a preaching of the grace of God The like hath Gesnerus in Compendio loco 15. Gerlachius to 2. disp 13. The law requiring workes properly belongeth not to the Ghospell Againe It is truely saied that not the Ghospell but the law requireth workes Lobechius Disput 9. The word of the Ghospell sheweth not what is to be done by working but what we must beleiue Caluin in Rom. 10. ver 8. As the law exacted workes the Ghospell requireth nothing else but that men bring faith to receaue Gods grace The like hath Beza in Catechismo compend and others THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that Ihon Baptist Christ and the Apostles begā the preaching of Ghospell by preaching pennance that Christ came to call sinners to pennance that pennance and remission of sinnes are to be preached in his name that God in the Ghospell denounceth to all mē that they doe pennance And the Ghospell euery where preacheth good workes The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the Ghospell properly taken doth not preach pennance that the Ghospell commandeth onely to beleiue in Christ requireth nothing but faith sheweth not what is to be done or vndone but what is to be beleiued that it requireth not workes cānot abide that workes be preached whatsoeuer they be preacheth not that this or that thing is to be done preacheth not newnesse of life or good workes containeth not doctrin of Good workes Which are so contrarie to Scripture as some Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART V. WHETHER THE GHOSPELL do reproue sinne SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Rom. 1. v. 17. For the iustice of God is reuealed in it Gospell The Ghospell reproueth sinne by faith into faith v. 18. For the wrath of God from heauen is reuealed vpon all impietie and iniustice c. Ihon. 16. v. 8. And when he the Paraclet is come he shall argue the world of sinne and of iniustice The same teach the places cited in the former article and others wherein the Ghospell commandeth men to abstaine from sinne and threatneth punishment thereto CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton Roman 1. vers 18. Absurdly and impiously is saied that it belongeth not to the ministerie of the Ghospell to reproue sinne PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther Concordiae cap. 5. pag. 593. When the law and The Ghospell reproueth not sinne the Ghospell are compared together we beleiue each and confesse that the Ghospell is not a preaching of pennance reprouing sinne but that properly it is nothing els but a most ioyfull message and a preaching full of comfort not reprouing or terrifying Luther Postilla in die Om. Sanct. fol. 441. The law commandeth Dot not threaten threatneth and vrgeth the Ghospell maketh no threats nor pusheth on Schusselb to 4. Catal. Haeret. p. 209. The Ghospell properly speaking doth reproue no sinne but this is the proper and most proper office of the law Caluin 2. Instit c. 10. § 4. The Ghospells preaching pronounceth nothing els but that sinners through the fatherly goodnes of God are iustified without their merit Beza in Rom. 1. v. 18. To reproue sinne rather belongeth to the ministerie of the law then of the Ghospell THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that in the Gholpell Gods anger is reuealed vpon all iniustice that the spirit of the Ghospell reproueth sinne The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that to reproue sinne rather belongeth to the ministerie of the law then of the Ghospell that the Ghospell properly taken reproueth not sinne but is nothing els but a message of ioy and comfort that to reproue sinne is the proper office of the law Which is so opposite to the Scripture as some times Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART VI. WHETHER THE GHOSPELL promiseth saluation with condition of good workes SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Mathew 19. vers 17. If thou wilt enter into life keepe the The Ghospell promiseth saluation vpon condition of Workes commandments Luke 13. vers 3. Vnlesse you haue pennance you shall all likewise perish Roman 8. vers 13. If you liue according to the flesh you shall die Hebrews 10. v. 36 For patience is necessarie for you that doing the will of God you may receaue the promise C. 12. v. 14. Follow peace with all men and holines without which no man shall see God Ihon 3. v. 5. Vnlesse a man be borne againe of water and the spirit he cannot enter into the kingdome of God c. 6. v. 53. Vnlesse ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood ye shall not haue life in you c. 15. v. 10. If you keepe my precepts you shall abide in