4. CHAP. IV. Of Ecclesiastical laws, of Traditions, of the discerning of spirits, of Councils, Fathers, and of the Canon
CHAP. IV. Of Ecclesiastical laws, of Traditions, of the discerning of spirits, of Councils, Fathers, and of the Canons, which they call the Canons of the Apostles.
H ere are three things to be considered of us. The first is, whether it be lawful for Bishops and Ecclesiastical men to set forth such manner of laws and decrees. Secondly, if it be lawful, what manner of laws those ought to be. Thirdly, what force they may have to bind the conscience. As touching the first, we know that all godly men are bound to obey Princes and Magistrates, And that as Paul saith for conscience sake. Peter and Paul command servants to obey their Masters, even though they be froward.
Christ himself paid tributes and customs, and was never against the laws.
We are commanded to obey parents. And the Magistrate is instead of a parent as unto whom our parents have referred all their power and authority.
Solomon in the proverbs saith. Fear God and honor the king, and meddle not with Seditious men, for their destruction is at hand. But this is true so long as they command nothing against the Lord. For if that happen, we must obey God rather than men. Albeit in the Civil laws there be certain things belonging unto the necessity of a City: some unto decency only. It is
for necessity, that men should punish offenders: unto decency, that it may not be lawful for a matron to marry in the time of mourning: which was provided for by the Roman laws. Further his purpose also is to be considered who made the Law. For some things he would have to be straitly and thoroughly observed: and that some things should be certain provocations and admonitions. Lastly in these lighter sorts of decrees we must take heed, that nothing he violated by contempt. The effect is, that men seeing they be not born to themselves, but to the commonwealth, should endeavor with all their care to obey laws.
2. But some think that Bishops may not make laws. And thus to say they are moved by no small or obscure Reasons. For first they demand from whence they should have that part: I speak here of Bishops so far forth as they be Ministers of the word, not in respect that they be civil Princes: for the consideration of that matter is otherwise. That power they have not of Christ, for he neither made laws, nor yet ever gave such commandments to his Apostles. Wherefore, if Bishops be so sent from Christ, as he was sent from the father, they cannot make laws. Further it behooveth that they which make laws should have dominion. But Peter warneth Bishops that they should not bear rule over the Clergy. Besides, he that writeth laws, it behooveth he have an interest to punish: as it is in the Pandects de legibus
& Senatus consultis out of Demosthenes. For he saith, that the law is ἐπανόρθωμα τῶν ἁμαρτημάτων καί ἑκουσίων καὶ ἀκουσίων, that is, the law is a lawful correction of offenses committed willingly or unwillingly.
But the Church hath not the sword or power of punishing. Moreover where the law is, there of necessity must follow transgression: such is the infirmity of our nature. But Paul would not ensnare any man. And James saith, in the 4th chapter: There is one lawmaker who can save and destroy. And Isaiah in
the 33rd chapter: Thou art our King, Thou art our Judge, thou art our Lawgiver. But the Canons decree far otherwise. Yea and when they speak of them which may make laws, they give the first place unto the Pope: the second, unto the Councils and Bishops: the third, unto Emperors. And of this mind be the Schoolmen, as Thomas in Secunda Secundae de Jejuni: saith, that the Church cannot decree: at what time and in what manner we should fast. For even as (saith he) civil Magistrates may declare and ratify those things which be confusedly and obscurely shadowed in the law of nature: so the Church may define and determine those things which be confusedly taught in the holy Scriptures. And Ostiensis de vi Constitutionum saith, that such decrees ought to be of that force, that he which contenmeth them should be excommunicated. And we read in the histories that Victor would have excommunicated all the East part, for no other cause but for that they did not solemnize the feast of Easter after the Roman use: Albeit that matter was somewhat repressed by the Counsel of Irenaeus. The reasons that are brought for the contrary, they think that they be able easily to refell. For whereas it is said, that the Bishops received not authority of Christ to make laws, they answer, that that is nothing. For they say that laws do belong unto doctrine: For the law (as Cicero saith) is a commanding of honest things and a repelling of things shameful. So that seeing the Church hath the authority to teach, if hath also (say they) authority to make Laws. And albeit Peter saith that a Bishop ought not to bear rule, yet that he ought to have oversight in the Church and to have the power of the keys. And whereas it is alleged that the Church hath no right to punish, they say it is false: for the Church may bind, loose, and excommunicate. And whereas Paul writeth that he will not cast any man into a snare, they say he writeth this particularly of virgins, because chastity
is not commonly given unto all men: And that it is a weak argument for a man thus to gather: It is not lawful to make a law of virginity, therefore it is not lawful for any cause. And that whereas Isaiah saith: Thou art our lawmaker and king: that is true as touching the last judgment and eternal damnation: Or by the figure Antonomasia, because whatsoever is, is of him.
For otherwise by the same reason every civil magistrate should be taken away.
3. But whether these be Laws or no, I will not contend, because it maketh not much to purpose. Wherefore let it be set down, that it is lawful for the Church to make to itself, either Canons, or laws; or decrees, or statutes, or call them by what name thou wilt. For the Church is a company, and must be ruled by the word of God, especially because it belongeth to the salvation thereof, and to the worshiping of God. But there be other things which belong only unto outward discipline. For there is need of certain outward bonds, to the end that the fellowship of the people may be retained.
So the Apostle decreed, that women ought to pray with the head covered, and men uncovered. And the Apostles in the Acts, decreed that we should abstain from blood, from strangled, and from things dedicated unto Idols.
And always in Councils after they had done with doctrine, they began to entreat of discipline. Finally so did all the Fathers as Tertullian, Origen,
Basel, Augustine and Jerome. The end of these laws must be edifying and good order. But for so much as they be not of necessity, they may be changed according to the times and places: as in Baptism, concerning the three times dipping, of sprinkling of them that are diseased: of the time of Easter and Pentecost: at which times only Baptism was wont to be given.
Of the Eucharist, in what place, at what time, after what manner, whether we ought to communicate standing or sitting, in the morning or at evening:
unless that these things shall be determined of, there will never be any tranquility of the Church. For one man will hear a Sermon at one time, and another at another time: one in this place, and another in that. So as it is lawful to appoint such decrees if it be done with the peace of the Church.
Others reason thus: The people is unlearned and unskillful, therefore to be held in Ceremonies. But this difference is between us and them of old time:
They had many Ceremonies: we, as saith Augustine, have very few. And Christ saith that God will have a people of whom he shall be called upon in spirit and in truth. Yet Paul teacheth the Corinthians, that it behooveth that there should be some things which may serve unto order and comeliness.
Howbeit this order consisteth not in great pomp, in apparel, in songs, in the noise of bells, and organs, but in that which may serve unto modesty and gravity, which may remove lightness, confusion, and barbarousness.
4. Now that we may understand, of what sort such laws should be, we ought to remember, that some there be, which pertain to doctrine, and some to governance. Unto doctrines nothing ought to be thought necessary, but that which is gathered either expressly or by manifest and sound reason out of the holy Scriptures: such as is of the baptizing of Infants, and of Homoousion, that is [that Christ is of one substance with his father.] For God expressly commanded in Deuteronomy, that there should not anything be added unto his law. Again, those things which pertain to governance, are distinguished two manner of ways. For some be necessary and serve unto salvation: of which sort none must be thought, unless they be taught in the holy Scriptures. Others there be indifferent in their own nature, the which we may use either well or ill. Unto this part only belongeth all this discourse: In this kind we must specially take heed; that nothing be thought to be done to the worshipping of God. For divine worshiping dependeth not
of the will of men, but of the counsel of God. Therefore Christ in Matthew saith out of Isaiah: In vain do they worship me, teaching doctrines being precepts of men. For the worshipping of God must remain simple and pure.
