Bellarmine's three heads of the tradition controversy; papists as twin rabbis
X. But Bellarmine sets this controversy in three heads (On the Word of God, book 4, chapters 3 and 4). The first is that the papists assert that all necessary doctrine, whether of faith or of morals, is not expressly contained in the Scriptures, and therefore besides the written Word of God an unwritten Word of God is required — that is, divine and apostolic traditions. So teaches John of Deventer in The Dart of Christian Truth, or Catapult of the Faith: The Church holds very many things not produced in dead letters, but written by the Holy Spirit in human hearts. To these as firm a faith is to be given as to evangelical Scripture, since it is agreed they were inspired by the same Spirit by which the Gospel was. It is therefore plain as a third truth that not all things to be believed and equally to be kept have been set out in the sacred letters. So Jodocus Clichtove in Anti-Luther book 1, chapter 4; John Fisher, bishop of Rochester; Peter de Soto; Alfonso de Castro of Zamora; Albert Pighius of Kampen; Martin Perez de Ayala, bishop of Guadix; Gregory of Valencia; and countless others. See the refutation in Whitaker and our Chanier, solidly and at length; briefly but with nerve in the Synopsis of purer theology, disp. 6, by the most celebrated D. Polyander, and, Bellarmine being unnerved, by D. Ames and others.
But here the papists are twin brothers of the rabbis, clinging to a double law from Moses — one written, the other by tradition — and branding as heretics those well versed in the Bibles, under the name of letter-men, textualists, biblical men, as Sadducees who, given only to the reading of the Bibles, clung to the written law alone, traditions rejected. But that the Apostles did not openly communicate to all their hearers all that God had revealed to them, but handed some things secretly and to a few as pertaining to the whole Church — Tertullian in the book On Prescription calls that madness.
XI. The second is that we think the Apostles did indeed institute certain things besides Scripture that pertain to the rites and order of the Church, which yet are not necessary for all Christians, nor commanded, but free; but the papists acknowledge apostolic traditions of every kind — that is, not only particular but universal, which are to be kept and handed down to the whole Church, as is to be seen in Bellarmine of the same book, chapter 3. See the refutation in the authors praised and in disp. 4 of our Anti-Bellarmine college, question 2.
XII. The third is that we teach that apostolic traditions, if they ever existed, do not now exist — that is, it cannot be certainly shown that any tradition is apostolic; but the papists assert that there is no lack of sure ways by which apostolic traditions are shown, in Bellarmine of the same book 4, chapter 9. But these are uncertain, obscure, and deceitful, as ours have clearly shown on this book of Bellarmine and elsewhere. Confer the praised disputation of the Anti-Bellarmine college, question 3.
Latin
X. Controversiam vero hanc Bellarminus in tribus constituit lib. 4. de verbo Dei, cap. 3. & 4. primum est, quod Pontificii asserunt, in Scripturis non contineri expresse totam doctrinam necessariam, sive de fide, sive de moribus, ac proinde praeter verbum Dei scriptum requiri verbum Dei non scriptum, id est, divinas & Apostolicas traditiones. Sic docet Joh. de Daventria in Christianae veritatis telo seu fidei catapulta. Plurima, inquiens, tenet Ecclesia non mortuis literis prodita, sed Spiritu sancto auctore humanis cordibus inscripta. Quibus juxta atque Evangelicae Scripturae firma fides habenda est, quum eodem spiritu, quo Evangelium, haec inspirata esse constet. Patet igitur tertia veritas, non omnia credenda pariter observanda sacris literis esse explicata. Sic Jodocus Clichtoveus in Anti-Luthero lib. 1. cap. 4. Joh. Fischerus Roffensis Episcopus, Petrus a Soto, Alphonsus a Castro Zamorensis, Alb. Pighius Campensis, Mart. Peresius Ajala, Gregory de Valentia, & innumeri alii. Refutationem vide apud Whitakerum & Chanierum nostrum solide & prolixe: breviter vero nervose in Synopsi purioris Theologiae disp. 6. a celeberrimo D. Polyandro, Bellarmino enervato, a D. Amesio, aliisque institutam. Sunt autem hic Pontificii Rabinorum gemini, duplici legi a Mose esse, unam scriptam, alteram per traditionem inhaerentes, tanquam haereticos literales, textuales, Biblicos, in Bibliis probe versatorum nomine insectantur, ut Sadducaeos, qui soli Bibliorum lectioni addicti, soli legi scriptae adhaerebant rejectis traditionibus. Apostolos vero non omnia sibi a Deo revelata cum omnibus auditoribus suis communicasse palam, sed quaedam secreto & paucis tradidisse ad totam ecclesiam pertinentia: id Tertullianus libr. de Praescriptione dementiam vocat. XI. Alterum est, quod nos existimamus Apostolos quidem instituisse quaedam praeter Scripturam, quae ad ritus & ordinem Ecclesiae pertinent, quae tamen non sunt omnibus Christianis necessaria, nec praecepta, sed libera: Pontificii vero agnoscunt traditiones Apostolicas omnium generum, i.e. non tantum particulares, sed universales, quae toti Ecclesiae servandae tradantur, ut videre est apud Bellarminum ejusdem libri c. 3. Refutationem vide apud autores laudatos & in disp. 4. collegii nostri Anti-Bellarminiani quaest. 2. XII. Tertium est, quod docemus traditiones Apostolicas, si quae exstiterunt, nunc non exstare, h.e. non posse certo demonstrari aliquam traditionem esse Apostolicam: Pontificii vero asserunt, non deesse certas vias quibus Apostolicae traditiones ostendantur, apud Bellarm. eodem lib. 4. c. 9. Sed hae incertae sunt, obscurae & fallaces, ut luculente demonstrarunt nostri ad hunc Bellarmini librum & alibi. Confer disputationem laudatam collegii Anti-Bellarmin. quaest. 3.