A iust and temperate defence of the fiue books of ecclesiastical policie: written by M. Richard Hooker against an vncharitable letter of certain English Protestants (as they tearme themselues) crauing resolution, in some matters of doctrine, which seeme to ouerthrow the foundation of religion, and the Church amongst vs. Written by William Covel Doctor in Diuinitie, and published by authority. The contents whereof are in the page following.

ARTICLE XX. Of Schoolemen, Philosophie, and Popery. (Book 20)

PHilosophie telleth vs (if it be lawfull for me to vse so much Philosophie) that naturall moti∣ons in the end are swifter, but violet are more slowe; and therefore heauy things, the lower they descend, doe moue faster; and by so much also they moue slower, by how much they ascend higher. It seemeth that the accusations in this letter were such, as had their first motion, rather from the violence of some affection, then from any naturall inclination to vnder∣stand the truth. For surely, though I take not vpon me to censure any man (being my selfe clothed with so many

wants) yet in my weake opinion, those, that would desire are solution of such things, as ouerthrow the foundation of the Church amongst vs, which in your le••ter you pro∣fesse, should hardly esteeme, the right vse of Philosophers and schoole learning, to be an accusation of that kind. So that whereas, at the first your obiections seemed to moue with a greater strength, now in the end, they growe weake like the stroke of a man that is halfe tyred. But I haue final reason to complaine of this, which is mine owne aduan∣tage: for without the armour of other learning, only in the strength of reason, I du••st incounter a stronger man then my selfe, in this, wherein you accuse Maister Hooker; that the right vse of Schoolemen, and Philosophers, is no hindrance, or disgrace to true diuinity. And therefore, whereas you charge him,* 1.1 that in all his discourse for the most part Aristotle and the ingenious Schoolemen, almost in all points haue some finger; and that reason is highly set vp against holy Scripture, and such like: I ve∣rely perswade my selfe, that herein he hath committed no vnlawfull thing. For those schoole imployments, are ac∣knowledged by graue and wise men, not vnprofitablie to haue bin inuented; the most approued for learning and iudgment doe vse them without blame; the vse of them, hath bin well liked, by those that haue written in this kind; the quality of the readers of his bookes, though not of the most, yet of those whom the matter concerned most, was such, as he could not but thinke them of capacity very sufficient, to conceiue harder learning then he hath vsed any; the cause he had in hand, did in my opinion necessa∣rily require those schoolemen and philosophers that he hath vsed: for where a cause is strangely mistaken, for want of distinctions, what other way was there for him, but by distinctions to lay it open? That so it might appeare vnto all men whether it were consonant to truth or no; and al∣though you and I peraduenture, being vsed to a more fa∣miliar, and easie learning, thinke it vnmeete, to admit, ap∣prooue, or frequent the schooles; yet our opinions are

no Canons for Maister Hooker: And although you being troubled in minde, doe thinke that his writings, seeme like fetters, and manacles; yet no doubt he hath met both with readers and hearers, more calmely affected; which haue iudged otherwise. But it is a strange presumption in my opinion,* 1.2 for priuate men, such as professe themselues to be but common Christians, (which your writings, be∣sides your owne confession, doe make manifest) to pre∣scribe a forme, either of writing or teaching, so plaine and familiar, or rather indeed so empty, and shallow, that no man may doubte, how vnlearned soeuer, to giue his cen∣sure. Must all knowledge be humbled so low, that it must stoope to the capacity of the meanest reader? But the Fa∣thers, say you, haue misliked it. Indeed I confesse, there is an ouermuch vse,* 1.3 which is euill, in all things, where there is not an absolute necessity. Besides things compara∣tiuely spoken, in regard of true vnderstanding of the scrip∣tures, is no rule for warrant that they are to be misliked simply. For Stapleton himselfe confesseth, in his cautions of expounding the scripture,* 1.4 that the Schoolemen haue not a certaine, and infallible authority of interpreting; which as to maintaine must needes be great simplicity, so to dislike all vse of them is intolerable vnthankfulnesse. But in this accusation, it is not apparant what you meane, whē you alledge out of Luther, that schoole diuinity, hath banished from vs, the true and sincere diuinity. If this were the direct iudgement of Luther, to condemne all schoole diuinity; yet it is a strange oppositiō to alledge the sentence of one man, against the practise, and authorities of the best Fathers. Neither doe we vnderstand which it is (the olde or the new) that so much offendes you; by old, we meane that Scholasticall kinde of expounding, which the most eloquent Fathers lately comen from the schooles of Rhetoricians, and Philosophers, haue brought with them, to the interpreting of holy Scriptures; that thus they might be able to teach, to delight, to perswade; a matter fitting al, but not easie for any, that is not excel∣lently