Therefore God saith in Isaiah, that he would send fury and madness upon them of whom he is worshipped according to the precepts of men. And in deed so we see it commonly come to pass, that they which are wholly occupied in this, are after a sort given up to a reprobate sense: they dote, they are mad, and they cannot see, even those things that be most clear. Paul unto the Colossians saith: If ye be dead with Christ, why are ye yet as it were living held with decrees? And unto the Galatians: Stand you in the same liberty wherein Christ hath delivered you. And to the Colossians he utterly condemneth all voluntary worshipping's. These things in deed have a show of holiness and wisdom, but that show standeth in superstition, in humility, in ἀφειδία, that is, neglecting of the body, and in the revelation of Angels, but in very deed they be rebuked, as Christ saith in Matthew. But now if these things be neither necessary, nor yet belong to the worshipping of God, they may be changed: neither is it necessary that they should be after one sort in all Churches. In these things saith Jerome let every
Province abound in his own sense. And Ambrose, as he is cited by Augustine to Januarius: If ye will not err do you (saith he) as I am wont: for I unto what Church soever I come, do apply myself unto the ceremonies thereof. Neither undoubtedly ought the Church be deprived of that liberty, which Christ would have evermore remain whole unto it. Yet do I not therefore speak these things, to the intent I would have Ceremonies to be every day altered in the Church, for nothing must either be changed or abolished without great counsel and grave deliberation. Further we must take heed, least these ceremonies do grow to an exceeding number, and so
do overturn all things. Augustine in his 119th Epistle unto Januarius saith, that in his time the number of observations was so great, as the condition of the Jews seemed much more tolerable than did the condition of the Christians. All things (saith he) be full of presumptions: so as he may seem to sin more grievously, which during their Octaves treadeth on the ground with his bare feet, than he that drinketh drunk. And what do these things profit in the end? Verily they will make ill men nothing the better. For as we have said, they are only effectual unto good order, for so much as many of these kind of things are invented for filthiness, and gains sake: for by these arts the Papists kitchings are made fat. It also happeneth oftentimes, that by these small matters men are led away from the true worship of God. This did Christ reprove in the Pharisees, that for their traditions they contemned the precepts of God. Wherefore such inventions and decrees of men must be taken away so often as they begin to hinder holiness to Godward. For so Hezekiah took away the brazen Serpent when the people had once begun to honor it for God, although it was erected by Moses. Ceremonies therefore are to be suffered so long as they serve to good order and to any use of the Church: but whereas there shall be no more use of them, they must without all doubt be taken away.
5. Now let us see as touching the third part, which fit the best our purpose, what force such decrees should have for the binding of consciences, and what difference there is between these things and civil decrees. First of all those things bind not, if contempt and offense be renewed, and that we do not either through pride and of set purpose abolish those things that be well instituted, or else trouble the common quiet of the Church. These things being observed, the conscience is nothing bound. For example sake: The Apostles decreed that the gentiles converted unto Christ should abstain
from strangled, from blood, and from the thing dedicated unto Idols.
Wherein they had respect unto nothing else but the tranquility of the Church: for otherwise the Jews could never have agreed with the Ethnics. If any man had eaten those things, preserving the common quiet of the Church, he had nothing at all sinned against conscience. For otherwise Peter saith: Why tempt you God, in putting on a yoke &c? And Paul unto the Colossians: Let no man judge you in meat and drink. And if so be we ought not to be judged of our brother much less ought we to be judged of ourselves. And Christ saith, That which goeth in at the mouth, defileth not the man: and so he defended his disciples when they had eaten with unwashed hands, and when as they journeyed, they rubbed out the ears of corn in their hands. The same doeth Paul prove in the Epistle to the Corinthians, saying: Whatsoever shall be set before you, that eat without asking any question. But if any man shall declare unto thee, that that meat is dedicated to an Idol, eat not for conscience sake, not thine own conscience, but his that showed it unto thee. But a far other there is in civil precepts. For we are commanded to obey, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience sake: the conscience I mean not of another man, but our own.
Therefore great is the difference between Ecclesiastical decrees and political. So then it is of necessity that those things do not bind the consciences. For in Ecclesiastical things, good order must be regarded, but in civil things we must obey, although thou perceive not that good order.
6. In fine we must always hold that common rule, To obey is better than sacrifice: and to hearken, is better than the fat of rams. Samuel disputing of sacrifices and obedience, useth a double comparison. For first he saith, that those things are not of like estimation. Further he saith, that obedience is better than all sacrifices. Ben Gerson showeth this reason thereof. Because
sacrifices (saith he) are invented to take away sins, but obedience maketh a man not to sin at all. And much better is that which causeth us not to sin, than which purgeth sin committed. Another reason is, because, that must needs be less which is sometime refused by God, than that which is always required: but sacrifices are often rejected of God; obedience, never: wherefore this must needs be the better. For Jeremiah saith in the 7th chapter: When I brought your fathers out of Egypt, I spake not a word unto them of sacrifices, but only that you should obey my word. And Isaiah,
Why offer ye (saith he) so many sacrifices unto me? I am full of burnt offerings and of the fatness of fed beasts. And David in the 50th Psalm: I will take no calves out of thy stall, nor he goats out of thy flocks, for all the wild beasts of the forest are mine, and so are the cattle upon a thousand hills. I know all the fowls of the mountains, and the wild beasts are with me. If I be hungry I will not tell thee. I might cite many other places for the confirmation hereof, but it sufficiently appeareth by these few, that sacrifices were sometimes refused: but God never refused obedience.
7. But here by the way, somewhat must be spoken of those words of Jeremiah, how it can be said, that God spake not to the old Jews as touching sacrifices. Jerome referreth this unto the ten commandments, because in it there is no mention made of sacrifices, but that afterward, when they had made unto themselves a Calf, God commanded, that if they would needs do sacrifices, they should rather do them unto him than unto Idols. Albeit there may be another reason no less probable gathered by the History itself. For when the people was brought forth into the wilderness, when the tabernacle was consecrated and that now the Priests were appointed, there was instituted a most plentiful sacrifice upon mount Sinai. But after that time, so long as they remained by the space of forty years in the wilderness, they
neither had circumcision nor sacrifices. Hereunto it seems that Jeremiah had respect, rather than unto the Levitical law. A third exposition may be: that God required not these things, that is to wit, chiefly and especially: For this kind of speech is usual in the holy Scriptures, that that which is not chiefly done, is absolutely denied to be done. So Paul saith: Christ sent not me to baptize. Whereas yet he said unto all the Apostles: Go ye and baptize. But because that seemed to be the least part of the Apostolical office, therefore
Paul denieth utterly that the same belonged to his office. Otherwise he baptized Gaius and Stephanas, in the doing whereof he had swerved from his vocation, if he had not been sent to baptize. So as God commanded not sacrifices unto the old Jews: that is, he did not specially and chiefly command them. Also we may say, that God required not sacrifices of them, namely after such a manner as they were done of them: that is to wit, with dissimulation and hypocrisy, when as their heart was altogether strange from God. For sacraments be seals of the promises of God, and confirmations of our faith. But if faith be absent, what can either be sealed or confirmed? Moreover God requireth no such kind of sacrifices, which for the very work sake should be thought to purge sins; or which should be gathered of robbery of poor men's oblations. In sacrifices, the thing signified did please, that is to wit, Christ, unto whom those things, and the mortification of affections stirred up the minds of men. So Paul saith: I beseech you my brethren that ye will give your bodies a lively sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable serving of God.
