The second Booke,
Concerning their first position who
vrge reformation in the Church of England:
Namely,
That Scripture is the onely rule of all things which in this
life maybe done by men.

The matter contayned in this second Booke.

1 AN answere to their first proofe brought out of scripture Prou. 2. 9.
2 To their second. 1. Cor. 10. 31.
3 To their third. 1. Tim. 4. 5.
4 To their fourth. Rom. 14. 23.
5 To their proofes out of fathers, who dispute negatiuely from the authoritie of holie scripture.
6 To their proofe by the scriptures custome of disputing from diuine authoritie negatiuely.
7 An examination of their opinion concerning the force of argumentes taken from humaine
authoritie for the ordering of mens actions and perswasions.
8 A declaration what the truth is in this matter.

AS that which in the title hath beene proposed for the matter
whereof we treat, is onely the Ecclesiasticall law whereby
we are gouerned; So neyther is it my purpose to maintaine
any other thing then that which therin truth and reason
shall approoue. For concerning the dealinges of men
who administer gouernment, and vnto whom the execution
of that law belongeth, they haue their iudge who sitteth
in heauen, and before whose tribunall seat they are accomptable for whatsoeuer
abuse or corruption which (being worthily misliked in this Church) the
want eyther of care or of conscience in them hath bred. We are no Patrones
of those things therfore, the best defence whereof is speedie redresse & amendment.
That which is of God we defend, to the vttermost of that habilitie which
he hath giuen: that which is otherwise, let it wither euen in the roote from
whence it hath sprong. Wherefore all these abuses being seuered and set apart,
which rise from the corruption of men and not from the lawes the~selues: come
we to those things which in the very whole intier forme of our Church-politie

I

haue beene (as we perswade our selues) iniuriously blamed by them, who
endeuour to ouerthrow the same, and in stead therof to establish a much worse;
onely through a strong misconceipt they haue, that the same is grounded on
diuine authoritie. Now whether it be that through an earnest longing desire to
see things brought to a peaceable end, I do but imagin in the matters, whereof we
contend, to be fewer then indeed they are, or els for that in truth they are fewer
when they come to be discust by reason, then otherwise they seeme, when by
heat of contention they are deuided into many slipps, and of euery branch an
heape is made: surely, as now we haue drawne them together, choosing out
those thinges which are requisite to be seuerally all discust, and omitting such
meane specialties as are likely (without any great labour) to fall afterwardes of
themselues; I knowe no cause why either the number or the length of these
controuersies should diminish our hope of seeing them end with concord and
loue on all sides; which of his infinite loue and goodnes the father of all peace
and vnitie graunt. Vnto which scope that our endeuour may the more directly
tend, it seemeth fittest that first those thinges bee examined, which are as
seedes from whence the rest that ensue haue growne. And of such the most
generall is that, wherewith we are here to make our entrance; a question not
mooued (I thinke) any where in other Churches, and therefore in ours the
more likely to be soone (I trust) determined. The rather, for that it hath grown
from no other roote, then only a desire to enlarge the necessarie vse of the word
of God; which desire hath begotten an error enlarging it further then (as we
are perswaded) soundnes of truth will beare. For whereas God hath left sundry
kindes of lawes vnto men, and by all those lawes the actions of men are in
some sort directed: they hold that one onely lawe, the scripture, must be the
rule to direct in all thinges, euen so farre as to the taking vp of a rush or strawe.
About which point there should not neede any question to growe, and that
which is growne might presently ende, if they did yeelde but to these two restraints:
the first is, not to extende the actions whereof they speake so lowe as
that instance doth import of taking vp a straw, but rather keepe themselues at
the least, within the compasse of morall actions, actions which haue in them
vice or vertue; the second, not to exact at our hands for euery action the knowledge
of some place of scripture out of which we stand bound to deduce it, as
by diuerse testimonies they seeke to enforce, but rather as the truth is, so to acknowledge,
that it sufficeth if such actions be framed according to the lawe of
reason; the generall axiomes, rules, and principles of which law being so frequent
in holy scripture, there is no let but in that regard, euen out of scripture
such duties may be deduced by some kinde of consequence (as by long circuit
of deduction it may be that euen all truth out of anie truth may be concluded)
howbeit no man bound in such sort to deduce all his actions out of scripture,
as if eyther the place be to him vnknowne, whereon they may be concluded, or
the reference vnto that place not presently considered of, the action shall in that
respect be condemned as vnlawfull. In this we dissent, and this we are presently
to examine.
1 In all parts of knowledge rightly so termed things most generall are most
strong: Thus it must be, in as much as the certaintie of our perswasion touching