my loue CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 6. Can. 20. If anie shall say that a man iustified and neuer so perfect is not bound to keepe the commandments of God and the Church but onely to beleiue as if the Ghospell were an absolute and bare promise without condition of keeping Gods commandments be he accursed PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Apol. Conf. Augustan fol. 60. Doth not the Ghospell promise remission of sinnes and saluation euen to those that haue no good workes at all ib. in resp ad arg If remission of sinnes do depend of the cōdition of our workes it wil be altogether vncertaine Luther in Colloq Mensal apud Vlemberg causa 5. The Ghospell promiseth saluation without condition of workes Whosoeuer saieth that the Ghospell requireth workes to saluation is a lyer Perkins in Gal. 3. to 2. The Ghospell offereth and giueth life freely without condition of anie worke and requireth nothing but the acceptance of the thing offered Willet Controu 19. quaest 1. pa. 1012. The Ghospell and the law are twoe distinct things The law saieth Doe this and thou shalt be saued The Ghospell Beleiue onely and it sufficeth vnto life Adamus Francisci in Margarita Theol. loco 8. The promisse of the Ghospell is not conditionall Gerlachius to 2. disput 13. The promisses of the Ghospell are not conditionall but absolute in respect of workes The Diuines of Saxonie in Colloq Aldeburg Scripto 6. p. 134. The promises of the law are conditionall because they propose reward with condition of obedience But the promises of the Ghospell are not conditionall but free Caluin in Antidot Concil Sess 6. Con. 20. In that the Ghospell differeth frō the law because it promiseth life by faith and not vnder the condition of workes as the law doth And 3. Instit c. 11. § 17. The promises of the Ghospell are free and relie vpon the onely mercie of God whereas the promises of the law depend of the condition of workes Peter Martyr in Rom. 11. We denie that Gods testament of remission of sinnes in Christ hath anie condition adioyned Pareus l. 4. de Iustif c. 1. The Ghospell properly is the doctrine of grace so it requireth onely the condition of faith And c. 2. The Ghospell strictly and properly hath promises of saluation vnder the onely condition of faith and
or This is my sacramentall or mysticall bodie Oecalampadius in Beza Resp ad Repet Sanctis pag. 48. That bread is a symbolicall bodie Zanchius lib. 1. Epistolarum pag. 280. These three bodies Misticall bodie of Christ we reade in the holie Scriptures His true and naturall his Misticall which is the Church and sacramentall which is bread Daneus Cont. de Euchar. c. 10. Austin confesseth that the Onely Sacramentall bodie bread is onely the sacramentall bodie of Christ but not his naturall bodie Againe The bread which Christ gaue to his Apostles was his sacramentall bodie Vrsinus in Miscellaneis p. 172. There is a bodie of Christ properly so called and a sacramentall which is the Eucharisticall bread Thus we see how plainly they say that the Eucharist is Christs symbolicall bodie his sacramentall bodie his mysticall bodie and not his true bodie Which himselfe saieth most plainly to be his true bodie that very bodie which was giuen and deliuered for vs. Finally we see how manie wayes the Caluinists do contradict the expresse word of God in this one matter First in expressely denying the Eucharist to be the bodie of Christ which the Scripture so often and so plainely affirmeth Secondly in saying that it is onely a signe or figure of Christs bodie which the Scripture plainely and often saieth is his true bodie Thirdly in saying that it is but onely figuratiuely his bodie which the Scripture simply and absolutely saieth is his bodie Fourthly in saying that Christs bodie is but figuratiuely or by faith and imagination in the Eucharist Which the Scripture directly affirmeth to be the substance of the Eucharist Fiftly in saying that Christs bodie is no more receaued in the Eucharist then in the simple word whereas Christ bidde vs take and eate his bodie in the Eucharist but not in his word Sixtly by saying that the Fathers in the ould law receaued Christs bodie in their Sacraments as truely as we do in the Eucharist when as they were neuer bidden to take and eate Christs flesh in their Sacraments as we are in the Eucharist Finally in saying that the Eucharist is Christs symbolicall sacramentall and mysticall bodie which the holie Scripture saieth is his bodie which was giuen and deliuered for vs. ART II. WHETHER CHRISTS FLESH be to be eaten and his blood to be drunke SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Math. 