furnished with humane learning.* 1.5 In this sense Beda calleth Prudentius the most noble Schooleman of the Spaniards, whom it is like in the seueritie of your iudg∣ment, you would haue dispraised; and Gennadius in the Catalogue of famous writers, reckoneth vp Museus, Iu∣lianus, Eucherius, and diuers others, amongst the School∣men; that is, amongst the chiefe professours of Schoole-eloquence. Saint Hierome affirmeth of himselfe,* 1.6 that manie things in Diuinitie, he handled with Schoole o••∣nament; and of Saint Paul he saith, that when he prea∣ched at Athens, vpon occasion of the inscription of the Altar to the vnknowne God, he handled it with a schola∣sticall kind of elegancie. Is this then that which so much offends you? Was it an ornament in these Fathers, and many others, and is it a blemish in M. Hooker? But per∣aduenture it is the new and later kind of Schoole inter∣preting that you mislike; whose methode is Philoso∣phicall disputing, made of Aristotelian learning; this sprang vp about some foure hundreth and odde yeares past,* 1.7 in the time of Lotharius the second, Emperour of Rome, who recouering out of darkenesse the Roman lawes, caused them publikely to bee read, and to be ex∣pounded by diuers Writers; by this meanes diuinitie be∣gan to waxe cold, vntill by imitation of these men, cer∣taine deuout Monkes, and others, vndertooke the like in expounding the holy Scripture; by which meanes e∣uen vntill this day,* 1.8 there remaineth in the Schooles tenne orders of their vsuall expounding; by Concor∣dance, Historie, Postill, Question, Lecture, Compen∣dium, or Abridgement, Sermon, Meeter, Meditation, all which no doubt of it in your opinion, are esteemed vn∣lawfull and vnprofitable: Nowe, many that were excel∣lent in this kind, the Church both knoweth how to vse with great profit, and in recompence of their labour, hath giuen them titles, with much honour. Thus Alexander Hales, who made his Summe, that excel∣lent worke, by commaundement of Innocentius the

fourth was called the fountaine of life,* 1.9 because of that liuely knowledge, that flowed from him: he was Maister to Bonauenture, a scholer not inferiour to himselfe, of whom he was wont to say, that in Bonauenture he thought Adam sinned not; meaning, for that illumination, which was in him (& doubtles there was much in him) as though he had not beene darkened by the fall of Adam; and ther∣fore the Church called him the Seraphicall Doctor. To these Aquinas was not inferiour, who came so neere vnto Saint Austin, that some thought, hee had all his works by heart, and by a common prouerbe it was spoken, that the soule of Saint Austin dwelt in Aquinas; in whom aboue all the rest, foure contrarieties were said to excell; abun∣dance, breuitie,* 1.10 facilitie, security: In respect whereof, hee gained the title to be called Angelicall. Now for any man to follow the steps of these, though treading sure, as ha∣uing more light, can any man in reason account it to be a fault? Is there no other matter of reproofe in Maister Hoo∣kers writings, but that vertues must bee faults? But hee seeketh to proue matters of diuinity with the strength of reason: Indeed this is a great fault, which if many had not beene afraid to commit, the world had not beene fil∣led with so many idle, and vnreasonable discourses. But so it is, that through an ignorant zeale of honouring the scriptures, the name of the light of nature, is made hateful with men; the starre of reason, and learning, & all other such like helps, beginneth no otherwise to be thought of, then as if it were an vnlucky Comet, or as if God had so accursed it, that it should neuer shine, or giue light in things, concerning our duty, any way toward him; but be esteemed as that starre,* 1.11 in the Reuelation called worm∣wood: Which being fallen from heauen, maketh riuers, & waters, in which it falleth so bitter, that men tasting them, die thereof. A number there are, who thinke they cannot admire, as the ought, the power & authority of the word of God, if in things diuine, they should attribute any force to mans reason; for which cause they neuer vse rea∣son

