A TRACT OF THE SOVEREIGN JUDGE OF CONTROVERSIES IN MATTERS OF RELIGION.  
By JOHN CAMERON Minister of the Word of God, and Divinity Professor in the Academy of Montauban.  
Translated into English by JOHN VERNEVIL. M. A.  Basilius ad Eustathium medicum epist. quae est 80. ex edit. Paris. 1618. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 
Let the Scripture given by inspiration of God be Umpire, and the sentence of truth shall wholly be given to them, with whom the tenants agreeable to the holy w 〈…〉 shall be found.  
OXFORD. Printed by William Turner Printer to the famous University, and are to be sold by Henry Curtain. 1648.   

TO THE RIGHT WORSHIPFUL Sr THOMAS LEIGH KNIGHT AND BARONET, AND TO THE VIRTUOUS and Religious Lady Mary Leigh his dear and loving Consort.  
I AM not unmindful of the favours and courtesies (Right Wor ll.) received from your much honoured Grandfather Sr Thomas Leigh, (of blessed memory) at my first coming into England, how in my distress his liberal maintenance refreshed me: And in all those years that I had the honour to belong unto you, how gracious and bountiful I found you both: should I silence these your benefits bestowed on me, and not acknowledge them to the world, my conscience surely would accuse me of ingratitude, a vice abominable and hateful both to God and good men 
* Peremptoria siquidem res est ingratitudo, hostis gratiae inimica salutis▪ Bernard sermone 2. de septem misericordijs. . To avoid which, I have presumed to publish, and offer to the world under both your names this my little translation, of the great and learned Cameron; not for any hope I have by this, or any greater service to requite your favours to me, but only to testify that I confess and acknowledge God's goodness towards me in finding such a shelter that hath received & kept me safe in a land where I was a stranger. For which your favours towards me, the Lord of heaven and earth restore you an hundred fold into your bosoms, and give your Worship's grace to see (as your Honourable Grand fathers have done) your children's children like Olive plants round about your table.  
Receive then this small mite as a token of the bounden service of him, who uncessantly prayeth God to bless you and your Noble Family with all spiritual blessings in Christ jesus.  
From the public Library in Oxford this. 30. of Aug. 1628. Your Wor PS. most humbly to command JOHN VERNEVIL   

To the Reader.  
I present unto your censure this tract of Monsieur Cameron in English; I know the skill of many for translating out of French to be far better than mine own: but my request is, that you respect my desire to do good, and not my imperfections. I hold it a matter altogether impossible to draw a picture fully to the life: let Poets tell of painters, and of birds deceived by the exactness of their skill; yet an original ever looseth some lustre and grace, though the translators care be never so great. Howsoever consider I entreat you, the author of this little tract: for the work of any man is nowadays esteemed, as the workman is, and men care most for reading that whose authors they esteem. For the Author I will say this little: during his natural life his reputation was great in France, and so great, that all the Jesuits there did seek, and at last obtained to have him banished, nor was there any other cause thereof then his great learning, 
Plantus ●in milite. Act. 3. scena 2. v. 29.  the Jesuits in their conferences being not able to withstand him.  Quoniam aemulare non licet, nunc insides. 
He had his refuge here, where by the special care of that great favourer of learning K. james (of blessed memory) he was provided for in Scotland, his native country, but so great was his hearty love to France, that by the effectual mediation of those honourable Ambassadors then in France, he got that envious sentence reversed, which being done he immediately conveyed himself to Montauban to be professor there, where he ended his days, to the great loss of God's Church, and that University. Now seeing the fervent love that he had in doing good to my own native Country, I have endeavoured (as much as lieth in me) to requite his love, and to make his French work speak English. If this tract be favourably received, and that I shall perceive my English phrase tolerably to be approved, your kind acceptance shall encourage me to a greater work: my nature abhorreth idleness, and being in such a place, I love to be doing, and to employ myself, for fear to be worse imployed*. 
Quem diabolus non invenit occupatum ipse occupat.  Enjoy this as a prodromus, till by your prayers God of his infinite grace and mercy enable me to end my greater work now in hand. Farewell.  
Thine in the Lord JOHN VERNEVIL.   

CHAP. 1.  
The subtlety of those who shun the reformation, and the sincerity of them who require it.  
IT is said that Alcibiades as yet but young in years, but in craft and subtlety already aged, coming on a day to visit Pericles, when one had told him that he was busy making up the accounts which he was to give of his office; immediately replied, it was better for Pericles to busy himself, in seeking the means how he might give no accounts at all, and so went his ways. This passage hath been applauded by many as most sharp and witty. But there are some, and of those not a few who much esteem the use and necessity of the council it importeth: All bankrupts, pettifoggers, extortioners, and in a word, the whole rabble of impostors make use thereof, and have recourse unto it, as to the only sovereign remedy of their despair: and indeed he that is convinced in his conscience, that knoweth that he shall come short of his accounts, and in the proof of his pretended right, it is his safest and easiest way to avoid the coming to any account, or trial at all. Where chose, he that hath a clear conscience, his reckonings ready, his cause good, doth fly nothing more than such shifts; and desires, and endeavours above all to be heard throughly, fearing lest the prescription, exceptions, and pretences of cunning wranglers, though he could make use of them, should darken the equity of his cause, and leave behind it this scruple, that his cause in the issue of it, will prove like to those other unto which it hath some resemblance in the proceeding. Would to GOD all men in the controversies of religion, were of the same opinion, and had the same courage, and true meaning, which humane and civil wisdom doth suggest to us in our law suits, that we would be willing to come to an issue. And since we all agree that our heavenly Father hath not left us without a Testament, that we on both sides, know by what Notaries it hath been received, where they have enroled it, since we have the law and the testimony, that we would also have our recourse with a joint consent, to that Testament, to those Notaries, to their Registers, and say with one and the same voice after the Prophet, To the law and to the testimony, if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.  
Truly God revealeth not his will; the Prophets, the Apostles teach it not, but by his word; we have this word, what can we ask more? would we know what the judgement of God is, what the testimony of the Prophets, and Apostles are concerning that doctrine? aught not God himself to declare it? should not the Prophets and Apostles Publish it? We have this declaration, we have (no Christian doubteth thereof) the authentic copy of this publication, have we not then what we need, what we seek, and ask so earnestly, to wit a sentence and a final decree on our controversies? Truly it is not necessary, that the King, the Secretary, the Court, the Register be all present wheresoever it is requisite that the Kings will be known, if we have the order of the Court, we are assured of the Edict and decree. We stand at this day on these terms, we have not to do with the jews, neither with the Turks, who deny the authority, the one of a part, the other of the whole Scripture. We are Christians, we believe, we all protest that we have in the Canonical book of the Scripture of the old and new Testament, the declaration of the will of God. We acknowledge on both sides that whatsoever is there contained, is the word of God which is able to make us wise unto salvation, and throughly furnished unto all good works. 
2 Timoth 3. 1● 17.  Why do we then so earnestly demand the corporal presence of our judge? why do we desire that he should give us a Vicar, a substitute, since we have his decree, and acknowledge that he hath pronounced it?   

CHAP. 2.  
The demand and proposal of those, who desire a holy reformation.  
This is the complaint of them, who at this day grieve and sigh; lamenting the desolation of Israel and juda, who wish and demand, that as good josiah caused the book of the Law to be read before him, 
2 Kings 22. 10.  as Esdras, and Nehemiah did the like before the congregation, when they endeavoured to reform the Church, and restore it to her first integrity: so the like may be practised at this day. If in Christendom all things be found conformable to this law in matters of Religion, there will be no need of changing any thing therein, but to punish rather those unquiet spirits, those troublesome and schismatical heretics, which trouble and mar by their novelties the peace of the Church, and repose of the whole world. But if this conformity be not there to be found, but on the contrary a difference & disagreeing, why should not God's truth be preferred before humane inventions, the law before there customs, and the kingdom of jesus Christ before the tyranny, and dominion of him, who hath usurped both over the living and the dead, over soul and body, prince and people, an authority in effect wholly sovereign? And here let every soul in which there is left any touch of conscience, let every man in whom there is found the least spark of manhood, remaining in such a division of the Church, in such a disagreeing especially about things of so great importance, judge which of the two doth rather practise the craft of Alcibiades in shunning and declining, whether they who demand that their proceedings be examined by the rule of this word, (which we all avouch to be inspired, dictated, and registered by the spirit of God, or else those who shun nothing more than the censure of this word, of this Scripture, so far as to charge it with defects, unsufferable even in humane writings, accusing it of obscurity, ambiguity, and imperfections; which truly are the proprieties of the Oracles of Apollo, of the leaves of Sybil's, but little agreeable to the the law of the Almighty, the which the kingly Prophet so much magnifieth as being perfect, 
Psa. 9 7. 8.  pure, sure, and giving wisdom to the simple.   