26. ver 26. Take ye and eate This is my bodie ver 28. Christs bodie and blood to be eaten and drunck Drinke ye all of this For this is my blood c. Ihon 6. v. 53. Vnlesse you eate the flesh of the Sonne of man Truely and drinke his blood you shall not haue life in you Et 56. My flesh is truely meate and my blood is truely drinke CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Math. 26. v. 28. For to perfect the new testament and couenant of which Christ speaketh betwixt vs and him no spirituall eating or drinking of the bodie and blood of Christ sufficeth but there is plainely required an externall reall and corporall receauing of them both PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Zuinglius l. de Relig. c. de Euchar. to 2. Christs flesh eaten Christ flesh eaten profiteth not profiteth nothing at all Which he often repeateth in Exegesi fol. 333. 334. 336. 346. and in Ioan. 6. to 4. in so much as Hospin part 2. Histor fol. 181. writeth that Zuinglius euerie where inculcateth that Christs flesh eaten profiteth nothing And c. cit de Euchar. Nether do we thinke that they are to be Not be eaten spiritually heard who determin thus we eate the true and corporall flesh of Christ but spiritually for they do not see that it can not stand together to be a bodie and to be spiritually eaten Againe What is giuen to be eaten is Christs bodie but symbolicall In Exegesi fol. 329. Christ did not command his bodie to be eaten but symbolicall bread Respons ad Luther fol 435. We eate and drinke We eate and drinke nothing but bread and wine nothing but bread and wine In Apol. f. 370. We teach that the onely signe of Christs bodie is eaten in this Eucharisticall Supper Respons ad Billican fol. 264. We are taught that Christs corporall flesh can be no way eaten And as Hospin lib. cit fol. 181. saieth Zuinglius euerie where inculcateth that the true and reall flesh of Christ cannot be eaten so much as spiritually and that to eate Christs flesh is nothing els but to beleiue Oecolampadius in Hospin l. cit f. 75. Flesh eaten profiteth nothing but the spirit And in Schusselburg lib. 1. Theol. Caluin Mistica artic 22. I do not read in the Euangelists that they bidde receaue and eate Christs bodie Carolstadius in Scusselburg l. cit art 28. This I know that Christ neuer gaue his bodie that we should receaue it For he saieth My flesh profiteth you not Tigurins in Schusselburg lib. cit artic 23. His flesh on earth profited for to accomplish our saluation now it profiteth no more Peter Martyr cont Gardiner col 146. It is farre from the Christs bodie not to be truely eaten He gaue not his bodie but bread He exhibited not his bodie in substance bodie of the Lord to be truely eaten Confessio Czengerina c. de Caena p. 193. Yea after the pronouncing of Christs words Christ gaue bread to the Apostles and not his bodie Caluin defens 2. cont Westphal pag. 774. I saied that Christs bodie was exhibited effectually in the Supper not naturally according to vertue not according to substance Beza Resp ad Acta Torgens vol. 3. p. 68. What is eaten with the mouth auaileth nothing to eternall and spirituall life Perkins in Cathol reform Cont. 10. c. 3. Though the bodie may be bettered with spirituall food of the soule yet cannot the soule be fedde with bodily food Polanus in Grauer in Absurdis Caluin cap. 3. Those words of Christ Take eate are not spoaken of Christs bodie for nether The words not ment of his bodie tooke he that into his hands nether brake nor gaue it to his disciples And albeit sometimes they say in words that they eate the bodie of Christ yet they adde that to eate is nothing but to beleiue as we haue already repeated out of Zuinglius and haue cited more places of their like sayings in my Latin booke c. 10. art 2. or by word Body or Flesh they vnderstand not Christs true body or flesh but some other thing as the same Zuinglius doth Respons ad Luther tom 2. fol. 390. In Exegesi fol. 350. and 333. and in Explicat art 18. tom 1. fol. 37. In like sorte how beit sometimes in words they say they eate the substance of Christs bodie yet Beza confesseth Apolog. 1. cont Sainctem pag. 294. that vnwillingly they vse the name Substance and as he addeth Respons 3. ad Selneccer pag. 271. Manie of them refuse it and not without cause and that is euident by the words now cited out of Caluin