98

particulars dependeth altogether vpon the credite of those generalities out of
which they growe. Albeit therefore euery cause admit not such infallible euidence
of profe, as leaueth no possibilitie of doubt or scruple behind it; yet they
who claime the generall assent of the whole world vnto that which they teach,
and doe not feare to giue very hard and heauy sentence vpon as many as refuse
to embrace the same, must haue speciall regard that their first foundations and
grounds be more then sclender probabilities. This whole question which hath
beene mooued about the kinde of Church regiment, we could not but for our
owne resolutions sake, endeuour to vnrip and sift; following therein, as neere
as we might, the conduct of that iudiciall method which serueth best for inuention
of truth. By meanes whereof hauing found this the head theoreme of all
their discourses, who pleade for the change of Ecclesiasticall gouernement in
England, namely, That the Scripture of God is in such sort the rule of humaine actions,
that simply whatsoeuer we doe, and are not by it directed thereunto, the same is sinne; we
hold it necessarie that the proofes hereof be waighed. Be they of waight sufficient
or otherwise it is not ours to iudge and determine: onely what difficulties
there are which as yet withhold our assent, till we be further and better satisfied,
I hope no indifferent amongest them will scorne or refuse to heare. First therefore
whereas they alleage that wisedome doth teach men euery good way; and haue
thereupon inferred, that no way is good in any kind of action, vnlesse wisedom
do by scripture leade vnto it: see they not plainely how they restraine the manifold
wayes which wisedome hath to teach men by, vnto one only way of teaching,
which is by scripture? The boundes of wisedome are large, and within
them much is contayned. Wisedome was Adams instructor in Paradise: wisdom
indued the fathers, who liued before the law, with the knowledg of holy things:
by the wisedome of the law of God, Dauid attayned to excell others in vnderstanding;
& Salomon likewise to excell Dauid by the selfe same wisedom of God
teaching him many thinges besides the law. The waies of well-doing are in nu~ber
euen as many as are the kindes of voluntary actions: so that whatsoeuer we
do in this world and may doe it ill, we shew our selues therein by well doing to
be wise. Now if wisedome did teach men by scripture not onely all the wayes
that are right and good in some certaine kind,
according to that of S. Paule concerning the
vse of scripture; but did simply without any maner
of exception, restraint, or distinction teach
euery way of doing wel; there is no art but scripture
should teach it because euery art doth teach
the way how to do some thing or other well. To
teach men therfore wisedome professeth, and to
teach the~ euery good way: but not euery good
way by one way of teaching. Whatsoeuer either me~ on earth, or the Angels of
heauen do know, it is as a drop of that vnemptiable fountaine of wisdom, which
wisdom hath diuersly imparted her treasures vnto the world. As her waies are of
sundry kinds, so her maner of teaching is not meerely one and the same. Some
things she openeth by the sacred bookes of Scripture; some things by the glorious
works of nature: with some things she inspireth the~ fro~ aboue by spirituall

