturday with the Jewes, the receiving of the sacraments fasting, [Page 10] the eating of blood and strangled meat prohibited in the Actes of the Apostles? How can they cat a black pudding without the help of tradition, since they know it is forbidden by the written word, and no writte word found plainely to license it. Therefore S. Paul se­ing how necessarie the vse of traditions were in Gods church, so oftē [...]. Thess. 2. cōmendeth it unto vs. Therefore brethren stand, and holdthe tradi­tions [...]6. [...]. Tim. which you have learnt whether it be by word or by our [...]:2. Tim▪ 1. Th' [...]fficacy' and force of which is so necessary by experiēce, and so cōve1 Cor. 11. n [...]t by the judgmēt of cōmō sense, that I wonder how men should de­ny [...]. Thes. 3. the necessary vse therof: For I aske if the Apostles were alive and should by word of mouth tel us the contents of many things contey­ned in the scripture, without all doubt with all readynes we should beleeve them; why then will they not beleeve them that lived in the Apostles dayes, and such holy Fathers as flourished shortly after. Dy [...]isnis Areopagita affirmeth, the Liturgie of the Masse for the dead to be an Apostolicall tradition in fine eccles. Hier. c. 7. parte 3. Tertull. de corona militis. S. Aug. De cura pro mortuis c. 1. D Chrvs. homil. 3. in epist. ad Philipp. in Morali. D. Damascen. sermone de defunctis: initio: Also the [...]rcede is affirmes to be an Apostolica [...]l tradition: sic Ruffinus in exposit: symboli in principio: D. Hier. epistol. 61. c. 9. D. Ambros. sermone 38. D. Augustinus de Symbolo ad Catech: lib. 3. c. 1. Yea that traditions w [...]re of this account we may gather out of the antient Fathers of the Church. We may easily gather by the irreverend speaches which Doctor Whitaker vseth against S. Chrysostom: for whereas he in the 2 of the Thess. 4▪ graunts that traditions are as w [...]ll to be beleeved as scripture, he sayth his speach was irreverend and vnworthy of a Father. And wheras Euseb. lib 1. De demonstrat. Euangel: c. 8. sayth the Apostles did publish and propagate the fayth of Christ partly by scriptures, and partly by tradi [...]i [...]s; he breifly rejects one of the famousest recorders of anti­q [...]ty, saying his authority is not to be received. Raynolds also in his conclusions a [...]ered to his conference, 1. conclus. pag. 689. Cart­wr. [...]. 8. in his defense pag. 103. affirmes that the fathers did still al­low of v [...]written traditions. Wherefore I will breifly conclude this point showing that a man ruled by his private spirites direction can have no faith. For since they beleeve scriptures only to be scriptures, in that [...] are delivered vp by the Church, why should not they thē beleeve any thing that the Church with a generall consent propou [...] ­ [...]eth as [...] [...] of our beleefe. For if I beleeve the relation of my freind because my freind tells me, I must beleeve all that my freind relates with the like firme assertion and with the like reason▪ or else I doe not beleeve my freind, but my owne affection, that is thereunto incli [...]ed to beleeve the one, and not beleeve the other. No more doth no protestāt or any other sect beleeve with a supernatural act of faith for then would [...]e beleeve al that the scripture propo [...]eth to be be­leeved, aswell as beleeve the scripture by reason it is of her propoun­ded, [Page 11] else they beleeve onely their private spirits, dictament, and fan­ [...]ies; that hath derived unto the knowledge of many other mysteries as well, as of the truth of the scriptures.

The second thing I am to prove breefly is, that the Popes defini­ [...]iveII. sentence as he is head of the church, is an indeficiēr rule in mat­ters of faith. The which is proved out of Luc. 22. Simon ecce Sathan expetivit vos ut cribraret sicut triticū, ego autē rogavi pro te ut [...]ides tua non deficiat, et tu aliquando conversus confirma fratres tuo▪ Where our Saviour that is the founteyne of all grace and goodnes sayth, that he hath prayed for S Peter and so cōsequently for his successors since Christ speaketh of the confirmation of the Church against hell gates, not onely for a tyme but for ever; promising that S Peter and their faith should not faile, commaunding both him and them, and there­fore bidding thē cōfirm their brethrē. And that this prayer was pow­red forth for S. Peter and his successors, appeareth [...]vid [...]tly. First i [...] that our Saviour points forth one particular man saying, Simon, Si­mon, particularizing the speech with a pronowne of the second person saying, for thee, thy fayth, and thy brethren. 2. Though our Savi­our did begin to speake in the plurall number, Sathan expetivit ut cri­braret vos, Sathan desired to sift you, immediately changeth the mā ­ner of speech, I haue prayed for thee, and not for yee. 3. Our Saviour prayeth for him to whom he bidds & thou being converted confirme thy brethren, but onely S. Peter and not the Church in generall hath brethren: Besides S. Math 16. He sayth, he builds his church vp­on S. Peter. Tues P [...]trus et super hanc Petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam, and therevpon he chaunged his name, of Simon, he makes him Peter and Petra, and Cephas which name in the Spria [...]k tong signifyes a rock, thereby to prevent all f [...]volous answers to a point so clearly declared: As appeareth first, in that first he designes him first out by the name of his father Bar Jonas, 2. by his own name Simon, then doth he as it were seclude him from the rest, saying, su­per han [...] Petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam; then by the authority and prehe [...]inence given him, showed by the delivery of the kepes. All which the auncient Fathers doe affirme with an uniform consent, as Tertull: lib. d [...] praescript Orig. homil: 5. in Exod. Sanctus Cypr: de unitate Ecclesiae S. Hyll: Cano: 16. in Mat. S. Ambros. sermo. 47. 68. lib. 6. in cap: 9. Luc. D. Hier. lib: 1. in lovini: S. Epiph. in Anchor: S. Chrysost. homil: 55. in Mat. etc. every one of them affirming expressly that the Church of God was built on S. Peter as vpon a rock▪ Be­sides this our Saviour in S. John 21. gives S. Peter the office of an vniversall Pastor, saying, pasce ov [...]s meas, feed my flock, which sounds as much as have care of my sold. But in S. John the 10. it is sayd that there is but one flock and one shepheard, and therefore since he bids him thrise feed his flock, he honors him thrise with the stile of an universall pastor: And therefore all the fathers joyntly in­terpret this place of an especiall charge and dominion assigned unto [Page 12] S. Peter, investing him thereby in the supreame seat and govern­ment of his church, and by him he is installed that had all power gi­ven him in heaven above and in earth beneath.

Now lastly and breifly to showe that our Romane Church is theIII. true and onely Catholike Church of God, that it is that holy citie, A­pocal. 21. v. 20. that fruitful vine, Psa. 79. v. 9. that high mountayne, that direct path, Is [...] 35. vers. 8. that onely Dove, Cant: 6. v. 8. that kingdome of heaven, Mat. 13. v. 24. that onely spouse, Cant. 4. v. 8. that mysticall body of Christ Jesu, Ephes. 5. v. 23. 1 Cor. 12: v: 12. that foundation and rock of the truth, 1 Tim. 3. v. 15 that holy mul­titude to whom such speciall directions of the Holy Ghost is promi­sed, Ioh. 14. 26. that Church against which hell gates shall not pre­vayle, Mat 16. v. 18. the which Church was prefigured by the Arlie of Noe, out of which none were saved from the all drowning deluge; that is that tabernacle posuit tabernaculum suum in sole, a tabernaclePsal. 18. placed in the sunne conspicuous of all to be seene; It is that citie that cannot be hidd. S. Math. 8. All which properties belong onely unto our Romaine Catholike Church. First our church is Catholik. For in my memorie first we onely are catholiks, in so much that the name Catholick was hatefull to a Puritaine or a Protestant. And there­fore Beza in his preface novi testamenti 1565. calls the name Catho­licke a vaine word. D. Humfrey in vita Iuelli pag. 113. calls it a vain term: Sutliff in his challenge, a fruitlesse name; not unlike Gaudē ­tius the hereticke who termed the word catholick a humane fiction. Vt D. Aug: contra Gaudentium, lib: 2 c. 25 though it be against the article of our beleefe, whereas S. Hier: Apol. 1. adversus Ruff: sayth, if we agree with the Bishop of Rome go. Catholici sumus [...] where S. Hier: makes an vnfallible note of a catholicke man to agree with the sea of Rome. 2. Our Church is an auncient church, and God is more auncient then the Divill, truth then falshood, the good seed thē the bad cockle; Christs seamless coate then his rent peeces, that is Christs Church concording, then the division into schismes: And if you graunt that once our Church was the true Church, but since it hath swarved from her auncient purity, and incorruption; shewe I praye you which Pope first gave place to the defects, by what doc­trine first, in what age of our Lord, on what motive and occasion, who openly repugned it, how that defect increased: But all these points we can prove on your religions and sects. Wee can shewe that there was neyther Wicliff, Nuss, Zuther, Calvin of your reli­gion; Zuther and Calvin seeme first to have broached it, though with in this hundred yeares, we can trace thē forth the yeares, motives, places, increase of their religion, as you may read in hystories. Wee are not ignorant of the motives that made King Henry the 8. first op­pose himself to the Romane church, though notwithstanding in his [...]ir articles he held and ratified seven sacraments of the Church, and conformed himself to al points of the Romane Catholick church one­ly [Page 13] excepting the point of supremacie: Wee can show so that lawful in his dayes and sworne to, which of some was held blasyliemy in the latter end of King Edward the 6: dayes; That also which was al­lowed of in his dayes in his cōmunion book was def [...]ed in Queen E­lizabeths dayes; And that in her daies that is rejected in K. James. And that in his Majesties dayes now, whose Highness offers his re­ligion to be tried by the united consent of the Fathers, and the 4. or 5. generall Councells, whose triall both his Bishops and you we are assured dare not stand to: That which the Protestants now held to be a true lanterne and touchstone of the truth, you repute o [...]iy as a stumblin [...] block and a stincking snuff [...].

We can show that interrupted duration of the Romane catholick church according to that in Daniel the 9. Regnum, quod in aeternum non dissipabitur; and 5. of the Arts, si ex hominibus consilium hoc, aut opus, dissolvetur, si vero ex D [...]o non potest dissolvi. Wee can show the prophe [...]y of the psalmist fulfilled, Dabo tibi gentes hereditatem tuam, et possession [...]m tuam t [...]minos terrae, Psal 2. Et dominabitur a marius (que) ad mare. Wee can show multitudes of people converted to our religi­on in the East and west Indies, in Iaponia and China, by men of our religion, and sent by an Apostolicall mission. Wee can show how that S. Peter about the 63 year of Christ came hither into Englād.Si [...] Metaph de Petro et pa [...]lo apud Lippo: Beatus Be­da l. 1. c. 4. Camden. in sua descriptione Br [...]tanniae pag. 52. et Nicephorus ut pse re­fert. We read how Pope Eleutherius sent hither anno 156. S Fu­gatium, et Damianum who baptized King Lucius: and lastly, S. Augustin and his companions Moncks were sent into England and wrought the conversion thereof; and that S. Gregorie whom D. Hū ­frey so farre extolleth p. 2. [...]e [...]uitis. rat. 5. pag. 624. Gregorius nomine quidem magnus, revera magnus, vir magnus et multis divinae gratiae do­tibus exornatus, was with his followers of our religion, shall moni­nifestly be proved by D. Humfreys owne assertion p. 2. ratione 5. p. 626. In ecclesiam vero quid induxerunt Gregorius, et Augustinus, nisi onus caeremoniarum, Missarum solennia, et Purgatorium; so that we see they held those opinions of Masse and Purgatory that of Protestāts is so extreamly condemned. Now if we should urge you to showe the succession of your interpreters and teachers from S. Peter, you will be mute, but we can shewe who succeeded each Pope, how long he lived, what doctrines he established. Lastly we can [...]now all sanc­tity, vnitie and conformity of doctrine: Out of all which notes we cā gather our church to be Vnam, Sanctam, et Apostolicam. But you can prove no one of these notes in your church. And when you shalbe de­manded at the tribunall of Almighty God why you hold this faith you now profess: you can onely answer, the holy and your privat spi­rit told you it was so, though against all antiguitie of [...]yme, just in­terpretation of scripture, consent of Fathers Greek and Latin. But when we shal be demanded why we beleeve in the Romane catholick church; we shall answer by reason Christ himselfe teacheth vs so, He [Page 14] that heareth you heareth me, and he that contemneth you cont [...]net [...] me; the church propoundeth vnto v [...] to be b [...]leeved so: the church, counsells, holy fathers, Doctors, fo [...]ders of all orders teacheth us so, in that the death of so many thowsand Martyrs confirmes it so, so many thowsand miracles wrought in the confirmation of it, witnes­eth it so. So that we may justly and confidently say with Richard [...] be sanet [...] Victore lib. 1. de [...]ri [...]tate. Nam cum omni fiducia ideò di­cere poterimus; Domine si error est a teipso decepti sumus. Nam ista tā ­tis signis et prodigijs confirmata sunt, et talibus quae non nisi per [...]e fieri possunt. Ponder and waigh well (Mr. Ainsworth) these few lines I send you, for I wish frō the bottome of my hart your soules good, and that your eyes were opened to see the errour wherein you have lived; and the more earnestly I wish it vnto you for country, name sake and alliaunce; and that those good talents of naturall vnderstan­ding and learning God hath indowed you withall, should not serve as heapers up of your greater condēnatiō, if you should dye out of the Romane catholick church which God of his infir [...]te mercy forbidd. To whom I shall pray that he will of his free infusion of his holy grace, inlighten your vnderstanding to see the truth, and incline your will with all fervour and zeale to imbrace it. From Justice hall in Newgate the 22. of September stilo veteri. 1609.

Your freind most desirous to give you satisfaction, to work your conversion Iohn Aynsworth.

The answer to the former writing.

To Mr Iohn Aynsworth, in Justice hall in Newgate; Grace and understanding from God our Father, and Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.

I Perceive by your second writing, Mr Ainsworth, your readie in­clination, to controvert the differences between you and us, about the grounds of our religions; wherto (as in my first I signified,) I al­so am willing, for your or others good, to condescend, and prose­quute as leysure [...]erveth me. God guide me in this my enterprise: and blesse my labours unto you.

The first thing which both of us were to agree upon, that we wrast­led not in vain, was, how our differences shall be tried and composed, whether by the verdict of God, (as I hold) or of man? Herevnto. (after you have set down certayn generall things required that a man may elicit a supernaturall act of faith; which hereafter if need be may be seanned;) you returne me this word: I answer you directly enough though with a distinction, viz. that if you vnderstand by what formal motive we shalbe tried in our beleefe, I answer, by the verdict of Gods written and unwritten word: but if you as [...] who shall deter­mine [Page 15] our faith, after a propounding manner, so we say the Church concurreth after the manner of an applying conditiō, teaching what is canonicall, and that which is not authenti [...].

This answer which you think direct enough, seemeth unto me very intricate and full of fear. I had thought never to have me [...]t with a man professing the religion of God, that would eyther deney the differences of religion to be tried & composed by the verdict of God; or that would doubt to answer such a demaund, without a distinction, when to a simple hart there is no doublenes or ambiguitie. Again you distinguish with such terms, as doo rather dimm the light then clear the same: for these words, formal motive; to determine after a propounding manner; to toucurr after the manner of an applying condition, &c. are more am­biguous [...]hen the thing it self propounded and distinguished. So, were I disposed to folow this game, we should h [...]re even at first, fall into con­tention and strife of words, which the holy Ghost hath Me Logo­machem. 2 Tim. 2. 1 [...] forbidden with earnest protestation. From this course I signified before, that I would be farr: and will therefore plainly confirm that I hold, wishing you to weigh it in equitie.

That God onely is to be the umpier and arbiter of all questions and cō ­troversies about religion, is manifested thus. 1. Because himself com­maundeth us his people, to Deut. 5, 32 take heed that we doo as the Lord our God hath commaunded us, not turning aside to the right hand or to the left; not Deut 12. 32. putting any thing thereto, nor taking ought therefrom.

2. Because the corruption of man is so great, as naturally Rom. 3, 10 11. - 19. 1 Cor. 2, 14. he under­standeth not the things of God, neyther can he know them; (which la­mentable experience dayly dooth confirm;) mans wisdom is 1. Cor. 1. 20. foolishnes and Rō. 8. 7. enimitie against God. Wherupon all Col. 2. 22. 23. Mat 15. [...] voluntarie religion, and humane precepts in divine worship, are condemned as vain and fruitless.

3 Because, men being Eph. 2. 1. 5 dead in trespasses and synns, are quickned onely of God, and doo live Gal. 3. 11. Eb [...]. 11. 6. by faith, without which we cannot please God: and faith is by Rō. 10, 17. hearing, & hearing by the word of God. Wherfore without Gods word, we cānot in faith assure our selves of any point of doctrine, neither cā our questiōs of religiō, [...]oūdly without it be determined.

4. Because, the Preists and Prophets of God, were bound Eze. 3, 17. to heare the word frō Gods mouth, and give the people warning frō him; & not for to Eze. 13. 2. [...]. prophesie out of their own hart, or [...]o [...]ow their own spirit Also in cases of controversie to teach them Deu. 17. 11. Eze. 44. [...]. according to the law, and judge ac­cording to the judgements of God. Wherefore the verdict of God, is the onely true triall and touchilone of religion, all other, are ballances of deceit. The Psal. 62, 9. secundū Hebr. sonns of base-m [...]n are vanitie, the sonns of noble men are fal [...]itie: in the ballances they are togither leighter then vanitie it self. But the Lord Prov. 2, 6. giveth wisdom, out of his mouth cōmeth knowledge & understanding; [...]ā. 1. 17. every good giving, and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the father of lights. Had I to deal with an Atheist or Paynim, I would use other grounds: but writing to you a pro­fessor of Christ, it is enough to lay down such principles, as all of Chri­stian [Page 16] religion will confesse.

The second thing we were to accord of, was, where this verdict of God is to be found, whether in the scriptures of the old and new te­stament, (which is my faith) or in the writings and mouthes of other men? To this I have not your direct answer as I expected; yet you mani­fest your mind, in that you take upon you to prove, That onely the bare text of the scripture, is not a sufficiēt rule of our faith. I wil first breifly confirm, that which I set down: and then I will answer your arguments.

In many parts and in many sorts (Hebr 1. 1. sayth the holy Ghost) God having spokē of old time to the Fathers by the Prophets; hath in these last daies spoken to us by the Son: which Son having Ioh. 5, 39. witnesse of the former pro­phets writings, chose also special men to be Act 10. 40. 41. 42. & 5. 32. witnesses of his doctrines and actions unto the world, both by word and writing. Who haue testi­fied unto us, that whatsoever God promised to the fathers, he hath ful­filled unto us by 2. Cor. 1. 20. the Son; and have opened Rom. 16, 25, 26. by the propheticall scrip­tures, the secret and mysterie of the Gospel: so as none need to say in his hart, Rom. 10, 6. 7, 8. who shall goe up into heaven, or who shall goe down into the deep; for the word is neer us, in our mouth and in our hart, even the word of faith which they preached. And by them we learn that all 2 Tim. 3. 16, 17. scri­pture is the opneustos, inspired of God, & profitable for doctrine, for re­prehension, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousnes, that the man of God may be (artios and exe [...]tismenos,) perfect and perfectly fitted unto every good work. These also, after vocal preaching, did write their gospel, that such as read, mought beleeve, and Ioh. 20, 31 in beleeving might haue life through Christs name, and that 1 Ioh. 1, 4. their joy might be full. Wher­fore as we are referred to the scriptures for assurance of our faith: so also are we willed not 1 Cor. 4, 6. phronein. to presume, (or be wise) above that which is writ­ten. This being the auctoritie and authentia of the scriptures, as we are taught of God: let us now weigh your reasons alleged to disable them.

Your first argument is:

Nothing is to be beleeved, that is not taught or gathered out of the writ­ten 1. Argum. word. But that the Bible is canonical, is not directly taught, nor by evident consequence deduced out of the same. Therfore it is not to be be­leeved, that the Bible is canonicall scripture. The Major as you say is the cōmon assertion of Protestants; citing Calvin, and the Apologie of the Church of England. The Minor you say is approved by Hooker a principall Protestant.

I answer; the pillars of your propositions being earth and ashes; theAnswer. whole frame and conclusion of your argument, lieth in the dust. I told you before we entred into this feild, that it is Gods word, not mans, that I would trie and be tried by: Wherfore you bet the aier in vain, if by a­ny mans auctoritie, you think to supplant my faith. Much lesse will I ap­prove what every Protestant hath written. So leaving others, I return unto your self. Your first proposition is too generall, I grant, many things may be beleeved, though they be not gathered out of the written [Page 17] word: but I hold not any thing needful to be beleeved for salvation with God; but that which is taught by his written word. Which perswasion [...] ground upon these and other like scriptures, Ioh. 20. 30. 31. 2. Tim. 3. 15. 16. 17. Eccles. 12, 11, 12.

Your second proposition I deney. Your reason, learned from M. Hooker [...] is▪ F [...] if any book did give testimonie of all the rest, yet the scripture that gives credit to all the [...] scripture to be credited, neyther could we come to any pa [...]se wheron to rest, or assurance this way. I answer; Al scripture (such as I rely upon) is theopneustos, inspired of God, and therefore authentik, and to be a canon and rule of our faith and actions. To discern what scripture is inspired of God, none is able but by the spirit of God. For the Apo­stle sayth, What man knoweth the things of man, save the spirit of a man which is in him; even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the spi­rit of God; 1. Cor. 2▪ 11. Of this spirit God powreth out upon all his chil­dren some mesure; without this spirit, none 1. Cor. 12, 3. can say that Iesus is the Lord; though men should see all his mighty miracles, and hear all his gracious words, yet Ioh. 12, 37 38. 39, 40. Act 16, 14. could they not be p [...]rswaded, unless God opened their harts. Therfore sayd our Saviour to Simon bar Ionas, Mat. 16, 17. flesh and blood hath not reveled this unto thee, (that I am the Christ the son of the living God,) but my father which is in heaven. And as of him, so of all, he sayth, Ioh. [...], 44. No man can come unto me except the father which hath sent me draw him. Whither the word therfore be spoken or written, it cannot be beleeved to be of God, but by the spirit of God, which therfore is called the 2. Cor. 4, 13▪ spi­rit of beleef or of faith; & which spirit is joyned togither with the word, in the Saincts (as [...]sa. 59▪ 21. Isaias prophesieth:) who therupon are all Ioh. 6. 45. taught of God; & have received (as Paul sayth,) not the spirit which is of the world, but the spirit which is of God, that they may know the things which are given to them of God, 1. Cor. 2, 12. and it is the Spirit which testifieth, that the Spirit is truth. 1. Ioh. 5. 6.

The whole word of God being of it self worthy to be credited, and ha­ving testimony of the same Spirit which spake & wrote it, is also further confirmed by the power & effect therof in the conscience, peircing more sharply then any Heb. 4, 12▪ two edged sword, and discerning the thoughts and in­tents of the hart. The power, majestie, excellencie, of the scriptures above all humane writings, felt in the hart, and confirmed by the spirit; evident­ly prove to all that are Christs, that they are of God; and if from him, then are they canonical, the rule and mesure of our faith and actions: & these all doe bear witnesse one to an other, the latter Prophets and Apo­stles commenting upon Moses the first divine writer, & Iohn the last, cō ­firming and abridging all other from the first, in his heavenly Revelation. The ear (fayth Iob. 12, 11 Iob) discerneth words, as the palat tasteth meat for it self; wherfore though the natural man discerneth no difference between Gods canonical and mans apocryphal scriptures, yet the spirituall man 1 Cor. [...]. 15. discerneth all things▪ and by testimonies of the scripture is able for to prove that the Bible is canonical, contrary unto your Conclusion; al­though [Page 18] perhaps he cannot perswade it, to them which are carnal & have not the spirit; as the Iude, 19. Apostle speaketh. It this be not, as I have shewed; but we must rely upon men, for the ground of our faith: then would I know, how you can perswade an infidel, to beleeve Christianisme rather then Mahometisme, to be the way of life. For the Turk will say & swear that the Alkoran is of God; as the Pope will say of the new Testament. And if mens voices shall cary it away, our beleef in Christ is lost. If mi­racles be alleged, there is still the same controversie, whither they be di­vine or divilish: for hethens and idolaters have had miracles many; and Antichrist, as it is prophesied, shal Rev. 13, 13. shall doe great wonders, making fyre to come down from heaven on the earth, in the sight of men Your other allegations of antiquitie, Vniversalitie &c. wil not stop the mouth of Iu­li [...] the Apostata, but he will bear down Christianitie and restore Paga­nisme, as being ancient and universal. So there wil be no setling of the conscience til it come unto God, and rest upon him alone, and receive the plerophorian, the full assurance by his spirit; without which men can not discerne between the propheticall writings and the Iewes Thalmud, between Christs Testament and the Turks Alkoran, or between Gods oracle out of the Debir in Ierusalem, and the Divils oracle out of his tem­ple in Delphos.

Again, as the Israelites discerned canonical scriptures from others; so doo we: for we Gentiles are Ephes. 3, 6 coheyrs with them, and of the same body; for there is Eph. 4, 4, 5 one body and one spirit, as there is one Lord and one faith. But they relyed not on the Church, or on the Highpreist & his council: for had they so doon, their church must haue had privilege not to err, (as you think of yours,) which if you grant a Iew, he wil overthrow your be­leef in Christ, seing their Preists, Elders & people condemned Christ, his Apostles, and their writings. As you would answer a Pharisee for this point, so mind the like answer to your self

Finally your plea is overthrown & confounded by your own practise: for you will have us receive the scriptures for canonical, because your Church of Rome sayth so they are: we must beleeve upon her word, To­bie and Iudith to be canonical, but the third and fourth of Esdras, not: the first and second of the Machabees to be canonical, but not the third or fourth. If any make question of this for conscience sake; you seek to resolve him by the definitive sentence of the Pope who cannot err. But if he ask why the Pope of Rome may not err, aswel as the Patriarch of Constantinople: you then allege (as after to me in this your letter) Christs promise to Peter, Mat. 16 and there you scan every word, and presse e­very circumstance of the text, to make him beleeve that Peter was the Rock and head of the Church, and consequently the Popes his successors. Ask he you againe, how he shall know that Matthewes gospel (wherin this promise is written) is canonical, rather then Nicodemus gospel you will answer because the Pope hath so determined. Thus the very en­trance and ground of your religion, bringeth men into a maze and Laby­rinth: for we must beleeve the Pope cannot err, because Christ sayth such [Page 19] words to Peter; which the Pope expoundeth and applyeth to himself: & we must beleeve that Christ sayd them words, because the Pope hath de­termined that he sayd them. Thus the foundation of our faith, must re­ly wholly upon man, (a clod of clay:) whatsoever he telleth us is scrip­ture, that must we so esteme; how ever he expound scripture, so must we take it: what he sayth is tradition or Gods unwritten word; we must so regard and keep it: be it never so absurd, against the light of nature, a­gainst reason, against the grounds of faith; against the evident testi­monies of the prophets and Apostles; we must captivate all our under­standing, faith and conscience, under the Popes wisdome: and all be­cause he telleth us we must so doo. Otherweise, if we may trie this principle of yours by the scripture, through the light of Gods spirit in us; then may we doe the like of other, which be of lesser moment. Consider I pray you this first point seriously; and the Lord give you understanding in all things. And let me here put you in mind (though I be not yet come to the end,) of the last motive in your letter, where you tell me how whē you shalbe demanded at the tribunal of almighty God, why you be­leeve in the Roman catholik church; you can answer, by reason Christ himself teacheth you so, saying, He that heareth you heareth me &c. But deceive not your own soul; for when Christ shall ask you at that day, why you have worshiped images, sung masse and Dirige, prayed to Saints and soules departed, and Mat. 15, 3. transgressed many other of his fathers cōman­dements by your traditions; you will answer, because the head of your church the Pope did teach you so; when he shall ask you, how you knew the Pope to be head of the church, and to haue such authoritie over your conscience; you will answer because Christ himself spake such words to Peter as are written, Mat. 16. When he ask you agayn, how you knew that he spake those words, or that they extended to the Pope of Rome, a­bove all other: your answer vvil be (according to the grounds of your re­ligion) because the Pope himself, vvith his senate of Cardinals did tel you so. Then vvil your hope be the vveb of a spider, and your house novv seeming upon the Rock, vvil be found upon the sand: you shall hear the Curse pronounced upon Ier. 17. [...]. the man that trusted in man, and made flesh his arm, and vvithdre [...]v his hart from the Lord; and that all such Mat. [...]. 9. Isa. 29. 13. vvor­shiped him in vain, as had their fear tovvard him, taught by the precept of men. The P [...]. 73, 26. Rock of my hart, vvho is my portion for ever, preserve me and deliver you from those syrtes and quicksands, vvhere men make ship-vvrack of faith.

Your second argument to prove that the bare & naked vvord of God2. Argum. a [...]vvered. cannot be an infallible rule or square of truth, is this; That which is difficult and includeth many fenses, at least to the ignorant, cannot be a certaine rule of faith: But the scriptures are thus. Your antece­dent you seek to confirm by Luther, Te [...]tullian; and S. Peter also vvho (as you vvrite) sayth 2 pet 3. that in S. Pauls epistles ther be many things hard to be understood, which the vnlearned and unstable deprave as all the rest of the scriptures, to their own perdition. To this of the Apo­stle [Page 20] I answer, first, you set the holy text on the centers, to stretch it out for your us [...]. The Apostle sayth [...]. some things are hard to be understood; you vvould haue him say, many things: he sayth, they deprave these as the rest of the scriptures; you say, as all the rest. Secondly this testimo­nie, though it vvere as large as you extend it, proves not your antece­dent, but onely the first part of it, and scarce that too. For to gather be­cause part is difficult, therfore the vvhole is; is more then eyther his vvords, or good reason vvil bear. The later part, that the scripture cā ­not be a certayn rule of faith, follovveth not upon the former: it may be a [...] though some part of it be difficult, though many men doo deprave it. Our ignorance or perversnes, cannot make crooked that vvhich is most streight, no more then our Rom. [...]. 3. unfaithfulnes can make the faith of God of none effect. The artizen that vvorketh by rule and squire, ma [...] through vvant of skil or heed▪ vvork amysse▪ but himself is to blame, and not his rule. Againe though some scriptures be difficult, yet many be plaine and easy; and God hath so tempered them togither, that the vvisest should haue vvherin to exercise their vvit, and admire Gods mys­terios▪ and the simplest should haue playne documents, vvherby to groūd their faith. It is our fathers vvil also that to some, his vvord should be in parables; that Mat. 12, 13. 14. Luk. 8. 10. hearing men may hear and not understand, vvhen to others it is given to knovv the secrets of the kingdom of God; vvho hath vvritten his vvord Pro. 1. 4. to give unto the simple sharpnes of vvitt; to the child, knovvledge and discretion. Again you allege the Eunuch, Act. 8. vvho confesseth that he could not understand the scripture vvithout a master. I ansvver as before, this proveth no insufficiencie in the scripture, but in the reader. I vvil further confirm it by your ovvn position; vvher after­vvards you undertake to prove, That the Popes definitive sentence as he is head of the church, is an indeficient rule in matters of faith. But these definitive sentences, say I, are some of them hard to be under­stood, at least by the ignorant; and many cannot understand them vvith­out a master▪ if therfore your argument be good, your position is naught, and you must seek a nevv rule in matters of faith. Your humane testi­monies say no more then is alreadie heard and ansvvered: if they did say more and you pressed it, I vvould make ansvver as to you, but leave the Fathers to sleep in peace.

You procede vvith the second branch of your antecedent, saying, that the scripture hath many senses literal, many senses spiritual; vvher­upon you gather, siure is the old law when any difficultie happened, the Preist was to decide it, therfore with a farr greater interest, theDeut. 17.Pr [...]ist of the new law, that hath the spirit of interpretatiō redoubled, and rati [...]ication of his doctrine assigned and confirmed by Christ Je­sus himself, is to e [...]pound the hidden senses of scripture.

I ansvver, first that ther be so many senses literal & spiritual as you doo say, resteth for you to prove in your next, for in this you make none. I hold the sense of scripture to be one, though applied to many tymes, places, and persons. Pentheus in the [...]. Poet, thought he savv tvvo suns▪ [Page 21] in the firm [...]ment, when ther was in deed but one: it was but the dif [...]r [...] ­perature of his own senses that made him so to think. You suppose the word (which shineth as the s [...]n in the firmament of the church hath many meanings: when it is but the dazeling of your eyes. Secondly though it were granted to haue many senses, yet the law in Deut. 11. maketh nothing against my faith. For I graunt the scriptures are to be expoun­ded by the Preists and Ministers of God. Deut. 33. 10. Eph [...]. 4. [...]. yet not by mans owne judgment, or at the wil of any mortal [...] but by the 1 Cor. [...], [...]. spirit of God▪ and by the scripture it self, as did [...]. 8, [...] the [...] in Israel. For no minister of Christ, (no not the 2. Cor. 1, 2 [...]. Apostles; haue de [...] nion over our faith: but are in declaration of the teach, to approve them­selves to every mans conscience, in the sight of God, as 2. Cor. 4▪ [...] Paul say [...]th Nei­ther mought the Preists of old, decide controversies as they [...] them­selves; their words were not oracles: but they were to inform the peo­ple according Deu, [...] [...] to the law; which the Lord explaineth by the preist Eze­kiel thus; In controversies they shall stand to judge, and they shall judge it according to my judgements, &c. Ezek 44, [...]4. Thus Gods law is the rule of judgement; and the scriptures are not so bare & naked, as to need the raggs of mens inventions to array them. If you yeeld not in this, I pray you what answer will you make to the Iewes, that shall plead vvith you against Christ, and alledg [...], how their high Preists and Rulers which were to decide all controversies. Deut. 17. decided this controversie of Iesus of Nazareth thus, that he was a seducer, a blasphemer, a traytor, & therfore to dye the death. If the bare and naked scripture (as you call it,) help you not against their pontifical decrees and expositions; you wil hav but a bare and naked faith, the shame wherof, no [...]igleaves wil hide. But the Preist of the new law you say, is to decide vvith a farr greater in­terest. I grant it; for Christ being come, Heb. 9. 1 [...] the high Preist of good things that were to come, hath farr greater privilege and power then any legal Preist; and him we are commanded Mat. 17. 5. to hear. But he is not the Preist you mean: for you allege from Iohn 2 [...] ▪ that Christ biddeth S. Peter and his successors, feed his flock with the spirit of interpretation, &c. I mar­vel hovv this wil make for your opinion, that the bare word of God, is not an infallible rule or square of truth. For doo you think in good [...]ar­nest, that Christ would ha [...]th Apostle feed his flock, with ought save Gods word, because he bad him feed? then all other Pastors must doo so too. For the same Apostle writeth afterward thus, 1 Pet. 5. 7. 2. The Elders which ar [...] among you, I bes [...]ech, who am a co [...]lder, &c. seed the flock of God, & another Apostle sayth to the Elders of an other church, Act. 20▪ 28. Take h [...]ed to your selves, and to all the flock wherof the holy Ghost hath made you Bishops, to feed the Church of God &c. If the commandement to feed, privileged S. Peter above the law and word of God: then all Christian Bishops or Elders, haue like privilege, because they haue like commande­ment. But I deny eyther that Peter alone was to feed Christs sheep, or that he mought feed them with any thing, save Gods word. For the A­postles doctrines were the commandements of the Lord. 1 Cor. 14, 37. & [Page 22] not their own counsels▪ and if S. Peter or any other, taught or practised contrary to the word, he was to be withstood and reproved, Gal. [...]. 11. Wh [...]rfore [...]ven Peter himself (who knew wel the meaning of his cōmis­sion,) taught the church, that their new birth was 1 Pet. 1. 23 25. not of mortal feed, but of immortal, by the vvord of God; and that was the word which was preached among them; and which he exhorted them stil to 1 Pet. 2, 2. desire that they mought grow therby; & willed thē, that if any man spake, it should 1 Pet. 4, [...]1. be as the words of God, and referreth them to the sure [...] Pet. 1, 19 word of the prophets, as to a light that shineth in a dark place: that strange it is you should gather any thing against the auctoritie or sufficiencie of the scrip­tures, because the Apostle was willed to feed the sheep of Christ; vnlesse you think they should not have wheat but [...]haff to feed upon. And if your ch [...]if shepheard of Rome use so to feed his flock, & gather such do­ctrines from Christs commandement; I will never goe over the Alpes to setch my food from him.

You next allege Act. 15. where the Apostles meaning to decide a cō ­troversie, repayred not (you say) to their private spirits interprctatiō but to a council gathered in Jerusalem, where S Peter was head, wher al was concluded with It seemeth good to the holy Ghost and to vs.

I answer, you hold not to the point which you took upon you to prove, viz. that the bare word of God is not an infallible rule of truth: the scripture you cite maketh against you; for the Apostles were publishers not of their own word but of Gods, 1. Thes. 2, 13. 1. Pet. 1. 25. 2. Pet 1. 16. They confirmed their sayings in this Council, by the former scrip­tures, Act 15, 15, 16. They expounded and applyed the scriptures to their present questiō, by the same spirit which wrote them, which was no pri­vate but the most publik spirit of God, 1 Cor 2. 10. 11. without which no scripture can be vvel interpreted. And vvhere you say S. Peter was head of that council, you passe the boundes of the text vvhich shevves no such thing. Christ vvas Mat. 18, 20 Eph. 1. 22. the head, and he guided them by his Act. 15. 28 holy spirit. Peter, after much disputation shevved his mind, grounded upon the vvorks and lavv of the Lord, Barnabas and Paul confirmed the same by their ovvn experience: then Iames confirmed vers. 13. 14 &c. Symon Peters speech by the vvords of the Prophets, & thereupon vers. 19. cr [...]o. gave sentence or judgment vvhat should be doon; vvherto the Apostles and Elders vvith the vvhole church agre­ed. Wherefore if any man vvere head, reason vvould lead us to think lames rather then Simeon vvas the man. Thus the decree had povver and force from Gods vvord, vvhich by the holy Ghost vvas serched, scan­ned, manifested of vers. 6, &c the Apostles and Elders; vvas approved and consen­ted to, of the vvhole Church there, the vers. 23. Apostles, Elders and brethren; all vvhich, and not Simon alone, sayd, vers. 28. It seemed good to the Holy ghost and to us. And that all care and diligence should be used to decide con­troversies by the vvord of God; I acknovvledg [...] but to deney Gods vvord (vvhich you call bare and naked, though it be gloriously arayed vvith al ornaments of the spirit,) to be an infal [...]ible rule of truth; is farr from my [Page 23] hart, and farr from being proved by these your allegations. But you shut up your argument thus. Therfore let S. Peter himself conclude,2 Petr. 1.that no prophesie of scripture (that is no interpretation as the holy Fathers interpr [...]t) to made by a private spirits interpretation. But the Apostle concludes not your purpose, that Gods word or scr [...]p [...]ure is not an infallible rule of truth; therfore you are nothing h [...]lpen [...] this text, though you constreyn it to sp [...]a [...] otherw [...]is [...] then the auctor [...] it downe: which was not (is you say) by a private spirit [...]; but [...]dias epi▪. [...]: pro­pria inter­pretatione sayth your authentik [...]a [...]in. of ones own interpretation, or of it own explication or [...]. This speech dooth no whit disprove the auctoritie, sufficiencie, or i [...]lli­bilitie of the prophesies of scripture, which the Apostle before did approve, (v [...]r [...] ▪ 19.) Therfore this standeth still firm against you, th [...]t Gods bare word (meaning without the raggs of mens inventions,) is a [...] in­fallible rule of truth: but how this infallible rule is to be used, interpre­ted, applyed &c. is a second consideration. And, though I would not swery from the question, yet to help you what I may, I will speak a litle of that which you allege. If by [...] spirit you mean an humane spirit, or the spirit natural in man; I grant it: no prophesie of scripture is of private, or of a m [...]s own interpretation: he can not by all his w [...]t, learning, or industrie explane it, without the spirit of God. If you mean a private mans interpretation; as that no privat man can interprete a­ny prophesie: I deney it. For the publick man with you is the Pop; & he interprets all; having his supposed soveraigntie from Peter. But if all other be private men, save Peter and his successors the Popes; then doe you injurie to all the other Apostles, Prophets, Evang lists, Pastors and Teachers, at that time and in ages since: as if they without Peter or the Pope, could not interpret any proph [...]sie of scripture. It is also against your own Bishops, Preists, Iesuits, and against your self; for none of you (but the publick spirit of the Pope onely) can interpret any scripture: which if it be so, why medle you now with controversies about the scri­ptures against me, seing you can give but a private spirits interpretation, which the Apostle (in your own judgment) condemneth? If all Church officers be exempted from the private number, and are among [...]th pub­lick, and may all interpret: then will your Pope have [...]le privilege from this place, above other Bishops▪ Or if you think, that no private that is (as you speak) no [...] man, can interpret any prophesie of scripture, you doo injurie to Gods people or l [...]itie. For were not all the laie o [...] people of the church in Cor [...]th willed to 1. Cor 14. 1. covet spiritual gif [...]s, and rather that they might prophesie; which vers. 31. all of them might perform in the church? Doth not the wind Ioh▪ 3▪ blow where it lysteth, & Gods spirit breath on whō he pleaseth? Prophesies of scripture never were of propre or private in­terpretation, yet Christ a carpenters son, brought up Ioh▪ [...]. 15. unlettered, n [...]y­ther Preist nor Levite, but a laie man in Israel, was permitted to Luk. [...]. 16, 17. &c. inter­prete the prophesies of scripture publikly; and C [...]iaphas himself cavill [...]d not against him, as being a private spirit. The Apostles also were Act. [...]. 13. un­lettered and private men, yet were they not for that, forbidden to inter­pret [Page 24] scriptures: but if they lived in your church, it seemes they should, Consider I pray you of these things, and the Lord give you understand­ing.

But you procede with this matter, and thirdly you argue, and by3. Argum. ansvvered.your argument (as you say) break the force of a pretended answer, thus, Not onely scriptures by themselves are not sufficient to prove what is canonical, and what is not: but also that scriptures helped by private mens interpretation, are not sufficient to prove the same. I see this your proposition, but I see no proof: in sted of that, you digresse to complayn that the poorest handycrafts man &c, is allowed to in­terpret the hardest places of scripture. But all this proveth not the point in hand, namely that the scripture is not a sufficiēt rule of our faith. For this it may be, and is: how ever men err in expounding it. Of this point I have spoken before: your assertion is not an argument; and if ther were but a pretended answer, yet your bare position would not break the force of it; the Eccles. 10. 10. yron is blunt, and you have not whet the edge; ther­fore you must put to more strength.

Fourthly you argue thus. That which by the lights and lanterns of your opinions hath been wronged in the highest degree to bolster4. Argum. ansvvered.vp heresies, cannot be a true and indeficient rule of faith. The as­sumption is a rhetorical flourish: for what more [...] quent (say you) with here [...]i [...]s then at their fingers ends to [...] places of scripture? &c. And here you mention divers points and persons, and then without con­clusion, passe on to an other argument. The assumption which is per­sonal, touching Luther, Calvin, &c, and unjustly b [...]nt against us; I leave to strive about, and could requite you with the like of your Popes and Prelates, who have wronged the scripture not in the least degree. Your proposition I deney: for though men wrong the word of God never so much, eyther ignorantly or wilfully; yet is the word never the worse, not lesse sufficient rule of faith. The Preists in Israel Zoph. 3, 4. wrested the law, by which they should haue taught the people: yet was the law in it self a true and indeficient rule of faith, to which the Prophets Isa. 8. 20. referred the people, and blamed those that spake otherweise, as wanting light. Our Saviours most holy doctrines vvere vvronged and depraved in the high­est degree by Pharisees: vvill you therfore conclude, that his doctrine vvas not a true and indeficient rule of faith? Bevvare of such pleading, and learn rather of the Apostles, vvho though men 2. Pet. 3, 16 depraved the scrip­tures; yet 2. Pet. 1. 19. referred the Christians unto them, as being able to make us vvise vnto salvation, through the saith that is in Christ Iesus, and to make the man of God absolute and perfect unto all good vvorks. 2. Tim. 3, 15. 1 [...].

Fiftly and lastly you argue many mysteries of our faith [...] beleeved,5 Argum. [...]v. [...]d.that are not explicitly declared in the word of God, [...] i [...]fallibly (prescinding from al traditions of the catholik church) [...] thēce, so that they are sufficient to make one beleeve that [...] act as our faith requireth. Therfore that which makes these myste­ries [Page 25] worthy of constant beleef, is a rule of faith as wel as the written word, whither they be traditions divine or Apostelical.

The first part of this your argument I deney, for neyther many nor any mysteries of our faith, are without their due and sufficient proof from the holy scriptures. You labour to confirm that you sayd, thus, because till Moses [...] word, but men were taught by traditiō. You allege also Exod. 14. thou shalt tel thy [...] Deut [...] ask thy father and he wil shew thee &c. Iob, 8 ask the former generation, &c. Also, how after our Saviours cōming, the Apostles preached viva vo­ce, before they wrote &c.

Your first reason is altogither insufficient: for though the scriptures could be no perfect rule of faith, before they were written; yet after the writing of them, they mought be, and so were. You might as well say, neyther tradition nor doctrine by lively voice, could be a rule of faith, be­fore it was spoken. You might also say, the scriptures are not sufficient to make one beleeve any one mysterie of faith, seing before Moses, all my­steries were taught by voice. The Exo 25, 40 pattern of the Tabernacle shewed to Moses on the mount, could be no perfect rule for him to build by, before it was shewed. Was it not therfore a perfect and sufficient pattern, after it was exhibited? Even so the scriptures, now that they are written, are a sufficient rule and assurance of our faith. Ioh. 20. 31. 2 Tim. 3. 16. 17. Your other allegations out of Moses & Iob, wil serve much better for the Iewish traditions, then for yours; and confirm their Thalmud and Caba­la, rather then your papal decrees. But the Apostles turned the Iewes from their 1 Pe [...]. 1. 1 [...] vain conversation, received by the tradition of the fathers; and would not have them Tit. 1. 14. take heed to Iewish fables and cōmandments of men that turn from the truth. Our Lord also reproved the traditi­ons of the Pharisees, though received from their Elders, Mat▪ 1, 2, 3. &c. by which you may learn (God opening your hart) that Israel was not left to unwritten verities for a ground of their faith; but were to tel their children the works of God that they had seen and heard, (as we all are to doo ours,) and for a rule of their faith and life, to Deut 6, 7. teach them Gods written law. This you may see by the In your Latin, the 43. & 77. 44. and 78. Psalms, wher the fa­thers told their children such things as are written in the books of Moses & Iosua &c. which as they continued the rule & ground of [...] rough out the Prophets ages, so Malachi the last Angel of the old Testament co­mendeth them to the Mal. 4 4. memorie of the church; even as from the first gi­ving, they were the Deu. 33. 4 inheritance of the same. The power and authori­tie of vvhich Lavv and Prophets vvas so great, as our Saviour sayth h [...] Luk. 16, 3 [...] that vvil not hear them, neyther vvil they be persvvaded though [...] from the dead agayn. Bevvare therfore, least vvhile you [...]k to support traditions, you supplant Christian faith: for a levv vvil presse you by tra­dition to receive their Cabala as vvel as their prophets, seing you have had these all from them; & cannot vvithout them (by your ovvn groūds) tel vvhat is canonical scripture, & vvhat is not: and they do [...] affirm that God gave to Moses a double lavv; the one vvritten, the other by vvo [...]d of [Page 26] mouth. [...]ambam [...] Misnajoth. Your particulars insisted upon for the equal [...] of [...]. persons in the god hed; the baptising of infant; the pro­ [...] h [...]ly Ghost; the keeping of the Lords day; the lawfulnes to [...]at blood &c: vvhich you think can not be proved by scripture without tradition; sh [...]w that you are too much a stranger in Gods book▪ for it af­ffordeth us sufficient proof for all of th [...]se▪ And [...] us, if we [...] without sure groūds frō scripture: & shame would cover our faces, before Arrians, Anabaptists & other heretiks, if we should le [...] goe our [...] foundation, to build upon your sands. As for other points of Masse for the dead &c: vvhich you mention upon certayne fathers credit, as it hath no ground in Gods book, so by the same it may easilie be refuted: and what God condemneth, no man can justify.

Wheras you all [...] 2 Thes. 2. and other like testimonies for traditions; I readily grant you to accept all traditions divine or Apostolical; for they were the 1. Cor. 14 37. cōmandements of God: but your church traditions I refuse, for they are the institutions of m [...]n. I grant you also that Paul taught more things by word, then were written in that his Epistle: but that he taught any thing as needful for salvation, without warrant from the scriptures, I deney; or that the sūm and effect of all that he taught, be not in the Prophets, his own and other evangelical writings▪ If you wil not beleeve me, beleeve himself who testifieth that he Act. 26. 22 sayd none other things then those which the Prophets & Moses did say should come: be­leeve an other Apostle which sayth, Ioh. 20. 31 th [...]se things are written that ye might beleev &c. & that in beleeving ye might have life through Christs name. And wheras you wonder how men should deney the necessa­ry vse of traditions, asking, if we will beleeve the Apostles, why then we wil not beleeve them that lived in the Apostles dayes, and such holy fathers as flourished shortly of er: you may stay your wonder, if you consider how Paul 2 Tim. 3. 16, 17. tea [...]h [...]th, that the scripture is able to make a man vvis [...] unto salvation, absolute, and perfect unto every good work▪ for now there is no necessary vse of other traditions, unlesse it be for works that are too good, and they be (I trow) work▪ of sup [...]rerogation. You may also answer your own question, if you mind how there lived in the Apostles dayes, many Tit. 1. 10, [...]. vain talkers and deceive [...]s of minds, [...]. Ioh. 4. 1 & 2 18. many false prophets that were gone out into the world and many Antichrists: and how after their departing Act. 20, 29 there entred in gr [...]vous wolves▪ Now seing such weeds flourished shortly after in the garden of the Lord, is it not more safe for us (think you) to keep the foundation of the Apostles & Prophets (on which Christs church is Eph▪ 2. 20 builded) then to build upon the bo [...]s of after writers? To conclude th [...]fore this point, Christ sendeth us to Ioh 5, 39. serch the scriptures; his Apostles 2 Pet. 1. 19 doo the like; the Prophets be­fore Isa. 34, 16. Psal. 4. 4. spake also to like effect: this counsel by Gods grace I shall folow [...] these I wil exercise my self, not doubting but I have chosen the better part, which shall not be taken from me. And unto you that [...]zelous for the traditions of your fathers, I shew the counsel of the hol [...] Ch [...]st E [...]. 20. 18 walk not in the ordinances of your fathers; Mat. 15. 3. transgres [...]e not the cōmā ­dements; [Page 27] of God by your traditions, and presume not 1. Cor. 4, 6 above that which is written.

The second thing you take upon you to prove, is, That the PopesII.definitive sentence, as he is head of the Church, is an indeficient rule in matters of faith. This position if you well understood it, I would not strive against: for the definitive sentence of that Papa or Father, that is head of the church, is (I confesse) such an indeficient rule. But the Vicar of Rome is not this Pope; it is Christ himself that is Isai. 9. 6. Father of e­ternitie; and he is the Col, [...]. 18. head of his body the church; and he hath forbid­den us to call any man our Pope or Father upon the earth, for th [...]r is but one our Father which is in heaven. Mat. 23, 9. But you understand it of an earthly Pope and head, and would confirm it by this scripture, Luk. 22 31. Simon Simon loe Satan hath desired you to winnow you as wheat, &c. but I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not. Here first I ob­serve how you labour to confirm the Popes definitive power, by the scri­ptures: so that which before you pleaded against, as an insufficient groūd, now here you make a ground of grounds▪ and so you are contrary to your self. For before you taught me to beleeve this is Gods word, because the Pope saith so: here you will have me beleeve your Popes sentence to be a rule of faith, because the scripture sayth something which you imagine makes for him. Thus you would lead me as in a round: and I cannot tel what you make the rock of your faith. But I wil folow your argument. Christ prayed for Simon, that his faith (upon Satans sifting) mought not fayl. I grant it, neyther did it fayl, though he fel greevously. Yet this grace made not Simon, Pope or Head of the church: for it is a grace cōmon to all the elect members of the bodie, whom though Satan sifteth, and they be often foyled, yet rise they again by beleef in God; and though their faith often fainteth, yet it never faileth or is consumed. And this by vertue of Christs prayer or mediation, 1. Ioh. [...]. 1. 2. for Gods gracious gifts are Rō. 11, 2 [...]. without repentance, and Christ giveth all Ioh. 10. 2 [...] his sheep eternall life, and they shall never perish, neyther shall any pluck them out of his hand. You procede and say▪ that this prayer was consequently for his successors. If you mean successors in his office, I know not who they be; neyther shew you the Popes to be the men. If you mean successors in his faith, I grant it, as before. For Peter had the faith of Gods elect (as true justifying faith is caled): Titus 1. 2. in which faith, whosoever succeed or come after him, (as also they that then lived in like faith with him,) they were & are and shalbe by Christs mediation, confirmed that their faith (which is their Abak. 2. 4 life) fayl not. For example: Christ chose 12. Apostles, and one of them was Ioh. 6. 70. a Divil. Iscariot (who was the Divil,) fell into syn, and Christ prayed not for him, so his faith fayled (though he cōfessed his syn), and he dyed in dispeir, hanging himself; for he was the Son of losse or per­dition, and therfore was to be lost, that the scripture mought be fulfilled. Iohn. 17. 12. Simon Cephas fell also into syn, above the other ten, but he was one of Christs sheep, no child of perdition, therfore he kept him from being lost, praying that his faith mought not fayl. And as for him, [Page 28] for the rest, at an other time, he Ioh. 17. 11▪ prayed to his father to keep them in his name; and not vers▪ 20. for them alone, but for those also which shall beleev in him through their word. Wherfore Christ prayed not onely for Simō, but for all the Saincts; though speciall need and use was for him at that time: yet as Paul sayth of Abrahams justification, Rom. 4, 23, 24. it is not written for him onely, but also for us; so say I of Simons confirmation by the prayer of Christ: for whatsoever is written, is written for our learning Rō. 15. 4.

But you prosequute your argument thus, that S. Peter was bidden cō ­firm his brethren; but onely S. Peter and not the church in generall hath brethren. Wherupon you would have me gather, that this was his special privilege, and no mans ells, save his successors in the headship. Your assumption I withstand as a fallacie, proving Peters popedome for confirming his brethren, no better then as if you should reason thus: Paul sayd to Barnabas, Act. 15, 36▪ let us return and visit our brethren in every citie &c. but onely Paul and Barnabas, & not the church in general, have brethrē: therfore onely Paul and Barnabas are Popes of the catholik church, and visiters of the same, they and their successors. If this be not a good rea­son to prove a supremacie of visitation; the other is no better to prove a supremacie of Confirmation. For the church in generall is a 1. Pet. 5, 9. brother­hood, as the Apostle Peter himself calleth it; and of this brotherhood, Peter was one, Paul an other, Iohn an other, and so the rest, not onely the Apostles but all [...]. Pet. 1. 1—10. beleevers. Wherfore as Simon had brethren, so hath every Christian, and all are brethren ech to other, and all brethren Heb. 2, 11▪ 12. unto Christ. And Peter as he was 1. Pet. 5, 1▪ a joynt elder with the other elders; so was he also a joynt brother with the other brethrē: or els he was none of Christs. And as for confirming his brethren, it is farr from proving a popedome: for Paul an other Apostle, Act. 14. 22▪ & 15, 41. confirmed his brethren, and Ti­mothee an Evangelist 1 Thes. 3, 2▪ did the like; and Iudas and Silas being Prophets, Act 15. 32▪ did the same; and all the Angels or ministers of churches, are taught of Christ to Apoc. 3, 2▪ doo likeweise. Wherfore Simons cōmission to confirm his brethren, made him not Pope, and consequently neyther his supposed successors.

But you presse the circumstances, that our Saviour points out one particular man, saying Simon Simon; and after, having spoken of al, particularizeth the speech agayn, saying, for thee, thy faith, & thy bre­thren &c. I answer, there was cause why our Saviour should speak to him thus, because in his sifting, he should shew more weaknes then the rest: and a speciall fore, needeth a special medicine. But the fore being healed, the recured person is as an other man of his degree: and I shew­ed before, that Peter had no privilege in these things above the other A­postles, Is [...]ariot onely excepted.

You next allege from Mat. 16. how Christ sayth, he builds his church vpon S. Peter; adding moreover, that he changed his name, and of Simon he makes him Peter, and Petra, and [...]phas, which name in the Syriah tongue signifies a Rock; therby to prevent all frivo­lous answers &c. I wish you more wary in alleging of scriptures; [Page 29] Christ sayd he would build his church upon that Rock (petra) and had changed before Simons name not into that, but into Petros. And wher­as CEPHAS the Syriak name is ambiguous to signifie in Greek both PE­TRON and PETRAN; the ambiguitie is cleared by the holy Ghost, in Ioh 1. 43. where Cephas the mans name is interpreted Petros, that is in Eng­lish a stone. Moreover that Simons name was not Petra Rock, is playn by Mat. 16. wher the Apostle distinguisheth the terms, adding also a pro­noune demonstrative of the [...]aute. feminine sex, which agreeth not with a mans propre name; & the Syriak also by the demonstrative hada, distin­guisheth the propre name Cipha, from the appellative cipha, which o­therwise by termination had no difference. As it standeth not with the grammatical construction that Simon should have the name of the Rock: so neyther standeth it with the theological explication. For the Rock signified Christ himself, who was figured out to his Church by a Rock, 1. Cor. 10. 4. which is a title that Moses and the prophets after him, give unto God; as Deu. 32, 4▪ 15. perfect is the work of the Rock; and, the Rock of his salvation; and many the like: and that he onely is the true and proper Rock of the church, we are taught by this and the like speeches, 2 Sam. 22. 32. vvho is a Rock save our God? meaning none ells. So Christ is called Eph. 5. 23. the head of the church, and not any Apostle; and he is the onely foundation upon which the church is builded, as it is written, 1. Cor. 3, 11. Other foundation can no man lay, then that which is layd, which is Iesus Christ. And Peter himself telleth us that 1 Pet. 2. Christ is the Rock and living stone, unto vvhich all Chri­stians as living stones doe come, and are builded to a spiritual house. And Simon being a principal stone in this house, had therfore the name Peter Stone, of Petra, as we all of Christ haue the name Christians; and as tou­ching faith, are living stones, that is Peters; having obteyned 2 Pet. 1. 1. isotimon pistin, a like precious faith with Simon Peter himself, and the other A­postles: though as touching order, they were principal, next unto Christ, (as it is written 1 Cor. 12▪ 28. first Apostles, secondly Prophets &c:) and then other officers and brethren, in their due places.

Moreover were it granted that Christ meant to build his church upon S. Peter; yet was it not upon him onely; for it is written; Eph. 2, 20. Ye are built upon the foundation of th'Apostles and Prophets; and agayn, Apoc. 21. 14. the wall of the citie had twelve foundations, and in them the n [...]mes of the lambs twelve Apostles. Wherfore Christ builded the Church upon the 12. not upon one alone; & it resteth upon you to prove that by saying super hanc Petram, Christ secluded Peter from the rest; for the rest had the rock, and belonged therto aswel as Simon, though he were foremost in the r [...]w. And though he onely had the name of Peter, a stone; that exempteth not others from this grace: for the two that were next unto him, Iames and Iohn, onely had the name of Mark 3. 17. Boanerges, that is, Sonns of thonder; yet did not they onely thonder out the gospel, or understand (as Iob. 2 [...]. 14▪ Iob speak­eth,) the thonder of God's power; but the other Apostles also, had the same office, by preaching of the gospel; though perhaps not in like man­ner or mesure of graces. The like answer I make, for the delivery of [Page 30] keyes to Peter; (a thing which you barely mention:) they were not given to him alone. For as Christ asked his disciples joyntly (and not Peter onely,) Mat. 16, 15▪ whom say ye that I am? so Simon answered not for him­self alone, but for them all. Wherupon Christ pronounced a blessing, and annexed promises, not for him alone, but (as you grant for his suc­cessors also, as I defend,) for the other Apostles also. This may be cōfirm­ed by other like testimonies, as Iohn. 6, 67. where Christ saying to the 12. will ye also goe away? then Simon Peter answered, Master to whom shal we goe? wherby it is playn, that Christ asking all, when one answered, he answered for all: therfore also the blessing upon the answer, must con­cern all; and so the promises not peculiar to Peter, but cōmune with the rest. The scripture plainly confirmeth this doct [...]ine: for where one Evā ­gelist writeth, Peter sayd unto him, Mat. 15, 15. another writing of the same, sayth, His disciples asked him▪ Mark. 7. 17. so that Peter spa [...]e in the name of the rest; and his words were theirs likeweise. So also in this particular of the keyes; for further proof wherof, set you down by the scri­ptures what is meant by keyes: and I will shew you by scriptures also, that the 12. Apostles had equal power in using them. Your supply of proof from testimonie of later doctors, I leave as insufficient; their writings neyther being au­thentik, nor any thing so anciēt as the Apostles writings; and the most ancient records, I stand to be tried by. Yet if I lysted to fight with such weapons, I could cite Doctors against Doctors, and many against you, & Augustine De verb. Dom. Serm 13. most plainly contrarying your opinion, and saying that the Rock was that vvhich Peter confessed & knew when he sayd that Christ was the son of the living God; and that the Rock was Christ, not Peter: but I will not presse you with mans auctoritie; the book of God shalbe my panoplie, and sufficient artillerie.

Your last proof is from Iohn. 21. Where Christ sayd to Peter, Feed my sheep: which sounds as much (you say) as have care of my fold: but in S. John. 10. it is sayd, there is but one flock and one shep­heard &c. and therfore he honours Peter thrise with the stile of an Universal Pastor. This reason hath like frayltie as the former. I de­ney that Peter alone was to feed Christs sheep, for he sent al his Apostles with that charge. Mat. 28. 19, 20. and before this speech to him, he had sayd to them all, As my father sent me, so send I you, Ioh. 20, 21. Peter therfore as he was 1. Pet. 5, 1▪ sympresbyteros, joint elder with the rest, (not archi­presbyteros, cheif elder:) so was he also sympoimen, a joynt Pastor with the rest, and not archipoimen, Cheif pastor, (as you would have him,) for himself telleth us that Christ is he. 1. Pet▪ 5. 4. The same, Christ also con­firmeth in the place you allege, Iohn, 10. for there he sayth, vers. 11. 14▪ I am the good Pastor; and vers. 15. I lay down my life for the sheep; and vers. 18. I have power to lay down (my life) and have povver to take it again, this commande­ment have I received of my father: and vers. 28. I give unto my sheep eternal life, and they shall never perish. With many like speeches vvhich cannot vvithout blasphemie be applied to any mere man, but to him vvhich is vers. 30. one vvith the Father. And therfore unlesse you vvil renounce [Page 31] Christ, and make Peter your Rock, your God, your Saviour, that layd down his life for you, to give you eternal life you cannot make him that vers. 16. one Pastor over the one fold of Iewes and Gentiles. Wherfore neyther thrise nor yet once, is Peter honoured with the stile of universal Pastor; but onely is charged Ioh. 21. to feed Christs sheep, as other Pastors also are required; & our Lord Iesus Heb. 13, 20. the great Pastor of the sheep, hath given not one but many Pastors for this work: Ephe. 4. 11.

Having heard your reasons for Peters headship, I exspected somewhat for your Popes pretended primacie; but for this you shew no evidence frō Gods book; you have none I trow, so ancient. Wherfore your position That the Popes definitive sentence as he is head of the church, is an indeficient rule in matters of faith: is farr as yet frō being proved. And though this preeminence were yeilded for Cephas, yet would I not grant the like for Caiaphas: though Peter vvere the Rock on which Christs Church is builded; yet your house may be situate on the sands, for ought you have sayd to perswade the contrarie. But let us see what the 3. point in your letter wil afford, which now next foloweth.

