A reply to Fulke, In defense of M. D. Allens scroll of articles, and booke of purgatorie. By Richard Bristo Doctor of Diuinitie ... perused and allowed by me Th. Stapleton.

The first part. Concerning the question of Onely Scripture.

And as touching the first: In the last Chapter we saw, how to make exception against all our other euidēces, he euermore said, that in all matters Onely euident Scripture must be brought and heard: confessing those other euidences to be so euident for vs, that they can not otherwise be auoyded. Now then, this bée∣ing his onely refuge, how many and how euident Scriptures hath he alleaged for it, as you thinke? Surely in all his first booke to D. Allens Articles, they being altogether our foresaid Eui∣dences, he alleageth but one place onely: and not many mo nei∣ther in his other booke of Purgatorie. And what maner of place also, thinke you, that it is? specially considering howe muche he craketh of it, as where he saith: Thus I haue declared, &c. that the true Church of Christ hath conuicted all Heretikes, onely by the Scripture. Agayne, it hath bene already proued sufficiently, that the true Catholike Church which is ledde only by the worde of God, the onely weapon by which heresies are cut downe, counting it to be sufficient for that purpose, hath ouerthrowen heresies of all sortes. And againe: Doctrine is to be sought out

and tried onely by the Scriptures, as we haue declared at large in the answere to the fourth Article, first Demaunde. And once a∣gaine: As for doubtes that arise by difficultie of Scripture, or cō∣tention of heresie, they must be resolued and determined, as it is abundauntly declared before, onely by the Scriptures. With that place of Scripture he alleaged certayne Fathers, as Hilarius, Basilius, Chrysostome, Sainct Augustine, Leo the first, and the Councell of Constantinople the sixte. To whom I must aun∣swere in the next Chapter. But he graunteth pardie, that the Fathers authoritie is no warrant to him so to crake: as another where also expresly he saith, It is not for confirmation of the trueth, that we alleadge the authoritie of the Doctors and olde Councels. Then must all these crakes be onely in respect of the Scripture that you there alleaged. Let vs therefore nowe heare [ 1] that Scripture: So did Paule ouercome the Iewes, Act. 18. that is to say, only by the Scripture. That he often disputed against the Iewes, prouing Iesus to be Christ, I there finde, but that his argumentes were none but Scriptures, I finde not. But reade you Actes .13. and you shall finde, that he vsed also other argu∣mentes agaynst them, to witte, the testimonie of certayne men, as of S. Iohn Baptist, and of his owne Disciples, that sawe him many dayes together after his resurrection, qui vsque nunc sunt testes eius ad plebem, Who to this day are witnesses for him to the people. Reade likewise Act. 4. for the argument of Miracles, specially where it is sayde, Hominem quoque vi∣dentes stantem cum eis qui curatus fierat, nihil poterant contra∣dicere, Seeing the man also standing with Peter and Iohn, whom they had healed, the Gouernours of the Iewes were quite put to silence. And therefore also if S. Paule had in your place ouer∣come them onely by Scriptures, it would not follow thereof, that no other argumentes are good ynough agaynst Iewes and Heretikes.

[ 2] Now to the places alleaged in your other booke: Other per∣swasion (say you) then suche as is grounded vpon the hearing of Gods worde, will neuer of Christians be counted for true be∣liefe, so long as the tenth Chapter to the Romanes remayneth in the Canon of the Bible. S. Paule there saith, that hearing is presupposed to beléeuing, and agayne to hearing is presupposed

the worde of God. But in what sorte, the worde of God? onely in writing? doth he not there expresse, that by the worde of God he meaneth preaching, and preaching of suche as be Sent? for that which he saith in one place, Hearing is of Gods worde, the same he saith afore, How shall they heare without preachers? And what is more common in the New Testament, then to call the preaching of Gods messengers, the worde of God? Euen as we to this day count it the worde of God, which we heare of the Church of God, either in her Councels, or in her Doctors, or any other way, for so said God to them, He that heareth you, hea∣reth me.