I 2

influence, in some thinges she leadeth and trayneth them onely by worldly
experience and practise. We may not so in any one speciall kind admire her that
we disgrace her in any other, but let all her wayes be according vnto their place
and degree adored.
2 That all things be done to the glorie of God, the blessed Apostle (it is true)
exhorteth. The glorie of God is the admirable excellencie of that vertue diuine,
which being made manifest, causeth men and Angels to extoll his greatnes, and
in regard thereof to feare him. By being glorifyed it is not meant that he doth
receiue any augmentation of glory at our hands, but his name we glorifie when
we testifie our acknowledgement of his glorie. Which albeit we most effectually
do by the vertue of obedience: neuerthelesse it may be perhaps a question,
whether S. Paule did meane that we sinne as oft as euer we goe about any
thing, without an expresse intent and purpose to obey God therein. He sayth
of himselfe, I do in all things please all men, seeking not mine owne commoditie but rather
the good of many, that may be saued. Shall it hereupon be thought that
S. Paule did not moue eyther hand or foot, but with expresse intent euen therby
to further the common saluation of men? We moue, we sleepe, we take the
cuppe at the hand of our freind, a number of thinges we oftentimes doe, only
to satisfie some naturall desire, without present expresse, and actuall reference
vnto any commaundement of God. Vnto his glory euen these things are done
which we naturally performe, and not onely that which morally and spiritually
we doe. For by euery effect proceeding from the most concealed instincts
of nature his power is made manifest. But it doth not therefore follow that of
necessitie we shall sinne, vnlesse we expressely intend this in euery such particular.
But be it a thing which requireth no more then onely our generall presupposed
willingnesse to please God in all thinges; or be it a matter wherein we
can not so glorifie the name of God as we should without an actuall intent to
doe him in that particular some speciall obedience: yet for any thing there is
in this sentence alleaged to the contrarie, God may be glorified by obedience,
and obeyed by performance of his will, and his will be performed with an
actuall intelligent desire to fulfill that lawe which maketh knowne what his
will is, although no speciall clause or sentence of Scripture be in euery such
action set before mens eyes to warrant it. For scripture is not the onely lawe
whereby God hath opened his will touching all thinges that may be done, but
there are other kindes of lawes which notifie the will of God, as in the former
booke hath beene prooued at large: Nor is there any law of God, whereunto
he doth not accompt our obedience his glorie. Doe therefore all thinges vnto the
glorie of God (sayth the Apostle) be inoffensiue both to Iewes and Græcians and the
Church of God, euen as I please all men in all thinges, not seeking mine owne commoditie, but manies that they may be saued.In the least thing done disobediently towardes
God, or offensiuelie against the good of men, whose benefite wee
ought to seeke for as for our owne, we plainely shew, that we doe not acknowledge
God to be such as indeede he is, and consequently that we glorifie him
not. This the blessed Apostle teacheth: but doth any Apostle teach, that we
cannot glorifye God otherwise, then onely in doing what we finde that God
in Scripture commaundeth vs to doe? The Churches dispersed amongest the