Lastly and breifly you take upon you to shew that your is the true and onely catholik church of God, that holy citie. Apoc. 21. &c. And first your church (you say) is catholik, for in your memory, you onely are catholiks, in so much that the name catholik was hateful to a puritan or a protestant, citing Beza, D. Humfrie, Sutcliff &c. Your reason hath no weight. What if others should say, your church is the whore of Babylon Apoc. 17. because in their me­mory you only are lovers of that whore, in so much that the name whore is hateful to a puritan or protestant. Would you approve of this argumēt? Yea but it is (you say) against the article of our beleef to deney the ca­tholik church. I answer, we beleeve Eph. 3. 15, Gal. 4. 26. ther is a catholik, that is an uni­versal church; no puritan or protestant I think denyes it. But that your church of Rome or any other particular church in the world, should be the universal or catholik church, neyther faith nor reason dooth per­swade. Wherfore the auctors whom you cite, mought vvel blame you for taking to your selves that ambitious title, which never was given you of God. If therfore you speak, let it be 1. 1▪ Pet. 4, 11. as the words of God; and if by his word you can say any thing to help you, sh [...]w it, and by his grace, I will hear▪ Otherwise your assumed name Catholik, moves me no more then the name Apostolik, Pr [...]tegiani (corruptly called Prester John,) among the Eth [...]pians. I know the Apostle Paul gave the church in Rome no such swelling title when he wrote therunto: and if you would have your church called by a new name, you should let the mouth of the Lord name it (as sayth the Prophet Isa▪ 62▪ 2.) except you would have it noted to be none of his. Secondly you say your church is an ancient church: and God is more ancient then the Divil; truth then falshood &c▪ I grant your church is ancient; but I deney it to be the most ancient. Seing then the most ancient (by your own grant) is the most true, bring [...]orth the testimonies of your antiquitie; and if in the particulars I shew [Page 32] more ancient testimonie then yow, I will yeild. But you proced [...] & say, If yow grant that once our church was the true church / but st [...]ce it hath swarved from her ancient purity / shew which Pope first gave place to the d [...]fects. &c. I grant there was a true church in Rome in t [...] Apostles dayes; so was there in Ierusalem, in Ephesus, Co­rinth, Colosse, & other cities many What their faith & estate vvas, I see in the most ancient records, the Apostles a [...]s & letters unto them What yowr faith & estate is, I see also by your late council of Trident, & other b [...]oks of yours, maynteyning a religion unheard of in [...]h Apostles dayes, as in the particulars vvhen they come to be scanned (after vve have en­ded these general grounds in hand) I doubt not but to manifest. Hovv Rome is come to be Lady & mistresse of al churches, I knovv not by any ancient record of the Apostles, save by that mysterie opened unto Iohn in the vvildernes, Apoc. 17. And if your Popes lives vvere in Gods re­cord, as were the Kings of Israel; I could easily thevv which Pope first gave place to the defects &c. but seing they are not recorded by him, I vvil not 1. Cor. 4. 6. pre [...]ume above that vvhich is vvritten. If upon mens report I should centure them, I mought doo many good men vvrong. They that are dead are gone to th [...]ir judgmēt, & have stood or fallen unto the Lord: you that are liv [...]ng must ansvv [...]r for your selves, and your present state; vvhich if you can not vvarrant by the vvord of God 1. Pet. 1. 23 vvho liveth & in­du [...]eth for ever; your dead mens bones vvil be but slender pillars co un­derprop your church This I am sure of and testify unto you, Our Savi­our and his Apostles forecold of Mat. 7. 15 Act. 20. 29. false prophets and of greivous vvolves, that should come soon after, and not spare the flock. Who vvas the first vvolf in Ephesus, vvho the first in Rome &c, I can not tel: out if our Lord have given vs a true rule, Mat. 7. 16. ye shall knovv them by their fruits▪ vve may knovv your Pope not to be head of the Church, unlesse of Antichrists, & your church it self to be Nú. [...]5, 15 Cos bi-bath tsur, Falsitie daughter of a rock, but not of Christ. Be not offended at my plain dealing vvith you; it is a case of conscience, and concerneth your salvation and my ovvn▪ and I vvish your vvelfare as my ovvn.

Your conclusion, neaping many praises upon your church, many dis­praises upon o [...]ns & others that have forsaken her, remayns hereafter un­to due trial, vvhen (having finished these first questions begun) you shall set dovvn arguments from Gods vvord, eyther for your selves or against us. In the mean time, I obs [...]rve your dispute against us to have no more vveight or colour, then as if the AEdomites or Ismaelites (elder brethren to t [...] Israelites) should have alleged their outvvard carnal privileges & possessions, against their poor brother Iaakob in AEgyptian bondage, and after, a pilgrim in the vvildernes: or as if the Scribes and Pharisees should have pleaded for Annas and Caiaphas and their proceedings (from Deut. 33, 8—11. and other scriptures many,) against Iesus of Nazareth and his disciples. I knovv he magnificence and pomp of the false church da­zeleth the eyes of many; her sorceries bevvitch many; her fornications destroy many: but her cup is ful of the vvine of vvrath, and her lovers [Page 33] shalbe cormented vvith her, but those vvhom God loveth, shalbe deli­vered from her▪ Wherefore serch in the book of God, and read; let his law be your light, and make not fleth your arm: se [...]k wisdom as silver, & serch for her as for treasures; so God may be intreated to shew you the way of life, that you may escape from h [...]l beneath Which grace I wish, and shall doo my andevour to procure unto you. So rest I your freind for all Christian help to my power;

Henry Ainsworth.

Your letter I received the beginning of this moneth December 1609. and I write this the 23. of the same; stilo vete­ri. From Amsterdam.

Iohn Aynsworths reply.

To Mr Henry Ainsworth in Amsterdam. Site audierit, lucratus eris fratrem tuum. S. Math. 18.

I Perceive now by your second writing (Mr Ainsworth) your rea­dynes to write, but your vnreadynes to answer all the groundes of my discourse. For where as still I pressed you with the autho­rity, & vniform consent of those that lived in the Apostles times, and were their schollers: When I vrge you with the authoritie, and most ancient record of hystories: When we bring against you the whole body of councells and holy fathers, the whole schoole of Doc­tors: When we vrge you with the assertions of Luther, C [...]lvin, Be­za, I well, Whitaker, Hooker, pillars nay first founders of the pro­testant religion, out of whose neare withered stock, the Br [...]w [...]sts are newly budded, and even in the bud remaine as blasted, by the breath of their own parents; You think this answer sufficient that they were all men, all dust and ashes and so erred, saying l [...]t the fathers sleep. As though the whole world had bene in a dead st [...]ep of error, vntill this present age. As though the Apostles own disciples, that sucked knowledge frō their mouths, had need to be discipled of you for their dangerous errors. As though the Apostles themselves, Euseb c. [...] Eccle. hyst. Dionisius Areopagita, Euseb. l 4. hist c. 8. Egesippus, Idem l. 2. c. 20. Polycarpus, lib. 3. c. 3. et 4. Irenaeus, Gregor: Nazianz. Chrys. Tertul. S. Cypr S. Ambrose, S. Hi [...]r: S. Augustin were all deceived, all hoodwincut so long in [...]rror; yea that the whole church that was promised to be the pillar of t [...], that was seated on a roch should be swallowed up of hell gat [...]s for a thowsand five hundred yeares contrarn to the firm promise of our Saviour, yea that Luther, Calvin, B [...]za, I [...]wel, Whitaker, Hum­frey &c. these tymes grand Iurie men, and Doctors, were all d. c [...] ­ved in giving up their verdicts: And so decrived that they are of you implicitly condemned as hereticks. Surely such a verdict, can ne­ver [Page 34] win credit before any bar or tribunall in the world, where so ma­ny eye and eare witnesses cannot be heard, evidences, and records, of above a thowsand yeares of age, are not admitted as currant; where infinite Doctors and professors, are refused in their own sci­ences to be beleeved: When our adversaries own fathers, freindes, and adherents are held as partial; and all testimonies of what con­dition soever, braved with this that they were all but men, that th [...]y have all erred. What doe you Mr Ainsworth but teach me a way to answer whatsoever you can bring. For I can say you are onely dust and ashes, onely a man, and lichlier sure to err, then all they that have lived before you, and then all men that live in this age with you. Pard [...]n me in dealing so roundly with you, for it proceeds through no aversion towards your person, but onely to demonstrate the truth of my cause, and the insufficiencie of your answer.

Now to descend down, more particularly vnto your answer: you [...]arp first at my proceeding, which I thought by a distinction direct enough, at which you except: as though direct and distinct, are not in the sense I take them, all one, and so then to answer by a distinc­tion, is to give a direct, or a distinct answer. But you are like one, that is even wearied ere ever he sets forth foot in journey; & ther­fore to make your journey the shorter, you would conceive it onely in a continued, and dead way, deluding therby your self with imagina­tion that your journey is shorter; And therefore I think you in a confuse dealing seeme more fearful of the way to run then I that consider the questiō we are to handle by distinct points, dividing my answer by the eye of judgement into distinct portions. And therfore I answer you againe when you demaund of me what shall decide al controversies in religion, whether the word of God or of man? I an­swer you directly enough that by Gods written, and unwritten word, as by a formal motive we are to be tried; and by the catholick church as by a propounding manner, & by way of circumstance necessarily requi­red to show what is authentick, and what is not canonica; And so I hope this answer is direct and plaine ynough: Aske a Philoso­pher what burneth, and he wil tell you the fire and his qualitie; but demaund how approximation of the subject concurreth, without which the fire never naturally burneth, and he wil tell you it is con­dicio sine qua non most necessarily required. Ask a Philosopher, who gives power to some hidden herb vnknowen, to have his operation; he will answer the nature of the herbe principally, but what doth determine it, hic, et nunc, to work, he will answer the art, & know­ledge of the herbalist, that findeth out the secret nature of the herbe showes how it is to be applied, and vsed to have his due operation. So here I answer that Gods written, and vnwritten word formal­ly, and principally causeth vs to beleeve, but the church that pro­poundeth it as Gods word, concurreth as an applying circumstāce; [Page 35] the church being the treasury of all truth / the B. Anth. magnus e­pist▪ 4. [...] D. Hyll: 2▪ lib Trinit. medi [...]e against all maladies, the [...]howse of truth showeth vs vnfalliblie what is to be beleeved and what is not. And therfore you wonder without cause that I should answer by a distinction, definition and distinction be­ing the two eyes or guides of reason. But now to proceed to the matter, I intend briefly to show how my reasons that I gave to prove my assertion, viz: That onely the scripture is not a sufficient rule and an infallible guide of faith, remaine yet (for all your pre­tended answer) in firme force unshaken.

2. I intend to show how your reasons deduced out of the holy scriptures are not reasons, in that they are wrested from that sense, in which the holy Ghost spake them or meant them.

3. As occasion shall offer I will touch your answer to the other questions, leaving the exact and direct handling therof vntill this controversie in hand be ended.

First then you set down the first argumēt which I brought thus; Nothing is to be beleeved that is not taught, or manifestly gatheredI. out of the written word: But that the Bible is canonical is not taught, or gathered out of the written word, therfore it is not to be beleeved that the Bible is canonicall. Mark then how Mr Ains­worthAn ans. to his oppug­nation of my first ar­gument. smooths up the matter that he hath givē a sufficient answer; when he answers that the pillars of our propositions are earth & ashes, and therfore the whole frame of my Argument lieth in the dust. Then descending more particularly he answereth that my Major is too generall. For he sayes many things may be beleeved, though they be not gathered out of the written word, so that we see he holds some tradition necessary besides the written word, for he sayes to be be­leeved that is with an act of faith, now that which is to be beleeved must be certaine, and must have also infallible, & most certaine mo­tives proportionable to so firm an act; and must be beleeved of those at least that are schollars, who are more precisely to examine the ar­ticles of beleef then laiemen, so that wee have drawen water out of the rock since you graunt that tradition is necessary to your own be­leef: which afterwards you deny, when you say there is nothing ne­cessarie to salvation but is taught by the written word. For now I ask those many things that may be beleeved without the written word, eyther have their motives infallible and sufficiently propounded & so they shalbe faultie, if those schollers to whom they are sufficient­ly proposed beleeve not: or else the motives that are propounded are not certaine, infallible, and constant, and so they shall onely cause an opinion, or at most a humane beleefe; and not a most firme, & con­stant supernaturall art of faith, that is ever most certaine and infal­lible caused by the written, and the vnwritten word of God, and the church propounding. Moreover your answer is found halting, when you say, that there is nothing necessary unto salvation but is delivered by the writtē word, which is most false, since nothing with [Page 36] you is more necessarie unto salvation then the written word, which word is not proved by an other written word, for so that also by an other, and so we should never have an end, so that hence you must cō ­fesse, though against your position, that something most necessary vnto salvation is to be bel [...]eved, and that without the written word; now if that which is most necessary, and the rule of all the rest, be be­leeved, in that it is delivered by tradition, surely things of lesse con­sequence though necessary to salvation, may also be beleeved, though ther is no written word of God to affirme it, having tradition which is Gods vnwritten word tyme out of mynd to deliver it.

As for the proof of my Minor proposition, you put down these words I cited, though not learned out of Mr Hooker. For if any book gives testimonie to the rest, yet the scripture that gives credit to the rest would require another scripture to be credited, neither could we come to any pause wheron to rest or assurance that way; and if you answer that all scriptures are theopneustoi that is in pired of God, I will graunt you that, but I wil demaund how you prove that this book, or this parcel of scripture without tradition is inspired of God? For to say it is inspired of God, by reason it is scripture, and scripture by reason it is inspired of God, is to prove idem per idem, and petere principium, to suppose that prov [...]d, which is given you to prove: And besides I would know of you, how you know, that your interpreta­tion is onely true. But you have your answer ready ceyned, you say the things of God no man knoweth but 1. Cor. 2. [...]1. the spirit of God. But how doe you prove you have the spirit of God? How doe you prove you have the effect thereof in your conscience Heb. 6. 4, 5 piercing more sharply then a two edged swo [...]d, For the Mamchei, Montanist, Arian, [...]estorian, Pelagian, Semipe [...]agian, Lutheran, Calvinist, Familist will [...]ll bo [...]st of this private spirit, will all say they are illuminated of God, that they have the 1. Cor. 2, 15. spirit that discerneth all things, & they are able as w [...]l as you to uphold their religion with wrested peeces of the scripture. Now whereas you object that the Turk c [...]n urge against us their Allco [...]ans antiquitie▪ I answer no:Note here that when I say anti­tiquity is a note of the church, I compare only Iewes with the Heathens, and Christians one­ly with Christians, so that it is a true note since those th [...]t are most ancient have the onely true religion, & so thos [...] Chri­stians that are more anciēt have the onely true Christia religiō. si [...]ce the Romane catholicke church can shewe their beginner, beginning, increase, and their de­clining estate: And wheras you object againe, that Iulian the Aposta [...]a may offer plea with us for antiquitie▪ I answer no, since he went out of the catholick church, to whose faith he was Apo­stata, and therfore supposeth the catholik church to be more ancient then he, as he particularly opposed himself against her. And if it be here objected that the heathe [...]sme he [...]lo is anci [...]ter then our Christianitie, I grant all, but not ancienter then Judai me: For God is more ancient then the Divil, truth then falshood, and so [Page 37] those Christians that are most ancient, have the most true religion.

Your second Objection made against this point, I answer thatII. the high Preisthood that was judge did not err, First we might ansvver that Aaron vvillinglie & ex cathedra did not cōmit [...]dolatrie, but in fragilitie & for fear of the peo­ples displeasure, & so it vvas an error of fact & not of doctr [...]ne. Psal. 98 Exod. 29 Levit. 8. in that Moses was never [...]viltie of Idolatrie, & Moses was joint Priest with Aarō as it is re­corded in the Psalmes Moses et Aaron in sacer­dotibus ejus et Samuel inter eos qui invocant no­men ejus. All which appeares and is most ma­nifestly showen also in that he ordered Aaron. Exod. 29 And in that there Moses is cōmanded to sacrific [...] Applicabis et vitulum etc. ma [...] abis eūQuod Moses erat sacerdos & princeps tenent Greg. Nazianz. in creatione de Moyse et Aaron Phylo Iudaeus lib. 3 de vita Mosis: Et hoc etiam deducitur ex Exod. 24. et 29 et 35. et Deu. 34. vbi dr. quod Iosue erat spiri­tu plenus quod Moses imposuit illi suam manum Deut. conspect Dei etc. offeres incensum super altare And that Moses did execute al this it appeares out of Levit. 8.

Likewise I answer that when our Saviour Iesus Christ was condemned, the high preist­hood did not err, in that the high preisthood re­mayned in our Saviour; for he was then cheif judge and decider, or [...]he the high preist was our Saviours superiour which ye wil not grant. For that pr [...]sthood was infallible onely till Christs coming, being also clearly foretold that at his cōming the highpreist should concurr vnto his death and condemnation, and so not to be directed by the ho­ly ghost.

Finally wheras you would confute me by my own practise in that I r [...]solve all things by the definitive sentence of the Church groun­ded on Christs promise to S. Peter, Math. 16. that his faith should not faile, and that he being converted he should confirme his brethrē all the other Apostles. I answer that as our Saviour was of in­finiteMat. 16. Luk. 22, v. 31, 32. grace, and mercy to promise, so he was of infinite power, and fidelitie to perform. Now wheras you object that I know onely this promise by Mat. 16. & that by the Popes & churches s [...]ntence I knovv onely S. Matthevves gospell to be canonicall, and that the gospell of Ni­codemus is not authenticke, I grant all, but I deny that here there is any maze or circle, that you would fayne from hence inferr, since this mutuall reference, and reciprocall dependence is in diverse kindes; and then Aristotle will tell you, that it is no circle or vitious argu­mentation to demonstrate a causa ad effectum et ab effectu ad causam; and a younge Philosopher wil tell you that the materia and the form doe mutually depend, and reciprocally cause one an other, but the one in genere subjecti, and the other in genere causae formalis. And as a Iewel in his prize dependeth of the knowledge of a skilfull lapidary,Mat. 13. et Marc. [...]c. Ioh. 14. [...] 16. 1. Tim. 5. and yet the knowledge of the lapidary dependeth of the excellent na­ture, and quallity of the stone: So we answer that the Church doth formally depend on the word of God that showes she is taught in all truth; and yet the word of God doth depend of the determination [...] [Page 38] definition of the church: And therfore S. Augu­stinD. August. contra ep: fund: c. 5. Ego verò Euangelio nō crederē nisi me Catholicae commoveret authoritas, et postea: quibus praecipientibus Euangelio cre­didi et his his jubentibus tibi om­nino non credam. said that he would not beleeve the scripture to be scripture without the authority of the chu­rch: And at this answer in effect you wonder, that any one would have the faith of God, to be tried by any other, then by the written word of God; therfore eyther give me leave to be of S. Augustins mind, or leave to mervaile onely at me, since that great Doctor, and holy father doth give the lilie occa­sion to you of wonder.

Now unto your Corolarium that bad rhetorick, and not solid rea­son gathered out from hence, that my faith and hope is grounded on the Spiders vveb: I answer that it is not seated on a webb but on aMat. 16. 18. rock, against which all heretical persecutions, perswasions, blasphe­mies, which is as hell gates shal never prevaile. For my resoluti­on & account of faith that I told you I was one day to give before the tribunal of God, was no other thē this which S. Augustin givesD. Aug. lib contra ep: fundamēt: where he sayes. In ecclesia catholica etc. In the catholick church doth keep me the consent, and agreement of so many people, and na­tions, the authoritie of the same church began by miracles, nourish­ed with hope, increased with charitie, confirm [...]d and established by antiquitie; In the same catholick church doth also hold m [...] the succes­sion of Bishops, frō the sea of the Apostle S. Peter, to whom Christ our Lord after his resurrection commended the fe [...]ding of his flock, continued vnto him, who at this present occupieth this place: And lastly doth keep me the very name catholik, which not without cause amongst so many hereticks, this onely church doth so obteyn, as al­though all her [...]ticks doe pretend vamly to be termed Catholicks, yet if any stranger doe chaunce to demand which is the church of the ca­tholicks, there is no heretick so impudent, as dareth showe eyther his house or synagogue. And thus far S. Augustin himself taught me what answer of my faith I shall make before the eternall tribu­nall of God. But when you shall come there to give account of your faith, the best that you can allege for your self is that you thought & judged it so, that your private spirit interpreted it so, though against the hight of nature in very many points, against al antiquitie of time▪ consent and vnitie of doctrine, against the whole streame of holy fa­thers learned Doctors, and most true expesiters. Who now I pray you Iere. 17, 5. putts trust in man and makes flesh his arm? Who are taught novv by the Mat. 15, 9.precepts of men? Who but you are led by their ovvn inventiōs, spirits and illusions? Who but you, commits idolatrie in worshipping the golden calfe, the idol of your own invention? Therfore I wil cō ­clude with your saying took out of the Psalm 73, 26. The roc [...]. o [...] my hart who is my portion for ever preserve me, and deliver you fr [...]m that s [...]ylla of Calvnustical profession, and from that devo [...]ing cha­ribdis, those syrtes, and quicksands of Brownisme, and Pu [...]itanicalPsal. 73, 26. [Page 39] brotherhood, where men make shipwrack of their faith and soules.II.

The secōd arg. you examin of mine to prove that the b [...]e [...] naked word cannot be an infallible rule or square of faith; you pr [...]pound it out of my writings thus. That which is difficult & includeth many senses: at least to the ignorant can not bee a certaine rule of faith. But the scriptures are thus. My antecedent you admit proved by Tertullian S. Hierome, and S. Peter himselfe whose place you one­ly examin; the others you turne over as you are woont deeming thē vnworthy of your consideration. You examine that of S. Peter now where he sayes that in S. Pauls epistles are certaine things hard to be vnderstood which the vnlearned and the unstable deprave, as also the rest2. Pet. 3. 16,of the scriptures to their owne perdition. Here you except against me that I say many things in sted of certaine; where in deed I cited one­ly the sense of that place propoūding it as the Protestāts vse for yours and their advantage, meaning so tacitè to prevent an objection. For they answer here that S. Paules epistles are not hard, but that ma­ny things in thē are hard. For the Greek copies have en hois that is in which things; and some read en hais in which epistles: And wher­as you object that I say all the rest of the scripture, in stead of also the rest of scripture: I answer the holy Ghost may very well speak gene­rally since the very plainest places of scripture have bene wrested to bolster up heresies: Thirdly you say that this testimony proves scarse the first part of my antecedent that scriptures are onely difficult; but you say, it doth not prove, that scriptures cannot be an indeficient rule of faith. I answer that it proves both. For in what doth S. Peter say that S. Paul is hard, but concerning many points of our faith and religion, as concerning predestination, reprobation, voca­tion of the gentiles, justification by faith. Of which high mysteries S. Paul is the cheif and principall Maister. And as for the exam­ple of the artizē you bring makes much against you. For if an unst [...]l­full Mathematician▪ or sea man knoweth not the right vse of the A­strolabe or crosse staffe, the missing of a hayres breadth, in the right using thereof, makes him judge wrong of the object infinitely almost although the instrument in it self be most true: And if the Physitian misse the right Dose, though he gives the right ingredients, he is lik­lier to kill then to minister help. So if a man misse of the right judge­ment & sense of those places of scripture touching predestination, re­probation &c. the corruption of that place is able to turne all the other places of scripture that leaues that way into his owne nature.

But now here to your reply that not all but onely some places of scripture are difficult and hard, though we see the contrary by experi­ence, since Luther, Zuinglius, Calvin, Berengar: have stumbled at the plainest places of scripture▪ viz. This is my body; yea they stumb­led there at though S. John explicates also most plainely that place when he sayes Caro mea verè est cibus et sanguis mens verè est potus, My flesh is truely meat and my blood is truely drinck. For Luther [Page 40] will have them one way to be understood, [...]uinglius another, Ber [...] ­garius an other, and Calv [...] another Neyther can the paralleling & comparing of one place of scripture with another r [...]n dy this, or satisfy the infinite difficults that arise out of holy scripture. As that of the 2. Regum. 23. 11. The feild is sayd to be full of len­tills. But the 1 Parall: 11. 13. It is sayd to be full of ba [...]iy. And the 1. [...]eg. 7. 15. It is sayd that the bra [...]en pillars were thirty eight cubi [...] in length, and yer 2. Parall: 3. 19. but thirty five Math. 1. 8. It is sayd that Joram bega [...] Qzia [...]: but in the 4. book of the Kings which the Protestants call the second it is written, that Jo­ram was father to Ochozias, Ochoizas to Joas, Joas to Ama [...]s, (not Joram) to Ozias otherwise called Azarias: Mat. 1. & 3 16. Joseph is called Jacob, wheras S. Luk. 3. 23 nameth him [...]: Mat 10 10. the Apostles sent to pr [...]ach are forbidden to have a [...]reffe in their [...]a [...]ds, and yet S. Mark 6 8 ba [...] them take onely a staffe, or rod in their hand, Mat. 26, 34 and Luk. 22, 34. sayth that be­fore the cock did crow Peter should deny him thrice, but S. Marke the 14. 30. sayth Christs words were, Before the cock shall crowe twise thou shalt thris [...] deny me: Mar 15 25. [...]ayth, our Saviour was crucified at the third howre: but S. John 19 14 saith it was about the sixt houre before he was condenmed by P [...]ate; So that you see the comparing of place onely with place often times, may bring a poore man into a maze, or circle, except he adde to this the authoritie of the Church, and the holy Fathers, and the learned Doctors expo­sition by whose helpe all these seeming contrad [...]tions will easily be salved. Now wheras you may answer that these difficults are in matters of fact, and not of doctrine, & so it much imports not whi­ther a man reconcil [...]s these places or no, I graunt the first but I de­ny the sequ [...]. For since you teach that al difficults of scripture, may be helped by comparing of one place with another: now when as ignorant men shall folow this your rule as an unfallible guide, when they see themselves ledd by it vnto a contradiction, they doe not one­ly begin to cal into question this, but al other things conteyned in the scriptures, seing the self same truth affirming the little as well as the great, and as much abhorring from cōtradiction of a litle matter as of a great.

The second braunch of my antecedent which I bring is, that holy scriptures hath many senses, litterall, and spirituall, yea and often many senses literrall and many senses spirituall. All this you deny & wonder that I doe not prove it. I answer that no disputant useth to prove como [...]m [...]mes, and principles, and we use not to prove cō ­mon [...], at most Protestants allow of, viz. of a litterall and a spirituall sense, the l [...]s [...] wherof they divide into three members, into an all▪ g [...]ricell tropological & anagogicall sense: yea and not without great cause they allow of this since D. August. lib. 11. confess. cap. 26 et lib. 11. De [...]tate Dei c. 19. sayth also that the scripture often ha [...] [Page] many litterall senses. But you against the holy fathers held that it hath onely one sense, but as you answer, appliable to diverse places, times and persons. Here I wonder that you should be so considēt­ly hoveld with your own conc [...]t, and so caried away with your pri­vat spirit that you see not that which to most manifest. But even as a pigeon that is seeled in your soaring spirit you see onely the way, at length to your own downfall, though in your conceit you ascend bolt upright for a season: But that the scripture hath many senses we leave as proved, and if to prove, fitter for another place: Now it sufficeth for this place to show that which you graunt to sufficient to prove the second part of my antecedent. For if that one sense hath reference to diverse tymes places and persons, it must needes be very difficult, & require some common help besides themselves to obtaine their severall true expositions: nay here me thinks you graunt that the scriptures hath diverse senses, since you graunt diverse as it were formalities of senses respecting divers places, tymes and persons.

Here also in prosecuting of this point you seem to mistake our doc­trine. For we hold that neyther Apostle or the Pope have domintō over our faith, or authoritie to institut. Sacraments of themselves, neyther can they make what they will as a matter of faith, or tradi­tion: But it must be received tyme out of mynde by the vniform cō ­sent of that Church which hath kept her pe [...]petuall succession of Bi­shops from S. Peter, and then S Aug. in epist. 118. will teach you that insolentissimae infaniae est existimare non certe fieri quod ab v­niversa ecclesia fit, that it is a most insolent madness to think that it should not be right that the whole church doth teach. Besides the Pope doth not make a matter of faith, but declareth onely that such and such a thing is to be beleeved, and that by the inspiration of Al­mighty God guiding him as he is the head of the church. Neyther dooth he for all this omitt to use all humane helpes of counsell and consultatiō with the learned, that though as he is head of the church he hath a promise frō Almighty stil to assist him, yet in that he might not seeme to presume in omitting the vse of naturall and prudentiall helpes and meanes, he vseth all diligent ser [...]tinp therein. The place of 15. of the Acts which you examine of mine; where I lay that in the counsel held at Hierusalem all was concluded with this of S. Peter the head, It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us. This I sayd and still averr makes much against you. For here the Apo­stles to end the controversy in hand, trusted not their own several spi­rits, but to a mature deliberation and counsell: where S. Peter was h [...]ad and vin [...]eere, though he vsed an Apostolicall inguisition; and therfore it is noted in the 7. verse that Peter role up, showing thereby that he was head, and had the preemine [...]ce of place first to speak▪ no­ting also his priviledge that the first Gentills were chosen by his mou [...]h, though S. Paul was design [...]d to convert them. Now un­to that which you [...] that (verse 13. and 14.) S. James [...]. stan­ [...] [Page 42] all and that hence we might rather hold him head of the Church. I answer that doth not hence folow, in that S. James in that he was an Apostle and Bishop of Hierusalē gave his sentence nert; For surely S. Paul and S. Barnabas also spake, though their speach is interposed for the better declaration of the question to be decided, and for the greater confirmation of S. Peters sentence: And though S. James sayd in his speach I judge, he doth not meane thereby that he gave the principal definitive sentence, since he and all the rest follow­ed, and seconded by their suff [...]ages the decision of S. Peter: as it is plaine in the text: The whole assembly for reverence of his person, and approbation of his sentence holding their peace The which S. Hier [...]m affirmeth saying all the multitude held their peace, andD Hier▪ to: 2 epist. 89. ad Aug. c. 2. into his sentence James the Apostle and the Preists did passe togi­ther. Wherefore I may conclude with S. Peter this poin [...]t as I did before. That no prophesie of scripture is made by a private spi­rits2. Pet 1, 20 interpretation, and so consequently not by the naked word: And therefore S. John also bidds them trie their spirits whether they be of God, 1. Joh. 4. v: 20. And as for your distinction of private spi­rits1. Ioh 4. 20 it li [...]le avail [...]th you For though the Pope be also a private man, yet he is the head of the Church, and hath the promise of our Saviour that his faith should not fayle him, and though he may e [...] in matter of fact, or sinn as well as an other man, yet in matter of doctrine when as the head of the Church he is to give his definitive sentence, he can not err, in that he is directed as Christs Dicar in earth by the holy Ghost. Yet for all this he dooth not neglect natu­rall meanes for the decision of any waighty cause; But useth all vsu­all serutiuie of causes, and circumstances, takes advice of the learn­ed councells. But you though you be also a private man, yet you can not showe me any promise of the holy Ghost, made rather to you thē to any other of your adversaries; neyther have you greater signes to manifest the truth then the Protestants have. Nay every one of your profession thinks he hath that spirit of interpreting; which spirit of­ten times proves no other then the spirit of A [...]niball a merrie com­panion; who when he had deceived poore Bullbrooke the interpreter of the word▪ by casting out thrice Bullbrooke as from God at the mouth of a cave whither his reformed brethren resorted to heare frō lum delivered the word of the Lord: afterward showed unto the whole campany that flocked more and more to this their illum [...]na­ted prophet the man of God, so strangely called, how he alone had deceived the poore man, saying, hang me if any other spirit, but the spirit of A [...]iball called thrife upō Bulbrook: Yet admit you should have a spirite to distinguish the truth of one mistery as I sayd, yet you have not the spirit to distinguish the truth of all: But that you might c [...]y out with the true illuminated prophet now and then Do­minus celavit hoc a me. Our Lord hath hidden this from me; that is in not revealing it. Besides you see that every false prophet brags [Page 43] of his spiritt, how then can a private spirit decide any controversie? And for that you bring of the Israelites, it were wel if you with them from the mouth of the Preist would learne wisdome. And if you had that visible coming downe of the holy Ghost that the Apostles had, if you had the giftes of tongues, the power to worke miracles; if you were taught with them all truth; if your followers though illitera­ted were indowed with all these priviledges of the Apostles, then might they with them take upon thē to interpret the scriptures. For S. Luke recordeth, That our Saviour opened his Apostles vnder­standingLuk. 24 45. in all truth that they might vnderstand the scriptures, but you can not show that our Saviour hath done more to you then to other men.

You now proceed and begin to ponder my third argument, byIII. which I did occure a future answer. Not onely scriptures by them­selves, but scriptures by a privat mans interpretation, or comparing one place with an other are not sufficient to be a rule of faith. Which you say I dor not prove here▪ to this I answer, I did prove it there but the more sparingly in that this point seemes to be partly proved in that which goes before. Yet to give you ful satisfactiō I wil a litle reinforce the force therof: For since the scriptures hath diverse senses, or as you say diverse references to sundry places, persons and tymes; how can a private spirit of a man assure one that this and no other is the true sense of this place? Or how can you discern that the true spirit interprets this vnto you? For the communication of this infu­sed spirit must eyther be by a publick message bee delivered you, so that those that are your adherents and followers may be assured, by some visible signe that the holy ghost dictates unto you: and I think by these visible apparitions and communication of the holy Ghost, you wil not mainteyn your spirits interpretation. Or else the holy ghost secretly instil [...]eth into you what is the true sense; But here I demand of you how you are assured of this working of the holy ghost, since there was never yet here [...]ick so senseless, or error so grosse, but would tell vs of this private assurāce of the holy Ghost. And though the communication of the true spirit should be manifest to your self, yet you could give no warrant or assurance thereof to vs; to the Pro­testant adversaries, or to your own followers. How would you be able to convince an Ariā, that wil thwart you with that of S. John, my father is greater then I: If you say this place is to be vnder­stood in regard of his humanitie and not in regard of his divinitie, he will bid you show scripture plainly to affirme that. How wil you answer an Anabaptist that will have no man to be baptized before they come to the yeares of discretion to give a reason of their faith? How will you answer us Catholiks or the Protestants when we de­maund of you why you follow the vulgar translation, in saying El­der, when the originall and all other languages almost hath stil the word Presbyter, which signifies Preist to all? Nay since the holy [Page 44] scriptures admitteth divers senses and doe not explaine themselves, how should a poore artificer perswade himself that this sense which he apprehends is onely the true sense; Nay that he is easily deceided herein by a p [...]dicated opinion I will show. For when he comes to read that S. Peter in his first epistle salutes them from Babylō, he in that he may not admit S. Peter to have bene at Rome, will not have Babylon there to be Rome, but he will have S. Peter to salute them from that Babylon in Assyria. But when he comes to [...]ad Apoc. 1 [...], & 18. Babylon againe, in that he hath rooted mal­lice against Rome he will have her alone to be that Babylon, he will applie all these mischeifs and deformities to the church of Rome.

Now if you object that comparing one place with another will afford, the right sense; I ask you how you are certayne of that since that place with whome you are to compare it hath divers sen­ses, or references, how are you assured to compare it to the right in regard of each circumstance. Nay if these spiritual men be the onely decidants, why doe they when the word signifies an evil sense trans­late traditions, though it be the self same Greek word, Col. 2. v. 20. Why are you ledd with traditions; And when in divers places the self same word imports Apostolicall traditions, in stedd thereof they read, ordinances, institutions &c. Why did they in the printed Bible 1 [...]62 thrust in Rom. 11. Baals image, which now Bible [...]595 to corrected. And if every image be an idoll as they translate it, why Genesis the first can we not say God created Adā according to his own idol? And that all images in the old law were idols Exod. 25. 3. Regum. 6. Why doe they make the Hebrew and Greek word that signifies hell when they list onely to signify the grave; Though it be against scripture it self. Gen. 37. I will goe down to the grave to [...] mourning, which cannot signifie though racked in sense the grave, since he thought his sonne to be devoured of wild beasts, and so vnburied without a grave: But when the self same word, Prov. 15. speakes of the dan [...]ied, they translate onely hell, how then can theProv. 15. parallising and cōparing of one place with an other settle all doubts of the ignorant, stop the mouth of the contrarie part who shall af­firm that it is not the true sense? Nay if scripture be a most manifest interpreter of it self: Why did Luther that affirmed before this as­sertion of yours in assertione articulorum 10. damnatorum retraetate and recall that opinion of his before his death, in colloq. conviviali titulo de verbo Dei. No man can vnderstand sayes he the Bucolica of Uirgil except h [...] be first five yeares a shepheard: No man can vnder­stand his G [...]o [...]icks, except he be five yeares a husbandman: so let every man know that he hath not tasted sufficiently the scriptures, except he hath governed in it a hundred yeares. Nay if holy scrip­tures be so easy of themselves to be understood; why doth Luther cal the epistle of S James stramineam, and vnworthy of an Apostoli­call spirit? Why doth Beza writing on the eight chapter call into [Page 45] question the whole book of S. John, when he averrs that it was not probable that our Saviour was left alone in the temple with a wo­man, or that he did write in the dust with his finger.

My fourth argument you being forth thus. That which by theIIII▪lights & lanterns of your opinion, hath been wronged in the highest de­gree, to bolster up heresie, can not be a true, and indeficient rule of faith. You geaunt my assumption and you instance it in Luther, Calvin, Be­za: Onely to answer this you think it sufficient to say it is a rhetorical flourish. No flourish that by your own confession hath flonge down your strongest pillars: But you say it is the fault in them, which wil­lingly I graunt, but with this addition, that there is the like in you. And I pray you tell me, if all that have gone over such a bridge, be­ing in their right senses, perfect judgmēts have bene drowned, would you think, that bridge remayning, thus unrepaired as it is, a sure & safe way. So if all, or most that have trusted to the naked and bare word of the scripture onely, and to their own witts and spirits have grossely and dangerously erred, wil you hold it so remayning an vn­deficient rule? Nay if the bare word so cōfirmes them in their errors, that without some one common and visible judge they stil remain stiff in their errours: can the bare word be the indeficient, onely, and the infallible rule? But that it is so: dispute against the Lutheran, Cal­vinist, Zui [...]glian, Anabaptist, Protestant, Fa [...]list, and they wil ell [...]ite place of scripture, interpretation for interpretation, spirit for spi­rit [...]ieng and re [...]ying you with places, and spirits dictam [...]ns, telling you long stories of the communication of the holy Ghost. Where­fore I will conclude breifly this argument that the naked and bare word of the scripture cannot be an infallible rule and judge, s [...]t doth not make the partie overthrowen certaine, that the sentence as much as lieth in the judge is passed against him; which is the pro­pertie of the sentence of every supreme judge, that his decree be plainly seen and that without all contradiction the partie overthrowen in law may yeeld unto it; For else there is no end of sentence, no end of judgement if the partie overthrowen, may with the like probability as before recom [...]nence his suite, and offer plea without any [...]d.

My fift argument which you put downe thus, Many misteriesV. of our faith are beleeved which explicitely are not declared in the word of God, nor so infalliblie (prescinding from all traditions of the church) deduted thence, so as they are sufficient to make a man be­leeve with so firm an act of [...]aith as is required. Therefore that which makes that worthy of constant beleefe is a rule of faith, aswel as the written word, whether they be traditious divine or Apostoli­call.

Now to all the places I bring to prove traditions How the world was onely governed and taught by traditions till Moses tyme, who was the first pen-man of the holy Ghost, and to that Ero. 14. Deu. 32. 37. &c. you graunt that traditions were before necessary, but [Page 46] you deny that they are now a rule of faith. But you assigne no reason but onely this in disputing as if it were the total rule of faith; where I would inferr onely that it was a partial togither with the word of God. And whereas you object that these traditions spoken of in Deut. might for the Jewish Cabalists, which are rejected by S. Peter, 1. Pet. [...]. Tit. 1. 14 as vain conversation and Jewish fa­bles; Is plaine against the holy scriptures Deu. 32. interroga patrem tuum, et anuntiabit tibi, majores tuos et dicent tibi. Ask thy father &c. Ero. 14. Narrabis filio tuo in illa die dicens hoc est quod fecit Dominus: Et Iob. 8. Iud. 6. Psal 43. Psal. 47. Eccles. 8; where it is plaine that the holy Ghost speakes of such traditions that are good to be followed & not to be estemed vain, idle & fabulous. To that of S. Pa: to the Thes. is plaine that the Apostle speakes of that which was taught by word of his mouth, yea of such traditions as you call humane in vs. For when S. Chrysost. comes to explicate the 2 Thess. 2. he explicates it so plainely for such traditions as wee have in controversie that D. Whitaker de sacra scriptura pag. 678. sayes that S. Chrisost. spoke in this point inconsiderately, & vnworthy of so great a father. Therfore S. Paul and S. Chrysost: vnderstood more here by traditions then you would willingly vnderstand. And that not onely things of lit­tle consequence but of greatest moment, are beleeved onely by traditi­on, I prove manifestly since the Bible can not be canonicall without it were delivered by the hand of traditiō frō tyme to tyme as authen­ticke. And besides, how can you prove the procession of God the son, and God the holy Ghost from God the Father, as from one begin­ning, or the consubstantilitie of the blessed Trinitie? How are you a­ble onely by bare scripture to prove the remedie in the old law vsed to women children for original sinne, and to man children when in dan­ger of death before the eight day they necessarily were to receive re­medie of their sinne? How prove you that our blessed virgin Marie was a perpetuall virgin, ante partum, in partu, et post partum? how ar you able to prove this by the bare letter against Helvidius the here­tick;vide D. Hier. cont. Helvid. et D. August: haeresi 84. for he vrgeth you with the plaine text, and with originall phrase viz. That he knew her not till the brought forth her first sonne; and the word know you know what it imports in the Hebrew phrase: As Abraham knew Sara: So that you see we beleeve this perfection of the blessed and perpetuall Uirgin Mary by tradition, though the bare text seems to make against it: How doe you prove that our sun­day should be celebrated on sunday and not on saterday by the bare letter without tradition? How doe you prove the celebration of Ea­ster as it is now, without tradition? How doe you prove the Creede of the Apostles out of the naked word? How doe you prove without tradition that you should receive the blessed sacrament kneeling? the receiving of it fasting? the eating of blood and strāgled meates prohi­bited in the Acts of the Apostles? How are you able to prove all these or any one of these by convincing reasons out of the holy scriptures [Page 47] alone? All these you say you can prove, not alleaging one place of scri­pture for any of them, though you have bene most copious to prove idem per idem in other pointes to little purpose. Now you say onely it would goe hard with you if you could not prove these without tradi­tion, and me thinks it goes hard with you since you prove not one particular of them all. Therfore I desire you that you would not confound your trace so like the Fore, or hare in doubling, and turn­ing; but that you would answer distinctly to each poinct as it lies if you answer. Wherfore to shut up this point I will conclude with S. August: Genes: ad litt: [...]. 10. [...]. 23. that as he sayes that the not rebaptising of infants were not to be beleeved if it were not taught by tradition: So I say these forealleaged mysteries were not to be beleeved without the direction of tradition.

Now since we are come to the answering of your arguments, which are nothing but allegations of scripture falsly applied, me thinks I cannot better compare them, then as to so many orient pearles and rich Jewels, hung and placed out of order in an Judian, or [...]thi­opians lippes, nose, armes and legges: so these places of scripture in that they are racked and wrested from their right sence and mean­ing, their lustre, and beautie is rather a disgrace thē ornament to the wearer.

For when you bring the place of Deut. 5 32. to take heed that wee should doe as our Lord commaunded us; not turning to the right hand nor the left, and of that of Deut. 12. 32. not putting any thing therevnto, or taking any thing therfrom. I answer first granting that God commaundeth this, but I deny that hence can be gathered that in that we should doe as our Lord commaundeth us, and that we should not turne vnto the right hand or to the left, that the holy scripture should be the onely rule and v [...]ptor of faith: F [...]r as it doth not follow, nothing is to be added to the fourth cō ­maundement, and the fourth commandement is to be observed, ther­fore there is onely the fourth commaundement, and it is therfore the rule of all the rest.

2. I answer that all additions whatsoever are not here prohibi­ted but onely such as are contrary to the word of God; For many o­ther Prophets as the penn men of the holy Ghost did adde diverse yea most part of the holy scriptures. But now it is plaine that the definitions and traditions of the Catholick church, by whose mouth the holy Ghost doth dictat are most consonant to the text of scripture. For the holy Ghost speaketh by them though not tanquam calamus velociter scribentis.

For Luke 10. it is sayd he that heareth you heareth me, and he that contemneth you contemneth me: Math. 18. If he doe not hear the church let him be to thee as an Ethnicke and a Publican, and S. Ambrose expounding the last of S. John 18 v. where S. John saith If any man shall adde unto these things, God shall adde vnto him [Page 48] the plagues written in this book. S. Ambrose saith he makes not a protestation against the expositors of his prophesie, but against he­retichs; For the expositor doth adde nor diminish nothing, but one­ly openeth the obscuritie of the place, and sheweth the moral and spi­rituall sense.

Now to answer your second argument, I wonder how you being a man of vnderstanding should be so much deceived as to think that these places make for you, against vs. For wee holding firm our as­sertion can cite all the self same places Rom. 3. 10. 11 19. that man naturally understands not the things of God; & that mans wisdome is foolishnes. Coloss. 2. 22. For we affirm it the gift of the holy ghost by an infused habit of faith that we beleeve; and that by the directiō of the holy Ghost promised that the Church cannot [...]r; neyther doe we when we allow of tradition make at our pleasure voluntary reli­gion, for we acknowledge tradition also to be the word of God, the voice of his spouse that is taught in al truth, guided up the holy ghost vnto the end of the world. Wherfore your argument proves nothing since you presuppose that proved that rests yet to you to prove.

The like answer I give vnto your third argument, viz. that men are dead in trespasses Ephe. 2. 5. Math: 15 9. that faith to by hea­ring, and hearing by the word Rom. 10 17. But I deny that the word is the totall or onely rule of faith, since we finde many thinges to be beleeved that are not expresslie found in the written word, nor thence deduced.

And to answer breifly vnto your 4 Argument, I graunt that the Preists and Prophets were bound to heare the word, and that of Ezek. 13. 2, 3. that they should not prophesie according to their own heart, or follow their own spirit, but I deny that they should follow onely the written word or that folowing the voice of the Church, the interpretaton of holy Fathers and Doctors they follow their own harts and their own inventions. So that you see how weake your arguments be, so that they might with more reason bee returned on your self.

The second thing which you say I take vpon me to prove: butII. more rightly to say onely to propound, till the decision of this mayne question be ended; which was whether the definitive sentence of the Church and Pope be an infallible rule and guide of our faith. Thus questiō I say, I onely intēded rather to propound thē prove, that we have not at one tyme diverse pro [...]s togither in the fyre; But now to handle it by way of vellitation and not of purpose to prove as you would hence inferr: But you so mangle in propounding the reasons that I do onely point out, that they might seeme not to prove that which they intend. For you leave out the force of the argument; as the circumstances of the promise vnto S. Peter by our Saviour, and the prerogatives and priviledge given vnto S. Peter; that he is na­med first amongst the Apostles: That he alone walked with our Sa­viour [Page 49] on the water; Of the sundry promises of our Saviour made unto him that hell gates should not prevayle against him, that he being confirmed should confirme his brethren; that our Saviour wa­shed S. Peters feet first; that S. Peter onely of all the rest should receive a reveled promise of his particular Martyrdom of the cross; That he after infusion of the holy ghost first promi [...] [...] the Gos­pell; That the first miracle in confirmation of our faith is made by S. Peter; That he as a supreame judge did condemne the hypocri­sie of Ananias and Saphiras, that he first discovered Symon Ma­gus and condemned him; All which and other circumstances concur­ring onely in S. Peter showes manifestly that S. Peter had preemi­nence above all the other Apostles; that he is the rock and head of the Church, that Cephas so particularly pointed out by the holy Ghost, calling him first by the name given him at his nativitie Simon, by the name of his father Bar Ionae, and by his new imposed name Cephas; that no cavil might be took at a legacie so strongly and particularly confirmed unto S. Peter. Now all that you bring or can alleage a­gainst this belike is that the name Cephas was interpreted Petros, which in Greek eyther signifies a rock, or a stone. I answer it avay­leth nothing, since Petros signifyes, eyther a rock, or a stone; now if you ask, why he is called Petros and not Petra; I answer, in that the masculine gender best fitted the name of a man: And that S. Peter is the rock plainely appeareth out of the very text; For it is sayd in the Caldei tongue super hoc Cepha; and in the vulgar super hanc Pe­tram; where our Saviour signifies the rock of which he had spokenMat. 16. 1 [...]. of before, the which according to your grāmaticall construction you seeme not much to deny, since you confess that Cephas signifies in­differently a rocke or a stone, now your private spirits interpretatiō would onely limit it vnto a stone, though against S. Hier: most slit [...] ­full in languages and tongues in c. 2. epist. ad Gal. where he sayes it signifies a rocke: Optatus lib. 2. contra Parmen: sayes that in Greek it signifies a head: As Christ is called the head, Isa. 8, 28. Daniel: 2. Psal. 117. Math. 21. Rom. 9, 1. Cor. 10. Ephes. 2 [...]. so after a kind of a measured proportion S. Peter by the delegatiō of our Sa­viour is his Vicegerent in earth, a visible head of a visible Church.

But to that which you object that S. Peter answered as the mouth of the Apostles and therfore had not these promises made unto him a­lone; makes much against you, for to be the spokesman of all the rest, the Masterspring of all their judgments, seemes to graunt him supe­rioritie, and preeminence: And though S. Peter was the mouth of the rest, I graunt all, but not onely the mouth, but also the head; And if S. Peter could not have the prerogative of place given unto him in that he represented the Church: No more could the sonnes of Abraham be two sonnes in that they represented two nations. And whereas you object that all the other Apostles were foundations, A­ [...]oc. 21. 14. I graunt they were but not the principall. Neyther both [Page 50] the headship of S. Peter derogate from Christ Jesus our head, since S. Peter is but subordinated to Christ Jesus, and onely of his free institution: and if that place 1. Cor. 3. be understood absolutely; O­ther foundation can no man lay, then that which is layd which is Jesus Christ, then is that of S. Pa: 2. Ephes. false where he bidds us build upō the foundatiō of the Apostles: so that you see a less prin­cipall foundation or roch may wel agree with the absolute, most per­fect rock and foundation Christ Jesus, and that the Apostles may be a foundation though S. Peter be chiefe.

And that no man might reply that this doctrine of the Popes su­premacie is but a late doctrine; see Carthw. lib. 2 pag. 507. 50. lib. 2 pag. 97. Fullie against Saunders rocke pag. 248. 271. vpon the [...]hemis [...] restament where he affirming that the fathers of the coun­cell of Nice began the foundation of the Popes supremacie; which was one of the first 4. generall counsells so many yeares agoe.

And that this poinet of the Popes supremacie doth not lack force of reason to confirme it, I will onely alleage one generall reason is prove it. The ecclesiasticall Hierarchie is no worse governed, then any temporall regiment and government. And therefore Math. 25. It to compared unto a kingdome that is governed by one King, and Heb. 3. to a familie well governed. Caut. 6. to a Campe well orde­red. But in all wel ordered common wealthes there is ever required some visible judge besides the written law; since there must be a su­preme judge to know and take notice of the cōtroversies when they arise, and to ponder well and examine the reasons of both: 2. there must be one to erplicate the sense of the law, & to pronounce sentence in the behalf of one partie, when it shalbe necessary: And lastly there must be one to compell those that refuse, to due observation thereof. Now since the church of God is as wel ordered, as any other gover­ment, and that there ariseth the like difficults in her lawes explica­tion, as can happen in any temporall and politicall government; It is against the providence of God and love to his spouse the church, to denie her those helpes, which necessarily must be graunted to all well governed common wealthes. Therefore as the sentence of a su­preme judge in explicating the sence of the low is to be followed; so by a greater reason S. Peters successor guided by the holy Ghost, in all difficults of momēt is to be sought vnto for counsel, is to be heard with obedience when he counselleth, is to be obeyed whē he proceeds with his powrfull jurisdiction.

Now when you are come to my supplie of later Doctors, bran­ding the most ancient and venerable Fathers of the Church with noveltie; and onely you please your self with this answer that you ac­count them all as insufficient: I wonder how any man can say or think this, but I wonder more how you can averr, that you could cite in this point Father for Father, Doctor for Doctor with vs: al­though you cite S. August. 11. de verbo Dei sec. 12. where he sayes [Page 51] that Christ was the roche and not S. Peter. I answer first he doth not manifestly contrary vs. For though 1. lib. retract. c. 23. he doth approve rather of that opinion, yet doth he not manifestly contrary, that he thinks the other opinion false, or improbable; For he ronfes­seth that the whole Church, in a hymne of S. Ambrose doth acknowledge that S. Peter was head and rocke of the Church; Wherefore after he had proposed the cōmon opinion of the Church, and his pri­vate judgement: In great humilitie he concludeth all. Let the rea­der chuse whether of these two opinions is the probabler. Hence we may note how ill a friend you are to S. August. thus to put him on the racke: and how you may inforce fathers to seeme to speake for your cause in great nūber if you bring those that makes against you: & me thinks you that rely most in expositiōs of scripture, on still of lā ­guages, should not onely rely of S. August: words here that in this for lack of skill of languages mistook a litle: But this is certain that S. August: in Psal. 63, et contra partes Donati calls S. Peter & his suc­cessors the rock, against which hell gates shall not prevaile: So sapes Tertull. De praescript. Orig. homil. 5. in Exod. S. Cypr. De unitate Ec­clesiae. S. Hyllar. cant. 16. in Math. S. Ambr: serm: 47. 68. lib. 6. in c. 5 Lucae. S. Chrysost. homil. 55. in Math. S. Cyrill. lib. 2. c. 1, 2. cōment, in Ioannem.

Lastly you produce that which I bring out of S. John 21. wher it is sayd Pasce oves meas seed my flock, in which words I assumed S. Peters priviledge and power to be noted; since here a Pastorall office is graunted unto S. Peter, that is to feed with pasture, to lead, to defend, to governe, chasten, and heale. But you say that all the Apostles were alike charged here to feede. But the contrary is ma­nifest out, since he sayd onely to him feed my flocke to whom he sayd before, lovest thou me more then they? In which words he excludeth all the others: Besides Christ speakes to S. Peter that he should feed his generall flock though he may speak unto the other Apostles that they should feed their particular charges. Wherefore S. Leo saith 3. anniversario assumptionis. sayth Petro hoc singulariter creditur, quia cunctis Ecclesiae rectoribus Petri forma praeponitur; and so we may answer that in this generall charge given to Peter, the particular charge implicitly was commended unto all the other Apostles.

And though the other Apostles were sayd to be joinet Preists with S. Peter 1. Pet. 5, 1. It is spoken in regard that they were joinctly Preists in the exercise of their orders, and not in regard of the pree­minence of place, in which respect S. Peter was head of all the rest of the Apostles, though the others did joinctly labour with him in the conversion of nations.

Now after you have a litle smoothed up your self that you have done your part in this poinct, then begin you to say that my affertiō is not sufficiently proved: But as for that, you might better leave it to the iudgment of the indifferent reader, then to take upō you to be [Page 52] pliant and ju [...]e in the self same cause. But whereas you say I lack an [...]i [...]uitie to prove the supremacie of the Pope, I hope no, since the Protest [...] own Doctors teacheth that it began in the Niceā coun­cell; and I think when we shall scan the matter how it come in then I know we shall prove it of equall age or the self same with that of S Peter. But to say the truth I did not intend to prove this point of purpose, but onely to give you a tast what doctrine in this we fol­low; Therfore if in this you impugne Cardinall Bellar: doctrine as it lieth, you may at once impugne both that learned man and my selfe, to whose learning I acknowledge my self a scholler.

The last thing which you examine of mine is about the name Ca­tholicke; which faine you would challenge vnto your selfe, but after better consideration you seeme to refuse it, because it is not warran­ted by the written word. But why doe not you aswel reject the name Trinitie, consubstantialitie, three persons and one God? Nay why doe you not reject as wel the Crede of the Apostles? For if the church be a catholicke mother, surely she hath Catholicke children of which you wilbe none. But you belike say with Gaudentius the hereticke that the name Catholike is a humane fiction. D. August. contra Gau­ praefati­one novi testament.lib. 2. c. 25. Or with Beza you helshe when you call it a swel­ling title you think it a vaine word, or with Humfrey in vita Iuelli a vaine terme. But you doe well since you have neyther vniversalitie of tyme, place, or person of the Catholicks: Nor the vnitie of the Ro­mans having such divisiōs and sectaries amongst you to deny both: But we can say with S. August: writing upon the Psal. 65. Iubilate Deo omnis terra let the whol world & not only one corner of Amsterdā rejoyce, we can show you the prophecie of Esay fulfilled in that the Gosuell is preached to all nations. Gen. 2. 6. Psal. 2. Isa. 54. Mat. 28 Mat. 5 Luk. 8 Mal. 1. that the whole world is replinished with the fruit of our doctrine: Neyther is this the voice of the Israelites or AEdomites against the Israelites in glorying of fleshly privileges; For, these are noted as principall signes of the Church of God, and that if it were as invisible as your Church was, it should be excelled farr by the synagogue of the Jewes that still for all their scattering, have reteyned in sundry places visible meetings and congregations, visible vse of their sacraments and ceremonies: The which conside­ration made Castalio in the preface of the Bible of King Edward the [...]. after he had considered the promises made by our Saviour to his Church that it should be spread over all nations and that hell oates should not prevayl against it, and how invisible their Church had been, how unheard of the essentiall pointes of their doctrine, inforced him to say that eyther these promises are to be fulfilled, or that God els is a lyar: This also made George David to deny the verity ofHistoris Georgij Davidis Antverpiē. the Bible in that the promised visibilitie of the Church was not per­formed. Nay then a little to see whither wee or you make the best resolution of our faith, Let vs consider that we Romane Catholicks [Page 53] use all meanes and apply all helpes and motives to the due eliciting of an act of faith. For first we have all motives evidentiae credibili­tatis required unto an act of faith: Wee have all antiquitie, vnitie, vniversalitie, visibilitie, confirmed by the consent of Dortors, by the institution of most holy religious orders, we have the conversion of nations, the power of miracles: the infinite number almost of Mar­tyrs that have sealed our doctrin through al ages with their bloods: 2. wee have a certaine visible, and infallible way to decide all contro­versies, which is the Catholick Church that propoundeth what is to be beleeved, and what is not: 3. we have Gods divine veracitie spea­king by the mouth of the Church which formally makes vs to be­leeve: 4. wee have a supernaturall judgment to beleeve in common at least in that all people all nations have so beleeved. And lastly through all these we have a pious affection through the working of Gods holy grace to beleeve hic et nunc, hoc et illud, and that without any difficult, since we first beleeve there is but one true Church, and that Church cannot err, and so with great facilitie we beleeve ought that the Church shal propound unto vs to be beleeved. But you have none of these, but onely a prejudicated opinion not to beleeve ought wee say, and a presumptuous spiritt to preferr pour interpretations before all the Doctors of the Church: And if you would indeavour to convert any Turke, Jew or Atheist, you could not make him of your opinion, till you had convinced him in each particular and seve­rall poinct. But when we shall come to deale with an Atheist or an infidell; wee can give him such evident motives, such profoundnes of reasons, that even by the light of nature he may think almost that our articles of faith are worthy of beleefe, and after we have perswa­ded him to beleeve that there is but one true church, one meanes of saluation, and that this Church is guided in all truth by the holy Ghost, with great facilitie I can induce him to beleeve any one arti­cle of our beleef that this onely true, and most firm church teacheth. Let therefore any one judge whose foundation is grounded on sand: who is seated on earth and ashes. And as for the rellicks of the poi­soned cupp they are all too blasphemonsly false if you would poure them upon us; and I think they might be applied to your congrega­tion if I would descend downe into particulars. Wherefore that pour understanding may be inlightned and judgment corrected read the Bible but not onely with the scholiast of your private spirit, but with the holy fathers and learned Doctors expositions. Therefore I will conclude with that short exhortation S. Augustin sent unto his freind Honoratus lib: De unitate Cred. c. 8. You see you have bene loue troubled with these broiles of parties in the world, and now if you think your self to have bene tossed and turmoiled enough, and would at length have an end of these verations folow the way of the Catholick discipline; in which the prophesie of Isoia the third is ful­filled. And there shalbe in it a path, and a way, and a holy way it [Page 54] shalbe called, the befiled shall not passe by it, but this to you shalbe a direct way, so that fooles can not nuffe if they follow it.

And thus Mr Ainsworth I have mainteyned my arguments, an­swered your objections, though not so spedily as I could have wish­ed, having other busynesse: And now here I could wish you doe not secare lignum eadem lineà, that you would when you answer me ex­amin [...]. Bellarmins groundes, reasons, doctrine and authorities as they lie, that so you may the better give your self and others satisfac­tion, and the more worthily deserve an answer; And thus with har­ty prayers for your conversiō I leav you the fourth of March 1610. from Justice Hall stilo veteri.

Your freind to give your vnderstanding the best satisfaction he can. Iohn Aynsworth.

The answer to the former reply.

To Mr Iohn Aynsworth prisoner in justice hal, in London: Grace and mercy, from our Lo. Jesus Christ.

WHeras my first writing gave yow to understand that I held all differences in religion were to be tried & cōpo­sed by the verdict of God, wherunto I humbly submit the triall of my faith & actions alwayes, & in my secōd, (because I did not see yow condescend hereunto,) I shewed reasons of such my perswasion: yow (Mr Aynsworth) in your replie, first taxe me with unreadynes to answer all the the grounds of your discourse; & secondly entwite me, as one that chargeth with error, them that lived in the Apostles times, [...] were their scholars, the most ancient record of historyes, the whole body of councils and holy fathers, the whole schole of Doctors &c. yea as one that hath implicitly condēned for he­retiks; Luther, Calvin, Beza, Jewel, Whitaker, Humfrey, &c. The first I leav to the indifferent readers judgment, whither I have omitted any ground of your discourse pertinent to our present cause; or yow ra­ther have omitted of mine, in your replie. If yow blame me for omitting discourses impertinent, I must bear it stil: for still I mean so to folow the matter in hand.

The second I leav to your ovvn secōd consideratiō, & all unpartial judg­ment, what cause yow have so to accuse me. Doe I otherwise debase mē, then by comparison with the most high God? doe I speak of the fathers, worse then the scriptures (which I alledged) speak of al men? And wil yow match earth with heaven, frayl man, with God, as joynt umpiers in religions controversies.? If not, why are yow offended, that I cleay to God alone: that I would leav the farhers to sleep in peace; (which yow [Page 55] out of charitie, doo interpret a dead sleep of errors:) whom yow (it seems) would rouse out of their graves, as if yow thought to find a 1. Sam. 28 Sa­muel at Endor, when the Lord himself answereth yow not by Vrim, nor by Prophets. And much yow mistake me, (if not purposely); as if I thought my self not dust and ashes as they, or any more priviledged frō errors then they. There be thowsands of them whom yow implie as tax­ed of me with error, whom I preferr for wisdom truth & holines before my self: yea I match not my self with the least of Gods servants: but by the grace of God I am that I am; & his word, (not my own) is that I st [...]d upon, & doe oppose unto all the world: but I judge no man, neyther wil I be judged, in cases of conscience, by mans day. Isa. 2. 22, Cease yow therefore from the man whose breath is in his nosthrels: for wherein is he to be e­stemed?

Or if you will not cease, the truth it self out of the mouth of God and man shal force yow hereunto. For in my former answer, I set down fowr reasons, fortified with many scriptures, to prove this position: ThatThe 1. point of controver­sie.God onely is to be umpier and arbyter of all questions and contro­versies about religion: which was the first point to be accorded be­tween us. You (after you had generally censured them to be nothing but allegations of scripture falsly applied,) answer to the first, confir­med by Deut. 5. 32. & 12. 32. by denying that hence can be gathered, that the holy scripture should be the onely rule or umpier of faith. For (say you) as it dooth not follow, nothing is to be added to the 4. commandement, and the 4. commaund is to be observed, there­fore there is onely the 4. command. and it is therfore the rule of all the rest. The reddition of this your similitude, shewes not his face (per­haps least it should blush:) but lyes hid in silence.

First you gather a consequence, which here I strowed not: I spake of God, and of his verdict and authoritie; not of the scriptures as yet. For whither it be by writing or by speaking, or any other way that God ma­nifesteth his will unto us, it is to me all one, and the authority of the scripture is a second point. Thus your answer is not here to the purpose.

Your reason annexed, is a fallacie, concluding from a part against the whole unequally. The scriptures cited speak of Gods commands in ge­nerall: you take one in particular; and because one is not all, therfore all must not be all, but more then all must be observed; which what they wil be I cannot tel, unlesse the commandements of men. Mat. 15. 9.

2. You answer, that all additions whatsoever are not here prohi­bited, but onely such as ar contrary to the word of God: for many other prophets, as the penmen of the holy Ghost, did add divers, pea most part of the holy scriptures, &c.

In deed this answer is your own, none of Gods: you shew no tittle of his word for that you speak. But I will shew you the contrary. Prov. 30 [...]. Adde not unto his words, least he reprehend thee, and thou be a lyar. Lo here all additions, and not onely things contrary, are forbidden. Againe; though it be but a mans testament, (sayth our Gal. 3. 15. Apostle,) when [Page 56] it is confirmed, no man dooth abrogate it, or addeth therto. If you addThis I. A. answereth not, but Gal. 1. for it. to your naturall fathers testament, civill lawes would count you an unna­turall son; & your distinction would not help yow: much lesse can it help yow, for doing such wrong to the will of our father which is in heaven.

Your reason is direct against yow: for the Prophets being penmen of the holy ghost, added nothing of their own: the additions were2. Pet. 1. 21, Gods own. If the Prophets & Apostles mought add nothing of themselves, much lesse may we. Thus God yet reigneth alone. And if yow vvould have mans oil to lighten your lamp, hear what Chrisostom sayth for this point:In opere imperfect. cap. 7. Mat. See also Ambrose 1. de para­diso. 5. 12. vvhere he cōdēneth al additiōs & conclu­deth Nihil igitur vel quod bonū videtur ad­dēdum est. Every Doctor is a servāt of the law, for neyther may he add unto the law any thing of his own sense, neyther may he withdraw any thing according to his own understanding, but preach that one­ly which is found in the law.