CHAP. 3.  
Wherein the objections against the foresaid demand are set down, and that which is framed against the person of those which require it is refuted.  
Since than we are brought to this point, that instead of pleading the cause throughly, there is a question made whether we ought to come so far, they stand much upon the quality of the accuser, they conteste against the sufficiency of the judge, to whom he appeals. We are constrained first of all to examine the equity or injustice of this manner of proceeding.  
And first as touching the quality of the accusers, they term them new start-ups, they ask them what calling they have thereunto, by what authority they have made so bold an attempt as to protest they desire the reformation of the Church.  
The thing then objected to them is novelty and rashness. But both of these objections are but a recrimination, the which cannot be verified, but that first their accusation be convinced of untruth, and therefore ought not, neither can it be received, before that point of their accusation be cleared.  
They undertake to prove that the doctrine of our Lord and of the Apostles hath been altered and changed in that Church which termeth itself Catholic: they urge that every other doctrine is to be rejected, no other admitted but that alone. They protest then, not that they will bring in, but that their meaning is to banish novelties, for which cause Novelty, cannot be objected unto them, so long as it cannot be proved that they are innovatours: which is the chief point of the controversy: the question being not here of the Novelty of the persons but of that of faith and doctrine, according to which we ought to judge of the persons, and not of it according to the persons. 
Tertull. Prisc●s ad haeret: cap. 3. ex personis probamus fidem, an ex fide personas?  As learnedly Tertullian.  
Seeing then that the sum of their accusations consist, in this that they accuse the Church, falsely called Catholic, to have innovated, so long as it doth not appear, whether their accusation be true or no, novelty cannot be objected to them. As for the rashness of the accusation, no more can it be objected unto them, until that the accusation be retorted by a direct and just defence: for even as in an estate and commonwealth, every man is admitted to accuse in case of high treason, and none is rejected, but upon a manifest falsity of his accusation, neither is he accounted to accuse rashly, who accuseth truly: so in the Church, whosoever accuseth of high treason against God, is to be heard without objecting unto him rashness, until it be proved that his accusation is false: In an army, in a besieged town, when there is question of treason, no advice whatsoever is neglected, but they rather duly weigh & consider, not so much from whom it proceedeth, as the importance of it, the accusers are not punished, if their accusation be not found false; but if it be true they are applauded, rewarded, advanced, and often promoted in the offices, and places of the accused. In the Church of God, in matter of conscience we ought not to stop any man's mouth, but to convince, or satisfy the heart and conscience; such was the practice of the Apostolical Church. The Fathers have so carried themselves towards Heretics, yea S Austustine himself, speaking of the Manicheans, 
Aug. concr. epist Man. cap. 4. Basil. de Sp. S. c. 17.  is of this opinion. And if any of the Ancients have used perscription in any such case, it hath been in matters that were not properly of the essence of faith: or if the doctrine was quaestioned, then have they to do with them, 
Tertul. praescr. cap● 7.  who grounded not themselves especially upon the Scripture, but wrested according as they listed, some certain pieces of it, forcing them to their purpose, and as it were by torture, making them to confess what they never knew. And therefore the same Fathers called them Sucifugas Scripturarum, men who shun the light of the Scripture: 
Tertul. de res. car. c. 47.  yea in those time's prescription became them well. It was impossible that then there should be such a declining and falling from the truth. The mystery of iniquity, which had already begun to be conceived in the times of the Apostles, was yet in the cradle. Our condition at this day is otherwise, who are come unto the last times, who reckon a thousand and so many hundred years since the flourishing and happy times of the Apostles. During which so long space of time this mystery should in probability be well grown. We see the most flourishing Churches, in times past planted by the Apostles, now brought into desolation, and we cannot now call to witness the memory of men.   

CHAP. 4.  
Wherein are proposed the allegations against the sufficiency of the judge, to whom those who desire a reformation do appeal.  
BUT for all this they call in doubt the sufficiency of the judge, before whom the accusers commence their suit, to wit, God speaking in the Scriptures, or by the Scriptures.  
1 They doubt whether he can be judge considered after that manner, because, say they every judge ought to speak, 
Eight reasons wherefore God cannot be judge.  now God speaking in the Scripture, is as though he did not speak at all, the Scripture having need itself to be propounded, and applied by some other.  
2 And beside, the words of a judge ought to be clear, & intelligible, & this written word is obscure as much as may be.  
3 Thirdly, the Scripture is ambiguous and subject to diverse interpretations, whereas the decrees of a judge ought to be certain and positive.  
4 Fourthly, the Scripture is defective, and imperfect, and therefore cannot be extended, nor applied to the decision of our controversies.  
5 Fiftly, the resolution of a judge ought to make them agree, who refer themselves to him, whereas it is seen what discord there is, even amongst those who would end these variances by the Scriptures.  
6 Sixtly, the Heretics themselves make use of the Scriptures, whereas the sentence of the judge, cannot advantage the party condemned by him.  
7 Seaventhly, if God speaking in, or by, the Scripture were the judge, to what end then serve the Counsels?  
8 Finally, if we had no other determination then that of the Scriptures, we must needs always live in uncertainty: for the weakness and deceitfulness of man's understanding considered, who amongst so great a multitude, & in such a discord of those, who take upon them to have the gift of the holy Ghost, could know and discern who hath it? Who amidst such a number of those who think they have it, & are deceived in their opinion can assure himself that he hath it? what then, do they refuse to be judged? by no means in appearance, but they would have the Church to be judge; the truth is that when that comes to the upshot, we find that this Church is themselves; who would be both judges and parties, as shall be more plainly shown hereafter.   

CHAP. 5.  
The proposal of the means of nullity against the foresaid allegations, and the verifying of the first means against the first and second allegation.  
NOW let us consider their arguments alleged against the sufficiency of the judge before whom they are summoned, which if they are not, 1 Contrary to their own design. 2. to the truth. 3. If they do not tend to the subversion of Christian Religion: the accusers refuse not to accept of them. But if they be found incompatible, 1. with the cause for the defence of which they are alleged, 2. with the truth, 3. with the authority of Christian Religion; No body will condemn the accusers of false dealing, if they keep themselves to their first citation and appeal.  
But we are confident that all these means of nullity may 
The eight reasons retorted against the adversary.  easily be verified: and that we may proceed in order, let us begin with the first, and let us consider all these reasons, one after another, if they do not oppose that cause in favour of which they are produced.  
1 And as for the first, if God speaking in the Scriptures, or by the Scriptures is as if he speak not at all, under a colour that the Scripture is dumb, and giving no sound, ought we not upon the same reason to say that the Father's speaking in their writings, the Church speaking in the Canons of the Counsels, the Pope in his decrees, and decretals, in his breefes and in his bulls and indulgences: it were all one as if the Fathers, Church, and Pope speak not at all? And ought not the writings of the Fathers, the Canons of the Counsels, the decrees and decretals, the briefs, bulls, and indulgences be propounded and applied? nay and that by such who are not qualified for judges, to wit the particular or Ecclesiastical persons who may err, as not having the promise of infallibility. Every one a part, as they are in their pulpitts, in their states, or less solemn exhortations proposing the traditions of the Fathers, the Canons of the Counsels, the decrees & constitutions of the Popes, their breefes, bulls and indulgences.  
This first reason then drawn from the nature of the Scripture that it is dumb, that it hath need to be propounded and applied, cannot be admitted, unless they will upon the same grounds annihilate the authority of the Fathers, Counsels, Popes, in whose words the very pretended defects are to be found, as plainly appears.  
2 And for the second allegation touching the obscurity of the Scripture, it cannot be maintained, but it must be withal averred, that all the proofs drawn from this word are likewise obscure and consequently that the Romish Religion cannot be gathered from the Scripture, but by guesses and conjectures: So that all the proofs drawn from this Scripture, to maintain the Doctrine of the Romish Church, shall be mere conjectures and guesses: And are they not to blame then upon this reckoning, not to bind those that accuse the Romish Church of revolt, to keep themselves to the judge before whom they have made their appeal? seeing he speaks so obscurely on the accuser's side, that he will never justify his accusation, neither condemn the party accused, who being in possession, whereas the accuser is the plaintiff, if the evidences by which he pretends to verify his accusation be obscure, and intricate, ought rather oblige him to produce them, then oppose or hinder that he should make use of them. For he that accuseth, and for proof of his accusation, allegeth reasons too hard to be ununderstood, that he may seem to speak Welsh, or Irish, both justifies the party accused and makes himself worthy to be laughed at.   