100

Heathen in the East part of the world, are by the Apostle S. Peter exhorted, to
haue their conuersation honest amongest the Gentilles, that they which spake euill of them
as of euill doers, might by the good workes which they should see, glorifie God in the day of
visitation. As long as that which Christians did was good, and no way subiect
vnto iust reproofe; their vertuous conuersation was a meane to worke the Heathens
conuersion vnto Christ. Seeing therefore this had beene a thing altogether
impossible, but that infidels themselues did discerne, in matters of life
and conuersation, when beleeuers did well, and when otherwise; when they
glorified their heauenly father, and when not: it followeth that some thinges
wherein God is glorifyed, may be some other way knowne, then onely by
the sacred Scripture; of which Scripture the Gentiles being vtterly ignorant,
did notwithstanding iudge rightly of the qualitie of Christian mens actions.
Most certaine it is that nothing, but onely sinne doth dishonour God. So
that to glorifie him in all thinges, is to doe nothing whereby the name of
God may be blasphemed; nothing whereby the saluation of Iew or Grecian
or any in the Church of Christ may be let or hindered; nothing whereby
his lawe is transgrest. But the question is, whether onely Scripture doe shewe
whatsoeuer God is glorified in.
3 And though meates and drinkes be said to be sanctified by the worde of
God, and by prayer: yet neither is this a reason sufficient to prooue, that
by scripture we must of necessitie be directed in euerie light and common
thing which is incident into any part of mans life. Onely it sheweth that vnto
vs the worde, that is to say, the Gospell of Christ, hauing not deliuered any
such difference of thinges cleane and vncleane, as the lawe of Moses did vnto
the Iewes; there is no cause but that we may vse indifferently all thinges, as
long as we do not (like swine) take the benefite of them, without a thankefull
acknowledgement of his liberalitie and goodnes, by whose prouidence they
are inioyed: and therfore the Apostle gaue warning before hand to take heede
of such as should inioyne to abstaine from meates, which God hath created to be receiued,
with thankes-giuing by them which belieue and knowe the truth. For euerie creature
of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be receiued with thankesgiuing, because
it is sanctified by the worde of God and prayer. The Gospell by not making many
thinges vncleane, as the lawe did, hath sanctified those thinges generally to all,
which particularlie each man vnto him self must sanctifie by a reuerend and holie
vse: which will hardlie be drawne so far, as to serue their purpose, who haue
imagined the word in such sort to sanctifie all thinges, that neither foode can be
tasted, nor rayment put on, nor in the world any thing done, but this deed must
needes be sinne in them, which do not first knowe it appointed vnto them by
scripture before they do it.
4 But to come vnto that which of all other things in scripture is most stood
vpon, that place of S. Paule, they say, is of all other most cleare, where speaking of
those thinges which are called indifferent, in the ende he concludeth, that whatsoeuer is
not of fayth, is sinne. But fayth is not but in respect of the worde of God. Therefore whatsoeuer is not done by the worde of God is sinne. Whereunto wee aunswere,
that albeit the name of fayth being properly and strictlie taken, it must
needes haue reference vnto some vttered worde, as the obiect of beliefe:

I 3

neuerthelesse, sith the ground of credite is the credibilitie of thinges credited;
and things are made credible, eyther by the knowne condition and qualitie of
the vtterer, or by the manifest likelihood of truth which they haue in the~selues;
hereupon it riseth, that whatsoeuer we are perswaded of, the same we are generally
sayd to beleeue. In which generalitie the obiect of fayth may not so narrowly
be restrayned, as if the same did extend no further then to the only scriptures
of God. Though (sayth our Sauiour) ye beleeue not me, beleeue my workes, that
ye may know and beleeue that the father is in me and I in him.
The other Disciples sayd vnto
Thomas, we haue seene the Lord; but his aunswere vnto them was, Except I see
in his handes the print of the nayles, and put my finger into them, I will not beleeue. Can
there be any thing more plaine, then that which by these two sentences appeareth,
namely, that there may be a certaine beliefe grou~ded vpon other assurance
then Scripture; any thing more cleare, then that we are sayd not onely to beleeue
the thinges which we knowe by anothers relation, but euen whatsoeuer
we are certainly perswaded of, whether it be by reason or by sense? For as much
therefore as it is graunted, that S. Paule doth
meane nothing else by Fayth, but only a full perswasion
that that which we doe is well done; against
which kinde of fayth or perswasion as S. Paule
doth count it sinne to enterprise any thing, so
likewise some of the very Heathen haue taught,
as Tullie, that nothing ought to be done whereof thou
doubtest whether it be right or wrong, whereby it appeareth
that euen those which had no knowledge of the
word of God did see much of the equitie of this which
the Apostle requireth of a Christian man: I hope
we shall not seeme altogether vnnecessarily to
doubt of the soundnesse of their opinion, who
thinke simply that nothing but onely the worde
of God, can giue vs assurance in any thing wee are to doe, and resolue vs that
we doe well. For might not the Iewes haue beene fully perswaded that they
did well to thinke (if they had so thought) that in Christ God the father was,
although the only ground of this their fayth, had beene the wonderfull workes
they saw him do? Might not, yea, did not Thomas fully in the end perswade him
selfe, that he did well to thinke that bodie, which now was raysed, to be the
same which had beene crucified? That which gaue Thomas this assurance was
his sense, Thomas because thou hast seene, thou beleeuest, sayth our Sauiour. What
scripture had Tully for his assurance? Yet I nothing doubt but that they who
alleage him, thinke he did well to set downe in writing a thing so consonant
vnto truth. Finally we all beleeue that the Scriptures of God are sacred, and
that they haue proceeded from God; our selues we assure that wee doe right
well in so beleeuing. We haue for this point a demonstration sound and
infallible. But it is not the worde of God which doth or possible can assure
vs, that wee doe well to thinke it his worde. For if any one booke of
Scripture did giue testimonie to all; yet still that Scripture which giueth
credite to the rest, would require another Scripture to giue credite vnto it:

neither could we euer come vnto any pause whereon to rest our assurance this
way, so that vnlesse besides scripture there were some thing which might assure
vs that we do well, we could not thinke we do well, no not in being assured that
scripture is a sacred and holie rule of well doing. On which determination we
might be contented to stay our selues without further proceeding herein, but
that we are drawne on into larger speech by reason of their so great earnestnes,
who beate more and more vpon these last alleaged words, as being of all other
most pregnant. Whereas therefore they still argue, that wheresoeuer faith is wanting,
there is sinne, and in euerie action not commaunded, faith is wanting, Ergo, in euery
action not commaunded there is sinne: I would demaund of them, first for as much
as the nature of things indifferent is neither to be commaunded nor forbidden,
but left free and arbitrarie: how there can be any thing indifferent, if for want of
faith sinne be committed, when any thing not commaunded is done. So that
of necessitie they must adde somewhat, and at leastwise thus set it downe: In
euery action not commanded of God or permitted with approbation, faith is
wanting, and for want of faith there is sinne. The next thing we are to enquire
is, what those things be which God permitteth with approbation, and how we
may knowe them to be so permitted. When there are vnto one ende sundrie
meanes, as for example, for the sustenance of our bodies many kindes of foode,
many sorts of rayment to cloath our nakednes, and so in other things of like
condition: here the end it selfe being necessarie, but not so any one meane thereunto;
necessary that our bodies should be both fed and cloathed, howbeit no
one kind of foode or rayment necessary; therefore we hold these things free in
their owne nature and indifferent. The choice is left to our owne discretion,
except a principall bond of some higher dutie remoue the indifferencie that
such things haue in themselues. Their indifferencie is remoued, if either we
take away our owne libertie, as Ananias did, for whome to haue sould or held
his possessions it was indifferent, till his sollemne vow and promise vnto God
had strictly bound him one onely way: or if God himselfe haue precisely abridged
the same, by restraining vs vnto, or by barring vs from some one or moe
things of many, which otherwise were in themselues altogether indifferent.
Many fashions of Priestly attire there were, whereof Aaron & his sonnes might
haue had their free choice without sinne, but that God expreslie tied them vnto
one. All meates indifferent vnto the Iewe, were it not that God by name excepted
some, as swines flesh. Impossible therefore it is we should otherwise thinke,
then that what things God doth neither commaund nor forbid, the same he
permitteth with approbation either to be done or left vndone. All things are lawfull
vnto me, sayth the Apostle, speaking, as it seemeth, in the person of the Christian
Gentile for maintenance of libertie in things indifferent: whereunto his
answere is, that neuerthelesse All things are not expedient; in things indifferent
there is a choice, they are not alwayes equallie expedient. Now in things although
not commaunded of God, yet lawfull because they are permitted, the
question is, what light shall shew vs the conueniencie which one hath aboue
another. For answere, their finall determination is, that whereas the Heathen did
send men for the difference of good and euill to the light of reason, in such things the Apostle
sendeth vs to the schoole of Christ in his word, which only is able through faith to giue vs