Whereas yow add, that your traditions are also from the holy ghost, for Luk. 10. it is sayd, he that heareth yow, heareth me, and Mat. 18. If he hear not the church, let him be to thee as an ethnik and a publican: First, these are spoken to all Christs ministers & of al his chur­ches: and therefore make no more for Rome, then for Corinth or Ephe­sus. But yow stil keep from the point, & yeild the cause unawares. For be it tradition, definition or whatsoever, by whomsoever, if it be Gods, not mans, it is yenough, & al that I would prove in this first particular. After it shalbe scanned whither your traditions be of God or no.

Wheras therfore in answering my secōd agrument, yow wonder how I should be so deceived, as to think the places that I cite, make for me and against yow: yow may wonder rather at your own mistakeing (that I say no more,) who when I plead for God onely & his alsufficiency, by opposing as the scripture teacheth, mans corruption & folly; yow will not yeild, though yow have nothing to contradict. And even thus yow turn over the 3. & 4. reason, by denying them to prove that thing, which I there did not cite them for. Such oversight hereafter I hope yow will amend, that yow weary not both me & your reader.

Now to your former ansvver which was with a distinctiō in this plain point, whither God onely, or some other, should beIsa. 33. 22. judge & lawgi­ver to his people for their religion & controversies therabout: the same distinction yow urge here agayn, which whither it be a meet & distinct answer, or argues not rather fear, let the prudent judge. For yow yeild not plainly to the thing by me propounded, which neyther religion nor reason vvould stick at: onely atheisme vvil deny. For if ther be a God, & he of man to be served, & man knovves not the things of God til by himself they be reveled, neyther may doe more or lesse then by the Lord is cōmaunded, (as I have before proved:) hereupon it vvil folovv undenyably, that in al doubts & controversies of religion, Gods voice & verdict must decide vvhat is truth and vvhat pleaseth him. Whither he show it by himself from heaven, by Angels or by churches, or by parti­cular men, by writing or by speaking, it is & ought to be all one to us. But the more to convince yovv, yovv shal have humane testimonie; as of [Page 57] Ambrose, vvho sayth.Epist. l. 5. epis. 31 Ser also Hilar. l. 1 de tri­nitat et l. 4▪ ratio est▪ [...]a sum­mi lovis. The mysterie of heaven let God himself teach me, which made (heaven:) not man, which knew not himself Whom should I rather beleev concerning God, then God himself? Or if yow be not moved by this Fathers judgment; the hethen shal rise up and condemn yow, vvho esteemed true lavv, apt to command and to forbid, to be the right reason of the great God; & thatdivina mens sum­ma lex est. The 2. point of cōtrover­sie. the divine mind, to be the cheiflavv. Cicero de Legib. lib. 2.

The second point novv is. Wher this verdict of God is to be found; whither in the scriptures of the old and new Testamēt (as I beleev;) or in the writings and mouthes of other men. To this I had not be­fore, neyther yet have your dir [...] answer. What makes yow shun the light herein, is easy to discern. To confirm my faith that the verdict and wil of God is to be foūd in holy writt, I alledged divine testimoniesHeb. 1. 1. Rom. 16, 25 29. & 10, 6. 7. 8. 2. Tim 2. 16, 17. Ioh. 20. 31. 1. Ioh. 1, 4. 1. Cor. 4. 6. many: to them yow answer not one word: neyther yet doo yow yeild to the truth. Beware yow wink not vvith your eyes, that yow may not see. But seeing the holy scriptures move yow not; yow shal have candle light, to see the sun shine.

C. Bellarmine, (to whom yow referr me, twise in your last writing, & to whose learning yow acknowledge yourself a scholar,) ingeniously cōfesseth saying:Preface to the first tome of his vvorks. Neq, n distputari potest &c. Ther can be no disputing (sayth he) except we and our adversaries first doo agree in some cō ­mune principle: now we & al hereticks agree in this, that the word of God, is the rule of faith, wherby men are to judge of points of doctrine: is a commune principle granted of al men, from whence arguments may be drawen: & is the spiritual sword, which in this battel may not be refused. Behold here the first point plainly yeilded by your champion: vvhich you, vvithout dark distinction, could not be drawn unto.

The second concerning the scriptures is in effect also yeilded, when he saythBellarm. De verbo Dei. l. 1. c. 1. That the Prophetical and Apostolical book [...], according to the catholik churches mind, explaned both by the 3. council of Car­thage. c. 47. and late council of Trent, sess. 4. is the true word of God, and the certayn and stable rule of faith. Loe here agayn my se­cond assertion justified by your C. that the vvord of God is to be found in the Prophets and Apostles vvritings. As for the meaning or understād­ing of these scriptures, explaned by the church; that remaineth for a thirdDe verbo Dei l. 1, c. 2. consideration. But furder to confirm this second, he sayth, The rule of the catholik faith ought to be certayn and known; for if it be not known, it wil be no rule to us; and if it be not certayn, it is no rule at all But nothing is more known, nothing more certayn then the holy scriptures, which are conteyned in the Prophetical and Aposio­lical writings: that most foolish must he needs be, which denyes that credit is to be given unto them. Agayn he confesseth, thatibidem. the holy scripture is a most certayn and a most safe rule of beleeving These things spake your Cardinal, though perhaps not of himself but as beingIoh. 11, 51. high preist that yere, when he disputed against the Libertines & others [Page 58] that despise tho scriptures of God. And thus hath the truth obteyned tes­timony out of your masters mouth whose learning I crow his scholars wil not withstand; or if they doe, this d [...]o n [...]s given against them by the le­sait [...]:Bellarm: ibidem. They fight with Moses, with the Prophets, with the Apos­tled, wich Christ [...] to God the father, and the holy Ghost, which contemn the holy scriptures and [...]ael [...]s of God.

Thus have I proved sufficiently as I suppos [...], in my former & this wri­ting, that God, vvord & vvill is to be found in the propheticall and A­postolical scriptures; that if you longer resist, you vvilbe condemned of yourself. Other humane testimonies out ofAugust. de doctr. Christ l, 2 c. 9 In has omnibus libris, nempe sa­crae scripturae, timentes Daū, et pietate mansueti, quaerūt volū ­tatem Dei. Augustine, Hier, & many like Doctors, I could further all edge to confirm this trach: but the vvitnesse of God is venough for me; & both it and the testimonies of your Cardinal, are sufficient against you.

And novv I come to your first assertion vvhich yovv took upon you to prove, That the bare scri­pture is not a sufficient rule of our beleef: [...] that many mysteries and points are is be beleeved, that are not erp [...]sl [...]The 1 of your asser­tions.taught, or evidently deduced out of the holy scriptures. Against this I brought in my former vvriting, evident testimonies from heaven, as 2. Tim. 3. 16. 17 Iohn. 20. 31. 1 Cor. 4. 6. & others, against vvhich you o­pen not your mouth.

An [...]g your first argument, that vve mought not by any aequi­vocationThe 1. of your argu­ments. mistake one another, I shevved my meaning distinctly, hovv things many man be beleeved, though they be not gathered out of the written word, understanding hereby a cōmune or humane beleef, wher­in men may varie vvithout danger of damnation. As for example; a man may beleev that the Apostle Matth [...]vvvvis in AEthiopia, Thomas in In­dia, Iude in Persia & upon the report of human [...] records And so Peter at Rome, if you vvil. But for salvation with God, I sayd, not any thing is needful to be beleeved; [...]ave that which is taught by his written word. You in your replie, seeking advantage by vvords, conclude that I hold some tradition necessarie besided the written word; & thus now have drawen (as you say) water out of the Rock, synce I grant that tradition is necessary to m [...] beleef. Wheras I used not the vvord necessarie, but may be: & evidently restreyned things needful for sal­vation, to Gods written word: to that your water is spilt on the groūd, & cannot be gathered up agayn; hovv ever you may strive about vvords, vvhen matter fayleth.

Agayn, my assertion; that nothing is needful to be beleeved for salva­tion with God, but that which is taught by his written word, is you say, most false, since nothing with m [...]is more necessarie to salvation then the written word, which word is not proved by an other writ­ten word &c. Where first you fight against God, vvho sayth, in Iohn, 20. 30. 31. Many o [...] her signs did Iesus in the presēce of his disciples, which are not vvritten in this book, but these things are vvrittē that ye mought [Page 59] beleev that Iesus is the Christ the son of God, and that in beleeving ye mought have life through his name. And agayn, in 2. Tim 3 16. 17. All scripture (is) inspired of God, and profitable for doctrine, for reprehen­sion, for correction for instruction vvhich is in righteousnes, that the man of God may be perfect & perfectly ti [...]t [...]d unto every good vvork These are the testimonies of the holy Ghost as your self vvil not dency: and in them, both faith and all good works are deduced from the scriptures and what more, think you, is needful for salvation with God? [...] how then is my assertion most false? doe you not gave the lye unto the holy ghost?

Secondly, I wish you to deal plainly & distinctly with me & my words; as I endevour to do with you. I hold the word of God to be absolutelyRom. 10. 9-17. necessarie as a means for mās salvatiō: which is the [...]rst point, this word,2 Pet. 1. 21 Pheróme­noi. was first spoken, afterwards writtē: by men that weret [...]aried by the holy ghost. To our first fathers, the vvord spoken was necessarie, & sufficient, whiles it was not written: to us novv, the written word is left, as a ne­cessarie mean or instrument, sufficient to teach us Gods vvil, & bring usI mought better al­ledg this a­gainst you, that your catholik churches set [...]nce, is not proved by an other catholik churches sentence. to salvation: vvhich is the second point. Against the sufficiencie hereof you except, that this written word is not proved by an other written word: vvheras before I have proved, that the scriptures of God doe prov & approve, & cōfirm one an other, & his spirit vvhich is in thēm, & [...]n al his people, doth seal that they are true More sound & sufficiēt proof ther needeth not, nor cā be had. You relie upō the church; but I say vvith the Apostle, 1 Ioh. 1, 9 [...]. if vve receav he vvitnes of m [...]: the vvitnes of God is greater. As yovv carp here at the vvritten vvord, so did the faithlesse Pharisees as the spoken vvord; yea at the eternal speaking vvord the son of God him­self. Thow bravest witnes of thy self (sayd Ioh. 8. 13. 14. they) thy witnes is not true. Though I bear vvitnes of my self (sayd Christ) my vvitnes is true: for I knovv vvhence I came & vvnither I goe; but ye cannot tel vvhence I come, and vvhich [...]r I goe. vers. 15. Ye judge after the flesh. Even so, the scrip­tures bear vvitnes of themselves, (say I): yovv accept not this theyr testimonie. And vvhy? doubtlesse because you knovv not vvhence they came: you judge after the flesh. Our Lord Iesus had the Ioh 5 3 [...] vvitness of Iohn Baptist, & other men many; but he received vers. 34. not the vvitnes of men, nor vers 41. praise of men. So the holy scriptures hav vvitnes of the church & saincts in al ages: but they receav not the vvitnes of men, as that vvhich is most irrefragable. Christ had vers. 36. greater vvitnes, then Iohns: for the vvorks vvhich he did, bare witnes or him, that the Father sent him. So the works which the scriptures doo, in the consciences of men, bear witnes that they are of God. The Father himself which sent Christ, vers. 37. bare witnes of him: so the Father which hath sent u [...] the scriptures, beareth witnes of them. Ye have not heard his voice at any time, (sayth Christ,) ver [...] 17. [...] neyther have ye seen his shape: & his word ye have not abiding in you, for whom he hath sent, him ye beleev not. So say I to you; if ye beleev not the scriptures, it is because the word of God abides not in you: if you hear not them, ney­ther wil you be perswaded, though one rise from the dead agayn: Luk. 16 31. But loe how you require proof of a received principle: (for which, [Page 60] by lawes of right reasoning, you deserv not to be reasoned with; as a Chri­stian. It is the speech of an atheist, to cal for proof that ther is a God: of a Turk o [...] p [...]ynim, to cal for proof that our divine scriptures, are of God. Professed Christians grant this, why should we then warr one with an o­ther, about our own received grounds? The books that I hold to be in­spired of God, authentik, canonical; your selves grant [...]o to be. Cease therfore I pray you to [...]ight against God, least by your own mouthes you [...]s condemned.

But as yet you cease not; for demanding how I prove without tradition, the scripture to be inspired of God; and my interpretation to be onely true: you say I have my answer ready coyned viz. 1. Cor 2. 11. the things of God no man knoweth but the spirit of God. It is wel my answer hath been coyned in the Lords mint: and it shalbe wel with you if you receiv your money from no worse coyners. But what fault find you with this coyn? you ask: how I do proov that I have the spirit of God? For my self, first I answer, with th'Apostle 1. Cor. 2, 11. what man knoweth the things of man, but the spirit of man which is in him? I cannot make proof of that to an other, which can be known but to my self: onely as the tree is known by the fruits, so may my spirit by the Gal. 5. 23—25. fruits thereof be discerned whither it be of God or no. For my interpretatiō I answer, it may be truth it may be error; let it be tried by the scripture it self, of them that have the Quo spirituscripturae factae sunt, eo spiritu legi deside­rant, ipsae etiā intelli gēdae sunt. Bernard. ad fratres de monte Dei. spirit of God Further proof ther is none on earth: till the great day come, when all secrets shalbe made manifest. But for the scripture, (vvhich is the thing you should keep unto,) it needs not my proof that it is inspired of God: it hath proof in it self of God, then vvhich can be no great­er. It is as if you should ask me proof, that there is light in the sun, my ansvver vvould be, all vvhose eyes have the spirit of life and sight in thē, doo see it: the blind and senselesse can never discern it. So is it much more in the things of God. Learn it (I pray you) of our Saviour: vvho saith, that the Ioh. 14. 17 vvorld cannot receive the spirit of truth, because it seeth him not, neyther knovveth him: but yee (my disciples) knovv him, for he dvvelleth vvith you, and shall be in you and vers. 26. he shall teach you all things; and Ioh. 15, 26 he shall testify of me, Ioh. 16. 14. he shall glorifie me, for he shall receive of mine and shall shew it unto you. Now this Anointing or holy spirit, all that are Rom. 8, 9 Christs, have, (none other in the world;) and it dvvelleth in them; and they 1. Ioh. 2, 27. need not that any man teach them, but as the same Anoynting teacheth them all things, and it is true and is not lying. If you say with Nicodemus, Ioh. 3, 9. how can these things be? I answer with Christ, vers. 11. Verily verily, we speak that we know, and testify that vve have seen: but ye receive not our vvitnesse. If ye cannot perceive vers 8. Ec­cles. 11, 5. the vvind that blovveth; nor knovv hovv the bones doe grovv in the vvomb of a woman with child: how should ye know the work of God, that worketh all? If you see not Gods spirit in the script [...]res, it is because the eyes of your hart are blinded: yet the light Ioh. 1. 5. shines in darknes, though the darknes comprehends it not. If you still call for testimonie and proof of the spirit; you have been answered, 1, Ioh. 5, 6 it is the spirit which testifieth, [Page 61] that the spirit is truth: and if you refuse to walk in this light, you must grope in darknes till you lye down in sorow.

But you still object, (as having a mist before your eyes,) that the Ma­nichie, Montanist, Arian and all other haeretiks, will v [...]a [...] of this pri­vate spirit &c. be [...]t [...]o, and cannot you [...] Iohn 4. [...] trie the spirits (as the Apostle biddeth) whither they [...]e of God? doubtlesse if you were of God, you should not onely trie and find out, but overcome them; for greater is he that is in the Saincts, then he that is in the world: this promise have we received from the Father; 1 Ioh. 4, 4.

Againe you consider not (though you were put in mind) that Ievves & Turks and Ethniks, vvill beat you with your ovvn vveapons. For the I [...]vv resteth upon the books of Moses and the Prophets, vvhich are the ground Act. 26 22 23. of our Christian religion: and from them he reasoneth against [...]esus of Nazareth our hope. To allege novv against Ievves, the authoritie of your catholik church, or Pope, is no more then for them to allege against youth authoritie of Annas and Caiaphas, and the church of Israel. If you confound not the Ievv by scriptures (as did Act. 17. 2. 3. & 18. 28. the first Christians,) & by 1 Cor 2. 4. demonstration of the spirit and of power; your self vvil turn back and be ashamed; for no other weapons, vvill vvin the victorie in this feild. And the same vvill foile all Antichristians and heretiks vvhosoever: for though they take up the sword of the spirit, which is Eph. 6, 17. the word of God; yet the true spirituall man, vvhose eyes are in his head, vvill return that svvord Ps. 37. 15 into their ovvn harts, and slay them thervvith. For the vvea­pons of our vvarfare 2 Cor. 10, 4. are mighty through God, to cast dovvn holds: and a vvise man goeth up into the citie of the mighty, and casteth dovvn the strength of the confidence thereof: Prov. 21. 22. I, but the Ro­mane catholik church (you say) can shew Turks their beginner, be­ginning, increase and declyning estate. And vvil not the Ievv say as much against us Christians; that they can shevv our beginner, beginning, increase &c. If this be your best defense, the Turk vvill laugh you to scorn. And IVLIAN the Apostata, vvould not have his mouth stopped by your slight answer, because he himself went out of the catholik Ch:, which was more ancient then he: for then if a Ievv should novv come to your catholik church: his brethren Ievves might stop his mouth, (by your yeason) because he goeth out of a church more ancient then him­self. Iulian pleaded not for his own person, but for Paganisme as much more ancient and universal then Christianisme: vvhich if they be unfalli­ble demonstrations of the truth, our faith vvill perish; unlesse vve de­duce our antiquitie from paradise, vvhere in deed Christianitie did Gen. 3. 15 20. be­ginn. And so the truth vvill prevayl in antiquitie against all opposites: but then Gods vvord and spirit in his scriptures and servants, must be ou [...] bulwark, as now they be mine. If your Church, Pope, and tradi­tions, will not stand you in stead against Iewes, Turks, [...] thinks; but one­ly for to contend a while, against your even Christen: then doo you not build upon the Rock, nor lay such a ground as all Mat. 16. h [...]l gates can not pre­vail against: for these misc [...]eants will prevail against it: but wee that re­ly [Page 62] on Gods word and spirit, shall by his grace stand for ever, even as the Apostles did by these, convert all nations under heaven.

Wheras I further th [...]w [...]d you [...]h insufficiencie of your plea for church traditions, by example or Israel, whose church and preists [...]ared, and co­demned Christ &c. You answer m [...] Ioh 9. 22., that the high preisthood that was judge did not err; n [...] not when ou [...] Saviour was co dē [...]d: in that the high preisthood remayned in our saviour, for he was th [...] if judge &c. But doubtlesse the Pharisees would have smiled a [...] [...]his an­swer: wherin you [...]ke for graunted, the main controversie Question was then in Israel whether Iesus of Nazareth were the true M [...]s [...], the high preists, scribes, rul [...]r, sayd no, he is a deceiver, and hath a D [...]l; & if any confesse him to be the Christ, let him be excōmunicate. Dooth any of the rulers or of the pharisees beleeve in him? but this peopleIoh. 7. 48. 49. which know not the lawer cursed. If you [...]ad then lived it seemes you vvould have confuted all the Rabb [...]nes with this, that Iesus was the Messias because he was the cheif preist, and judge; But had you not c [...]a­ved othervveise to the scriptures, (as did th' Apostles, and s [...]novv doo,) they vvould soon have stopt your mouth vvith this, that hard controver­sies were by the lavv to come unto the Deu. 17. 9 Preists of the Levites, (not a Preist of Iuda, concerning vvhich tribe. Moses spake Heb 7. 14. nothing touching the preisthood,) and unto the Iudge that should been th [...]se dayes, in the place vvhich the Lord did Deu. 17. 8 choose (vvhich vva Ierusalem, not Ioh. 1 46 Naza­reth, or Ioh. 7. 41 Galilee vvhence Iesus came,) and h [...]y should shevv the sen­tence of judgment &c: and he that vvould not [...]a [...]ken to the Pr [...] or Iudge should die. But vve are the Preists of the Levites (vvould they say), and by our o [...]ce must teach the people betvveeneth holy & pro­f [...]n [...], and in Ezek. 44. 23 24. controversie must stand to judge; according Deu 17. 11 to [...]h [...] lavv vvhich vve teach & tel, must m [...]n doo: now we have a law Iohn. 19 7 and by our lavv he ought to dye, because he made himself the son of God. If now your religion had been known that the Church, the preisthood, can not err: the simple people might have chosen Bar [...]bb [...]s, rather then Ie­sus, (as in deed they did,) and have had much more colour to plead for Annas and Caiaphas, then you have for your Pop [...]: and succession (the pillar of your catholik church,) would have born down all the disciples of our Lord. Beware therfore how you build upon these [...]oggs, least you betray the Gospell, unto stubborn Iewes.

Besides all this, if you knew the scriptures, you might find long be­fore, that the church of Israel erred. Did not the preists, rulers and peo­ple, condemn the Prophets of God sent in severall ages; and was not Ierusalem the Mat. 4. 5. holy citie, and seat of the preisthood, g [...] Luk. 13. 33 3 [...]. of their blood? Was not vile and grosse idolatrie practised often in Iuda and Ie­rusalem: by the Preists and Princes? so that Ierusalem Ezek. 23. 11. A [...]OL [...]AH, m [...]red her self with inordinate love and with her fornications, more then her idolatrous sister AHOLAH or Samaria. For Iudah 2 Chr. 2 [...]. 6. forsook the Lord, and turned their faces from his tabernacle, vers. 7. shut the dores of his howse, quenched his lamps, and neyther burnt incense nor offred burnt [Page 63] offrings in the sanctuarie, unto the God of Israel: and will you say in all this, the Church did not err? Vriah the Preist 1 king 16. 10. 11 &c. 16. made an altar idola­trous like that in Damascus, and polluted Gods worship in the temple. Pa [...]h it the son of Imm [...]r the Preist Ier. 20. 1. 2 being governour in the house of the Lord, persecuted Ieremiah for preaching the truth; and himself prophe­sied vers. 6. lyes. A general defection was in the church, they, Ier 32. 32. 33. their Kings, their Princes, their Preists, and their Prophets, the men of Iudah & the inhabitants of Ierusalem, they turned the back unto God, and not the f [...], and s [...] vers. 34. their abominations in the house wherupon his name vvas called, to defile it, and vers. 35. built the high places of Baal, and offred their children into Molech. The heads of Ierusalem judged for rewards, Mica. 3. 11 & the preists taught for hire, and the prophets prophesied for money. And wil you yet say, the church did not err? The Lord sayd by Malachi, that Ma [...] 2. 5. 6 &c. his covenant, had been with Levi, even life and peace: and he gave him fear, that he feared him, and was afrayd before his name: the law of truth was in his mouth, and no iniquitie found in his lips: for vers. 7. the Preists lips should preserve knowledge, & they should seek the law at his mouth; for he is the Angel of the Lord of hosts. But of the Preists that thē lived he cōplaineth that they vers. 8. w [...]r gone out of the way, had caused many to fall by the law, & had brokē the covenāt of Levi; for which God made thē vers. 9. despised & vile before al the people. And where now is the privilege of the preistood, not to err? And if the church then erred, (as many moe proofs may yet be brought, if you stil denev it,) how did the godly for a groūd of their faith? Wil not the law of the Lord & his good spirit which he gave to N [...]hem. 9. 20. instruct them, susteyn is now, as it did them then, against all errors heresies and idolatries? Otherweise Christians now under the gos­pel, should have lesse grace or benefit by the scriptures and spirit of God, then thee had then: which is contrary to all the promises. Th [...]se things I dor the more insist upon, to inforce you to a de [...]p [...]r consideratiō of your estate, & foundation of you faith, which you lay upō the sands: for though the church is to be respected and honoured above all socie­ties in the world her doctrines, admonitions, censures to be regarded: yet may we not make an idol of her, nor set her in Gods throne: him­self hath taught us from the beginning, that the Lev. 1. 3. Annointed preist may syn to thr syn of the people; a vers. 22. ruler mought syn: the vers. 13. wh [...]l congre­gation of Israel mought syn: and all were to offer sacrifie [...] for their tres­passes: that all flesh may learn to be silent before God and confesse thē ­selves to err But Gods word [...]tr [...]th not; his scriptures are Psal. 12. 6. as silver fined 7 times, no drosse is in them: therfore the scripture is above the church, and that perfect rule must guide us, not the imperfect doctrines of men.

Now wheras I shewed how the Labyrinth of your religion leadeth to the Pope, the centre of your circle; and maketh him a ground of grounds, whereon [...] b [...]ild our faith that he must tell us what is divine scripture, and vvhat is the meaning of every point of scripture, & vvhat is unvvrit­ten veritie &c. and none may doubt or contradict: you give me an an­ansvver [Page 64] from Aristotle & Philosophie, but altogither neglect the true sophie or wisdome that is from above. For by what ground from GodIam. 3. 17. may I be assured, that the B. of Rome, rather then of Eph s [...], &c, is the onely man in the world, on whom my [...]aith must rest o [...] that ther is such a mutual reciprocation betwixt Gods word & him, that the one neces­sarily depends on an other, the word on the Pope as touching us? I know the church, as it is manifested by the scriptures, so beareth witnes agayn of the scriptures, & holdeth them forth, or should, as the pillar & ground of truth. But this not alwayes, nor necessarily. For how th [...]n is it come to passe, that the church of Ephesus, which in Pauls time was 1 Tim. 1. 3. & 3. 15. the pil­lar and ground of truth; hath long synce been swallowed up of heresies? Why may I not fear also, that the church of Rome, (whom Paul w [...]rn▪d Rom. 11. 20 2 [...]. not to be hie minded out to fear, least God who spared not the natu­ral branches, the Iewes, would also not spare her, but vers. 22. cutt her off,) is swallowed up of like evils? And to follow your ovvn similitude; hovv do you manifest that the Pope is the onely skilful Lapidarie, that must va­lue the Carbuncles, Saphirs, and al other precious stones that shine in the scriptures? If a Lapidary should shew you a chaulk stone, and say it [...] a diamond, & prize it a [...]ording: vvould you beleev him and give him [...] price yet, you beleev the Pope, vvhē he tels you that the fabulous books of [...]obie and of Iudith & other like apocryphal; are canonical inspired of God, to be prized as dear as Mos [...]s and the Prophets. As he shevves lit­tle skil in this art, that gives such rubbish in sted of the Topaz & Chryso­lite [...] so dare I not trust him in valuing the stones upon Aarons Ephod, or shevving the vertue & uses of them, vvh [...]r of he is more ignorant (as ex­perience hath taught) them many other men. Yet you refuse the holy Ghost the spirit of al truth, who 1 Cor. 2.. 10. 11. Iob 28. 12. 13—23. &c. onely is able to value the word of God, and undoubtedly to manifest the wisdom of the same: to build your sal­vation upon a man, who may himself (as anon I wil prove by your own confession) be the child of damnation. Now verily I am loth to put my soul into his hand, that hath so little care of his ovvn: or make him the onely Pilote of my ship, that sayles himself into the gulf of h [...]ll.

And wheras you vvould hav [...] me giv you leav to be of S [...]g [...]stines mind, who sayd he would not beleev the scripture to be scripture, without the authoritie of the church: if he and you understand Christ the head of the church & auctor of the scriptures, good leav have you. But if you mean his supposed Vicar the Pope, (for so your catholik church shrinketh into one man) or any such prelate, you may take leav if you vvill, but I vvil give you none. For Augustine vvho vvrote a book of [...]e­tractations, r [...]p [...]nting his ovvn sundry errors and oversights, mought err in this, as vvel as in other points: & it is not vvisdom for any man, to follovv him in all things, that vvas deceived in many▪ And this is such an assertion, as behoved him eyther vv [...]l to explaine it, or plainly to re­tract it: and not to leav a stumbling block before the blind▪ And if you vvil needs blindfold your self and folovv him: yet give others leav to use their ey-sight, least they fall into the ditch. And herein I (not you) follovv [Page 65] Augustines stepps: for when controversie was between Hierom and him about Peters syn, Galat. 2. & Hierom alledged many Doctors to back his opinion, & then desired of him (as you doo now of me) to give him leav to err with such men if he thought him to err: Augustine answered Epist. 19 that he had Paul himself, in sted of them al yea & above them al, and to him he did flie and appeal from them al, that were otherweise minded: and asked leav of them, that he mought rather beleev so great an Apostle then any other how learned so ever. As you would have leav to be of Au­stins mind for the other point: so wil I take leav to be of his practise in this.

Your [...]. argument now foloweth, drawn from the difficultie & hard­nesThe [...]. of your argu­ments. to understand the scripture. Wherto I answered granting some things to be difficult in the Bible: but deneying the inference, that therefore it is no certayn rule or square of truth. Yow reply, that the testimonie alledged (2. Pet. 3. 16.) doth prove it: for in what (say you) dooth S. Peter say that S. Paul is hard, but concerning many points of our faith and religion, as concerning predestination, reprobation, voca­tion of the gentils, justification by faith, of which high mysteries S. Paul is the chief and principal master. I answer, First you confound the things, with the scripture which manifesteth the things: whereas these two differ much. Predestination is a hard thing for men to understand, whosoever speak or write of it: but the scripture that treateth hereof is playn in it self, & Paul is not so obscure as your Pope. Secondly the Apostle saith that the unlearned & unstable doo pervert (or wrest) these things as the other scriptures also: but what is this against those that be taught of God, and stablished in the truth by his spirit. Evil minded men wil wrest al things De intel­ligentia [...]. haeresis, no de scriptu­ra est: et sensus non sermo fit crimen. Hilarius l. 2. de Trini­tat. be they never so playn. Shal we therefore have no rule, no sure groūd of our faith? To come thē neer unto you in this point, I freely grant that many high mysteries are in the scriptures, hard to be vnderstood of us, ignorant men, but withal I add this, that those myste­ries are made more hard, by your Popes determinations. For wheras men mought have some good mesure of light in these mysteries, by the playn scriptures: it is come to passe by your Popes & prelates glosses, interpre­tations, cōments, &c. that darknes & grosse darknes hath covered many people, who if they had never read any thing but the book of God, inought have seen much more clearly, through his grace. You doe not right therfore to complayne of difficultie & insufficiencie in the Prophe­tical and Apostolical writings: Why rather mind you not the [...]saying of the holy Ghost in the scriptures, Prov. 18, 8. 9. The words of my mouth are al playn to him that wil understand, and streight to them that would find knowledg. But you make Gods holy & comfortable words, to be crooked, dark, deceivable rules: and his divine oracles given for the salvation of men, to be like the doubtfull Delphik oracles of the Di­vill, uttered for mens destruction. You think the late fathers and your Popes can speak playn to simple mens understanding, but al the holy Pro­phets and Apostles could not (or would not) speak to the capacitie of the [Page 66] simple, so you make them the greatest deceivers of soules in the world: & a pagan mought justly scorn our heavenly law, if it be a leaden rule, a nos [...] of wax [...], as some have blasphemed it. But hogs esteme draffe better then pearls; & though the wisdom of God powreth out her minde unto them, yet in them is fulfilled the true proverb, wherfore is ther a price in the hand of the fool, to get wisdom, & he hath none hart? Prov 17. 16. But where may we think to find the place of wisdom, if it be not in the Pro­phets & Apostles writings? For touching these points you speak of, if a man read the late Fathers, Augustine, Ambrose & the rest: he shall find them often dark, difficult, intricate, contradicting themselves sometimes, and one another. And if he compare your Popes determinations with the holy scriptures, he shall find as good agreement as between harp and harrow. For example; Gods plain law sayth, Exod. 20. Thou shalt not make to thy self a graven (thing) or any similitude of things that are in heaven above, or in earth beneath &c. thou shalt not bow down to them, ney­ther serv them: and agayn, Deu. 27. 15 Cursed be the man that shal make a graven or a molten (thing,) the abomination of the Lord, the work of the hands of the artificer, and shal set it in a secret place; & al the people shal answer and say, Amen. These evident scriptures may perswade every simple hart, that it is a fearful syn to make & worship similitudes of God & of Christ, and of Saincts departed or any the like▪ Now let him come to your catho­lik churches interpretation, and read your Cardinals glosse, that Bellarm. de imag sanct. l. 2. c. [...]3. such scriptures reprechend idolatrie, that is to say, the worshiping of im­ages which are esteemed for Gods; or, by which they are worshiped for Gods, which indeed are not but as for ibidem. c. [...]. the Images of Christ & of saincts they are to be worshiped, and not onely by accident & un­properly but also by themselves and properly; so as they doe termi­nate (or end) the worship, as in themselves they are considered, and not onely as they bear the part of the exemplar (or person represen­ted): and let him read your learned distinctions of the worship latria, the worship dulia and hyperdulia and other like schole points digged out of the abisme of the rock of Rome: & the man wil be amazed to find such comments upō such a text; and make him ween his witts be not his own. But I make no doubt ther be thowsands and ten thowsands upon earth, that if they read Moses law, and your churches comments upō this point, they wil say Moses is surer and playner & easier to understand, then your Cardinal, a great deal. And as of this, so of other things many▪ that to leav the scriptures, and rely upon your church determinations, were to blow out the candle that men may see by the snuff. Moreover, if that cannot be an indeficient rule of faith, wherin some things ar hard to be understood: then doubtlesse your [...] ▪ assertion is overthrown, which sayth, that the scriptures expounded by the catholik church, is a true & indeficient rule of our faith For by the catholik church you mean the Roman Ch [...] ▪ and in the Roman church you restreyn al to the Pope: now his expositiō dooth often times as wel clear the truth, as a cloud before the sun. Yea even the playnest places, which in holy writ are as bright as noon day; [Page 67] your church hath enveloped with AEgyptian darknes: as Mariage hono­rableBellar. de Rom. pont. l. 3. c. 23.among al, and the bed undefiled; sayth the text, Heb. 13. 4. If among all (sayth *your glosse) comprehendeth al men wholly: then mariage shalbe honorable also between father and daughter, betweē mother and son, between brother and sister. &c. Drink ye al of this, (sayth Mat. 26. 27 our saviour:) Let a man examine himself (sayth the 1 Cor. 1 [...]. 28. Apostle) and so let him eat of this bread & drink of this cup. We yet see not (sayth your quick eyed Bellar. de Rom pont. l. 3. c. 23. Cardinal) that place of the gospel wher we be taught, that both parts of the sacrament of our Lords supper are to be mi­nistred to al Christians. For our Lord sayth not, Drink ye al Chri­stians of this, but drink ye al of this &c. Such catholik expositiōs doe illustrate the scriptures, as the smoke of the pit did the sun & aier, Apoc. 9. 2.

But me thinks you deney that the Pope hath dominion over (your) faith, neyther can make what he wil, as a matter of faith or tradi­tion. He dooth not make a matter of faith (you say) but beelareth one­ly that such and such a thing is to be beleeved. It is wel, if you can keep you here: for if he be but a declarer of the faith, he is by office but as al other Bishops and ministers of the Gospel: and Peters primacie wil be no more then Pauls, who sayd, 1 Cor. 4. [...] Let a man so think of us as of the mi­nisters of Christ, & disposers (or stewards) of the mysteries of God. But if the Pope have not indeed dominion over your faith, then I trow, men may trie his declarations, by Christs word who hath dominion over our faith and sowles. Then are not the Popes declarations authentik, canoni­cal, of necessitie to be beleeved, unlesse he prove them by the scriptures, which himself acknowledgeth to be divine and canonical. And thus the scriptures wil be found a sufficient rule of the Churches faith: & men must by the word and spirit, trye the spirits of the Popes, as wel as of o­ther Bishops. Otherweise when Platina, in vit [...]. Steph. 6. Pope Stephen the 6. repealed the de­crees of P. Formosus, and condemned his acts: and contrariweise P. Plat. in. vita Rom. et Theod. 2. &c. Romanus and other his successors justified Formosus, and condemned Ste­phen; and yet after that agayn P. Sergius the 3. allowed Stephen, and cō ­demned Formosus; (as your own records doo report:) how should men know, what Popes decrees to follow, if they may not examine them by the book of God, nor have better stay for their faith, then the we­thercock of the Vatican. And wheras you speak of all humane helps that the Pope useth, of counsel and consultation with the learned they be fayr shewes▪ but your Cardinal tels us, that the catholik church Bellar. de Pontif. l. 4. c. 15. hath alwayes beleeved that he is a true ecclesiastical Prince in the whol church, who can of his own auctoritie vvithout consent of the people, or counsel of Preists, make lavves vvhich bind the conscience, can judge in causes ecclesiastical &c. and that vvhen he teacheth the vvhol church, in things perteyning to faith; Ibidē. c. [...] he can not err by any hap or chance and Ibidē. c. 5. not onely in matters of faith, but in preceps of manners also prescribed to the vvhol church, he cannot err. What marvel is it then though your Lavvyers say, Extrav. de trās [...]. episc. Quanto: [...] glossa. His bare vvill, must be holden as a lavv; and that [Page 68] Extra de concess Praeb. Pro­posuit. In gloss. whatsoever he dooth, no man may say to him vvhy doe you this; and that Dist. 81. Si qui sunt. In glossa. whosoever obeyes not his precepts, incures the syn of idolatrie & paganisme. You may tell me, that the Pope hath not dominion over your faith: but your Canonist, tel me, that 16. q. 1. Quicun (que). In glossa. he can dispense against the law of God; that he can dispense 15. q. 6. Authorita­te, In gloss. against the law of nature; that he can dispense Dist▪ 34. Lector. against an Apostle; that he can dispense Panorm. Extra. de divort. cap▪ sin. against the new testa­ment; yea that he can dispense concerning Summ. Angel. in dict. Papa. all the precepts of the old and nevv testament. And may vve novv think, that he hath not domi­nion over your saith? or may wee think, that vvhen he is come which should 2▪ Thess. 2. 4. sit as God, in the Temple of God, that he wil doe greater things then these? But of your Popes preeminence, wee are to speak in another place.

To return therfore to the scripture which you deney to be an indefici­ent rule of our faith: you objected that it had many senses, and stil you stand to it, as proved: well, I am content to leave it unto judgement. But though it were so, yet this is not proved, that therfore it is no sure rule of our faith: save by your churches exposition. For why might not the church in Corinth, which were made rich by Christ 1 Cor. 1, 5. in all kind of speech and in all knowledge, so that vers. 7. they were not destitute of any gift: why might not that church (I say) declare the many senses of scripture, as well as the church of Rome? Or rather, why may not the holy ghost, shew any church or any member or Christs church, the meanings of the scripture; and so it remayn as a firm rule of faith, and the Spirit of God the sole authentik expositor of the same? But here you urge agayn your bastard phrase, falsly fathered upon S. Peter; 2 Pet. 1. 20. that no prophesie of scri­pture is made by a private spirits interpretatiō: though I blamed you before, for speaking in such sort. If you can not perceive heavenly things, consider earthly. Your one body hath but one spirit, which gives life to the vvhole and to every member of the body. The same spirit dooth quicken the hand and foot, that quickneth the head and hart: although a greater measure is in the principal members, then in the inferiour. Even so by the scriptures we learn, that the catholik church is Eph. 4. 4. one bodie and hath one spirite; and though the many members of this bodie have Rom. 12, 4. &c. not one work, but have received diversities of giftes, yet it is 1. Cor. 12 4. the same spi­rit. To vers. 8, 9. &c. one by the spirit is given the word of vvisdom; to an other the word of knowledge, by the same spirit, and to an other faith by the same spirit; and so all the gifts to all the members. This is the most pu­blick spirit that the church hath; and every member of the church hath the same: so there is no privat spirit which Christians have, as you by tra­dition it seemes have learned. Now seeing all Christians have the same spirit that the Pope himself (unlesse he have the spirit of Satan:) how is it that he onely must be the publik spirit and interpreter of the word? Be­cause (say you) he is the head of the church, and hath the promise of our Saviour that his faith should not fayl him. This I deney. Now you beleeve it, because the Pope himself tells it you; for your ovvn pri­vat spirit may assure you of nothing. I wil disprove it by your next words, [Page 69] and knowen experience▪ For you say, he may err in matter of fact, and syn aswell as an other man. then say I, he may goe to the Divil for his facts, and synns, as vvell as an other man: then is he the successor of Iu­das Iscariot, not of Simon Peter: then the gates of hel, prevaile against him. And thus your Rock is rent in peeces; and your building is on the sands. You rely upō one whom you know not but he may be a reprobate; a child of the Divil; yea a divil incarnate as Pope Iohn the 23. was found and judged to be by the Sess. 11. & 12. Council of Constance) and then he may Ioh. 8. 44. lye as well as his father the Divil; and then (if you take not heed) he may mur­der your soul, as well as his father the Divil. And how then dare you make him your rock, your hope, your confidence; to beleeve all that he sayth; not to beleeve Gods word, unlesse he tell you it is Gods word, not to beleeve any meaning of the scriptures, but as he tell you the meaning is. If men were bruite beasts without understanding, they could not be more overruled then thus: but the Lord sayth, Psal. 32. be not as the horse and as the mule. And if the inhabitants of the earth had not been Apoc. 17. 2. druncken with the wine of her fornication, the great whore could ne­ver thus have benummed their senses, and bereft them of heavenly light If you deney that your Popes may be reprobates and Heariots, though they may syn: your own popish records will teach you, by as undoubted marks upon them, as ever had Cain: the dearest lovers of your catholik chaire, branding their holy fathers with titles of Gene­b [...]ard. Chr. l. 4. Plati­na: in Be­nedict 4 [...] Christop [...]. 1. prodigious, wonders, monsters, for their beastly lives; & so some of them are knowen to have dyed, without repentāce or faith in God; that eyther they never had faith, or els their faith failed, and then Christ prayed not for them, as he did for Peter; & so their pretended priviledge lieth in the dust.

The 15. of the Acts alledged for Peters primacie, I have before answer­ed; and leav it unto judgment, yow urge now againe, vers. 7. that P [...]er rose up, shewing therby that he was head &c. a strange collection, that if a man rise up to speak in an assembly, he must need, therfore be head; you mought better have gathered so, if he had sitten stil & spoken; for sitting of the two, rather argues auctoritie, then standing up. But tel me I pray you in earnest, when Gamaliel is sayd to Ac [...]. 5. 3▪ rise up in the coun­cil of the Iewes in Ierusalem: would you gather from this, that he was the head of them all. Or when Paul Act. 13. 16. rose up in the synagogue of Anti­ochia; was he therefore the head? If not, why dally you thus with the ho­ly scriptures, to gather such conclusions as common sense wil not bear? But if you would plead for no other headship, then this, that your Pope may rise up and speak in councils; it wil easily be granted: but then if o­thers should judge and give sentence frō the scripture, (as Iames Act. 15. 13. 19. there did) your chair of Rome would soon be overthrown.

Like weight is in your next words, that the first gentils were chosen by his mouth; for that you should say, Act. 15, 7. God chose that the gentils by his mouth should hear the word of the Gospel and beleev. What pri­macie of power you can build hereon, I cannot tell: order I am sure ther must be in al things, so ther was with them, and is with us, & we grant, [Page 70] unto you. But the Lordship which your Pope claimeth is to be Bellar. de Pont. l. 4. c. 15. a true ec­elesiastical prince in the whol church, of his own auctority without cō sent of the people or counsel of the preists, to make lawes which bind the conscience &c. with other like exorbitant power, which hath ney­ther proof nor colour of proof from this 15. of the Acts, but the contra­ry is playn by the scripture, as in my former writing I shewed, and leav it to the judgment of the prudent.

Your 3. arguments force you would reinforce by a long speech of pri­vatThe 3. of your argu­ments. spirits interpretation, of errors and heresies & unfit translations, ma­nifold and ambiguous senses &c. where I must acknowledge, you have put to more strength, but you have not whet the edge, as I sayd unto you: so that your purpose is not effected. For al that you say, may with as good (if not better) right, be retorted upon your selves; and the Pope himself, who hath as private and erroneous a spirit as al other Byshops, hath given as absurd and erroneous translations, wrested the scriptures, broched as deadly errors, & is as unable to prove his mission frō Christ, as any prelat [...] or preist in Christendom. So in al your discourse you have neyther proof from scripture, nor argument upon ground of reason: ther­fore I need not spend labour in vayn; and the points some of them are be­fore handled, othersome belong not to the matter in hand.

With like successe you repete your 4. argument, that the scripturesThe 4. of your argu­ments.have been wronged by our men, to bolster up heresies &c. you say I grant your assumption; but deceiv not your self or others, I did leav to strive about it because it was personal, touching Luther, Calvin &c. who when they lived were able yenough to mainteyn their cause against Rome gates, though as men they had their infirmities. I told you the like charge mought be returned upon your Popes and Prelats. Your propo­sition I deneyed, and shewed reasons of my denyal, from the scriptures. You replie (as your manner is) with your popular carnal reason, that al sorts of hereticks alledge scriptures & boast of the spirit, & unlesse there be a supreme judge, strifes can have no end. You have been answered, that so it must be, and 1 Cor. 11. 19. Act. 15. 1. 2. so it was in the Apostles times; who yet referred not Christians to the Pope as supreme judge; but laboured to compose controversies and correct errors Act. 1 [...]. 15▪ 16▪ 1. Cor. 15. 3. 4. 25. 27. 45. 54. by the scriptures. Strife wil continue without end, til the world have an end, then al warr shal cease: in the mean while the church is militant, under her head Christ. and no other. He alone walketh Apoc. 1. 13 amids the 7. golden candlesticks; al churches have their several Act. 20. 28 Phil. 1. 1. Bishops and Pastors, and onely Christ is 1 Pet. 5. 4 Archpastour; at his appearing, shal supreme judgement be. In the mean time, they be Anti­christs, that usurp his office and place.

But why alledge you this against the divine scriptures onely? for doe you not think that men have wrested the late Fathers also, to bolster up heresies: yea and councils too; yea and the Popes own decrees? Now if whatsoever be wrested to bol [...]er up heresies, can not be a true rule of faith: then the world wil soon be without rule; and so that 2 Thes. 2. 8. Anomos, that unruly and lawlesse fellow foretold of, wil be fittest to be their cap­tayn [Page 71] even as he hath been now too long a day, sitting in that citie, which in S Ioh is time Apoc. 17. 18. reigned over the kings of the earth, and fayn would mainteyn that regiment stil.

Your 5. and last argument, was for vnwritten traditions. You affirmedThe 5. of your argu­ments. that many mysteries of our faith are beleeved, that are not explicitly declared nor infallibly deduced from the scriptures. I deneyed, that any mysterie of our faith was without due & sufficient proof from the scri­pture▪ Now you recken up divers matters as before, and ask of me proof for them, otherweise then by tradition. My answer was and is, that some are your own invētiōs, & I wil not undertake to approve but to reprove them by Gods word: others that are truths I can prove by Gods word, better then you can by mouth tradition. But you find great fault & think it goes hard with me since I prove not one particular of them all: & therfore desire me to answer distinctly to ech point as it l [...]es &c. I mar­vel you would expect proofs of these points now. Would you hav me en­ter into battel with Arrians & Antitrinitarians, Anabaptists & other like hereticks, and sh [...]w how I can convince them by scripture? I list not so to digresse. When th [...]se matters in hand are ended, if you wil take up their buklers. I wil fight against you by the scriptures onely; if you wil adven­ture the credit of your unwritte traditiōs, in the battel. In the mean time, make you proof (as order requireth) of your argument; and seek not to turn it away, by setting on foot new questions.

The scriptures that you brought to prove unvvritten traditions, I answer­ed. In this your reply you say, that I dispute as if you made traditions the total rule of faith whereas you would inferr onely that it was a par­tial, togither with the word of God. Then belike you grāt some word of God without unvvrittē traditiō: & vvhere is that but in the scriptures? If vve have Gods vvord in the scriptures vvithout unvvritten tradition▪ hovv is it, that vvhilear you reasoned, vve could not knovv scriptures to be Gods vvord, but by such tradition? Doe not you make mouth traditiō the total ground of your faith? For take avvay this tradition; & the scrip­tures, you think, are lost; then Gods vvord is lost, unlesse unvvritten tra­dition give it us. So dead tradition is the ground of grounds, that must tel us vvhat is scripture, vvhat is the meaning of scripture, vvhat is true be­side scripture: and so in effect is all in all? Though yet to make it a par­tiall rule of faith as you speak, is too much: man may not think to part stakes vvith God, his vvord is yenough, if vve can be content.

You say I object that those traditions spoken of in Deuteronomis might make for the Iewish Cabalists which are reiected by S. Pe­ter &c Nay, I knovv they make neyther for them nor you: but, as I sayd, rather for them then for you. I proved unto you out of the Psalmes, Ps. 44. & 78. secundum Hebr. that the Fathers taught their children vvritten traditions; I proved by other divine testimonies, that yenough is vvritten in the scriptures, for Ioh. 20. 3 [...] 2 Tim 3. [...]6 17. faith & all good vvorks. As for Gods acts in al ages, fathers are to tell them to their children: such tradition I allovv. We tel our posteritie novv by tradition, the great vvork of God in confounding the Spanish armado that [Page 72] came against England in the yere 1588 If I in my dayes should see Rome [...] become Rumee as Sibylla Orac. Si­byll. lib. 3. prophesied, and the Pope like Nabuchodno­ [...]or Dan. 4. 30. turnd out to gra [...]e, or like Pharao Exod. 14. drovvned in the sea: I vvould hold it my dutie to tel it my child, & my childes child, that it mought never be forgotten. But yet for a ground of faith unto life, I would vvarn my children to hold to the scriptures, as the instrument of God, able to make them vvise unto salvation through the faith vvhich is in Christ Iesus; as Paul 2 Tim. 3. 15 sayd to his son Timothee.

You say, it is playn that the Apostle 2. Thes. 2. speaks of such tra­ditions as I cal humane in you. I deney it, & have plainly disproved it in my former vvriting, by the same Apostles ovvn testimonie, Act. 26. 22 1. Co. 14. 37. and you have not a vvord to say against it, but shun those ancient Apostolik records, and betake you to later humane writers, as Chrysostome. But remember your ovvn vvords, God is more ancient then the Divil, truth then falshood. The Apostle shevved his ovvn meaning, long before Chrysostome had a mouth to speak. But if you can better see by Chrysostoms candle, then by Pauls bright sun: behold vvhatChrysost. in Mat. 22. homil 41. the Doctor sayth. Whatsoever is sought unto salvatiō all novv is fulfilled in the scriptures. He that is ignorant, may find there vvhat to learn: he that is stubborn & synful, may find the scourges of the judgmēt to come, vvhereof he may be afrayd: he that laboureth, may there find glorie, and promises of eternal life. This speech dooth farr better become his golden mouth, then your plea for humane traditions.

The 2. thing vvhich you took upon you to prove. (or, as novv youThe 2. of your asser­tions. faintly say intended rather to propound then prove,) vvas, That the scripture expounded by the catholik church is a true and indeficient rule of our faith. I vvil ease you if I may of this labour; if you understād the position vvell, I grant it to be true. By the catholik church I trovv yovv mean not the multitude, al beleevers: but the head of the church. So I vvillingly yield, that the scriptures expounded by Christ the head of the catholik church, are a true and indeficient rule of our faith. But when you came to make proof of your positiō, you set it dovvn thus, that the Popes definitive sentence as he is head of the church is an inde­ficient rule in matters of faith. Where all men may see your lode starr. You pretend the scriptures and word of God: but if a man deale vvith you by them, (as I novv have experience,) you flee to later humane vvri­ters. If you be followed in them, you retire to your Catholik church: ask your meaning by the catholik church, and it is the Pope with his defi­nitive sentence, as your self have expounded it to me: He virtualiter (as Hervaeus, de potest. Papae c. 23 one of your side sayth) is the whole church. Al the other are but stales, he alone is the man that must strike the stroke. And if he give sentence a­gainst you, I shal never trust him: so you deal on the surest side for your selves. You intended rather to propound then to prove this point (as you say,) that we haue not at one time diverse pro [...]s togither in the fyre; and now agayn, you handle it by way of velitation (you say) & not of purpose to prove? Wheras it is the mayn ground of al controversie be­tween [Page 73] us. For question being whither Gods written word, or the Popes definitive sentence must judge & rule our faith: I cleav to the scriptures, you to the Pope. Now my ground is in part granted by your selves, for the scriptures which I build upon, your council Sess. 4. of Trent hath allowed for canonical, and come from God: and whither you granted it or not, I have given you reasons that are unanswered. But your ground I utter ly deney, and grant not your Popes definitive sentences to be canoni­cal but haeretical: and would have proof of that you say. You lyst not yet to have this yron in the fyre, belike least it burn your fingers. Yet in this your velitation, you bring most of your valiant men into the feild, lea­ving out some few casshierd soldjers; and brave me with a great many of S. Peters prerogatives, which are indeed but a cold yron for the Pope. For though al you say for Peter were granted, yet nothing at al is sayd for the Bishop of Rome more then for the Bishop of Babylon. You would hav men think, that if you have so many men in a skirmish or velitation, you have many moe against a day of battel. But if these your velitaries be discomfited (as some of them are already,) I suppose your armado wil never enter this feild. Let us therfore try their strength.

1. S. Peter (you say) is named first among the Apostles. True, he is so usually, except in 3. or 4. places: This may argue a primacie of or­der, but of no auctoritie over his brethren. The Apoc. 21, 19. first foundation of the wall of the heavenly Ierusalem, was a Iasper, the stone of Exod. 28. Benja­min, th' Apostle Pauls Phil. 3, 5. tribe▪ wil you grant me hence to conclude that S. Paul was head of the catholik church?

2. S. Peter alone walked (you say) with our Saviour on the wa­ter. True, and there Mat. 14, 28 30, 31. he shewed his weaknes more then others, & was reproved by our Saviour for his little faith. Doth this deserve the head­ship of the church? Elias and Eliseus walked 2. King. 2. through the water; and Shadrach Meshach and Abednego-walked in Dan. 3, 25 the mids of the fyre; and herein shewed their great Heb. 11, 34. faith: yet vvere they not therfore heads of the catholik church.

3. Our Saviour promised (you say) that hell gates should not pre­vail against him. Our Saviour dooth say, not Mat. 16. 18 against it, that is, the church; of vvhich Peter vvas a principall member. Hell gates shall not prevail against Ioh. 10, 27 28, 29. any true Christian: are they all therfore heade [...] But hell gates (if horrible synns be part of their strength) have prevayl­ed against sundry of your Popes, by testimonie of your own records: such I trow were not heads, unlesse of the beast. Apoc. 14. 17. 3.

4. He was to confirm his brethren. So were all the other Apostles and Ministers, Act 14, 22, & 15, 41 32. 1 Thes. 3, 2. Apoc. 3, 2. as I proved at large in my former writing: and marvel you bring this argumēt now again bleeding into the skirmish, before you had cured any of his vvounds. If you cannot heal him, you should let him rest.

5. Our Saviour (you say) washed S. Peters feet first. It may be so, though Bellarm. de Rō pō [...], l. 1. c. 2 [...]. some Doctors doubt of it. It is sure some was first, for they could not all be at once. It is sure also, that Peter shewed then more [Page 74] Ioh. 13, 6 [...], 9. weaknes then his brethren; for which he mought well have need to be washed, but not deserve to wear a triple crown, as your Pope.

6. S. Peter onely received a reveled promise of his particular martyrdom of the crosse. Performance is more then promise. Iames Act. 12, 2. & 7, 59. and Stephen suffred martyrdom before Peter. And if the crosse be that vvhich must prove the headship, the penitent Luk. 23 4 [...] 43. theef may lay claim to the crown.

7. He after infusion of the holy ghost, first (you say) premulgates the gospel. I would the Pope were his successor in this. Peter was first I confesse in many good things: for which he deserveth praise: but that he was first in this, you prove not. When they had the infasion of the ho­ly Ghost, Act. 2, 4. erxanto. they began (sayth the scripture) to speak. It may be Peter was indeed the first, for he was first in order among them, and as is like in age: but not in office above the other Apostles.

8. The first miracle in confirmation of our faith, is made by S. Peter. And you shal work another miracle in confirmation of my saith; if from this (though it be granted,) you can by sound argument cōclude him head, as your Pope expounds the head ship. Howbeit the first mira­cle was the speaking with strange tongues▪ (for that Act. 2. 7, 11. all men admired:) & who was first in that, neither I nor you can tell.

9. He as supreme judge condemned the hypocrisy of Ananias and Saphira. And Paul as supreme judge condemned the blasphemie of Hy­menaeus & Alexander, 1. Tim. 1. 20. delivering them to Satan: and the forcerie of E­lymas, Act. 13, 11. striking him with blindnes. If miracles prove supremacies, the church shall have many supreme heads.

10. He first discovered Simon Magus, and condemned him. If the Pope vvould doe so too, Simonie at this day vvould not be so rise. When Platina in vit. Ser­gius et Be­ned: Sergius tertius, & Benedictus 4. got the Popedome with bribe­rie, and Alexander the [...]. Guicci­ard. hist. Ital. l. 1. bought the voices of many Cardinals: whi­ther was Cephas or Magus their predecessor? If the vertue made Pe­ter head: the cont [...]arie vice made your Popes the taile. How be it your Prelates (if Bernard. Epist. 42. ad Archiep [...]s. Senon. Budaeus de asse. l. 5. writers say true) have been more ready to receive with Mat. 26, 15 with Iudas, then to give Act. 8, 18 with Simon.

All these and other circumstances concurring in S. Peter, showes (you say) manifestly that S. Peter had preeminence above all the o­ther Apostles, that he is the rock and head of the church [...]. They are showes in deed, & circumstances standing a farr off: but never a one of them have striken a stroke in this your [...]l [...]tation. Peter had for the most part preeminence in order, I readily grant: but his office and aucto­ritie was one and the same with the other Apostles. Mat. 28. 16.—20. Ioh. 20, 21. 22, 23. Paul relating the offices ordeyned of God in the church, saith; 1 Cor. 12 28. first Apostles, secondly prophets [...] and agayn, Eph 4, 11. he gave some Apostles, and some Prophets: but the scripture no where sayth, first Peter the head of the church, then Apostles. And that Peter was neyther head nor Rock, I proved in my former writing, if you will admit of proof from Gods book: if not, then keep your showes and cir­cumstances [Page 75] still, but make no such conclusions with a manifest-lye.

You proceed and say, that Peter was particularly pointed out by his ovvn name, his fathers name, and his new name Cephas, that no cavil might be took at a legacie so stronglie & particularly firmed unto S. Peter. His legacie is no way by me impugned, I know it is firme, though not so great as you would make it. But you impugne the legacie of the other Apostles, unto whom in Peter vvas promised, and after to them all generally performed, whatsoever power Peter had in the ministerie of the gospel. Mat. 28. Ioh. 20. Act. 2. yea you impugne the dominion of Christ himself; whiles you would make Peter the Rock and Head of the catholik church; contrary to the scriptures. 2. Sam. 22, 32. 1 Cor. 10, 4. Ephe. 5, 23. And whither you have answered all that I brought to prove Christ onely the Rock, let the equall reader of my former writing judge; you make bold and bare affirmations, without proof of holy scri­pture, or humane learning: Petros (you say) signifies eyther a Rock or a stone; but what learned auctor doo you shew for it? and he was cal­led Petros (you say,) not Petra, because the masculine gender best fitted the name of a man: as if Christ were not a man, unto whom the title Petra, Rock, is by Peter himself given. 1. Pet. 2, 8. But he is unto you the Rock of scandal, whiles you stumble at his power, and headship, and give it to his enemie the Pope, vnder the pretence of Peter. And that your church hath made shipwrack against this Rock, not onely of faith, but of learning also, appeares in this, that you make Cephas, (up­on Optatus credit,) in Greek to signifie a head; as Christ (you say) is called the head, Isa 8, & 28. Dan. 2. Psal. 117. Mat. 21. Rom. 9. 1. Cor 10. Ephes. 2. What, doo all or any of these scriptures shew that Cephas signifies a head? nothing lesse. You that entwite we with my private spirits interpretation, should have been better avized then thus openly and directly to oppugn the publik interpretation of the holy Ghost, Ioh. 1. 43. wher Cephas is interpreted Petros, a stone, & not Cephalee a Head. Or if you think the Apostle had also a private spi­rit, and knew not Syriak and Greek so well as Optatus, yet mought you have preferred the publik approved learning of your owne linguists, who Dictionar. Syro chald ad sacri appar. in­struc. Reg. bibl. Tom. 6. interpreting Cephas a Rock, shew that Optatus head wanted wit, in this that he sayd it signified a head; and they want conscience, that upon this false ground, apply these scriptures that speak of Christ the head, unto a mortall creature, wheras the Tsur k [...]is­tes. 2. Sā. 22, 32. Rock is the creator, & Tsur The­os Deut. 32, 4, 15, 1 [...] 30. &c. where­to your au­thentik La­tine also a­greeth. God himself as the Lxxij Greek interpreters, (if you wil learn of them) wil teach you. But let me follow your arguments.

You say my objection that S. Peter answered as the mouth of the Apostles, and therfore had not these promises made to himself alone, makes much against me, for to be spokesman of all the rest, the ma­ster-spring of all their judgements, seems to grant him superioritie. If every spokes-man were master-spring of all their judgemēts for whō he speaks: it were something that you say: but ask a jurie of any 12 men in England, whither this be true in the foreman of the quest, The spokes­man [Page 76] in a Council; the speaker in a parhamēt; are they the master-springs of all their judgments with whom they sit? When Ioh. 14, 5. Thomas, when vers. 8. Phi­lip, when vers. 22. Iude spake unto Christ in the name of the rest, were they ma­ster-springs of all the others judgements? I perceiv your Rock the Pope hath but a weak foundation, that is born up, by such sandy conclusions.

If S. Peter could not have the prerogative of place given unto him, in that he represented the church: no more (you say) could the sonns of Abraham be two sonns, in that they represented two nati­ons. You want help to make up your argument, thus: But Abrahams a sonns were 2. sonns stil, though they represented 2. nations: therfore S. Peter was S. Peter still though he represented the Church. Very true; & all the Apostles were Apostles still, though they represented the Church. And so Antichrist shalbe Antichrist stil, though he take upon him to re­present the Church, yea and 2. Thess. 2, 4. God himself.

You grant me that all the other Apostles were a foundation Apoc. 21. but not the principal. Neyther would I have you [...]o grant, for Christ himself is the principal, vea & the1 Cor. 3, 11 onely foundatiō properly; & all the Apostles are foundationsMetony­mi [...]è. figuratively; among whom was order, Apoc. 21. 19. first, second, third, &c, and excellencie in graces; but not preeminence of au­ctoritie; for they were all sent of Christ, as Christ of the Father, Ioh. 20. 21 and the church of Christ is builded upon them all, not upon Peter onely. Ephes. 2. 20.

S. Peters headship (you say) derogates not from Christ Jesus our head, since S. Peter is but subordinated to Christ Jesus, and onely of his free institution. That institution say I is yet to shew wher­by Peter should be head more then the other Apostles. The headship which you giue unto Peter dooth derogate from Christ; for as the church is but Ephe. 4, 4 one body, and hath but one spirit, so hath it but vers. 5. one Lord & vers. 15. head Christ, who is present Mat. 28, 20 with his Church all dayes till the worlds end, walking amids the golden candlestiks of his Churches, that there needs no universal Vicar, but onely the Angels of every particular church, as the 7. churches in Asia shew. Apoc. 2. & 3. But he was a head of your church (and therfore I trow could not lye) which sayd Pope Le­o. Epist 8 [...] that Christ pla­ced Peter as it were a certayn head, to powr his gifts from him as it were into all the body, for having taken him into the fellowship of the indivisible vnitie, he would have him named that which himself was. And elsewhere the same Pope preacheth that if God Serm 3. in ānivers. would have any thing to be commune unto other Princes with [Peter], he never gave but by him whatsoever he gave to others. Thus rored the Lion of Rome, against the Lion Apoc. [...]. 5 of the tribe of Iudah. What marvel was it then though an other P. Grego­rie the 7. of your Popes, praying to S. Peter as to his God, sayd, Platina in Greg. [...]. Jurline thine ears o blessed Peter prince of th'Apostles, and hear me thy servant, &c. acknowledging further his faith to be in him. If these things derogate not from Christ our head, I know not what can doo. It is no marvel though one of your Canonists c. Cū [...]n­ter. Inglos­sa extrav. Ioh. [...]2. called him Our Lord God the Pope: for the Pope is Peter (as Father Campian [Page 77] Rat. 4. telleth us:) and Peter (as Leo sayth) is assumed into the fellowship of the indivisible vnitie, that is of God, and therfore is made a God, and prayed unto, as a God: and yet you would bear men in hand, nothing is derogated frō God or Christ. Yea your self in your former writing made him the vniversal pastor Ioh. 10 and he I am sure is God, for he is one Ioh. 10, 30 with the Father. And if Peter was but subordinate (as you say) to Christ; your Popes (I trow) be now superordinate: for Christs kingdom Ioh. 18, 36. was not of this world, neyther did his servants fight: he was no Luk. 12, 14 Judge or divider of inheritances: but Popes are Iulins 2. Gu [...]cciard. hist. Ital. l. 9. fighters with the t [...] ­poral sword, and have their kingdome of this world, as politik princes; and divide not onely private mens inheritances, but even whole king­doms, deposing Princes, & disturbing States, as the world hath long felt with greef.