was not whashed by baptisme See artic 7. Scripture We were by nature the children of wrathe as also the rest As by the offence of one vnto all men to condemnation Protestants Originall sinne is not imputed to them the children of the faithfull are borne Saintes See art 9. Scripture In what then were ye baptized who saied in Ihons Some baptized in Saint Ihons Baptisme Not in that baptisme Some knew not of the Holie Ghost They knew of him baptisme Protestants It is demonstrated that they were neuer baptized in Ihons outward baptisme See more art 11. Scripture But they saied to him Nay nether haue we heard whither there be a Holie Ghost Protestants How could it be that Iewes had heard nothing of the Holie Ghost Se more art 12. CHAPTER XI OF THE EVCHARIST SCripture This is my bodie which is giuen for you This is my The Eucharist is the bodie of Christ It is not his bodie bloud of the new testament that shal be shed for manie Protestants The Sacramentall bread is called Christs bodie although indeed it be not Christs bodie The Eucharist is not truely the bodie of Christ Some do vrge that the lords bread is the verie bodie of Christ but we say the contrarie See more art 1. Scripture Vnles ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and Christs flesh to be eaten drinke his blood ye shall not haue life in you Protestants Christ did not command his bodie to be eaten Not to be eaten but symbolicall bread VVe eate and drinke nothing but bread and wine Christs corporall flesh can be no way eaten See more art 2. His flesh truly meate Scripture My flesh is truely meate Protestants It is farre from the bodie of the lord to be truly Not truly meate eaten See art 2. cit Scripture Drinke ye all of this For this is the blood of the Blood of the new testameÌ„to be drunk Not to be drunk The Chalice is the new testament There is sacrifice new testament Protestants Christ did not giue the blood of the new testament to drink See art 3. Scripture This chalice is the new testament in my blood Protestants That Cuppe was not the new testament This Cuppe was not the new testament it self See more art 4. Scripture In euerie place there is sacrificing and there is offered to my name a cleane oblation Protestants There is no more Sacrifice remayning in the There is none Church See more art 11. Scripture This is the chalice the new testament in my blood The Chalice shed for vs. which chalice as is euident by the Greek text shal be shed for you ProtestaÌ„ts The chalice was not shedde for vs. See more art 6. Not shedde for vs. We haue an altar We haue none Scripture We haue an altar whereof they haue no power to eate who serue the tabernacle Protestants Paule maketh no mention of an altar In the Apostolicall writings there is no mention of an altar Altars haue no place in the time of the Ghospell See more art 24. Scripture And the whole mulâ—â—tude of the children of Israel The Paschall lambe sacrificed Not sacrificed shall sacrifice him the paschall lambe at euen Protestants The holie Bible no where teacheth that the paschall lambe was immolated and sacrificed The paschall lambe was no sacrifice See more art 13. OF THE OTHER SACRAMENTS CHAPTER XII SCripture Whose sinnes you shall forgiue they are forgiuen Men can forgiue sinnes They can not Protestants Men do not forgiue sinnes who attributeth remission of sinnes to a creature robbeth God of his glorie It is proper to God alone to remit sinnes and so proper as he communicateth this glorie to none See more art 1. Scripture Confesse your sinnes one to an other Sinnes to be confessed to men Not to be coÌ„fessed to theÌ„ Grace by imposition of hands Not by it Protestants God requireth not this confession to manne Confession of sinnes is forbidden Nether Christ nor his Apostles would command it See art 2. Scripture Resuscitate the grace of God which is in thee by the imposition of my hands Protestants Grace was not giuen by the externall signe of imposition of hands Imposition of hands of it self hath no efficacie but the effect dependeth of God alone See more art 3. Scripture Euerie one that dismisseth his wife and marrieth an To marie after diuerce is aduantrie Not aduantrie Men dying are to be auoiled other committeth aduoutrie Protestants Who dismisseth his wife for whoredome and marrieth an other doth not commit aduoutrie See more art 6. Scripture Is anie man sick among you let him bring in the preists of the Church and let them pray ouer him anoiling him with oile Protestants The Preists were commanded that they should Not to be not anoile those that died See more art 7. CHAPTER XIII OF FAITHE SCripture This is the worke of God that you beleiue in him Faith is a worke whom he hath sent Protestants Faith is no worke It is false that faith is a Not to worke worke See more art 1. Scripture And now there remaine Faith Hope and Charitie Faith distinct from Hope these three c. Protestants Who wnderstand not that Faith Hope and Not distinct