assurance and resolution in our doings. Which word Only, is vtterly without possibilitie of euer being proued. For what if it were true concerning things indifferent,
that vnlesse the word of the Lord had determined of the free vse of them,
there could haue bene no lawfull vse of them at all, which notwithstanding is
vntrue, because it is not the Scriptures setting downe such things as indifferent,
but their not setting downe as necessarie that doth make them to be indifferent:
yet this to our present purpose serueth nothing at all. We inquire not
now whether any thing be free to be vsed, which scripture hath not set downe
as free: but concerning things knowne and acknowledged to be indifferent,
whether particularlie in choosing any one of them before another we sinne, if
any thing but scripture direct vs in this our choice. When manie meates are set
before me, all are indifferent, none vnlawfull, I take one as most conuenient. If
scripture require me so to do, then is not the thing indifferent, because I must do
what scripture requireth. They are all indifferent, I might take any, scripture
doth not require of me to make any speciall choice of one: I doe notwithstanding
make choice of one, my discretion teaching me so to do. A hard case, that
hereupon I should be iustly condemned of sinne. Nor let any man thinke, that
following the iudgement of naturall discretion in such cases, we can haue no assurance
that we please God. For to the author and God of our nature, how shall
any operation proceeding in naturall sort be in that respect vnacceptable? The
nature which himselfe hath giuen to worke by, he cannot but be delighted with,
when we exercise the same any way without commaundement of his to the
contrarie. My desire is to make this cause so manifest, that if it were possible, no
doubt or scruple concerning the same might remayne in any mans cogitation.
Some truthes there are, the varietie whereof time doth alter: as it is now true
that Christ is risen from the dead, which thing was not true at such time as
Christ was liuing on earth, and had not suffered. It would be knowne therefore,
whether this which they teach concerning the sinfull staine of all actions not
commanded of God, be a truth that doth now appertaine vnto vs only, or a perpetuall
truth, in such sort, that from the first beginning of the world vnto the last
consummation thereof, it neither hath bene, nor can be otherwise. I see not how
they can restraine this vnto any perticular time, how they can thinke it true now
and not alwayes true, that in euery action not commanded there is for want of
faith sinne. Then let them cast backe their eyes vnto former generations of men,
and marke what was done in the prime of the world. Seth, Enoch, Noah, Sem,
Abraham, Iob, and the rest that liued before any syllable of the lawe of God was
written, did they not sinne as much as we doe in euery action not commaunded?
That which God is vnto vs by his sacred word, the same he was vnto them
by such like meanes as Eliphaz in Iob describeth. If therefore we sinne in euery
action which the scripture commandeth vs not, it followeth that they did the
like in all such actions as were not by reuelation from heauen exacted at their
hands. Vnlesse God from heauen did by vision still shewe them what to do, they
might do nothing, not eate, not drinke, not sleepe, not moue. Yea, but euen as in
darkenes candle light may serue to guide mens steps, which to vse in the daye
were madnes; so when God had once deliuered his lawe in writing, it may be
they are of opinion, that then it must needes be sinne for men to doe any thing

which was not there commanded them to do, whatsoeuer they might do before.
Let this be graunted, and it shall hereupon plainely ensue, either that the
light of scripture once shining in the world, all other light of nature is therewith
in such sort drowned, that now we need it not, neither may we longer vse it; or
if it stand vs in any stead, yet as Aristotle speaketh of men whome nature hath framed
for the state of seruitude, saying, They haue reason so far forth as to conceiue
when others direct them, but little or none in directing them selues by them selues,
so likewise our naturall capacitie and iudgement must serue vs only for the right
vnderstanding of that which the sacred scripture teacheth. Had the Prophets
who succeeded Moses, or the blessed Apostles which followed them, bene setled
in this perswasion, neuer would they haue taken so great paines in gathering together
naturall arguments, thereby to teach the faithfull their duties. To vse vnto
them any other motiue then Scriptum est, Thus it is written, had bene to teach
them other grounds of their actions then scripture, which I graunt they alleage
commonly but not only. Only scripture they should haue alleaged had they
bene thus perswaded, that so far forth we do sinne, as we do any thing otherwise
directed then by scripture. Saint Augustine was resolute in points of Christianitie
to credit none, how godly and learned soeuer he were, vnlesse he confirmed
his sentence by the scriptures, or by some reason not contrarie to them. Let them
therefore with Saint Augustine reiect and condemne that which is not grounded
either on the scripture, or on some reason not contrarie to scripture, and we
are readie to giue them our hands in token of friendlie consent with them.