From Peters primacie you slide along to the Popes supremacie: for which having no word of God, nor any so ancient testimonie as the Apo­stles, you flee to the name of the council of Nice, where some say the foundation began. But against such innovation when or whersoever it was hatched, I allege the whole new testament of Christ, where Apoc. 2. & 3 Act. 20 1. Pet. 5. E­phe. 4. 1. Cor. 12. Luk. 22, 25, 26. Angels and Bishops of Churches are found of equal auctoritie, not one above an other. And me thinks I could fetch your popes supremacie from more an­cient ground then the council of Nice, even from Dio [...]rephes, 3. Ioh. 9. who lo­ved preeminence in the Apostles time But this ground is slabby, and the Pope I know wilbe loth to set his foot on it. You proceed therfore, with a generall reason thus.

The ecclesiastical hierarchie is no worse governed then any tempo­ral regiment. For it is compared to a kingdome governed by one King, Mat 25 to a familie wel governed, Heb. 3. to a camp wel or­dered, Ca [...]t. 6.

But in al wel ordered common weales, there is ever required some visible iudge, besides the written law, since there must be a supreme iudge to take notice of controversies when they arise a [...]. 2. there must be one to explicate the sense of the law, and to pronounce sentence &c. and 3. there must be one to compell those that refuse, to the due obser­vation thereof. Now in the church there arise like difficulties in her lawes explication &c. Therfore S Peters successor indued by the holy ghost, in all difficulties of moment is to be sought unto for counsell: is to be heard with obedience when he counselleth, is to be obeyed when he proceeds with his powrful jurisdiction.

This your reason is faultie from head to foot. The first part faileth in comparing togither a visible humane politie, and a visible hierarchie. Wheras humane polities concerning worldly matters are merely visible, earthly, temporal: but ecclesiastical polities are partly invisible, heaven­ly and eternal. Those, respecting this world and life onely, have worldly dominion and glorie: these, respecting chiefly the next world & life; have no worldly dominion or glorie; but is for the meek, poor, persecuted for righteousnes sake &c. Mat. 5. My kingdome (sayth Christ) is not of this [Page 87] world, Ioh. 18. 36. Again the rulers of the gentils have domination over them, & they that are great exercise auctoritie over them, but it shal not be so among you &c. Mat. 20, 25, 26. These things being thus minded & distinguished, I grant, that the church is no worse governed, considering the nature thereof, then any temporall regiment, considering the nature of it.

Secondly you fail in applying to your Pope the scriptures intended of Christ onely. For he (not the Vicar of Rome) is the King of that one king­dom, Mat. 25. he is the master of that one familie, Heb. 3, 1, 6. he is the Captayn of that ordered camp, Cant. 6. Apoc. 19. 11. 13, 14, 16▪ &c. So that he that challengeth these titles and honours besides Christ, is Anti­christ.

To the second part of your reason I answer, 1. that in wel ordered cō ­mon weales, the lawes are above the magistrates, according to Tullies say­ing, De Legib. lib. 3. as lawes are above the magistrates, so magistrates are above the people. What good order may we then think is in the papacie where Popes are above Gods lavv? 2. That for explicating the sense of the law &c. in wel ordered common weales, it is a ruled case, that L. Si. Cod. De legib. et constit. princip. he who made the law, should interpret the law. According hereunto, in the church, the lawes given of God in the scriptures are aboue the Pastors Ezek. 44, 24. that go­vern the people by them: yea above Deut. 17. 18, 10, 20. Kings: & Gods spirit which gave those lawes, is the supreme 1. Cor. 2. 10. interpreter of them. As for outward order, in difficulties, the Mal. 2, 7. Preists lips should preserve knowledge, and the peo­ple should seek the law at his mouth. If he Zoph. 3, 4 wrest the law, and teach false doctrine, men should Mat, 15, 14. let him alone as a blind guide, least they fal with him into the ditch. But herein you misse proportion in making ma­ny common weales, and but one church: wheras there be also many churches. For though there be but one catholik or vniversall church, which is invisible, comprehending the Eph. 3, 15. Heb. 12, 22 23, 24. whole familie in heaven and in earth: yet are there many particular churches visible, as Gal. 1, [...]. in Galatia, Apoc. 1, 4 in Asia, and other partes of the world. Now you imagine one visible ca­tholik or vniversal church, having visible officers, and a visible head the Pope, invested as praesident Ceremo­niarum. l. 1 c. 4. Vrbiet Orbi, all the world over: and all particular churches with their Bishops, to be under the guidance of that visible head. This is neyther according to God, who appointed no such order: nor according to man; for is ther any one Monarch over all the world, unto whom all nations vvith their governours doo obey?

Your conclusion is vvorst of all. For by Peters successor you mean the Bishop of Rome onely. Wheras Peter being an Apostle had 1 Cor. 4. 9. no suc­cessor in his Apostleship: as he vvas Bishop or Pastor, all Bishops in all churches are his successors: and not onely the Bishop of Rome. 1 Pet. 5. 1. 2. Act. 20. 28. Againe you vveen that your Pope is necessarily indued with the holy ghost, vvheras the starr of the Roman Rom. 1 [...], 20. 22. church, as vvel as of any other church, may Apoc. 8. 10. fall from heaven, and may have the Apoc. 9, 1 Ioh. 19. key of the bottomlesse pitt. And vvhy Rome should have preeminence a­bove all other cities in the vvorld, I cannot tell, unlesse because [...] by her [Page 79] policie our Lord Christ was crucified. For which, above all other cities she deserves the visible curse. And if God in justice hath wasted Ierusa­lem Da [...]. 9. 26. for this syn: how can we think that he hath blessed Rome, which hath spilt the blood of Christ, and of may other his Saincts. The book of the Apocalyps shewes plainly the contrary, Apoc. 17. & 18.

Agayn you would lay an intollerable burden upon the churches: for eve­ry synner is to be judged and excommunicated (if he repent not,) by that particular church wherof he is a member; as is Christs playn rule, Mat. 18. 15. 16. 17. compared with 1 Cor. 5. 4. 5. 12. 13. but you applying Christs rule to Rome onely, would constreyn al men al over the world, (when they deal with their brethren for syn and folow them to excommunicatio they not repenting,) to come to Rome before the Pope, which is unpos­sible; Oth [...]rweise, by what rule from Christ, cite you men thither? Wher­fore you conclude that which your premisses no way do prove; & beg the question, to gayn the time.

But you are angrie that I Ieav your supplie of later Doctors▪ wheras I told you playnly at the first, that I would trie and be tried in religion by the holy scriptures onely; as being the undoubted rule of truth. If you would not thus have dealt, why began you the battel? I have far greater cause to except against them, then you can have against my records of the Prophets & Apostles: for your fathers are but children in respect of thē, nothing so ancient, nothing so authentik, in any comparison; nothing so playn, nothing so constant: but contrary one to an other; contrary (some times) unto the truth; contrary to themselves▪ Example by Augustine, plainly averring with me: you bring him retracting, or leaving indiffe­rent. How then should we trust him, that trusteth not himself? So I told you, Doctors mought be alleged against Doctors: you marvel at it Nay marvell at them & at your self that allege them. You quote Chrysostom. homil 55 in Mat. and there though (these be not the words you mean,) he savth vpon this rock wil I build my Church, that is faith and con­fession: whither this make more for you or for me, let indifferent men judge. You cite Origen, homil 5. in Exodū: wheras if you would read him on Matthew, you may find how he counteth al Christians, Peters, which the Pope wil not allow. You produce Ambrose, serm. 47. wher­as the same man, upon Ephes. 2. sayth, vpon this rock wil I build my church, that is, in this confession of the catholik faith I appoint the faithfull unto life. Thus if I would weary my self and my reader in your wilde [...]nes, I could send you up and down, from one father to an other; & from the same father in one place, to himself in another; as, for Hillarie whom you quote, I may cite [...]yssenus, in testimon. ex vet. Test. de Trini­tate: and from Cyril. l. 2. c. 1 [...]. comment. in Ioan. as you alledge him, I can direct you to the same Cyril, de Trinitat. l. 4. And when now shal we get out of this wood? But wander you there alone if you wil, I mean not so to toyl in vayn. Yet cōdemn I not the men, but reverence their la­bours: how [...]eit I reverence Gods word more: As for me, I would not have you or any rest upon my words, but upon the proofs which I bring [Page 80] from the book of God: which though it be Apoc. 10. 2▪ litle, yet they that vers. 9. 10. eat it, may vers. 11.prophesie among people and nations and tongues, and to ma­ny kings And me thinks, you need not be offended, that I refuse to fight with dead men, and doo deal vvith you by the scriptures onely: for you have (as you may think) the advantage, vvho besides my weapon, that single two edged Eph. 6. 17. sword of Gods vvord, which you may use also as you can, have likevveise to help you the arrovves of the Fathers, the halberds of the Councils, the bullets of your schole men, the canons of your Ca­nonists, vvith the panoplie of your Popes; frō vvhom all Bishops (as a By­shop Durand Rational l. 2. c. 1. sayth) doe grovv as members grow from the head, and of whose fulnes they doe all receiv: that if my cause be not very good, you must needs drive me out of the feild. Vse therefore if you please the reasons of all or any of these, and I vvil ansvver them to you, not to the dead: but if you muster their bare names onely; be sure, you shal neyther fray nor hurt me. Next you retire to the place of Iohn. 21. feed my sheep. I told you al the Apostles had that charge Mat. 28. 19. 20 Iohn. 20. 21. The contrary (you say) is manifest, since he sayd onely to him feed my flock, to whō he said before, lovest thou me more then they, in which words he excludeth al the other.

Think you, in good sooth, that the former charge layd upō all, vvas ta­ken from them & novv layd vpon Peter onely▪ because upon special oc­casion he vvas spoken to alone? Why then, Peter also vvas himself dis­charged, vvhen after this, Christ spake to Paul alone, Act. 26. 17. 18. sending him to the gentils to open their eyes &c. & to 1 Cor. 1. 17. preach the gospel. But it is a strange collection of you, that vvhen a company of men are sent vvith one com­mission, and one of them having fayled in his fidelitie, is in special excited unto duty & diligence; al the other should be excluded. Doe you not see hovv after this, Paul shevveth, (Eph. 4.) not Peter onely, but Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors and Teachers, to be given of Christ for the building up of his church?

Your conclusion to be inferred hereupon, (if you conclude the questi­on,) wil be much more unreasonable. The point you undertook to prove, vvas that not Gods vvord in the Bible, but the catholik churches (yea the Popes) definitive sentence as he is head of the church, is an inde­ficient rule in matters of faith. To confirm this haeresie, you produce here Christs charge to Peter, Freed my sheep. Behold Novv the strength of your argument; If Peter vvas to feed Christs sheep: then not Gods vvord in the scriptures, but Peters definitive sentence (and consequently the Popes) is an indeficient rule of faith. But Peter vvas to feed Christs sheep: Iohn 21. Frgo &c. The unreasonablenes of vvhich consequence (if the bare rehearsal of it doo not convince,) may be shewed by the like thus. If the Bishops of Ephesus vvere to feed the church of God: then not Gods vvord in the scripture, but their definitive sentences vvere in­deficient rules in matters of faith. But the Bishops of Ephesus vvere to feed the church of God, Act. 20. 28. Ergo.

If the Elders of the churches of Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithy­nia; [Page 81] were to feed the flocks of God: then not Gods word in the Bible, but their definitive sentences were indeficient rules in matters of faith. But the Elders of those churches were to feed the flock of God, 1 Pet. 5, [...] 2. Ergo.

Behold what deep waters you have digged out from the Rock of Rome: their spring, I trow, comes from the bottomlesse pitt. If you say, those Elders were under Peter as a head, therfore they were to feed with his definitive sentence, not their own. First I deny that so they were under him; and you shal never prove it whiles Rome gates doo stand though I grant their office was inferiour to the Apostles. Secondly, if you could prove it, yet would it make against you: for if because Peter was their head, therfore they must feed with his doctrine onely▪ then because Christ was Peters head, Peter was to feed with Christs doctrine onely. But Christ was Peters head, acknowledged by Peter himself to be 1 Pet. 5. 4. Arch pas­tor; so taught by Christ himself Iohn. 10. Therfore Christ definitive sentence onely, not Peters, (much lesse the Popes) is the indeficient rule of our faith. And thus my cause is confirmed, and yours overturned by your own weapon.

Yet you procede and say; besides Christ speaks to S. Peter that he should feed his general flock, though he may speak unto the other Apostles, that they should feed their particular charges. I would we might once have an end of words of wind. You say al things, but prove nothing; unlesse your definitive sentence also must be taken for a law. But then I am sure it is against Christs law: for, as he neyther used the word general to Peter, nor the word particular to the other Apostles: so whē he sent them with their charge al indifferently, it was unto Mat. 28. 19. al nations▪ yea into Mark. 16. 1 [...]. al the world; to preach the gospel to every creature; and as the Father sent him so sent he them. And where now I pray you, were their particular charges? But let it be as you say; let the Apostles and al [...]Ioh. 20. [...] Christian Bishops their successors, have these precincts; in al nations, in al the world, and what place is over and beside, let your Peter the Pope have, there to menage his supremacie.

But here you bring your S. Leo to speak for S. Peter: and I know he was his freind, for I shewed before how Epist. 87. he placed Peter in the fellow­ship of the indivisible unitie, so making him a God: I know also & have shewed that in the same 3. anniversarie sermon which you cite, he spea­keth more for S. Peter then you bring here: how be it, though the Lion roreth, he hath got no prey. For the headship hath been proved to be Christs, not Peters: & the Apostleship to be Peters with the other Apol­tles. And though you again and again doe barely affirm S. Peter was head of al the rest of the Apostles: yet I must tel you again & again, that I hold not your definitive sentence (nor the Popes neyther) to be Quic­quid n. no [...] ab Aposto­lis traditū est, scele [...]i­bꝰ plenum est▪ Am­bros. com­m [...]nt, in [...] ▪ Cor. 4. 9. a right rule of faith, but if you can bring the word of God for you; that, thr [...]ugh his grace, I wil gladly receive.

In the end of this your velitation, you leav me to impu [...]ne [...]. B. [...]ar­mines doctrine as it heth &c. But your captayn comes not into this [Page 82] feild, he lyes intrenched within the walls of Rome, and triumphes in the Vatican. It is you that have bid me battel, and as you entred not these lists without an alarme, so you wil not depart (I trow) without an io tri­umphe. Yet to say the truth, in answering you, I have answered your Car­dinal: for your reasons be his▪ & you have taken them out of his skonc [...]. Onely you have culled them out here and there, in other order▪ & have taken the most pregnant arguments that he hath▪ Which being by him and by you propounded, by me now answered: you are to look, whither the propugning of them shallye upon him or on you, against this my im­pugnation. Or if you wil let them dye, you may sound the retrait▪

The 3. and last thing which you promised to prove, was, that this rule The 3 of your asser­tions▪ (the indeficient rule of faith,) is onely found in the Roman Catholik church sentence, and not in privat mens illuminations, or motions of a pri [...]t and unseen spirit. Both parts of this your divided proposition, I disallow: and mainteyn a third, viz▪ that this rule is to be found in the writings Prophetical and Apostolical: because (as your Cardinal hath▪ wel sayd,) Bellar. de verbo De. l. 1. c. 2. nothing is more known, nothing more certeyn, then the holy scriptures which are conteyned in them: and this Ibidem. is a most cer­tayn and a most safe rule of beleeving.

Before vvhen you came to shew your proof, it was, that your Roman church is the true and onely catholik church of God. Which▪ though I doo deney, yet if I did grant it, it would not prove your assertion. For it is the voice of the Ioh. 3. 29. 36. bridegroom, not of the bride, which is the ground of mens faith; the catholik church is Eph. 5 24. & 4. 15. 16. to receiv lawes and rules from her head Christ; not to prescribe lawes or rules to her members. There is Iam 4. 12. one Lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy. But because your church must first be proved true & catholik, before her sentence can be approved: therefore I was content to look into this first branch, requi­ring proof that your Roman church is the true & then the onely catho­lik; for I deney both What proofs you brought before, & how I answer­ed them, I leav to indifferent consideration: and wil now again take a view, how you mainteyn your proofs.

First you say, I fayn would challenge the name catholik unto my self. I answer, this is not so: The catholik church is the Gal. 4. 26 mother of al Christians, of which I am an unworthy child: but were not worthy to be named her child, if I would challenge her title which belongs not to me, nor to any her daughters, the particular churches on earth.

Secondly, you say, that after, I seem to refuse it because it is not war­ranted by the written word; asking, why I doo not as wel reject the name Trinitie a [...]. I answer agayn, the contrary to that you say is true: for I proved and that by the written word, (which it seems you could not doo) that ther is a catholik or vniversal church▪ and if need were, could bring many moe proofs. Why then doe you injurie me so o­penly before the sun, and then run on to dilate upon your own wilfull mistaking? such dealing dooth not become any true member of the ca­tholik church▪

[Page 83] But you can shew us (you say) the prophesie of Isaiah fulfilled, that the gospel is preached to all nations.

But we need not be shewed that by you; for it is shewed us by the A­p ostle almost 16. hundred yeres agoe. Rom. 10. 18. & 16, 26.

The whole world (you say) is replenished with the fruit of your doctrine. The more is the pitty, if it pleased God: for your doctrine is not the gospel, but the Popes definitive sentences. But this also we have been taught many yeres agoe. As al Apo. 13, 3. the world wondred and folowed the first beast: so the second vers▪ 12. did all that the first beast could doe before him; and made vers. 16. all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to re­ceive the mark. The waters where the whore fitteth, Apoc 17. 15. are people and multitudes & nations & tongues. Apoc 18. 3. All nations have drunk of the vvine of the vvrath of her fornication. Papisme is large, Mahometisme larger, Paganisme largest dispred, in these our last and most dangerous days.

But our invisible churches (you think) are excelled farr by the Jewes visible meetings in sundry places. But the Apoc. 12. 6 14. &c. woman that fled into the vvildernes, vvas seen of God, and dear unto him, though she vvere hid from the visible Dragon,, and his persecuting Angels. Esau had much more visible glorie then his poor brother Iaakob, vvhen so many kings reigned in AEdom, Gen. 36. 31. &c. before any King reigned over Israel. Fevv soules vvere saved in the Ark, vvhen many perished in the syn-floud. And this maketh many George Davids to deney the verity of the Bible, & be­leeve the traditions of Babel: because the Apoc. 1 [...] promised visible destruc­tion of the church of Antichrist, is not yet performed.

But you Roman catholiks have all motives (as you say) of evident credibilitie; as 1. all antiquitie. Nay stay there, the most antique re­cords of the holy Prophets and Apostles, you dare not stand to be tried by: but shun them, and flee to your late traditions, and Popes definitive sentences. So your church vvil be her ovvn judge vvhether she be a vvhore or no; vvheras neyther Ezek. 23. 4. &c. Aholah nor Aholibah, vvould give that sentence against themselves, though men vers. 44. vvent unto them as to a common harlot: but the righteous men, vers. 45. judged them after the manner of harlots.

2. Unitie] not in the truth but in haeresie: for your church hath by degrees from age to age so declined from the lavves of God, that she is one vvith her self; but become an alien from Christ. For proof vvhe­of, let the ancient faith of the church in Rome, vvhē Paul vvrot▪ therto, & the nevv faith of the church of Rome decreed in the Council of Trēt, be compared togither; and vve shall find as good unity betvveen them in many things, as betvveen light & darknes. Besides vvhat unitie is in your religion; the late broiles in England betvveen the Iesuites and the secu­lars, (to omit all former schismes that have been in Rome it s [...]lf) may shevv. Though by the Popes povvrfull hand, they are novv tyed togi­ther, at least by th [...] tayles, like the I [...]. 15, 4▪ foxes in Palestina.

3. Universalitie], even as it vvas in the dayes of Noe, vvhen the [...]ood came and destroyd them L [...]k 17, 26, 27. all: for vers. 30. so shall it be in the day vvhen [Page 84] the son of man shalbe reveled. Vniversalitie of abomination, shal procure from God univorsal desolation: for with her inchantments vvere decei­ved Apoc. 18, 23. all nations.

4. Disibilitie.] Even notorious to all that have eyes to see. For if a citie can not Mat. 5, 14. be hid, that is situate upon a mountayn; hovv should not that citie be seen, vvhich is set Apoc. 17, 9, 18. upon 7. mountayns; on vvhose top, your vvoman sayleth.

5. Confirmed by the consent of Doctors:] for her Apoc. 18, 23. merchants are the great men of the earth.

6. By the institution of most holy religious orders:] for the vvomā is Apo. 17. 4 arrayed in purple and scarlet, and guilded vvith gold, and precious stones and pearles: in her house are Pro. 7. 14. peace offrings, and the payeth her vovves; and vers. 17. perfumeth her bed vvith myrrh a [...]oes and cinamon: be­cause Christs institutions and most holy orders, are too mean and base for her royaltie.

7. The conversion of nations] for the Apoc. 17 2. inhabitants of the earth are drunken vvith th vvine of her fornication: Prov. 7. 26. she hath caused many to fall dovvn vvounded, and great is the number of all that are slayn by her.

8. The power of miracles] shewing Mat. 24, 24. 2 Thes. 2, 9, 10-. 12 great signes and vvonders, that if it vvere possible the very elect mought be deceived: but that all they may be damned, vvhich beleeve not the truth, but have pleasure in unrighteousnes.

9. Infinite number almost of martyrs that have sealed her doc­trine with their bloods, &c.] for among her other merchandise, are also the Apoc. 18, [...]3. soules or lives of men; vvhom she exposeth by sending into the nations to sovv her darnel, and to sel her vvares: till the kingdomes of the earth, (vers. 6. revvarding her as she hath revvarded them,) doo cut off these chapmen from land of the living. Hovv be it she her self hath made many moe martyrs, by killing Christs vvitnesses that have spoken against her, as England, France, Germanie and many other nations testify: for in her must be found Apoc. 18, 24. the blood of the prophets and of the saincts.

Thus have I confirmed your notes by the scriptures, vvhich you did set dovvn barely without proof: that all men may see, your markes may be shewed by the vvord of God. Other Apoc. 18, 14. apples there are vvhich your soules lust after, all vvhich shall depart from you, as God raiseth vp the vvitnesses of his truth against you. But you proceed and say▪

2. You have a certaine visible and infallible way to decide all con­troversies, which is the catholik church, that propoundeth what is to be beleeved and what is not.] A sure vvay in deed, vvherein you may vvalk safely, till God rise up to judgement against you. You boast to be the onely catholik church; and to have the onely true beleef: vve ex­cept against you by the vvord of God: your church vvhich novv stands charged to be a harlot, vvilbe her ovvn judge, and decide the controver­sie her self. If you grant Mahomet but this one ground for himself: I vvarrant you he vvil vvin the feild. And if you can prove unto me, but [Page 85] this one ground, (vvhich being the question, is here begged by you,) I vvill soon receive al [...] doctrines, traditions, ceremonies that your motherIsa. [...], [...]0. Mal. 4, 4. Ioh. 5, 3 [...]. Act. 17, 2. & 26; 2 [...]. [...] Tim. 3, 15, 16, 17. 2. Pet. 1, 19. church propoun [...]eth. But I have shevved you a more certaine playn and infallible vvay, (the old and good vvay vvherein our Fathers* vvalked,) to decide all controversies by, vvhich is the holy oracles of God vvritten by his Prophets and Apostles: vvhich if you vvil not yeeld to vvalk in, but continue in your catholik aberrations: you and your church shall perish in the hovvr appointed; and then shal be sayd, Apoc. 18, 20. O heaven rejoyce of her, and ye holy Apostles and Prophets, for God hath given your judgement (not her ovvn) upon her

3. You have (as you say) Gods divine veracit [...]e speaking by the mouth of the church, which formally makes you beleeve.

But vve (say I to you) have Gods divine veracitie speaking by the Luk. 1, 70 2 Pet. 1, 19. mouth of his holy Prophets, vvhich have been since the vvorld began; and also the [...] Pet. 3, 2. comandements of the Apostles of our Lord and saviour, vvhich effectually make us Rom. 10, 17. beleeve, through the spirit God 1 Cor 2, 12. Isa. 59. 21. vvhich is given unto us. That God Mat. 22, 31. speaks in them is p [...]ayn, and your Bellarm. de verb. Dei; l. 1, [...]. [...] selves grant: that undoubted veracitie is in his vvords, Ps. 19, 7, 9. is evident, and your selves dare not deney: & by this divine veracitie vve submitt our selves, our churches, our faith, our actions to be tried of all. But your church lifteth up her self, to be her ovvn judge and lavvgiver: and vvil not suffer her self to be tried by the holy scriptures. Thus glorifieth th [...] her self, and liveth in pleasure, and sayth in her hart, Apoc. 1 [...], 7. I sit a Queen: but strong is the Lord God vers. 8. vvhich vvill condemn her.

4. You have (as you say) a supernatural judgement to beleeve in common at least, in that all people, all nations have so beleeved. You need no supernaturall judgement for this, for it is a popular carnal reasō, which the natural man easily receiveth. But the spiritual man by super­natural light from the law of God, beleeveth Abak. 2, 4. Heb. 10, 38. in particular, Ioh. 6, 66. 6 [...], 69. though all people all nations should depart from Christ, because he hath the 2 Pet. 1, 19 sure word of God in the scriptures, and the spirit of God, by a covenant frō the Lord. Isa. 59, 21. And by this means he discrieth Apoc. 17, 3. in the wildernes that woman, and her vers. 5. mysterie, how she sitteth vers. 1. upon many waters, or vers. 15. peoples; of whose wine the nations having drunk, Ier. 51, 7. therfore they rage.

Lastly through all these you have (as you say) a pious affection through the working of Gods holy grace, to beleeve hir et [...] hoc et illud, and that without any difficultie, since you first beleeve there to but one true church, and that church cannot err. &c.

I confesse in deed you have the Mat. 7, 13 broad and easy vvay, wherin yow run on with great facilitie, (if God of his grace stay you not) unto your perdition. For by these false grounds your minds are so bewitched, that with Prov. 7, 21. her great craft she hath caused you to yeild, & with her flattering lipps hath entised you, and ye folow her straightway vers. 22 as oxen that goe to the slaughter, and as fools to the stocks for correction; vers. 23. til a dart strike through your live [...], as birds hast [...] to the snare, not knowing that it is for their lives. For by beleeving this and that as your catholik mother [Page 86] dooth propound, and not trying nor daring to trie her propositions by the book of God: you have quite lost the ancient catholik and Apostolik faith vvhich was in the Churches of God in Rome, Corinth, Galatia, & throughout all nations, as whensoever you bring your opinions to the trial by Gods authentik writings, will appear. And though you glorie of S. Peter for your Rock, as your ancestors Ioh. 8. 33. &c. gloried of their Father Abra­ham: yet wil you not folow his holy playn & Apostolical counsels, when he referrs you to the 2. Pet. 1▪ [...]9. sure word of the Prophets, and 2 Pet. 3, 2. to the comman­dements of them the Apostles of the Lord: giving you warning 2 Pet. 2, 1, [...] of false teachers to come after, which privily should bring in heresies of perditi­on, whose damnable wayes many should follow, by whom the way of truth should be evil spoken of.

What remayneth then if you proceed in this evil course, but as yow cleave to your late fathers synns, so you be partaker of their plagues. And if you will not hearken to that Apoc. 18, 4. voice from heaven, Goe out of her my people: you shall hear and feel the effect of that voice which the Apoc. 19. 17. &c. An­gel standing in the sun, crieth so lowd, to al fowles of the heaven to come unto the supper of the great God, wher they shall eat the fleshes of Kings and high captayns, and of mighty men, and of horses and horsmen, & of freemen and bondmen, of small and great: when the beast, and the vers. 20. false prophet which deceived with miracles them that received his mark, shal be cast alive into the lake of fyre burning in brimstone. To save you from this perdition, loe how large a letter I have written unto you this second time, testifying unto you the word of God, and against the erro­neous grounds or quicksands rather, wheron you build your faith. God offring me this occasion by your self, I have out of the love of my hart, endevoured to save your soule frō death, by shewing you the way of life: choose life therfore that you may live. Look into the book of God, (wherin you seem to me to be a stranger,) and pray unto him for under­standing in the same: so shall you find more light to your eyes, more cō ­fort to your hart, then the ca [...]t lodes of later Doctors, Fathers, Councils &c. can give unto you. And if you will not be warned, I shal lament your estate: yet whiles I may, I will doo you good, and as for all repro­ches, taunts, vituperies which you hav already uttered, or may yet further utter against me, I shal willingly bear and bury them; and use all good means I can, to save you from the damnation of hel. God open you: eyes, and perswade your hart unto the sight & obedience of his most ho­ly [...] Iude, v. 3 faith, [...] once given unto the saincts. Amen. From Amsterdam this 16. of April. 1610.

Yours if you wilbe Christs Henr: Ainsworth.

If you have sayd what you can against the scriptures of God & their alsufficiencie for mans faith: you may (if you please) shew your strongest argumets for your Roman catholik church (as you cal her) and her definitive sentences. Or procede, if you think good, to some [Page 87] other grounds and mayn controversies between us. Onely be advertised to folow the good counsel of him whom you count the Rock of your faith; If any man speak (let him speak) as the words of God 1. Pet. 4. 11.

There being no reply to this second answer of a long time, about 3. yeres after H. A. wrote, as foloweth.

To his very loving freind M. John A [...]nsworth prisoner in Newgate: be these in London.

MR. Aynsworth I vvas glad to hear of your former release ou [...] of bands, and exspected your answer to my last letter, which you promised: but now loe some yeres are past and I hear not from you. It is not my desire to contend vvith you, but to save your soul from death, by converting you from poperie to true Christianity. I had not begun this busynes, but that I vvas provoked by your self: if you mean to give over and so signify, I also vvil so rest, but vvith pittying your estate and praying for you. If you think good to prosequute your vvork begun, I also purpose God assisting me, eyther to manifest your aberrati­ons, or to yeild unto you. I am the more occasioned thus to vvrite, by reason of an other chalenge lately made by some of your side: but reason vvould that the old be mainteyned, or let fall, before vvay be given to a­ny nevv. Thus vvith unfeighned desire of your good, I commend you to the mercy of the most high, remayning your freind to command in all Christian duty▪

Henr: Ainsworth.

I. A. his answer to the former short letter.

To his loving freind Mr Henry Aynsworth [...] Amsterdam deliver these.

MR. H Aynsworth. That you were so kindly gladde for my releasement out of prison, I am to thank you; but wher­as you say you ery [...]cted my answer to the lost of yours as I promised, I cannot see how you can take any just erceptions. For first my releasement was but rather a cha [...]ge of restraint, then absolute a freedome being a banishment, so that I hav been inforced to coast many parts since: and before my banishment immediately all the books and papers I had, were taken from me here in prison, amongst which (I take) pours and my [...]ferentes were. [Page 88] As for the latter replie, I can not tel where it is now; though I pro­mise you I had half answered it, and had fully satisfied you therein, if my papers and I had not suddainly bene severed. Although I a­verr there is no special poinct therein conteyned that I take I have not abundātly satisfied in my former. That you seeme to say I gave the onset, it much imports not whether I did or no; I seeking to draw you from the AEgyptian darkness, that is so palpable. But this I can remember, this question now controverted by you was by your self proposed: howsoever in your former rep [...]e you desired to change the thesi [...] or discourse, which argued, you had litle advantage or hope to prevaile in the former. Wee both agree belike in the in­tention, each seeking each others conversion, though wee are ex diametro opposed in our assertions. I wonder what hope you should have by any thing you writt, to pervert my obedience to the Church of God, that you so seeffingly terme Poperte, but therin you shew your ignorance, distinguishing a Romane catholicke and a true Chri­stian, although all Papists in your opinion are not true Christians▪ But I could with better reason retort; and desire to convert you frō Death [...]nisme, or Judaisme to true Christianitie. For I take accor­ding to your grounds a man might prudently doubt whether yow are baptised or not, in that your Parents or Ministers might as much slight (as your se [...]t doth) the necessitie of baptisme. If I had your last papers though tedious▪ and long, in a few lines I could an­swer any thing that urgeth me therin, and that is not answered in my former replies. But this is sufficient you have p [...]lded to me onely quotations, and that d [...]sparatas, hanging togither sine calce in lieu of the reasons, antiquitie, vniversalitie and consent, which I ur­ged against you from Distories the registers of tyme, from Holy Fa­thers and Doctors the interpreters of scripture, and from all kind of witnesses. All which you call carnal motives, the errors of flesh and blood, or some such other scor [...]f [...]l terme of the Fathers & Doctors. reasons I proposed to you (as I referr my self to any indifferent judgment) are full for all your pretended reasons in full force. But [...]erein you mi [...]e, for being onely exercised to coape with Protestants, against whom your writings ar in ful force; in that they urge against you antiquitie, visibilitie and consent of Councells and Fathers; all which being brought by us against them, they flie presently from all these to their private spirit and interpretatiō, yet they are no reasons or urge not against us: For we Catholiks have still one rule of faith that must tri [...] all▪ Rom. 12. v. 7▪ for keeping of which rule the Ro­manesRom. [...]. v. 7▪ Rom. 6▪ v. 17. 1. before▪ 6▪ 6▪ v. 17. were before praised; which square S. Paul commendeth into Timet [...]e as ins depositum. This line of truth, and analogie of faith makes us all agree, and it makes us not to beTi [...] ▪ 6▪ 20. vanqui [...]ned of our enemies.

Therfore▪ [...] not [...] [...] Ainsworth [...]f [...] d [...]e not hear you, for I must [...]t beleeve you against this rule though you were an [Page 89] Angel from heaven in that by private interpretation against the rule of faith you invert the gospel of Christ. [...]. [...]

As for the beginning of your new subject, I know neyther the controversie▪ nor your Antagonist. If you be minded to deale fur­ther in your question begun, answer my argumento, and that breifly and in forme; For I charge you that by the multipl [...]tie of quo [...]ti­ons you have rather avoided then answered my reasons.

But if you be wearie of this subject, at your pleasure you may begin another, provided it bee stil a maine, essentiall or substantiall po [...]ce.

But since you seem so willing to give me satisfaction in any thing. I desire you breifly and yet distinctly to answer these questiōs I shal propose.

First I demand how you challenge your faith to be the same ofMy first question. the Apostles: I desire to know which of the Apostles s [...]h [...]ll [...]rs whether Abdias Bishop of Babylonia, whether S. Dyonis [...]s [...]rcopa­gita, S. Ignatius, whether S. Polycarpus, aut S. Clemens the schollar of S. Peter, or the canons of the holy Apostles did teach this your doctrine; if they did teach show how long it did cōtinue in the visible church of Christ, what monuments you have to warrant you therein.

2. Set down the essential and fundamentall points without which your religion can not stand; and which being graunted your religion is graunted.

3. Name the authours that successively from thence unto this tyme, have mainteyned these poincts you now hold.

4. Who and on what occasion did suppresse them. (Howsoe­ver, I desire you to give a direct answer to these [...]. questions hers propounded.)

5. Whether it was in time of persecution, or in the tyme of peace that your church begā to be invisible; In the time of peace there was no adversarie to make it invisible; In the tyme of persecution; no man can persequ [...]te an invisible thing.

6. I ask you which of the Martyrs of the primitive church yo [...] will allow of for your Martyrs; whether of S. Laurence or [...]o.These que­stions can not be an­swered nei­ther by Protestant, p [...] ­ [...]itan or Brownist▪or any o­ther secta­ry.

7. Whether you allow of Constantius the first Christian Empe­rour to be of your religion.

8. Whether you will allow of any of our three conversions of England to have been to this religion which you now professe.

9▪ Whether you hold that those that have died or shall die resol­ved Romane Catholicks, have bene or shalbe saved?

10. Whether you will graunt the Church of Christ, or the syna­gogue of the Jewes to be more visible or less subject to ruin, and sub­version.

11. Whether you allow of the last edition of the protestants Bi­ble; or else what edition you propound to your flock [...]etest to be fo­lowed?

[Page 90]12▪ Whether sufficiencie onely (since I take you hold ordering or imposition of hands not to be vsed) is to be required to make one of your teaching Elders; or if onely that sufficeth not, to assigne what more is required.

To these questions I intreat you Mr Henry Aynsworth, & that ear­nestly to give an orderly breife and distinct answer to ech one of these questions▪ for on the resolution of these, many fruitfull consequences may be gathered to make easie any poinct hereafter to be controver­ted betweene vs.

But now breifly to set downe my arguments which I maintain▪ stil, you have not satisfied in no one poinct: I will therfore breifly set them downe in forme desiring an answer as breif, yet as solid and as substancial as you can affoard; onely graunting, denying or distingui­shing, which in deed is to answer in forme like a scholler:

Your conclusion as I take was this. The written word ofMr Henr. Aynsw. position. God contained in the Bible is the onely & sufficient rule of our faith:

My reasons were these in substance, to prove the contrary, though the same in word I can not affirme, not having one line of yours or my conference: [...]. Reasons refucing M. H. A. position, & yet vnan­swered: If you say answered, [...]bridge them, [...]s I have done my 5. Rea­sons. D. Aug. contra ep. fundamēt. Manich▪ c. 9. [...]. Ratio.

That which is not knowen for Gods word, cannot be the onely rule of faith:

But scriptures by themselves are not knowen for scriptures:

go. the bare scriptures which is the written word of God can not be the onely rule of faith:

My Major is most certaine and evident; My Minor I proved out of Dr. Whitaker, Hooker, Zanchius, Brentius, all holding tradi­tiō necessarily to distinguish scriptures frō no scriptures. Also I take I proved this out of the holy Councells, & out of S. Augustin con­tra epistolam fundamenti Manichaeic. 9. Ego Euangelio non crederem, &c. I would not beleeve the Gospel except the authoritie of the church should move thervnto.

Neyther did you answer my Minor, when you said scriptures [...]r knowen by themselves; For first you slight and let slip the authority of those that in common reason I should beleive asso [...]ne as your self: 2. You doe not answer to the authoritie of S. Aug: 3. your answer is against common sense. Since if scriptures were as prime a principle as that the sun shines, or that honie is sweet, no man could be [...] ignorant thereof that had all his naturall faculties: and if more then the natural faculties, and the object disposed be required, you eats your owne words. For then it is not so knowen a truth, And how shall I know I have this spirituall eye of discerning truth more thē my adversarie, that accepts of some things for no scripture, that I doConc. C [...]rth. 3. canon [...] 4 [...]. Laodi [...]. Canone 19. allow of as scripture? &c. Why had not S. Aug: this [...]ie that with whole Councel of Carthage accpted of the bookes of Machabees as divine and Canoricall scripture: why had not S. Hierom that tran­slated the holy scriptures?

[Page 91]Another reason that I urged was thus. Many things were be­leevedThe [...] ▪ Rea­son. before the written word of God, & many things are now be­leeved that are not expressely taught in the written word of God, go:Diverse things be­leeved not expressed in the written word. The perp: virginiti [...] of our B. Lady. the written word of God is not onely the rule of faith: The first part of my Antecedent is easily proved; For the church of God till Mo­ses tyme was well governed, and yet had no written word: My se­cond part was proved: I giving instance that the Sacrament in the old law for exp [...]ating of original sy [...] in women. The mysterie of the B. Trinity, that God the holy ghost did proceed frō God the father and God the sonne as from one beginning. That Easter day should be celebrated on Sunday, and not on Saturday, That the Creede of the Apostles is to be beleeved; and yet no one of these is expressely taught in holy scriptures; you sayd yes; but you cited no place of scripture for probation thereof: Moreover you have not sa­tisfyed2. Th [...]s [...]. [...] 15. the places of holy scripture I cited to prove traditions; es­pecially you have not answered to that place of S. Paul▪ 2. Thes. 2.D. Chrys. hom. 4. [...] 1. Thes. [...] v. 15. nor to the authoritie of S. Chrysost. homilie 4. i [...] [...]. Thes. 2. wherin Dr. Whitaker sayes he speaks unworthy of so holy a father, nor to the place off. Basil or S. Hierom or S. Aug.S Basil: S. Hierome. D. Aug: De Ge­nesi ad litteram lib. 10. c. 23. Conc. [...]. Carth. canone 47. Concil▪ Laodic. canone 59. D. Aug. lib. 1. c. 3 [...] ▪ cont [...]a Cresconium: affirms the book of Maccabees to be canonicall. De Genesi ad literam lib. 10. c. 23. where he tearheth many fasts, feasts, so­lemnities to be kept and beleeved onely through tradition, and he testifieth there that in no wise we could beleeve the bap­tising of childrē without vnwritten tra­dition:

Another which I vsed was this. That which is most difficult,The 3, Rea­son. hard and almost for occurring difficults inexplicable, can not be to the unlearned at least, a certaine and unfallible truth. But the scri­ptures are thus, as well witnesseth your own conscience, and divers places I set downe, that seem to contradist one another, go:

Moreover how should an artificer know, whether this Bible be well translated or no, since he can neyther conferr it with the original or the vulgar Latin. And I showed how these difficults are not tri­vial; Amongst other places I cited that place of S. Peter the [...] ▪ cha­pterEpistle [...] ▪ Pet. [...], [...] v. 16. In which are certaine things hard to be vnderstood, which the unlearned and vnstable deprave, as also the rest of the scriptures to their own perdition. No doubt S▪ Peter meanes of those things S. Paul delivered touching vocation, grace, justification, and predestination; In which I showed how parvus error in principio magnus est in sine; to which the words of S. Peter alludes to, as also the rest of the scrip­tures, meaning that an error in some one transcendall poinct of these, doe cause error in many other places that depend hereupon But is these and more plainly examplified, I had nothing but quotations im [...]ertinently alleged, and no determinate answer to the difficult.

[Page 92]That whose onely the hath been defective and erroneous, yea to4. Ratio. the greatest Elercks; to every one howsoever unf [...]ilfull, and unlear­ned can not be a certaine and unfallible rule of faith. But that the bare scripture is so, I showed by diverse seming plaine piares cited by the Arrians, Pelagians, Semipelagians, Donatists, Eutherās, Anabaptists, [...]t. All which vie scripture for scripture; If you give an interpretation of their place of scripture that they bring to confirme their hereste, they will give also an interpretation of any place of scri­pture that you shall bring to refute them: if your interpretation be a correspondencie to scripture, theirs also shall be so.

The fift Argument of mine I framed thus. God is as providēt5. Ratio. The [...]i [...]ch Reason. for necessarie meanes to direct his church; as he is provident to Em­pires, kingdomes, common wealthes and families. But all these besides the written law, have ever some one decyder, vnweere or tri­bunall to [...]hoke controversies, or diffentions in the seed, to mowe them downe in the flower, to e [...]tirpate them in the verie roote. go, the word of God is not sufficient in it self to settle all controversies.

Thus as I remember ran the sum of my reasons, which you has not answered in your last, or in any other replie of yours. Now since my reasons remaine in their ful force; I can not see any reason why I should be bound to spend much tyme in answering fruitless and impertinent allegations:

But here as I remember transcending the boundes of this que­stion now controverted, though I confess the matter you proposed is in the confines of this present; you brought a place out of S. Au­gustin, that on S. Mathewes wordes c 16. sayes that Christ did build his church on the faith of Peter & not of his person, on Christ Jesus, & not on S. Peter; First to this place I an­swerMat. 16, 18. See Theophilact on this place. Ioh. 21. [...]. 17. Chrysost: lib. 2. De sacerdotio. Luc. 22. 32. Math. 16. Tues Petrus. Concil. Chal­ced. Art. 3. pag. 118. Tertull: de prae­script. Orig. homil. 5. in Exod. S. Cyp. De vnitate Eccles. S. Hyll: canone 16. in Math. S. Ambros. sermon. 47. 68. lib 6. in c. 9. Lue. S. Hier: lib. in Iovinia. et in cap. 2. Esa. etc. Luc. 22. 32. vide D. Cypr. epist: 55. numero 6. D. Bernard [...]. epist. 190. S. Aug: interpreted. that in one sense S. Augustin sayes the first, yet I denie that ever S. Au­gustine dooth deney that the church of Christ is built on the persō of S. Peter. And well map the Church be sayd to be built on the faith of S. Peter, and yet also on his person, because the person of S. Peter touching his faith is no fraile mortal creature, but is a strōg unshalia­ble rock as the faith it self, In that Luk. 22. It is sand I have prayed for thee Pe­ter that thy faith may not faile: Since we beleeve that this prayer is obteyned, we must beleev that by the warrāt of Christs prayer, the person of Pe­ter [...]ib. 1. re­t [...]act. c. 2 [...]. & his faith shal never be severed; so S. Aug: calling sometimes S. Peter the roch of the church, and somtimes his faith doth mean one thing: The which S. August. himself testifieth, for remembring that [Page 93] he had taught that in the person of Peter the Church was foūded; quod in eo tanquam in Petra [...]data sit Ecclesia in which sense it was fong by many in the hym [...]s of S. Ambrose, Hoc [...]sa Petra Ecclesiae canente culpam d [...]uit: At the crowing of the cock the rock of the chur [...] [...].(Peter) lamented his fault, he concludeth the whole matter of these two expositions. Harum duarum sententiarum quae sit probab [...]or eligat le­ctor. Of which two expositions which to the probabler. I leave to the readers choice: What have you not by this allegation of S. Au­gustine? Nay what will you loose if you should come to answer the holy fathers that affirm the church to be founded on S. Peter.

That you write you are sorie for my error: I wonder you should bee so carefull for my soules good, that are so negligent of your own. For as I take in the last of myne I showed how ful of feare the last resolution of your faith would be when you should give account at [...]. that eternal tribunal; In that all you can answer for your self is that your owne phancie apprehended so; your private spirit interpreted so. Where my faith is warranted by Gods word, driivered by the holy catholick church, confirmed by General and Provinstall Coun­cels, sealed by thowsand of Martyrs blood, authoris [...]d by antiguitie [...]. of Historie, ratified by holy Fathers Doctors and instructors of ho­lie orders in all ages, having the profession of our religion inferted in our naturall [...] language, churches, crosses, buildings, mony [...] most ancient monuments, al which motives warrant me that I shal ren­der an answer without all feare or dread. All these and [...] motives you may have to yeeld to us; but you could never n [...]t [...]we me the least semblance of reason why I should yeeld to you. God send you make right use of them for the good of your soule, that you man at length be reduced to the true church of Christ, for which I shall heartily pray.

Iohn Aynsworth.

I received yours dated the 12. of April the 20. of the same, and I end this the 29. of Aprill stylo veteri. Justice Hall in Newgate.

H. A. his answer to the former letter.

To his loving fr [...]ind Mr. Iohn Aynsworth prisoner in Justice hall in Newgate, be these in London.

GRace and mercy from God the father of our Lord Iesus Christ, [...]e vouch safed unto you. 1. Wheras you g [...]ve me to vnder­ [...]tand (Mr. Aynsworth) that my writings among others were ta­ken from you, so that you could not answer them as you pro­mised, and that if yow had my last papers, in a few lines you could [Page 94] answer any thing that urgeth you therin, &c. I have out of my love to­wards you, and in compassion of your estate, sent you a copie of my last writing, not urging you to answer, unless you think the goodness of your cause will bear you out, but desiring you to yeild unto the truth there shewed you. You brought for your defense C. Bellarmines reasons: I have manifested the weaknes of them. If you can fortifie them, or your cause by any other, I am willing (as I have begunn) to take notice thereof, & eyther to refute them, or yeeld you the Victory. If you leave off, I also will rest, and let the prudent judge what we both have sayd.

2. You (as if you would beginn a new combate) propound 12. questi­ons for me to answer: I told you before, I would not digresse to by matters, for so we might run into confusion fruitlesse and endless. Also your questions (most of them) are of Fathers Doctors &c. since th'Apo­stles times, by whom I shewed you that I neyther might nor would trye any religion, til the Divine scriptures be proved insufficient, which will never be.

3. You then propound the controversie a new, as if we were now a­gain to beginn, when we are almost at an yssue: so might both of us wea­ry our selves in vayn. Your first long writing to me, hath made my answers the longer, for I desired (and stil doo) brevity with perspicuitie. Least through want of your papers, you should swarve from the questions in hand, I wil set them down, in the words that they have passed.

My assertions were question weise, when I should enter into dispute vvith you, to see if you vvould grant;

1. That our differences in religion should be tryed and composed by the verdict or vvord of God: not of men.

2. That Gods vvord is to be found in the scriptures of the Prophets & Apostles, vvho vvrote originally in Hebrevv and Greek. By these I of­fred my faith to be tryed, and to make trial of other faith proposed.

Yours were, vvhich you sayd you vvould prove; and so indevoured;

1. That onely the bare text of the scripture, is not a sufficient rule of our faith.

2. That the scriptures expounded by the catholik church, is a true and indeficient rule of our faith: or (as you set it dovvn vvhen you come to make proofe,) That the Popes definitive sentence as he is head of the church, is an indeficient rule in matters of faith.

3. That this rule is onely found in the Romane Catholik church sen­tence, and not in private mens illuminations and motions of a private & unseen spirit. Or (as after you expresse it, vvhen you labour to prove it,) That your Romane Church is the true & onely catholik church of God.

Your arguments for these vvere long discourses, I could not therfore ansvver, but by refelling your treatises. In these I folovv your footing still in my last vvriting, novv againe sent unto you. Hold I pray you to the points in hand, and be as breif as you can, I vvil labour to satisfy you in fevv vvords. But if you make outrodes to long narrations; blame not the length of my ansvvers, vvhich are but according to your ovvn size; & [Page 95] eeke your arguments no more with humane testimonies, til you have dis­proved the certainty and sufficiencie of the Divine oracles: which if it were possible for you to doo, you might colourably perswade fools unto Atheisme, but no wife man would ever suffer affliction for your traditi­onal and humane religion. Be you warned, yea intreated, to save your sowl from eternal flames; God hath offred more meanes of mercy unto yow then to many others; if yow shut your eyes against the light, (which shineth in darknes though the darknes comprehends it not,) yow wil but heap up unto your self wrath against the day wrath; but my prayer unto God is for your salvation in Christ, to whose grace I cōmend yow.

Henr: Ainsworth.

I. A. his answer to the former letter.

To his loving freind Mr Henry Aynsworth at Amsterdam deliver this.

SOme week agoe (Mr Henry Aynsworth) I received your letter and your last reply coppied out againe (as you say) to give me satisfaction. An answer whereof some three yeres agoe I had returned, if the papers then, and I had not been severed; And long ere this since the intended deliverie therof I had fully satisfied each point thereof, if some three weekes after the noti­fied aryvall thereof, the deliverie had not been delayed.

For your paynes and good will I thank you. But I wonder that through private affectation, so much payns, and good wil should be so far from being secundam scientiam, that a man might doubt ra­ther whether you writ not contra conscientiam, since to any indifferēt judgement the motives for our catholik religion, and for her doctri­nal assertions are so cleare, and therfore doubt not but that I shall answer you; although her well grounded truth would defend it selfe though I were silent.

But God willing I wil shortly send you the answer to your large biscourse, and to give you ta [...]t of that which I wil prove in fully an­swering your replication (though to write so large a coppie forth is more tedious thē difficult) I wil prove these seven points at least. First I will show the weaknes of your reasons; 2. I will prove that not onely the written word of God, but the unwritten word of God tradition, and the authoritie of the Church is the rule of our faith. 3. I wil show how my five Arguments for all your pretended an­swers remaine in ful force. 4. I will prove how you walk in a cir­cle, proving the word of God by your private spirit, and your privat [Page 96] spirit by the word of Gods 5. I wil defend our catholick opinion to be free from any circular or ridiculous proofe. 6. I wil show the Popes definitive Sentence, togither with a generall Councell at least to be an assured groundwork of faith: 7. I will show to you or any indifferent judgment that your building is on sand, and the resoluti­on of your faith at the last day of judgement groundless and full of feare.

But now to show that you have in nothing answered my last let­ter, I propounded certaine necessary questions breifly for the more clearing of this or any other disputation to be had between us: of which though there were twelve in number, yet you have not an­swered one word to any, which eyther showes you glosed before whē you sayd you writ all before for my good▪ or else rather that you could not answer one, which you might have doone in foure or 5. lines, de­nying or granting. So that I must needes inferr that you cannot show which of the Apostles did teach your doctrine that you now hold: 2. that you can not show which are the essentiall poincts of your religion: 3. that no ancient Doctor did maintayn the doctrine you now held: 4. that you can not show who, in what tyme, and on what occasion did suppress that doctrine: 5. that you can not show your church to have begun to be invisible in the time of perse­cution, or in the time of peace: 6 that S. Laurence nor any of the primitive martyrs were of your religion: 7. that you approve of no ancient historie, and that you must graunt Constantine our first Christian Emperour not to be of your religion: 8 that no one of the 3. conversions of England was to your religion: 9. that you must graunt the church of Christ to be more subject to invisibilitie, ruin, & subversion then the synagogue of the Jewes: 10. that you have no Bible or writen word of God that you allow of in all, and so that you have no rule of faith for all. To all these you answer with silence in your hart calling them carnall motives no doubt.

3. I answer you that in putting downe breifly my 5. argumēts in forme, I show you have not answered: But you in your silence to them showes that your answers consists onely in multiplicity of words that admitts no abbreviation.

4. You then set downe your 2 conclusions and my 3. contrary as­sertions. [...]ou blame my tediousnes, but I answer, my outroades are to trace onely your wildgoose chase, that is bounded in no circuit of a Methedicall discourse. I shall be the longer in this pre­sent discourse to come, so to avoide proliritie hereafter, still referring my selfe to this to come, how long so ever you shall dispute. Desist then Mr Henry Ainsworth to follow your private spirits phancie; & hold your self by that three fold chaine [...]in [...]ntius Lyrinensis pre­scribes, that is antiquitie, vniversalitie and consent, so should you save your self frō that headlong precipitium that the authour of evil the Divil tempts you to; when by the privat interpretation of scrip­tures [Page 97] he inst [...]uates to a man Mitte deorsum S. Math▪ [...]for it is writ­ten Psal. 90. cast thy self from the rock of the church, scriptum est frō the trabition and authoritie of the church, from the consent of holy Councels and fathers; for scriptum est, your private spirit must be your tower. God send you may recover your self from your imn [...] ­nent precipitium, that dying out of the church of God you doe not e­ternally burne in the quenchless flames: from Justice hall Julie 24 1613.

Iohn Aynsworth.

To this letter H. A. gave no answer, but exspected the promised large reply from I. A. which now followeth: as the third in defense of the Church of Rome.

To Mr Henry Aynsworth at Amsterdam.
6. 16. Ierem.‘State super vias, et videte et interrogate de semitis antiquis quae sit via bona et ambulate in eâ, et inve­nietis refrigerium animabus vestris.’

ALthough your replie was slight, and wilie, rather seeking to transfer the questiō then to examin it to the true ground, bespangling the rough rugge of your doctrine with multi­plicitie of wrested places of holy scripture, which makes me fitly resemble you to some AEthiopian, behanged all over eares, [...]yes, nose, lippes and armes with Jewels, and pearles that by their lu­stre, beautie, and misplacing makes the Nigroes fowllness the ug­lier. Yet of such importance is the decision of this question beingThis que­stion the cheifest question of contro [...] ­sic [...]. the keye, and Master-spring to all the other doctrinall, and contro­versall questions of religiō: That howsoever your exploded doctrine and shuffling replication needes no answer, being like a Comet that consumeth it self, yet to complie with the worth of the question, and to satisfy your followers desires, I have once agayne returned you an answer.

In which I will showe that your reasons being rather seming reflections then true beames (as you say) of the word of God, doe vanish of themselves.

2. I wil prove that the true & indeficient rule of our faith is notThe parti­tion of the treatise in­to 7. parts. onely the written word of God, but also the unwritten word of God, traditiō, the authoritie of the church of God in Councels [...] Fathers is the ultimate decyder of all matters of controversie.

3. I will show how my reasons for all your pretended answers, remaine in full force.

[Page 98]4 I wil prove that in your opinion you walk in a virious circle, pro [...] i [...] the self same by the [...] ▪ the word of God by the privat spi­rit, and the private spirit by the word of God.

5 I wil [...] defend our Catholick opinion to be free from any such circular and r [...]diculous proof▪

6 I [...] show the Popes definitive sentence togither with a ge­nerall Court [...] atleast to be a firme, and an assured groundwork, & rock [...].

7 And lastly I wil demonstrate to you, or to any indifferent judg­ment,Mr. H. A. his [...]. How [...] steeme of the s [...]pt. The [...] [...] of the fa­thers be­sides the written word of God required. that your building is on sands, or sp [...]ders [...]ks your arc [...] [...] and res [...]u [...]ō of your faith at the last day of judgment to be ground­less and fu [...]l of feare:

8 First then to begin with your reasons, which [...] I maint [...]yne to be nothing els but a [...]er a [...]ous of scripture f [...]sty applyed, I do think it [...] before I answere your reasons grounded on the bareterts of scripture▪ to signifie what a worthy & most reverend es [...]eme we have of the scriptures, and of each part of them. We reverence them as Gods holy word derived from the fulness of truth. [...]e hold this volume wor [...] to be meditated on day and night. Jos. 1, 8 Psalm. 1, 2 [...] hold it as seven times refined s [...]ver. Psal. 11, 7. A most cleare light illuminating our eyes Psal. 8 8 that it is a light [...] our steppes Psal. 1. 8. [...]2▪ & v 105 & 130. 140. Wee hold all the holy scriptures to be most just 8. 8. Prov. to be a frerie speech and buckler of defense. We also defend that the holy scriptures are dili­gently to be searched unto Joh. 5, 39. [...]om. 1. 1. [...]om. 15, 4. that whatsoever is writt in them is writ to our edificatiō: that all the scri­ptures are profitable unto us 2 [...]un. 3, 16 2. Pet. 1, 21. that men4. D. August. lib. 1 cont. Iuha: c. 2. et lib. 2. [...] ep [...]log [...]e­jus oper [...]s. As S. Aug did oppose the [...] time, so we do oppose you. Mr. H. A. [...] for calling the holy fa­thers earth and ashes. delivered this scripture inspired by the holy Ghost. Yet wee hold al­so though we worth [...]ly esteeme of them yet wee can not [...]clude the e [...] plications of the holy church in the holy Fathers and Councels, gui­ded, and directed, by the self same truth. And S. Augustin did op­pose by the authoritie of the holy fathers his predecessors, against Pe lagius and other [...]ereticks saying, [...]rag [...]lis [...]t arguta eorum novitas e [...]c. The weake and w [...] novelti [...] of hereticks is to be co [...]f [...]n̄ded by the authoritie of holy Fathers: and a little after this great Doctor▪ and holy Father [...] acknowledged by Calvin himself to be the faithful wriness of antiquiti [...], 4. [...] stitut. [...]. 14, sess. 25 and B [...]za calls him the Prince of a [...] Divines concerning dogmaticall po [...]cis in c. 3. [...]om. v. 12 as if on purpose he did answer your barbarous contempt of them calling them dust and athes; [...]et onely in regard of their morta­li [...]e as the scriptures calles them, but when the vniforme consent of the Fathers Greek and Latin was objected against [...]u: What sa [...]es D. Augustin, shall light be darkness, and darkness light that [...] aclestius. Julia: should on: ly see, and that Hyllarie, Greg. Amb [...]se [...]ier. August should b [...] blynd [...] So wee see how two wor­thy champions of yours hath raised S. August: a Samn [...]l [...] con­found [Page 99] a [...] not at Endor but at Amsterdam.

[...] But wheras by your submission you would seem [...] to [...] a­m [...]nd [...] your [...] that you [...] th [...]re be a tho [...]a [...]d of thē that I sa [...] [...] that you pre [...] for [...]. trut [...] and holyness before [...]. For if you understand this of the [...] fathers before [...], I pro [...] that you cannot [...] that without [...] visard to [...] your [...], since I wil prove that in [...] dogmatical [...] they differ from you, and so by your [...] [...]inpeere (except you will be wilfully blind) they [...] before you. If you understand Jewel, [...] &c. the Protestant Doctors, these in truth by your [...] neyther doe or can prefer before your self (since by your [...] have no true church as I heare you teach against Mr. [...] and so there difference must rather be hereticall then [...] and if it be a true church, why make you a sch [...]m [...] in d [...]parting from them▪

Now to come to the solution of your arguments if there were a­ny. [...] There be 4 [...]n number cited, as you saye grounded on the holy scriptures, but not one appearing in substance or in the true sense of the scriptures.

First you object out of Deut. [...]. 32. Keep and doe that [...] ▪ God commanded you, [...]e shall neyther [...] to the [...] to the [...], but by that our Lord God commaunded you [...] you [...] What can you inferr hence but that the lawe ought strictly to be kept▪ and that we [...]ught neyther to adde or to take from the 10 commande­ments, that is to make the 10. commandements [...] o [...] super­a [...]undant, what is this to your purpose to prove that the written word alone is sufficient to decyde all controvers [...]es. For as here [...] testification of the law or [...]rp [...]icati [...]n of the law was [...], (And that it was the office of the Preists to explicate the [...] of the law app [...]ares Deut. 1 [...]. v. 8 2 Paral. 19 1 [...]. 2 P [...] 26 16 [...] Deut 32. v. 7. Psal. 43, 1. Prov. 3▪ 8▪ [...] ▪ 6▪ [...]6▪ [...] 8▪ 1 [...] [...] 4▪ 4 3. 2 Thes. 2▪ 15. 2 [...]. 2▪ 1.) so we sa [...] the propo­sing of the word of God by the church; and the [...] of the Church b [...] h [...]r h [...]ad, councells and h [...]lfe ancient fa [...] [...] not re­sist but rather help the scriptures. And a [...] to [...]plicate the law [...] nei­ther [...] de [...]it [...]e to t [...]e right hand or to the l [...]ft▪ no more [...] [...] to [...] the scripture according to v [...]ersalitie, antiquiti [...] and cons [...]nt: [...] And here [...] [...] to be understood that such an addition is prohibited that to [...] to the law of God as appeareth vp [...] which [...] before [...] 4 chap. v. 3. where he brings in before [...] how he did [...] ▪ B [...]al ph [...]gor for [...] of [...] ▪ for adding or [...] as the te [...]t [...]p [...]ies, v 2 [...]. 4 Deut.

Againe [...] out of Deut. 12. [...]2. That [...] I co [...]aund [...].thee that [...] to [...] Lord▪ thou [...] [...]t adde o [...] [...]; what is here [...] but an heath▪ [...], and an [...] of their children to God as they did to their idols as appeareth [Page 100] out of the 30 verse of the same chapter. Is here any prohibition of c [...]nsicating the true sense of the law? And in the self [...]me sense [...] pro­hibitionNo true explication prohibited of an idolatrous or fal [...]fying addition is prohibited Deut. 4 v. 2. [...]u shall not adde unto the word I speak unto you, and in this sense that of the [...]po [...] the last chap. v. 18, et [...]9. and first of S. Paul to the Gal. chap. 1, v 8 as S. Aug: teacheth vs in tract. 98. in Jo­hannem.How the author himselfe slippes in tripping of my rea­son.

10. Now wheras you retort my reasō vrged against you, showes you have good will to maintayn the tennis plaie how unpractised soever you are therein: For as I remember I reasoned thus taking occa­sion out of Deu. 5, v. 32. no man may ad unto the fourth cōmādemēt & it is to be kept, therfore the 4 cōmandemēt is to be kept & onely to be kept: As it should follow by the selfe same reason. No man may adde in that [...]d to any particular scripture, and this or each parcel of scripture is the word of God; therfore this or each parcell of scrip­ture is onely scripture, or the word of God. Or thus, the scripture is a sufficient rule in that kind for that which it teacheth, therfore itThe con­clusion of­ten tym [...]s with more art cōcea­led, then v [...]rballie ever dedu­ced The 1. of Gal. [...]. v. makes a­gainst him­selfe. is the onely sufficient rule; where you may plainly see if you will not blin [...] that I conclude sufficiently against you. But you complayn that my redditum or conclusion doth not showe his head; I answer, we doe not use ever in the schooles the premises being presupposed ve [...]lli [...] to inferr the conclusion which followes necessarily. As if I should argue thus. Whosoever builds his religion onely on the privat spirit is a flat hereriche, But Mr. Henry Ayns worth doth this; the go. without any more I know will excuse me from infer­ring a lame conclusion, in that every one that hath common sense wil see what followes.

11. Now to answer to that of the Gal. 1. v. 8. But though we or an An­gel from heaven should euangelise to you besides that I have euangelised un to you be he an anathema: which text makes much against you; & dooth nothing prove that which you would inferr viz. that the writ­ten word of God is sole sufficient. For first there it is sayd besydes Contrarie glosses onely prohibi­ted. D: Aug: lib. 17. cō ­tra Faustū docet; qui supplet quod mi­nus erat, non tollit quod mi­ [...]us [...]rat. that which I euangelize that is eyther in writing or word of mouth; so that you see tradition is not obscurely implied: 2. we may note out of these words, that the text doth not prohibit any explicatiō or true glosse on the text, but onely that which is contrarie, for verse 6. he marvails that they should be transported to another gospel. So that you see all additions, & not contrary additions are forbidden in this and the like place. But first here your gospelling is against S. Au­gust: lib. 17. contra Faustū where he teacheth that the Apostle saies not more thē you have received, but besides that you have received, or else S. Aug: saies he should have prejudicated himself that did desire to come to pre [...]ch to the Thessalonians, and he concludes; he that supplies that which was too litle, doth not take away that which was too litle or w [...]nting.