CHAP. 6.  
The verification of the first means of Nullity against the third, and fourth allegation.  
3 But (if as by the third allegation it seems) the Scripture be ambiguous. and capable of diverse interpretations, wherefore and with what reason is it, that the Doctors that term themselves Catholics do make more account, of one expression of Scripture, then of another, grounding themselves either upon the circumstances of the very text, which is expounded, or upon some other passage of the Scripture, the sense whereof is clear, manifest and certain, and not simply upon the authority of the Church?  
If the Scripture be as they say, a nose of wax, Theramenes buskin, a shoe for both feet, a weathercock which turns with the wind: wherefore do they refute by Scripture the interpretations, nay, rather the false glosses of heretics? Wherefore do they not barely allege unto them the authority of the Church? Verily according to their reckoning, for the prooueing of transubstantiation, they need no more urge the words of the Scripture, hoc est corpus meum, neither to say that they must be taken as they sound, as being words of a last will and testament, seeing that this passage being a part of the Scripture, is according to the nature of the Scripture (if their allegation be true) ambiguous and capable of diverse interpretations: and therefore they ought not to believe transubstantiation by reason of this place of Scripture, but because it hath pleased the Church so to interpret it: and so the belief of the Church of Rome will not be grounded upon the Scripture, nor ruled according to it; but quite contrary, the sense of the Scripture, is ruled and grounded upon the knowledge of the Church; so that the foundation is builded upon the house, and the building is the level and the square.  
And to conclude, how cometh it to pass that they say that the Scripture proveth so distinctly, so clearly, so evidently the pretended authority of the Church, that they wonder how those that do but read the Scripture can admit it, if so be that the Scripture be ambiguous, and of a double meaning as hath been pretended by the third allegation.  
4 Touching the fourth defect objected against the Scripture, to wit that it is imperfect, and doth not sufficiently furnish us with reasons, for to prove or refute what is to be believed, in matters of controversy betwixt us. If this objection be received, how have the Doctors of the Church, which is called Catholic, undertaken to prove all the points of the Romish Religion by the Scripture? Have they taken upon them rashly a thing impossible? would they show themselves in this sophisters and cavilling disputers, seeking in the Scripture that which is not there to be found and proving a truth by a lie? or are there some points of doctrine believed in the Church termed Catholic, which are not contained in the Scripture? who amongst them all dare undertake to make a catalogue of any such points? what may those points of doctrine be, that are not handled in the Scripture, for being silent in which, the Scripture is termed imperfect?  
They are not points touching the Trinity, the incarnation of the Son of God, the redemption of mankind, or of faith in jesus Christ, of hope, charity and repentance, of the necessity and practice of good works, of life eternal, of Baptism, of the preaching of the word, of the holy supper; these points and those that depend on them are without doubt retained in the Scripture.  
What then can these articles of faith be, of which the Prophets, the Apostles, nay God himself hath spoken in the Scripture? Is it the article of the pope's authority, not only now to excommunitate, but also to depose Kings? his authority of dispencing with marriages, with which God dispenceth not in his word? to make eating of flesh in Lent (a thing of itself indifferent) to be a sin? and that an incestuous marriage be not incestuous, or else the article of his imperial dominion so sovereign and supreme that although he should lead whole troops of silly souls into hell, none may presume to say unto him my Lord why do you so? and of so large extent that it reacheth unto the souls both of the living and the dead? Or are they the articles of worshipping of Images, of invocation of Saints, of the fire of purgatory, as hot as that of hell, of works of supererogation, of merit ex congruo & ex condigno, that jesus Christ hath sacrificed himself upon earth twice, to wit, when he celebrated the holy Supper with his disciples, and not once alone upon the cross, that divine service ought to be said in an unknown tongue, that Christ hath not saved by his death the little children which die without baptism. And if there be any other article of this sort of which the holy Ghost hath made no mention, and the Prophets, and Apostles have written nothing. No the holy Ghost hath dictated, the Prophets and Apostles have written the clean contrary, That the temporal authority of Kings is immediately from God. 
Rom. 13. 1. 2. Cor. 4. 5.  That every man is subject to, and not above the law of God. That the very Apostles are the servants, but not the lords of the Church. 
Apoc. 14. 13.  That the souls of them which die in Christ rest from their labours. 
Rom. 10. 14.  That we must not call on him in whom we have not believed. That we must not bow down to images. 
Exod. 20. Luc. 17. 10. Heb. 9 & 10. cb.  That when we have done all we can, we are unprofitable servants. That Christ hath not offered himself oftentimes, but once. That the use of an unknown tongue in the Church is a curse. 
1. Cor. 14. 21. Mat. 1●. 1●,  That Christ received the little Children, yea before baptism.   

CHAP. 7.  
A verifying of the first means of nullity against the fifth and sixth allegation.  
AND for the fifth reproach cast upon the Scripture, to wit, that those who make profession to end their controversies by its determination, are disagreeing in opinion, if this consideration should make that God speaking in the Scripture or by the Scriptures, were not a competent judge to determine our controversies, it would follow also from thence that neither the Church should be our judge, since in this respect there is no difference. For in the times of the Primitive Church, both Arrians and Orthodoxes, Donatists & Catholics, did pretend to follow the judgement of the Church. The Arrians did reject the Council of Nice, required a new Council: yea many Arrians in effect protested that they would hold themselves to the Council of Nice: so that by this account the Church itself shall not be the judge, if from the discord of them, who profess to refer themselves to the decision of a judge, we shall conclude the insufficiency of the judge.  
Finally amongst the Doctors, who call themselves Catholics, and protest all with one full consent to submit themselves to the judgement of the Church, what jars? what contentions are there? The Angelical D S Thomas 
Discord amongst the Romish Doctors.  holds that the Cross is to be worshipped with a religious worship, to this purpose he brings the authority of the Church: and proveth that the image is to be worshipped with the very 
Tho. 2a 2ae qu. 103. art. 3. & 3. q 25. art. 40. Bellar. lib. 2. de magin. c: 20. 2●  same worship which is due to the same thing represented by the Image. Bellarmine is not of the same opinion, assigning a lower degree of worship to the Image, then to the thing whereof it is an Image, and for strengthening of his opinion he also allegeth the authority of the Church. wherefore then cast they this reproach rather on the sacred word, than the Church? And whereas in the sixth place, they endeavour to prove that, God speaking in the Scripture, cannot be judge of our differences, under a colour that Heretics do challenge and attribute to themselves the Scripture, by the same reason they conclude also that neither the Church shall be judge: for heretics make 
Concil. Cal● Act. 1.  use of the authority of the Church as of a cloak, Cite the Fathers, the Counsels, the traditions of the Church. But if it be replied, that this is for show only and in Sophistical manner; the answer also is easy, and at hand, to wit they do the like in alleging the Scripture: therefore things stand upon the very same terms, were it not that some though they dare not speak, yet do think that the Scripture indeed favoureth Heretics, which were all one as to imagine that God by his word doth cover (as with a cloak) the devils lies, which were as impious to think, as blasphemous to speak.   

CHAP. 8.  
The verification of the first means of Nullity against the 7. and 8. allegation.  
AND concerning that which is demanded in the seaventh place, for what serve Counsels if Scripture can reconcile us? do not they see they make way to another counterdemaund no less urgent, to wit, for what serve the Counsels if the Church be our judge? they cannot here reply that the Counsels make this Church, which is the judge that they require: for than it may be objected that the Church is without a judge save only during the time of a Council, and that once expired (or not begun) there shall be no means to resolve the doubts of conscience. And who shall call this Council? shall the Emperor and the Kings? but their thoughts are otherwise distracted, neither do they agree amongst themselves, and though they should take the business to heart, and to that end should agree, have not those of Rome stripped them of their privilege of calling a Council, as heretofore they have done? Or shall the Pope? he fears too much those assemblies, he knoweth very well what affronts have been given to his predecessors in them, and what hazard they ran even in the last Council of Trent, notwithstanding all their canvasing, and underhand dealing, and that the holy Ghost was sent thither by post from Rome. Furthermore the Council cannot be held always, neither can every one be there present to hear it speak vivavoce. Amidst all those difficulties what shall become of doubts and disputes? who shall resolve them? who shall determine them in the mean while? how shall the conscience by this means have always a judge to whom she may have recourse to be resolved? And now in the Church which termeth itself Catholic who shall be judge in our Controversies? shall it be the Council of Trent? but no judge will be admitted that speaks not vivavoce, and henceforth in this respect the Council of Trent, and all other Counsels are as dumb as the Scripture: they are cited, they are wrested to divers senses. If this question then touching the use of a Council (to which we shall answer directly hereafter) doth force ut to renounce the judgement of God speaking in the Scripture, it will also force them to renounce the judgement of the Church.  
Finally the last allegation touching the uncertainty of humane judgement when we are to judge who hath the spirit, or whether one hath it himself or no, amongst so great a number who disagreeing one from another do all notwithstanding equally lay claim to the gift of the holy spirit. If this allegation take place, it will also cause that no recourse can be had to the authority and judgement of the Church, for if it be so, that (according to the allegation) it cannot be known who hath the spirit, or who hath it not, because of the weakness of humane judgement, and the multitude and discord of pretenders; how shall it be known who are those who make the Catholic Church or not? Truly every man that cannot assure himself that he hath the spirit, which alone inspireth true wisdom, ought also to doubt whether he be not a fool, and ignorant, when question is made of judging of such things which belong to the spirit. And since it belongeth not to fools to judge who are wise men, every one being according to this last allegation, bound to doubt that he is a fool, as being destitute of the spirit; no man by the same reason can judge which is the assembly of those who are truly wise; no man (the incertitude of his judgement considered, if this allegation hath place, in such a multitude, variety and discord of those who usurp as proper unto themselves that title of the Church, pretending all that of right it belongs unto them) can make any certain choice, or cull out those on whom in truth it is to be conferred.   

