Christianity maintained. Or a discouery of sundry doctrines tending to the ouerthrovve of Christian religion: contayned in the answere to a booke entituled, mercy and truth, or, charity maintayned by Catholiques.

The second Doctrine.* 1.1 That the assurance which we haue of Scriptures, is but morall.

CHAP. III.

1. THis man magnifies holy Scriptures in ma∣ny places, as the only thing on which he relyes his Saluation; but whosoeuer shall walke along with him from place to place, & marke well his wayes, will find that they lead to the quite contrary, and shew that he neither doth value them to their right worth, nor doth lay any other grounds, but such as are more apt to breed disesteeme then esteeme of them. This may be seene, in that he tea∣cheth,(b) 1.2 That our assurance that the Scripture hath been preserued from any materiall alteration, and that any other booke of any profance writer is incor∣rupted, is of the same kind and condition, both morall as∣surances.

2. If this may be allowed, it must necessarily fol∣low that the assurance which we haue of Scripture must in degree be much inferiour to the assurance which we haue of such bookes of prophane Authors as haue a more full testimony and tradition of all sorts of men, to wit, Atheists, Pagans, Iewes, Turkes & Christians; wheras the bookes holy Scripture, are either vnknowne, or impugned by all except

Christiās, & by some also who would beare of Christians, and consequently the morall assurance of them, and of the incorruptednesse of them, is the much the lesse, and of lesse morall credit. And by so same reason whosoeuer builds vpō this mans groūds, cannot haue so great assurance that there was a Ie∣sus Christ, that he had disciples, and much lesse that he wrought wonderous things, and lesse then this, that those wonders were true miracles; as that there was a Coesar, Alexander, Pompey &c. or that they fought such battailes, and the like. For these things descend to vs by a more vniuersall tradition, then the former.(c) 1.3 Do not your selfe speake thus? We haue as great reason to belieue there was such a man as Henry the Eight King of England, as that Iesus Christ suffered vnder Pontius Pilate. You should haue said; we haue greater reason to belieue it, if we consult humane induce∣ments only, and consequently if Christian Fayth be not absolutely infallible, euen aboue the motiues of credibility, we are more certaine that there was a King Henry, then a Iesus Christ: A thing which no true Christian can heare without detestation.

3. That which followes out of the same 116. page, is of the like nature, laying a ground for vn wary peo∣ple to reiect Scripture; For, hauing spoken of some barbarous Nations, that belieued the doctrine of Christ, and yet belieued not the Scripture to be the word of God,(d) 1.4 for they neuer heard of it, and Fayth comes by hearing; you adde these words: Neither doubt I, but if the bookes of Scripture had byn proposed to them by the other parts of the Church where they had been before receiued, and had been doubted of, or euen reiected by th••se

barbarous nations, but still by the bare beliefe, and practise of Christianity they might be saued, God requiring of vs vn∣der paine of damnation, only to belieue the verities therein contained, and not the diuine authority of the bookes where∣in they are contained.

4. If this be granted, why might not any Church haue reiected the Scriptures being proposed by other parts of the Church? And why may not we do so at this day? Nay seeing de facto we know the verities of Christian Fayth by Scripture only, according to your doctrine; we cannot be obliged to belieue the Scrip∣tures, because the verities therein contained are ne∣cessary to be belieued, (for this very necessity you cannot belieue, but by belieuing aforehand the Scrip∣ture) but contrarily you may reiect the verities them∣selues, if you be not preobliged to belieue the diuine authority of the bookes wherein they are contained.

5. Againe, you say that Scripture is the only Rule of Christian Fayth,(e) 1.5 yet it is not necessary to Salua∣tion to belieue it to be a rule of Fayth, no nor to be the Word of God. The first part of this doctrine is the scope of your whole second Chapter. The second is taught purposely, and at large in the same Chapter(f) 1.6 pag. 116. n. 159. Ioyne these two assertions, and the Con∣clusion will be; That we are not obliged to receiue that which is the only ordinary meanes of attayning Christian Fayth, namely the Scriptures. And there∣fore in the ordinary way, we cannot be bound to im∣brace Christian Fayth, seeing it cannot be compassed without the meanes to attaine to it. For how can one be obliged to attayne an end, and yet be left free to re∣iect the only meanes of atchieuing that end? I am the

freer to make this question, because you concurre with me in the answere, when you say:(g) 1.7 It was ne∣cessary that God by his prouidence should preserue the Scrip∣ture from any vndiscernable corruption, in those things which he would haue knowne; otherwise it is apparent it had not been his will that these things should be knowne, the on∣ly meanes of continuing the Knowledge of them being peri∣shed. Now is it not in effect all one, whether the Scri∣pture haue perished, or whether it be preserued, if in the meane time we be not bound to belieue, that it is the Rule of Fayth, and word of God? Nay, seeing as things now stand we may find the verityes contay∣ned in Scripture, sufficiently expressed in innumera∣ble other bookes, we may at this present in conformi∣ty to your doctrine reiect all the holy Scripture, con∣tenting our selues with the contents thereof taken from other Authors, and not from the writers of the Bible.