Without these things, sacrifices were nothing else but dead bodies without life. The third reason why obedience is to be preferred before sacrifices, is, that sacrifices may be common unto God and unto Idols, but obedience is peculiar unto God. Lastly in sacrifices, a man may make much of the belly
and of good cheer: but obedience is reserved unto God alone. But that sacrifices are of some estimation, it appeareth by the very words of Samuel, to obey (saith he) is better than sacrifice: therefore sacrifices are good, so that they be done rightly and in order. This place do the Papists wrest unto that obedience, which they cry out to be due unto them and their traditions.
Howbeit Samuel spake not of this obedience, but of that which is due unto the commandment of God. So Paul saith: that he received grace and Apostleship to the obedience of faith, that all the Gentiles might be brought unto Christ. But Christ (say they) saith: He that heareth you, heareth me, and he that despiseth you despiseth me. These things indeed agree unto you, but yet so as you must allege the word of God.
Of Traditions.
8. Moreover false Apostles are by Paul reproved, because they brought in manners and doctrine altogether without Christ. Let them consider therefore how far they stray which earnestly affirm that traditions should be urged, seeing the same be not taught everywhere in the Church, neither were always received: and yet are they called Apostolical. There was a tradition in Tertullian's time, that milk and honey should forthwith be given to them that were baptized, that so (as he speaketh) they might he fed like infants.
Also it was a tradition, that the Eucharist, and that under both kinds, should be given to Infants in the time of Augustine and Cyprian, and should so be given as things necessary unto salvation. Epiphanius in Doctrina compendiaria contra heresies, saith, that it was an Apostolical tradition, that they should fast the day before the Sabbath, which is called Friday, because Christ as that day suffered. Also the fourth day of the weak, because Christ on that day was assumpted into heaven. And when he lived on the earth he said that the Apostles should not fast so long as they had the
bridegroom with them. But that they should then fast, when the bridegroom should be taken from them. It is there added and confirmed by Augustine, in an Epistle to Cassulanus, that there is a tradition, that we should not fast from Easter unto Pentecost: There is also a tradition, as Basil confirmeth in his book de spiritu Sancto, that during all those days we should not worship upon our knees. The very which he affirmeth of the Lord's Day. The tradition was Apostolical at Ephesus and in Asia, that the feast of Easter should be kept after the fashion of the Jews. In the Church of Rome that the tradition of the Apostles was said to be otherwise. Seeing therefore they be so diverse and are repugnant in themselves, they cannot be the ways of Paul or of the Apostles. For he saith, that he himself taught everywhere and in every place one and the self-same thing. Wherefore Cyprian writeth unto
Pompeius, that he alloweth not of traditions, unless it be those which are in the Gospels, Apostolical Epistles, and Acts of the Apostles, whereto I add those which necessarily are inferred out of the holy Scriptures. Whatsoever things else are brought they be uncertain and not everywhere received. So as if a due consent ought to be preserved in the Church, it is necessary that we firmly and constantly stay ourselves in the holy Scriptures.
Of discerning of Spirits.
9. But the discerning of spirits is a gift, by which the difference of them which are moved by an evil spirit is known from them which are inspired with the holy Ghost. Which, how necessary it is, Christ admonished, when he said, Beware of false Prophets which come unto you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they be ravening wolves. And Paul unto the Thessalonians,
Prove all things and keep that which is good. But how spirits are to be known, John teacheth in his first Epistle when he saith: If a man confess that the Lord Jesus is come in the flesh: he is of God: and he that denieth
that the Lord Jesus is come in the flesh, is not of the Lord, but is of Antichrist. Augustine treating on these words, marveleth, that many
Heretics be very pernicious, which confess the Lord Jesus to have come in the flesh, who nevertheless be not of God: but he answereth to this effect: that they confess the Lord Jesus to be come in flesh, which with a sound faith receive all those doctrines which either go before or follow this article.
If Christ come, in the flesh, he was before his coming: he took very flesh upon him to this end, that he should verily die, and that afterward he should rise again, whereby he might also give us the hope of resurrection. And many other things are knit unto that principle, the which as well heretics as infidels do refuse, either in whole or in part. Wherefore John would not distinctly reckon up everything which we ought to confess unto salvation, to the end that our spirit might be approved, but he only spake of that which was the chief, unto which in a manner all other things necessary to salvation are adjoined. But if thou wilt say: Admit there be some which rightly and faithfully hold all those opinions, is he therefore thought to have the spirit of Christ, if he live unpurely? Augustine answereth, that there is a certain confession which is in outward words only, and another which is true, and hath good works with it. And this he proveth out of the Epistle unto Titus:
They confess that they know God, but in deeds they deny him. Therefore by contraries he saith: there be some which in deeds confess God himself: therefore he affirmeth that confession, of which John speaketh, is no vulgare confession, but such a one as hath deeds. But through these things which are spoken by this godly man, we have as yet no certain rule by the which spirits are discerned. For there be many Heretics, which in outward show have had their life garnished with works notable enough, but the same in the meantime was contaminated with the endeavor of human glory, and
we being ignorant of the purpose of their mind, can judge nothing of the goodness of the works which they make semblance of: for this judgment pertaineth only to the conscience. Wherefore John in the same Epistle writeth: And if so be our heart accuse us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things. As if he had said: Although thou shalt behave thyself notably in outward show, and shalt have an evil mind, think not that thou art hidden: for God also understandeth the perverseness of thy mind, seeing he is greater than our heart. So as to God must be left the secrete judgment of perfect uprightness of works: because he being the judge, it may be, that he which shall give his body to be burned, seeing he is without charity, it is nothing: and that those things which he seemeth to do very well, are condemned: Only we can judge of those things which appear manifestly.
10. Wherefore there remaineth two rules for to judge of spirits. One is, if the opinions, as touching faith be retained perfect and pure. And this meant
John when he said: If any man confess the Lord Jesus, &c. And this confession of opinions must be examined by the holy Scriptures: the which seeing they had not in the Church at the beginning, as concerning the New
Testament, they were examined by the words and doctrine of the Apostles.
Therefore John a little after saith: He that is of God heareth us, and he that heareth not us is not of God. Then he addeth, that thus we do prove the spirit. Another rule is of manners and life: This did Christ express when he said: By their fruits ye shall know them. And as opinions are known by examining of them with the Scriptures, so life and manners should be tried by the discipline of the Church. Howbeit either rule of examination is at this day waxen cold. For the life of the faithful is not looked upon, but the sheep of Christ do miserably perish and are neglected. Further the holy Scripture is less red than meet it should; neither is it carefully and diligently handled.
And the Papists will that the opinions should be examined, not by the Scriptures, but by the councils and fathers. Thereof it cometh to pass, that the Church hath these many years been deceived. In the Primitive Church a gift was extant, whereby it might easily be known with what spirit they which did speak were led. By these means Satan was resisted when he transformed himself into an Angel of light.