CHAP. 9  
The verification of the second means of nullity against the first allegation.  
IT is then very manifest that all these allegations are incompatible with the intent of those who alleged them, but forall this they will darken, and weaken the right of the cause against which they are alleged, if we do not also show their falsity, and impertinency, which is the second means of nullity that we have opposed against them.  
To begin then with the first, it is an infinite wrong that the written word of the living God is called a dead and dumb letter, that God speaking in this fashion should be accounted not to speak at all, under colour that he uses not a voice, the which cannot be admitted in the divine nature, which is not necessary amongst men, but for to carry, and convey by the ear to the heart the conceptions of the mind, and together with them the knowledge of those things whereof they are the image: which being done by another means, as by writing, the lively voice is no word necessary. He therefore spoke very wittily who first called books dumb masters, at once endeavouring to express what they were in regard of the sound, and what in regard of the virtue and efficacy, of expressing and teaching, to wit, dumb, if we respect the sound, but eloquent and powerful, if we regard what they express, and teach▪ we hear not at this day the voice of Demosthenes nor of Cicero, nevertheless when we read their writings it seems unto us that we hear them. The instructions of an Ambassador, the testament of a Father, the sentence of a judge, the letter of a friend, the authentic copy of a contract, do they not express the pleasure of the King, the will of the Father, of the judge, of a frtend, of such as have made any contract after the same manner as the vocal word and lively voice? And shall not we make the same account, of the instructions, of the Testament, of the sentence, of the letters, of the authentic copy of the contract, which our King hath given to his Ambassadors, our heavenly Father hath left to us his children, the judge of the whole world hath pronounced, the bridegroom hath written to his spouse, and which the mediator between God and men the Lord jesus hath sealed with his blood? 
john. 5. 46.  For had ye believed Moses (saith the Lord) ye would have believed me, and nevertheless Moses then spoke not, 
Luke. 16. 29. v. 31.  but in and by his writings. They have Moses and the Prophets, said Abraham to the rich glutton, if they hear not Moses and the Prophets, speaking of the rich man's brethren, neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead. And yet who doubteth but that in those days Moses and the Prophets were not living in the world, nor spoke unto the world any other way, but in and by their writings: so true it is that he who imparts to us his mind by writing, doth speak and converse with us, albeit we hear not his voice. And therefore since we have, as we acknowledge on both sides, the writings not only of Moses and the Prophets, but also of the Evangelists and Apostles, Why should not we hearken unto Moses and the Prophets, unto the Evangelists and Apostles? why shall we say, under a pretext that they are dead, that they speak no more? Do they not speak all at this day in the same manner as Moses and the Prophets did when Abraham willed that we should give ear unto them? And since it is most true that the Scripture is given by inspiration of God, 
2 Tim. 3. 16. 2. Pet. 1. 10.  that it is not of private interpretation, why should not we receive it with the the same reverence, which we would yield unto it, if we should hear him delivering it by word of mouth unto the Prophets and Apostles? the letter and the word change not the signification, neither the force and efficacy of it, like as the voice and sound (with men of understanding addeth little or nothing unto it. But yet if we so much desire the sound & noise of the voice, let us hear this word propounded, let us hear it preached, let us hear it red. But as we hear the Crier & Sergeants proclaim the ordinances, and decrees of the Court, when they put them in execution, without attributing (for all that) unto them the title & honour of judges: yea if we find but the copy of them fixed in our absence on our doors, we read it with reverence and readily obey it, so that there is no need of the personal presence of the judge, who is sufficiently enough present, when he speaketh unto us by his decree: Let us then at least, bear the same respect towards the celestial judge and his holy decree, which we do towards an earthly judge, towards humane ordinances, although we have but the copy of it, let us read it with humility, let us obey it with zeal, let us not require that the invisible should make himself otherwise visible unto us, that the dead should rise from the grave; yea let us rather meditate on this truth, we have Moses, we have the Prophets, if we hear not them (to wit) speaking in their writings, we should not a jot sooner be persuaded, if they should rise again from the dead and speak unto us.   

CHAP. 10.  
The verification of the second means of Nullity against the the second allegation.  
WITH as little reason do they accuse the Scripture of obscurity: for if they speak of the matter handled in the Scriptures, 
How the Scripture is obscure.  truly it surmounteth humane sense and understanding in what manner soever it be considered, either as it is proposed in the Scripture, or published in the Church, it being altogether impossible to prove it by demonstrations, or to set it down by way of conclusions, and principles as in other sciences: But this obscurity is easily resolved by the light of the spirit, which wanting in the heart, it is no more possible to judge of the truth, whether it be considered as written & delivered in the Scripture, or heard, as preached by the Church, them its possible for a blind man to judge of colours, and of the light of the sun: or a foolish and mad man of true wisdom. Whence it appeareth, that it is not the sentence of an external judge which can order this rebellion of humane understanding against the truth of God, seeing question is made, of convincing the conscience which is the proper work of God leading by the force of his spirit every thought captive under the obedience of Christ. 
2. Cor. 10. 5.  As neither it is the authority of the earthly judge in civil causes, which can convince the party in his conscience, but the acknowledgement and feeling that he hath in his soul, of the equity and justice of the sentence, of the which as long as it remaineth unknown unto him he cannot be satisfied, though he may be constrained externally to obey it.  
In matter therefore of Religion, when men go not about to constrain, 
What kind of judge requisite for the Church.  but to persuade, not to stop the mouth by violence, but to convince the heart; no question is to be made in this case of having an external judge determining by definitive sentence, but rather of an internal Doctor persuading the heart. 
john 6. 44.  For no man comes to me (saith our Saviour) except the Father draw him, alleging to this purpose the Scripture speaking of the Prophets, and saying that they shall be all taught of God. 
Isaiah 54. 1●.  But if they speak not of the obscurity of the matter which is handled in the Scripture, but of that of the phrase and manner of speaking and of that of the words used by the holy spirit in expressing of it, without doubt they accuse the holy spirit either of inability, or unwillingness to express himself intelligibly. But neither the one nor the other can be said of him, without detracting either from his wisdom, or his goodness. Certainly that law of which David speaketh which he magnifieth so much, for its light that he calleth it a lantern to his feet, 
Psal. 119. v. 105. Psal. 19  and a light unto his path, making wise the simple, was a written law, was the Scripture, which giveth by this reckoning understanding not only to the Prophets and great ones, but also to the most simple and ignorant, this was the Scripture of which the Apostle speaketh when he saith that whatsoever things have been written afore time have been written for our learning: 
Rom. 15. 4.  and therefore by the same reason clearly & plainly, there being no greater enemy to learning then obscurity. It was the Scripture which he termed to be given by inspiration of God, 
2. Tim. 1. 19  and profitable to teach and instruct; how can this be if it be obscure? likewise he saith, that Timothy had known the holy Scriptures from his child hood nay 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from his very infancy. do we use to read dark, obscure authors unto little children? It was the Scripture which the Apostle Saint Peter calleth a light that shineth in a dark place. 
2. Pet. 1. 19  And what difference is there between darkness and light, a lantern and obscurity? And to be brief, it was the scripture, the reading of which hath been so much recommended, by the Ancient Fathers; namely, by Saint chrysostom whose exhortation so pathetical and pithy, 
Chris●st. he●. 3. de Laz.  so often reiterated and inculcated show plainly that this abuse of not reading the Scriptures, under a colour of their obscurity, did long ago in his time begin to creep into the Church, but was neither received nor approved by it as now it is.  
And here it may be some will say unto us that it cannot be denied, 
Objection for the obscurity of the Scripture. Answer.  but the Scripture is obscure, otherwise to what end serve so many commentaries, homilies, and sermons? But the answer is very easy that we deny not that the Scripture is in many places very obscure, God having so ordained it of his infinite wisdom, for to beat down the presumption of man, and to rouse up his laziness to a holy study, and diligent reading of it; as S● Augustine hath very well observed. But we say with the same Father, That in those things that are most plainly set down in the Scripture are contained all things which concern faith and good manners. For as touching what is over, and above that, the whole militant Church were it united in one, were not able to expound all the obscure places in the Scripture, otherwise she would not have been, so uncharitable as not to have taken care to have furnished her children with an ample and authentic conmentary, which might make all the Scripture clear and without obscurity; And as touching preaching and commentaries, they serve not always to illustrate, and explain, but oftentimes to delate and amplify, and when they do illustrate, they do it not by any light borrowed elsewhere then from the Scripture itself, interpreting the Scriptures by the Scriptures themselves following therein the Council of the Fathers, and the practice of the Levites, of whom it is written that they did read in the book of the law of God expounding it, 
Nehem. 8. 8.  and rendering the true sense of it, causing it to be understood by the Scripture. So that we way judge of the sense of that which is obscure, by the sense of that which is clear, & likewise discern whether the interpretation be agreeable to the place of the Scriptures, by that which goeth before, and followeth after, whereas in a place that is difficult, to speak properly, when the interpretation of it is given cannot be received but upon credit, and with relation to the authority of the interpreters, because in such a case we cannot see the correspondence that is between the Text and the commentary, the words and the sense, which cannot be said of good & whole some interpretation of the Scripture which therefore ought not to be condemned of obscurity.   