And so S. Paul said to the Galathians, If any man preach vn∣to [ 3] you any other Gospell, then that which we haue preached vn∣to you, and which you haue receiued, holde him for accursed He speaketh of preaching, and you alleage it as spoken of writing, and of onely writing. For thus you say to vs: It vexeth you at the very harte, that we require the authoritie of the holy Scrip∣tures, to confirme your doctrine, hauing a playne commaunde∣ment out of the word of God, that if any man teache otherwise then the word of God alloweth, he is to be accursed. No syr, it rather reioyceth vs at the heart, to see that this very same texte which you corrupte, is so playne a warrant to our brethren the Romaines accursing your masters Luther and Caluine, for preaching an other Gospell, then that which S. Paule preached to the saide Romaines, and which they receyued of him, the Scripture also testifying in other places, that S. Paule and the other Apostles taught the Romaines and other Churches, all things: but not likewise that he or they wrote all whiche they taught: neither againe, that in suche things as they wrote, the Churches alwayes should be required to bring forth their wri∣ting, & not otherwise to be credited, although they alleaged their preaching or tradition by worde of mouth.

Whereby you perceiue that your conclusion foloweth not, [ 4] though it were true that you bring out of another place, saying: All good workes are taught by the Scriptures: it is S Paules 2. Tim. 3. the holy Scriptures are hable to make the man of God perfect and prepared to all good workes. Suppose this to be S. Paules saying: will you conclude therof, that Timothie himselfe

commending any thing for a good worke, and saying that he had it of S. Paules owne mouth, where he had all things, should not be credited, but néedes he must proue the same by Scripture? We say, all good works were taught the Church by the Apostles speaking, and that saying doth not take away the Apostles wri∣ting. Euen so, if all good workes were taught in the Apostles writing, that taketh not away suche argumentes as are made vpon their speaking. As agayne, if a certayne article be confes∣sed to be taught in S. Paules Epistles, or also if all Articles (for so your words pretende here in the last Chapter) will it not suf∣fice for all that, to proue any article out of some other booke of Scripture? What a fonde reasoning is this, that because one euidence proueth all, therfore I can not haue any other euidence but that onely? And this I say, supposing that S. Paule had said, as you make him, All good workes are taught by the Scriptures, &c. But nowe I say further, that he doth not say so: but being now at the point of martyrdome, he exhorteth his Disciple not to faynt, but to fulfill his office to the ende, as he had done, the office (I say) of an Euangelist or Preacher, saying, that although he should nowe be depriued of his master, yet he had still the holy Scriptures with him, which be profitable, saith he, to teaching of truth, to disprouing of falshood, to correcting of vices, to instru∣cting in righteousnes, that the man of God (that is, the Euange∣list, be perfite, that is to say, furnished to euery good worke, mea∣ning thereby those foresaid workes of an Euangelist, as he also there had said, he that desireth a Bishops office, desireth a good worke. Now it is one thing, the Scripture to be profitable to this, and another thing, to be able, or sufficient vnto it. Agayne it is one thing, the Scripture to be profitable to euery parte of preaching, and another thing, the Scripture to teach (expresly) all good workes, in euery particular, as Oblations for the dead, (for of that you speake) and so forth.

Moreouer you alleage these two places, Search the Scriptures, and, Trie the spirites: and these you alleage for Only Scripture to be required both in all questions, and also in exposition of Scripture, declaring thereby, that you eyther know not or care not, what nor how you alleage. For where our Sauiour saith to the Iewes,

Search the Scriptures, for they it are which beare wit∣nesse

of me, in the very same place he saith also vnto them, And Iohn did beare witnesse to the trueth. And againe, My workes, or Miracles, do beare witnesse of me, that my Father sent me, and that, a greater witnesse then Iohn. And againe, Also my Father who sent me, he hath giuen witnesse of me.

Likewise vpon your other place, Trie the Spirites, you say, [ 6] And the Spirites are not tried but by the Scriptures. So you say, but your text doth not so say: yea the Apostle S. Iohn saith there straight after, By this we know a spirite (or Prophet, or teacher) of trueth, and a spirite of error.