Of Councils.
11. Wherefore let them take heed which in diverse places boast of the Councils, in which it hath been judged as touching religion, what men it behooved there to be, namely spiritual, for so much as the judgment only of divine things is brought to them: But at this day the greatest part of a Council, is so over-fraught with gross imperfections, as in very deed it is not lawful to take meat with them. They say that they be the Church: howbeit although they be baptized, and have taken orders in the Church, yet do they not therefore prove themselves to be spiritual, seeing it is proved that they do the works of the flesh and not of the spirit. And although some spiritual men may perhaps agree with them, very few they be and are overmatched both in number and authority of the carnal sort, neither deal they always valiantly as they ought to do. And in truth as the case now standeth it is the Pope which governeth the council. For he summoneth, suspendeth, alloweth, and refuseth the same at his own pleasure. Who, how truly he may be called spiritual, all men understand. Besides further seeing the holy Scriptures be inspired by God and therefore most spiritual, none that be spiritual can decree in councils anything against them. For spirits are not one against another. But in Councils they have sundry times defined against the decrees of the holy Scripture. There the communion was mangled: Matrimony was forbidden the ministers of the Church:
Innumerable abuses were brought in of masses: namely Invocation of Saints, the use of Images: the superstition of Purgatory and infinite pestilences of this kind were confirmed. And what authority a council should have, Augustine showeth in the 3rd book against Maximinus the bishop of the Arians, when he saith: But now neither ought I allege the council of Nice, nor thou the Council of Ariminum as though we would prejudice one another, neither must I be tied to the authority of this, not yet thou to the authority of that: Let thing with thing, cause with cause, reason with reason strive together by the authorities of the scriptures, not being each man's own testimonies, but by those which be common to both parts.
Where thou seest, that this father doth appeal from the Councils unto the Scriptures. The same father in the 2nd book against the Donatists the 3rd chapter, saith: The letters of bishops and the decrees of Provincial councils give place to the greater councils, but the Canonical Scripture giveth place to none. And the same father writing unto Jerome with whom he disputed as touching the reprehending of Peter which is spoken of to the Galatians, he most manifestly appealed from the Fathers which Jerome cited, unto the words of the holy Scripture.
12. Neither must we pass upon that which they often times object unto us: namely, that Christ said unto his Apostles: I have many things to speak unto you, but ye cannot now bear them away. Whereof they will gather, that many things as touching the worshipping of God and Religion, may be appointed by them, which the holy Scriptures have not taught: As though
Christ in those words had spoken of worshipping's and Ceremonies. Might not the Apostles then abide such things, who both had been born and were conversant from their childhood in ceremonies and rites? Was Moses able to teach those things to the ignorant people, and could not Christ teach the
Apostles those things which be of the same kind? The case doeth not so stand: but those many things were the same which he had already told them: and they were more expressly and effectually to be expounded unto them and to be printed in their minds, by the power of the holy Ghost which he promised unto them. For a little after he saith: When the comforter shall come, he shall prompt you in all things that I have showed you. Moreover he testified, that all things which he heard of his father, he told it unto them:
All things (saith he) which I have heard of my father, I have made them known unto you. So as there shall be nothing left necessary unto salvation which is lawful for these men to decree. Neither are these things spoken, to the intent that the authority of councils should be utterly rejected. For if so be they shall reprehend, excommunicate, or absolve by the word of God, and shall pray together by the power of the spirit, these things shall not be in vain and without fruit. Yea and Paul went to Peter and to the Apostles unto Jerusalem, not to derive doctrine from them, but least he should run in vain, he went for the commodity of others, that they might understand, that his kind of doctrine did not disagree from the opinions of the Apostles as some boasted that it did. If Councils were otherwhile had for this purpose, that all Churches might acknowledge a consent in the verity of the Scriptures, they might very well be borne withal. But when they decree against the testimonies of the holy Scriptures, they are not to be suffered.
For Paul if he had perceived anything to have been defined, either by Peter or by the other Apostles, otherwise than he himself had heard of Christ, he would not have given his assent, no verily Not to an Angel, if he had showed from heaven anything other than the Gospel which he had received: so as we also must esteem none to be spiritual, nor yet to judge aright, if they have decreed against the scriptures.
13. Wherefore that which Paul writeth of the Corinthians judgment, we must retain, if we be judged either by a Council or by the Papistical Church, against the scriptures, we may boldly say with Paul, we esteem it least of all to be judged by you. Neither must our adversaries be heard, who say, that the judgment of the Church must be preferred above the Scriptures: and they think that they have proved it by a sufficient reason, when they say: the Church hath judged of the Scriptures, by receiving some and refusing some: which it might not have done unless the judgment thereof had excelled the Scriptures. But these men must consider, that there hath been even from the beginning some men replenished with the spirit of God, by whom God hath set forth his Oracles unto men, the which he would have to be registered in writings. These words of God, when as others either heard or read, it happened by the benefit of the spirit, that the faithful acknowledged those to be the natural and sincere words of God. Hereof it came to pass that the holy scriptures be admitted. But and if they which being illuminated with the holy Ghost, acknowledged the holy scriptures to be the word of God, had been demanded, whether they would not have their own authority to be preferred above them, they would not have suffered it: but on the other side, those being known and received, they altogether submitted themselves, and agreed that they should be reputed for the most sure rule of their faith and life. Wherefore it is but a weak consequent: The fathers accepted and discerned the holy Scriptures from other writings, therefore they ought to be preferred above them. Because we also acknowledge one very God, and admit Jesus Christ, we dissever him from Idols and from the Devil: yet for all that we cannot infer, that we are more excellent either than Christ or God. Also our mind admitteth the persuasions and motions of the holy
Ghost unto reading and praying, unto chaste living, and them discerneth
from the enticements of the devil, the flesh and the world: yet shall not our mind for that cause be called, either superior or better than the holy Ghost.
Further also, a man endued with the knowledge of Philosophy, when as he shall receive Aristotle or Galen or noble Philosophers, and shall place them above Epicurus, Aristippus or Democritus: dare he therefore because he hath so judged as touching Philosophy, prefer his own authority either above Aristotle or Galen? Wherefore men have by faith and illumination of the holy Ghost known that those things which the Patriarchs, Prophets,
Christ, and the Apostles have spoken are the words of God. Which things being so known and received, they did not accompt themselves either greater or better than the Scriptures of them: nay rather (as we said at the first) they committed themselves to be governed and ruled by them. There was also another manner of judging of the Scriptures, that those things which the latter Canonical writers did speak or write did not disagree with the first, but they agreed very well with them. The Prophets, agree unto the law in all things. The Evangelists and Apostles borrowed the Testimonies of their sayings, as well of the law as of the Prophets. Whereby thou seest that the law is allowed by the Prophets, and the Prophets are confirmed by the Apostles and by the Evangelists. And when they demand how it came to pass that Luke and Mark being writers of the Gospel were received, whereas the Gospel of Bartholomew, of Thomas, of Thaddeus, and of the Nazarites, was excluded: we will answer, that the holy Ghost did not persuade the hearts and the minds of faithful men that these were the words of God, as were those which be written both of Luke and also of Mark. To this, there were many yet remaining in those days which had heard Christ, and had been much conversant with him: as Peter, John, and many others of the Disciples, who bare faithful witness unto the writings of Mark and
Luke; and did not so unto the monuments of others, who perhaps erred, not only from the truth of the History, but also pieced in many things, which sounded to be contrary to the old Testament and to the other Evangelists.