CHAP. 11.  
The verification of the second means of Nullity against the third and fourth allegation▪  
The third accusation of ambiguity is as unjust as the two former; for if the Scripture had been ambiguous, and capable of diverse interpretations, how had it been possible for the Apostle S● Paul to convince the jews by the Scriptures? can one by any saying having an ambiguous and double meaning, force the understanding and the conscience of an obdurate and obstinate enemy? how could the jews of Berea examine by the Scripture the doctrine of the same Apostle S. Paul? That which is ambiguous, and may be bend too and fro can it serve for a rule? the question not being of a Lesbian rule which is rather ruled than doth rule, and measured, than itself a measure, which is bowed and bended whither soever we list, but of a certain and constant rule which is always the same. And how did our Lord employ, not only his authority, as the son of God, but the Scripture itself, when he would prove the resurrection of the dead against the Sadduces, and so pregnantly that even the Devil himself with all his sophistry could not answer the argument, shall we think he proved a truth which he undertook to clear, and put out of all doubt by a passage, the sense whereof was doubtful and uncertain? And what, (for we also allege the Fathers) are not both Athanasius and S. Augustine of this opinion? that by a due consideration had of what goeth before, and what followeth after, and by the consent and agreement it hath with the Principal scope of the matter which is there treated of, the Scriptures are to be interpreted against heretics. How could it be shown by the same Scriptures which is yet daily practised that a false and heretical interpretation doth not agree to the Scripture? And finally is it in conscience seemly in calling the Scriptures ambiguous, to brand them, and disgrace them so far, as to fasten upon them the mark of Satan's Oracles? If they had been such; if Tertullian had believed them to be such, the heretics had never given them occasion to call them, he himself had never called them, Lucifugas Scripturarum, such as shun and fly the Scripture as the owl or batte doth the clear sunshine.  
The fourth accusation of the imperfection of the Scripture is no less grievous, and unjust: for since the Scripture hath been ordained of God to make men wise unto salvation, 
●. Timoth. 3. 15. ●7.  and perfect unto every good work. It must without doubt contain all doctrine necessary to salvation, otherwise it could not attain its end. And since Scripture itself doth promise this so exact and perfect doctrine, either its witness is not of God, or what it testifies of itself is true. Nay which is more, God hath expressly prohibited to add to it, or to diminish any thing from it. And if this hath had place in the old Testament, shall it not in the new which is much more full and perfect? it is not to be believed. Let us then adore, as Tertullian speaketh, the fullness of the Scriptures, and let us not hear (as Athanasius speaketh) neither receive any thing beside or above them in that which concerns the doctrine of faith. For touching the policy, & ceremonies used in the Church; it is another matter, we avouch that the Fathers did not think themselves bound to give an account of them by the Scripture. But a great part of those ceremonies used in their times hath been quite abolished, so that they are no longer in use, no not in the Romish Church, which notwithstanding doth glory so much for keeping & observing of traditions approved by antiquity, & received for Apostolical.   

CHAP. 12.  
The verification of the second means of nullity against the fifth allegation.  
TOuching the fifth allegation that the Scripture cannot be the rule, seeing it cannot put an end to the dissensions of them, who make profession to keep themselves strictly unto it, is also wonderfully perverse. For question is not made of such a rule, as unto which, all those should truly and indeed conform themselves, who make a show so to do, neither of finding such a judge, as all they who profess to yield, & refer themselves to his judgement, should in effect perform it: so long as the Church shall be militant here on earth, such a rule, such a judge will not be found. But the question is of finding a rule, of finding a judge, to whom whosoever shall submit himself, to which whosoever shall conform himself, shall not disagree from those who do the like? Otherwise albeit that passion, and malice hinder not that men may seem to hold themselves to one certain rule, of which the doctrine is evident and plain, for to disguise the business and colour over a bad cause these vices notwithstanding will not suffer us in truth to conform ourselves thereunto, as is seen in the example of the heretics above alleged, who did protest to keep themselves to the Council of Nice, and to the traditions of the Fathers. Moreover we do not seek a rule to which whosoever conformeth himself doth it wholly in all points. For it is well known that the Fathers did conform themselves to the pattern of the Scripture, to the consent of the Church, and yet which of them hath done it so exactly? all of them by reason of humane infirmity, disagreeing one with another, and oftentimes from themselves. He that shall say, that therefore God speaking in the scripture is not judge, by the same reason should be forced to conclude, that neither the Church itself is judge. But the question is of finding a judge, a rule which might cause agreement at least in the Principal points, amongst all those who sincerely desire the knowledge of truth.  
There were betwixt the Christians and the jews great controversies, they protested both the one and the other that the Scripture was the rule. And St Paul that he taught nothing but what the Prophets had foretold. And the jews would receive no other doctrine, but that of Moses and the Prophets: ceased he therefore to convince the jews by the Scriptures, and apply them as the rule against them? And under colour that the jews boasting themselves in Moses writings, agreed not with the Lords, who made as much or more reckoning of them, did he forbear to tell them, 
john. 5. 46. 47.  had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me, for he wrote of me: but if ye believe not his writings how shall ye believe my words? and in the verse immediately going before. 
v. 45▪  Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father, there is one that will accuse you, even Moses in whom you trust.   

CHAP. 13.  
The verifying of the second means of Nullity against the sixth allegation.  
BUT if heretics for answer unto the sixth accusation, lay claim to the Scripture, it is not in effect and indeed but only in show. and therefore as those who make some false Demonstrations in the Mathematics, although they make use of principles of the science, are notwithstanding refuted and convinced by the same principles, and therefore their error is no ways preiudicious to the authority and certainty of the Mathematics: even so the heretics, albeit for to cloak their heresy, they teere in pieces the Scripture, and wrest it to their sense, ought nevertheless to be convinced, no otherwise, then by the same Scriptures of which the Lord hath left unto us a notable example in his person, when being tempted by Satan who applied and used against him the scripture, he repelled the temptation by the same scripture: the holy Fathers also did they leave of to beat down heresy, even so far as to put it to death, by this sword of the spirit, albeit that heresy also in show made use of it. Truly the heretic's forge their heresy first in their heads, and then afterwards seek it in the Scripture, 
Tertul. de resur. car. cap. 3. Vt de Scripturis solis quaestiones suas sistant stare non poterunt.  which favoureth them so little, that if their controversies were to be determined by it, they would not subsist, as very well said Tertullian, who had never suffered himself to be carried away to the vain fancies of Montanus, if he had firmly held this his Maxim.   