so willingly, as to disgrace reason. Then vsuall and common discourses are to this effect; The naturall man perceiueth not the things of the Spirit of God,* 1.12 for they are foolishnesse vnto him; neither can he know them, be∣cause they are spiritually discerned. For answer where un∣to we say, that concerning the abilitie of Reason, to search out, and to iudge of things diuine, if they be such, as those properties of God, and those duties of men towards him, which may be conceiued by attentiue consideration of heauen and earth, wee know that of meere naturall men,* 1.13 the Apostle testifieth, how they know both God and the law of God; other things of God there be which are neither so found, nor though they bee shewed, can euer be approued, without the speciall approbation of Gods good grace, & spirit: such is the suffring, & rising againe of our Sauiour Christ,* 1.14 which Eestus, a meere naturall man, could not vnderstand; therefore Paul seemed in his eyes to be learnedly mad. This sheweth, that nature hath need of grace, to which Maister Hooker was neuer opposit, in saying that grace may haue vse of nature.* 1.15 But Paul char∣geth the Colossians to beware of Philosophie, that is to say, such knowledge as men, by naturall reason are able to attaine.* 1.16 I confesse, Philosophie wee are warned to take heed of, not that Philosophy, which is true and sound knowledge, attained by a naturall discourse of reason; but that Philosophie, which to bolster heresie, or errour, (which I am sure Maister Hooker doth not) casteth a frau∣dulent shew of reason, vpon things which are indeede vnreasonable; and by that meanes, as by a stratageme, spoyleth the simple, which are not able to withstand such cunning. He that giueth warning to take heede of an ene∣mies policie, doth not giue counsell to auoid all policie; but rather to vse all prouident foresight, and circumspe∣ction, least our simplicity bee ouerreacht by cunnin•• sleights: The way not to be inueigled, by them, that ar•• so guilefull through skill, is throughly to be instructed in that, which maketh skilful against guile; and to bee armed

with that true and sincere Philosophie, which doth teach against that deceitfull,* 1.17 and vaine which spoileth. But haue not the greatest troublers of the Church bin the greatest admirers of humane reason? Hath their deep & profound skil in secular learning made thē the more obedient to the truth, and not armed them rather against it? Indeed many great philosophers haue bin very vnsound in beleefe,* 1.18 & yet many sound in beleef haue bin great Philosophers. Could secular knowledge bring the one sort vnto y^e loue of chri∣stian faith? nor Christian faith, the other sort out of loue with secular knowledg. The harme that heretikes did, was to such, as by their weakenes were not able to discerne be∣tweene sound, and deceitfull reasoning, and the remedie against it was euer, the skill of the ancient Fathers, to dis∣couer it. In so much that Cresconius the heretike complai∣ned greatly of Saint Austin, as you do of Maister Hooker, for being too full of logicall subtilties.* 1.19 But the word of God in it selfe is absolute, exact, and perfect, and there∣fore needlesse to adde any humane or schoole learning; for those weapons are like the armour of Saul, rather cumbersome then needfull; and with these hath Maister Hooker filled his writings.* 1.20 I answer, there is in the World no kind of knowledge, whereby any part of truth is seen, but wee iustly account it precious: yea that principall truth, in comparison whereof, all other truth is vile, may receiue from it, some kind of light; whether it be that Egyptian,* 1.21 and Chaldean wisdome mathematicall, where∣with Moses and Daniel were furnished; or that naturall, morall, and ciuill wisdome, wherein Salomon excelled all men; or that rationall, and oratoriall wisedome of the Grecians, which the Apostle Saint Paul brought from Tharsus; or that Iudaicall which he learned in Ierusalem, sitting at the feete of Gamaliel; to detract from the dignity thereof were to iniure, euen God himselfe; who being that light which none can approch vnto, hath sent out these lights, whereof we are capable, as so many sparkles, resembling the bright fountain from which they rise. And