What authority the Fathers are of.
14. Finally as touching this, to wit, the judgment of Fathers, I protest that it seems unto me not the part of a Christian man, to appeal from the Scriptures of God to the judgments of men: For this is to do injury to the holy Ghost. For faith cometh of hearing, and hearing, of the word of God, and not of the Fathers. And unto the Corinthians: That your faith (as he saith) may be yours, not through the wisdom of men, but by the power of God. And unto Timothy: The whole Scripture (saith he) given by the inspiration of God, is profitable to teach, to convince, to correct, and to instruct in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect and instructed to every good work. These words must be diligently noted. For there be four things necessary in Ecclesiastical doctrine; to wit, that we should teach true things, that we should confute false things, that we should instruct unto virtues, and reprove vices. And all these things are to be sought out of the holy Scriptures. And to speak more manifestly hereof: whatsoever the minister doth unto the people; that belongeth either unto doctrine or unto manners. And either must the opinions be taught which are true, or else be confuted which are false: and either must manners which be good be taught, or which be evil be corrected. So shall the man of God be perfect, that nothing can be wanting unto him, as touching either doctrine or manners.
There is also another place in the same Chapter: Thou hast learned the holy scriptures, out of which thou mayest have salvation. These things manifestly teach, that we must not appeal from the Scriptures unto the Fathers: for that would be to appeal from certainties to uncertainties, from
manifest things to obscure from strong to weak. For although fathers being wise and learned, saw much, yet were they men, and might err. And that which I have said is most of all to be considered: namely that the Fathers do not always agree among themselves: and other whiles not one of them indeed doeth agree with himself. But here the adversaries answer: But they must be heard, when they all agree among themselves. But we say that they must not therefore be heard because they agree among themselves, but for that they consent with the word of God: so as that may be said unto them which was spoken unto the Woman of Samaria: Now do we not believe because of thy word, but because we ourselves have seen. For albeit that all the Fathers shall consent among themselves, yet will we not do this injury to the holy Ghost, that we should rather give credit to them, than to the word of God. Yea and the Fathers themselves would never have themselves to be so believed: and that have they sufficiently testified by their writings, that they will not have that honor to be given unto them, but to the holy
Scriptures only. So as he that appealeth from the Scriptures to the Fathers, appealeth unto the Fathers against the Fathers.
15. This hath Augustine in many places confirmed: That when Cyprian in his treatise de baptismo Haereticorum, was objected, he answered, that he accounted not the Epistles of Cyprian for Canonical, but that he attributed that to the word of God only. And he oftentimes reproved them which yielded more unto his own writings than was meet. And when as Jerome had cited three or four fathers as touching the reproving of Peter, he answereth, that he also can cite fathers, but that he had rather appeal unto the holy Scriptures. Basil in his Morals Summa 80, chapter 22 saith: If all that is not of faith be sin, and faith is of hearing, and hearing by the word of God, then whatsoever is not of the word of God is sin. And in a certain
oration of the confession of faith: It is a fall (saith he) from faith, and a crime of exceeding great pride either to start back from that which is written, or to admit that which is not written. And he addeth a proof:
Because my sheep hear my voice. Neither are we bound (saith he) to hear others than the shepherd. And that he might affirm his saying the more, he brought a place unto the Galatians: No man altereth a man's Testament, or addeth thereunto: And if so great honor (saith he) be done to the testament of a man, how much greater must be done to the Testament of God? And in the exposition of the Creed which is attributed unto Cyprian, after the recital of the Canonical Scriptures: By these things (saith he) are gathered whatsoever is necessary to salvation. And against the Aquarians, he always appealeth from custom unto the holy Scriptures, and unto those things which Christ himself did. And in an Epistle unto Pompeius he hath many things to the same purpose. Jerome also upon Jeremiah the 9th chapter: The Elders (saith he) must not be followed as touching errors, but faith must be sought for out of the holy scriptures. Chrysostom upon the 7th chapter to the Hebrews: Even as they which give rules have no need to teach a thousand verses, but a certain few by which the rest may be understood: even so if we would only hold fast the Scriptures of God, not only we should not fall ourselves, but we should also call them back which be fallen.
And this he proveth by that which Christ said: Search ye the Scriptures, in which ye think there is eternal life. Again, Ye err, not knowing the Scriptures. And he citeth the place of Paul: Whatsoever things are written, are written for our learning that by patience and consolation of the Scriptures we may have hope. Lastly he bringeth all those places the which are cited by me a little before, and in his oratione de profectu Euangelij, upon the place of Paul unto the Philippians. Whether by occasion or by
envy, &c. If ye would hold fast these words (saith he) ye may encounter with heretics. But upon the Epistle to the Galatians de Divite & Lazaro he hath many things much more evident. Abraham answereth: They have
Moses and the Prophets. Here Chrysostom showeth (saith he) that greater credit ought to be given to the scriptures, than if a man should rise again from the dead. And he addeth, that we ought not only to give more credit to the word of God than unto dead men, but also more than unto the Angels, as Paul hath admonished. Also if an Angel from heaven shall teach you another Gospel than that which we have taught, let him be accursed.
16. Furthermore it is certain, that the liberty of the Church must not be taken away. But the Church hath always judged by the word and the spirit:
Therefore it is now meet also that it should judge as it list. For what did those most ancient writers, when as yet there were no fathers? If then the Church judged by the word and the spirit, why may it not now also judge in the same sort? For the Fathers undoubtedly meant to help the Church, and not to deprive the same of her liberty. But they are wont to say, that in the Apostles times was only an infancy of the Church, and that afterward the same grew more and more to perfection. These things are not to be confuted but to be laughed at. For would to God that we could attain to the lowest step of the Church which was in the Apostles time. Howbeit, admit that the same were the infancy of the Church as ye affirm: but if so be that they were then able to advance the Church by the word and the spirit, why cannot we now also promote it after the same sort? For there be many things always in the Church which ought either to be renewed or taken away, judging by the spirit and holy scriptures those things which the fathers ordained, either by giving consent unto them, or dissent from them, according as we are now in a riper age of the Church than they were. But
how do these men esteem of the Fathers? If for age sake: we also shall one day become fathers: and those schoolmen which were five or six hundredth years past, shall now be fathers: And so there will never be any certain number of the fathers. But they say, that the Scriptures are obscure, and therefore, that there is need of Fathers to be interpreters. But the fathers were also obscure, and therefore there was need of the Master of Sentences.
But seeing the Master of sentences himself might seem to be obscure, there was need in a manner of infinite commentaries. And hereof arose very many sects disagreeing in opinions one from another: so that some were called Scotists, others Thomists, others Occamists: others were called by other names. Neither certainly can it be denied, but that the fathers erred often times. Cyprian erred as concerning the baptism of Heretics, Tertullian as touching Monogamia, that is the Marriage of one wife: and others after another sort. Councils also did oftentimes err, as we have above declared at large. Lastly the traditions do other while err and are repugnant in themselves. The tradition of Ephesus was, that the Christians should celebrate Easter upon the 14th day of the month, as the Jews did: and they ascribed the same unto John the Apostle and Evangelist. But contrariwise the Roman tradition was, that the Christians should not celebrate Easter but after the 14th day of the month, least they might seem to agree with the Jews. And of this tradition they make Peter and Paul to be authors. Either of both is Apostolical yet both of them may not be allowed. But Panormitanus de electionibus in the chapter, Significasti, saith that the unlearned, if they bring the Scriptures must be more believed, than the Pope and the whole
Council if they deal without the scriptures. A man that was a Canonist, although he oftentimes erred in many other things, yet could he see this.