CHAP. 14.  
The verifying of the second means of Nullity against the seaventh allegation.  
AS for the Counsels if we lived in the times of the Apostles, we should think it very expedient to entreat them to assemble themselves in a Council to determine our controversies: Their quality, the authority of their charge, or rather the extraordinary gifts, and the particular assistance of the holy Ghost, giving them this advantage of being both able and willing to judge infallibly; humane ignorance would not blind their eyes that they could not see the truth, and the fear of a Pope, of an Emperor, of Kings, would not hinder them to utter it. But we stand not now at this day, on such terms, this infallibility is no where to be found, there are no more Prophets, no Evangelists but only as they exhibit themselues to us in their writings: every leader of the Church taken a part, is subject to err, & all united together in one body, bring with them their portion of infirmity, the weakness of humane nature, passion, particular interest may intermingle themselves into their consultations, and so hoodwink their eyes that they cannot see the truth, or so tie their tongues that they cannot utter it. Witness the truth of this the history of the Council of Trent, * set forth by those who were engaged more than ordinary to cover its shame, 
And. Duellij orationes in Concilio Tridentino habitae. Examen Concilij Trident: Innocentio Gentileto authore.  avowed and evidently received in this Kingdom of France, to strengthen the opposition which hath been always framed against it, & to uphold the liberty of the French Church, a history which none hath been able to disprove to this day.  
But here it may be said, hath not then the Lord in vain promised his assistance, if we should yet doubt of the infallibility of the determinations of the Counsels? 
See the instructions and letters of the Kings of France and their Ambassadors with the letters of the Emperors and Princes of Germany. But especially read the history of the Council of Trent by Pietro S●ane.  God forbid, for is it not doubted, nay is it not formally denied that particular Synods are infallible? Is it not avouched that they have erred, and yet the promise of the Lord remaineth still true? And it will avail nothing to reply here, that the promise was not made to particular Counsels, but to the general which are called Ecumenical. For the Lord hath promised to be as well in themid'st of two or three gathered together in his name, as of a whole multitude. If this promise hindereth not, but two or three may err, how shall it oblige us to judge better of a multitude? what than the Lord shall not he keep his promise, and shall not he be justified when he speaks? nay, let every man be declared a liar, that the Lord may be acknowledged faithful and true: for he hath promised not to a multitude only, but also to two or three the assistance of his spirit in their consultations, to wit, if they be gathered together in his name, if they seek him in truth. But who can discern who are they; if not by the holiness of their constitutions, which if it be not found in them, we are not bound to believe that they were assembled in the name of Christ, nor consequently that they have been made partakers of the benefit of such an excellent promise. Saint Augustine well knew this truth when he affirmed that the Counsels even those which are general may be corrected and reform.  
To what good then serve the Counsels? truly oftentimes they are so far from being good, that they are pernicious: for if the number of those which are good be the less without doubt the multitude will carry it, and it will be as the Council of the four hundred Prophets and one, holden in the presence of jehosaphat, and Ahab, where the 400 evil prophets crushed the one good, and carried it notwithstanding all the resistance he could make. For which cause the Religious wisdom of holy Athanasius cannot sufficiently be praised, opposing himself against them, who required Synods under pretence of reforming the faith, in alleging unto them that we have the Scripture more proper for this purpose then any other means whatsoever, yea that because he doubted least the multitude of the worse part might sway the balance. In the time of Gregory Nazianzen things were come to such a height of corruption, that being summoned by Procopius in the Emperor's name to come to a Synod, 
Epist. ●5. Quo●●●m nu●lius Concil●j finem l●tum & faustum vi●i.  he excused himself saying, that he never saw any good issue of a synod. But when a Council may be held composed of men well red in the Scripture, zealous of the glory of God, lovers of the peace of the Church, there is no doubt but such an assembly may bring forth much good, because it might clear, that which is difficult, not by its own authority, but by its sufficiency. Even as when a window is opened by a strong dextrous hand, which was shut up before; the more weak and unable who could not open it, do see the sun, perceive the opening, not because of any authority of him that opened it, but by reason of his strength, & dexterity manifesting itself by a visible and sensible effect. But such Counsels we may rather wish than look for. The deluge of vices which hath overflowed Christendom having drawn upon us this horrible judgement. Such was that first Council of Nice, that took the Scripture only for the rule and square of its judgement, and refused not to submit itself to the touchstone and trial, as S● Athanasius witnesseth, proposing to other Counsels, or rather conventicles, the example of this Counsels modesty to make them blush with shame and confound their pride.  
And indeed it was a remarkable thing, that the Fathers protested that they would not use the authority of the Council of Nice against the Arrians, but of the scripture, upon which the Council of Nice is founded, what shall we then conclude, but that we ought to approve of the good Counsels, receive their ordinances with reverence, not because they could not err, but if so they have not erred, and argue in this manner against Heretics, when matter of right is called in question. The Council hath so concluded according to the Scripture, therefore it is true: and not after this manner. The Council hath so concluded, therefore it is so. But in matter of fact and touching history, to judge what is that which is universally believed and received, and by the greater part, we may well conclude from the determination of an Ecumenical Council, that it is believed and received generally: And therefore the Counsels also are good for this purpose to stop the mouth of Heretics, who might pretend the consent of the Church, and by such a protestation give some scandal to the weaker, which by this means may easily be taken away.  
Truly if the Counsels had thought that their consultations should be approved, because of their authority simply; & not much more rather, for the truth of them, and their conformity with the Scriptures, they had never inserted in their acts the places of Scripture, the reasons on which they grounded themselves, they had never framed us, a man may say, a verbal process of all that had passed, but they would have contented themselves to have inserted the Canons only without any further declaration, but not proceeding after this manner, they would give us a reason of their deliberation, and recommend themselves famous, not by the usurpation of a sovereign authority, but by a declaration and exposition of the truth, that so our faith might not be grounded upon humane authority, but upon that of the living God.  
And truly to what end is the ceremony of laying the bible upon the table in a Council; is it not to declare that its authority is ruled by a Law? and as a judge in a politic estate, who hath the Prince's Law for his rule, aught to judge according to that law, and is accountable for his judgement: so are the Counsels to determine according to the Scripture, and are bound to make apparent unto the conscience, as much as lies in them, that they have judged according unto it: but some may say, Counsels at least are subordinate judges. Be it so; but we seek a Sovereign judge, a judge from whom it is not lawful to appeal, an infallible judge. This authority, this privilege cannot be given to Counsels. We seek a judge that is always on bench giving audience, a judge to whom we may at all times have recourse, and such Counsels cannot be.   

CHAP. 15.  
The verifying of the second means of Nullity against the eight allegation by declaring the impertinasy thereof.  
THe last point remaineth to be cleared, to wit, whether the uncertainty of humane judgement can cause that God speaking in the Scripture should not be fit to be our judge, since a man cannot know, neither who hath, nor whether he himself hath the holy spirit, or not, And here first of all could we answer that touching the matter in hand, the question is not whether we can know immediately, or as the School speaketh à priori, who hath the holy Ghost: but only who speaketh according to the Scriptures, which being resolved, by conferring the Scriptures, with that which is proposed, we may easily conclude, if passion and malice darken not the understanding who proposeth the words of the holy Ghost, and by this means discern à posteriori as they say who hath the spirit, seeing that in regard of Pastors and Doctors none preach the word of the spirit but those to whom the spirit hath suggested them, how wicked and detestable soever otherwise they may be. So that the question is brought to matter of fact, to wit; who proposeth that which is contained in the Scripture, which question is cleared in examining the Doctrine proposed by the Scripture; as the proportion of a building is known by applying of the square and level. For example, the jews of Boerea did not directly and à priori inquire whether Saint Paul when he preached unto them was inspired of the holy spirit, or no; it had been an impossible thing for them, seeing it is the property of God alone to be the searcher of hearts. But they made inquiry for all that whether Saint Paul did speak according to the Scriptures, and having by conferring of Saint Paul's doctrine with the Scriptures, discovered the conformity, and how they answered the one to the other, they judged truly, & as indeed it was, to wit, that Saint Paul spoke not of himself, but by the holy spirit. Yea the Ancients themselves, having to do with heretics who made show to hold the Scripture for their rule, have not refused to dispute before a Pagan judge, who although by reason of his unbelief he was not capable to judge whether of two parties maintained the truth, pronounced nevertheless and very happily which of the two concluded most conformably to the Scripture, which both the one and the other alleged for their purpose, but the same sufficeth us at this day in our controversies: for if it be apparent who speak according to the Scriptures, no man who maketh profession of Christianity doubting of the Scripture, the conclusion will be plain and evident, that whosoever he be, speaks according to truth, and by the spirit of truth: There is much difference between believing the Principles of Christian Religion, and judging who teach most conformably to those principles. To the first, faith and the illumination of the holy spirit, are absolutely necessary: for the second, common sense is sufficient. To believe that the Scripture is true, when it teacheth us that there is but one God, that the Father is God, the Son God, and the holy Ghost also, that the Father is not the Son nor the holy Ghost, neither the one nor the other, for this faith only is required. But to infer from thence that the nature of God is one in number, that the persons of the Trinity are distinct, yet not divided, that they communicate in one and the same nature, for this I say common sense alone sufficeth, which cannot deny the consequent, the truth of the antecedent once granted, which without all doubt cannot be comprehended but by faith. It is then in vain to ask who shall judge of the consequences, as if a man having learned in a history how many companies and how many soldiers in every company were in an army, how many troops of horse, and how many horsemen in every troop, one should demand who shall judge whether the number of the soldiers of which the army did consist be rightly collected from thence: In like manner if we can prove by the Scripture that, that which Christ gave to his disciples, was bread broken, and if we prove by the same Scripture that the body of Christ is not broken in the Eucharist, and that yet much less the bread broken is Christ's body, to demand here who shall judge whether a man may infer from hence that the Lord gave not us externally his own body in the Eucharist is all one as to ask, who hath common sense. Likewise, when the Apostle saith, that we are saved by grace, through faith, and that not of ourselves, 
Eph. 2. 8▪ 9  it is the gift of God, not of works lest any man should Boast, If it be asked here who shall judge, whether it can be gathered from hence, that we are not saved by the merit of our works, but by faith, wholly relying upon this grace, without having merited it ourselves by any works of ours? is not this to ask how a man might know that he is in his senses? But if the consequence be so obscure, that it is hard to judge of it, this is an argument that there is no consequence at all: the nature of which is such, that in a manner it forceth our understanding to yield unto it, and to allow of it, albeit we had studied in no other logic then that of nature.   