6. The Doctrine which he carryeth through his whole Booke, but particularly insisteth vpon in his third Chapter, that we cannot learne from Scripture it selfe that it is Canonicall, but only from Tradi∣tion of men, deliuering it from hand to hand, is no lesse iniurious and derogatiue to holy Scripture then the former, speaking of men in his sense, that is, not as endued with any infallible assistance of the holy Ghost (which Catholicks belieue of the Church) but only as wise, or many men, or for the like human qua∣lifications; for to this effect he sayth:(h) 1.8 Tradition is a principle, not in Christianity, but in Reason, not praper to Christians, but common to all men. This is certainly the right course to blast the Authority of holy Scripture,

not to maintaine it. For besides that which I haue touched already, that by this meanes we are not so certaine of Scripture, as of profane bookes, he must come at length to resolue the beliefe of Scripture into the Tradition or Authority of Pagans, Iewes, Turkes, or condemned Hereticks, as well as of true Christiās. For seeing errours against fayth, or Heresies cannot in his principles be discerned but by Scriptures; be∣fore they be receaued, the testimony of one man con∣cerning the admittance of them must weigh as much as of another, and be considered only as prooceeding from a number of men, be they faythfull or Infidels, true Christians or condemned Hereticks.

7. And further according to the same principles he must acknowledge, that he belieueth some parts of Canonicall Scripture with a more firme assent, then others, to wit, as they haue been deliuered with more or lesse generall consent, or haue been more or lesse once questioned: which is to depriue Canonical Scri∣pture of all Authority. For if once we giue way to more or lesse in the behalfe of Gods word, we shall end in nothing. And this hath the more force in this mans doctrine, who professeth that the greatest cer∣tainty which he hath of any part of Scripture, is with∣in the compasse of probability. What certainty then shall those Scriptures haue, which participate of that probability in a lesse and lesse degree, according as they haue been deliuered with different tradition and consent. How this doctrine will sound in the eares of all true Christians, I leaue to be considered, conten∣ting my selfe to oppose your Assertion with the dis∣course of D. King, afterward Bishop of London, in the

beginning of his first Lecture vpon Ionas, where a∣mongst other things he sayes: Comparisons betwixt Scri∣pture and Scripture are both odious and daungerous. The Apostles names are euenly placed in the writings of the ho∣ly foundation. With an vnpartiall respect haue the children of Christs family from time to time, receiued, reuerenced, & imbraced the whole volume of Scriptures. You on the o∣ther side speake in a different strayne and say thus:(i) 1.9 I may belieue euen those questioned Bookes to haue been written by the Apostles, and to be Canonicall: but I cannot in reason belieue this of them so vndoubtedly, as of those bookes which were neuer questioned. And elswhere: The Canon of Scripture,(k) 1.10 as we receiue it, is built vpon vniuersall Tradition. For we do not professe our selues so absolutly and vndoubtedly certaine, neither do we vrge others to be so, of those Bookes which haue byn doubted, as of those which ne∣uer haue. By this meanes what will become of the E∣pistle of S. Iames, the second Epistle of S. Peter, the se∣cond and third of S. Iohn, the Epistle to the Hebrewes, and the Apocalyps of S. Iohn? And what part of Scri∣pture hath not been questioned by some, and those some so many, as would haue made vs doubt of the works of Tully or Liuy &c. if they had affirmed them not to haue been written by such Authours? And the only doubting of Erasmus, or some such other about the workes of some Fathers, hath caused them to be questioned by diuers, vpon much weaker grounds, as difference of stiles, or the like.

8. In another place you tell vs(l) 1.11 that to receiue a Booke for Canonicall, it is inough to haue had atte∣station though not vniuersall, yet at least sufficient to make considering men receiue them for Canonicall, which were

sometimes doubted of by some, yet whose number and au∣thority was not so great, as to preuaile against the contrary suffrages. Obserue vpon what inextricable passages, and lesse degrees of probability this man doth put vs in our beliefe of holy Scripture. First we must settle our Fayth on men; then on considering men, though the consent be not vniuersall; thirdly vpon the grea∣ter and more preualent number and authority of suf∣frages, as if the greater number alone, without in∣fallible assistance of the holy Ghost, were a sufficient ground for Christian Fayth. You deny (pag. 68. n. 42.) that the Controuersy about Scripture is to be tryed by most voyces, and yet what is your greater number, but most voyces? And as for greater Autho∣rity, what can you meane thereby, except perhaps greater learning, or some such quality, nothing pro∣portionable to that Authority, on which Christian Fayth must relye?

Notes

• * 1.1

  Chap. 3.
• (b) 1.2

  Pag. 141. & 62.
• (c) 1.3

  Pag. 116.
• (d) 1.4

  Pag. 116.
• (e) 1.5

  Cap. 2 per to∣tum.
• (f) 1.6

  Pag. 116.
• (g) 1.7

  Pag. 16.
• (h) 1.8

  Pag. 72. n. 51.
• (i) 1.9

  Pag. 67. n. 36.
• (k) 1.10

  Pag. 69. n. 45.
• (l) 1.11

  Pag. 68. n. 43.