Paul saith: When any man prophesieth, let the rest sit still and judge. The
fathers when they interpret the scriptures, do not they Prophesy? Wherefore we must as it were sit and judge of their sayings.
17. But they say that then at the leastwise the Fathers are to be allowed, when they agree among themselves. No verily not then always. For the consent of the Council of Chalcedon took away the consent of the second council of Ephesus. In the Synod of Constantinople under Leo the Emperor, there was a consent to take away Images. But that consent in the Synod of Nice, under Irene was taken away by another consent: And that selfsame consent was afterward also taken away by the Council of Germany, under Charles the great. But I will add a proof by induction that we must not always judge of the scriptures by the Fathers, but we must rather judge the Fathers by the Scriptures. Other Fathers say, that justification is of Faith, and not of works. Others do affirm that works do much avail unto justification. Who shall decide this controversy? The word of God. Paul unto the Romans saith. We judge that a man is justified without the works of the law. Neither can it be said, that Paul in that place doeth only treat of Ceremonies, for he treateth in that place as touching that law which showeth sin and worketh wrath: and he addeth that we be justified freely, and he mentioneth the Decalogue: I had not known lust (saith he) unless the law had said: Thou shalt not lust. Peter was reproved by Paul, because he dissembled and withdrew him from the Table. Here doeth Jerome contend with Augustine, Jerome saith that Peter so dealt with Paul as though that matter had been done of set purpose: that by the reproving of Peter, the Jews which were present might the better understand the whole matter.
Augustine cannot abide any dissembling or lie in the scriptures. Who shall here be the Judge? The word of God. Paul to the Galatians: He was (saith he) to be reprehended or blamed, because he did not walk uprightly
according to the truth of the Gospel. Upon these words: Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church, others understand: upon the rock, that is upon Christ, and upon the faith, and confession of Peter: but others: upon Peter himself. Who shall judge this controversy. The word of God.
Paul saith, An other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, even Jesus Christ. In the Scriptures the dead are oftentimes said to sleep. That do some refer unto the body, others unto the soul. Who shall judge this case?
The word of God. Christ saith unto the thief: This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise. And Paul saith, I desire to be dissolved and to be with Christ.
Daniel confesseth his sins. In which place, Origen saith, that he doeth not sustain his own person, but the person of others. Augustine citeth this very place against the Pelagians and teacheth, that none is innocent. Who shall judge these things? The word of God. Paul saith: All have sinned and need the glory of God. And John: If we shall say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. Paul saith: Who shall deliver me from this body subject unto death? This do Ambrose and Augustine interpret of Paul regenerate. Others think it was spoken of others not regenerate, and that it cannot be applied unto Paul. Who shall judge of these sayings but the word of God? In the same place it is written, I serve the Law of God in my mind: But those that be not regenerate serve not the law of God in mind.
And he addeth, The good which I would, that I do not. But those that be not regenerate, those cannot will that which is good. And he addeth through Jesus Christ our Lord. It is not the part of a man not regenerate to give thanks unto God: the Heretics called Millenarii, thought that Christ would return unto the earth, and reign among men for the space of a thousand years. And of this mind was Papias, Lactantius, Apollinarius, Irenaeus,
Justinus and others: those doeth Jerome flout and calleth it a Jewish fable.
This controversy doeth the word of God easily decide. Paul saith: The word of God is not meat and drink. And Christ saith: My kingdom is not of this world. And in the kingdom of my Father they are neither married nor do marry. In the times of Cyprian and Augustine, the Eucharist was delivered unto Infants. This is not done in these days, but which is the better the word of God shall judge. Paul saith: Let a man try himself, and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that cup. But Infants cannot try themselves. I might besides recite many things in which the fathers disagree among themselves, where it should be necessary to refer the judgment to the word of God.
Wherefore let Smith consider how wisely he might write thus: According to the rule and level of these fathers let us examine the sense of the holy
Scriptures: let us follow the judgment of these men in reasoning of things pertaining to the holy scriptures.
18. But our adversaries, while they thus obtrude the Fathers, seek no other thing but to bear rule over our faith. But this would not Paul. We will not (saith he) bear rule over your faith: That is, under that pretense that we teach you faith, we would not bear rule over you in taking away your substance. Wherefore it is not meet that the Fathers (in respect that they taught faith in the Church) should so far overrule, as whatsoever they have said or written, it should not be lawful to judge the contrary: for that would not be to bear rule, but to exercise tyranny. Augustine in his second book to Cresconius Grammaticus. We (saith he) do injury unto Cyprian when we sever any of his writings from the authority of the Canonical Scriptures. For it is not without cause that the Ecclesiastical Canon was made with so wholesome care, whereunto certain books of the Prophets and Apostles do belong, the which we ought not in any wise to judge, and according unto which we may freely judge of other men's writings whether they be faithful
or unfaithful. And Constantine in the Synod of Nice, exhorted the Bishops that they should decide all controversies by the Canonical Scriptures, by the scriptures Prophetical and Apostolical and inspired by God: As Theodoretus testifieth in his history. And Augustine against Faustus the Maniche in the 15th book and 5th chapter: The scripture (saith he) is set as it were in a certain seat aloft, to the which every faithful and godly understanding should humble itself. Therein if anything as absurd, shall move us, it is not lawful to say: the author of this book held not the truth, but either the book is faulty, or the Interpreter erred, or else thou doest not understand it. But in the works of them that came after, the which are contained in innumerable books, but are in no respect made equal unto that most sacred excellency of the Canonical scriptures, yea in which soever of them is found one and the same truth, yet the authority is far unequal. Wherefore if perhaps any things in them are therefore thought to dissent from the truth, because they be not understood as they be spoken, yet the reader or hearer hath there a free judgment, whereby he may allow that which shall please him, or disallow that which shall offend him: And all, which be of that sort, unless they be by sure reason, or else by that Canonical authority defended, so as it may be plainly showed, that that which is either there disputed or declared, is altogether so, or that it might be so; if it shall displease any man or that he will not believe it, he is not blamed. And in the 19th Epistle unto Jerome:
This free service I owe unto the divine Scriptures, whereby I so follow them alone, as I doubt not but that the writers of them erred nothing at all, nor put anything guilefully in them. And there is no antiquity or dignity of person so great as can prescribe unto the word of God. Whether we ourselves (saith
Paul) or an Angel from heaven shall preach unto you any other gospel than we have preached, let him be accursed.