CHAP. 16.  
The verifying of the second means of Nullity against the eight allegation by declaring the untruth thereof.  
BUT if we proceed so far as to demand how we may know, whether the Scripture be the copy of the declared will of God, since a man cannot know, neither who hath, nor whether he himself hath the spirit of God or no; the answer is very easy, he who knoweth not whether he hath the spirit or no, belongs not to Christ; and therefore it is not strange if he knows not the voice of Christ; but all those who belong to Christ are made partakers of his spirit. 
Rom. 8. 9 v. 14. 15. 16.  If any man hath not the spirit of Christ he is none of his. As many as are led by the spirit of God, they are the sons of God, they have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear, but the spirit of adoption which cryeth Abba Father in their hearts.  
The spirit itself beareth witness to their spirit, 
Eph. 1. 13. 14.  that they are the children of God. They are sealed until the redemption of the purchased possession, he is unto them a spirit of wisdom and revelation: 
john 10. 3. 4. 5.  They are the sheep of Christ, they hear and know the voice of their shepherd. They follow him, 
1. Cor. 2. ● 4. 15. 16.  and the voice of a stranger they will not follow but will fly from him, for they know not his voice. The Father drives them to Christ, they are taught of God, they have learned of the Father, 
1. john 2. 27.  they are spiritual, and therefore comprehend the things that are of God, because the spirit hath revealed them unto them, & they are spiritually discerned. They have received the anointing by the holy spirit and know all things: 
2. Cor. 3. 3. Ephes. 3. 17. 1. Cor. 16. 19 Luke 1. 78.  God hath written his laws in their hearts. Christ dwells there by faith. Their bodies are the temples of the holy Ghost. And those who are adorned and enriched so sumptuously, can they be ignorant of the excellency of the diamond, and the magnificency of the riches which they possess? Those who are enlightened with such a light, upon whom the Lord causeth the day to spring from on high to shine, and the light of his countenance to airse, to whom he is the sun and buckler, the sun of righteousness, bearing health under his wings, whose eyes he hath enlightened, can they doubt whether they walk in his light?  
Shall the natural man by his reason comprehend that he discourseth, and the spiritual man shall not he discern by the spirit, that he hath the spirit?  
And here some man may say unto us; But how many may be found who boast, nay who think verily they have the spirit, and yet are grossly deceived; how many have the spirit, and yet err oftentimes in their judgements? and indeed it is so: but is it not either a strange perversity, or indiscretion, to infer from thence that none can know, that none can judge and discern assuredly to salvation, the spiritual things which God hath revealed outwardly to his by his word, & inwardly by his spirit? For do we not see amongst men how many there are who glory and deceive themselves with a false opinion of wisdom, being indeed imprudent & foolish, & yet whosoever would conclude from thence, that he who is truly wise, cannot know that he is so; should bring into the world not that of the Academiques, but even the Pyrronian suspense of judgement. If then the boasting and vanity of a fool, cannot prejudice the assured knowledge, which he who is wise can, and aught to have of wisdom; no more can the false persuasions of hypocrites which proceed from the illusion of Satan, shake the certainty of that assurance which proceedeth from the sense and feeling of the spirit dwelling in the heart of the spiritual man, and giving as we have said, testimony to his spirit. Yea the conformity of his motions with the word of the Scripture, assures and strengthens him, and putteth a difference between the sense and feeling he hath, and that which ariseth from the false illusion of Satan, which hath no other rule then itself. From the same fountain either of malice or unadvisedness it proceeds that under pretence that those who have received the spirit do err sometimes, they would conclude, that in that which is necessary to salvation they cannot pass any certain judgement: for the wisest in the knowledge of worldly businesses may offend against the rules of wisdom, and yet who will deny for all this but they can give advise and sure counsel. We say, sure, according to the rules of wisdom: For no man can answer for the event which is oftentimes contrary to the wisdom of Counsel and favoureth rash attempts. The learned are ignorant of many things, but not of such without which they cannot deserve that name. As then the prudent differ not from fools in this that they never commit any follies, but in this that their follies are not gross, are not ordinary, and as the difference that is between the learned & the ignorant consists in that which is the Principal in the Science which he professeth. The ignorant on the contrary is either ignorant of all, or knows very little, and even that little which he knows to speak properly he knows not. So the difference that is between the man spiritually wise, & him that is ignorant according to the spirit, it is not in this that the Spiritual man never, but in that he errs not grossly and ordinarily: Not in that he knows all, but in that he knows all that which is necessary in his profession, whereas he that is spiritually foolish and ignorant, errs almost always, errs ordinarily, is ignorant of that which is necessary that he should know for the making of himself such as he professeth himself to be. And even as there is a great disproportion between fools and wisemen in the ordinary course and carriage of their lives; between the learned and ignorant in the knowledge of good arts, and yet all the wise in that kind are not equally wise, nor all the learned equally learned, nay in that very humane and secular wisdom, and learning, there is no one perfectly wise, perfectly learned: so great is the difference between those whom God hath enlightened with his knowledge, and those whom the eyes of their understanding the God of this world hath blinded, and yet there is no one amongst them all, who hath attained to the highest degree of perfection.  
We conclude then, that as those that belong not to the Lord, cannot assure themselves of his spirit, and by consequent cannot discern his word unto salvation: so all those that are his, do feel the efficacy of his spirit in their hearts, even as they feel and find in themselves by experience the use of reason; and judge by the spirit of spiritual things proposed in the word, after the same manner as by reason, they judge of things that can be comprehended by it. It sufficeth us to have proved that the faithful have an assured and certain rule in the Scripture.   

