Reply: sufficiency is of Scripture's body taken indefinitely, not of every booklet
We never meant: every single biblical booklet by itself teaches every dogma.
Sufficiency belongs to Scripture's body taken as a whole — indefinitely, and at least in its chief parts.
Rome assumes that dropping any one book instantly guts doctrine. That is not our claim.
Today's corpus holds salvation's teaching not only enough, but richly; many books only explain or apply what others already teach.
Even if some authentic divine writings had perished, the remaining Scripture could still hold the full saving doctrine — those lost books need not have carried any dogma missing from what survives.
Latin
III. Respondeo, quum dicimus Scripturam sufficienter continere omnia necessaria, nos id non intelligere de singulis Scripturae libris, quasi nullus esset Scripturae libellus in quo non traderentur omnia fidei dogmata. Sed hoc verum esse de Scripturae corpore indefinite sumpto, & secundum partes saltem praecipuas. Dico autem notanter de Scripturae corpore indefinite sumpto, & secundum partes praecipuas, quia mens nostra non est, doctrinam necessariam ita in toto Scripturae corpore contineri, ut, si inde pars aliqua, & liber aliquis dematur, statim aliquid desit ad integritatem doctrinae, quod in argumento supponunt adversarii. Nam in Scripturae corpore, prout illud hodie habemus, doctrina salutis continetur non tantum sufficienter, sed etiam abundanter. Suntque plures Scripturae libri in quibus nova dogmata non traduntur, & diversa ab iis quae alibi docentur, sed tantum luculentiores quaedam eorundem dogmatum explicationes & applicationes, sive ad contrarios errores refutandos, sive ad mores hominum formandos & instituendos. Itaque absque doctrinae salutaris dispendio quibusdam Scripturae sacrae libris carere possemus, & qui Ecclesiae dati sunt, non precise ad necessitatem, verum ad ubertatem & majorem utilitatem. Quamvis ergo daremus scripta quaedam divina & authentica periisse, non inde tamen sequeretur integram salutis doctrinam in Scriptura non posse amplius reperiri. Nam fieri posset ut alia quaedam scripta divina extiterint, neque tamen in iis ullum fuerit dogma, sive praeceptum, quod hodie non extet in Scripturae partibus quae supersunt.
About this text
Louis Le Blanc de Beaulieu, Sedan Theses, newly rendered from Latin: from theology proper through the Roman theses I–77 and the Reformed theses of Part Two. The theses only — not the collected works.
English follows locked Pitt Latin through Imaginum CLOSED + Sanctorum Cultu Romana CLOSED + Pars Secunda Reformata I-XL. 1675 PDF ~384-390 (book ~370-376); Vision OCR + pdftotext + tess. No modern English. This slice densifies Sanctorum Pars Secunda I-XL. Next: Pars Secunda XLI–fin (~CI). Claim stays claimed (book densify not done).
Catalogue & scope
ESTC R17887; Wing L802. IA bub_gb_eOkHAW4G0-wC (+ EEBO 1675 for gap leaves). Densify through Sanctorum Cultu Romana I-LXXVII + Pars Secunda Reformata I-XL (Pars Secunda not closed; not whole folio).
Witnesses
- Copy-text Locked Latin, De Theologia I-XLIII (Pitt 1675) (Latin)
- Checked print Internet Archive PDF of the 1675 Pitt folio (Latin)
- Checked print pdftotext of De Theologia pages (Latin)
- Checked print Internet Archive DjVu OCR of the 1675 Pitt folio (Latin)
- Copy-text Locked Latin, De Fide I-XXII (Pitt 1675) (Latin)
- Copy-text Locked Latin, De Authoritate Scripturae Pars I I-XLVII + Pars II I-XXXV + Pars III I-VIII (Pitt 1675) (Latin)
- Copy-text Locked Latin, De Scripturae plenitudine densify (Pitt 1675) (Latin)
This is an AI-assisted study translation. Source fidelity and completeness have not been independently certified. Open Latin on each section (or the Latin source witness link) for the source text. This is not a complete critical edition.