19. But our adversaries continually make much a do of years, of times, and of the holiness of fathers: But all these things ought to be of none importance against the word of God. Christ and the Apostles never cited the Rabbins and Fathers, although many were very well learned, but they taught all the things out of the law and the Prophets. Jerome upon Isaiah the 18th book and 65th chapter. That they should not hasten to believe without reason, let them follow Nathanael, who was praised by the mouth of the Lord: Behold a true Israelite in whom there is no guile. He sought Christ by the authority of the scriptures, and was desirous to have knowledge of the Prophets, saying: Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth? And the sense is: why bring ye me Messias out of Galilee and from Nazareth, whom
I know was sent before out of Bethlehem Judah? Wherefore the Apostles and Apostolical men will so beget their children as they may instruct them in the holy scriptures. The same father upon the 23rd chapter of Matthew upon these words: And upon you shall come all the blood which hath been shed from the blood of Abel the just, until the blood of Zechariah, dealeth with the place in controversy, who was that Zechariah that was slain between the Temple and the Altar. And he allegeth the opinion of them which would have him to be the father of John the Baptist, who was slain because he had preached Christ. Whereof he thus speaketh: Because this thing hath no authority of the Scriptures, it is as easily rejected as it is proved. And by these words he closely quippeth Basil, who was of the same mind. So in the seventeenth cha. of the Acts, when Paul had preached Christ to the Thessalonians, they did not straight way give credit to his words, but they took counsel of the scriptures whether the thing were so or no. And unto the Corinthians when he had said: Another foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, even Christ Jesus: he addeth, that some, but not all,
do build upon it gold and silver or precious stones, but othersome hay, others stubble.
20. When I read Augustine in the third book de Doctrina Christiana in many places, where he entreateth of the interpretation of the Scriptures, I never see him send the reader unto the fathers: If saith he there happen any obscure or hard place in the scriptures, confer the same with another place in the scriptures, either more manifest, or with the like. Then if out of one place many senses may he gathered, chiefly embrace thou that, which shall most seem to edify. Thirdly endeavor (saith he) that being instructed in the tongues thou mayest come to the interpretation of the scriptures. For it oftentimes cometh to pass, that what thou understandest not in one language thou mayest understand in another. Fourthly, let it not green thee to take counsel of sundry interpreters: for that which one hath expounded somewhat obscurely, another hath expressed oftentimes more plainly.
Fifthly, all circumstances must be diligently considered. Sixthly, thou must see what went before, and what followeth: but specially (saith he) never remove thine eyes from the purpose of the writer. By this way and means
Augustine thought that we might most easily attain to the sense and understanding of the Scriptures. Although I disallow not but that young men may also take counsel of men better learned and of interpreters. Howbeit this let them remember, that they whosoever they be, although never so well learned, cannot prescribe against the manifest word of God. There is an excellent Epistle of Cyprian unto Caecilius the 2nd book, the 3rd Epistle.
We must not regard (saith he) what this man or that man shall judge, but what Christ shall do and teach. In that place was disputed against the Aquarian heretics who in the celebration of the Lord's supper, used water instead of wine. Those did Cyprian blame, because they did it against the
word of God. At this day the Papists use not water indeed instead of wine, but they tear and mangle the Sacrament, and the one part they pluck away from the people: neither do they consider in the meantime, what Christ taught or did, but only what some men have decreed against the word of God. Even so in those ancient times of the Jews, when all things were weighed according to the Scriptures, all things were sound and perfect. But when the controversies were revoked unto the Rabbins, who sat in the chair of Moses, all things were marred and corrupted: And therefore the Pharisees were reproved by Christ, because for their own traditions they violated the commandments of God.
21. Further what else is there sought, but that the mind may be in quiet?
But the mind cannot be in quiet, unless it be in the word of God. But the word of God (say they) is obscure. Admit it be: and the Fathers also be oftentimes obscure. Wherefore they must needs waver always in mind and conscience, which take away this anchor from themselves. This order also the Ethnic writers followed. For from things (say they) that be better known, we must go to things that be less known. But those things which belong unto religion, are only known by faith and not by the sense. But unto faith the Scriptures are better known than be the fathers. For faith is by hearing, and hearing by the word of God, and not by the word of the Fathers. But we must specially note, that which Paul hath in the first to the Corinthians: Comparing spiritual things with spiritual things, for a carnal man doeth not perceive those things which belong to the spirit of God. So then a comparison must be made, that our spirit may be confirmed by spiritual things. What is so spiritual as be the divine Scriptures? For they proceeded (as I may say) immediately from the spirit of God. But they say, that the fathers also are spiritual. I confess: for they were faithful and
regenerate. But how were they spiritual? Verily not in that they were fathers, but in that they were Christians: and this is a thing common to all the faithful. And be it they were spiritual fathers, yet were they not so altogether of the spirit as they had nothing of the flesh or human affection, for they did not always speak, or write, or judge according to the spirit, they are even at variance sometime among themselves. So be not the holy
Scriptures. I add, that in Christ there is neither man nor woman, neither bond nor free, but only a new creature. For the spirit of God is not bound to persons that it should be in this man because he is a king, or in that man because he is a subject: for it is common unto all men. A father hath the spirit of God, but not in that respect that he is a father. A young man hath the spirit of God, yet not therefore because he is a young man. Augustine against the Donatists the 2nd Book and 3rd chapter: Who knoweth not that the holy Canonical scripture, as well of the Old Testament as of the New, is contained within his own certain bounds, and that the same is so preferred before all the latter writings of Bishops, as thereof may in no wise be any doubt or disputation? But the writings of Bishops which after the Canon confirmed either have been written, or now are in writing, we know, if that anything in them have perhaps scaped the truth, must be reprehended both by a speech perhaps more wise, of some man that is more skillful in that matter, and by a graver authority of other Bishops, and also by the wisdom and counsels of them that be better learned. And these Councils which are made by particular Regions or Provinces must give place (without casting any doubts) to the authority of more fuller councils, which are held by the whole Christian world. And that the more full Councils themselves being the former are oftentimes mended by the latter: when that which was closed up is by some experience opened, and that which was hidden is known. And
against Maximinus the Arian Bishop: Now (saith he) neither I ought to allege the Council of Nice, nor thou the Council of Ariminum, as it were to give judgment beforehand. Neither must I stay myself upon the authority of this, nor thou upon the authority of that. Let us contend by the authority of the Scriptures, which are not each man's own, but common witnesses of both, so that matter with matter, cause with cause, reason with reason, may encounter together. And in his treatise De bono viduitatis: what should I more teach thee than that which we read in the Apostle? For the holy
Scripture joineth a rule with our doctrine: that we should not presume to understand more than we ought to understand, but that (as he saith) we should understand according to sobriety, even as the Lord hath dealt unto every man the measure of faith.
22. But they object unto us that Paul in the Epistle unto Timothy, calleth the Church the pillar of truth. I grant it, it is indeed the pillar of truth, but not always, but when it is stayed up by the word of God. And it is called a Church of the Greek word, ἐκκαλεῖσθαι, which is to stir up: and it is stirred up and called forth by the word of God: and as long as it doth according thereunto, so long it is the pillar of truth. What then? Do we reject the fathers? No not at all. But as concerning the authority of the Fathers, we diminish the superstition of many, who account their words in the same place and number, as if they were the words of God. In very deed they wrought and found out many things, which we peradventure should never have found out. Yet have they not so written all things but that we must judge and weigh what they have written. But in judging of things obscure we must set forth two marks. The one of which is inward, that is the spirit: the other is outward, that is the word of God. Then if unto these things, there come also the authority of the fathers, it shall be very much worth. So
in civil causes, Orators, when the thing is confirmed do add other agreements taken from things already judged, and those otherwhile are of very much weight: howbeit the Judge pronounceth not according to those things: for we live by laws (as saith Demosthenes) not by examples. Hereby is understood that saying of Augustine Contra Epistolam Fundamenti. I would not believe the Gospel (saith he) unless the authority of the Church should move me. Here do the adversaries marvelously boast themselves, and cry out, that the authority of the Church is greater than is the authority of the word of God. And they bring forth the rule of Logic, Propter quod unumquodque est tale, illud ipsum est magis tale: that is, That whereby anything is such as it is, that itself is more such: but for the Churches sake
(say they) we believe the Gospel, therefore much rather we must believe the Church. Let us examine that rule, and see how much it maketh for them. A schoolmaster was the cause why Virgil should be a Poet, therefore his master was more a Poet than Virgil. By reason of wine a man is drunk or furious, therefore wine is more drunken and furious. Why do not these things follow? Because in efficient causes this rule doeth not hold, unless it be both the whole cause and the next cause, not the removed or instrumental cause. But the Church is not the whole cause why we believe the Gospel, the spirit helpeth also, without which we never believe. In deed the scriptures are preserved in the Church, and the Testaments are kept safe by the Bishop or Magistrate: but neither the Bishop nor Magistrate may alter them. A Notary or Scrivener writeth acts and bargains, and otherwhile retaineth the writings in his office: yet must not greater credit be given to the Notary than to the testator or to them that make the bargains.