Looke in the text, man, & sée what is that whereof he saith, by this, whether it be by Onely Scrip∣ture, or by some thing els. Briefly, Beleeue not euery spirit (saith he, but trie the spirites whether they be of God, for then you may be bolde to beléeue them. By this is knowen a spirite of God first in one particular, which I passe ouer, then in generall, after this maner: You my children (you Romanes and other Catholikes) be of God. We (Apostles and other Catholike teachers) be of God. And therefore, He that knoweth God, heareth vs: and he that is not of God, doth not heare vs. By this we know a spirite of trueth, and a spirite of error, or a false Prophet: to wit, by considering whether he agrée with them that are of God, with them that receiued and kéepe the vnction or spirite of truth which was sent to the Church for euer, with them that depart not after any Seducers, but continue in that which they heard in the be∣ginning, as the Romanes do most manifestly, no Antichrist nor Heretike being able to name the time, the noueltie, the Seducer, that euer they went after, so as Wittenberge, Geneua, England and all other that we charge with it, haue done most notoriously.

This is the effect (in generall) of S. Iohns Epistles.

Agayne you alleage, and say: The word of the Lorde is a light [ 7] vnto our steppes, and a lanterne vnto our féete, Therfore we will not walke in the darknes of mens traditions. Item▪ The faithful testimonie of Gods word onely giueth true light vnto the eyes, as the Prophet saith. And by and by after you call it, The onely au∣thoritie of Gods word written. But the Prophet neither hath the word onely, neither saith, that Gods word is not but in writing, but rather most euidently by Gods worde there he meaneth the preaching of his Apostles, S. Paule also him selfe referring that

verse of the same Psalme vnto them accordingly, Into all the earth their sound is gone forth, and their words to the ends of the world. And so you may see, the light of Gods word to be not on∣ly in writing, but also in tradition by mouth.

[ 8] Last of all you alleage and say against Iudas Machabeus: In the Law not so much as one pinne of the Tabernacle was omit∣ted, lest any thing might be left to the will of man, to deuise in the worship of God.

You shall not do (saith the Lord) what séemeth good in your owne eyes, but that which I commaunde you, that only shal you do, without adding any thing to it, or taking away any thing from it.

You are very dayntie of your quotations, in maner none at all in your margin, because you alleage so fewe places, and commonly omitted in your texte also, because you alleage your places without booke. This is my coniecture, let the Reader loke in the places, as I doe quote them, because for bre∣uitie sake I omitte many thinges that were worth the noting. Wel in this place, Moises saith not, That only which I do write, but, That only which I commaund you. And so our Sauiour said long after to the Iewes accordingly:

The Scribes and Pharises sit in Moises chaire: and therefore whatsoeuer they commaund you, obserue it and doe it.

As for the Pinnes of the Tabernacle, they are so mentioned for other causes, as you may sée in the Doctors Commentaries, and not for the cause that you imagin, that is, to leaue nothing to any man afterwarde in the worship of God, for how say you then by Dauid and Salamon, who chaunged not only a pinne yea all the pinnes, but also that whole Tabernacle, building in stéed of it, a Temple in Hierusalem, and there ordei∣ning musicall instrumentes, and many other things, for the wor∣ship of God, that the law did not mention. You alwayes erre, be∣cause you do not distinguish betwene men that haue onely their owne humane spirite, and men that haue the spirite of God, as Moyses, the Prophets, the Apostles, and the Catholike Church.

And so hauing answered al your places, I would your Vnlear∣ned Brother to know of it, him that euery yere sendeth out the Newyeres giftes, and what els I know not, and to tell me now, why I might not in my last Motiue call this your Castle of Onely Scripture, Your weake and false Castle: Weake, be∣cause you haue no defence at all for it, neither of Srripture,