12. And S. Augustin in his 98, tract notes that the word besides doth [Page 101] not prohibit more or other preaching or teaching (as the trabitio [...] S. Aug. saies the word be­sides prohibits onely that which is contrarie. S. Iohn himself o­therwise by M. H. A. should sin. and explications of the church bee) but such as are contrarie or disa­greeing to the rule of faith, and S. Augustine notes that the Apostle both not say if any doe euangelize to you more thē you have received, but besides: For if he had forbidden any more, S. John had synned that wrote after the Apocalyps.

13. You upbraide me in saying this answ. is none of the word of God but my owne, saying that I have not a tittle of the word of God to prove it which you have: and for to prove pour purpose you [...]te the 30 of the Proverbs the 6. v: adde nothing unto his wordes least he re­proove thee; which text proves no more thē the other text explicated; that cōrrarie doctrine [...] not explicatiōs a [...] here prohibited; so that we see our archer hath lost another bolt shot at rand [...] ̄ to seek his brother.

14. But wheras you say my answer is not warranted of God, is not true: For read Rō. the last, v. 17. Observe diligētly those that cause di­visionThe like showed. and diffention besides the doctrine you have learned, where E­ras [...]us turnes it in his translation contra against; and your Bezaes translation reades so if contrarie; S. Ambrose also reades si contra, My doctrin warranted by Gods own word. The desinatiōs of the church are Gods. Mat. 18, 17. et 1 [...]. De [...]. 19, 15. so that we see repugnant, and not explicating doctrine, contrarie and not more doctrine of the self same kind is prohibited.

15. Wheras you say my reasō is against myself, in that the Prophets did not adde of their own but of Gods; no more I say the definitions of the church be mans own but Gods, ther being one self sam [...] of Christ and hi [...] Church, He that heareth you heareth me, and he that contemneth you contemneth me, S. Luke 10, 16. which is true also of particular churches, but so fart forth as their doctrine accordeth with the Romane catholik church.

16 But where you say you will inlighten my eyes with the lamp oil that stincketh by your false interpretation of the holy fathers sense, I am litle beholden to you. For S Chrysost and S. Ambrose in those places cited by you wil have nothing else understood, but that the ex­positors must applie thēselves to the true sense of the scripture, & the law, [...] not to corrupt the sense though on good pretences. But you [...]. H. A. if you would ha [...] the dust wiped of your spectacles, might have seen Dyonisius A­reopagita in the yeare of our Lord 100 andIn opere imperfecto c. 7. Math. D. Ambrose lib. de Pa [...]adiso c. 12. Nihil igitur l. quod bonum videtur. the Apostles schollar in his first chapter of his celestial Hierarchie, show how the Apo­stles did declare their doctrin partly by writing & partly not by writing: yea you mightMark vvel Deut. 32. vers. 7. Psal. 43 1. Prov. 1, 8. Esa. 38. 19. Ier. 6, 16. Eccle. 8, 11. 4. Esdr. 14. 3. 2. Thes. 2, 15. 1. Tim. 6, 20. 2 Tim 2, 1. and see whether unvvritten traditions are not to be observed, seen. [...]. S. Chrys. plaine vvords for tradition. better have scāned first, and answered that place cited by me out of h [...]l [...] S. Chrysost: on the 2. of the Thess. oratione 4. Stand and keep your traditions, where the holy Fa­ther sayes it is plain the holie Fathers did not deliver all things vp [...]istle but many [Page 102] things without writing, and those thingsSee [...] lib. 3. c. 4. Clemens A­lexand lib. 5. Streat: c. 2. Orig. lib. 5. super numeros Athanas. epistolâ ad Epictetum D. Ambrosius lib. de [...]ide 3. c. 7. epistola 83. D. Aug: lib. contra Cresco: Grammat. c. 33▪ lib: contra epistolam Manich: quā vocant fundamentum c. 5. et episto­la [...]6. ad Casul. vide n. [...]1. also are worth [...] of faith; and S. Chry­sost: sayes, Est traditio nihil qu [...]ras amp [...]ius; which wordes are so playn that they made Or I [...]w [...]l to say they were words unwor­thy so h [...]lp a father: And that S. Ambrose did approve of tradition is plain out of his 34 sermon on Lent, where he reproving those that would keep certaine dayes after Lent, when this after f [...]st was neither (as the feast of Lent) neither delivered by the authoritie of our antestors. So that we see if wee should but give Mr. H. A. the S [...]cons place but to put oile in­to our lampes, he would adde his dust and askes to quench it rather [...] contemning still as he doth the authoritie of the holy Fathers, in terming their authoritie produce [...] against him, dust and ashes.

17. Mr. Henry Aynsworth objects against me that I have turned over his third and fourth Arguments o [...] reasons; denying them to prove that which they were cited for: I answer I possed them over; But see here Mr [...]. A. hath turned them off the ladder to their last d [...]steni [...]; not showing that they proved ought what he intended by them: we may suppose his reasons were wounded to death in the an­swer [...] the former, o [...] like runa [...]ates have forsaken their armes thatTHE II. PART. of [...] [...]ted barely before, but one appeareth in his likeness; I hope ou [...] adversarie will acknowledge or amend his slight dealing herein.

18. The second part that Iam to prove is that the rule of our faithThe rule of our faith the writtē & vnwrittē word jointly. Tra [...]it: was once the total rule, therfore it may be th [...] partial. The [...]h: of God taught onely by tradition 2470 yeres. Tradition directed men after writtē law vide n. 16. is not onely the written word, but joyntly the unwrittē word of God, tradition and the authoritie of the church, councells and Fathers is the ultimate decyder of all matters of controve [...]ste.

This I prove first thus: That which was the totall rule of our faith before the written word of God, may be well the partiall rule of our faith after, where the written word of God doth not sufficient­ly e [...]ress [...] divers mysteries of us to be beleeved. But traditiō was a sufficient yea and the total rule of our faith til Moses tyme the first [...] in of the holy ghost, go▪ tradition now togither with the writ­ten word is a sufficiēt rule of our faith. My major through out this whole tract shal be proved; My minor is graunted by Mr H. A.

20. Secondly, Not onely before the law of Moses men we [...] wholly directed by the month of tradition, but after also as it appeares in Deut. 3 [...], verse 7. Ask thy fatners and they shall annantiate unto thee, ask thy auncestors and they shall tell thee, showing that of many thinges that were to be beleeved wee should depend of the in­struction of our auncestors, for in the wordes young [...] diat [...]y be­fore that is implied co [...]ra generationes singulas; and Psal. 43, 1. Oh Lord we have heard with our eares, our fathers have [...] unto us that which thou hast wrought in their dayes, and in the ancients dayes. Prov 8, 1. Heare oh sonne the discipline of thy father, and doe not leave [Page 103] the law of thy mother. Isa. 38, 19. The father shall make knowenMany pla­ces of the old testam [...] for tradit: to his sonne this truth; where truth & discipline showes rather mat­ters of discipline, and doctrine, then matters of fact as Mr H. A. would interpret: and Jere. 6, 16. Stand upon the wayes, and see & ask of the ancient pathes, what is the right way and walk in it, and ye shall find rest unto your souls: which is playne there that the Prophet doth not onely speak of matter of faith, but to prevent error and [...] of doctrine: also see Eccles 8 11. 4 Esdr. 14, 3. 2 Tim. 2, 15. 1 Tim. 6 20 2. Tim. 2, 1. what can be hence inferr [...]d but that the Isra [...]lites and Christians were to be directed by the help of traditions.2 [...]. S Dyon: A­r [...]opag [...]. Cl [...]meas Alex. Th [...]anc [...] fathers most plain for the al­lowing of tradition. Origen S. Athanasius S. Basil.

See the holy fathers so firme and so frequent for this great truth, that falshood it self of our adversaries cannot tell how to oppose, see [...]. cited before number 16. [...] in the [...]ere of our Lord 80 lib. 3. [...]. 4. calles tradition dives deposico [...]um a rich treasurie or [...]usrodie. E [...]emens [...] lib. [...] Strema: [...] 4 in the yeare 200 say is that the knowledge of traditis̄ by succession is come from the Apostles, et lib. 7 Stromat: [...]. 9. he calls unwritten tra­dition the [...] of truth. Origenes in the yeare 240 in his 5. [...] in Numeros et tr [...]t: 29 in Math: teacheth that wee beleeve and doe many things by tradition. S. Athanasius in his epistle ad Epi [...]t [...]te tu [...] sayes That it is sufficient to answer to his adversaries that it is not the doctrine of the Catholick church, & that the holy fathers have not thought so. S. Basil also sayes he can beleeve many things by the unwritten witness of the Apostles; the 2. Councel of [...] in actione 7. approves the authoritie of unwritten traditions. D. [...]ier: in the yeare 390 in his dialogue contra Lucifer: affirmes that forThe 2. co [...] cel of Nice S. Hierom [...] S. August; his part if ther were no scripture, yet the consent of the whole church were sufficient. And S. August: De baptismo contra Donatistas lib. 7. c. 53 affirmes, that which the universal church holdes, neyther is it instituted, but was ever reteyned we may judge most rightly to be delivered by the Apostles, idem epist. 86. ad [...]asul:

Yea if our adversaries testimonie is availeable in confirming a truth against themselves for us. See how Martin Luther in his22. yea our [...]a [...] adversar [...]o [...] confirm this. M. Luther. Lypsick disp. submits himself to the judgment, and determination of the holy church: and in his epist. ad Marchion [...] Brandeburg: which is to be found in his second in Germane language folio 2▪ 3. He is not ashamed to say it is an horrible thing to heare or say that which is contrarie to the uniforme testimonie of faith, and the doc­trine of the holy Catholick church that from above a thowsand with uniform consent she had kept. John Calvin in his book against Pig­ [...]iusIohn Calv. brag [...]ingly but with dissimulation affirms that he would not refuse the triall of the universall Church and warrant of tradition. Phil. Melancthon in his epist. ad Fr [...]der. Myream De locis veteris The­ol de caena Domini affirmes that it is not safe to depart from the con­sentPh: Melīc. of the ancient church, and in his epistle ad Iohannem Cratonem v [...]tatista: he confesseth that doubt in a mans conscience is a tortu­ [...]er, [Page 104] and that the vniversall consent of doctrine must prevaile for con­firming of a truth, and he graunts that the best Masters are Irenae us, Tertullian and S. Augustin that have left many monuments of truth for us, to whom they did adjoyne the rule of faith the suffrages of the learned, the consent of the Apostolicall churches, and this is that which he affirms they deduced from the Apostles or from Apo­stolicall men.

23. And not without great reasō doth God use that means both to ad e­stimatiō to his holy mysteries, & to preserve these pretious stones for the Jewellers that did know how to prise thē, that even natural rea­sonDiverse reasons whi [...] God vseth traditions hath taught, and that the very Heathen Philosophers have used, therby to adde prise and to distinguish the fitness of the auditor. Py­thagoras therfore taught his schollars rather by word of mouth & relation of others then by Dictats or writing: Gallen also lib. 2. de Anatomicis Adminiculis declares how the auncient Physitians did preserve and teach their medicines and receipts onely by verball re­lation frō one from another. Cicero 1. De legibus affirms that it is a great error in a well governed cōmon wealth to have all governedD. Hyll: supra. 2. Psal. Orig. homil: 5. Num: by written lawes. And therfore the most ancientest and famous Rab­bines and not onely they but our Hyllarius and Origen doe teach that Moses had not onely delivered him the tables of the law in the mountaigne, but also most secret and hidden mysteries, and explica­tion of the law which truth the author of the first book of Esdras doth not obscurely testifie c. 14: 5. I have declared to Moises many miracles and I sayd vnto him saying these wordes thow shalt speake o­penly,lib. 4. Esdras c. 14. v. 5and these wordes thow shalt hide; and of such secret myste­ries that of the Psal. 43. & psal. 77. Deutr 32. is to bee understood. And in regard of these hidden mysteries Dyonis. Areopag: lib. de caelest: Hierarchia [...]. 1. most diligently warnes Timothie, That he should not disclose these things to the rude people. So thatDyonis. Areopag. we see God writ in Moyses heart many thinges, that he did not write in the tables of stone; This made St. Paul to speake the bidden mysteries in secrett, and to give the little ones milk in that1. Cor. 3. 2▪ Hebr: 5. 1 [...] their weake stomackes could not brooke other meate; And yet by pour rule Mr. H. Ainsw. new borne babes like Ostreches should devour prō, in freclie reading, applying and epplicating the difficult places of scripture.

24. Now since the second and third question are so neerely confined that the ending of the one is the begining of the other; the ending of my reasons the begining of your answers; and so requiring a resu­tationThe secōd & third parts con­ [...]ined▪ of them I thought good having in generall proved the necessi­tie of tradition bes [...]des the written word, to end my second part, and with my particular proofes to begin the third poinct in interla­cing the reasons & answers & replications together in order, but both as breifly as I can.

[Page 105]25. My first Reason to prove that the written word of God withoutTHE 3. PART. 1. Ratio▪ the v [...]written word of God Tradition, and the definition of the [...]h: is not the rule of faith in summe is this

26. That which is not knowen for Gods word cannot be the rule ofMajor Minor Conclusio My Major proved. faith: But scriptures by themselves are not knowen for Gods word go scriptures by them [...]lves are not the rule of faith.

27 My Major is most certaine, since nothing can be the indeficient rul [...] of all truth revealed, and to bee revealed, but the word of the first veritie God, which is eyther the writtē word of God conteyned in the Prophets and the Apostl [...]s, or the unwritten word of God cō ­tained27. Stil it is Gods word whether it be mediat or imme­diat: spokē or written. My Miner proved. S. August▪ saying. P [...]oved al­so by Pro­testants. in Apostolical traditions, definitions of the church and the u­niforme consent of holie Councels and Fathers. For still it is Gods or a Kings word whether it be immediately spoke by himself, or by the mouth of another whom he authoriseth to speak, or whither it be in writing: And nothing else cā be unto us the rule to direct our faith except it first be knowen to be the word of God.

28 My Minor is also true proved out of S. Augustine contra episto­lam fundament: Manich: c. 5, Ego Euangelio non crederem nisi me ad haee commoveret Ecclesiae authoritas; I should not beleeve the gospel except the authoritie of the church should move me thervnto. Lanchius in his confess. c. 1. and Brentius in his Prologo Kemnitij in examine Cō ­cil. Trident. Whitak contra Stapl. lib. 2. Hooker in his Ecclesia­sticall policie lib. 1, pag. 84. et lib. pag. 200. et 142. doe all affirme that tradition of the church is necessarie to distinguish what bookes of scripture be scripture and what not. And reason it self teacheth us, since we doe not heare or see God or his knowen Prophets to write or speak this that is proposed unto us for the word of God: most cō ­venientWhat S. Pa: mean [...] by his [...]e­positum. Platform of words & phrase over & a­bove the scripture to be ob­served. it is, least we wander in infinitū in proving the word of God by the private spirit and the private spirit by the word of God, that there must be one certaine rule or depositum fidei, and therfore St. Paul to Timothie [...]. 6. ch. 20. Oh Timothee keep the depositum avoi­ding the prophane noveltie of voices, and avoiding the opposition of falsly called knowledge, which certain promising have e [...]red about faith, and what that depositum is S Paul in his 2. to Tim 1. v. 13, [...] ▪ 14▪ showes. Have thou a forme o [...] sound of words, which thou hast h [...]a [...]d of me in faith, and in the love in Iesus Christ. Keep the good depositum by the holy ghost which dwelleth in us: showing that Timothie and Christians ought to keep a certain platform of words, delivered to them over and above his epistles; which rule of words appropriated to high mysteries, and matters of our religion, as Trinitie, Person,D. Aug l. 10. de [...]iv. D [...]i c [...]3. Essence, Consubstantial, Transubstantiatiō, frō one beginning Sa­crament which the Apostle calls so [...]d words verba sana▪ [...]

29 You in [...] this my first a g [...]nēt, say that things may be be­l [...]ved though not gathred out of [...]he written word, understa [...]ng th [...]r­byHis ans to my [...]st a [...]a humane and a common beleefe. I know not what you mean by this, except you would have Gods written word onely to be b [...]le [...]v­ed [Page 106] by a humane faith. And therfore when I took you at your word and [...]athered th [...]nce, that some tradition (or as you will terme it traditum) is necessarily beleeved besides the written word. For wh [...] wee speak absolutely of beleefe in divinitie it is to be understood of a divine, and not of a humane beleefe, and when you speak of the cheef rule, you say it may be b [...]leeved without the written word, I mightI did right­ly infer out of his wordes. inferr that necessarilie it was to b [...] beleeved, since you hold that the word of God is the word of God, and that necessarily and so to be beleeved: So that you may see that your water hath rather wet your shoes, th [...]n that myne was spilt on the ground.

30. 2. Wheras you say I doe vnj [...]stly condemn your assertiō that nothing to be beleeved is necessarie for salvatiō that is not taught by the written word, I say most justly, and I convinced you of falshood sufficiently when I sayd nothing is so necessarie to salvation by you, as the written word, which word is not proved by another writtenThe writte word not proved by another written word: go▪ by traditiō. A place of script▪ pro­duced, ans. Another answered. word of God. To infirme which proofe of mine you produce two texts of scripture John. 20, 30, 31. That the signes which Iesus did, which signes are written that we may beleeve. And the 1. of Timothie [...]. 16. 17, Where all scripture is inspired of God etc. is said to be pro­fitable for doctrine, for reprehension, for correction, for instruction. &c. These places prove nothing for your purpose. The first proves not that all things or sayings of our Saviour that he did or said are written, though those signes were: for all the signes the whole world could not contayn, see a little after, S. John 21. v. 25.

31. And the second place proves no more, but that the scripture is good for these ends, but it proves not that scripture is sufficient without tradition etc. and ecclesiastical lawes to all these ends. And one might deduce out of these wordes to better reason then you, each parcel of scripture in the old and new testament were sufficient for al this without any other. So that you see I doe not fight with the holie ghost but with the perverter of the holy ghost.

32. 3. You desire me to deale distinctly and plainly with your words, I answer I hope I doe, Then you beginne to answereMr H▪ A. his first answ. how the word of God is known so to be. distinctly to my wordes, vidz. the written word is not proved by another written word. You answer first that the scriptures of God doe approve and confirme one another, and his spirit that is in them, and in all people doth seale that they are true. For proof wherof you cite the first of S. John 5, 9. The witness of God is greater, and John 8, 13. 14▪ I answer that Christ needed no testimonie for him­self. John 5, 33. But I receive no testimonie of man, meaning thatHow Christ both hath no need, & hath need of mans testimoni [...] he is greater then man & that his divinitie doth not depend of mans witness, yet for the benefit of others S. John is sayd to give testimonie of him: 1. John through the whole chapter almost: & Acts 1, 8. Christ say unto his Apostles that they shall be witness unto him, in Jerusalem, and in all Jewrie, and in Samaria; also Martyrs are sayd to be witnesses: But now we doe not say that scriptures in [Page 107] themselves needs any witness; for in actu 1. and in regard of them­selvesScriptures in actu 2. & not in 1. needs witness. they are scripture by themselves proceeding from God▪ but as they be in act 1 secundo and to be beleeved of others so they need testi­monie of others.

33. After he sees this d [...]fective he flies unto the privat spirit (though he sayes it is in all people) to unseale the authoritie of his word. For if he understand by that spirit in all people, that is of all ages, times &His 2. an­swer. persons then must he accept of those bookes of holie scripture, and of that sense and explication, that by consent of holie Councills, Fa­thers Doctors and expositors haith bene received.

34. If he vnderstand this spirit in all people virtuallie, and actuallie ifWhat he means by the [...] in all peo­ple. they doe applie themselves to the right vnderstanding thereof. This spirit by just reason they can not vnderstand, since then wee must rather beleive St. Hierome that spent all his tyme and labor retyring himself to the desert for the vnderstāding of the scriptures.

35. What must Mr. H. A. understand else then that this spirit is inThat this spirit is not in the church of Amsterda. all the illuminated brethren of the church of Amsterdam [...], and yet this can not bee well understood, since I heare Mr. H. A. stiffly maintains by the word of God with his cōpanie against Mr. John­son there and his, that this present church of England is not a scis­maticall but an haeretical church: What is then one of these cleare Eagle sight teachers blinded so in spirit that he can not discerne by the word of God what makes a church or a man haereticall?

36. But now to prove that the comparing of one place with anotherHis third Answer. (which is your other refuge) is not sufficient to distinguish what is true scripture or the true sence therof. For if it bee so to bee vnder­stoodWhat is to be under­stood by comparing one place with ano­ther. that after the collation of one place to another, that by the na­ture of the scripture compared so the true sence shall bee vnderstood; I inferr no, but rather by this comparison the difficultie is often in­creased by a seeming contradiction. If it bee vnderstood that by comparing of one that by a little and a little. If it bee vnderstood that vy comparing one place, with another by a little discourse the true sence and the scripture will be discerned; I saie mens discour­ses are verie erroneous without the especiall assistance of gods holie grace which the church of God hath promised in her defining; yeaCollatione in diverse times in the self mā often cau­seth divers judgments Hereticks have had stil this cō ­parison o [...] places. the verie selfe same man in divers times out of the self same conferē ­ces of places of scripture hath inferred divers conclusions. If you say the spirit to distinguish this is to be had by prayer. I demand where these infallible promises are to be had for these infallible illu­minations; and what more certaine whether wee praie as wee ought. And since Novatus, Donatus, Sabellius, Arrius, Cuno­mius, Macedo: Jovinianus, Pelag: Caelest: Nestorius have had for their heresies diverse texts, and cōferences with others to grownde heresies, how should one vnfallibly to their judgments overthrow them in this. For if you obiect to the Arian, I and my Father am one; he will object out of the selfe same St. John, My father is greater [Page 108] then I: If you sai [...] this by [...]llation of scripture is to be vnderstoodYour groūd not able to cō ­fute an Ar­ [...]an. in regard of his human [...] and not of his divinit [...]e. He will [...] like­wise that vnitie signified in the other place is to bee vnderstood by references of other places of scripture in regard of consent and vni [...]y of wil [...], and not of nature.

37. 2 And that the seale of your spirit can not distinguish this truth [...], yea not so much as probablie▪ I move. For frist I aske what this seale of the spirit is? Doth i [...] co [...]st onely of Gods perticular illumination that yee should have this touch­stoneWhat the seale of your p [...]it is. to discerne scripture. If so you contradict your selfe Mr. H: A: for so you grant that a man hath a divine faith, and the spirit of discerning all before he read [...]s the scriptures: for this spirit must distinguish them, and so you have built without your grounde, and guided your faith without your ruler the written word of God.His ground t [...]ach [...]th [...] m [...] be­le [...]ves be­fore he reades the scripture. Another a [...]s. of his. Calv. [...]. inst c. 7. S. [...], 2. 4 [...] [...].

38. If you answer this spirit consists in the evidence of the thing reaveled as you seeme to gra [...]nt: When you bidd me aske your proof that ther is a light in the same; seeming so with Calvin to graunt that the scriptures are distinguished by themselves, as light from dark­ness, sweetness from sowrness, this is most false, for then everie one that had but natural perfection of the organ, and free proposing of the object should distinguish this light and sweetness.

39. If yee answer this spirit consists in the authoritie of God, how will you prove this in particular to bee revealed of God, and not the other part of scripture. If you replie you can prove it by the Majestie of the writing. How will you answer and show to everie particular mans cie that there is more Majestie in Ecclesiastes then in the Ecclesiasticus? How will Luther demonstrate against the whole church that S. James epistle is strawie, the epistle to the He­brewes, Apocalyps etc. to be doubted of.

40. When I object against you that the Mani [...]h [...]i, Montanist, Arrian, Pe [...]agian, and all other hereticks will boast of this private spirit. Nou answer that I have a mist before my eyes or else I would discerne them. I answer I doe distinguish them, and leave them [...] Al heretiks doe b [...]ag of their pri­vate spirit. by the church of God to the pit of hell, but not by my private spirit, but by the ordinarie meanes the definitions and de­clarations of the church, whose office is to distinguish these spirits infalliblie; whose doctrine wee are punctuallie to follow, if wee will have in all things this spirit of truth, and with one answer I satis­fieHow I di­stinguish hereticks. the multiplicitie of places of scripture he ap [...]d vp to no purpose.

41. Wheras you would whet the edge of the Jewes sword against m [...] in that they may object against Christians the lawe and the Pro­phets,The Iewes cannot ob­ject against us the law and the Prophets. yea and antiquitie. I answer the lawe and Prophets yea antiquitie it self promising our Saviours cō [...]ing, and fulfilled by his cōming in each particular cirstumstance proph [...]ied and promi­sed, doth rebat the edge. And I could show out of the [...] [...]abbines themselves▪ S [...]hillaes prophecies preaching of S. John [Page 109] Baptist, conversion of S Paul▪ the destruction of Jerusalem, their [...]rse and continued dispersion onely to be justly inflicted on them for tru [...]fying of our Saviour; I could shew strange motives of theirGenerall motives to con [...]nce a Iew. [...] errou [...]. Neither can the Jew (as you object) as we against the [...]urk or and H [...]r [...]sie our begin [...]er, beginning, increase and de­clyning estate. For the Jewes can show our beginner their Messias, our beginning he buriall of the cer [...]monial law prophe [...]ied and per­formed by all titles of truth, but who can justly shew our declining estate.

42. Neyther is the objection of a Jew against a new Christian be­cause he went out of them of such force as our is against Jul [...]an or a­ny other Apostata. For they cannot defend themselves with any show of truth as we can defend our cause with evident motives of [...]r [...]dibilitie, as I shall hereafter show. And Julian might object that Paganism [...] is more ancient then Christianiti [...]: but not then the [...] law, which was compleat and [...]erfected as it was pro­phecied and promised, by the coming of the new lawe. Where you say Gods word and spirit in the scriptures must be the bulwark, I answer a bulwark, but not able to defend you from gun shot, and a s [...]onse onely for your selves. For as yet there was never any of your sects, protestant or any other heretit [...] that was able to convert any nation to their religion: But men of our religion haue converted all nations & doe still convert as well witnesseth both the Judges, Ja­ponia yea and C [...]ina it self.

43. I showed you one way how the high preisthood did not erre in the cond [...]mnation of our Saviour, in that the Preisthood was [...] ­servedHow the high preist hood did not [...] in Christ Jesus person. True it is the Hipghpreists, Scribes; & Rulers questioned this, but their ignorance was most vi [...]ible by their own lawe, and by that lawe he should live, since that law decla­red him to be the sonne of God.

44. Against your forced rock, and running over many wr [...]sted places of scripture to prove the church of God invisible, it were sufficient for me to oppose many evident and clear places of scripture interpreted by the holy fathers Greek and Latin for the pepetuall visibilitie of the church. 2. [...]. [...]. v 13. 1. Pa [...]l. 22, 10. Psal 4 [...], 17 Psal. 45, 5. Psal. 47. 9. Psal. 86. 1. Psal. 88, 29 Psal. 101, 17. Ps. 128, 1. Psal. 131, 14. Cant. 3▪ 4. Isa. 9, 7. Isa. 33, 20. where the perpetual flourishing of the church of God is described Isa. 40, 8.Many pla­ces o [...] [...]ol [...] scripture to prove the visibi­litie of the church. Isa. 59, 21. Isa. 60, [...]9 where it is said the Sun and Moon of the church shall not cease: Jer. 6 16. Dan. 2 44. Ose. 2, 19. where God is described to espouse eternally his espouse unto him. Mich, 4, 1. wher the church is described to be a high seated mountain to whom all people have recourse. Mat. 5, 15. where the citie seated on a hil can not be obscured. Math 26. 18. where the church is described to be built upon a rock against which hell gates shall not prevaile. 28. Math. 2. Our Saviour sayes he will be with his disciples to the end [Page 110] of the world Lu [...] 1, 32. Lu [...]. 21. 32. Luk. 22, 31. Where Christ sayes he prayed for S Peter that his faith should not fail him. Joh. 14. 1 [...]. He sayes the father shall give them another spirit which shall remaine with them eternally. John 17, 11. Act. 5, 38. Ephe. 4, 11. yea and the Creed made by the Apostles doth acknowledge the perpetuall flourishing of the church of God. I beleeve the catholick church: whose generalitie can not stand without visibilitie▪

45 I answer to your contrarie doctrine that the church of GodThat the church of God hath never er­red. Adā did not err in doctrine & if he did a­gainst our adversaries owne grounds. never since it was a church hath erred. If Genes. 6. ther was then a church, Adā the head did err in fact not in doctrine, & if we should graunt that he did err our adversaries are bound as wel as wee to answer, since not onely the visible church then with us, but the invi­sible church with them should have erred: But true it is that thers was then no perfect church, but onely a materiall, and a formall be­ginning of a church.

46. To that of Gen. 6. where all their harts are described to be set on mischeef, is not to be understood that all then were naught. For not long before M [...]husalem and divers holy men died Sem & J [...]phet also were zealous of Gods honour, and their wives also most religious, in whom the church of God might be preserved.

47. I answer also. In the time of Moses, Aaron and the peo­ple did commit idolatrie in worshipping the golden [...]alfe; yet MosesMoses & al the Levites free frō [...] ­dolatrie. the head of all; and all the Levites were free from that sinne. So that wee read Erod. 32. If there be any of God (sayes Moses) let him jo [...]ne with mee, and all the sonnes of Levi were gathered vnto him.

48. I answer, In the time of Judges after Josh. The IsraelitesIudg. 2. How the word all is to be un­derstood. In what sense Elias was said to be left a­lone. are described as though they had sinned al; which is an usual figura­tive speech of Sy [...]echdoche of the whole for the part, as Exod. 9▪ 6. wher it is sayd all the beasts of Egypt are dead. Isa. 2. v.▪ All nations shal flow unto him. Phil. 2, 21. All men seek their own, Ioh. 3. v. 33. And no man did receive his testimonie.

49. To that of the Prophet Elias 3. Reg. 19. where Elias com­plaines that he is left alone. I answer that then the people were di­vided into two kingdomes, the one of the Jewes, and the other of the Israelites. A [...]hab did govern the Israelites, but holy Josaphat did govern the Jewes; the one did destroy altars and kill Prophets, the other did heare Prophets & erect altars. And though we should graunt that Elias did think himself left alone in Israel; yet Almigh­tie God did answer him; I wil leave 7. thowsand men in Israel that have not bowed their knees to B [...]al

50. I answer that Esay the Prophet in his first chapter dooth use the self same fi [...]ure of Syn [...]hd [...]che; also the self same manner of speech is vsed the 4. [...]eg. 21. For Manasses himself did r [...]pent and redeeme m [...]nn, and many were never seduced; so understand that al­so of the Prophet here.

51. That of which Azarias dooth prophetise 2 Paral. 15. is to [Page 111] be understood of the Israelites that were dificient, and not of the Jewes that were constant. I graunt also that at the cōming of our Saviour the church was but a little one: yet I say it was preserved in Marie, Joseph, Zacharie, Elizabeth and Anna the Prophetess; In just Simeon and the Pastors.

52. That of Daniel the 9. the host and sacrifice shall faile is to be understood of the destruction of Hierusal [...]m, and the c [...]ing of the Jewish sacrifice, Luk. 18. Our Saviour doth not absolutely speak of faith but of an external faith; and of an excellent faith. 2 Thes. 2. Is to be vnderstood the particular departing of Antichrist and his [...]rew from the church. And so by these grounds to the usual objecti­ons against the perpetuall visibilitie of Gods church, wee may an­swer any thing that hath bene or may be produced.

53. Yet to confirm this truth with one short reason, I argue thus.A breif r [...] so that the ch: of God is and hath been stil [...] visible. This church of God if it must be invisible: Eyther it must begin to be invisible in the time of peace or in the time of persecution; in the time of peace there was no opposition to make her invisible; in the tyme of persecution no bodie could persecute an invisible thing.

54. Now wheras you sayd you show how the labyrinth of my religi­on leadeth to the Pope the center of our circle. True it is I sayd the vltimate resolution of our religion is to be resolved into the veracitie of God revealing as into the formal caus [...], and into the authoritie of the church as into the applying [...]ause. And I am glad you have tra­ [...]ed me not to your heretical quicksands but to S. Peters rock.

55. And that you may see the resolution of my religion is no other but that of S. Cyprian lib de unitate Eccles. where he compares [...]ouThe resolution of my religiō the same with S. Cypr. in regard of the church of Rome as Beames in regard of the sun, as boughes in regard of the tree; as a river in regard of the fountayn. So that he concludes he that separates himself from the church of God he must needs vanish, fade and drie up, in that they lack their origen by which all unitie is preserved▪

55. I gave you 2 or three instances to show how the word of God might in a divers kind depend of the Church, and the church of theHow the word of God & the Church may dep [...] word of God, as we prove the self same a priori et a posteriori, the operation of the stone or herb depends of the skil and knowledge of the herbalist and lapidarie, and their skil and knowledge depends of the innated and inward proprietie of the stone and herbe. For ney­ther can have his effect without mutual help of both, except chance which is no regular action be the applier; and so I take you have thalked your self a way to a ridiculous building without foundatiō as I shall shew anone.

56. You answer nothing to this but that I prove out of natu­ral philosophie as though divinitie though it excels is not concor­dant to natural reason: whereas we can beleeve nothing that we see implies by the light of naturall reason.

57. To the places that you object of the 1. of Timoth. 1, 3. ra­ther [Page 112] proves against you then makes for you. For it showes all the while that she did not reach otherwise to the church she remain­ed sound. And that which you cite 1. Tim 3, & 15. would make you trest salue if you did daily consider it. For there he warnes her that she might conforme her conversation to the house of God the pillar of truth; And though the text sayes in the house of God; yet it must be understood in the particular church that must have reference to that place (as wee shall prove hereafter) where S. Peter did esta­blish his chaire. Ioh. 14, 16. Mat. 16. Math. 28 Ephes. 4, Ioh. 17. Luc. 22. Psal. 2. Eph [...]s. 2.

58. When you seeme to drawe out of my speech that I denie for my witness the spirit of God is your error and fraude. For I holdI doe not deny for my witness the spirit of God. that which is taught out of these places 1 Cor▪ 2. 10, 11. Iob. 28, 2 13, 22. &c. to signifie nothing else but that the holy Ghost teacheth the church in all truth, and her members with reference to her; and my private spirit I ought not to follow; so that if I might be your Pilote I would save you from that bottomlesse gulphe that ghaspes to receive your erroneous soule.

59. St. Augustines authoritie you let slip denying him a fit Maister to follow, you say he might retractate this; but neither you doe nor can show that he did retractate it.

60. As for S. Augustines opposition to S. Hierome, it was in some smal matter, and not in a matter defined vp the consent of the church.

61. My second Argument was this in substance.

Major. That which is hard and for occurring places almost in­explicable cannot be to the rud▪ & ignorant at least a certain ground of faith. Mmor. But the scriptures of themselves are thus.

Conclusion. go the scriptures by themselves can not bee a cer­taine and infallible rule of saith to the ignorant and rude at least

62. My major propositiō is most certain. For a rule must be known and certaine, and more fit to our capacitie to bee conceived then that which is to be ruled and certefied therby.

63. My Mmor also I prove both in regard of many seeming contradictions, of the Hebraimes, nature of things therin contained being high misteries.

64. In answering of this Argument, you say some thinges are hard in the scriptures, I proved this difficultie and hardnes was inThe diffi­cultie and hardness of th [...] scrip­tures in principal matters. principal matters which I proved out of the second of S. Peter 3. 16. Our most deare brother Paul according to his wisdome given h [...]m hath written to you as also in all his epistles speaking of them in these things, in which are certain thi [...]gs hard which the unlearned & unstable deprave, as also the rest of th [...] scr [...]p [...]ures to their own destructio. Hence is gathered that not on ly the places of S. P [...]ul touchi [...]g vocation, justification, sanctification, predestination and [...]pr [...]bation in [...]p [...]i­cating [Page 113] which pointes S. Paul is most frequent, but also any other place is subject to be depraved as the word implies as also the rest of the scriptures. And S. August. in his book de fide et operibus c. 14, showes that one of the cheife matters they did deprave was about justifying by faith. And I showed you here as erring a little in someParvus er­ror in prin­cipio mag­nus est in fine. mathematical instrument, makes a mans sight and judgment quite contrarie as appeareth in the vse of the Astrolabe or crosse staffe: So I say the least error in any of these transcendental doctrinal points doth shake the whole body of beleef.

65. You say the matters are hard, but the places that treats of them are easie, as though in such short wordes of poincts that de­sireHis answer refuted. so many hundred quires of paper to examine them they can be easie; as though the wordes doe not befit the matter. And that not onely the matter, but that also the manner of penning is difficult ap­peares out of S Augustin 2. lib. de doctrina Christ. et epist. 119, and S. Ambrose epistola 44 in principio acknowledgeth the difficulties he had to understand the manner of writing of scripture: And S. Hier: to Paul: epist. 103. c. 5. 6, 7. et epist. 65. c. 1. confesseth that in his old age when rather he should teach then be taught he went asNot onely the matter but the manner of proving is difficult. farr as Alexandria onely to heare Didymus, and to have his help to understand the scriptures. And S. Augustin in his epistle 119. c. 21. acknowledgeth that there were more things he understood not then that he did understand.

66. That of Proverb. 8, 8. 9. is to be understood eyther of general doctrine or of precepts of maners and good life, and so Gods words are easie: which explication we give you as a iewel unto your hand to that cited of you Prover. 17, 16. Wherfore is ther price in the hand of a fool. &c.

67. Then you seem ingeniously to graunt the scriptures to be hard but you instance that the determinations of the Pope doth make thē harder. You say Exod. 20. Deut. 25, 15. Images are absolutely and plainly prohibited here: But I deny it and prove that idols areThe brasen serpent be­fore an i­mage be­came an idol. onely here prohibited, and not images. Which that of the brafen serpent proves that as long as it was an image it was erected, and kept by Gods commandement, but when it grew to be an idol, when the people began to adore it as God (as S. August notes in his 10. lib. de civitat. Dei c. 8.) Ezechia [...] 4. Regū. 18. broke it into peeces. And that of the 2. of Cor. 6, proves as much; [...] that place can not be understood of images but of idole, for the temple was a­dorneda. Cor. 6, 16▪ with Cherubins which were images. And therefore it must be read How agreeth the Temple of God with idolls, and not with ima­gesOur adver­saries igno­rance like that of the Moabites & [...]. as you commonly read and translate. But I [...] you as S. Ierom sayes in c. 25. Eze. of the [...] and [...] that were idolatrous Gentiles, that comm [...] of [...] and seing the propitiatorie shadowed over [...] Cherubims, [...] as the Gentiles so Judah also hath [...] then religion [Page 114] they putting no more difference between the Gentiles heathenish idols and the Jewes lawful images then you.

68. As for your wilfull error in citing of Cardinal Bellarmines probable opinion as the determination of the Pope, I must much blame you: But you may know that both his opinion, and the dif­ferent opinion of Ga: Dasques are both probable in schooles.

As for the subtile and most true distinction, of the worship of Latria,Latria. Dulia.Dulia and Hyperdulia must needes seem strange and insipidd to him that never tasted peradventure one grain of the salt of the Universi­ties, or one line of the schoolmen.

69. Yet here you take upon you like a great [...]abbin that I say the Pope cannot make of himself a matter of faith, but that he onely declareth what is a matter of faith, and that such a thing is to be be­leeved. It is well you say that I hold me here. But then you infer [...] that the Pope can doe no more then other Bishops; and Peters prima­cie will be no more then Pauls which you prove 1. Cor. 4, 1. So let aAll the A­postles a­like in pow­er of order but not in jurisdictiō.man esteeme us as the Ministers of Christ, & the dispensers of the myste­ries of God: I answer they be all alike in power of order but not of jurisdiction, and in a juditiall determination to settle controver­sies in the Church of God: which appeareth in that in the councel of Chalcedon that had determined the matter controverted, and 630. Bishops having subscribed, the Popes Legates being also present in that Councell having defined and judged with the rest, what neededThe Popes confir­mation of the Coūcel of Ch [...]lc. required. contra he­reticum Eutich. then a solemne ratification by the Popes own letters to confirm the Councell, but that the Emperor and other Bishops did acknowledg a soveraigne power above all other particular Bishops. See Leo e­pistle 61. et in epist: ad Martianum Imperatorem 59. where he sayes Constitutionibus synodalibus &c. Unto the constitution of the Coun­cell which hath pleased me both for the confirmation of the catholick faith, and for the condemnation of the hereticks I have added my verdiet. And this verdict or sentence was not a bare consent, but a judiciall confirmation, and ratification of the Councel, appeareth out of his letters sent the self same time unto the Empress PulcheriaThis was a judicial cō ­firmation. saying, Wheras the most godly Emperor hath willed me to direct my letters to the Bishops present at the Councell of Chalcedon; qui­bus quae illic de fidei sunt regula definita firmarem, by which I should confirm such things as have bene there defined touching the rule of faith I have gladly fulfilled his request.

70. And he addeth this reason immediately; Ne fallax cujusdam simulatio sententiam meā vellet habere incertam, To the intent that no man by any deceiptfull dissembling may take my verdict or sen­tence herein uncertaine, To the intent that no man by any deceiptful dissimbling may take my sentence or verdict herein uncertaine.

71. So also the Affricane Bishops having discussed the heresie of Pela [...]ius and [...] sent their definition therein to the See Apostolicke to be confirmed by Silvester, and the Councell of Con­stantinople [Page 115] by Damasus & the Councel of Ephesus by [...]aelestinus.Diverse Councel [...]s confirmed by Popes. Doth not all this Mr. H. A. prove to you that the prerogatives of the Pope in defining and ratefying any thing is above al other Bi­shops, which privileges al ages would not have given, but that they did see as s. Peter had primacie over the other Apostles, so his succes­sor must have over other Bishops.

72. And to showe this I will folow the thread of your matter, [...] not the manner of your discourse that in the interim is farced up with fowle mouthed slaunders (as I shall touch anone). The nextAct. 15. a­gainst M. H▪ A. page you begin to examine that of the 15. of the Acts of the Apostles alleged by me as a congruencie to argue S. Peters primarie, v. 7. Peter rose up, showing therby that he was head of the Church. Wher first you show your wilful fraude, in that you would have me gather his superioritie by his bare rising up. Where I gathered rather by the due circumstances that passed there in that place. For the text sayes, when there was made a great disputation Peter rising up sayd to them, you know that of old dayes God amongst us chose that the Gentils by my mouth should heare the word of the Gospel and beleeve. In which chapter first we may note by the way verse 6. that the Apo­stles and auncients assembled to consider of this word, which place [...]ō ­futes your proceedings that would have all men to give their voice and to be present in Councel, which is the place of the Apostles and auncients, and not of many others though holie men that were at Jerusalem, according to that of Deut. 17. Malach. 2. Agge 1, 2▪ Lur. 10. 16. where the sentence of the Preist is sayd to settle that which is hard difficult & doubtful; must keep the law, must be heard as God.

73. 2. I note the 7. verse that when there was made a great dis­putationNote. ech partie producing his reasons, and arguments for their assertion. S. Peter rising up and speaking by his authoritie com­posed that great disputation, that is settled the height of their differēce which argues superioritie. For what decorum or manners were it, if two Doctors of like authoritie disputing, the third of the same or of lesse authoritie as Calvin would have, should stop the current of their disputation, when it touched the point of the difficultie, when there was a great disputation, when their reasons as the text both not obscurely note were in aequi librio unsettled, whē there was made a great disputation. So that we see it is a signe of great authority to speak so first as to interrupt the great disputation to prefixe an end, to firme a definition to the proposed question.

74. As for that which you object out of the 13. and 19. verse frō The 19, v. examined. that of S. James giving sentence from the scriptures sh [...]wes that out of your partial affection you would be content to give with Cal­vin primacie to S. James so to derogate from St. Peters and the Popes authoritie. Whē nothing else cā be inferred out of S. James but that which S. Hierome epist. 12. inter epistolas Aug: inferro, & that which is implied in the 12. verse et tacuit omnis multitudo, and [Page 116] all the multitude held their peace showing thereby the power of hisS. Hieron. decision, and that as Saint Hier: inferrs S. James and all the A­postles did passe. Who wil not then acknowledge a general autho­ritie in him that with his sentence composeth different suffrages and motives.

75. That which S. James speakes verse 15. and 16. is nothing else but a confirmation or an explication of S. Peters sentence. FirstAlso v. 15. 16. Act. 15. he approves S. Peters vocation mentioned by S. Peter, by the tes­timonies of the Prophets, and nextly he doth as to win the goodwil of the Judaizing Christians moderate that sence of S. Peter, that would have all legal ceremonies removed; that so they might take that speech better at his hands then at S. Peters, S. James being their Bishop of Hierusalem he expoūds that which he thought most conventent to be done: And the whole Councel and not onely Sainct James promulgates & determines that decree. So that we see theThe reason why S. Iames did speak. definition of the principal question is onely S. Peters and the pru­dential Councel to the setling of the busynes to each parties liking is onely S. James.

76. But presently after to signifie his willingnes to say something, he objects that Peters sitting still would rather argue authority thē his rising up: To which I answer that admitting most true it were his sitting doth argue his authoritie as well as his rising up: and S. Peters judiciall and attentive hearing the debating of the questi­on till there was a great disputation, and then being noted to begin to rise that to rising the heat of disputation comming to head, and the disputers vehemencie requiring a period, that he beganne then toS. Peter did not speak risen but rising. rise argue preheminencie of authoritie. And it is not sayd that he did speak these words risen, but when he was rising: what have you then concluded.

77. But on goes our subtil disputer to prosecute his great doubt, and argues out of the 5. of the Acts 34. where Gamaliel is sayd to rise up in the councel of the Jewes v. 34. But here he conceals what the Church distinguisheth calling him a Doctor of the Lawe and so signifying that it was his office as Doctors that be Cardinals doeWhy Ga­maliel rose up. in the Popes conclavi to cramine matters by way of argument, and not to determine and define; then he conceals the immediate cause of his rising up including a farr inferior office then that of the head, v. 35. to cōmaund the men to be put forth & onely a while to signifie that he spake rather like a freind then like a judge. And that Gama­liel did secretly favour the Apostles then, the very wordes of the textGamaliel spoke ra­ther as a [...]ind then as a judge. teacheth and notes how your doctrine not grounded on God and reasons as yours s [...]l come to ruine, he bidds them take heed what they mean to doe with these men, showing that Th [...]as and foure hundred men, Judas and his companie that followed all perished: and here inferring that they should leave to persecute them. For if their work were not of God, of it self it would come to ru [...], as all o­ther [Page 117] heresies and sects have and shall, so that we see the text cited by you is the pronouncer of your own ruin.

78. And that Gamaliels sentence was rather a favorable per­swasion then a chief Judges resolution appeares that howsoever heGamaliel did use ra­ther a fa­vorable perswasion then a de­finitive sen­tence. was a pollitike statesman, yet he was a secret favourer of the Apo­stles and their preaching. For he did procure S. Stephens burial 20 myles from Jerusalem as B: Lucianus Martyr notes in the invention of the bodie of S. Stephen. Also he receives and nouri­seth Nicodemus when he was spoiled and expelled by the Jewes, & buried him there by S. Stephen as B: Lucianus testifieth.

79. And that which you bring out of the 17. of the Acts 16▪ ra­ther hinders then furthers your purpose, since we may gather that as S. Paul being intreated by the princes of the synagogue verse 15 to preach, took upon himself without any more to doe, rising up andAct. 17, 16. makes a­gainst him. with his hand beckening for silence, showes there that he was the cheife preacher, so S. Peter rising and composing their controversie shewes that in that kind he was the cheefe. So that we see we have woven the webbe to intangle flies of your own kind.

80. That which you bring before out of the 2. of Peter v. 20 ci­ted by me thus, No prophecie is made by privat interpretation, you call but doe not prove it a bastard phrase, showing that such ill befit­ting termes proceedes from a bad conscience. Your glosse Ephes.His simili­tude a­gainst him self. 4, 4. Rom. 12, 4. 1 Cor. 12, 4. v. 8, 9. urges against your selfe. For though there is the very self same soule in the head and foot, and in each part, yet it worketh otherwise in the head then in the foot; as the spirit in the cheese of his Church, then his members; so as it is the office of the head to decyde busyness, and not of the foot, so it be­longs unto the head of the church and not to every particular crafts­man to interpret scriptures; and verse 21 the self same doctrine is ex­plicated in that it is sayd, For not by mans will was prophecie brought at any tyme, but the holy men of God spake inspired by the Holy Ghost, showing that the self same spirit whrewith they were writtē and re­sident in the church must interpret scripture. And that you ought not condemne (as you doe) the uniforme consent of all the fathers of all ages and nations. Thus dooth Mr H. A. as a boie hoodwin [...]kt at blindman buffe belabor himself and his own fellowes in stead of his adversaries.

81. And that which I bring for congruencie for the primarie of S. Peter Act 15, ver: 7. where he would gather that if the Gentiles were chosen by his mouth to heare the gospel that he was chosen al­so to preach unto them: his inference is nothing to the purpose since we graunt the Popes primacie is from God and not of the election of men.The First▪ of Pope Stephen examined.

82. I graunt that Pope Stephen the 7. called Stephen 6 did revoke many decrees (which yet are not definitions of Pope For­mosus in the yeare 89. But this argues onely a violence in fact, and [Page 118] not an error in doctrine, and faith. And hence I inferr that it ar­gues an essential assistāce of the holy Ghost that could mainteyn his church though in the hand of the bad, water the gardē of the church through stonie water pipes, make his arke of Noe to fl [...]ate though in the tempestuous flood Genes. 7, 8. mainteyn his church against hell gates. But all that can be opposed herein doth not prove that the Pope. Stephen did this as the head of the church, but out of the violence of his private spirit, which appears in that Sigebertus notes that all that were with him reclaimed from that violent pro­ceeding. And in the Councel he did approve onely of his fact, being flattered by factious Cardinals Sergius Benedictus & Martinus.

83 Note also that at this unaccustomed course of the Pope the corporal church of Lateran fel down, and the Images of the church where Pope Formosus body was intombed did salute Formosus as Luitiprandus lib. 1. c. 8. witnesseth. And though I graunt thatPope For­mosus wit­nessed for a holy man Pope Stephen was a wicked man in the course of his privat spirit, yet we may see the great respect that Fulco the Arch B: of [...]hemes did humblie and submissively salute him, which was not in regard of his particular defects but as he was head of the church. In which respect S. John the 9 that condemneth him and his compli­ces, yet calles him Pope of happie memorie. All which motives makes a strong argument for us, that since of so many Popes so few could be ta [...]ed (though most of them unjustly of our adversaries) yet for all the wickednes of some God hath still preserved the vnitie of faith; that although all the other sees have had many hereticks that have governed. Yet the sea of Rome had never any that by his defi­nitive sentence did define heresie. And we have read of an Arrian Bishop promoted to the see of Rome that he might defend Arianism, yet he being elected to that sea he did condemne that heresie.

84. The Canonists that you cite, as to extend the power of the Pope above the lawe of God, no doubt are falsly understood or ci­ted; But to disprove them in each particular I cannot, in that I am not so wel read in the canon lawe; and if I were I am in prison, and have not commoditie of bookes, and to send for 10. or 12. great vo­lumes to look 3 or 4 places that I assure me are eyther falsly allea­ged or injuriously applied, will not quit cost, especially since I con­vince you of one especial untruth hereafter where you say the Cano­u [...]sts call and esteeme the Pope our Lord God the Pope.

85. But di [...]urnished of bookes as I am I thought good to let the authour to the protestant pulpit babell, that hath no doubt seene & pondered the decretalls answer you, that on credit of some crackt & cracking Crashaw that ingrosses such babels for whole sale, whose citation or such like you are glad to re [...]le.

86. For that which the author cites out of Decret 40▪ in appen­diceDecret. 40▪ examined. ad c. 6. The wordes of our Countreyman Boniface, famous for sanctitie of life and justly called the Apostle of Germanie. Where he [Page 119] setts down rather a historie then a decree of doctrine, a matter of fact rather then a doctrinall definition. True it is he sayes men ra­ther sought instruction from the mouth of the Bishops then from mouth of holy scriptures, and tradition. Yet to show how farr heBoniface no flatt [...] ­er of the Pope. was from flatterie, he showes that as the Pope may doe most good, so he is eternally scourged with the Divill himself, if he draw by his exāple others into hell. So that wee see he showes rather what was done thē what should be done. As if a māshould say such a mā is his Master, it followes not that he should approve the unnaturall mai­stership. Yea S. Boniface was so farr from preferring the Pope before God, that in the self same canon he teacheth the contrarie in eadem appendice ad cap. 6. dist. 40. Where he affirmes Christianitiead [...] 6. di­stinct▪ [...]. doth depend of the Pope in secundo loco post De [...] in the second place after God.

87. And wheras Decretum distinct. 19. [...]. 6▪ where it is sayd that the decretalls are numbred amongst canonicall scriptures; that is to be understood in regard of the canonicall writings of the Councels, and not in regard of canonicall writings of the scriptures, in which sense both the begining, bodie, and end of the book showes that Cre­tian speaketh.

88. As for that M. H. A. writes that the Pope can dispence a­gainstHow the P. dispenseth against the law of na­ture in som sense. the lawe of nature, you must know that things may be pro­hibited by the lawe of nature after a threefold manner. First when there is a prohibition of a thing intrinsecall ill in it self, and that by no circumstance it may be made good, as to hate God or to lie; and this is indispensable to the Pope. 2. Other things are intrinsecall ill and prohibited till some matter or circumstance be changed, as to steal in extreame necessitie, or to kill and execute by publick authori­tie; and in these the Pope can dispence according to the cessatiō of the matter or mutation of the circumstance: 3. Things in their nature may be commonly ill, yet for the publick good there may be given some dispensation, and so the Pope dooth dispense in mariages: if you would have satisfaction to what accurring doubt soever there­in read, Sanches de Matrimonio.

My third Argument as I remember was this. That which [...] ▪ My third Argumen [...] hath still been a rule to them that have erred, cānot be a certain rule to direct all in faith: But the scripture interpreted by the privat spi­rit (as every one pretends given from God) hath led many into dan­gerous & most horrible errors, go the scriptures though directed by the private spirits interpretatiō cannot be a rule of faith. My major is most certaine. My Minor is also certainely knowen, since ther was never yet any heresie so absurd or monstrous, that did not pre­tend to vse for his weapon cited places of scripture, and their colla­tions as the Arrians, Pelagians, Semipelagians, Lutheranists & Calvinists, go that private spirits interpretation cannot be a certain [Page 120] rule to all.

90▪ To this Argument▪ you saie I have put to much strength, but you say I have not whet the edge. All that you can bring a­gainst me is that you saie you can retort it on the private spirit of the Popes determinations and definitions: but you can not deme but that the chur [...]h hath more promises, and so consequently her visible head as I shall prove. And so I see howsoever you would not be cut with the edge, you care not much to admit a fore bruife byM. H. A. contented to be drie beaten. the blowes. And it is the greatest disgrace a man can have still to be drie beaten as you confesse you are and are sure to be; But for your virtuall retorsion I shall actually answer you in his due place.

91. That you object out of the 1. Cor. 11, 19. Act. 15. 1, 2. Act. 15, 15, 16. etc. proves rather that there must be one visible supreme judge to decide controversies. As for your calumniations they are most proper to men of your coat, and ranck: and when time, place, and paper wil scarse give sufficiēt vent to our reasons I wonder you should blow abroad these glassy bubbles breathed against the Sea Apostolick. But the best that you can answer is that they will serv your children of Amsterdam to run after. I never return your jestsThe uni­form con­sent of the church may easilie distinguish whether scriptures [...] [...]acked. but provoked by you. Where you say that counsels and Fathers may be racked to favour heresie as well as the scriptures I deney that they can be, but that the vniforme and generall consent of the church may easily distinguish them.

92. My Fourth Argument as I take was this.

THere be many things we beleeve by a divine, and not by a hu­maine art of faith which are not revealed in holy scripture, nor with such evidēce deduced out of holy scriptures (if you exempt the authoritie of the church. My antecedent I proved by instances; that we beleeve against Helvidius our Ladies perpetuall virginitie;Many thinges beleeved not expressed in the [...]. that God the holy Ghost proceedes from God the Father and the sonne as from one beginning; the twelve articles of our beleefe as they [...]e; the abstayning from strangled meat, baptising of infants, relebration of the Sabaoth on Sunday and not on Satterday, the receiving fasting and kneeling [...]c. All which I did urge against you. You answer you have sufficient proof of these things that ar of faith; but you show neither scripture, or denie them to be beleeved with a divine a [...]t of faith, or give reason why we practise other things out of scripture contrarie to the practise of the primitive church.

93. And when I have twice or thrise desired a distinct answerThat [...] [...]o ea [...] particular, you would satisfi [...]e with your marvaile that I would have you enter battaile with the Arrians. Anti-Trinitari­ans [...] and have you convince them by scriptures. And with great reason I prove I urge this: For since you adventure to assigne an ad [...]quate rule of faith, you are bound to show me how this rule of yours is able to mainteyne it self against whosoever, and to distin­guish truth from falshood, as I offer to doe by my assigned rule: So [Page 121] that this is not to put on foot new questions, but it is properly [...] presse the footing of our cheife questions answer.

94. You proceed and would have me to mainteyne Tradition to be the totall and not the partial rule of faith togither with the writ­ten word of God. Hence you inferr that I graunt some word ofIntri [...]secal he the word of God is so of it self▪ but to bee knowen of us it de­pends of the traditi­on of the Church. God without tradition to be knowen. I answer the word of God as it is extrinsecall the word of God and to be knowen of vs depends of tradition, and the authoritie of the church. Though in­trinsecallie and in it self it is the word of God though it be knowen to none; so that you may see in what sense I make tradition to be the rule of faith, and apostolicall tradition also I affirme to be also the word of God though unwritten.

95. Here make you a long digression, and you show what acts kept by tradition are to be kept, and to be remembred to children, & after ages; as you say to see the destruction of Rome, but we knowe certainly the opposers by their oppositiō, will work themselves their destruction, and confusion of their Babylon. And we know that Balaam in stedd of cursing Gods people did blesse them. John Fox was your Nabucodonosor turned so out to grasse that he durst not come neare the wall (by reason of a deep mellancholie apprehension for feare of being crased like an vrinall.) As for the spanish Armadoe whatsoever the Spaniards intended to doe here in England, our Countrymen did performe much at Cales, howsoever they ded speed at Lisborne before. I answer onely this, God and St. George for my religion, King, and Countreymen. I would doe that which be­fitted a good subject, but these your instances are malitious and o­dious.

96. To that plaine place 2. Thes 2. v. 15. Therefore brethren stand and hold the traditions which you have learned whether it be by word of mouth or by epistle. This place is so playne that S. Chry­sost: affirms S. Paul herein to have meant of unwritten traditions, that Doct. Whitaker sayes his speech is herein very unworthy so holy a father. And that which you bring out of S Chrysostom a­gainst me, showes that all sufficient precepts of manners and good life are set down in scripture. That which you bring out of the 26. of the Acts 22, we say that in tradition nothing is spoken besides that is contrarie to the Apostles speeches. As for that which you bring the 1. of the Cor. 14, 37. is nothing to the purpose. For we doe not deny but those things that are written are true. But if you would have more plain places of scripture in defense of tradition, [...]s the 15. of the Acts 41. Where he in confirming of the church com­mands them to keep the precepts of the Apostles, and what precepts S Paul meanes he explaines himself chap. 16. v. 4. He delivered unto them to keep the decrees that were decreed of the Apostles, and aunci­ents that were at Hierusalem, which deliverie without question were by word of mouth, what these decrees were it is uncertain by scrip­tura, [Page 122] though they may be kept by the help of tradition.

98. The fourth thing that I am to show is to prove how you walkTHE FOVRTH PART. in a vitious circle, proving the selfe same by the selfe same, as the au­thoritie of the scripture by your private spirit, and your privat spirit by the authority of the scripture, by which manner of proof you may prove any thing.

99▪ For first and formost you doe not distinguish what are scrip­tures and what are not, by the authoritie of the church. For so you should admit of all that she dooth receive, and if ye reject any thing that she hath doubted of you should as well as yow refuse those bookes called Deutrocanonici of the old Testament, you should as well reject those Deutrocanonici of the new testament as the epistle to the Hebrewes, Judas epistle and the Apocalyps, but the touch of your triall is the private spirit, and the unction not of the holy Ghost, but of an addle head, and a self conceipted phancie.

100. And that you like a blind baiard walk in this round though you may apprehend you have gone many a mile; and to show thatMr. M. A. walkes in a circle. you have confined your selfe in the selfe same circle I prove.

101. For first I aske how you know the scripture of the Prophets and Apostles is Gods word; you answer the spirit of God, the testi­fication and witness of the spirit, the annointing of the spirit doe te­stifieIoh. 15, 16. Ioh. 16. 14. Ioh. 3. 9. 11 to you that they are written by God. But then againe I de­maund how you prove that you have that spirit of God this spi­rituall annointing.

You answ. what mā knoweth what is in him but the spirit of God that is in him 1. Cor. 2. He answers again that he can make no proofHere it is proved that he doth pete­re principium. of that to another that is onely knowen to himself; & againe no man knoweth how the wind bloweth, or knowes how the bones do grow in the wombe of a woman, Eccles. 11, 5. it is the spirit that testifies 1. Joh. 5, 6. So that we see you prove the scripture by your private spirit, and your spirituall annointing, and you prove you have this spirit by the scripture. As if a child should prove he were no bastard, in that his mother sayes so, and she likewise prove that she her selfe were honest in that he saies so: Or prove the Church of Amsterdam to be a true church, in that the Amsterdamian spirit interpreting the scripture saies so. And that the Amsterdamian spirit is a true spirit, in that the Amsterdamiā spirit sayes so. So I demand of you how you doe know the scripture to be Gods word, you answer out of theMr H. A. walkes in a circle. testificatiō of the holy ghost; And how you know the internal testificatiō is frō God, you answer likewise out of the scripture interpre­ted by the Spirit. My sheep heares my voice, and how doe you know how it is the scripture? You answer by the testification of theJo. 10. 27. inward spirit, so that we see your discourses like puppets have their motiō frō one string, & speak by the mouth of the same interpreter.His dis­course is unprofita­ble.

102. But now to show the falshood and unprofitablenes of your circular discourse, I demand what you hold the testification of the inward spirit to be. For you must hold that it proceeds from God, [Page 123] as wel as your inward habit or act of faith: and then againe I askeMr H. A. to solution circular, fruitless & endlesse. whether you be certaine by the certaintie of faith that you have this inward act of faith that you have the testification of the spirit. Then I argue this certitude must proceed from an other testification, and that from another, and the other from another, so wee shall runne headless in infinitum.

103. Besides I ask whether that testification of the spirit, since it can not have his residence in the will, being a certaine perswasionHe cannot tell what this inward testificatiō is. or speech of God belonging to the understanding; and so it must be a certain notice or cognitiō. If it be obscure I aske how it is distingui­shed frō faith: if it be clear & evident how is it to be distinguished frō the knowledg or vision of a thing; so that wee see you affirme a thing that indeed you doe not understand what it is.

104. But before I gathered your mind when you said the scri­ptures of themselves are so cleare that by themselves they appeare for scriptures, so that you seeme to resolve that which you beleeve inMr H. A. resolution uncertain. to the holie scriptures and the formal reason why you beleeve it into the testification or perswasion of the spirit, yet this also you doe not hold to alwayes. For other times you resolve both the one and the other into the testification of the inward spirit with you most often, which showes your great inconstancie grounded on seare.

105. But admitting that you had onely sayd the things to bee beleeved, or fides externa were to be resolved into the holy scripture onely. Yet so you should admit of as great an absurditie. For so you should say the gospel of S. Mathew, or the whole scripture ta­ken totally togither are not canonical and authentick, nor that Mr. H. Aynsw: is predestinated or that his sinns are remitted. All whichMany ab­surdities sequeles of his doctrin Aprove. For nothing he is to beleeve, for which he hath not the ex­presse word of God. But none of these are expressed in the word of God. If he will say he will gather these by necessa­rie consequence; his adversaries may oppose him, and he can show no certaintie; If he flie unto the inward testification of the spirit thē I inferr that the things to be beleeved ar not to be resolved into the scriptures alone. So Mr H. A. eates his own word though with­out one graine of salt or pretence of reason. Yet to show this a lit­tle more plaine I reason thus. Is the scripture the word of God? you answer it is, and that without all question; But I demaund how you know it is the word of God; if you answer by the testifica­tion of your inward spirit, you ride your first circuit; If you say itNo parcel of scripture affirms the whole scri­pture to be scri­pture. appeares by it self, this is not so plaine since most parts and parcels of scripture have bene doubted of and that by schollers. Yet admit scripture were so cleare a light by it self, yet you cannot avoid as great a difficultie. For I aske whether you will prove the whole scripture by the whole, and then every one will see you [...]ie for refuge thether which you ought to defend. If you say that the whole scrip­ture is proved by some particular parcell of scripture, you are bound to show me that which you can never performe, viz. that any part [Page 124] of scripture dooth affirme the whole scripture and every part and parcel thereof to be scripture.