23. But they are wont to say, that Heretics believe not the Scriptures: but that is their own fault and not the fault of the Scriptures. And the obstinate
Jews would not believe, no not Christ or the Apostles. But this must be imputed to their own fault and not to Christ nor to the Apostles. What; will they say that they will not believe, no not the Church? For after the Synod of Nice the Arians both were more in number and more obstinate than ever they were before. But why do they place the Church above the Scriptures?
Let themselves go unto the Turks, that by the authority and name of the Church they may bring them unto the faith. Cyprian, De singularitate
Clericorum hath an excellent place: If (saith he) all that we do, we do it only to the end that we may please the Lord, undoubtedly, whatsoever the Lord, whom we seek to please shall will and command and allow, that only shall be just. For seeing that servants cannot know of themselves, what will please their lords, unless they follow the commandments of their lords, and that men doubtless are not able to know the minds of men like unto themselves, unless they have received that which they should observe: much rather mortal men cannot comprehend the righteousness of the immortal God, unless he himself vouchsafe to declare the judgments of his righteousness. Wherefore they which shun the scriptures and make much of the Fathers, seem to me not to be students of divinity, but of Fathers. But we will say, that which in old time a certain Ethnic answered, that he cared not for those dimi-gods, so he might have Jupiter to be favorable. Even so we make not so great account of the sayings of the Fathers, so the Scriptures make of our side. So as we see that in old time it was a laudable custom, that nothing should be read in the Church besides the Canonical
Scriptures: and this was decreed in the third Council of Carthage. And in the Synods when the controversies were disputed both of the one side and of the other, at the last, the Bishops pronounced sentence out of the holy scriptures, whereof we have a most manifest example in Cyprian. For when
there was a controversy in the Council as touching the Baptism of Heretics, every Bishop proved his opinion by the testimony of the Scriptures. Again, seeing we would restore the Church in which the adversaries themselves confess many things to be corrupted, there is no better counsel than to revoke all things to the first beginnings of the Church, and to the first originals of Religion. For so long as we stay in Councils and Fathers, we shall always dwell in the same errors. So in the commonwealths, where anything is decayed, good Citizens give their endeavor, that the same may be revoked to the first beginnings and foundations of the City if so be that those were good.
A judgment touching the Canons ascribed to the Apostles.
24. But Smith keepeth a great stir for Canons of the Apostles, and vehemently accuseth us because we will not by public teaching receive them as Canons of the Apostles. But I would have him to tell me whether they themselves receive them or no. Perhaps, as he is willful, he will say: yea. But in the 9th Chapter, it is there commanded, that a Bishop and any else of the Catalogue of Priests, which standeth at the ministration of the holy mysteries, if he will not communicate, either let him show the cause, or let him be excommunicate. Verily if he will admit this law, he himself shall be a thousand times excommunicate, seeing he is very often present at his idolatrous Mass, and doeth neither communicate nor yet show a reasonable cause why he abstaineth from the communion. In the 10th chapter also it is there commanded, that faithful men which enter into the Church, should hear the scriptures, should persevere in prayers with others, and should communicate; otherwise they ought to be deprived of the Communion. Let this fellow say, whether at this day his Papistical Churches will have this Canon to be of force, or whether they do receive it for a
Canon or no. In the 6th Canon it is commanded that no Bishop or Priest under the pretense of Religion, should put away his own wife, and that if he should put her away, he should be excommunicate, and finally if he persevere, he should be deprived. Doeth not this place sufficiently prove that they which were called to be Bishops, might lawfully retain the company of their own wives? And again it appeareth hereby, that Matrimony is not so repugnant to the holy Ministry as these men imagine.
Which thing is now declared by Paul: and therefore for the confirmation of this, there is no need of these unwritten Canons. But let us yet proceed further, and see whether these Canons do so greatly please Smith. In the 38th chapter we read that the Councils of the Bishops should be celebrated twice in the year: namely at the feast of Pentecost, and in the month of October. Here would I know, whether the Papistical Church receive this
Canon. It receiveth it not, seeing the Councils of Bishops are rare therein.
Woe be to Gregory Nazianzen if this Canon were true: who not only conveyed himself away from the Council of Bishops, but as it is in a certain
Epistle of his, he durst write that he never in a manner saw any good end of the Councils of Bishops. Certainly these Canons, if they were written by the Apostles (as this man would bear me in hand) they should no less be reckoned within the account of the divine scriptures, than be the Epistles of the Apostles. For what privilege should be more assigned unto the Epistles than unto the Canons, if the Apostles had been authors alike of both sorts of Scripture? Did ever any man reckon these Canons among the Catalogue of the Scriptures? But yet I mind to add that which is written in the 8th Canon.
If any Bishop, or Priest, or Deacon shall with the Jews celebrate the holy day of Easter before the winter Equinoctial, he shall be deprived. This
Canon if it had been made by the Apostles, what place could have been left
for the contention which happened in the time of Victor, Policrates and Irenaeus? The Ephesians did celebrate Easter after the manner of the Jews, alleging the tradition of John the Apostle. The Romans did otherwise, and made vaunt of an old institution of Peter their Apostle. Undoubtedly the Canons of the Apostles if they had been now sprung up had defined this vain question. Hereby this cometh to my mind, that, as the self-same Canon citeth, they make mention both of the readers and singers, as though in the time of the Apostles either readers or singers were reckoned among the holy orders: these orders (believe me) were brought in after the Apostles. There is never any mention made of these orders in the holy Scriptures of the New
Testament. Thou mayest find Bishops, Elders, and Deacons. The rest be put in and invented by men, not that there were not in the Apostles time those which read or recited something in the holy congregation, or those which did sing somewhat, but thou canst never show, that these things belonged to the holy orders. Wherefore seeing the Apostolical Canons have made mention of these orders, they bewray themselves to be counterfeit. Further I pass over that Zepherinus the Bishop of Rome in his decretal Epistle, maketh these Canons of the Apostle to be seventy; when as there are only reckoned fifty. Which so great a diversity of number, declareth them not to be of the right sort. For if they had been properly and lawfully set forth by the Apostles, we should have them preserved with singular diligence, and there would be a certainty of their number, according as the Canonical
Epistles of the Apostles are extant: neither is there any doubt of their number.