as I haue here declared, neither of Doctor, as in the nexte chapter I will declare. False, because not so much as one worde of Scripture, from the beginning of Genesis to the ende of the Apocalipse, maketh for you in any thing, nor against vs in any thing, as in this Chapter I doe ynough to persuade therein any reasonable man, and therefore it is but a false sleight of you Heretikes, and a mere deception of the simple, when you be ouerthrowen by Apostolike traditions, by auncient Fathers, and so by many other our weapons in Christe, as in the laste Chapter your selfe haue confessed, to sette a bolde face vpon it, and vaunte, that yet for all that the Scriptures be plainelye for you, and plainely against vs. In which boldnes your im∣pudencie cryeth euen to heauen, when you dare yet vaunt there∣of so farre, to saye, that the Church of God is faine therefore, to blaspheme the holye Scriptures, seeing them to make so plainely for you. When you here in the laste Chapter, and your Masters and Scholefelowes commonly in their writinges feare not to open your mouthes thus against Gods holy Ta∣bernacle in earth: I that am nothing, and in very deede no∣thing, and lesse then nothing, may not disdaine the like opening at me by the foresaide Vnlearned, but contenting me with mine owne conscience, and the conscience of God him selfe and his Angels, and all his Seruauntes that knowe me by my person, or by my writings, beeing moste certaine how alwayes in heart and worde I haue honored the most holy Scriptures, euen as gods owne liuely and infallible worde, I submit my selfe with Dauid in an humble and contrite heart, to all that Semei hath or shall vtter against me, if peraduenture my Lorde God most mercifull will accept it to forgeuenes of my manifold and heynous sinnes: desiring of him no other reuenge, but the par∣ties conuersion and reconciliation to him and his swéete spouse my lieue Mother the Catholike Church. And so muche in this place to that man.

In which place you also, Fellow Fulke, may be admonished to looke better to your Logicke, concerning your argument ab authoritate negatiuè, that you oppose it no more to our so ma∣ny argumentes ab authoritate affirmatiuè. I gaue you a litle before two causes thereof: consider them well I pray you.

All knowledge that Christian men haue of heauenly things (you say, to mainteine your argument) is grounded vpon the autho∣ritie of Gods word, meaning the Scripture. Therefore as it is no good Logicke, to conclude negatiuely of one place or booke of Scripture, This is not conteined in it, therefore it is not true: So of the whole doctrine of God, wherein all trueth necessary to sal∣uation is conteined, the argument is most inuincible that conclu∣deth negatiuely thus: All true doctrine is taught in the Scripture, Purgatory is not taught in the Scripture, therefore Purgatory is no true doctrine. Letting Purgatory alone till anone, there are two faultes, I say, in this reasoning. One, because the Maior is false, as to all your textes alleaged for it, I haue answered. The other, because although the Maior were true, yet can not the ar∣gument be opposed to our argumentes, as you oppose it in the last Chapter. You might, if the Maior were true, labour to the purpose (I graunt) in prouing the Minor. But you might not, I say, for all that, make of it an opposition or exception, when we make argumentes out of Traditions, Councels, Fathers, &c. as in the like I shew vnto you: I proue a doctrine vnto you out of the Old Testament, you oppose therevnto your negatiue argu∣ment, and say to me: All true doctrine is taught in the New Te∣stament (for so you do holde, and must holde) that doctrine is not taught in the New Testament: therfore that doctrine is no true doctrine. Is this well opposed of you? May not I say to you not∣withstanding, Yea syr, but for all that, what say you to my place alleaged out of the Old Testament? vnlesse you haue any thing against the Old Testament it selfe. Euen so, vnles you haue any thing directly against Traditions them selues, Councels, Fa∣thers, and suche others, our argumentes do preuayle, and you in vayne do flée to Only Scripture, although all true doctrine were taught in Scripture. Now to the second question concerning the Church.

Notes

• Ar. 11.15
• Ar. 16.
• Ar. 82.
• Ar. 86.
• Infra pag.
• Pur. 383.
• Ar. 11.
• Pur. 6.
• 1. Thes. 2.
• Luc. 10.
• Gal. 1.
• Pur. 449.163.
• Falsification by chaunging.
• Act. 28.
• Mat. 28. Act. 20. Rom. 15.
• Pur. 410.
• 2. Tim. 4.
• 2. Tim. 3.
• 1. Tim. 3.
• Pur. 434.
• Iohn. 5.
• VVho euer al∣leaged Scrip∣ture more blindly.
• 1. Iohn. 4. Ar. 4.
• Pur. 285.364. Psal. 118.18.
• Rom. 10.
• Pur. 210.
• Deut. 12. ver. 8. & 32.
• Mat. 23.
• Onely Scrip∣ture.
• Arg. ab au∣thoritate negatiuè.
• Pur. 449.