106. And if I should graunt you this, yet another absurditie at the suit of reason hath arrested you. For by what will you trie thatWhat should au­thorise that scripture that should give authē ­tickness to all the rest. particular parcel of scripture that so authoriseth al the rest to be scri­pture? Thus you see in defending your private spirit you have un­dergone the labours of Hercules, the difficulties arising as Hydraes heades two for one as one is dissolved.

107. Besides this opinion of theirs doth not onely lead a man into these endlesse windings, but it makes against cōmon sense, that God should leave his holte scriptures so carelesse, at six and sevens unsettled that every hereticli might challenge to himself to be taught from God, so that he might reject the authoritie of all the Fathers▪ By his opi­nion Gods provid [...]ce is weakned which could not chuse but puffe up men with pride.

108. Against which men I reason thus, Eyther the holie Fa­thers had this spirit of God or else they had not. If they had (as surely they should have if Mr H. A. did not feynedly preferr them before him) then they infalliblie were instructed by his spirit in mat­tersWhether the holie fathers had this spirit or not, makes a­gainst him. of faith, why are their authorities rejected by Mr Henry Ayns­worth as earth and ashes? If they had not, then this spirit is a new and so not a true spiritt, since it differrs from that spirit that ruled the auncient fathers many whereof were the Apostles schollers.

109. But that the holy Fathers had this spirit I prove, since you cannot deny, but that they were of the elect & the sonnes of God, but they can not be of the elect and of the sonns of God without his spirit John 10, 27. My sheep heare my voice 6. Joh. 45. erunt om­nesThat the auncient fathers had this spirit.docibiles Dei. 1. Joh. 2, 27. You have no need that any teach you of ought. And here by better reason the places that you cited before for the proving of your privat spirit, return on your own head Joh. 14. 17. vers. 26. Joh. 15, 26. John 16, 14. Rom. 8, 9 1. Joh.Mr H. A. places of scripture retorted on himself. [...], 27. Joh. 3, 9. v. 11. [...] 8 Joh. 1, 5. 1. John 4, 1. there is no tri­all of the spirits, then to trie whether it be of God, but these men [...]s spirit were of God since they were of the elect: And if you prescribe the tree of the spirit by the fruit Gal. [...], 22, 25, these mens virtues, learning, pietie (as you confesse) are to be preferred before your self.

109. Againe I will not onely prove your spirit to be dissonant fr [...] the holie fathers, but that it is not Apostolical; For if the Apostles had been inspired with this spirit every one had [...]ayed it, so that by himself without the help of another he could have distinguished ofHis spirit not Apostolical. truth from falshood, what needed then a Conne [...]l to be held at Hieru­salem, since every one could sufficiently distinguish of this truth.

110. And to show further how your spirit is incompassed with difficults I argue thus: This spirits testification is ever infallible or not. If it doe deceive them it is not of God; If it be still infallible how can ther come such various cōtroversies in the Church of God.

111. If you answer this is ever infallible when it agrees with [Page 125] the word of God to which it is to be compared. But then I argue if this spirit doth never testifie but when it is read, what will they doe then if they were to dispute with a Turke, if he should deny theHis answ. pretended whole Bible, or about a controversie of the whole Bible whether it be Canonical or no [...]

But admit that the testification of the spirit were onely to be tri­ed by the written word of God, How comes it then that the Luthe­rans and Calvinists are at such an unreconcïlable diffentien in com­paring the scriptures, This is my body, and this is my blood, by their private spirits interpretation; every one contends to have this spirit, to have the true sense of the word. How will you then be able to settle these variances by the bare word to the liking of both.

112. And to answer the placrs that you doe or may be produced for the mainteyning of the privat spirit, I wil give generall groundsGeneral groundes reselling the privat spirits proofe to answer all, answering some in particular. First then to that of John 10, 27. My sheep heare my voice. you must mark what sheep he meanes, viz. the sheep that he committed to S. Peter as Pastor, John 2 [...], 17. feed mysheep. And not content with this he showes how these sheep should hear his voice Luc. 10. 6. He that heares you hears me, and he that contemns you contemns me. The other place is of Esaie the Prophet 54. 13. I will give all my sonns learned &c. Jer. 31. 34. Herafter the man shall not teach his neighbour all shall know me from the least to the greatest Joh. 6. 45. out of which and such like places they falsly gather they have testificatiō of the spirit.

113. But these men abuse scripture drawing it to their own sence; For these places and the like doth not prove that which they seeke, but onely show a threefold difference between the old testament andA threefold difference between the old and new testament the new. First in that the Prophets did teach in the old testamēt but Christ Jesus himselfe did teach in the new [...]cv. 1. 1. Where our Sa­viour is said to have spoke to the Fathers in the Prophets but to vs in his Sonn: 2. Moses and the Prophets did propound to the people what they were to beleeve, but Christ Jesus vy his inward prace given them did help them to beleeve, he not only teaching them by his voice, but also helping them by his grace. 3. that Moyses and the Prophets did preach Christ onely to the Jewes, but Christ, and his Apostles to all nations [...]ō. 10. 18. in omnem terram exivit sonus eorum, so that interpreting what places soever you have or shal pro­duceThe Ca­tholicke o­pinion defended from such a idle proofe. for the establishing of this privat spirit shall easily be answered by referring them to these places.


114. That I am to prove is to defend our Catholiche opinion from such an idle proofe or circular resolution of our faith. The which that I may better performe, some cōmon grounds are to be handled before that being presupposed the difficults that oppose our opinion may be the better cleared.

115. First then we must [...] suppose that since every Heathen or [Page 126] Jew doth know by the light of nature that their is one God the au­thor of all things, and that wee are created to serve and honor him, and that God is the rewarder of vertue and punisher of vice. AndA general doctrine first to be presupposed. since by discourse he may naturally reach vnto this, that although it was most free for God to create any thing or to will any thing ad extra, yet supposing that he hath created and so if not necessarily yet infaliblie by the excessive propension of his goodnesse, he doth pro­pose to men the best and fittest meanes for his honor and divine ser­vice. And since the Monarchical government is best as appeareth by necessary subordination of creatures, elements, nations, causes, beasts vnto one supreme Mr. spring of all: So since God having cre­ated man would be worshipped of him, It is most readie to any mans discourse that he hath ordained one vniform kind of church or service to al people. The which as it cannot chuse but seem most pro­bable to a man through the great conveniencie and congruitie. Yet if we shall suppose that the multiplicitie of religious and ceremonious services should as cōtradictories or contraries thwart one another, & so their supreme end. It would necessarily be gathered out of the cō ­pass of any reasonable reaching brain, that al these religiōs were not instituted of God and that everie man was bound to weigh & pon­der the motives, and to see which religion had greater credibilitie.

116. 2. This being presupposed I will prove that our Romaine Catholicke church compared with what religions soever of the Hea­thens, ceremontal of the Jewes, heresies, and sects of Christians, is to be preferred in any reasonable mans judgment before any of them. Since I will prove that the motives of our religion are of evident credibilitie:

117. 3. I am to prove that the motives of our Catholick religion are to be and are of most evident credibilitie, whether they be takenThe mo­tives of our religiō of evident credibility. by themselves, or whether they be parralleld with the doctrine of the Gentile, Jewe, or heretick, and the motives of our religion must be of evident credibilitie, appeareth out of the Psal. 9 2. Testimonia tua credibilia facta sunt nimis. Heb. 2. the preaching of the Apostles is said to be confirmed by signes, and myracles; 2. if there were not motives of evidēt credibility, no man prudētly should be thought to assent vnto faith.

118. And that the motives of our religion are of evident credibi­litieThe author of our reli­gion the first mo­tive. appeareth in the particular relation of them.

119. The first motive of our religion is from the author of our religion who to have been is as certaine as that Alexander or Ari­stotle was. And that our Savieur did not teach false things of igno­rance, or mallice appeareth by his doctrine preaching and his vir­tues and power prophecied by the Prophets, and by the Syb [...]liacs by the silence of oracles, of whom S John Baptist honoured so by the very Jewes for sanctitie of life doth give such testimonie of; whō the Apostles also did testifie, and not of ignorance since they preach [Page 127] those things they sawe; nor of mallice, or gaine, since they preached without any hope of temporal commoditie, or preferment, they be­ing condemned and despised of all. And it appeares out of Josephus lib. 18. Antiquitatum, and by Tertullian libro cō ­tra Celfum, and Porphyrius where it is sayd De­osThis argument S. Chrysost: orat. 2, et 3. contra I [...] a os▪ et D. Augustin lib. deca [...] ­chisandis rudibus. The second motive.gentium etc. The Gods of the Gentiles pro­nounced Christ to bee wise and godly.

120 The second Argument and motive of e­dident credibilitie is taken out of particular pro­phecies concerning our Saviour; which motive Justinus in his Qbus Orthodoxos q. 2. et 146. Tertull. in Apoll. c. 20. D. Chry­sost: 18. in Iohannem. D. Aug: 1. De consensu Euangelico c. 28. usque ad finem. Also the prophesies of our Saviour, propagation of the Church, conversion of Gentiles, persecutions of Christians are dai­ly seen to be fulfilled.

121. Hetherto all Christians may vsurpe these motives as then own: But when those that they shall seek to perswade shall aske of them what the essentiall pointes of their religion are without which it cannot stand: If they be demaunded which of the Apostles schol­lars did teach these points of doctrine that they boast they teach, and say they have received different frō the Romane Catholiks grounds. Where their church hath lurcht this thowsand five hundred yeares. Whie none of the auncient Fathers writings are for them; no hysto­ries the records of time; whether their nation was first converted to their religion, here they are gravelld and can vse no other or further motive, which hath been the reason why yet never any nation to this day hath been converted to their religion. To these and other que­stions of the self same nature Mr H. A d [...]st not and yet dares not answer I or no, though ther be 13 in number and of great moment set downe in my last letter.

122. But here our Church can goe forward with her third mo­tiveThe third motive antiquitie. of most evident credibilitie, which is [...]ercht from the antiquitie of our religion, and doctrine; Which Argument S. August: contra epistolam [...]auda: Manich. vseth. Justinus also in adhortatio ad Gen­tes, Lact. lib. 2. Divinarum institut: c. 14. Cyrillus Alexand▪ contra Iul: Aug. 18. de civit. Deic 18. Iosephus the record of our antiqui [...]ie libio 1. contra Ap [...]onem showes that it exceeds all prophane mom [...]ments. Iustin: Apolog: 2 Tertull. Apolog. c. 19. e [...]alij. And if wee under­stand of Christ Jesus and the Apostles doctrine, it appeares by the perpetual succession of Bishops from S Peters chaire, which Ar­gument Irenaeus lib. 3, c. 3. Tertull. De praescript. c 6. et Hieron: con­traOur Anti­quitie in cluded in the name Catholick.Lucifer: versus finem vseth to prove our church to be the most au­nent, true, and Apostolical church.

123. Which antiquitie also doth appeare out of the name Catho­licke which wee have still reteyned though our adversaries have la­boured what in them lieth to deface that name, so the Montanists [Page 128] called Catholicks Psychias that is anima­lesBeza in praefatione novi testa. printed 1565. calls the name ca­tholick a vaine word: Humfrei in vita Iuelli a vaine terme pag 113. Sutlcif in his chalenge pag 1. fruictless name: the like did Gaudentius as appeareth out of S. Aug. lib. 2, contra Gaud. c. 25. in that they refused to observe their three fasts; and the Calvinists termes vs Papists; But al in vaine. For no sooner can a man aske where a catholick dwells, but presently they will direct them to some of vs, which argumēt S. Aug. vseth.

124 Our 4. Argument may be the sancti­tie of our doctrine, teaching most congruous to reason, and so behooful in respect of God, ourMuscul: in his preface locorum commu: for catholick church in the creed reade christian church. neighbour and our selfs, as appeareth by our fasts, religious vowes of Preists, so that all is conformable to that of the Psal. 18. his law is an immaculate law converting soules.

125 The fif [...] motive is out of the admirable and divine manner of promulgating our faith both in the Apostles tymes and in their [...] Motive Apostolicall followers, that our faith should be first established by poore fishermē; 2 in that the things they preached wēt against mens wil and against the haire of humaine inclination. 3. In that they did perswade men to this religiō not with hope of privat lucre or styles of honor, but by coūselling of a pecfect resignatiō of our wils to God in all things. 4. In that by the efficacie of this their doctrine most potent eloquent and learned men have been converted, according to that the 1 Cor. 2. Se brethren our vocation qua non multi sapientes, which Argument Justinus Apolog: 2. Christ. homil. 34. in Math. Aug. 22. de civit: det. c. 5. Dainast. 4. de fide c. 4 vseth.

126. The 6 Motive is that since God and his servants have6 Motive been ever mamfested from deluders, and imposcers by true myra­cles doon to the proffit of many, and not for ostentation as appear­eththe power of myra­cles in the conflict of Moyses and Aaron with Pharoes Magi Exo. [...]. Elias with Baals Prophets: B. S. Peter with Simon Ma­gus as Egisippus relates. Of Eugenius the Catholick Byshop with Cittola the Ariā Byshop as Greg. Turonensis witnesseth lib. 3. [...]ist. c. 3. The which success hath animated our Catholicks to vrge the Gentlies to the triall of their religion by true myracles as Ar­nobins lib. 1. et Tertull. apolog. lib. 23. And S. Joh. 5. our Savi­our affirms that the works he did, gave a greater testimonie of him, then the testimonie of S. John Baptist; and Joh 8. We know that that comes from God. And Erodi 4. Whereas Moyses objected that the people would not heare him, he gave him the power of my­racles. And as our Saviour vseth this Argument Joh. 10. If you will not beleeve me &c. S [...]S. Chrysost. homil. 3 in 2 Cor. Tertul. in a­pologet. c. 2 [...]. Arnobius lib. 1. vseth the like. [...] Motive

127▪ The seaventh motive which S. Chrysost. vseth homel 26 in Mat. D. Hier. c. [...]. in Mat. Lact. lib. 3. inst. tut. divinarum c. 23: is ta­ken from the efficacie of our doctrine that did stopp the mouthes [Page 129] of the idols, and hath resisted heresies of all ages: see Ruff lib. 10. c. 10 et. Victorem lib. 1. de persecut. Vand [...]l; And those that were sent of the Iewes did acknowledg this motive Joh. 7. Never any man spoke like this man.

128▪ The 8. motive is the great constancie of our religion that8. Motive. hath flourished by the persecutiō of the Gentils, & of hereticks wher­as so many great opposers hereticks have buried themselves & their names in oblivion: This Arg: vsed Gamaliel Act. 5 If this work be not of God it wil be dissolved. This argum: Tertullian vseth against Scapulā et apolog. c. vltimo et Iustin. in dialog cum Tryphone. S. Aug. lib. 22. de civitate dei c. 6.

129. The 9. Motive is of the great and constant martyrdome9. Motive of infinit people that of all nations, sects, and conditions have died for our religion. Just Martyr in his Apolog: ad Senat. Rom. acknow­ledgeth that he was most moved with this motive. Lact. lib. 1. Iust. c. 13. et 14. which motive must have as all the rest relation to one ano­ther. For it is the cause and not the paine that makes a Martyr: and so Sanguis Martyrum est semen Christianorum Tertull. apol. c. vltimo.

130. The 10. motive is by the prodigeous, vntimely and most10. Motive infortunate death of most of the opposers of our religion: see Medinā lib. de certa fide in deum; this Argument Tertullian vseth against Scapulā et D. Chrysost. oratione contra Iudaeos; It were well Mr. H. Apnsworth you would teach your children the truth of these traditi­ons.

131. The 11 Motive is the testimonie given by our adversaries themselves of vs. Iosephus lib. 18. antiq: gives testimonie of Christ,11. Motive the Sybillaes, Lactantius lib. 1. c. 5. 6. et 7. Iust. in 2. Apolog: brings the commendations of [...] severall Emperors of Christians; Plinius 2. in Tertull. in Apolog. c. 2 writ an epistle to Trajan the Emperor in commendation of Christians; Protestants, safe we Catholicks dying so maie be saved, that the Fathers confessed Papists were vertuous holie men, this motive S. Aug. his book de civitate dei saice is of great force to confirme any doctrine. Socrates, lib. 4. c. 27. et Theod. lib. 4. c. vltimo affirmes that barbarous nations elected Christians for governors.

132. The 12. Motive is the inward motions inspirations il­lustrations,12. Motive and internall consolations that Catholicks find in their religion, and spiritual exercises which S. Thomas Aquinas that well had drunk of that spirituall fountaigne, acknowledgeth to be a cheife motive in- 2. 29. 2. ar. 6.

134. Out of all these I frame my first demonstration of the truthThe first Demostra­tion of the Catholick truth. of our Catholick religiō against Gentiles, Iewes, & Hereticks. That doctrine is most evident eredible, whose author is o [...] an meffable vv­ritie, and singular sanctity; who also was prophected before by many holy men, and containes nothing cōtradictorie to the light of nature or repugnant to manners, but contrariwise is a doctrine of great [Page 130] wisdome, sanctity integritie and efficacie, which by the infinite pro­pagation thereof, & by many myracles hath been divinely cōfirmed, which hath remained firme and stable against all persecutions of Gentiles Jewes and Heriticks; For the profession and defence of which doctrine, infinite men of all sects, ages & cōditions, have most willingly suffred exquisit torments; Whose professors have been most holy illuminated men: But our Remane religion is this, as appear­eth by a perticular induction, go. our religsō is most evident credible.

134 The second Demonstration that I make for the confirmingThe secōd Demostra­tion of this former is thus taken out of Gods divine providence he hath of al our humane actiōs especiallie touching those actions as touch the eternal felicitie or honestie of manners, and about the true wor­ship of himselfe: go it is against his providence that a man directed by so many prudentiall motives, especially since his faith is suffici [...]t­ly proposed to all to be beleeved. But God hath permitted our Ca­tholick cause to be warranted by all these most credible motives: go it is most evident that our religion is from God and most true.

135. These being presupposed it is the part of a prudent man to assent vnto many motives of credibilitie, especially having received a precept of faith and in generall having well pondered them, he is bound to dispose himself vnto a pious affection that he may give a firme consent by the working of the Holy Ghost in particular to that doctrine and faith warrāted by so many evident motives of credibi­litie.

136. These motives of evident credibilitie being hic et nunc as­sented vnto, here wee come to resolve our principal intended doubt of the resolution of our faith; presupposing still that the formall motive of our faith is the first veritie, or authoritie of God obscurely revea­ling.To faith two judg­ments re­quired Into what one evidēt judgmēt of credibilitie is to be re­solvedi [...] ▪ to.

137. Now since to faith there concur two judgments, the one evi­dēt of the credibility of the thing to be beleeved, the other an obscure but a certaine beleefe of the veritie of the thing to be beleeved, so we see there is a twofold resolution. viz. of the resolution of the evident, and certaine judgment of credibilitie; and of the second of our judg­ment ceretaine but obscure.

138. First then I saie our evident judgment of the credibilitie of the thing being rather presupposed, then presupposing an act of faith is resolved onely into these related motives of credibilitie, & into the foresaid humaine inducements as into the formal reason of our be­leeving.That this evidēt judgment is to be had be­fore an act of faith.

139. Secondly I saie that everie one according to his capacitie is to have the for said certaine, and evident judgment of credibilitie before he elicit an act of faith, that prudently he maie be judged to give his assēt. So the Samaritanes are said to beleeve for the word of the Samaritan woman, so the Regulus is said to beleeve for the recovered health of his sonne. So the C [...]nturion is said to beleeve for [Page 131] the signes of the passion of our Saviour; And to this end our Savi­our gave power to his disciples of confirming their doctrine by my racles Praedicaverunt &c. They preached our Lord cooperating etc. And S. Aug. lib. 1. ad Simplic. q. 2. demaunds this quis potest credere nisi aliqua vocatione: et de spiritu et littera c. 34. He affirmes it thus Ne (que) e. anima rationals &c. For neither a reasonable soule can beleeve with a free will, if there be no vocation or perswasion, for which he should beleeve.

140 Thirdly I affirme our certaine yet inevident judgment of the truth of the points of our faith to be beleeved, & so the assent of our faith if it be as it ought; that is if it be accomodated & proporti­oned vnto the object, & end of our faith as it is necessary vnto salva­tion, deth eyther require a particular motion of the Holy Ghost, or an infused habit of faith, as it appeareth out of the 7. chapter of the Aransicanum Conc. and out of the Trident Sess 6. c. 5. et canone &. Where it is affirmed, that without Gods preventing grace, and the illuminatiō of the holy Ghost, no man can beleeve things reveled as he ought, that is that Gods justifying grace be given him.

141. Fourthly I affirme that this certaine and inevident iudg­mentIn to what our cer­taine me­vident judgment is to be re­solved into of the truth of our faith into these humain reasōs and motives as into the moving, applying, and impulsive cause, but not as into the formal motive of beleeving. And the selfe same judgment is resol­ved into the supernatural light as into the true efficiēt cause of that certitude and proportiō which it hath with his adequate object and end both being supernatural.

142 If I be demaunded therefore whie I beleeve [...]. persōs and one God, or any other thing. I answer if you aske of me the for­mal reason whie I assent, I answer, I beleeve because God hath re­vealed it. If I be thenas [...]ed how I know God hath revealed it. IWhie I beleeve a­ny article of our be­l [...]se. Whie I certainly and evidently do beleeve. That the [...] is cōmitted no circle herein. Two di­verse ob­jects. answer I doe not evidently know this though certainly I know it for the same revelation, and infalible authoritie, which the church of God as an intrinsecal condition or application, applies to me to be beleeved.

143. But if I be further questioned, since the revelation of God, and the proposing are both obscure and inevident, how cames it thē that I certainly and evidently doe beleeve.

144. I answer then I returne vnto the motives of evident cre­dibilitie that maie induce any prudent man to beleeve that saith, and that church warranted by so many motives.

145. Neither is here cōmitted any vitious circle between the autho­ritie of God & the church; as I have before convinced you in your grounds to commit. For first the authoritie of God revealing in ver­tue of which the infailibilitie of the proposition is beleeved, and the selfe same infallible proposition in vertue of which we beleeve that God [...]ies and reveales, hath two diverse objects. For the object of the infailible proposition is that God reveales; And the object that [Page 132] God reveales, or of the revelation of God is the veritie beleeves.

146. [...]. I saie in that when out of the authoritie of God re­vealingWhi [...]in our opini­on ther is no circle. is given the formal reason of our beleeving; the motive is given by the formal cause. But when out of the infallible proposing of the church, a reason to given whie we beleeve the divine revelati­on. If it be vnderstood aright it is not to be given by a formal cause or motive; but by an intrinsecall and requisite application of the motives whie we beleeve, which is doone by the proposing of it by the church, so that ther is no circle ab eodem in idem, secundum idem, which Aristotle only cōdemns 1. Post. text. 5. as I have shewed before.

147. Yet to goe one degree further in shewing how we are freeWee are free from a circle. in another regard from this mere circular, and fruictless resolu­tion of theirs, I presuppose that then is cōmitted a circle when the selfe same is proved by the selfe same to him that graunteth neither or doth aequallie deny both, or doubteth of both. For proofe of which we learne out of Aristotle that we ought to proceed from that which to knowen to that which is not knowen: or at least from that which is graunted to that which is not graunted, for so we shall proceed from that which is knowen after a manner, to that which is not knowen.

148. Whence I inferr that he should cōmit this circuler discourse that to an Ethnick that equally should denie both scripture and the infallibilitie of the church, should prove that the scripture were of divine authoritie in that the church teacheth vs it; and the church of infallible authoritie in that the scripture teacheth vs it. But to a protestant that admits of most of the scripture, it is no circle to prove the infallibilitie of the church which he denies from the scripture which he admits of: but first you do not give a resolutiō of your faith (as I doe) that is powerful against Ethnick or heretick: 2. though wee admit of scripture yet wee cannot be vrged therevnto by you; that receiving from the church the scripture, will not beleeve allSee 1 [...]. that she proposeth alike to be beleeved.

149. The foresaid manner of proof is vsuall both in the scrip­tured and in ancient Fathers. The Pharisees did admit of Moses, and denie Christ. Therfore our Saviour convinced them with these words Joh. 5. 46. If you did beleeve Moses you would beleeve me for he gave testimonie of me. Againe contrariwise the Manicheies did admit of Christ and the gospel, & did deny Moses and the Pro­phets, & therfore S. Aug. contra Faustū Manichaeū & in his book lib. 1. de moribus Ecclesiae Catholicaec. 1. et seq. did convince the Mani­chees. The like manner of proceeding wee take to instruct a Catho­lick that should denie any parcel of scripture, wee convince him by the judgment of the church to whom he submits himselfe. And Here­ticks that denie tradition, the church and the Popes author [...]tie wee convince them out of scripture & out of the writings & vniform con­sent of the holy Fathers thowsands of whom M. [...]. A. saies he pre­ferres [Page 133] for wisdom truth, and holiness before himself, whose vniversall consent of them living in all times, being most expert in tongues, neare our Saviours times; many of them being the Apostles schol­lers not partiall to eyther of our causes, writing so long before many delivering matters of facts that doth prove or cōfirme many poi [...] of our doctrine, I cannot see how you can denie them: especially since you saie you admit so farr of them as they agree with scripture. For S. Hierom translated it, S. Ambrose, S. Aug. S. Greg. S. Bar­nard interpreted it; and they all cite many places of scripture to prove fundamentall points of doctrine of our religion. But I shewed how the holie Fathers agreed with scripture to which you are silent.

150. But that you doe not proceed after the self same manner is plaine. For though you abound with wrested places of scripture which we admit of all in their true sence: Yet you denie the interpre­tation of the Fathers interpreting the scripture; that by common consent and your owne graunt should better vnderstand them thenThat M H. A doth not vrge a­ny graun­ted ground against [...] see 143. you: And wee doe not admit of scriptures as a sufficient proofe by themselves, but togither with the interpretation of the holy Fa­thers; of whom by your own words you should admit of since you prefer their wisdome, truth, and holynes before your selfe.

151. Wherfore, then M. H. A. would you have me beleeve you allea­ging onely scripture for your self, & i [...] sense depraved, before the holy Fathers that cite scriptures both for them and vs; and whose judg­ment you saie you preferr before your selfe. For first you intangleThat I should not beleeve him him­selfe, per­swades me your selfe in an endless circle. For you prove the privat spirit to be true in that the written word saies as interpreted by you that it is true; and you prove the writtē word to bee true by the private spirit, both which wee denie; since we will have neither the writtē word a­lone, or privat spirit to be the rule of our faith. And you doe not only cōmit a circle but perswade against your owne perswasion; since you would have me to beleeve you onely citing scriptures, before thow­sandM. H. A. woven vp in an end­less bo [...]ō. Fathers citing scriptures also, whose worth by so many titles you preferr before your selfe; suerly, suerly you have no guift in per­swasion.

152. And not onely thus vnreasonablie doe you proceed, but as the Manichies to S. August. you object many places of scripture, whose inferēces still [...]re Nol [...] Catholicis credere, doe not beleeve the Catholicks; I can then returne you this answer with St. Aug.Catholicis praedic [...]ti­bus. nō rectè facies per Euāgeliū me cogere ad Manichaei fidem q. ipsi Evāge­lio Catholicis praedicantibus credidi You doe not wel by scriptures ci­ted from the gospel to vrge me to beleeve your Brownisme against the Catholick faith. For this Gospel out of which you cite these wordes and wrested places, I received frō [...]he Catholick church, from whence you would di [...]wade me.

153. The [...]. thing that I am to shew is that the Popes defini [...] ­tiveThe 6. Pa [...]. [Page 134] sentence at least with a generall counsel is sufficient to determineThe mayn question might for 2 [...] Mr. H. A. argument have bene transferred How the judgmēt of the church & in what sense is in­fallible. The Ca­tholick church is the rule of faith in manifold sences. Hervaeus interpre­ted vide n. 165. Mat 10. 2. Mat 17. 1. Marci 9. 2. Marci 4. 33 Luc. 8. 51. et 18. Ioh. 21. 2. 18. 11. Ioh. 3. 1. Ioh. 8 1. 10 Mat. 2. Marc. 3. Lucae. 6. To be na­med stil first, rather argues pri­macie of authoritie then of or­der. all controversies, and is a sufficient groundworke of faith. This you saie I propound faintly in that I did alleage I did not of purpose dispute it; though as you object it was the maine question.

154. I answer most true it is according to my answer wherin I did voluntarily, yeild to this to which by force of argument I was ne­ver vrged, so it is the maine drift of the question. But in regard of the satisfaction of you or your arguments it is not the maine question. For when I saie there is something els required besides the writtē word to make it a compleat rule of faith. I did not answer faintly when I graunted more then that to which I was vrged For your Argument required to know how the judgment of the church and in what sence might be infallible; might have a manifold sence. For if you take the definition of the church; for the consent of all the fa­thers & doctors of the church so it is infallible. If you take it for a ge­neral Coūcel cōfirmed by the Pope so it is also of infallible authori­tie: If you take it for the definition of the Pope with the councel of Cardinals defining ex cathedra, so it is of infallible authoritie. And since in all these sences the Catholick church is an indeficient rule to determine a matter of faith, and to interpret the scriptures, I did not therefore faintly answer when I insisted on the last.

155 As for your rhethoricall flourish, and forged resolution of my faith, I have sufficiently excluded our opinion from that circle in which you stick fast. Nervaeus whē he saies the Pope is virtualy the whole church, meanes nothing else; but that he is the spiritual head to direct the whole church by the infallible assistance of the holy Ghost.

156. As for my vellitation those few that I brought were suffi­cient to overthrow your groundles opiniō. As for my reasons in the armadoe of mine as you terme thē, that you saie wil never enter the feild. It may be well they scorn to oppose one that lies at their fel­lowes mercie already.

157. Now you come to examin the prerogatives of S. Peter: Out of the whole series of which, & the circūstances therof & not onely out­of each particular I drawe an infallible Argument, but you in an swering them rather seeke to shun or avoid a blow then to give any.

158. First you graunt that ever almost S. Peter is named first of the Apostles, you except some 3. or 4. places; but you cite none, though otherwise most frequent in multiplicitie of cited places to no purpose. Hence you graunt that primacie of order and not of authoritie maie be gathered: You saie this gratis: But since the holy Ghost both not repeat this prunacie to no purpose; surely there his authoritie a­bove his other brethrē is argued thence. And since to be named still first through the whol scripture rather argues primacie of autority then of order. Why should not wee rather i [...]fer [...] the vsual then the vnusual significatiō, especiallie since in all records wee see the priori­tie [Page 135] of the place is given to the preheminencie of the person.

159. But let us examin one place the 10. of Mat 2. And the namesThe 10 of S Mat. 2. examinedof the 12. Apostles be th [...]se. The first Simon who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother, and so Marci. 3. Luc. 6. he is still named first. Which cannot bee vnderstood of prioritie of your order you vnder­stāding therby prioritie of yeares or vocatiō. Since S. Andrew that is named next excelled S. Peter in yeares, & was first called. As S.S. Andr. [...]. der & cal­led before S. Peter. Ambr. witnesseth on the 2. of the Cor. 12. and he inferreth then that although S. Andrew was his elder, yet S. Peter was his superior. This place made so much for this that Theodorus Beza although he cōfessed all copies agreed herein; yet he would have this word first to be [...]oisted in: see Beza in the annotations of the new testamēt 556.

As for that of the Galatians where S. Paul not numbring orWhie S. Paul men­tioneth S. Iames [...] reckoning the Apostles of set purpose (as the 3. Euangelists doe) mē ­tioneth first S. James Bishop of Jerusalem, whom first he met: and who led him vnto the other Apostles as it appeareth Act 21. I. Calvin seing in his conscience the force of this Argument (at which you wink) grants that hence may be gathered that he was first of the 12. Apostles, but not the head of the whole world.

160. As for that which you object the 21. of the Apocalyps 19. where the foundation of the wall of the citie is described to be ador­ned with pretious stones. And then you inferr in that in the Preists21. of the Apoc. 19. makes a­gainst him­self if it prove ought in reference to that of Exo. 28. 1. 18. 19. habit or ornament the Jasper which is as you say the stone of Ben­jamin: by his place makes against you, if I would plaie the part of a Cabbalist or naturalist: But the scripture it self Exod. 28, v. 18, 19. confutes you. For there in the first place is said to be placed the stone Sardius, Topazius and Smaragdus. In the second the Carbun­ [...], the Saphyrus, and the Jaspis. So that we see the Jaspis or the stone Benjamin by your doctrine should not have the first place.

161. Secondly against my congruitie alleaged for S. Peters pri­macie Math. 14. 29. where S. Peter walkes vpon the water. Out of which place S. Chrysostom homil. 57. and S. Bernard lib. 2. de consider: ad Eugeniū doth inferr S. Peters prerogative above the other Apostles, you saie rather argues his weakness of faith.2. S. Peter walkes on the water Whereas indeed S. Peters words if thou be the sonn of God are an argument of confidence, and beleeving manifested by the word fol­lowing commaund me to come vpon the waters; And that our Saviour argued S. Peter of little faith, was when he feared the strong winde, and began to sinck, not for his walking vpon the wa­ters before others, no other having with that firmnes of faith asked or attēpted to come to our Sa [...]: though they saw him. Those places cited 2 King. 2. Dan. 3. 25. Heb. 11. 34. proves that ever such myra­cles doe not prove superioritie, or of dignitie before others; which wee intend not to prove; but onely that this together with many o­ther circumstances doe prove superiority of S. Peter.

162. 3. Our Saviour calls S. Peter the rocke and saies on [Page 136] this rocke I will build my church, and that hell gates shall not pre­vaile [...] He is cal­ed by our Saviour the rocke against him. First you saie John the 10. 27. 28. 29. that hell gates shal not prevaile against the just▪ which if you vnderstand in the Calvinistical sence that one once justified can not be againe the child of wrath, which is a most horrible falsehood and against the holy scriptures▪ Roma. 11. 20. but thow by faith dooth stand, be not highly wise but feare; et: 21 Revel. 2. 5. But if not, I come to the, and will move thy candlestick out of his place.

163. It is against the principles of faith; since so all Christians being truely baptised and so regenerated in grace, could not sinne to death and so all should bee saved.

164. You take it for a great matter that I graunt the Pope maie sinne in matter of fact, & be reprovated if he die in mortal sinne. It is our Catholick doctrine, and the Pope goes to confession cōmonly oftener then any ordinarie Preist; yet this proves nothing that the Divill prevailes against him as he is head of the church, as he de­fines ex cathedra▪ As for your blasphemous speeches torne out of the Apocalyps, in his place I shall returne them on your owne head, and of the hereticall sonnes your father.

165. 4. You object against that which I cite out of S. Luk. 22 31. And our Lord said Simon Simon; Behold Sathan hath re­quired to have you to sift as wheat, But I have praied for thee that thy faith maie not faile thee, and thou once converted confirme thy brethrē, you answer that the other Apostles were to cōfirm their bre­thrē, I answer as particular pastors Act. 14. 22. et 15. 41. & 32. 1 Thes. 3. 2. Apoc. 3. 2. but not as the supreame pastor by special assistance of Gods grace, dissigned here to confirme his brethren. S. Aug. lib. q. novi testamenti q. 75. to: 4. teacheth that Christ praying for Peter prai­ed for the rest because in the pastor and prelate the people are correc­ted or amended. And S. Cyprian Epist 55. n: 6. saies that hence in­fidelitieSo Hervae­us is to be interpre­ted [...]. 155. or a false faith cannot fasten on S. Peter; and in the selfe same chap. he affirmes though there were 12. Apostles, yet for keep­ing vnitie he would have one head of all. You saie you will consent with the holie Fathers so farr forth as they agree with scripture; [...] bie will not you consent then vnto them when they alleage thus scripture for the Popes primacie? But I proved that you admitted thē so farr as they agree to scripture that is to your owne phancie, to which as guiltie, you are altogither silent. As for the places cited by you Act. 14. v. 22. I finde therein nothing to your purpose but a grosse corruption of the holie text in your opiniō translating presby­ter, Elder, which soundes as well as if you would translate the Ma­jor of London the Elder, against the common vnderstanding and vse of the word. But in the old testament you translate sacerdos a Priest; and yet here you translate Elder.

166. That which you prove the 16. of the Act. 41. proves that S. Paul▪ did cōfirme particular churches; but not the whole church [Page 137] as head by office; and in that he commanded them to keep the Apo­stles precepts and the ancients, proves tradition against you. And that particular pastors precepts are to bee kept, & not onely things expressed in the writtē word. That the 32. ver. affirmes that particu­lar may particularly comfort others; the 1 of the Thess. 3. 2. proves onely, that Timothie was sent particularly onely to confirme them; and the like can onely be inferred out of the third of the Apoc. 2. which is so farr from proving the speciall confirmation promised to S. Peter that the confirmation is by the vigilencie of one that had the name, onely to live &c. Thus wee though you object my objections bleede; I am assured your wrested places as poore same souldiers are to retreate on crutchess.

167. 5. I gathered by a congruencie that S. Peter was head in that his feet were first washed by our Saviour, Ioh 13. 6. 7. where presently after he had spoke of washing, the text saies. He cō ­meth therefore to Peter, by therefore hath reference to washing, and to S. Peters first washing: you stand not much herevpon, but accor­ding to the opinion of most of the ancient fathers you admitt S. Peter was first washed. Onely you except that he shewed greater weakness then his brethren. I answer, that his refusing to wash was out of a respective love that he had to our Saviour, but vnder­standing presently that of our Saviour, If I wash the not, v. S. S. Pe­ter to show he had a perfect resignation (not expressed by any of the rest) he presently pe [...]ldes, Lord not onely my feet, but also my hands and head.

168. 6. I inferr that S. Peter onely received a revealed pro­mise of his Martyrdome but here you that slights any thing ob­jects that performāce is more thē promise. And S. Stephē [...] James Act. 12. 2. 7. 59. suffred Martyrdome before; I answer, that an assu­red promise absolutly to come is not worse but rather better then an accelerated performance, if the performance of the other be differred for greater good as S. Peters was: And the theife on the crosse for dying repentant, maie challenge a crowne of glorie as Christ Jesus promised him, and not to bee the head of the church as it was pro­mised to S. Peter.

169. 7. I gathered S Peters preheminence above others in that Act. 2. v. 14. S. Peter as the head of the rest made the first ser­mon when the Jewes objected they were ful of win [...]. But Peter standing with the eleven lifted vp his voice and spake to them, yee men Jewes, and all that dwell at Hierusalem etc. v. 15. he answers for the rest. For these are not drunck as you suppose: and that he was not onely superior in age, or order only I have showē Therfore Mr. H. A. doth as it were graunt this and with that the Pope were as forward as S. Peter in these, and such good offices. I wi [...] al [...]o that wee had also that abundance of Gods especiall grace that was given to the Apostles. But you cannot denie but that S. [...] [Page 138] diverse other Popes that you condemn have been forward in prea­ching.

170. I inferr 8. the preheminence of S. Peter in that the first myracle was doone by him. You here more merily then seriously an­swer [...] 5. Am­brose serm. 6 [...]. gather out of S. Peters working of the first myracle, that he was head of the church. that I shall work a second myracle in converting you, if from this though graunted by you I could prove him head as wee ex­pound it. I answer from most of these congruancies solely by them­selves I doe not bring any convince [...]ng argument, but from the whole series of them together I doe convince you, since you cannot denie but the Apostle whome our Saviour first names, promiseth speciall assistance, calls him the rocke, first washeth his feet; that sitts ever first; first in all assemblies speakes, doth the first myracles, must needs bee head of all the rest, or else all these primarie offices should not casually or cōmonly happen: Since then if you were not through obstinacie hindred you would bee converted, I admitt that the first myracle was speaking of tongues Act. 2. 7. 11. but I speake of des­t [...]ce myracles and beneficiall to others, and in his first preaching I showed he had preheminence above others.

171. 9. I enferred that S. Peter was head in that as su­preame judge he condemned the hypocrisie of Ananias and Sa­phyras 5 of Act. 5. which was the sentence of excommunication by S. Aug. judgment lib. 3. contra epist. Parmeni. c. 2 [...]. to 7. And that S. Peter did give the first judiciall excommunication, doth it not in­ferr that he was the head?

172. That which you object out of the 1 of Tim. 2. & Act. 13. 11. proves that S. Paul excōmunicated some, but it doth not prove that he exercised that judicial authoritie first, therfeor it proves nothing.

173. 10. I inferr S. Peters prerogative in that he first disco­vered Symon Magus & cōdemned him; to which place you make an outroade in objected symonies committed by the Pope; when you might ferth your instances nearer home.

174. After all these proofes breifly touched, and congruencies I inferred thus. All these, and other circumstances concerning S. Peter showes manifestly that S. Peter had preheminencie above the other of the Apostles; that he is rock and head of the church: How they have vrged I desire not to bee my owne judge, but referr my selfe to the indifferent judgment of the reader.

175. And that this preheminence of S. Peter was onely in order I have proved and will hereafter prove. The place that you bring 28. of Math. 16. 20 but that particular men are to bee joyned as wit­nesses; and that God heares the congregation of the church praying. But that which you bring S. John. 20. 21. 22. 23. I could prove that the church of God by the mission of the Apostles remaines for ever. That the church is to be heard as Christ himselfe by the re [...] parative mission: As my Father sends me so I send you. I [...] inferr preisthood; and might from the verse 25 inferr with the holy [Page 139] [...] power to forgive sinnes; but it is sufficient that your place [...] proves nothing, and if it be proved ought it were equallitie of [...] not of jurisdiction.Mat. [...]. [...] ▪ 1. Ioh 4▪ [...] ▪ Ioh. 2 [...]. [...]

176. And whereas I inferr a reason in briefe that the legacie of S. Peters primacie was so particularly distinguished that no man can doubt thereof, Since his owne old name is specified there Si­mon; his fathers name the sonne of Jonas, and his owne imposed name: Peter et Cephas, you saie you doe not impugne the priviledge of Peter, but that I doe impugne the testamēt of the Apostles, which I have shewed and shall still show is a great vntruth.

177. And that I doe not impugne our Saviour the head of the church, when I make our Saviour the head of the church, when I make Sainct Peter the ministeriall and subordinate head to him: I proved that as God is said to bee our onely Father; Mat. 23. 9. And yet it is said that wee have many fathers. Christ Jesus is said to bee the foundation, 1 Cor. 3. 11. And yet the Apostles are said to bee foundations Ephes. 2. 20. So Christ Jesus 2 Sam. 22.S. Mat. 23 [...] c. v. 9. 32. [...] Cor. 10. 4 Ephes. 5. 23▪ he is said to be the rocke and head. And S. Basil 1. de paenitentia saies, Though Peter bee a rock, yet he is not a rocke as Christ, For Christ is immovable by himselfe; He is the light; And the Apostles also are said to bee lights, 2 Mat. 5. 14. He is Preist, and yet he made Preists.

178. When I saie Petros eyther signifies a rocke or a stone, you bidde me produce any learned authoritie for it. I answer I could produce many. But I appeale for this tyme to your owne consciēce since Christ spake, Mat. 16. in the Syrick language in which there is no difference betwene a rocke or a stone, Petrus or Petra. Yea though Petrus and Petra differr in termination in the Greek, yet they indifferently signifie a rocke or a stone as the protestants tran­slate Ioh. 1. 42. And that S. Peter was still accounted the rock, and head of the church, appeares by that place of S. August. lib. 1. retract. [...]. 21. that you cited against me. But I see in conscience you are sa­tisfied of S. Aug. opinion that you are silent. And Tertull: de pre­script: Orig. homil. 5 in Exodum▪ Stus. Cypr. de vnitate Ecclesiae: Stus. Ambrosius sermone 47. et 68. et lib. 6. in c. 9. Luc. everie one affir­mingCephas signifieth a head and that which is the foū ­dation to a house is in proportion a head to a bodie that the church was builded on S. Peter.

179. Where I saie that it was Petros in the masculine gen­der, in that the masculine gender was most fittest for a man, But that our Saviour, the first of Peter 2, 8. was named a rock might well bee since all that admitted of his doctrine would never denie, but that he was head of the church, & so there was no need to change the gender as there is here.

You taxe me that I on Optatus creddit would have Cephas to signifie a head. I answer that I doe not remember it; and I graunt that I have no [...]ul in the Spricke language. But surely I eyther spoke of the greeke word Cephalos, or else intended to show that [Page 140] which is the foundation to a house, is in proportion of a head to a­bodie. So that if you graunt that Cephas to signifie a principall stone of a house or rocke; it is sufficient to me that so it signifies an head or proportion.

180. Whereas being vrged you seem to graunt th [...] S. Peter was the mouth of the Apostles, I prove still to make against you. For eyther he must bee the spokeman or Mr. spring by election still where he speaks first; which election of theirs you cannot prove out of scripture; that he should as the foreman of the jurie or the speaker in the parlament: or else being cheife ever in place and speach, he must have it by authoritie given him as I have proved it before.

181. You seem to except against my breife confutation of your wordes when I reasoned thus. If S. Peter could not have prero­gative of place in that he represented the church, no more could the sonnes of Abraham bee two sonnes in that they represented two na­tions. Here you inferr for me but they were two sōns etc. go. S. Peter was S. Peter still etc. I thancke you for your paines, but you doe not marke that I doe of purpose omitt to inferr the sequele, which everie one may see to follow: but you have forgot to have compassiō of pour selfe, that vnarmed admitts of the Argument in that you sa­tisfie me nothing therein, but here like some railing minister out of his text, beginnes to talke of Antichrist whose forerunner himselfe is.

182. To that where you saie all the Apostles were equall, though there was order as, first, second, and third, Apoc. 21. 19 Whence is that order fetched and derived, but since not in the first ordering or age as I have proved, therefore in the free election of Christ Jesus, that chose and made worthie S. Peter the first That of S. John 21. 21. Ephes. 2. 20 proves that they were all equall in the execution of the power of order which was equal to al; not in powr of jurisdictiō: & that they were equall as they were Apostles, but not as they were [...]ys. And if al the Apostles had the like power of jurisdictiō with S Peter yet it dooth not follow that all Byshopps should have like jurisdiction with the Pope. For Byshopps are sayd to succeede the Apostles as Preists are said to succeede the 72. disciples, who did not succeed properly as appeareth out of Anacletus epist: et ex Beda in c. 10. Luc. And the reasō is given in that the 72. were not Preists, nei­ther did they erercise any jurisdictiō which appeareth in that Phi­lip; & James & the 5. other Deacons were ordred A [...]t. 6 by the Apos­tles, & that they were of the 72. appeareth out of Epiphā: heresi 20.

184. That admonition Rom. [...]. 11. 20. 22. and that of the Apoc. 8. 10. is to bee vnderstood that if God should forsake her shee should perish; that is in sensu divi [...]o [...] in sensu composito as the Sea of Rome is guided by the holy Ghost, and is there fired is [...]he cann [...] finally fall, yet it is a farr different question of the infallible decree of the Pope & of the infallible residence of the Pope at Rome; though [Page 141] both bee truthes in a diverse degree, and both firme howsoever [...]pugned.

185. Wee doe not hold that the Pope is necessarily indued with Gods holy grace. For in matter of fact wee hold, that he may synne as well as any other, but wee hold a necessary assistance of the holy Ghost as he defines ex cathedra as the head of the church.

186. Here you cite two places out of S. Leo. that writ in the yeare of sur Lord 454. accusing him that he said too much for theS. Leo. de­fended Sea Apostollick; in saying that he the head infuseth grace to the whole church; And that God takes vp S. Peter into the fellowship of the individuall vnitie, he would have him named that which him­selfe was; et sermone 3. and what he gives Princes he gives by S. Peter. Where here first you see our religion is no vpstart religion, that so many years agoe was maintained by so holie a Father, and whom Theodoretus in his epistle so much commendes: 2. wee se [...] this holie Pope Leo to doe no otherwise but that which S. Peter did in his second epistle, 1. c. v. 4. where he saies that by the pretious promises yee may be made partakers of the divine nature: & so by the assistāce of the holie Ghost S. Peter is by participatiō said to bee so directed by the [...]. Trinitie, that his definitiōs shall be the definitiōs of the holy Ghost, according to that, He that heareth you heareth me.

And not vnlike is that of S Paul, I will fulfill that which is wanting of passions of Christ. And by the participation of Gods grace wee are said to bee heires of God, coheires of Christ Rom. 8. 187. And for this participation [...]. Greg. the 7. saies incline thie [...]ares oh S. Peter, prince of the Apostles: Not meaning therby to aske any thing of our B. Lady or of S. Peter, but onely that they would bee intercessors for vs. And since you conclude with this scoffing Epi­phonema: Thus roares the Lion of Rome, contemning so the holie Father of the church, I will end this point thus with you. ThusThat the Pope is not called the Lord God the Pope. in a lower keie braies our A. of Amsterdame against the victorious Lyon of Juda, and against B. Leo his vicegerent on earth.

187. But now your Artesmaster hath taught you a further [...]etch. For having these words of s. Leo, he thinks he may prevail to deceiv the ignorant reader, if to a point of truth he makes an addition of vntruth; and so with a colour he goeth further on and affirmes, that the Canonists calles him our Lord God the Pope, cum inter glossa extravag. Ioh. 22. Here the first vntruth is that the Canonists saie as though it were a generall rule or suppositum or an ordinarie style of the Canon lawe; when as yet there was never found any adversarie of ours so bold faced that durst taxe any author but one and that but in one place.

188. 2. It is but Dominum nostrum Papa [...], our Lord the Pope in many auntient copies, in which God is wanting, which soundes no otherwise then this, our Lord the King, & that it is an intrude [...] corruption of the text maie manifestly appeare by the manuscript [Page 142] of Zui [...]s the author of that g [...]e [...]e, yet extant in the Pa [...]i [...] library, and maie bee seene there.

189. 3. Admitting it were so in the ram [...]on lawe, and in the Canonists which is false, yet it would not follow in this style though in sound to [...] insolent that wee should make him or account hi [...] our Lord God. For the scripture dooth often honor men with the title of God, to signifie therby onely the participation of his grace or authoritie, so Psa. 8 [...] 6. I said you are Gods, and children of the highest al: where those to whom the word is reveled be called Gods as Christ himselfe doth declare Joh. 10 35. Exod. 21. 6. Judges also are called Gods. The cause of both shall bee brought before the Gods Exo. 2. [...] and [...]. thou shallt not detract from the Gods, Moyses Exo. 7. [...] who is called the God of Pharao.

190. As for that of deposition you seeme to bee ignorant of our opinion, For wee doe not hold that the Pope hath at his free libertie this power to depose, but when all other meanes have been vsed, and for the vniversall good of the church, and when there is a hope­fullWhat wee hold of de­position. success. And this doctrine that the Pope hath indirect authoritie over Princes as s. Greg. Nazianz. teacheth the foule maie chasten the bodie when it is rebellious to her end, so maie the spirituall power vse the best meanes for the obtaining, & conserving her ende to which the end of the temporall is subordinate. And this indirect authoritie of the spirituall power over the temporall is grounded on scrip­ture Exod. 22. v. 18. Deut. 2 [...]. 1. Deut. 17. 12 3. Reg. 18. 40 4. Reg. 10. 11. 1. Esdr. 6. 10 1. Esdr. 7 26. Psal. 105. 34. Dan. 3. [...]6. Act. 5. et 13. 11. 1 Cor. 5. 6 Tit. 3. 10. 2. Joh. v. 10. Which places wee doe not interpret so rigorously that it is lawfull for the comminaltie as you doe to depose him; or that it is lawful to kil an anointed King, which doctrine we abhorr as bloodie: A declaration of which we may giveProofes out of ho­ly scrip­ture to prove S. Peters pri­macie. that of so many Antipa [...]es (though they are ever the greatest eni­mies to the Sea Apostollicke) that ever any one was privately or publickly made away; But how barbarous your procedings have beene in that time to which you have not answered.

191. Though I have proved before that S. Peter had prehe­minence of authoritie above the other of the Apostles; yet I thought good to set downe certaine proofes out of the holie scriptures to prove S. Peters primacie, & so also the Popes, & so then to confirme them by the authoritie of the holie fathers; so that their authoritie citing scripture cannot [...]ee refuseh. Math. 10. v. 2. Simon is called first Mat. 15. 6. he chaungeth his name that it now signifies, a head or superior; and the channging of a name I proved commonly to be mysterious. Mark. 16. 7. The Angell directeth Peter to goe before their as there captaine. Luc. 22. [...]1. He praied particularly for S. Peter that his faith should not faile him; and viddes him cō ­firme his brethren. Joh. 1. 42. He calles him Cephas that is a great stone, a foundation stone Joh. 1 [...]. 5. Christ washed S. Peters feete [Page 143] first John 20 4. S. Peter came first to the monument. Joh. 21. 15. he bidds him 3. tymes feede his shee [...]. Act. 2. 14. Peter speakes for the rest Act. 5. 4. Peter exerciseth first the power of excommunitati­on. Act. [...]5. 7. S. Peter in the councell of Hierusalem first gives his definitive sentence Gal. 1. 8. S. Paul came to Hierusalē to see S. Peter.

192 For the confirming of which primarie of S. Peter so esta­blished by holie scriptures, the holie Doctors are s [...]lai [...]e that false­hood it self cannot denie it. For s. Clemens Romanus in the year of our Lord 80. saies that S. Peter by the merrit of his faith was assig­nedEpistola 1. 2 [...] lacob [...] to bee the foundation of the church, and he is the first of the A­postles etc. whe [...]e you see that to bee the first is to bee the foundati­on of the church: Dyonysius Areopagita in the yeare of our Lord 100. lib. de divinis nominibus c. 3 [...] teacheth that St. Peter wasThe Greek fathers af­firme the Popes pri­maci [...]. supreme honor, & the ancientest head of divines: Hy [...]olytus in the yeare 220. in his oratione de consummatione [...]ndi, calls S. Peter prince and rocke of faith. And Origenes in the yeare 230. in his 5. homilie on Ex [...]s, he calles S. Peter the rock and sollid foundation of the church; et ad Psal. 1. as you maie read in Eusebius lib 6. [...]. [...]: he calles Peter the rocke against whome hell gates shall not prevaile; et 17. homil. in Lucam he calles him Prince of the Apostles; and on the 6▪ to the Roma: he expounds that of S. John 20. of the threefold charge of feeding his sheep to bee made the foundation of the church.

193. And Eusebius Alexandrinus in the 260. in his homilie of the resurrection expounding those wordes, Saie vnto the Disciples & vnto Peter, he there declares how onely to Peter he gave the keis. Petrus Alex: in the year 280. in his sermō de Poenitentia calles Peter the Prince of the Apostles. And Constantyne the Emperor in the yeare 280. in his donation calles Peter the vicar of God on earth. And the first Councell of Nice in the yeare 325. canone 39. Arabic [...] calls the Byshop of Rome the prince of all the Patriarchs, S. A [...]ha. in the yeare 340. in his epistle ad Felicem calles S. Peter the piller on whom of the foundatiō and Apostles of the church. And S. Basil the great in the yeare 370 in c. 2. Esaiae; et in prohaemio de judicio dei; [...] in orat: 3. de peccatis, et lib. 2. contra Eunomiū he calls Peter the prince of the Apostles and foundation of the church; Cyrillus. Hierosol. in the yeare 370 calls Peter the prince of the Apostles: [...]echs: [...] ▪ & 11. he gives the reason in that Math 17. wh [...] the [...]her Apostles were silent Peter confessed Thou a [...]t Christ the sonne of the living God. S. Chrys: inferreth from thence whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth it shall be bound in heaven, that he is the foundation of the church; and in his 83. homil, in Math. he inferrs the like ou [...] of these words I will build my church, and in the Psal. [...]0. he inferrs asmuch out of these words Simon Simon S [...]a [...] hath sought.

194. And for the same primacie of Peter; the [...]in Fathers are as plaine, Tertull: in the yeare 200. [...]. 21. de pudici [...]ia on those words [Page 144] on thee I will build my church; and to thee I wil give my keies: heThe Greek Fāthers allso affime it. inferres in that it is said whatsoever thou loosest and not whatsoe­ver yee loose that S. Peter was head. And s. Cyprian in the yeare 25 [...] lib. 1. epist. 8. He saies there is one God, one Christ, one church, one ehaire seated on S. Peter by our saviours voice; And s. Cyprian lib. de vnitate Ecclesiae Cathol: out of the words of S. Math. 16. Vpon this roche etc. and of S. John the 21. Feede my flocke; and of S Joh. the 20. As my father sends me so I send you; He showes there that S. Peter is the onely foundation; and though the Apostles were sent yet with a mission subordinate to S. Peter and to the virtue of his chaire. s. Ambrose in the yeare 370. out of these words, Mat 16. Vp­on this rocke I will build my church, he gathers that S. Peter is the rock. s. Hier. in the yeare 380 ad. Ps 13 calls. S. Peter the head of the church et in [...]. 16. Mat. cōcording the rebuke of our Saviour & the au­thoritie of S. Peter given to him; he saies that preheminence was onely promised then, and after his infirmitie it was performed, et in his epist. 89. ad. Aug. c 2. he saies S. Peter was of such authoritie that S. Paul writes he came to [...]ome to see S. Peter. And S. Aug. in the yere 400. in his book quaestionū veteris et novi testam. q. 75. he inferrs that all the Apostles were contained in S. Peters firmness, that before you brought as an inference of great absurditie against me; et in tract. 124. in Joh. he inferrs out of these words. Vnto thee I give the keies &c. et in sermone 5. in festo Petri et Pauli he inferrs frō those words, Vn­to thee I give the keies of the kingdome of heaven &c. That S. Peter in the house of God is a stone to found, a pillar to sustaine, and a [...]i to governe and dispose.

195. And that the authoritie given S. Peter must be derived vn­to S. Peters surressors lawfully, elected, and governing at Rome I could prove by the expresse authorities of all these Fathers cited, butThat S. Petes au­thoritie must bee derived to his succes­sors. let reason it selfe suffice, for since our Saviour did give the power of [...]reaching, administring of sacraments, for the good of others to the [...]ude of the world. So Christ Jesus in instituting S. Peter the head would have that preheminence derived to his lawful successors. Be­sides it was impossible that Peter should governe all vnto the end of the world, since the church was to continew so long after, go. that authoritie was given to him, and to his successors.

196. Here you dare me to bring in the arrow [...]s of the fathers, halberts of the Councells, bull [...]tts of schoolmen, and canons of [...]onists in particular you saie you will answer them. Thrasonlike spoke. But I know for your refuge with Theasoe you will take vp your scand after the manipulum of dis [...]washers expositions of these tymes for your safety, but all in vaine. For no doubt so many wea­pons will beat into Mammoks one already disagreeing from him selfe, and whose cheife points and arguments ar [...] of themselves like [...] vnsocketed.

197. To these places of S. Ioh. 20, 21. S. Math. 28. 19. I an­swer [Page 145] the holy Fathers have expounded in what sente these places are to bee vnderstood; & except Mr. H. A. wili eate his word I must needes preferr their vniforme consēt of so many worthie men before him, the like I answer to that of the Act 2. 17. 18. 1 Cor. 1. 17.

198. I answer to your seeming retorted reason taken out of the 1 Petri 5. 4 graunting that S. Peter must feede his sheep onely with the word of Christ Jesus the cheife; but here I saie the word of God is eyther written, or vnwritten what have you then inferred.

199. But now to speake something of that false, malitious, and odious blasphemie you have sprinkled through your treatise; All which applications if tediousness, and respect of civilitie did not hin­der me, I could naile those markes and notes of the forcrunker of Antichrist to your forehead.

200 But it shall suffice to showe in a word or two that the PopeThe Pope is not anti­christ. is not Antichrist.

201. First then if the Pope should bee Antichrist it should follow for so many hundred yeares that hell gates have prevailed against the church of God more then against the Synagogne of the Jewes contrary to the promised assistaunce of the holy Ghost: And that most glorious Martyrs, learned Doctors of the church as S. Cy­prian2 Thes. [...]. 2. vide Iren [...] ­um lib. 5. c. [...] Hyppo­lit: in the yeare 2 [...]. in oratione de cōsum­matione mundi. D. Athams. in the yere 340. quest. 29. Cyrillus Hierosol: 300. cate­ches. 15. Greg. Kaz [...] orat. 14. et 4 [...]. D. Chrysost. orat 4. in 2. Thes 2 Cyrillus l. 3 in Ioh. c. 6. Divus Hier: q. 11. ad Algasi [...]. S. Ambrose, S. Hier: S. Aug: S. Leo and all our forefathers should broile eternally in hell fire in offring vp homage to the beast.

202. 2. That the Pope is not Antichrist is proved; in that he shall bee one particular man, I came in my name and yee did not re­ceive me; but another comes in his name, and yee will receive him; where Christ Jesus opposeth person to person, place to place, king­dome to kingdome, sect to sect; but the Popes are many successively; 2 Thes. 2. he is called the man of sinne the sonne of perdition.

203. 3. Antichrist shall bee descended of the tribe of Dan Genes. Fuit Dan coluber &c. 49. v. 17. Hier. 8. EDan audivimus vocem acu­tissimam equorum &c.

204. 4 Antichrist shall oppugne the mysceries of our Savi­our, Joh. 2. Who is a lyar but he that denies Jesus Christ. 2 Thes. 2. 2. He shall extoll himselfe above all that is said God.

205. 5. Those 7. mountaignes in the Apoca. are playnly said to bee seven kingdomes. None of which doe agree with the Pope.

A [...] the ten hornes are ten Kings: Cyrillus Alexand: oratione 7. in Danielem.

206. To answer every thing againe that you repeat would but make me more wearie, and tyre the reader. It is much that you graunt the Popes primacie to have beene frō the Councel of Nyce, thereby to graunt Antichrisme to have reigned so long in Christen­dome. For the Popes loving of preheminence. As for that of Dio­trephes that you obj [...]ct is nothing to the purpose. And 1 Petri 5. 3. Preheminence absolutly is not forbidden, but one secular prehemi­nence with example of lyfe and humilitie. For Tit. 15. 16 It is said [Page 146] Haec doce, exhortare et argue cum omni imperio.

207. My generall reason you repeat thus. The Ecclesiasticall Hierachie is no worse governed they any temporall regiment For it is compared to a kingdome governed by one King. Mat. 25. to aMy gene­rall reason for the Popes pri­macie. familie wel governed; Hebr:3: to a campe wel ordered. Cant: 6. But in all well ordered cōmon weales there is ever required some visible head or judge besides the writtē lawe, since there must bee a supreme to take notise of controversies when they arise etc. there must bee one to explicate the sence of the lawe [...] to pronounce sentence etc. & there must bee one to compell those to the due observation thereof.

208. Now since in the church there ariseth like difficults in the lawes explication etc. Therefore Peters successor indued by the holie Ghost, with gifts of grace in all difficults of moment is to be sought to for councell, is to be heard with obedience when he coun­selleth, is to bee obeyed when he procedes with his powrefull juris­diction.

209. Your answer is that this reason is faultie from the head to the foot. Wherein you give the holie Ghost the lie that compare his church to the visible government, and nothing so frequent in scrip­tures there is then by cōparison of terrestrial things to be instructedHis answer refuted. in caelestiall. But you must note that a similitude must not run on 4. feete or agree in all, but in the primo analogato which you cannot in­fringe, 2. You bring one falsehood to cōfirm another. For though we saie the Pope is to explicate the lawe; yet he is not above the lawe in your sence; and all that you cite proves onely; that the scriptures are the partiall explicators of themselves Ezech. 44. 24 Deut. 17. 18. 20. [...] Cor. 2. 10. For as for outward order in difficulties you grant that Pr [...]ists lipps must preserve wi [...]dome or knowledge.

211. You sate I misse proportion in making many common weales, and but one church: I understand one vniversall church which you graunt one invisible. I have proved one invisible, your proofe is to small purpose. For in London then wee might inferr there were as many churches as there hee parishes, which would bee a fond or fruitless inference, except you vnderstand materiall churches.

212. The third thing that you sate I am to prove: and the 7.They part. and last that I am to prove here, is that the indeficient rule of our faith is onely to be found in the Catholicke church; & not in privat menssences and illuminations, or motions of an vnseen spirit; whichSee before a [...]n: 117. vsae ad n. 135. is against S. Joh. the 17. 11. Vt sint v [...]um St. et nos.

213. I prove this in that the Romaine church is the onely true and Catholicke church: this you sate if you should admit of, yet it proves nothing in that the voice of the bridegroome and not of the bride is that you say wee must beleeve, Joh. 3. 29. 36. Ephes. 2. 24. 4. 5See before [...] 123. 16. As though that were false▪ of Christ, he that heared you heares me Luc. 10. 16. 18. Mat. 17. S. Joh. 14. 16. 26. Joh. 16. 19. 1 Tun. 3. 15 [Page 147] The church of the living God is said to bee the pillar and sir [...]am [...]tSee n. 123. By this h [...] would with Beza avoide the name Ca­tholicke which he cannot does if he graūe the article of beleife I beleive, the Catho­licke church. of truth

214. I am gladd to heare you dente your selfe as in truth you are knowen to bee no Catholicke. That you will not challenge your Mothers name showes your degenerating spirit. For well might you bee a Catholicke member of a Catholike church; but as others have been ashamed of that name, so also you; but the truth is your church is not Catholicke in that it hath neyther vniversallitie of time, place or person.