CHAP. 17.  
The verifying of the third means of nullity against the allegations.  
And by these reasons we think we have made good the two first means of Nullity proposed against the eight allegations; It remaineth that we verify the third, to wit, that they tend to the subversion of Christian Religion.  
To come then to the point, let ut first of all consider that their aim is to prove that a Christian can have no assurance of his Religion of that which he ought to believe, by the Scripture, because it is dumb, obscure, ambiguous, imperfect, which cannot assure those who depend on it, and may be alleged in favour of heretics. If that detestable opinion be once engrafted in the heart, as it is set forth and maintained by word, and writing, what will become I pray you of the authority of the Church, which is grounded upon the Scripture? if the foundation of it be so falty, is it not to be feared that the building will sink? If a Christian cannot, yea ought not to ground himself upon the Scripture by reason of these pretended imperfections, with what confidence shall he ground himself upon the authority of the Church, which hath no other foundation, than this foundation so imperfect, if the foresaid allegations be true? But if the one and the other prop of faith fail, this of the scripture, and consequently that of the authority of the Church grounded on the Scripture, (as of necessity when the foundation is undermined, those that lean upon the wall must fall together with the wall) what will become of the authority, of the assurance of Christian Religion? The right of the Church is called in question, and she, either as a daughter produces the scripture, the copy of the Testament of her Father, or as a spouse brings forth the Scripture, the contract of her marriage, and this Testament is found dumb, obscure, ambiguous, of a double meaning, being not able to clear the night of the Church, nay which may be employed against her. In this case what shall be the foundation? what the title? what the proofs of the right of the Church? will they not be found (if we believe the allegations) to be dumb, ambiguous, obscure, imperfect proofs? and consequently shall not the right, instead of being confirmed, become invalide and of no force? And who will not judge that the Church proceeds not fairly attributing to herself so great authority, and maintaining it by proofs foe defective, or who will believe that the same is the true Church, the true people of God, who show a Testament, a covenant of God, contracted with her, which she confesseth to be set down in dumb words, obscure, ambiguous, appliable to every sense, and which may be produced and urged against herself?  
How will the Atheists laugh at this? & how, alas! will the consciences of them be shaken, that believe and receive this opinion of the obscurity, ambiguity, and insufficiency of the Scriptures?  
Let us consider in the second place that their aim is to cast all Christians into incertainty; striving to prove by these allegations that a man in what concerns Religion ought to mistrust his own judgement, which being once granted, how shall a man know whether he deceives not himself in believing that there is a Church? Here the Scripture cannot succour or help: for it is presupposed that it cannot afford any certainty: It is laid for a foundation, that a Christian hearing, reading, meditating on the Scripture may cousin and deceive himself. Neither can a man in this strait have recourse to the testimony of the holy Ghost; for the allegation presupposeth, that it cannot be known neither who hath, neither whether a man himself hath the holy spirit or no. And as for the authority of the Church, it cannot be alleged, for question may be made whether there be any Church at all. As then to him who should doubt whether there ought to be a Pope in the world, it would seem strange & far from the purpose to allege the testimony of the Pope, for to persuade him that there ought to be one: Even so when we are to prove, that there is a Church, it is in vain to allege the testimony of the Church. If then Christian Religion hath no foundation either in the Scripture, or in the testimony of the holy Ghost, or in the authority of the Church, as it followeth from the allegation, where shall she seek, where shall she find whereupon to uphold herself? shall it be in Philosophy? there much less; for if a Christian man cannot judge whether there be a Church by the spirit; as not being able to assure himself whether he hath the spirit, much less able shall he be to do it by his reason, which without the spirit is stark blind in spiritual things.  
Let us in the third place consider that in the disputes touching the marks and notes of the Church, it is questioned what they are? one is of one opinion, another of another, whence may a certain knowledge of them be had? shall it be from the Scripture? but the allegation presupposeth that it is impossible: shall it be from the Church? never the nearer: for it so little appears which is the Church, that it is controversed what are her marks by which she is known.  
Let us in the fourth place consider, (that grant we had found the marks of the Church, according to the allegation which casts men into incertitude,) it could not be discerned to what congregation to apply them, amongst so many and diverse assemblies, who challenge them: for it is supposed as granted according to the allegation, that the Scripture cannot here guide us, that we may deceive ourselves in making the choice: and the testimony of the Church can as little help us, if first of all it be not presupposed that it hath the marks of the Church, which is the point in question: for we seek in what Church the marks of the Church are to be found: and to rely herein upon the testimony of the Church doth presuppose that we know already in what Church the marks of the Church are found.  
Let us in the fifth place consider that according to the allegations there is no means how a man converted to the Church, can be assured of his Religion: For if he hath not been convinced by lawful arguments, neither his profession, which followed the conviction of his conscience shall be lawful. It is very certain that if the foundation of his faith who hath been converted, be the authority of the Church, the foundation of his conversion hath not been lawful. for there was no means to persuade him, that the Church hath any such authority; in alleging to him the testimony of the Church. And the allegation of Scripture, and of reason according to their supposition, is not a lawful means to resolve the conscience. Having been then brought to acknowledge the authority of the Church founded upon these arguments, it cannot be but weak and unlawful; and consequently the belief of all that he hath believed, as depending upon the authority which he giveth unto the Church. And indeed if such a one whom we would convert doth question the authority of the Church, shall we prove unto him that whereof he doubteth, by alleging unto him that whereof he maketh likewise doubt? the argument then of his conversion to the acknowledgement of the Church cannot have been the authority of the Church. If then no man can be assured of the foundation of his conversion, no more neither can he be which is builded upon the foundation.  
In the sixth place let us observe that the Church which is called Catholic never speaketh by word of mouth, they are the particulars that are her Heralds. It may be demanded then by what means a man may be assured that they discharge their place faithfully, since they may err in proposing doctrine contrary to the meaning of the Church? This cannot be by the Scripture: for according to the allegation, truth and falsehood cannot be discerned by it; no, nor by the testimony of the Church; for he speaketh not but by particular men, of whom it is doubted whether they have faithfully reported the determination of the Church.  
In the Seaventh place let us consider, that if the authority of the Church be the foundation of faith, every one shall believe because his companion hath believed: and so christian religion shall be made ridiculous: for seeing the Church is a congregation of persons in which every one grounds his faith upon the authority of the whole congregation of which they are Members, it will necessarily follow, that every one of them shall believe apart because all have believed together.  
In the eight place let us weigh this horrible inconvenience, that we shall not believe the mysteries of the Trinit, of the incarnation of the redemption of mankind, but by hearsay, because our Ancestors, our Parents, our fellow burgesses, have believed so; and shall not believe that they have been the Church of God, but because they have left this testimony of themselves, which the jews may usurp with the like appearance of right, if we renounce the authority of Scriptures.  
Now have we verified this last means of Nullity not to incense any, (God is our witness) but to show if it be possible, into what, and how many execrable absurdities some amongst them unadvisedly precipitate themselves, who by the means of these allegations endeavour to draw us from the judgement of God speaking in the Scripture, to the judgement of men pretending the title of the Church being most certain that he who urged principally this business, if we way be judge of him according to his writings aimed especially to lay the foundation of Atheism, not that his intent was to overthrow the Romish Religion. He was a French man and a lover of public peace, he did know that so to maintain it, it behoved that the most welcome and the most approved Religion was to be maintained. We think it not strange, that he should have commended in public the Romish Religion: from thence he had his means: But we are extremely displeased, that he durst testify by his writings his contempt, and little respect of all Religion.  
Furthermore as we have proved the iniquity of the judgement which the Doctors who call themselves Catholics pass on the Scripture: so we hope that it will be easy to see their assignment of a judge in sending us to the Church, is either illusive or impossible; illusive, if by the Church they understand themselves: for since they are our opposite parties, they cannot be our judges. Impossible if by the Church they understand the mystical body of our Lord jesus Christ, to whom only notwithstanding the promises have been made; For who can distinctly point out the members of that body but he alone who is the head? And who can then assemble them? And if this be impossible, how shall that Church be the judge which we require? A speaking judge, a well know judge, to whom all may have their recourse, by whom all may be resolved. And therefore we persist in our demand that we may be remitted to answer before that unsuspected judge, and acknowledged of all parties, to wit, God speaking in the Scriptures.  
Let us conclude then with Optatus Milevitanus; 
* Optatus Episcopus Milevitanus contra Parmenianum lib. 5. Tomo. 2. Bibliothaec. patrum. pag. 393. columna. 1. editione Parisiensi 1575. Nemo vobis credat, nemo nobis: omnes contensiosi homines sumus, Quaerendi sunt judices ●●i Christiani, de utraque parte dari non possunt, deforis quaerendus est judex. si Paganus, non potest nos●e Christiana secreta, si judaeus, inimicus est Christiani baptismatis. Ergo in terris de hac re nullum poterit reperiri iudicium: de coelo quaerendus est iudex sed ut quid pulsamus ad coelum, cum habeamus hic in Evangelio Testamentum? Quia hoc loco rectè possunt terrena coelestibus comparari: tale est, quod qu●uis hominum habens numerosos filios. His quamdiu pater praesens est, ipse imperat singulis: non est adhuc necessarium testamentum. Sic & Christus, quamdiu praesens in terris fuit (quamuis nec modò desit) pro tempore quicquid necessarium erat, Apostolis imperavit Sed quomodo terrenus pater cum se in confinio senserit mortis, timens ne post mortem ●uam rupta pace, litigent frattes, adhibitis testibus voluntatem suam de pectore morituro transfert in tabulas diu duraturas. Et si fuerit inter fratres contentio nata, non itur ad tumulum, sed quaeritur testamentum. Et qui in tumulo quiescit, tacitis de tabulis loquitur viws. Is; cuius est testamentum in caelo est. Ergo voluntas eius, velut in testamento, sic in Evangelio inquiratur.  Let no body believe you, let no body believe us, for indeed we are opposite parties. We must seek then judges; if we take them from among Christians; they can be neither of the one nor the other party, they must be sought then without If we call a Pagan, he knows not Christian mysteries; if a jew, he is an enemy of Christian Baptism. We cannot then find on earth any judge of this business, we mnst then seek a judge from heaven. But why knock we at heaven's gate, since we have the TESTAMENT in the Gospel? for here we may compare terrestrial things with celestial: it is as if a man had many children; whilst he is with them he governeth and commandeth every one of them; his Testament is not as yet necessary. But as the terrestrial father finding himself near his end, and fearing that after his death, the bond of peace being broken, contentions and debates may arise amongst the brothers; calling witnesses, signeth in tabls to endure for ever, that which he hath within his dying heart, that if there happen any strife between the brothers; it shall not be needful to go to the grave, but that the Testament be sought for in the dumb tables, from whence, he that rests quietly in his grave, ●●eakes lively; The testator is in heaven: let us search then his will in the Gospel as in his testament.  
For according to the saying of chrysostom, 
a Homil in Ps 95. 〈◊〉 3. p. 〈…〉 Ducats 16●1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  If any thing be said without the Scripture, the spirit of the hearer halteth, now assenting, anon doubting; sometimes rejecting the words as frivolous▪ and presently receiving the same again as probable: But when the testimony of God's word is produced out of the Scripture, i● strengthens as well the discourse of the speaker, as the spirit of 〈…〉 And would it not be very absurd▪ saith the same Father, not to trust another in a matter of money, but to account, and ●●ll it on's self: and nevertheless when the determining of th●se so weighty matters is in hand, to suffer himself to be drawn as it were by force, and inconsiderately, to another man's opinion; especially having an exact scale, rule, and square, to wit, the declaration of the holy Scriptures? And therefore I adjure, and pray you all, that you leave that which seemeth Good to this man or to that man, and that ye inquire of the Scriptures concerning these things. 
〈◊〉 13. in ● epist. ad 〈◊〉 finem ex ed●io● Com●liona● 84▪ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉   Galat. 6. v. 16. As man● as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God. 
FINIS.