against them the argument which St. Augustine opposed to his Manicheans in these words: 'I would not believe* the gospel, unless the authority of the church did move me. Them, therefore, whom I obeyed, saying, Believe the gospel, why should I not obey, saying to me, Do not believe Manicheus (Luther, Calvin, &c.) choose what thou pleasest. If thou shalt say, Believe the catholics; they warn me not to give any credit to you. If therefore I believe them, I cannot believe thee. If you say, Do not believe the catholics, thou shalt not do well in forcing me to the faith of Manicheus, because, by the preaching of catholics, I believed the gospel itself. If you say, You did well to believe them [catholics] commending the gospel, but you did not well to believe them, discommending Manicheus; dost thou think me so very foolish, that without any reason at all, I should believe what thou wilt, and not believe what thou wilt not?' And do not protestants perfectly resemble these men, to whom St. Augustine spake, when they will have men to believe the Roman church delivering Scripture, but not to believe her condemning Luther, and the rest? Against whom, when they first opposed themselves to the Roman church, St. Augustine may have seemed to have spoken no less prophetically than doctrinally, when he said, 'Why should I not most diligently inquire what Christ commanded of them before all others, by whose authority I was moved to believe, that Christ commanded any good thing: canst thou better declare to me what he said, whom I would not have thought to have * Con. Ep. Fund. cap. 5. + Lib. de Util. Cre. cap. 14, been, or to be, if the belief thereof had been recommended by thee to me? This therefore I believed by fame, strengthened with celebrity, consent, antiquity. But every one may see that you, so few, so turbulent, so new, can produce nothing deserving authority. What madness is this? Believe them [catholics] that we ought to believe Christ; but learn of us, what Christ said. Why, I beseech thee? Surely, if they [catholics] were not at all, and could not teach me any thing, I would more easily persuade myself, that I were not to believe Christ, than that I should learn any thing concerning him from any other than them by whom I believed him.' If therefore we receive the knowledge of Christ and Scriptures from the church, from her also we take his doctrine, and the interpretation thereof. 19. "But, besides all this, the Scripture cannot be judge of controversies; who ought to be such, as that to him not only the learned or veterans, but also the unlearned and novices, may have recourse: for these being capable of salvation, and endued with faith of the same nature with that of the learned, there must be some universal judge, which the ignorant may understand, and to whom the greatest clerks must submit. Such is the church; and the Scripture is not such. 20. "Now, the inconveniences which follow by referring all controversies to Scripture alone, are very clear: for by this principle, all is finally in very deed and truth reduced to the internal private spirit, because there is really no middle way betwixt a public external, and a private internal voice; and whosoever refuseth the one, must of necessity adhere to the other. 21. "This tenet also of protestants, by taking the office of judicature from the church, comes to confer it upon every particular man, who, being driven from submission to the church, cannot be blamed if he trust himself as far as any other, his conscience dictating, that wittingly he means not to cozen himself, as others maliciously may do: which inference is so manifest, that it hath extorted from divers protestants the open confession of so vast an absurdity. Hear Luther: The governors of *churches, and pastors of Christ's sheep, have indeed power to teach, but the sheep ought to give judgment, whether they propound the voice of Christ, or of aliens.' Lubbertus saith, 'As we have demonstrated, that all public judges may be deceived in interpreting; so we affirm, that they may err in judging. All faithful men are private judges, and they also have power to judge of doctrines and interpretations.' Whitaker, even of the unlearned, saith, "They fought to have recourse unto the more learned; but in the mean time we must be careful not to attribute to them over much, but so that still we retain our own freedom.' Bilson also affirmeth, that the people §must be discerners and judges of that which is taught.' This same pernicious doctrine is delivered by Brentius, Zanchius, Cartwright, and others exactly cited by Breerely; and nothing is more common in every protestant's mouth, than that he admits of fathers, councils, church, &c. as far as * Tom. 2. Wittem. fol. 375. In lib. de Principiis Christian. Dogm. l. 6. c. 3. § In his true Difference, part 2. Tract. 2. cap. 1. sect. 1. they agree with Scripture; which upon the matter is himself. Thus heresy ever falls upon extremes: it pretends to have Scripture alone for judge of controversies; and in the mean time sets up as many judges as there are men and women in the Christian world. What good statesmen would they be, who should ideate or fancy such a commonwealth, as these men have framed to themselves a church? They verify what St. Augustine objecteth against certain heretics: You see* that you go about to overthrow all authority of Scripture, and that every man's mind may be to himself a rule, what he is to allow, or disallow, in' every Scripture.' 22: "Moreover, what confusion to the church, what danger to the commonwealth, this denial of the authority of the church may bring, I leave to the consideration of any judicious, indifferent man. I will only set down some words of D. Potter, who, speaking of the proposition of revealed truths, sufficient to prove him that gainsayeth them to be an heretic, saith thus: "This proposition of revealed truths, is not by infalli ble determination of pope or church; (pope and church being excluded, let us hear what more secure rule he will prescribe) but by whatsoever means a man may be convinced in conscience of Divine revelation. If a preacher do clear any point of faith to his hearers; if a private Christian do make it appear to his neighbour, that any conclusion, or point of faith is delivered by Divine revelation of God's word; if a man himself (without any teacher) by reading of the Scriptures, or hear * Lib. 32. Cont. Faust. + Page 247. ing them read, be convinced of the truth of any such conclusion; this is a sufficient proposition to prove him that gainsayeth any such proof, to be an heretic, an obstinate opposer of the faith.' Behold, what goodly safe propounders of faith arise in place of God's universal visible church, which must yield to a single preacher, a neighbour, a man himself if he can read, or at least have ears to hear Scripture read! Verily I do not see, but that every well-governed civil commonwealth ought to concur towards the exterminating of this doctrine, whereby the interpretation of Scripture is taken from the church and conferred upon every man, who, whatsoever is pretended to the contrary, may be a passionate seditious creature. 23. "Moreover, there was no Scripture or written word for about two thousand years from Adam to Moses, whom all acknowledge to have been the first author of canonical Scripture: and again, for about two thousand years more, from Moses to Christ our Lord, Holy Scripture was only among the people of Israel; and yet there were gentiles endued in those days with Divine faith, as appeareth in Job, and his friends. Wherefore, during so many ages, the church alone was the decider of controversies, and instructor of the faithful. Neither did the word written by Moses deprive that church of her former infallibility, or other qualities requisite for a judge: yea, D. Potter acknowledgeth, that besides the law, there was a living judge in the Jewish church, endued with an absolutely infallible direction in cases of moment; as all points belonging to Divine faith are. Now the church of Christ our Lord was before the Scriptures of the New Testament, which were not |