215. That the whole world is replenished with our doctrine you slight over with most impertinent places of scripture to inferr the Pope to bee Antichrist; and you graunt that the synagogue of the Jewes in her flourishing [...] visibilitie hath excelled Christs church, which is contrarie to the predictions of the Prophets and Apostles.

216. To the motives of evident credibilitie that maie induce a­ny man to beleeve as the Romaine church teacheth, I proposed ma­ny motives, as her antiquitie, vnitie, vniversallitie, visibilitie: thatSee before n: 117. ad [...] n. 135. Mr. H; A. snatchet [...] but doth not fasten on my motives. The Ca­tholicke religion grounded nether on the spiri­tuall or temporall profite or pleasure; Not by the the policie of the clergie established No [...] by the policie of the tem­porall. her doctrine was confirmed by the doctors; by the in­stitution and institutors of most holie orders, by the conversion of nations, by the power of myracles, infinit number of Martyrs; All which notes and motives the ancient Doctors have taken out of scripture to distinguish the true church; most of which you graunt we have; Onely with your wrested places paralleld herevnto you se [...]k to cōfute thē, but so lamely, that any mā may see your answers are sud­daine snatches, then true bitings, or wounds according to the na­ture of a madd dogge, that runne headlonge and immediately snatch­eth at any thing that opposeth him.

217. That which you bring else where is to small purpose, or a­bundantly satisfied elsewhere.

218. Now to conclude I prove by a common Argument in re­futing your answer in calling our motives carnall that wee maie bringe to prove the Catholicke church the true church.

219. If our faith bee so ancient as you confess, and allowed so long of all sorts and conditions, if it bee not from God it must bee grounded on carnall motives, viz. the profitt of the spiritual or tem­porall. But it smoothes neither. And that it is not grounded on the inventiō of the clergie for there profitt, or pleasure is plaine since they so strictly binde themselves to chastitie; vowes, fasting, praying so longe everie daie; and all these vnder mortall sinne, with all which burdēs they would not have loaden themselves if onely pollicie had beene their loadstone. Neither is it governed by the pollicie of tempo­rall Princes. For it cannot bee immagined howe [...]o many Empe­perors, Kings, Queenes; Princes would have teddered themselves vnder mortal sinne, as to confesse their sinns, to fast to restore etc. go. the religion warranted by all the foresaid notes and so against the haire of humane affection must needes bee true that hath [...] [Page 148] inviolable so long against so many assaultes of enimies, and heresies▪ For according to that before cited of Gamaliel, if it bee not of God it will bee dissolved.

220. Thus having proved, and confirmed my doctrine, and re­futed your grounds and sacked the castel builded and raised by your owne phancie and having destroied the golden caife of your selfe lik­ing conceipt to which you sacrifize; I am to conclude admiring anyThe feare­full resolu­tion of their reli­gion. one can bee so fonde as to follow you against the course of all tymes, the recordes of Historie, consent of Fathers etc. And I bewaile the fearfull resolution you shal make to Christ Jesus when he shal aske you whie you beleeve against the holie scriptures, explicated and warranted by all the motives, and onely because you perswade your selfe so.

221 Whereas our resolution at the eternall tribunall shall bee full of comfort; since wee beleeve Gods word allowed by all those notes and warrants: [...] by the interpretation of the holie Fathers. Your plea shall not bee like the plea of that sonne that pretendes to bee heire of all, saving of one pennie▪ In that his father made hisHis plea examplfied to be most ridiculus brother haeredem ex asse, heire of one penie (as he interpretts.) When as the grave tribunal, judge, learned Doctors, lawes showes against him that to bee made haeredem ex asse is to bee possessed, and invested in all; and not to have one penie and no more.

222. So you saie the sense of this or that parcell of scripture is as you conceive though against the letter, as Hoc est corpus meum etc. and against all Doctors and expositors, and records of tyme sh [...]wing the practise of the church. As that Clients cause shall bee full of feare; his plea ridiculous, the sentence sure to passe against him with a hisse, and contempt of the whole bench. So shall that irre­vocable sentence of God passe against you in following your owne phancie against his word & the holie Catholicke church the expoun­der thereof: I praie God to averte his judgment and to wipe of the scailes of your eies that you maie see and imbrace the true church that with the blasphemous breath of your nostrilles you have per­secuted: From Justice hall in Newgate the 13. of September siple veteri 1613.

3 Esdrae. 4.‘Magna est veritas et praevalet: Great is truth and prevaileth.’
Iohn Aynsworth.

Ad post script:

What I have said before, or heare have delivered, I have brought out of the scriptures and their interpretation; and not against the scriptures (as you object) except you would have that onely to bee scriptures that in sense fittes the last of your owne phancie. To conunence new disputes you know would be endless; If you have [Page 149] nothing more to object, against this maine truth; begin what you will and I shal answer: but onely be advertised here that I make a great impression of those wordes of S. John 2. x. 10. Si quis venit ad vos. et hanc doctrinam non affert, nolite recipere eum in domum, nec Ave dixeritis. Quie: dixerit illi Ave, communicat operibus ejusHis stile of salutation in the fot [...] front of his Pamphle [...]malignis: ercuse me then if in salutation or freindly complement of grace & mercie [...]. I doe not comply with you: it proceeds not frō the hatred of your person whose conversion and salvation I desire, but of your heresies and error, but to answer your grounds and Ar­gum [...] I shall ever be readie.

The answer to I. A. his third large writing.

To Mr Iohn Aynsworth prisoner in Iustice hall in New­gate: grace & mercie from God, to find repentance un­to salvation.

TWo things (Mr. I. A.) I proposed to my self, when first I began to answer you in these questions of religion: the defense of the truth, which God hath vouchsafed me mercy to witnesse; and 2. the saving of your soul from death by turning you from your evil way vnto Christ, if such were his pleasure. Now although for this latter I have small hope left, seing you so stiffly bent to keep the religion [...] received by tradition of your fathers: yet for the first respect I cannot be1. Pet. 1. [...]. silent, for I have still what to answer in the behalfe of God and of his written word, against the reasons which you bring for the Pope and his Traditions. The Lord guide my hart and hand, vnto the mainteyning of his truth: & if it may be, vnto the gayning of your soul. You first pro­fessS. 3. [...]. [...]. to have a reverend esteem of the scriptures, which you set down; & I like well of. But somewhat you want: as That by the scriptures we come to beleive in Christ, & in beleeving may have life through his name. Ioh. 20. 31 That by thē, the man of God may be made wise vnto salvatiō, may be perfect, and perfectly furnished vnto every good work: 2 Tim. 3. 15. 16. 17. and therefore that no man presume, above that which is written: 1 Cor. 4. 6. This if you graunt, (as you cannot with reason deny:) there wil be no necessary or profitable vse of your vnwritten traditions eyther for faith in Christ vnto life, for wisdome vnto salvation, or for any good work. Whiles we therfore keep us to this heavenly light of Gods writ­ten word so commended by your selves, (though againe you disclaym it as not sufficient without your Popes traditiōs:) I may say with Moyses.†Deut▪ [...] ▪ 31. Their Rock is not as our Rock, even our enimies being judges.

You devide your treatise vnto 7. parts.

The first thing which you promise, is to shew that my reasons The 1. part of your treatise. (taken from the word of God,) doo vanish of themselves. This you at­tempted before, but were defeted: let us see now what your latter [Page 150] thoughts doo bring forth. For answer vnto Deut. 5. 32. you aske, ‡ whatS. 7. p. 99.I can inferr hence but that the law ought strictly to be kept, & that we ought neyther to add nor to take from the 10. commandements &c. I answer, you strayten the words too much, in restreyning them to the 10. commandements: for you may see before, (in Deut. 5. 4.-22.) that the people themselves did hear the 10. commandements promulga­ted: and [...]durst here no more, but prayed Moyses to goe neere and hearev. 25. 27. the rest what God would say; and to declare all vnto them. This he did, and God told him v. 8. 31. all the commandements ordinances and lawes which they should doe in Canaan: whereupon he inferreth that generall admo­nition, (v. 3 [...]. 33.) touching all the wayes of God: and not the 10 com­mandements onely. So your limitation being weighed in the Lords bal­lance, is found too light.

You proceed and ask, what this is to my purpose to prove that the written word alone is sufficient to decide all controversies? I answer, I did express my purpose was to prove this, That God onely is to be the umpier and arbiter of all controversies about religion: & whither it were by his word written or unwrittē, I stood not vpō that in this first point. This I told you plainly before: & if your purpose were not wilfullie to mistake and make needless cōtroversie; you would not (after warning) have doon thus the second time.

Like fruitless labour you bestow to prove that the law of God should be explicated by the Priests &c. A thing which I never doubted of: yea I hold that the B. of Rome if he were as he ought to be, should spend all his dayes in [...]. Tim. [...]. 2. explicating Gods lawes to the people; & so should all Bishops in the world. But Popes lawes devises & traditions, should neither be explicated nor once mētioned in the church without detestatiō.

You say, S. 8. p. 9 [...]. such additiō is prohibited as is contrary to Gods law as appeareth Deut 4. 2. 3. where the idolatry with Beelphegor was puni­shed for adding or diminishing as the text implies. I answer, though you costreyn the text to seem to help you, while you set that before which Moyses setts after; yet to let that pass, I graūt that you say: if you vnder­stād it wel. For seing all additions to Gods law is forbidden, whatsoever is added by others, is contrary to Gods law. Now all additiō is plainly for­bidden Deut. 4. 2. and 12 32. Prov. 30. 5. Therefore nothing can be ad­ded by your Pope or any, which is not contrary to the law of God. Your Doctors whom you rely vpon tel you the same: nothing is to be added (sayth L. de p [...] ­radis. c. 12. Ambrose) no though it seemes to be good. That which hath not authority frō the scriptures (saith Cōment. in Mat. 23. S. 9. Hierō) is as easily cōtēned, as allowed. The answer you [...] give to Deut. 12. 32. is; what is here forbidden but an Hethen imitation, and immolation of their children &c. Is here any pro hibition, of explicating the true sense of the law? &c. I answer, you run into your former fault, abridging the scope of the text. To imitate the hethens, was vnlawfull: but to divise things of their own heads, yea and to imitate God otherwise then he commaunded them, was wicked also. Proofe in Ieroboam, who made a feast not like the heathens, but like the feast in Iudah, 1 King. 12. 32. yet was it sinful, and the holy Ghost bran­deth [Page 151] him with forging the moneth out of his own hart, v. 33. Many of your Popes idolatrous feasts, have nothing so good a colour. And your devised worship of Lord, Lady, Angels, Saincts, Popes, Confessors &c. is not onely an imitation of the hethens; but an idolatrie worse then ma­ny of theirs; as when we have ended these questions in hand, I will vnder­take to prove vnto you. As for explicating the law; I before approved it.

Your former reason from the 4. commandment, you seek S. 10. p. 100. to vphold with a staffe of reed. For when God gives many commandements, why will you make the keeping of one to be the keeping of all? In deed, if he had given but one precept, and men had given the rest: it were somwhat that you say. But they are all given by the same God, to be our Deut [...], 24. 25. life and righteousnes if we keep them. For man to add any thing to the 4 or to any, or to all the commandements, is an odious syn. Mat. 15. 9.

Whereas against all additions to Gods word, I See pag. 55. 56. alleadged Prov. 30. 6. and Gal. 3. 15. to overthrow your fraudulent distinction: you frame a reply S. 11. pag. 100. to Gal. 1. 8. which place I produced not. In Gal. 3, 15. the Apo­stle sheweth frō the similitude of a mans Testamēt, that much more vnto Gods, nothing may be added. Against this, you having nothing justly to except: doo choose to your selfe an other place, more easy to pervert. What els dooth this bewray, but the helplessnes of your cause? Now to folow your wādringes: What dooth Gal 1. 8. say against that I set down? The word besides, meaneth as you think, contrary to, and not more then they had receaved: because he forbidds not any explication or true gloss &c. I answer, you weary your selfe and others, to prove that which none denyeth. Explications of Gods law by the mouth of his mini­sters, are allowed of God, Nehem. 8. 8. these are not additions, such as God forbiddes, Galat. 3. 15. Our question is of other or moe lawes or doctrines then God hath taught. And vnto those which the Prophets had writtē, and Paul with the other Apostles taught, none might be added. For he kept back nothing that was profitable, but taught the whole counsel of God, Act. 20. 20. 27. so then whatsoever men could add more or besides, was not profitable, neyther any of Gods counsel: therefore it was contrary, and so may be put among Popes tra­ditions. For their doctrines and traditions are as evidently contrary to Gods word, as darknes is to light. Such be your image worship, contra­ry to Exo. 20. 4. your praying to creatures, contrary to Mat 4. 10. Rom. 1. 25. service in a barbarous vnknowen tongue, contrary to 1 Cor. 14. 11, 16. 28. robbing the people of the chalice in the sacrament, contrary to Mat. 26. 27. justification by mens works, contrary to Rom. 3. 20. 22. 24. and 4. 2, 3, &c. and many other idolatrous observations, as plainly con­trary to Gods law, ever vvere the abominations of the heathen. Fi­nally Chrysostome, a Doctor whome you rely vpon, Chrysost Gal. 1. sayth that Paul preferreth the scriptures, before Angels from heaven. Here then (if you wil beleeve him,) is no place at al for vnwrittē traditions. Where­as you S. [...]. bring Rom. 16. 17. to shew that para meaneth contrary; no man denyeth it: but that it signifieth no more then contrary, in your sense, [Page 152] you prove not. In Rom. 1. 25. you may see par [...] ton ktisant [...], meaneth any thing [...]sides the creator onely. But our strife was not about para, or Gal. [...].

You S. 15. [...], as the Prophets additions to Moses law, were Gods, so the churches definitions are Gods, not mans. I deny your [...]: the churches addition [...], which you call definitions are not Gods, as the Prophets writings, [...] were added to Moses books: you are not farr frō blasphemie in making such a comparison. If that were true, you might read and expound as authentick scriptures, your churches additions and Popes traditions, as Christ read Esaias the Prophet; and expounded hi [...] in the synagogue, Luk. 4. 1 [...].—21.

The proofs you would bring are, Luk. 10. 16. he that heareth you, heareth me &c. Mat. 18. 1 [...]. 18. tel the church &c. Deut. [...]9. 15. (or [...].) they shall stand before the Lord, before the Preists &c. I answer, these scriptures shewe not that they might add any thing to the word of God: but they prove the cōtrary: For they were sent to preach the Gos­pel, Mark. 16. 15. & that was Gods word, not any creatures: Thes 2, 2. 4. 13. So they were not additions not definitions of their own: such as your church makes. Also the Preists were bound to teach Gods lawes, not their owne, Ezek. 44. 24. And so the hearing of them that teach Gods word, is the hearing of God himself in his ministers. But the contrary: to hear the churches traditions is not to hear God: for they were many a­gainst God, as you may see, Mark. [...] 3. 4. 9. 10. &c. For els behold what strange doctrine you wil bring in, viz. that everie church, yea every preist and minister, may make additions to Gods law; and the people must be bound so to receive them as Gods word. Here to helpe your selfe, you retire to your old skonce, saying S. 15. it is true of particular churches, but so farr as their doctrine accordeth with the Somane catholick church. A meer fiction of your own head, what one title of Gods word doo you or can you bring for this stuft? did Christin Luk. 10. 16. speak to the church of Rome, more then to the Church of Corinch Ephesus or any other? you make your Roman Church an idol, by putting her in Gods place, Isa. 33. 22. Iam. 4. [...]2. to give lawes, you make her a monster, whiles being a particular Church, you proclaym her for the catholik, that is vniversal Church. And her doctrine, if it accord not with Christs, as it dooth not: is with her to be abhorred and accursed. Gal. 1. 8. By this which hath bene sayd; let the prudent judge, how soundly you haue proved that any other word or doctrine, then Gods, may be brought into the Church for a ground of our faith: which was the first thing in controversie.

The 2. part that you are to prove (as you S. 18. p. 102. say) is that the rule of our faith is not onely the written word, but jointly the unwritten2. Part.word of God, tradition, and the authority of the Church, councils, fathers is the ultimate decider of all matters of controversie.

In this assertion you confasedly shuffle togither for your advantage, the church, councels, & fathers. By the Church you mean your Romish Church, which is none of Christs: and therefore can judge no Christian [Page 153] controversie. Councils and fathers are named but for a show. For [...]o [...] regard nothing that Councils or Fathers say, vnless your Pope approve it. On the contrary I hold that Gods written word is to be the rule of our faith, and by it all churches, Councils, Fathers are to be tried, whe­ther they be of God or no. But let us hea [...] your proofe.

That which was say S. [...]. p. 1 [...].you [...] the total rule of our faith before the written word of God▪ man be wel the partial rule of our faith after, where the written word of God dooth not sufficiently cru [...]ss di­verse mysteries of us to ve beleeved But tradition was a sufficient and total rule of our faith till Moyses time the first [...] of the holy Ghost. Therfore traditiō now together with the written word, is a sufficient rule of our faith. The fir [...] prop. you say [...] proved: the second you [...]a [...] is graunted by me▪ I answer, If the writings of God were as dark and deceitfull as is this your writing, it were woe with vs all. In the first proposition you say it may well be the partiall rule of our faith: in the conclusion you say, it to so. If I should say. It may w [...]ll be your argument is deceytfull: and conclude therefore it is dece [...]tfull: would you graunt the conclusion? yet is it truer then yours, For that which was a rule before, may be a rule still, if it please God so to conti­nue it: this you need not labour to prove. But that which was a r [...] be­fore, neyther may nor can be a rule still, when God hath taken it away & put another in the sted. And this is the very truth, if you would receive it. For before Gods law was written, it was spoken, and by speech from the mouth of holy persons it was to be learned. But now it is written, o [...] Gods commandment, Exod. 34. 27. & so sufficiently written, as Pa [...]th it is able to make us wise vnto salvation, even perfect and perfectly fur­nished vnto every good work, 2. Tim. 3. 15. 17. away therfore with your partiall rule o [...] vnwritten traditions; they may not be, neyther are they any rule for our faith: for no [...]e must prefume above that which is written 1 Cor. 4. 6. But you ad a clawse to your proposition th [...]s; where the written word dooth not sufficiently erpress divers mysteries of vs to be beleeved And where is that trow we? I your assumption this clawse dares not shew his face, for there it would con [...]nce you of false­shood. If you affirme it not, how frivolous & deceytfull is your argumet? If you intend to assume it, though you express it not, (for so elsewhere you blame me for not vnderstanding your reasoning:) then say [...] by your assumption you intend a lye against the truth, and a stander against me. It is a ly against the truth to say, that the holy bible which we have writ­ten, dooth not sufficiently express diverse mysteries of [...]s to be beleeve [...]: If have before disproved this by evident testimonies from heaven, which you cannot withstand. Ioh. 20. 31 2 Tim. 3. 1 [...]. 17. Rom. 1 [...]. 25. 26. 1 Cor. 15 3. 4. A [...] 26. 22 Ioh. 5. 39. It is aslander against me, when you say I grant your Minor: for if this clause be there intended, I did and doo dis [...]aym it.

Your conclusion can be no better then your premisses: even false and fraudulent. Which that you (or others at least) may the better espye, I [Page 154] wil shew how you wrap vp things in confusion and darknes. First Tra­dition, which title you claym for your vnwritten mysteries, is as well the word of God written as vnwritten, 2. Thes. 2. 15. but you doo op­pose it to the written word. Secondly, holy Tradition or Doctrine by word of mouth, was delivered alwayes by holy persons: even as holy Tradition or doctrine by writing, was delivered alwayes by holy scrip­tures. The holy persons that spake, were eyther God himselfe, (as to Moses in the Mount; to Iob Iob. 38, 1. &c. in the whirlwind:) or some Angel, (as to Gé. 22, 11. &c. Abraham, Iaakob, &c.) or, some holy man of God, (as Peter 2 Pet. 1. 21 sayth,)Exo. 20. 21. [...]2. spake being moved by the holy Ghost. So Abraham is Gé. 20. 7. called a Prophet: and so vvas Gen. 49. Iaakob and all the holy patriarches from Adam to Moses. The manner of speaking the vvord vvas also diverse, as Num. 12. 6. 8. Iob. 4. 16 & 33, 14 15, 16. 2. Sā. 23, 2. by visions, or by dreames, or by playn speech mouth to mouth, or by secret motion of the holy Ghost. Novv you shevv not vvhich of these vvayes your traditions come: onely you give vs a generall paralogisme, vvhich vvill serve as vvel to maynteyn H. N. or Mahomet, vvith their nevv Gospel and Alkoran, as the Pope vvith his nevv Canon lavv. For thus may Mahomet, or the Fa­milist reason: that vvhich vvas a rule heretofore, may be a rule stil: but the vvord of God given by visions, revelations and instinct of the spirit, vvas a rule heretofore: therefore it is so still; at least in part. Here is as good and true an argument as yours: that your Logik vvill persvvade as soone to Mahometisme, or Familisine; as vnto Popery. Novv as for the persons, there vvil be no disparagement. For Mahomet himselfe, or H. N. vvill as easily be proved to be holy men of God, as Pope Iohn the 23. vvho vvas judged by the Council Sess. 11, & 12. of Constance to be a divil incarnate; and as other your reprobate Popes that vvere monsters among men, for their beastly life til their dying day, as your ovvn vvriters doo record, and your selfe in this your vvriting deny it not, nor defend them here­in. And novv I pray you tel me, vvhy men may not be induced by your manner of reasoning, as vvel to receive the Turks Alkoran, and H. N. his Evangelium regni, as your Popish decretals. I find no more mention in Gods book, that the Pope of Rome in the vvest churches, should be a divine person to give heavenly traditions, then that Mahomet in the East, should be the man of God. You find not so much as the Popes name, much less his provvd office spoken of (for good) in the Bible. You tel us of the promise to Peter, Mat. 16. and Mahomet telleth us of the promise of the comforter, Ioh. 16 7. That the Pope is head of the church, is as vnpossible for you to prove by Gods lavv; as it is for the Turks to prove that Mahomet is that Comforter. You vvould have vs take the Popes ovvn vvord for a vvarrant: the Turks vvould have us take Mahomets vvord for a vvarrant. The truth is, these both vvith their new doctrines and traditions, are the curse and scourge of God vpon the world; because they received not the love of the truth, therefore God hath sent them strong delusion to beleeve lyes, as th' Apostle prophesied: 2 Thes. 2. 10. 11.

You S. 10, p. [...]02. proceed, & for vnwritten tradition cite some scriptures, Deu. 32 [...]. Ps. 43. 1. & Ps. 77. Pro. 1. 8. Esa. 38. 19. Ier. 6. 16. Ecclus. 8. 11. 4. Esd. 14. [...]. 2. [Page 155] Thes. 2. 15. 1. Tim. 6. 20 2. Tim. 2. 1 from all which you p. 10 [...]. inferr, that Is­raelites and Christians were to be directed by the help of traditios. I answer, your reasons from most of these and the like places, I have taken away in my See pag. 25. 26. 72. former writings. Here you repete the same scriptures againe but ansvver not vvhat I sayd: you may thus doo a 100. times, and vveary men vvith your tautologies Vnto the things vvhich heretofore I vvrote (and vvhereto I referr you) I novv add. All parents vvere bound to teach Gods lavv to their children; and children to heare & obey their parents in the Lord. Deut. 6. 7. Eph. 6. 1. 4. If this serves for traditions, then vnvvritten verities from all parents mouths, vvere to be received as oracles of God. If you hold thus, I pray you tel it plainly: If not; then shevv vvhich parents had the facultie to teach traditions, and vvhich had not.

2. The traditions vvhich those scriptures speak of, being novv vvrit­ten as in Ps. 44. & 78. &c. are a part of the canonicall bible to be read and expounded in the church, as being 2 Tim. 3. 1 [...] inspired of God, profitable to teach &c. if such be the traditions of your fathers, Councils, Popes, which the vvorld seeth now vvritten; then are they to be acknowledged also scripture inspired of God, (as Paul speaketh) and so to be read and expounded in churches, as other books of the Prophets and Apostles. For all Gods divine oracles and traditions, are of equall authority. If you esteem your decretals of this vvorth, I pray you tel me in your next. If not, then the scriptures by you cited, vvill justify your Popes traditions, no more then the Pha­risees, Mar. 7, 3 6. 7. 8 9. - 13.

That the Doctrines taught by the fathers in Psal. (or as you recken 43. & 77.) 44. and 78. vvere vvrittē traditions, the particulars in the Psalms doo evince, against your too bold asseveratiōs. For the casting out of the hethens, & planting Israel, spoken of in Ps. 44. was largely vvritten in the book of Iosua. The things rehearsed throughout Psa. 78. are writtē in Exo. Num. Ios. Sam. &c. So the evident scriptures doo cōvince you. The old & good vvay, Ier. 6. 16 vvas the law taught by Moses and the Prophets, Psa. 103, 7. Deut. 8. 6. & 9. 12. and 11. 22. 28 and 31. 29. Iudg. 2. 17. this law vvas vvritten, and to this did the Prophets call the people Isa. 8. 20. Mal. 4. 4. and from the o­ther ordinances of their fathers, Ezek. 20. 18. And this, vvith the accom­plishment of the promises vpon them that vvalked therin, vvas the truth vvhich the fathers should tel their children, Isa. 38. 19. as appeareth Deu. 6, 6, 7. Ioh. 17, 17. And the things vvhich Solomon teacheth as a father Prov. 1. 8. &c. are vvritten in that & other his books, Prov. 22. 20. Eccl. 12. 10. and of other things he vvilleth us to take heed, Eccle. 12. 12. That strange it is, any man reading the scriptures, should plead against them as insufficient to teach us all doctrines needfull for salvation.

Vnto Ecclus. 8. 11. (I think you meane v. 8. 9.) I answer the book is not authentik, and so proves nothing, yet if the author mean the Elders doctrine agreeable to the law: his counsel is Mal. 4. 4. Isa. 8, 20. good. If he mean other humane traditions of the Iewes; then I answer, the vvisdome of Iesus the soon of Sirach herein is proved to be foolishnes, by the doctrine of Iesus [Page 156] the Sonn of God, Mark. 7. 7. 8. - 13.

Vnto 4. Esdr. 14. 5. 6. I answer; the author is a fit man to bolster vp popish traditions, by 2 Thes. 2, 9 signes and lying vvonders. He telleth (as you S. 23. p. 104. al­lege) of doctrines that Moses vvas not to teach but to hide. These then apperteyned neyther to law nor gospel, Deu. 32. 4. Rom 10, 5. 6. 8. I am content therfore, that they go among the Popes decrees. He telleth that Gods law vvas 2 Esdr. 14. 21. 22. & chap. 4. 23. burnt, and that he vvould vvrite agayn all that had been doon in the vvorld since the beginning. This lye is vvorthy to be put in­to your Legendaurie: But what forgeries vvill not you bring to help your Pope withal. To this also you may ad if you please, your tale father­ed vpon Dyonysius Areop. with the vvriter thereof: as vnlike that Di­onyse in Act. 17. as Es [...]ras the 2. vvas to Ezra the first.

Vnto 2. Thes. 2 15. I answer, all Pauls traditions I vvill gladly admitt of: but not of the Popes therefore, any more then of Mahomets. Besides Paul taught nothing but from the vvrittē law, Act. 26. 22. yea that which he taught by word to these Thessalonians, was from the scriptures, as you may see, Act. 17. 1. 2. 3.

Vnto: 1 Tim. 6. 20 and 2. Tim. 2. 1. I answer as to the former: what­soever doctrine is Apostolik, is also authenticall: and I imbrace it. The thing committed first from God to Paul, from Paul to Timothie, from Timothie to others, vvas the sound doctrine of the Gospel, 1. Tim. 1. 11. [...]. Tim. 1. 10. 11. All vvhich is written in the bible, sufficient for faith, for all good workes, and for vvisdom vnto salvation, 2. Tim. 3. 15. 17. So that vnwritten traditions are needless for the gospel of life; though necessary I graunt for the stablishment of Poperie. Besides you mark not, that this committing of the vvord to Timothie, and by him to others: will cary the crown away frō Peters feighned successor the Pope. That Timothies successors at Ephesus, have more [...]o shew for themselves, thē the Byshops of Rome, for authority of vnwritten traditions, if any there be.

Whereas you say S. 23. S. Paul spake the hidden mysteries in secret: I know not vvhere you learned this, vnless by some secret tradition at Rome. For if they vvere the hidden mysteries of the Gospell; Christ wil­led Mat. 10, 27 them to be preached openly; and Paul himselfe testifieth that they vvere Rō. 16. 25 26. published among all nations, even to Colos. 1, 23. every creature vnder hea­ven. and he vvrote his Epistles (which conteyn the hidden Ephes. 3, 4 mysteries of the wisdome of God) to vvhole churches to be read to 1 Thes. 5. [...]7. all the brethren▪ True it is he taught them orderly, first the rudiments of religion or doc­trines of the beginning of Christ, vvhich he calleth 1 Cor 3, 2. Heb▪ 5, [...]. milli: then, the higher mysteries which he caleth strong meat. Which order of his, all good Byshops and ministers of Christ should follow stil, in feeding their flocks. But that the mysteries of Christ should be spokē by him in secret, so as the yonger Christians might not freely hear or read them, as you gather: is a tradition of your own. There is none of his Epistles, vvhere­in you may not find both milk and strong meat: and as he vvrote, so he spake in his sermons. It may be you have reference to 1 Cor. 2. 7. we speak the wisdom of God in a mysterie, even the hidden wisdom &c. [Page 157] If so, then you corrupt both Pauls vvords & meaning. The mysteries were not hidden or conceled from any Christian: but from the princes of the world, and naturall man▪ as the words following manifest 1 Cor. 3. 8. 14. and hidden, not as vnlawfull for them to heare, but as vnpossible for them to vnderstand Act. 28, 26 2 [...]. though they heard: because in their vvorldly wis­dome, they despised God. 1 Cor. 1, 18, 20, 21. &c. Thus men may see into vvhat strayts you are driven to find out your traditions, which cannot be mainteyned but by wresting the texts.The 3. Part.

The 3. thing which you vndertake to shew, is, that your reasons for all my answers remayn in full force. you repete [...]. 26, pag. 105. your [...] reason thus.

That which is not known for Gods word, cannot be the rule of faith. But scriptures by themselves are not knowē for Gods word: go. Scriptures by themselves are not the rule of faith.

I answer, first by imitating your argument thus.
That vvhich is not knowen for Gods word, cannot be the rule of faith.
But Popes traditions are not knowen for Gods word.
Therefore Popes traditions are not the rule of faith.
On the contrary I reason thus.
That vvhich is known for Gods word, is to be the rule of faith.
The holy scripture is known for Gods word.
Therefore it is to be the rule of faith.
The first proposition is by your selfe here proved.
The second, was also by your selfe graunced S. 3. where you said of the scriptures thus, we reverence them as Gods holy word, derived from the fulnes of truth &c.

The conclusion must follow of the premisses: so the truth hath wonne for the book of God: & your error for vnwritten traditions must give place: or ells your owne mouth shall condemn you.

Secondly I answer, your argument is deceytfull as your former vvas. For (to omitt, that it is all of negatives, vvhich in strict reasoning should not be,) you add a term in the 2. proposition vvhich vvas not in the first, viz, by themselves, vvhich also you put in the conclusion. This is no right nor faithful vvay of reasoning. If (as your māner is) you vvould have me to vnderstand it in the first: I vvill so. Then it is thus: That which is not by it self known for Gods word, cannot be t [...]e rule of faith. This now I deny: and your proof is vvanting. The proof vvhich you make for it as you had set it down▪ I admitt of concer [...]ing the vvord of God: onely vvhere you extend Gods vvord, to the definitions of the church &c. I run not so farr vvith you. But require you to prove your churches, councils, fathers definitions, to be Gods vvord: vvhich you doo not.

Your 2. proposition I deny: for the scriptures by themselves (vvith­out your traditions) may as easily be known for Gods vvord; as the Sun in the firmament may be known to give light, vvithout a candle. This I vvill manifest hereafter. Yo [...] S. 2 [...] seek to prove your a [...]ertion by authori­ty of men. That I refuse as insufficient, by authority of Christ vvho thew­eth [Page 158] their religion to be vayn, vvhich teach for doctrines the precepts of men Mat. 15. 9. Secondly you allege a reason. Since we doo not see or heare God in his known Prophets to write or speak the word &c. there must (you say) be one certayn rule or depositum fidei. As 1 Tim. 6. 20. 2. Tim. 1. 13. 14. have thou a form of sound of words etc. whence you gather that Christians must keep acertain platforme of words delivered to them over and above Pauls epistles: amongst which you name for one, Transsubstantiation. I answer, first God his vvisdome, power majesty, truth &c. are to be seen as evidently in the vvritings of the Prophets and Apostles; as his eternall power and God­head are to be seen in the creatures of the vvorld, Rom. 1. Ps. 19. although Atheists cannot see these in the one, nor Papists in the other. Secondly as men doo not hear God vocally in his Prophets: so if they did hear him in them, or in Christ his sonn, yet could they not beleeve, vnless Gods spirit illuminated their harts, Iohn. 12. 37. 39. So your reason is against Christ himselfe, as vvel as against the [...]pture. Thirdly the church (whereto you vvould send us,) when 1. [...]ayth this is Gods vvord, how shall men know it so to be, any more then they knew the vvords that Christ spake to be Gods? unless you lift vp your church above Christ.

Fourthly, vvhat church mean you; Greek, or Latine, or AEthiopian? and how shall men know Christs Church from Antichrists? And if the Latin church tel us the fables of Tobit and Iudith, are Gods canonicall scripture; and the Greek church say they are nor, but apocryphal; vvhich of these shall vve beleeve? Thus you vvould draw us into a vvilderness, vvherein vve may loose all stay of faith, and fall eyther into despayr or a­theisme.

To those vvords of Paul I have answered before: and (to let pass your mistaking as if he did inioyn a sound of words, as you vvrite;) further I vvould have you manifest if you can, vvho are Timothees successors and vvith vvhom he left Pauls depositum, as you call it? And how a man may know your kenophonie and monstrous vvord of Trāsubstantiatiō, to be one of Pauls holsom vvords, rather then the Lutherans Consub­stantiation?

Your contending S. 29. against the distinction vvhich I gave of beleeving things necessary to salvation, and other things not necessary, as, whither Peter were ever at Rome or no, and the like: I leave to the judicious reader, seing you cannot or vvill not vnderstand and rest in the truth.

Your marginall S. 30. p. 106. argument, that The written word is not proved by an other written word; therefore by tradition: I reject as false and inconsequent: so proved in my former▪ See pag. [...]7. 18. 59. vvriting. You in reciting the scriptures vvhich I brought, doo maym the texts, to ease your shoulders, In Iohn 20. 30 31. you leave out these words, and that in beleeving you might have life through his name. So in 2 Tim. 3. 16. 17. you [...]. 31. ney­ther mention nor answer this, that by the scriptures the man of God may be perfect and perfectly fitted vnto every good work. Whereby [...] proved that faith vnto life, and every good vvork may be learned out [Page 159] of the scripture, as I inferred. When you cannot answer, you call me the perverter of the holy Ghost. Let the prudent judge.

Vnto your answers S. 32. &c. p. 106. made to my evident demonstrations by the book of God, that the scriptures and spirit of God are sufficient to prove and approve themselves to every conscience: I need not make any replye, but leave it vnto judgment. But to help you (if it may be) I vvill breefly note your oversights. 1. You allege my words sundrie S. 3 [...]. 3 [...]. 34. times as if I had sayd, Gods spirit is in all people: vvhich I never spake nor thought, but proved the contrary by Ioh. 14. 17. I sayd Gods spirit is in all his people: vvhich if you doubt of, see Rom 8. 9. 16. 1 Ioh. 2. 27. You barely say (and prove not) that in actu 2. the scriptures need testimo­ny of others, besides God and his spirit, and themselves; meaning your Church and Pope: you seem to say the like of Christ himself; as others of your side h [...]ve playnly spoken. By which blasphemie, God must be behol­ding to men, Christ to the Pope, that by their witness men may beleeve in Christ and his vvord. The contrary is evident by Mat. 16. 17. flesh & blood (sayth Christ) hath not reveled it vnto thee, but my father vvhich is in heaven. See also Gal. 1. 16. 17. and 2. 6. 9. 3. You are often vp agayn vvith your bastard phrase of the private spirit; vvhereas al Gods children, have the publick or catholick spirit (if you vvill so call it) as I playnly proved in my former vvriting; & you have nothing to say against it, but that the spirit S. 8 [...] worketh otherwise in the head then in the foot: vvhich is a manifest tergiversation, vvhereof in due place.

4. You cary your self in this passage about the spirit of God, as a sish out of the element; as having no relish or feeling of this heavenly grace, whereat I much marvel not, though I am sory for it. Enter into your self and see by vvhat spirit you doo discern the Pope to be Christs vicar (as you suppose) and his traditions to be Christs oracles. Will you not say it is by the spirit of God? Now vve are assured that Christ is more able to furnish us vvith the spirit of God, then the Pope is to furnish you. That you perceive not Gods spirit to be in us, but S. [...]5. reproch us, it is not strange: for the vvorld (as Christ Ioh. 14. 17. sayth) seeth him not neyther knoweth him. Your fathers also could not perceive Gods spirit to be in Christ himself, but sayd he had an Mark. 3, 30 vnclean spirit: and we his servants are not better then our Lord. 5. So for the majesty of the scriptures shining as the sun in his strength; & by their majesty, vvisdom, harmony &c. proving & approving themselves & one an other to the faithfull conscience; you turne & vvind, because S. 36. we cānot perswade the Arians &c. by confe­rence of scriptures to beleeve aright. It is not what vve can perswade others, but our selves. For there are many Arians and other heretik [...] vvhich you vvith your fathers, councils, Popes, are not able to convert. Yet you think your Popes decrees are Gods vvord: and vve know that the holy scriptures are so indeed. And the more to convince you, look to your Mr. (as you called him) Cardinall Bellarmine, and see a sound ar­gument of his, to prove the knowledge and assurance of the scriptures to be of God, by the testimony of the scripture it selfe. Bellar. de verb. dei [Page 160] I. 1. c. 2. argument 4.

6. You ask S. 37. p. 108. a question thinking to intangle me, what the seal of the spirit is: and you suppose divers answers. Because you are so partial a judge of my spirit, I pray aske your Pope, what the seale of his spirit is, and how he discerns scripture, & whither he build without ground, as you say I doo Look what he can wel answer for himself to satisfy your conscience; that think to be answered by me. In the mean while, mind that the seal of the spirit is for my own assurance and comfort: which concerneth an other man nothing. 2 Cor. 1. 22. 1 Cor. 2. 11.

7. You having my answer already, doo refuse S. 38. it: saying it is most false that the scriptures are distinguished (from other books) by them­selves, as light from darknes For then (say you) every one that had but naturall perfection of the organ and free proposing of the object, should distinguish this light. This (say I) is most true: for the law of God is a light, Prov. 6. 23. which when it is by him free proposed, and the organ that is the mind of man (wich now is 1 Cor. 2. 14. blinded) recovereth natu­rall perfection, that is to say, is Ephes. 1. 17. 18. illuminated or renued in knowledge Colos. 3. 10. after the image of him that created it▪ every such man with his perfect organ, seeth the word of God to be in the scriptures, as every man that hath a perfect naturall ey, seeth the light of the sun: and can assure himself hereof, though he goe not to Rome to ask the Pope whither the sun gives light or no. But you are as a man without sense, that though the sun shine at noon day, yet if the Pope say it is midnight you will be­leeve him: & so on the contrary. For you S. 3. profess to beleeve each part of scripture to be Gods holy word, derived from the fulnes of truth. Now this is because the Pope tells you so, and he tells you also that the books of Tobit, Iudith, Maccabees, &c. are scripture canonicall, although in them there be apparant lyes, as you may see Tobit 12. 15. compared with Tob. 15. 18. Iudith 9. 2. compared with Gen. 49▪ 5. 6. 1 Mac. 6 16. compared with 2. Mac. 1, 16. 2 Mac. 1. 19. cōpared with 2 King. 25. 1. &c. so 2. Mac. 1. 20. 21. 22. 31. & many the like. Now though the Apostle sayth, no lye is of the truth, 1 Ioh. 2. 21. yet you beleeve these lyes are deri­ved from the fulnes of truth; because the Pope will have it so to be. Thus the blind lead the blind into the ditch.

So you doo not by your private spirit, (as you S. 40. say) distinguish he­ritiks from true beleevers, but by the definitions and declarations of the church; that is (I trow) of the Pope. I shewed you a better way by the Apostle, 1 Ioh. 4. 1. 4. but you love darknes better then light. And by your grounds, if you had lived in Christs dayes on earth, you would have distinguished Christ as an heretick from true beleeving Iewes, by the definitions of that Ioh. 9. 22. church and Preisthood.

Vnto Iewes, you confess S. 41. you must shew other grounds, then your Popes authority: But if they retort vpon you your private spirit, as you doo to me, eyther your mouth is stopped, or your conscience in pleading against me as you doo, is corrupted. Yea when you are driven about the high Preists that condemned Christ, to say S. 43. their ignorance was most [Page 161] vincible by their own law, (which was the scriptures:) your own mouth giveth sentence against you. For by the same law, say I, the ignorance of your Romish Preisthood is most vincible also. Your owne traditions are of no more force against us, then the Iewes Mar. 7. 5. &c. were against Christ.

You charge me with S. 44. &c. to 54. p. 109. racking many wrested places of scripture to prove the church of God invisible: and you oppose many scriptures against it: I answer, eyther your care was litle, or your conscience was large, to write so vntruely. The question was whither the church erred or no: that I proved by See be­fore, in p. 62. 63. many examples and testimonies of scripture, (as is to be seen in my former writing:) when your mouth is stopped her in, you pass by all that I alleged, and turne to another matter wher­in you seem to say somewhat, and answer S. 45. 46. 47. &c. p. 110. vnto scriptures which I men­tioned not. I mean to hold to the point, and not to follow your wan­drings; which are in the moveable pathes of that strange womā, Pr [...] 5. 6▪

That which you answer S. 54. &c. p▪ 111. to my demonstration of the Lab [...]ri [...]th of your religion, leading to the Pope &c. I shall not bestow labour to re­ply upon, but leave it to judgment: & so for S. 57. 58. your answers to the scrip­tures by me alleged; for I will not strive to have the last word. Whither I answered nothing (as you say S▪ 56.) to your reason, let the reader pag. [...]4. 2. Argu­ment see.

Your 2. Argument from the hardnes of the scriptures you agayn [...]. [...]. p. 112. re­pete and dilate. Seing you make no other proofe then was before, I vvil not follow you to repete my answers, but referr to my former pag. [...] wri­tings.

To prov. 8. 8. 9. you reply S. 66 p. 113. it is to be vnderstood eyther of generall doctrine, or of precepts of manners and good life. I answer, you ought not so to restrayn it. For wisdom there sayth al her words are righteous, all are playn: will you say, nay? generall doctrines are playn, but not particular: precepts of manners, but not of faith. Belike then the Prov. 9. 13 foolish woman, (that whore of Babylon, Apo. 17.) must explayn matters of faith, and particular doctrines. Well, I shall content me with Wisdoms playn words, and vvhat she teacheth not, I regard not to learne: if you vvill needs goe to the banket of stollen Pro. 9. 17. vvaters and hid bread, know that the [...]. 18. dead are there, if you vvill take vvarning.

Where I shewed how your Popes determinations make Gods law more hard to simple men, instancing the second commandement, cor­rupted by your glosses and distinctions.

You take vpon you to S. 67. defend your image-worship by the brazen Serpent and Cherubims. And might not Ieroboam so have defended his golden calves? Gods law sayth Exod. 20. Thou shalt not make to thy self any simi­litudes: thou shalt not bow down to them nor vvorship them: you make many similitudes of God, Christ, Angels, men, vvomen, cross, &c. and yee bow down before them, vvhereas the similitudes vvhich God com­manded vvere not to be vvorshiped, as you doo the Cru [...]m [...] [...]am ado­r [...]mus Do­mine. cross: the brazen Serpent vvhich you allege, shewes it. Besides vvill your Pope take vpon him Gods place and power, and make vvhat images he thinks good, be­cause God made such as pleased him? Why then if he had lived in Iero­boams [Page 162] dayes, he might have made a Temple at Bethel, because God made one in Ierusalem: and set vp Preists, altars, sacrifices of his own head, be­cause God had appointed such in Iudah. And now, let your Pope make new Churches, new Sacraments, new Ministeries, yea & an other Testa­ment, because Christ did so. But for your idolatries, they perteyn to an other place then this▪ I leave it to the judgment of every godly hart, vvhi­ther your Popish glosses, decrees, distinctions &c. be not more dark and intricate then the holy scriptures, vvhich are Psa. 119. 105. a lamp to our feet and a light to our pathes. And as for your Councils and Fathers, to vvhom so often you flee for help, vvhen holy scriptures fayl you: they are so cross and intricate in themselves and one to another: that the Pope vvith all his guard could never yet, neyther ever vvilbe able to reconcile them. Your Mr. Cardinall Bellarmine useth them as men doo Counters, that sometime stand for pounds, sometime for halfe pence. So he sometime al­loweth the Doctors, sometime dismisseth them as erring from the truth. Yet you to brave your cause muster their names, vvhose vertues you doo not imitate.

You much S. 68, p. 114.blame me as for wilfull error in citing Card. Bellarmines vvritings as the determinations of the Pope. Beare vvith me, I knew not that your Cardinal had a private spirit differing from your Pope: and bear part of the blame vvith me your selfe, that referred me in your former vvriting to answer Bellarmine your master.

Vnto my proof frō 1 Cor. 4. 1. that the other Apostles vvere dispensers of Gods mysteries as vvell as Peter: & so other Bishops now, as well as the Bishop of Rome: you answer, S. 69. 70. 71. they be all alike in power of order, but not of jurisdiction. This your distinction I deny, and in my former See pag. 29. 30. 80. 81. vvritings disproved it: and you bring not, neyther can bring any vvord of God to confirme it: and therefore as your manner in such exi­gents is, you flee to humane authority. Now I graunt that your Popes throne is from men; or from the Dragon Rev. 13. 2. if you will. But Gods vvord sayth, A man can receive nothing, unless it be given him from hea­ven: John. 3. 27.

From this you S. 72. p. 115. pass to Act. 15. (afterwards you S. 80. goe back again to other things that in order vvere before.) I answered twise your reasons from that scripture, shewing how you constreyn it beyond all reason: yet the 3. time you press it thus From v. 6. the Apostles and Ancients assi­bled: you note it against us, that vvould (you say) have all men to give their voice and be present in council. I answer, in v. 4. it is shewed they were received of the Church, and of the Apostles and ancients. In v. 12. it is sayd, all the multitude kept silence. In v. 22. it is sayd, it seemed good to the Apostles & ancients with the whole church to send &c. In v. 23. the letters vvere thus vvritten, The Apostles ancients and the brethren, unto the brethrē &c. & v. 25. It seemed good to us vvhē vve vvere come togither vvith one accord &c. All vvhich doo manifest that the people vvere present, and not the Apostles and ancients onely; as you from an usual figurative Synech­doche. speech in v. 6. mistaken vvould collect.

[Page 163]From v. 7. you S. 73. gather, that vvhen there vvas made a great disputati­on, Peter rising up and speaking by his authority composed that great dispuration, that is setled the height of their difference, which argues superiority. And eftsoones you▪ press this word great disputation, for Peters rising vp vvas before proved to be but a staff of reed for the Pope▪ I answer, you dally vvith the holy scriptures unsufferably. The ar­gument if it wil help you should be this. Whosoever in a Council when there is great disputation riseth up & speaketh, he is head of that coun­cil; yea and of the vniversal church. But Peter in a council, vvhen there vvas great disputation rose up and spake: therefore he vvas head. I de­ny your first proposition: as strayned against scripture and light of reason. And I vvould pray you in sooth to answer, vvhither in the many conten­tious Councils vvhich have been since the Apostles dayes, there have not been sundry men that rose up and spake when there was great dis­putation: and vvhither they vvere all heads of the church therefore. That vvhich you add, of Peters composing the great disputation by his authoritie; is not of the text, but a gloss of your private spirit.

Your S. 74. 7 [...] extenuating of the Apostle Iames his authority, vvho spake last, and gave Krino. judgment or sentence v. 19. sheweth hovv partiall you are for S. Peter. But I vvill cease from answering vvords of vvind. Let him that readeth that scripture judge, vvhither of the two had the chiefest place.

Your exception S. 76. p. 116. that it is not sayd Peter spoke those words risen but when he was rising; (as if you vvould put a cushion vnder him to sit down agayn:) is altogither vnworthy to be answered. For, (besides that the very same speech is used of Gamaliel, as I told you, in Act. 5, 34.) you might even as vvel say, that Peter vvent not to Ioppa risen, but when he was rising, Act. 9. 39. and that Peter vvas sent to goe Act. 10. 20. to Cornelius, and Paul to goe Act. 22. 10. to Damascus, not vvhen they vvere risen but vvhen they vvere rising: seing there is one and the same Anastas. vvord and phrase u­sed in all these and sundry other like places. But such traditionall expo­sitions of holy scripture, is your church fayn to use for vvant of better, to bolster vp her preeminence.

Gamaliel (you S. 77. 78. say) spake rather as a freind then as a judge: as a Cardinall in the Popes conclavi, rather then as a Pope. Be it so: yet he Act. 5. 34. rose up I trow vvhen he spake: so then rising up to speak, is no proof of superiority: and you might have spared this strife about your frivolous reason.

Yet from Act. 13. 16. you S. 79. p. 117. vvould gather by Pauls rising up in the Synagogue, that he vvas cheif preacher. Well, let your argument from rising to speak, be layd up in the Popes conclavi: for to prove his pree­minence if need be, to speak in a church, as Paul did in that synagogue.

You bethink you, and turn S. 80. back to your other pervered place of 2. Pet. 1. 20. cited (as you pretend) by you thus, No prophesy is made by pri­vate interpretation, vvhich you say I call and doo not prove a bastard phrase. I answer you tvvise cited it, private spirit interpretation, and had vvritten it so this third time, but blotted out the vvord spirit. Your [Page 164] own hand writing therefore convinceth you of vntruth, not me of bad conscience as you charge me. I did and doo cal it a bastard phrase; as be­ing of your own or of the Popes begetting, for th'Apostle Peter neyther spake nor meant so. You add to his idias epi­luseos. vvords, and therfore are reproved of God, Prov. 30. 6. you swary from your authentik Latin Propria interpreta­tione. En­glished by Mr. I. A. private spi­rit inter­pretation. translation, and therefore are reproved by your own canon law.

I proved by the scriptures, Ephe. 4. 4. Rom. 12. 4. &c. 1 Cor. 12. 4. 8. 9. &c. that there is but one spirit which al Gods people have; though in divers mesures; as mans body hath but one soul or spirit to quicken it. This you not being able to deny, doo vvind away, and except; S. 80. though it be the same fowl, yet it worketh otherwise in the head, then in the foot etc I answer, it is very true. You inferr then, that so it belongs to the head of the church and not to every craftsman, to interpret scrip­tures. Why: are ther no members in a mans body, between the head and the heels: that you make such a leap? Is there no mean between the head and every craftsman? What place then is there for your Cardinals, Bi­shops, Preists, Doctors, Iesuits &c. they are not the head of the church: yet you think them higher then the feet. But if this your answer be good, then though Peter were head (as you erroneously think,) I hope the spirit wrought otherwise in him then it did in that divil incarnate Pope Iohn the 22. and in other your monstrous & vvicked Popes; as your own friends doo vvitnes against them. Then had those beasts a private spirit; vvorse then any an honest craftsman: then it belonged not to them to in­terpret scriptures. No nor to your Preists and Iesuits unless you vvill make them heads? A little after, S. 82. touching Pope Stephen, vvho repe­led the decrees of his predecessor Pope Formosus: you vvould have him to doo this, not as the head of the church, but out of the violen­cie of his private spirit. I like vvell of your answer, and think the very same of all the Popes traditions: and therefore the privat spirit, vvhich so oft you entwite me vvith; I return into your own hands, to be kept as the Popes Depositum.

You pretend, S. 83. that for all the vvickednes of some Popes, God hath stil preserved the unity of faith in your church. And that never any Pope by his definitive sentence did define heresie. I answer, if the Pope may be judge as vvith you he is, I vvarrant you he vvill never condemn himself of heresie. But if Gods word be judge, many heresies are easy to be found in your late council of Trent and in many Popes decrees. Which vvill come to be scanned in particular doctrines, after these generall grounds are ended.

Your digression S 85. to another vvriter, I omitt: you may seek answer (if you please) of himself.

And your author [...]o vvhom you S 88. send me for satisfaction about your Popes power of dispensations, I shall read vvhen I have leysure therto.

Your 3. Argument you S. 89. p. [...]19. set down now (upon your memorie) other­weise3. Arg. then ever before, thus. That which hath still been a rule to thē that have erred, cannot be a certayn rule to direct all in faith. But [Page 165] the scripture interpreted by the private spirit (as every one pretends given from God) hath led many into dangerous and horrible errors. go. the scriptures though directed by the private spirits interpreta­tion cannot be a rule of faith. I answer, your conclusion I grant, (though your argument be naught:) for the private spirit, wee found whileare to be the violent spirit of the Pope, or his like. And scripture directed (or rather perverted) by such a spirit, cannot in deed be a rule of faith.

Against your 2. Proposition I except, it implieth a fallacie putting that for the cause▪ which is not the cause. The scriptures never led any into errour: but vnlearned and unstable persons, pervert all scriptures (as the Apostle 2. Pet. 3. 10. sayth) unto their own destructiō: the cause hereof is not the scri­ptures but mens corruption. The Pharisees perverted the doctrines spo­ken by our Saviour Christ himselfe, yet I hope you will not deny but his heavenly words was a certayn rule to direct all in faith. So the proof of your minor, faileth you.

Against your first proposition, (which you say is most certayn) I ex­cept as not playn, and so deceitfull. That which is a rule to them that err, (understanding, of it own nature and properly) cannot be a cer­tayn rule to direct all in faith. But now to assume, that the scripture is such; were blasphemie. Agayn, That which is a rule to them that err, (to weet a rule by accident, through their ignorance or malice abusing it,) cannot be a certayn rule to direct al (Gods people) in faith: now I deny the proposition: and leave you to give proof of these things, in your next. And whither before or now, you have drie-beaten mee, as you boast: let the lookers on, give verdict.

Your 4. argument you omit, through oversight I suppose, onely wh [...]r I shewed by 1. Cor. 11. 19. Act. 15. &c. that contentions were in the Apostles times, and composed by the scriptures, not by setting up a su­premejudge or Pope: Yow S. 91. pag 120. answer barely, they prove rather the [...] must be one visible supreme judge to decide controversies. Wee are th [...]n at a point. Let him that readeth the see p. 70. scriptures and reasons which I there alleged: judge whither of the two, they doo rather prove.

Your 5. (which yow 5. Arg. S. 92. call your 4.) argument, is, that we beleeve many things, which are not reveled in holy scripture &c. I told yow and tell yow agayne, that I doo not (howsoever yow may) beleeve any thing needful for my salvation, which is not reveled in the Holy scrip­tures: In those things that are plaine­ly set do [...]n in the scriptures al such things ar found as concern faith hope & charity: Augustine de doct. Christ. l. 2, c. 9. neyther wil I use other weapons against Arians, Anabaptists or any heretiks that acknowledge the scriptures to be of God. This therfore is no argument to convince me at all. You insult for that I will not shewe my particular proofs against those heresies. I told you this were to di­gress from our present controversie. Propose yow arguments and I will answer you for the cause in hand: els multiplie not words in vaine.

You now plainly answer S. 94▪ that Gods vvord as it is extrinsecal the vvord of God, and to be knovvn of us, depends of tradition and the authoritie of the church. This I reject as an heresie. For vvhen vve read or hear [Page 166] the books of Moses or the Prophets, vve read that vvhich is spoken to us of God, (Mark. 1 [...], 26. compared vvith Math. 22, 31.) that vvhich the Spirit of God speaketh to the churches Rev. 2, [...], 11. novv not to be­leeve or rest upon this ground, but to rely upon mans record, is to make the testimony or man greater extrinsecally to us, then the testimonie of God; contrarie to 1. Ioh. 5, 9. and maketh men lyable to the curse, Ier. 17. 5.

You replie unto Act. 26, 22. that in tradition nothing is spoken be­sides, that is, contrarie, to the Apostles speeches. First this is untrue, many of your church traditiōs are both besides & cōntrary to the scrip­tures; as when we examine the particulars wil appear: and yow dare not subject your church and traditions, to the trial by the scriptures: but yow wil haue mens fayth extrinsecally to depend upō your church. Secondly you wind away by terms of your owne: besides, that is contra­ry; vvhereas the Apostle sayth, nothing without (or except) that vvhich the Prophets and Moses sayd: none other thing. Your allegation from 2. 2. Thes. 2. is answered in my former vvritings.

You further allege for traditions, Act. 15. 41. & 16. 4. I answer all A­postolicall decrees (such as are ther mentioned) we doo receiv: but yours decreed by the Pope, are Apostaticall. Secondly you may see that those which they delivered, vvere vvritten before, Act. 15. 23.-25. 28. &c. You say they are uncertayn: let the prudent judge. And if so they be, then are they not necessary for salvation, for all such are vvritten: Ioh. 20. 30. 31. 2. Tim. 3. 15. 17.

Here you interlace 2. other points comp [...]ing the grounds that vveThe 4. & 5. parts af­ter hand­led. and that you doe goe vpon: and you handle them largely in 55. sections. I vvill first follow on vvith your 6. part, (at S. 153.) both because that vvas the course of our former vvritings: and the examining of the things alleged for your Pope, vvil give light touching these other points, which also I vvill consider of after; in his place.

The second of your assertions (vvhich now you make the 6. part of your longsome pamphlet) vvas. That the Popes definitive sentence as he is head of the church, is an indeficient rule in matters of faith. To this now (as a man fearful of your cause,) you S. 153. &c pag. 134. have added, the Popes definitive sentence at least with a generall council. And this you say, you are to show: and vve (say I) are ready to behold your showes. Here I find no argument by you set down to conclude your assertion; as vvas in the former points: vvhich is an other declaration of the weaknes of your cause. Heretofore to help the Pope, you fled to S. Peters prerogatives: vvhich vvere they as great as you feign them to be, yet (as I told you,) there is no more proved for the Bishop of Rome, then for the Bishop of Babylon, or Patriarch of Constantinople Yet having no better grounds, you agayn flee to them; and labour to repayr your showes of Peters pre­eminence, vvhich I by the scriptures had pulled down.

And first you S. 157. say, that out of the whole series of them, and the cir­cumstances; and not, onely out of each particular, you draw an infalli­ble [Page 167] argument. I answer, the particulars I have proved to be by you wres­ted: so the vvhole series and rank of them, can conclude not hing sound­ly for you.

Your 1 show vvas S. Peters naming first. I told you this is usual, but not alwayes; and to help you (because you complayn [...] cited not the [...] see Ioh. 1. 45. vvhere Andrew is named before him; Gal. 2. 9. vvhere Iames is named before him, Mar 16. [...]. vvhere mention is made o [...] the disciples and Peter: so 1 Cor. 9. 5. the Apostles, brethren of the Lord, and Cephas. Though if he had been alvvayes first named, it proves him not to be the head of the church: more then the first foundation, Rev. 21. 19. vvill prove Paul; as I shewed you. Here you S. 160. boast that Exod. 28. 18. 19. confutes me: vvhere the Iasper (you think) is the sirt stone, and so not the 12. for Benjamin. I answer, an yll translation hath deceived you. For Moses there sheweth V. 20 that the stone Iaspeh (whereof the Greek Iaspis, Arabik Iasp, Latine Iaspis, and English Iasper are naturally derived) vvas the [...]2▪ and last in the brestplate, and so for Benjamin, (vvho vvas the last born of the patriarchs,) to be graved vpon, Exod. 28. 9. 10. 21. This your own learned Linguists as Arias Montanus and others doo acknowledge, and so correct your translation. So the best of the Iewish Rabbines, as Maimony, vvho sayth, Benjamin was written on the Iaspeh: (Misn. lib. 8. Treat. of the vessels of the Sanctuary, chapt. 9 S. [...].) And thus Paul of Benjamin, hath colour to be the head of the church, as vvell as Peter.

You S. 159. press Mat 10. 2. the first Simon caled Peter: Andrew (as you think) vvas first in yeres & first in caling: for proof you cite Ambrose on 2. Cor. 12. I answer, first Ambroses humane [...]uthority is no proof for Pe­ters pretended divine headship. Secondly Ambrose saith not that he vvas first in yeres, (put that therfore amōg your own traditiōs:) but Homil▪ 5 [...] ▪ in Math. Chrysostō (if you vvil rely upō men) maketh Peter elder then Andrew. That which Ambrose sayth is, Andrew folowed our Sav: before Peter, this I hold true, by Ioh. 1. 40. 41. but it is one thing to folow Christ as a disciple, & an other thing to be chosen an Apostle; as reason teacheth, and you may read▪ Mar. 3. 13. 14. 16. compared with Mar. 1. 16. Luk. 6. 12. 13. 14. vvith Luk. 5. 8. 10. That Andrew therefore vvas an Apostle before Pe­ter, I deny by vvarrant of scripture: & thus I wink not, (as you vvrite:) but vvith Calvin I confess Peter to be first of the Apostles.

You grant, S. [...] pag. 135. by that I alleged, from 2. King. 2. Dan. 3. that such mi­racles as Peters walking on the water, prove no headship of the church: so then this also you brought but for a show.

3: I corrected your error in translating him for it, in Mat. 16. 18. re­streyning that to Peter, vvhich Christ promised to his vvhole church. You stand to it S 162▪ 16 [...] stil. But first against humane learning, for autes the fe­minine gender, cannot accord with Petros the malculine: as it can and dooth vvith Ecclesias the Church. You plead also against true religion: for I proved by Io [...]. [...]0. 27. 28. 29. that all true Christians are invinci­ble of h [...]l g [...]s, and not Peter onely. Here you burst out and cry, that [Page 168] if I vnderstād it in the Calvinisticall sense that one once justified can not be again the child of wrath, it is (you say) a most horrible falshood, and against the holy scriptures. Rom. 11. 20. 21. Rev. 2. 5▪ I answer, I understand plainly as Christ sayth that his sheep shall never p [...]rish, ney­ther shall any pluck them out of his hand; but he vvill give them e [...]er [...]al life, Ioh. 10. 28. that it is not possible the elect should be seduced [...] Christ, Mat. 24▪ 24. for God putteth his fear in their harts that they shall not depart from him: Ier. 32. 40, and Gods gifts and caling are without repentance, Rom. 11. 29. and they that are born of God cannot syn vnto death 1 Ioh. 3. 9. And these things accord vvell with Rom. 11. 20. 21. &c. for by faith we stand: but all men have not faith, 2 Thes. 3. 2. there is a vayne fayth, Iam. 2. 14. 17. 20. from that men fall: and there is the faith of Gods elect, Tit. 1. 1. and this faith justifieth, Rom. 4. 3. 5. & 5. 1. and from it men never fall finally. They may fall into syn by infirmity, but shall not be cast off▪ for the Lord putteth under his hand: Psal. 37. 24. yea though they fall seven times, yet they rise agayn: but the vvicked fall into mischief Prov. 24. 16. This is my faith: and your contrary Popish heresies I abhorr.

You deny not S. 164. pa. 13 [...]. but your Popes may be reprobates and damned in hel. I trow then hel gates doo prevayl against them, and so the promise in Mat. 16. 18. perteyns not vnto them. You except, the Divil prevayls not against the Pope as he is head of the church, as he defines e [...] cathe­dra. Yes doubtless, therein he most prevayls against him, because he al­lures him into Christs Colos. 1. 17. 18, place, and so makes him Antichrist. And if you had the mind 1 Cor. 2. 16. of Christ: you would no more regard vvhat Rev. 9. 11. Apolluon the P. of Rome, defineth ex cathedra, (unless he could prove it by the ho­ly scriptures:) then what Apollo the D. of Delphos divined ex tripode.

4. Your fourth shew from Peters confirming his brethren, being con­futed by scriptures, Act. 14. 22. and 15. 41. 32. &c. you now say, the o­ther Apostles confirmed not S. 165. as the supreme pastor, not S. 166. as the head of the church by office. I answer, neyther did Peter so: if you add that to your wrested text, God will reprove you, Prov. 30. 6. and your hu­mane testimonies (vvhich you abuse also) shall not save you.

You digress S. 165. to entwite me with gross corruption of the text, for En­glishing presbyteros an Elder. I am loth to folow your outroades: onely let me tel you, that you check herein your authentik Latin translation which turneth it 2 Ioh. 1. 1 Senior, and Act. 20. 17 Major nat [...]: and▪ in your divinitie, En­glishing both Cohen▪ Hiereus, a Preist, and Zaken, Presbuteros a Preist, as if these were one you deceiv the simple with a sophistical aequivocatiō. And you may as wel say the Apostles were idiots, because they are caled idiotai. Act. 4. 13. as say Christs ministers are Preists (vnderstanding sacrificing Preists,) because they are caled Presbyteri.