therfore vnto he word of God, being in respect of that end wherunto God ordeined it, perfect, exact, and ab∣solute, we doe not adde any thing, as a supplement of a∣ny maime, or defect therein; but as a necessary instrument, without which wee coulde not reape by the scriptures perfection, that fruite, and benefit, which it yeeldeth. In respect of al which places alledged, it must needs seem strange, that any for the vse of schoole diuinity, and hu∣mane learning, should incur that hard suspition, which you seeke to fasten vpon M. Hooker, namely, that he is a priuie & subtil enimie,* 1.22 to the whole state of our Church; that he would haue men to deeme her Mai••stie to haue done ill, in abolishing the Romish religion; that he would be glad to see the back-slyding of all reformed Churches; or that he meanes, to bring in a confusion of all things; a tolleration of all religions; these, and such like, are the hea∣uie conclusions, that follow the vse of schoolemen, and secular learning; and the least of those euils, which are like∣ly in your opinion, to be deriued into the heart of our Church and common wealth, from that dangerous poy∣son which is conteined in Maister Hookers writings. Surely it is great pitie, that al men should thinke what they list, or speake openly what they think; but doubtlesse it did little moue him, whē you say that which a greater thē you cer∣tainely wil gainsay. His words in this cause haue seemed to you, as an arrow sticking in a thigh of flesh, and your own as a child, whereof you must needes be deliuered by an hower; but deliberation would haue giuen peraduenture, more ripenes, which now by haste, hath, as a thing borne out of time, beene small ioye to you that begat it. There∣fore I wil conclude, with the speech of the son of Sirach: He that applieth his minde to the law of the most high,* 1.23 keepeth the sayings of famous men, & entreth in also into the secrets of darke sentences: he seeketh out the mystery of graue sentences,* 1.24 and exerciseth himselfe in dark para∣bles; though he be dead he shall leaue a greater fame, thē a thousand: Doubtles this is verified in him, of whom you haue published vnto the world so hard a censure.

Notes

• * 1.1

  In the letter pag. 43.
• * 1.2

  In your letter pag. 35. lin. 29.
• * 1.3

  Cranmer, Luther.
• * 1.4

  Lib. 10. cap. 11.
• * 1.5

  In lib. de arte metr. nobilissim 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Hispanorum Scholasticum.
• * 1.6

  In Com. Epist. ad Ti••um.
• * 1.7

  Ann. 1130.
• * 1.8

  Sixt. Sin, bib. Sanct. lib. 3. pag. 180.
• * 1.9

  Pons vita.
• * 1.10

  Moritur▪ ae••at. 48. ••n. Dom. 1274.
• * 1.11

  R••uel. 8.10.
• * 1.12

  Ob. 1. 1. Cor. 2.14.
• * 1.13

  Rom. 1.2.
• * 1.14

  Act. 25.19 Act. 26.24. 1. Cor. 2.24.
• * 1.15

  Ob. 2. Col. 2.8.
• * 1.16

  Sol.
• * 1.17

  Ob. 3.
• * 1.18

  Sol.
• * 1.19

  Ob. 4.
• * 1.20

  Sol.
• * 1.21

  Act•• 7.22. Dan. 1.17. 1. King. 4.29.30▪ Act. 22.3.
• * 1.22

  In your letter. pag. 43.
• * 1.23

  Eccle. 39.1.2.3
• * 1.24

  verse. 11