5. You daily agayn S. 167. pa. 137. about Peters feet first washed, as some suppose▪ I let you alone vvith your fansie: let the reader judge whither it be a fit proof for his headship.

6. So for Peters martyrdome, vvhence you conclude it was pro­misedS. 168.[Page 169] to Peter to be head of the church. It is a bold untruth: the text sayth no such words, proveth no such thing.

7. Your 7. show was gathered also from a false translation, restrayn­ing, they began, Act. 2. 4. to Peter as if he began: which being but a guess, you now shrink S. 169. from that, to the next passage in v. 14▪ &c. where from Peters sermon you would prove him head of the church. It is a vvorld to see, vvhat shifts you are driven to: the very naming of them, is to all wise men ridiculous. But if Peter for first preaching was head of the church: that Pope vvhich first left preaching, was the head of the Beast: and so all your unpreaching Popes (at least) are Antichrists.

You graunt agayn S. 170. pag. 138. that the first miracle, which you uncertainly supposed S. Peter vvrought, Act. 2. 11. dooth not solely convince what you would: & herein I beleeve you. But I marvel at your discretion, that think a number of futilous and vvorthless arguments being heaped togither, would perswade any vnto popery, unless they be such as are spoken of Prov. 9. 16. who so is simple let him come hither. And here you are too lavish of your tongue, in saying I cannot deny but our Savi­our caleth Peter the rock, first washeth his feet, that Peter booth the first miracles &c. I denyed the first, and you cannot prove the latter. Though were they al granted for Peter, yet your applying them to your Pope, is altogither groundless.

The first S. 171. 17 [...] excommunication by Peter, inferrs (you think) that he was head. Before you urged the act: which being proved insufficient, now yee flee to the first doing of the act. At the most this sheweth but primacie in order; (which I graunted:) seing Paul and others did the like. But by your manner of reasoning, vvhosoever dooth any thing first, shallbe head of the church. And why I pray you, by like reason should not those Popes that first practised Simony, sorcerie and hypocrisie; be heads of the man of syn. You leav S. 174. it for the reader to judge whither all these reasons togither shew not that Peter was rock and head of the church. I also referr it to judgment. And if your vayn shewes for Peter be not sound proofs for your Pope: then he is left naked, as the heath in the wildernes, Ier. 17. 6.

I proved by the scriptures Mat. 28. 18. 19. 20. Ioh. 20. 21. 22. 23. Act. 2. 4. that the other Apostles had equal office, charge and power, vvith Pe­ter himself: you answer S. 175. the places prove nothing: and if ought, it is equality of order & not of jurisdiction. Thus you resist the truth vvith­out reason: it vvere vvell if you would add Prov. 16▪ 23. doctrine to your lips. When all the Apostles are sent by the power of Christ, vvith like vvords and authority: vvhen the rest (as Paul) doo whatsoever Peter himself did▪ in word, prayer, Sacraments, censures, miracles &c. you barely say, they vvere not equall in jurisdiction. You vveary me vvith your own words, and repetitions without proof. Seing Gods vvord moves you not, let me trie vvhat mans will doo: The rest of the Apostles (sayth Cyp▪ de simpl. pr [...]l, one of your Doctors) vvere verily the same that Peter vvas, indued vvith equal par­ticipation of honor and of power. Being blamed for your making Peter [Page 170] head and rock of the church, vvhich are Christs peculiar titles: You an­swer, he is the ministerial & subordinat head to Christ: as Christ is theS. 177. pa., 1 Cor. 3. 11. & yet the Apostles are foundations, Eph 2. 20. I answer, first Gods word no where caleth Peter the head: and vvhy will you be vviser then God? Secondly the Apostles, because they layd the foundation vvhich vvas Christ, as Paul sheweth, 1. Cor. 3 10. 11. therfore the Church is sayd to be built upon their foundation, Eph. 2. 20. And in this they vvere equal: if any excelled, it vvas Paul, who laboured in laying the foundation more then the rest, 2 Cor. 12. 11. 1 Cor. 15. 10. In this sense if you speak of ministerial head, that by the ministery of the word Peter preached the head Christ, the thing is true, but the phrase is not good: it vvas true in Paul also as much as Peter, yea & in all the Apo­stles: Act. 1. 2. 3. 4. 8. and thus all Christs ministers at this day, minister and preach him the head, vvhich the Pope dooth not. But you feign a thing which never vvas, that Christ should substitute Peter for head in his place & absence: no scripture tells you this, but the contrary, for Christ being Mat. 28. 20. present and Rev. 1. 13. and 2. 1. vvalking vvith his churches, needeth no vicar. And this title head, God in his vvord giveth onely to Christ: Col. 1. 18. Yet you, leaving Gods vvord, fly to your S. Basil for succor: that all men may see, your church and prelacy, is built on the sands of mens traditions, not on the Rock of divine oracles.

You vvill not from it, S. 178. but Peter signifies a rock: vvhich I have disproved; and shewed that Petros of Petra the Rock, and Cephas of Ceph, is no more then to be a Christian of Christ. Peter vvas a principal stone (yea the first if you vvill) layd upon Christ the chief Eph. 2. 20. corner stone, the 1 Cor. 10. 4. Rock: all Christians are 1 Pet. 2. 5. living stones layd on him also. Your racked allegations from Augustine and other Doctors, I vvil not spend time to confute: for I build my religion vpon the Rock Christ, & not upon men.

Your S. 179. reason vvhy the gender vvas not changed in Christs name as in Peters, is for that all vvhich admitted of his doctrine vvould not de­ny him to be head of the church. I see you love to say somwhat unto eve­ry thing. I also may say, all vvhich admitt of the Popes doctrine, vvill not deny Peter to be head of the church: so (by your argument) there was no need to change the gender for him neyther. And so the scripture hath doon somthing needless: or els your answer is fruitless. How you save Optatus credit, and your self from blame, for falsely interpreting Cephas a head, contrary to the holy Ghost, Ioh. 1. 43. vvho interpre­teth it a stone: I leave it for the learned to judge.

Your exception S. 180. pag. 140. that Peter vvas not elected to be the mouth of the rest, vvas refelled in my former vvriting, if you vvould rest: for Tho­mas, Philip, Iude, vvere not elected any more then Peter to speak for the other disciples, Ioh. 14. 5. 8. 22. yet you vvill not have them heads.

So your distination of the Apostles equallity in power of order, not of S. 183. jurisdiction; is a bare repetition of a thing never proved, but before re­futed And where you add, equall as they were Apostles but not as they were Bishops: it is mere trifling, you might as vvell say, [Page 171] equal as they were men, but not as they vvere living creatures. For they vvere no otherweise Bishops, then as they were Apostles. And in Act. 1. you may see that Iudas his Episcopee or Bishops office, vvas no other then his Apostolee or Apostles office, Act. 1. v. 20. compared vvith v. 17. 25. 26. Besides by 1. Cor. 12. 28. and Ephe. 4. 11. you may see the A­postles were by office the first in the church: that if the other were equal vvith Peter in the Apostleship (as you graunt); they vvere equal also in al power: that if you resist any longer, you vvill be condemned of your self. Your succession grounded but vpon mens report, I allow not of, for you build on boggs.

Your understanding S. 184. of that admonition Rom. 11. 20. 22. &c. is partly true, and against your self in that you vvrote before S. 162. partly it is frivolous, vvhiles you dream of more previlege to the See of Roome and Bishop there, then to others churches and Bishops. You have no colour for this in the testament of Christ: yet is it the mayn thing that yow should prove, if it were possible. No citie in the world remayneth so execrable by Gods word, as Rome for killing Christ of old, by her power and pollicie: and for being Antichrists throne. Rev. 17. and 18.

It is worth the noting, that you S. 185. pa▪ 141. doo not hold the Pope is necessa­rily indued with Gods holy grace. And that in matters of fact he maysyn (you say) as well as any other. Your Popes facts I am sure prove this, if any shoud have the face to deny it. Hereupon I inferr, that your Popes are not members, and so not possibly heads of the catholik church of God. It is high blasphemy to say the head of that church may want Gods holy grace, Colos. 1, 18. &c. & 2, 19. How now doo you know that the traditions and definitions of your graceless Popes, are of God? If you trie them not by the scriptures, (which you dare not, be­cause of the private spirit,) they may deceive and damne your soul, as well as any other men. You say, you hold a necessary assistance which the Pope hath of the holy Ghost, as he defines ex cathedra. And upon what ground hold you this? You find in Gods book no menti­on eyther of your Pope, or of his Chayr, for good. The Apostle Peter di­recteth us to that vvhich holy 2 Pet. 1. 21. men of God spake: not to that vvith Sa­tans slaves doo teach: such as vvas P. Silvester the 2. of vvhom Cardinal Benno Ben. in vi­ta Hildebr. vvriteth, that he came up out of the abyss (or bottomless deep) o [...] divine permission. And by the same answers of the Divils vvher­by he had deceived many, he vvas also deceived himself, & vvas intercepted vvith suddayn death, by the judgment of God. And yet vvil you trust such a miscreant; that out of his chayr he vvill tel you none but divine oracles. Never vvas there such a thing known since the beginning of the vvorld, that a graceless reprobate, should have necessarily the assistance of the holy Ghost, so often as he sits him down on his chayr, to define or determine the matters of God. No religion on earth (to my know­ledge) ever admitted such an unreasonable doctrine; for vvhich you have no proof, unless from the Popes own ungracious spirit: vvhereby he exalteth himself against all that is caled God, 2. Thes. 2 4.

[Page 172]Notvvithstanding you S. 186. labour to justify your S. Leo that sayd the head (meaning I trow your ministeriall head at Rome,) infuseth grace to the whole church: & that God took S. Peter into the fellowship of the indi­vidual vnity. And doe you, in earnest, beleev these things of your repro­bate Popes, as of S. Silvester the 2. of that Divil incarnate S. Iohn the 22. & their like? I perceive it is not vvithout cause that the scarlet coloured beast, is sayd to be Rev. 17. 3 full of the names of blasphemie. And here you say I see your religiō is no upstart religiō, that so many yeres agoe was main­teyned. Yes, upstart it is, but many yeres agoe I grant: for the mysterie of iniquity did vvork evē vvhiles Paul lived, 2 Thes. 2. 7. & he told how after his departure Act. 20. 29 greivous wolves should enter, not sparing the flock: under the name of wolves, comprehending it may be 2 Tim. 4. 17 Ier. 50. 17. Lions also and all other salvage beasts. Wherefore Antichrist is an old man, though you mistake, as if he were yet scarse in his cradle. 2. You helpe S. Leo, as mea­ning that vvhich S. Peter sayd, of such as should be partakers of the godly nature, I answer, first this is a very friendly interpretation, that the fellowship of the individual unity, should be but participation of the godly nature which al Christiās are partakers of. A man may thus inter­pret the Familists blasphemie, that they are H. N. Evan regni c. 1. S. 1. Godded with God. But I wil take S. Leo at the best. Secondly therfore I answer, that this speach of Peter vvas to all the Saincts, that fled the corruption vvhich is in the vvorld through lust, 2. Pet. 1. 1. 4. so that S. Peters privilege, vvill get litle hereby, much less the Popes. For these graces have not appeared in many heads of your church, but the contrary, vvhiles your Popes fo­lowed the corruption in the vvorld through lust, (as your self deny not:) so then such vvere not partakers of the divine, but of the Ioh. 8. 44. Divils nature. And now consider vvhat grace they have infused into your church. But for this participation you say, S. Greg. the 7. prayed to S. Peter. I think vve shall have a Luk. 11. 2. God of him anone. You say, nay, but that he vvould be an intercessor. And herein say I, you make him Christ: for there is, as the scripture telleth us, 1 Tim. 2, 5. one God, and one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Iesus. But if this reason be good, the Pope may kneel and pray to you also: for if you be, as you suppose, a true Christian▪ then have you that participation of the divine nature, 2. Pet. 1. 4. and the prayer of the righteous one for another even in this vvorld Iam. 5. 16. avayleth much as th'Apostle telleth us. Yet for al this, I think the Pope vvill scarse pray unto you, as he dooth to S. Peter▪

Whereas I sayd one of your Canonists caled him Cum in­ter. in gloss. ex­trav. Io. 22.our Lord God the Pope: you first S. 187. charge me vvith untruth, as if I sayd your Canonists and so made it an ordinary style of the canon law. I answer, you mis­take my vvriting, wh [...]re you may see it sayd, one of them. But had I vvritten as you say, you need no more blame me for untruth, then a pay­nim might cavil at the Euangelist, for flying that the theeves reproch­ed Christ, Mat. 27. 44. vvhen it vvas but one of them that did so, Luk, 23 39. 40. You say, S. 1 [...]7. in a vvritten copy in the Vatican library, the vvord God is not found; but, our Lord the Pope. I rest in your reporte: for [Page 173] the blasphemy vvas so gross, as I think you are all ashamed of it. Yet that so it hath been divulged by your selves in other copies, you cannot deny. And I trow you are not ignorant that your Pope is caled God oftner thē once: for see vvhat is also vvritten, Clement. in proem. in Gloss. and Concil Lateran. Sess. 4. sub Leo. 10. Therefore you vvould help it by script [...]re, alleging Ps. 81. 6. I have sayd you are Gods &c. I am sory that you set your self to justify all grossnes. Our Lord God, is a peculiar phrase to the onely true God; not to magistrates caled Gods by office: much less to any Vsurper. But if you vvill needs have it so, let the Pope be caled God of the Papists. D. Stapleton saluteth In Epist. ant. prin­cip. doct. Pope Gregorie 13. as his supreme Numen (or God) on earth. He vvas not therefore of the Prophets religion, vvho sayd, vvhom have I in heaven (but thee oh Lord) and there is none on earth that I desire besides thee; Psal. 73. 25. Your self have vvritten the Pope to be the Universal Pastor, Ioh. 10. & he (as I told you) is one with the Father, Ioh. 10. 30. and you retract it not. I know no reason, if you hold this stil, vvhy you may not say as the Apostle Thomas sayd to the true Universal Pastor, Christ; My Lord & my God: Ioh. 20. 28. and pray to the Pope, as did that vnclean mouth vvhich sayd, Paul. [...] myl. lib. [...] o thou that takest away the synns of the world have mercy vpon us.

Your opinion about deposing Princes, I am not ignorant of, as you S. 190 suppose. Your Mr. the Cardinall Bellarm. tract. de Potest. S. pontif, in temporal. hath lately vvritten more then a good deal hereabouts. But I forbear to urge this point, least you should think, I went about to ensnare you. I wish more good vnto you.

For a conclusion you S. 191. repete your former scriptures togither for S. Peters preeminence. I referr you, and al, to my former refutation of your showes. Onely I will answer where you add now somwhat more: as you say, The Angel directeth Peter to goe before them as their Cap­tayn, Mark. 16 17. This is a palpable perverting of the scripture: for the Angel there speaketh of Christ to the women; goe tel his disciples andpag. 142.Peter, that he goeth before you into Galil [...]e, there ye shal see him, This which Christ had promised to doo himself, Mark. 14. 28. and now performed it, Mark. 16. 17. you falsely apply unto Peter: to prove him head and Captayn: and so by Peters feighned Captainship, to intrude your Pope as head and Captayn; so thrusting out Christ. Did ever men offer such abuse to Gods word as you doo?

No better is your next addition; S. Peter (you say) came first to the monument. Ioh 20. 4. were this so, what sense is there to conclude him head of the Church for it? Mary Magdalen was there before Peter, Ioh. 20. 1. why doo you not make her head? But you falsify the scripture: for it sayth they rann both togither, but the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the monument. That which the holy Ghost witnesseth of Iohn, the other disciple: that doo you ascribe to Peter. How unsufferably doo you vvrest the scripture? What lyes (may vve think) vvill you not preach to your seduced people, vvhich may not read the scriptures: vvhen you vvrite thus to me? But any thing is good [Page 174] ynough, to help your Popes: like proofe like prerogative.

Thirdly you add, S. Paul came to Ierusalem to see S. Peter, Gal. 1. 18. This had had some show, if he had come to Rome to see S. Peter: now, if it could prove S. Peters preeminēcie, it might have some colour for the Bishops of Ierusalem: but for the Pope of Rome none at all. No more then as if one should reason thus, Iudas betrayed his master: therefore the Pope is Antichrist. I think you vvil not graunt the conclusion, though it be truer then yours. I further answer, that Paul there proveth his authority to be no vvay inferiour to Peters, both by his caling, v. 1. and his behaviour after his caling: for he vvent not to Ierusalem to them vvhich vvere Apostles before him, but (as he saith) vnto Arabia, and turned agayn unto Damascus, v. 17. then after 3. yeares he vvent to Ieru­salem to see Peter, vvhich being compared vvith his words and deeds af­ter, Gal 2. 6. 7. 8. 11. &c. argue rather Pauls Priviledge, then Peters. For his going to Peter, vvil no more debase him, then the mother of our Lord, vvho vvent into the hil country to Elizabet, vvith vvhom she ta­ryed much longer then Paul did vvith Peter, Luk. 1. 39. 40 43. 56.

And now we have seen your plea for S. Peter: I vvil shew how a man might plead better for S. Paul, that he was the head of your Catholik Roman church as you vainly call it. 1. S. Paul was caled to his office, not by S. Peter but by Iesus Christ, Gal. 1. 1. 2. S. Paul received the doctrine vvhich he preached, not from S. Peter but by revelation frō Iesus Christ, Gal. 1. 12. 3. S. Paul laboured in preaching the gospell, more then S. Pe­ter did 1. Cor. 15. 10. 4. S. Paul went and preached vvithout so much as conferring vvith S. Peter or the rest, Gal. 1. 16. 17. 5. The gospel over the vncircumcision (that is the Gentils among vvhom Rome vvas cheif) was committed to S. Paul. Gal. 2. 7. 6. S. Paul had upon him the care of all churches, 2 Cor. 11. 28. 7. S. Paul hath vvritten, and opened clearly the great mysteries of Christ, in his Epistles, more then S. Peter or any A­postle. 8. S. Pauls vvritings are by S. Peter himself reckned among the ho­ly scriptures, 2 Pet. 3. 15. 16. 9. S. Paul rather then any other Apostle, vvas caled of God to preach at Rome: Act. 23. 11. 10. In his voyage to Rome he vvas marvelously saved from shipwrack, and very memora­ble accidents fel out besides in that journey, Act. 27. and 28. 11. S. Paul preached the gospel and suffered persecution in Rome, and stood for the truth, vvhen no man there assisted him, Act. 28. 30. 31. 2 Tim. 4. 16. 12. S. Paul preached at Antioch where the name Christians vvas first given Act. 11. 26. 13. S. Paul. vvithstood S. Peter to his face, and blamed him vvhen he did amyss, Gal 2. 11. &c. 14. S. Paul first casteth out the Divil of divination, Act. 16. 16. 15. He striketh Elymas the forcerer vvith blindnes, Act. 13. 8. 11. 16. S. Paul in visions vvas taken up into the third heaven, into paradise, 2. Cor. 12. 2. 4. 17. S. Paul in nothing vvas inferior to the very cheif Apostles, 2 Cor. 12. 11. 18. He vvas of that tribe, vvhose precious stone is the first foundation of the heavenly Ierusalem, Rom. 11. 1. Rev. 21. 19. Exod. 2 [...]. 10. 20. 21. Therefore for all those rea­sons S. Paul vvas head of the Catholick Roman Church. Here I appele [Page 175] unto any unpartial reader, vvhither my proofs for S. Paul, be not stron­ger then yours for S. Peter: and vvhither the Pope vvas not overseen to choose S. Peter for his patron, vvhom he cannot prove by any one title of Gods vvord, that ever he set foot in Rome gates: & to leave S. Paul, vvho vvas caled of God to preach there, and did so a long time, as the scriptures doo confirm. Yet for all this, you vvil not graunt that S. Paul vvas head of the church: therefore say I, neyther S. Peter: and as for your Pope, he hath no more [...]ight to shew for the same, then Mahomet.

We have seen your proofs from scripture: you add unto them, Doc­tors And here as before you S. 192. 193. 194. bring in your forgeries of Clemens, and Dio [...]ysius▪ &c, vvith other vvrested testimonies of the Fathers. Who al of them if they sayd as much as you vvould have them, had no authority to make an head for the church. Secondly vvhatsoever they sayd for Pe­ter, it proveth nothing for your Pope. He must therefore shew better e­vidence for his usurped prelacy; or els he must stil be reputed the adver­sary that exalteth himself, 2 Thes. 2. 4.

You proceed, S. 195. pag. 144 and say that S. Peters authority must be derived to his successors, lawfully elected and governing at Rome. This is the mayn point, vvhich I vvould fayn see proved. You could prove it by expresse authority of all the fathers cited: but let reason (you say) suf­fice me. Behold here, and let all that have eyes behold, the desperate­nes of your cause: vvho for the mayn ground of your religion & church, vvhereof you so boast; cannot allege any one word or title of holy scrip­ture: but leave those true and ancient infallible records, and betake you to the latter forged erroneous humane testimonies & traditions of men. I deny that Peter left any such successor in his office as you dream of; and for the Pope to chaleng it, is to folow the violencie of his private spi­rit, as you S. 82▪ sayd of Pope Stephen.

Now let us hear your reasō. Christ gave the power of preaching &c. (you say) for the good of others to the worlds end. This I graunt. So Christ nstituting S. Peter the head (you say) would have that prehe­minēce derived to his lawful successors. All this I deny. 1. He made not Peter head, much less his successors. [...]. He appointed no such successors after Peter in his office. 3. If Peter vvere to have successors, the Bishop of Rome, hath no more to say for it, by vvarrant from Christ, then all other Bishops in the vvorld; vvho for preaching, ministring sacraments, and governing their flocks, have, and ever had, equal power with the Bishop of Rome, vvhen he was at the best. Thus after your long and tedious dis­pute, you cōclude vvith a fayr begging of the question: not being able to produce one line of the bible, which speaketh for your Pope: nor any suf­ficient ground of reason. How soundly now you have proved your sixth part, viz. That the Popes definitive sentence at least with a general council [...]t. is a sufficient groundwork of fayth: let any indifferent reasonable man give sentence.

Here I did not dare you (as you S. 196. say) to bring in the arrowes of the fathers &c: in an other place it vvas, that I gave you leave to use [Page 176] their reasons if you pleased; but not to press me vvith their bare names, as your manner is to doo. And in all your long discourse, let the reader mind, vvhat any one scripture or reason you have had by the help of Doc­tor, Father, Council or Pope, to prove your assertion that the Popes definitive sentence is to be a ground of our faith.

You S. 197. object (and that often) that unless I wil eat my word, you must preferr the uniform consent of the Fathers, before me. I answer to your often repetitions, this. First I spake of moe, and others, then you account holy Fathers: yea I included such, as I doubt not but you vvould burne for hereticks. Secondly, I spake and agayn speak it unfeighnedly as is in my hart: being privy to my own manifold ignorances and infir­mities; and esteming of others better then of my self. Thirdly therefore I say, beleeve not me, but beleeve the word of God which I shew vnto you. If I speak of my selfe, tread it vnder your foot: but if I speak the words of God, in despising thē you despise the Lord, sinning against your sowl. And if you depend on the sentences of Fathers, Councils, Popes, not confirmed by the scriptures: you make idols of them, and heap up wrath upon your head. Sanctorū patrū au­thoritas, ad assentien­dū ipso [...]ū dictis ne­minē cō ­pellit nisi in divinis fundata fu­eritscrip­turis, aut divinae innitatur revelationi Sayth Biel, Lect. 41. sub con. Mis. Leave therefore your disdayning of me; and leave your extolling of other men: for all flesh is grass, and all the glory of man is as the flower of grass, which withereth away: but the word of the Lord endureth for ever: and that is the word, which the Apostles preached to the churches. 1. Pet. 1. 24. 25. Finally, you are farr from an uniforme consent of the fathers to prove your haeretical assertion. Though many of them were mistaken in some things: yet were they not so senseless as to beleeve that graceless reprobate Popes, must needs have such grace as to desine nothing but truth out of their chair. But you that have abused the holy scriptures, as I have proved: what wrong wil you not doo to the fathers.

You are S. 199. moved I see, with my free applying of the scriptures that speak of Antichrist, unto your Pope. I am content to bear your con­tempt: but I must call evil evil, and faithfully witness what God hath manifested: though men Rev. 16. 10. gnaw their tongues for payn.

You goe about S. 200. to prove that the Pope is not Antichrist. First, S. 201 pa. [...]45. for then it should folow that hel gates have prevayld against Gods church many 100. yeres &c. I answer, nay: For it is prophesied the woman (the church) should flee into the wildernes, where God should feed her 1260. dayes, Rev. 12. 6. which may be so many prophetical yeares, as Dan. 9. 24. though therefore the church was persecuted into secret places, yet hel prevayled not agaynst it. In the old world, the church was but in that one familie of Noah: Gen. 6. 1. Pet. 3. 20. And Christ likeneth these last dayes, vnto those; Mat. 24. 37.

Agayn you except, how many martyrs, Doctors &c. in offring up homage to the beast should broyl in hel. &c. I answer this is no proof if it were as you inferr. But howsoever it is true the sowl that synneth shall dye; yet in many things we Iam. 3. 2 syn all: and the blood of Iesus Christ clenseth us 1 Ioh. 1. 7. from all syn (except the syn 1 Ioh. 5. 16 against the holy Ghost,) even [Page 177] from our Psa. 19. 1 [...]. secret synns. Although therefore many Doctors helped vp An­tichrist vnawares: yet doubt I not, but Gods mercy hath superabounded above all their syn, and saved them, for they did it ignorantly.

Your 2. reason S. 202. is, Antichrist shalbe one particular man as Ioh. 5. 43. another shal come in his own name so he is opposed by Ioh. 5. 43. Christ person to person &c. but the Popes are many successively. And 2 Thes. 2. he is caled the man of syn &c.] I answer, when Christ sayd Another shal come, he meant not one persō, but many of one kind successivly. My reasons are, first because he sayd elswhere, Mat. 24. [...] many shal come in my name, saying I am Christ: and there v. 2 [...]. shal arise false Christs, & false Prophets. Secondly because Antichrist is described as a Beast, Rev. 13. which beast in the Prophets signifieth a kingdom, and many persons of one sort, as is sayd in Dan. 7. 23. the fourth beast shalbe the fourth kingdom &c. So the Lion vvas for all the Kinges of Babylon, the Bear, for all the Kings of Persia &c. Dan. 7. 4. 5. & so by proportion that deformed beast Rev. 1 [...]. for all Popes. Thirdly because the word [Allos] another, vvhich Christ useth, often noteth many particular men of one kind; as in Ioh. 4. 37. one soweth and another reapeth: which he expoundeth in the next words, v. 38. other man laboured, (meaning the Prophets) and ye (my Apostles) enter into their labours. And thus the man of syn, though he be one person at once, yet successively meaneth many: as when Christ sayth, Ioh. 10. 10. the theef cōmeth not but to steal: he restreyneth it not to one theef in person alwayes; but meaneth every theef whensoever he cōmeth. Fourthly Antichrist cannot be one singular man, as you think; because he must reign at least 1000. yeres: as may be gathered by Rev. 20. 4. vvhere the godly vvhich worshiped not the Beast, lived & reigned with Christ 1000. yeres during vvhich time the Beast persecuted and kylled them: also by the vvomans lying hid in the vvildernes so many dayes, Rev. 12.

Your 3. reason is, S. 203. Antichrist shalbe of the tribe of Dan, as Gen. 49. 17. Dan shalbe a serpent &c. Ier. 8. 16. the neyghing of horses was heard from Dan. &c.] I answer, first you shew no reason that this is meant properly of Antichrist. And if figuratively, it is nothing to the purpose: for Antiochus, Nabuchodonosor and others figured him also. Secondly, Iakobsprophefie (which was a Gē. 49. 2 [...]. blessing and not a curse as Antichrist is) vvas literally meant of Samson, a man of that tribe, (caled therefore Bedan, 1 Sam. 12. 11.) vvho for his subtile vndermining of the Philistins, vvas likened to a serpent; Iudg. 14. &c. And thus the Chalde pa­raphrast on that place expoundeth it, saying: There shall be a man which shall be chosen & rise out of the house of Dan, vvhose fear shal fal vpon the peoples, and he shall valiantly smite the Philistians as an adder, as an asp he shal lye in wayt by the path, he shal s [...]ay the strong horsmen in the host of the Philistians &c. That of [...]. 8. is meant properly of vvarrs in those costs of Dan; in those times: not of Antichrist now, as the vvhole scope of the scripture there manifesteth.

Your 4. reason is, S. 20 [...]. Antichrist shal oppugn the misteries of our saviour [Page 178] 1 Ioh. 2. 22. and extol himself above all that is sayd God 2. Thes. 2] I an­swer, this is true in your Popes: for they oppugn Christ in his office, of prophesie, preisthood and kingdom; in their heretical doctrine of mans merits, mass sacrifice, purgatorie; &c. and in making lawes for the church; in forbidding people the holy scriptures in their mother tongue, and many the like. Though this is doon, vnder colour of meeknes and holynes; for the beast hath 2. hornes like the lamb, as if he were Christs own vicar. Rev. 13. 11. If you rest not in the scripture, let S. Bernard move you: who vvitnessed that Bern. Ep. 125. the Beast in the Revelation which hath a mouth speaking blasphemies, occupied Peters chayr.

Your 5 S. 205. reason is, The 7. mountayns in Rev. 17. are sayd to be 7. Kings▪ none of vvhith agree vvith the Pope.] I answer; yes, the seventh agrees very vvel. For the woman is the great city, Rome. Rev. 17. 18. the beast on vvhich she rideth, hath 7. heads, vvhich are expounded there to be both 7. mountains and 7. Kings. Rev. 17. 3. 9 The 7. moun­tayns ar famous through the world, as Palatinus, Capitolinus, Aventinus, Esquilinus, Caelius, Viminalis, Quirinal [...]s: on vvhich mountayns Rome was builded. The 7. Kings are also the 7. goverments of Rome, renoum­ed also in histories. As by Cornel. Tacitus l. 1 Kings, by Consuls, by Decemiviri, by Dicta­tors, by Triumviri, by Caesars, by forreyn Emperours and Popes. There­fore vvhen Iohn vvrote, the five first vvere fallen & removed, Rev. [...]7. 10. and one (sayth he) is; namely the sixt, by the Caesars: and another is not yet come, vvhich vvas the forrayn Emperors, (as Trajan the Spanyard, and the like,) who vvhen they came should continue but a vvhile, Con­stantine going to Bizantium, and the Empire being over [...]un by the barbarous Gothes &c. And the Beast (sayth he) v. 11. is the eight, and is one of the seaven: meaning the Popes, vvho by an Ecclesiasticall gover­ment differ from the civil Emperors, and so are an eight: yet because they reign togither vvith the Emperours, they make as it were one regiment, and so the eight is one of the seven, as the scripture sayth. And that the word King dooth signify a kingdome or regiment, appeareth by Dan. 7. 17. where the 4. beasts are sayd to be 4. kings meaning king­domes, as is explayned in v. 23. the fourth beast is the fourth king­dome. Likewise in Esa. 23. 15. So this exposition is playn, and according to truth. And thus, notwithstanding all that you have brought; the Pope remayneth Antichrist.

And think it not S. 206. much that Antichrist is so ancient. The Iewes look for Christ; and he is come 1600. yeres agoe, but they know him not: You looke for Antichrist, and he hath been 2 Thes. 2. 7 wel nigh so many yeres in the vvorld, and you are not aware. If you read the book of the Reve­lation judicially, (God opening your hart,) you may discern that mysterie of Babylon which yet is hidden from your eyes. And for preeminence forbidden to Christs ministers, see Mat. 20. 25. 26. Luk. 22. 25. 26. That which you allege of Tit. 2. 15. showes the power & authoritie of the word duly preached and applyed to mens consciences, and is not peculiar to the head of the church the Pope, (for you see Titus there had it;) but it [Page 179] is common to all Christs ministers.

You turne back S. 20 [...]. &c. to your general argument, vvhich I had confuted. How good a defense you have brought, I am content to let the prudent reader judge. Onely where you S. 209. charge me vvith falshood for saying the Pope with you is above the law; which you deny in my sense: I answer, my sense is according to your own explication, that S. 94. extrinsecally and as it is to be knowen of us, Gods word depends on the churches (that is the Popes) authority. He putteth Apocryphal lying books in to the holy canon: his interpretation (though absurd and hereticall) must stand for authentick: and a definition of his ex cathedra, you reverence as an oracle. And he dispenseth against Gods law. Is not he now above? yea he sitteth as God in the Temple of God, as Paul prophesied, 2 Thes. 2. 4.The 3. of your asser­tions The 7. part

The third thing which heretofore, (the seventh thing which now) you should prove, is, that the indeficiēt rule of our fayth is onely to be found in the [ [...]man] catholick church sentence, and not in private mens illuminatiōs &c. I hold neyther of these, as I told you before. You labour agayn to mainteyn the former. First you prove this, S. 213. in that the Romā church (you say) is the onely true & catholick church. I answer. You fayrly beg the question; and would prove it is so because it is so. You speak vntruely, in calling her the true church; proudly, in caling her the onely true church: absurdly, in caling her the catholick (that is, the vniversal) church. None of all these, can you make any proof of you referr in the margin to S. 123. and let men look what proof they can find there. I for the present referr you and all, to your own Cardinal Baroni­us testimonie of your holy church as he found it in his ancient records, and put it in his Chronicles thus. Tom. 10. Annal. an. 928. S. 8. What was then the face of the holy Roman church? how filthy was it, when most mighty and eke most filthy whores ruled at Rome? at whose pleasure, seats were chan­ged, Bishops were given, & which is horrible and vile to heare, false-Popes their paramours were intruded into Peters seat &c. Loe here the bewty of that Catholick church, whose sentence you say is the in­deficient rule of your faith.

You are S. 214. pa. 147. glad that I refuse the name Catholik: and I am glad of, and content me with that ancient name of a Christian given of God, Act. 11, 26, keep you your new fangled name of your own divising, to be called a catholik, that is, an Universal. I envie you not.

You are very S. 216. angrie that I proved unto you the marks of your Roman church, by the word of God; which you had set down without proof. You had cause rather to be thankfull. But now the reader may see, how having nothing soundly to reply, you wilfully persist in your error, for which I am sory. Your reproches I bear with patience.

Leaving your former reasons helpless: you S. 218. [...] conclude with a cōmon argumēt for your church & religiō; That seing your faith is cōfessed to be so ancient, if it be not frō God, it must be grounded on carnal mo­tives, viz, the profit of the spiritual or the temporall. But it is not (you say) for the profit or pleasure of the clergie, as appeares by their cha [Page 180] [...]ity, vowes, fasting▪ praying &c. Nor of temporal Princes, for how should so many Emperors, Kings &c. be brought to confess their syns; fast, &c. I answer, first your religiō in som points of it is ancient I cōfess, evē as ancien [...] as the Apostles daies, vvhen the mystery of iniquity begā to work, 2. Thes. 2. 7. & men loved preeminence, 3. Iohn. 9. & many Antichrists vvent abroad, 1 Ioh. 2. 18. vvhich vvere foretunners of the great Antichrist folowing. Who vvas to be reveled vvhen he that thē letted, (viz. the hea­then Empire) vvas taken out of the vvay, 2. Thes. 2. 7. 8. But yet the truth of the Gospel preached by the Apostles, vvas more ancient, 1 Ioh. 2. 24. which therefore is to be our rule and stay: not humane doctrines that came up after. Secondly I answer, the ambition, profit and pleasure of the Bishops and Preists, vvere the motives unto this height of evil. For histories record the See Euse­bius l. 8. histor. c. 1. contentions that vvere in churches, and among Bishops, (especially of Rome and of Constantinople,) vvho should be greatest. This made P. Gregory to say Greg. l. 4. Epist. 38. the King of pride is at haud and (quod dici quo (que) nefas est) an arwie of Preists is ready for him. I wish you vvould beleeve this Popes tradition, here. As for Profits and pleasures; vvho seeth not, that Christ and his Apostles being poor, Luk. 8. 3. Ioh. 12. 6. and Peter himself having neyther silver nor gold to give a needy man, Act. 3. 6. Your clergy have gotten such patrimonies, falsly purloyned in S. Peters name, as they are of the richest in the vvorld; their treasures infi­nite, their palaces like Kings, Vehiculis insidentes, circūspec­tè vestiti, epulas cu­rantes pro­fusas; adeo uteorū cō ­vivia rega­les supera­rint men­sas: sayth Ammian. Marcell. l. 27. their apparel prince like, their Kitchins ful of the finest fare; the plesantest & fertilest lands in all countries being in­grossed for the clergie; & for church livings. Their doctrines of Purgatory and pardons, being onely to pick mens purfes. Their vowes of chastitie, being to desile themselves in filthy Sodonne, adulterie and fornication▪ vvitness the 6000. childrens heads that vvere found murdered in P. Gre­gories fishpond, which moved him to reverse his own wicked decree that restreyned the Clergie frō their wives: besides infinite other testimonies of these evils, in other places. Their fasting being a mere mockery, to absteyn superstitiously from the flesh of beasts and fowles; and to fill them selves with the flesh of fishes, with bread and wine and oyl, and all such juncates. Their prayers being vayn repetitions of their Paternosters, Avees, &c. upon beads in an unknown tongue. Albeit many poor peo­ple in blind devotion, have (I grant) suffred many hard things in their penance, such as Paul caleth things which have a shew of wisdom, in vo­luntarie religion and humblenes of mind, and in not sparing the body. Colos. 2. 23. So that in verie deed, there never was a more carnall plea­sing religion in the world. As for the Kings and Princes, they have had their necks under the Popes girdle, partly against their wills, by the Popes frawd and tyranny treading them under his feet: partly by super­stitious fear of the Popes curse, and of purgatorie fyre & such like buggs, wherwith they were kept in aw. As for the Popes, they were privile­ged by their own decrees, viz. That neither the Emperor nor Kings, nor all the Clergie might judge the Pope; as Pope Silvester Coranz. sum▪ cōcil. in 16. f. 46. [...]. did enact. Because the Pope is subject to none but God, as sayd P. Symachus. Cap. [Page 181] 9, q. 3. Aliorum. So it came to passe, as the scriptures foretold, that Rev. 17. 1 [...] Kings gave their power & authoritie to the Beast; and Rev. 18. 9. lived in pleasure with that whore; and Rev. 18 3 all nations were drunken with the wine of the wrath of her fornication: and Rev. 13. 3. 4. all the world wondred after the beast, worshiped him, and sayd, who is like unto him? &c. And though the vialls Rev. 16. of Gods words wrath are now alreadie in great mesure powred out up­on that kingdom of syn, yet many will not beleeve that it shal fall, til in Re. 18. 10. one how [...] the judgment thereof come, when also they will bewayl it: but Re. 18, 20. heavens, and the holy Apostles and Prophets will rejoyce, when God hath given their judgement on it. These things I pray you seriously to consider of: and the Lord give you understanding.The 4. & [...] parts.

And now, (having done with your replies to the former matters,) I wil speak of those interlaced paragraphes which you bring in S. 98. &c: of the vicious circle as you call it, wherin you think we walk, proving (as you say) the authoritie of the scripture by the private spirit, and our pri­vate spirit by the authoritie of the scripture &c. But your Catholik o­pinion S. 114. &c p. 125. &c. you say you will defend from such an idle proof and circular resolution of your faith.

I answer; first you doo me wrong to set down my assertion so: if yow would deal honestly and plainly, you should express an other mans mea­ning in his own words. But you set down vanity, and spend many lines in framing objections and answers of your own. I referr the reader therefore to that vvhich I sayd in my 2 former vvritings, and shall more fully set down here.

Secondly, I told you heretofore, pag. [...]5 [...] that if I had to doo vvith a Turk or Pagan, that denyed our scriptures, I vvould give him other grounds: but dealing vvith you that profess to be a Christian, and allow the scrip­tures to be of God; it is ynough to confute you by the scriptures. Yet now, as if you were about to turn Turk, you call for proof that our scrip­tures are Gods vvord. And you regard not my former convictions, nor your Mr. the Cardinals See p [...]. 57 [...] reprehensions of your errors, though you before referred me to him.

Thirdly, in going about to clear your selves of this idle proof as you cal it, (vvhich yet you can never doo) you goe vpon grounds vvherewith Turks and Pagans may be moved to give credit vnto the scriptures: which vvas no part of the controversie between you and me: and you lay down motives S. 11 [...]. &c. perswading to Christianity, vvhich are nothing unto Popery, and Antichristian traditions against vvhich I dispute. For these causes I shal not folow you in your raunging movable waves, but vvill set down first the things that vve hold, and reasons of them: secondly I vvill use some motives vvhich may perswade any reasonable man, Turk or hethen; to incline unto our religion, rather then to yours.

1. We hold all the vv [...]itings of the Prophets and Apostles, to be of God, ful of heavenly vvisdome, inspired by his spirit: 2. Pet, 1. 21▪ and 3 16. 2 Tim. 3. 16.

2. That therefore they are of divine authority; and unfallible truth▪ [Page 182] vvherein the creature is bound to rest, as in the vvord of the creator: and sufficient to make men vvise unto salvation. Many reasons there be to perswade men, that the scriptures are of God: some principal, which are frō God himself: others secondary, vvhich are frō men. God himself testi­fieth the scriptures to be of him two vvayes. Outwardly, vvhereby he prepareth the hart unto faith, by motives of credibility: and inwardly vvhereby be assureth the hart of the beleever.

The outward motives are: which God giveth us in the word it self.

First in the Holy scriptures ther is a Majesty wisdom and grace of wri­ting, differing from al other writings in the world; which the minde of man (if it be not blind) may see and discerne to be of God; as the eye dis­cerneth the light of the Sun, from the light of a torch or candle: For God hath shewed as great wisdom in the Scriptures, as in the making of the world. Psal. 19.

Secondly the doctrine it self or institution in the scriptures, excelleth al humane doctrines and lawes, as leading us from our selves, from this world, & from Satan the prince of it; unto God, in faith, love, holy­nes, feare, humility &c. And these things farr passing the reach of any earthly creature naturally to conceiv or comprehend fully, though he be taught: much less could they be by men devised.

Thirdly the prophesies, which shine through all the scriptures, per­swade this. For as God convinceth al heathens idols, and Gods, to be vayn, because they could not prophesie; and proveth his ovvne sole deity by this foretelling of things to come, & performing thē, Isa. 41. 22. 23. 24. 26. & 44. 7. 8. 26. So the Holy scriptures, by the prophesies and true events of them, may be discerned to be divine, and of God: from all other writings in the world.

Fourthly it appeareth by the consent and agrement of al the partes of the Holy Bible, though written by severall men at several times, even hundreds of yeres one after an other, and that also after divers manners, some histories, some prophesies, some songs, some parables, some epistles &c. in al which notwithstanding, ther is an harmony; that no one writer in any place, crosseth or convinceth an other of error or falshood. The like wherof, is not possible to be shewed of halfe so many writers, that ever so agreed togither in their writings, since the world began.

Fiftly, the efficacy of the scriptures, & powrful working in the harts of al sorts of men, illumining the mind, changing the affections, sanctifying the whole body, sowl and spirit of men, that have read and heard their words: Wherby all other false religions have been confounded and abo­lished, and this hath been stablished against the forces of the divil, and of the princes and powers of the world, and sense of the flesh, and naturall minde of man: Al which doo manifest that these cannot but be of God.

The inward testification of God, is by his Holy 1 Cor. 2. 10 11. 12. & 14 37. 1. Ioh. 2. 20. spirit, which illu­mineth the mind, to vnderstand the things given us of God, writeth them in our harts, and sealeth up the assurance of the promises that ar in them, unto the beleeving conscience.

[Page 183]The secondary testimony that the scriptures ar of God, is from men: as,

First the Vniversal consent of churches in all ages, of the Iewes first, and after of the Christians in all places, which have received, beleeved, and obeyed the Holy scriptures, as the Oracles of God: yea even Anti­christians themselves acknowledge them to be from heaven.

Secondly the multitude of men that have given their lives, for defense of these scriptures and doctrines taught in them, yea even the heretik [...]s themselves, who thought their errors were confirmed by these scriptures and therfore died in them, are not excluded from this motive; which is such, as the like can not be shewed of any book under the sun.

The first outward proofs, which God hath engraved in the scriptures themselves; are sufficient to convince al men, and make them without ex­cuse. For as the invisible thinges of God, that is, his eternal power and godhead, are to be seen in his works the creatures; Rom. 1. 20: so the invisible things of Gods word, the powrfulnes, wisdom and alsufficiencie therof unto mans salvation, are to be seen in the Holy scriptures: whichPsal. 19. 7. &c. they that beleeve not, wil not be perswaded though one should ryse agayne from the dead: Luk. 16. 31. And if God will damn the wicked, that doo not by his works discern him, and honour him as God: much more wil he damn the prophane, that doo not by his scriptures discern his holy wil, and obey the same.

The inward testification by the spirit of God in the beleevers hart, is for the comfort and assurance of every one that hath it: not for any out­ward proof to others, much less to the wicked which have it not, neyther can perceive it. In vayn therfore doth Mr. I. A. and the papists, cal for manifestation of that, which they can not discern: and cavil against the spirit, as not a due outward proof, when we allege it not for that end.

Now wil I set down some motives which may draw any reasonable infidel (if God shut not up his hart from understanding,) to come [...]ather unto true Christianity, with us the Reformed churches: then unto Ca­tholikisme or Popery, with the Romists.

First we allege for the triall of our faith and religion, the most ancient records in the world, as Moses, and after him the Prophets: and the A­postles & Euangelists, first founders of Christiā religion through the earth. But Papists dare not stand to these, but allege for the triall of their religi­on, later new records of Doctors, Councills, Popes &c. Novv in all reason, that vvhich is most ancient, should be most true, both as Gods Deu. 32. 17 Ier. 6. 16. lavv shevveth, and as Tertullian also heretofore In lib. ad­vers. Pra [...]. c. 2. pleaded.

Secondly, we allow al men (by that common light and judgment which God hath graven in the hart of man, & which is the ground of al expo­sitions,) to read, hear, examine, and judge of our proofs, reasons, testi­monies; and therfore [...]o [...] exhort al, to have the scriptures, Ioh. 5. 39. and to peruse them: and to 1 Ioh. 4. 1. try the spirits of al men. But Papists allow not their ignorant disciples▪ [...]o read or hear the scriptures in their mother tongue, nor to try their doctrines, & spirits (which is Ioh. 3. 2 [...]. 21. a signe that they ar not of [Page 184] God) but doo captive al mens judgments unto the definitive sentences of their Popes: which is as if men should put out their own eyes, that the Pope might lead them blind.

Thirdly, the grounds which we build upon, namely the Prophets and Apostles writings, are both Mal. 4. 4. Luk. 16. 20. 31. 2 Pet. 1 19. & 3. 2. commanded of God, and by Papists them­selves, the scriptures are acknowledged to be of God, authentik and canonical, so that we build upon the Rock, even our adversaties being judges. But their traditions, and Popes decrees besides scripture, are Deut. 12. [...]2. Isa. 29. 13. Mar. 7. 6 7. 8.-13. for­bidden of God, and allowed of none save themselves, neyther doo vve acknowledg, or can they ever prove them to be of God, any otherwise then Mahomet may vvarrant his Alkoran: or the Iewes their Thalmud.

Fourthly, the writers of our grounds the Holy scriptures, vvere all 2 Pet. 1. 21 Rev. 18. 20. Luk. 13. 28. ho­ly persons, governed by the spirit of God; and not any one of them vvas a reprobate. But the writers and determiners of popish traditions, have been many of them (and that by the papists owne confession) most wic­ked and vile persons, that sold themselves unto syn and Satan al dayes of their life, and got their popedomes some by simonie and bribes; some by schisme and sedition, and other like evil meanes. Therfore in al reason, they are nothing so vvorthy to be beleeved or rested vpon, as the sacred vvriters on vvhome vve depend.

Fiftly, the Holy Apostles & Prophets (to vvhose vvritings vve cleave) preached not Isa. 8. 20. 2 Cor. 4. 5. 1. Cor. 3. 57. themselves, but Gods law and Christ: drew no 2 Cor. 1. 24. man to subjection unto themselves but unto God: sought not in their doc­trines or vvritings their ovvn vvealth or vvorldly prefermēt, sold not the Gospel, nor Act. 8. 18. 20. 2 Cor. 2 17. made marchandise of it: Wheras Popes (on vvhose defi­nitive sentences Papists doo rely) preach themselves; as, wee declare, (sayth Extra. de Major et o­bed. Vnum l [...]nct. P. Boniface) we define, and pronounce, that it is altogither of necessity to salvation, that every humane creature be under the By­shop of Rome. So other their traditions and definitions, tend to the maintenauce of their own pomp, dignity, vvorldly vvealth and pleasures; for their Popes bulls, pardons, and blessed reliks are set to sale for money; so are their Preists masses and Trentals, as the vvorld vvel knoweth: and therefore of all naturall vvise men are justly to be suspected: and the ho­ly Prophets to be preferred much before them.

Sixtly, the holy vvriters vvhom vve depend on; are all of such autho­rity and credit, as vve admit of proof from any one of them because they all teach one faith and obedience. Whereas Papists send men to Bi­shops, Doctors, Fathers, Councils, which disagree one from another: so making great show of them to the simple; wheras themselves as often as they lyst, refuse the judgment and exposition of their fathers doctors &c. as is to be seen in Cardinal Bellarmine and others, that often doo refuse the sentences of the Fathers: and conclude vvith the Council of Trent or definitive sentence of the Pope.

Seventhly, the scriptures that vve build upon doo all agree and are [...]one contrary one to another, but hovv ever there [...]ay seem contradic­tion, yet they are easily even by themselves reconciled if men vvil labour [Page 185] in them. But Papists have also for their rules of faith, Apocryphal booke and fables, vvherein are many open lyes and vnreconcilable contradicti­ons against the Prophets, as Tob. 12. 15. compared vvith Tob. 15. 18. 1. Maccab. 6. 16. vvith 2. Mac. 1. 16. 2. Macc. 1. 19. vvith 2. King. 25. Iudith. 9. 2. 3. vvith Gen. 49. 5. 6. Esth. apopcryph. 12. 5. 6. vvith Esth. can. 6. 3. and 3. 2. Esth. apoc. 11. 2. vvith Esth. can. 2. 16. besides their Popes de­terminations for making and vvorshiping of similitudes or images, of silver and gold, wood and stone, hethenlike: for having the vvorship of God and scriptures in a barbarous tongue vvhich the people understand not, and many the like; are expressly contrary to the commandements of God; as any man of common judgment may evidently preceive; yea & some of their Popes have repeled the decrees one of another; as before hath been manifested.

Eightly, The summ of our faith learned from holy scriptures, is to trust on God and Christ alone for mercy and salvation; not on creatures, as Angels, and souls of men, nor on our selves or humane merits: vvhereby vve resting on God, Ioh. 10. 29 Rom. 8. 38. 39. Luk. 10 20. and 12. [...]2. Heb. 10. 22. have, and doo profess to have ful assurance of our salvation; and so have peace of conscience, in life and death. But Popish faith learned by tradition, teacheth men not to trust on God and Christ alone, but on the intercession of creatures, and Pardons of Popes, and on their own merits also for salvatiō: vvhereby their cōsciences accusing them, they neyther have nor profess to have such peace, by full assurance that they are heyres of God unto salvation, as vve: nay they rage against this truth; as against an heresie.

Ninthly, The holy scriptures vvhich vve rest vpon, are of such power and authority that many thowsands in their ages have given their lives for the defense of them, and of the things taught onely in them; yea even hereticks have dyed for things vvhich they have erroneously thought to be in the scriptures reveled. But for Papists, they cannot shew many (if any) that have vvillingly given their lives for such doctrines as have one­ly bene taught by men & by unwritten popish tradition▪ and not in their judgment by the prophetical and Apostolical scriptures.

Tenthly, the Holy scriptures vvhich are the rule of our faith, have prophesies of things to come, and due accomplishments of the prophe­sies as they vvere foretold: vvhereby vve are confirmed of the truth and infallibility of those vvritings. But the vvritings of Doctors, Councils, Popes, on vvhich Papists rely, are destitute of this confirmation, Neyther dooth the Pope use to prophesie; though it vvere necessary, if he vvould as Christs vicar obtrude his ovvn decrees for divine oracles, seing the tes­timony of Iesus is the spirit of prophesie, as the Angel sayd Rev. 19. 10. Nay rather the prophesies of Rev. 13. & 17. &c. scripture plainly foreshew the Church of Rome to be the whore of Babylon, and her Lord the Pope to be An­tichrist. Which he fearing it wil come to light, forbiddeth therfore his subjects, the reading of Gods book.

Eleventhly, Papists themselves are forced in disputing against Iewes (which were once Gods church, and from which they themselves with [Page 186] us received the books of Moses and the Prophets:) to use onely the holy scriptures and prophesies to convince them: for their Romish church & traditions, the Iewes doo not regard. With these scriptures the Papists doo rightly Mr. I. A. sect. 41. 43. think the Iewes are sufficiently convicted. Even so doo we much more▪ (having the scriptures of the new Testament added to the old) rightly hold it sufficient to convince the Papists by the written vvord vvhich they acknowledge to be of God▪ and they have no more reason to refuse this and draw us to their Popes decretals, then the Iewes have to refuse the Bible, and draw men to their high preists, Rabbies and Thal­muds: or the Turkes, to their Alkoran.

12. Finally, grace, vvisdom, and divine majesty appeareth in the holy scriptures, to all that read them (except they have a reprobate sense) even by the confession of our adversaries. But no such vvisdom grace or ma­jesty appeareth in Popes decrétals, more then in other humane vvritings: yea they are full of ignorance, grossnes, barbarisme, error, favouring of the Popes private spirit; as any of understanding (unless they be the Popes bondmen) vvil confess: and no singular grace appeareth in them, more then in the books of H. N. or Alkoran of Mahomet. For all vvhich and sundry other like reasons vvhich might be alleged: every reasona­ble infidel vvhom God vvill save, vvill rather incline to our grounds of ancient Christianity; then to the other, of late Iesuitisme or Popery. Let him that readeth consider, and give sentence.

By this vvhich hath bene vvritten, you may see (M. I. A.) that we fly not for proof, to our privat spirit, as you often slander us: but we say a Papist may be couvinced by the wisdome and majesty of God shining in the scriptures (and other arguments forementioned,) more easily then an Atheist can be convinced by the wisdom and majesty of God shining in the creatures. And if this later were sufficient (by th'Apostles Rom. 1. 20. &c. testi­mony) to condemn the hethens: the former must needs be more suffici­ent to condemn you: especially seing you confess the scriptures to be of GOD: vvhereas the Atheist will not confess▪ the world to be of God: and yet you dare not abide the trial of your religion by this book of God, without your own traditions and decrees also. Whereas if you graunt a Turk to be tried by the Bible and his Alkoran; or a Iew to be tried by the Prophets, and his Thalmud, you will betray all Christi­anity.

And when one ask you a reason vvhy you beleeve the scriptures or a­ny doctrine to be of God: you answer that S. 91. pag. [...]21. extrinsi [...]ally (that is out­wardly) and in respect of your selves, it is because your church (that is the Pope vvho is head of your church) telleth you so, and not by your own private spirit. Which is, as if one should ask, vvhy you beleeve▪ the sun to be the light of the vvorld; and you should answer extrinsecally, because the Pope tells you so; and not because of any private sight or dis­cerning in your own eyes. Ask you agayn, vvhither you know the Pope to be a man of God, furnished vvith his grace and spirit, that he cannot deceive you. You answer, S. 185. pa. 14 [...]. we hold not, that the Pope is necessarily [Page 187] indued with Gods holy grace: for in matter of fa [...]t he may syn as wel as any other. Ask you agayn, how then you trust such vile un­gracious Popes as many have been, (by your own mens testimony?) you answer, Ibidem. you hold, the Pope hath a necessary assistance of the holy Ghost, as he defines ex cathedra, (out of his chayr,) as the head of the church. Ask you a proof of this paradox: and you cannot bring any one line of Gods holy scriptures to confirme it; you can neyth [...]r find the Pope nor his chayr there mentioned, any more then Mahom [...]t or the Alkoran. Then you flee to late humane testimonies, of Doctors, Fathers, Councils, vvhich also you vvrest. Yet ask you, vvhither those Doctors vvere necessarily indued vvith the spirit of God, & could not e [...]r & deceiv you. You dare not say this, nay in deed you deny it, whiles you refuse any doctrine or expositiō give by Doctor, Father or Council, vvhich the Pope approves not of: and this is ordinary to be seen in yourbooks. Follow you now still, vpō vvhat assurance you stay; & it is, your Pope is Christs vicar, & cānot err ex cathedra, because himself sayth so. And this is to make him a God. For onely God is the ground Rom. 3. 4. of truth, on whose word al creatures should rest. And so by this argumēt alone, if there were no more, your Pope is proved to be that mā of syn which exalreth himself above al that is caled God: & you are of those upō vvhom God hath sent strong delusiō to beleeve lyes, as the Apostle prophesied. 2. Thes. 2. 4. 11. Besides it is▪ against al reasō to take a mans witness of himself. The law of Isa. 44. 9. God and Ion. [...]. [...]. Christ is against it; the law of mā cōdemns it. Nemo in sua causa testis es­se, vel jus sibi dicere possit. l Generali. C. Ne quis. & 2. q. 1. C. de manifesta.

Behold M. I. A. this third time I have vvritten unto you, God by me warning you of your fearfull estate. Take heed, and despise not the mer­cy of the Lord, calling you to repentance. Be not unsensible of your ca­lamity & extreme peril, as he that sleepeth in the midds of the sea on the top of the mast, Pro 23. 34▪ 35. and sayth, they have striken me, but I vvas not sick; they have beaten me, but I felt it not. To day Psal. 95. if ye vvil hear the voice of God, harden not your hart; least he swear in his anger, that you shall never enter into his rest. My prayer shalbe against your evil: and that you may finde mercy unto life, if such be the vvil of God, Amen.

Your freind that vvisheth your vvelfare, Henr. Ainsw.

I. A. his 4. and last writing to H. A.

To his loving friend Mr Henry Aynsworth these: At Amsterdam.
Mr H. Ainsworth

AS small hope have you in deed of the former, viz. the de­fense of the truth, as you graunt you have of the second [...] ­tendement of yours, viz. my conversion. For trust me your▪ allegations, your prooses are so weak, though many in [...] [Page 188] ber, that I wonder that he that professeth himself to hunt after theHer name was Har phastes if I well remē ­ber. light onely, should content himself so in the dark like Senecaes poore blind woman who accounted all others to be blinde, and that onely she did see. But if you would as well have taken paines but even to have summed my reasons and proofes faithfully, as you vainely re­peate so often your owne: Mine and yours indifferently paralleld would have manifested long ere this the truth. But you conceale so my proofes, and so magnifie your own, that it is no wonder your se­ [...]tar [...]s prifeth yours as things of worth, when in deed they are but ga [...]die glasse, and plaine Bristowes stones in sted of Diamonds. And therefore as I remit you for all your slight replie to my former an­swer in so many sheates of paper delivered, so I remitt your audito­rie, but to compare both for their satisfaction and manifestation of the truth if they bee intelligible. It being a tedious thing to take so often such fruictless paine, as to plough [...] so many sheetes the bar­raine sands. A short answer especially being not compatible to ma­ny vnjoincted and scattered citations, were not your vanitie therin sufficiently v [...]asked in the former. And since you doe confess to bee tyred, as indeed I profess I am, but to reade your slight stuff; I shall content my selfe to poinct out how you have satisfied me in no one poinct, referring my selfe to my former defence, which doth, and shall stand in force for ought therin that you can justly oppugne.

To the first of mine wherein as I showe that your reasons va­nish of themselves, you keepe a greate pudder to no purpose; Naie you overthrow your selfe graunting the vnwritten word of God to deepde controversies, & that the law must bee explicated by Preists. For as traditions, the vnwritten word are included and implied in the written word, or belonge to the explication or performance of the same; so also fasts, feasts, and ceremonies of the Church are virtu­allie included in those generall precepts and prerogatives of the Church as I expressed in my former. Now to add that which is gathered thence, or to explicate that which is included is not contra­rie, as you doe in your replie not obscurely confess as I show in my 12. parag. as also the 16. & 17. parag. is to answer. Where as you charge me that you have often answered that which I object parag. 20. I referr to the indifferent reader; But verily I maie speake and not from my own judgment, that your writings deserve no an­swer.

I answer, Apostollicall traditions are to bee taught as the word of God and to bee expounded. what then?

In answering my first reason faine you would re [...]ai [...] we with a spllogisme of your owne▪ seing that which is known for Gods word is the rule of faith▪ which I denie not. But holie scriptures are knowne for Gods word, which in your sense I denie▪ For they are not knowen by themselves but by tradition, and the authoritie of the church; For many pa [...]ells of scripture have bene doubted of by [Page 189] those that bragged of the spirit of God to discerne scripture; And you neyther save your self from an infinite process in that kind, & if you could doe that, how can you prove the whole Bible to be canoni­call, as I have proked?

In my 32 parag: I fullie satisfied your tortured places; and if I doe leave out som places it is in that they are virtuallie answered in other places expounded; For if a man should examine each place you bring, wee should never have an end.

And if the scriptures bee as cleare as the Sunne to be distinguish­ed, it followes that they must bee knowne of all, if you saie of all his, you doe petere principium, since everie one will pretend to bee his: ISee 113. proved also by the authoritie of S. Aug: that scriptures in Actu. 2 & to bee knowne to others, requireth necessarily the authoritie of the Church, to which as to verie manie places more, you never answer.See from par. 97, 98, to 113. 145. 150. 151, 152, 154.

You wrong your self, and not I you, since you giue just occasion to me to terme the guide of your religiō your privat spirit; for the word [...]p [...]ly befitts your grounds as I prove effectuallie; and I doe con­vince that our faith is not subject to any such circular vagarie, I re­solving my religion into no other grounds then St. Cypr: did his, S. 55. And you might see if you would that the Pope doth not make what he wil a matter of faith, but onely doth declare it, parag: 69.See from the 113. to 153. left unanswer­ed.

And to what end should I answer him, that never answered me as I did procede; but onely by snatches which is not to answer me, but his owne phancie and to fight with his owne shaddow? that vilefies the holie Fathers as earth and ashes? that allowes of no rule of scripturs, but what his private spirit preferrs? That con­demns and contemnes the name which yet is found & beleeved as an arti­cle of your beleef. Catholicke as a new idle upstart phrase? What shall I deem of him but as one that sittes in cathedra pestilentiae readie to avoide, or denie any thing, and willing to per­vert others?

As for your motives; to propose which onely, is not to answer mine; I referr my selfe to the judiciall and indifferent reader to compare both together; see par: 109 120. 121. 122. 153. where I show howSee the preheminence given to S. Paul by you, answered in C. Bellar: as also see those canonicall. bookes de­fēded that you term Apocryph. you build on sands and spyders webbes; and how we ground our selves one the firme rocke, and of those true notes of the ancient Fa­thers did defend themselves from hereticks, see from 115 to 135. &c. Therefore since ther is nothing in your present that is not abūdant­ly cleared in my former: I desire you if you will further procede that some waie my last answer and yours, maie be set downe word for word: Or if you think not convenient, to avoide prolixitie hereafter, I desire you set downe al that shal bee spoken or answered in forme onely; which proceding will cleare more the question in one quarter of an hower, and in a quarter of paper, then this kind of discourse and dilating will doe in a quarter of a yeare and in a quire of paper. And thus having answered yours received about the beginning of June 1614 I end, desiring God to give you true humilitie to im­brace [Page 190] the truth no doubt in your vnderstanding seen.

Your well wishing freind John Aynsworth

And that many things to bee beleeved are not taught expresly in the written word▪ I have oftē instanced, as the Sab [...]oth on Sunday, the Apostles Creede, the receiving fasting, kneeling and not sitting, eating of strang [...]ed meates, see parag▪ 92.

The Conclusion.

BEcause I am not vvilling to strive for the last vvord, I cease fur­ther writing about these matters, having nothing of weight left for to refute any more, seing my opposite thus giveth over. I am content, that not onely Mr. Iohn Aynsworthes last answer (as he desireth,) and mine, but also that all the passages between us, be set down word for word, for any that please, to see and compare. Am wil­ling also to answer (as God shall give me means) unto whatsoever Mr. Ioh. Aynsw. shall further set down in form onely, as he speaketh: lea­ving the things that have passed between us, to the indifferent censure of the judicious reader.

Henry Ainsworth

Faults escaped in the printing.

Pag. 5. line 3. for master spings, read, master springs.

Pag. 65. line 8. before the end, read Prov. 8. 8. 9.

Pag. 68. line 22. for or Christs, read of Christs.

Pag. 108. line 17 for in the same, read in the Sun.

Pag. 139. line 2. for if it be proved, read if it proved.

Pag. 142. line 4. before the end, for before their as there, read be­fore them as their.

Pag. 151. line 6. before the end, for law, ever; read law, as ever.

Pag. 181. line 6. for Gods words wrath, read Gods wrath.

The end.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.