Charitie are the selfe same thinge wil be forced to let passe manie knotâ—es in Scripture vnloosed See more art 7. Scripture And now there remaine Faith Hope and Charitie Faith inferior to Charitie Not inferior these three but the greater of these is Charitie Protestants Faith is greater then Charitie Faith is better more worthie more noble then Charitie See more art 7. Scripture Of the Princes also manie beleiued in him but for Faith without confessioÌ„ the Pharises did not confesse Protestants True faith can no more be separated from confession Not without confession Faith of Christs Godhead helpeth of mouth then fire from heate See more art 9. Scripture These are written that you may beleeue that Iesus is Christ the Sonne of God and that beleiuing you may haue life in his name Protestants To beleiue that Christ is one person which is Helpeth not God and man would helpe none See more art 3. Scripture Of the Princes also manie beleiued in him but Faith without charitie for the Pharises did not confesse For they loued the glorie of man more then the glorie of God Protestants It is impossible to beleiue where charitie wanteth Not without charitie True faith can no more be without workes then fire without heate See more art 8. Scripture Faith without workes is dead Faith some times dead Neuer dead Protestants Who beleiue that true faith can be dead beleiue against the Confession of our Church True faith can neuer be saied to be dead See more art 10. Scripture VVithout faith it is impossible to please God Faith necessarie to saluation Not necessarie Faith without workes saueth not It saueth Beliefe doth iustifie Protestants
vnited THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ was inuocated as he was Sonne of Dauid and as in the time of his passion he had not yet entred into his kingdome and that he was adored as he was a child and the sonne of Marie The same saye Catholiks Protestants expressely saye that Christ as man is not to be inuocated that according to his humanitie he heareth not our praiers in heauen that as man he is no way to be worshipped that Godhead is the onely proper obiect of religious worshippe that who direct their inuocation or adoration to Christs humanitie blaspheme God are true Idolaters blaspheme God and are accursed by Gods mouth Which are so opposite to Scripture as Some Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. vlt. ART IV. WHETHER CHRIST AS MAN or the humanitie of Christ had power to quicken to remitte sinnes to worke miracles SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Mathew 9. v. 6. and 8. But that you may know that the Christ as maÌ„ had power to forgiue sinnes Sonne of man hath power in earth to forgiue sinnes And the multitudes seing it were affraied glorified God that gaue such power to men Ihon. 6. v. 54. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood To giue life hath life euerlasting Acts. 4. vers 10. In the name of Iesus Christ of Nazareth To worke miracles whom you did crucifie whom God hath raised from the dead in this same this man standeth before you whole Hebrews 9. v. 19. For if the blood of goates and of oxen and the asses of an heifer being sprincled sanctifieth the polluted to the cleansing of the flesh how much more shall the blood of Christ who by the holie Ghost offered him selfe vnspotted vnto God To puâ—ge from sinne cleanse our conscience from dead workes to serue the liuing God CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME S. Thomas 3. parte 416. art 11. The power of forgiuing sinnes consisteth in Christs diuine nature by authoritie but in his humane nature it is instrumentally and by ministerie PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Perkins in Galat. 3. v. 5. Not Christ himselfe as man could As man he could not worke a miracle Not profitable as man worke a true miracle Zuinglius l. de ver falsa relig c. de Euchar. to 2. Christ is profitable to vs on that parte wherewith he descended from heauen not on that whereby he was borne of the immaculate Virgin Agayne He could be profitable onely according to his diuinitie Which he repeateth in Ioan. 6. to m. 4. and there addeth Christs flesh profiteth nothing nothing at all His flesh profiteth nothing at all Had no power to giue life Beza in Colloq Montisbel p. 276. In the meane time we deny that Christs flesh is truly viuificall A gayne But that there is any power or vertue of quickning in Christs flesh for which power imparted to it it may be saied viuificall and to quicken that we deny And p. 279. The vertue of quickning is so proper to the diuinitie as it cannot be communicated euen to the flesh of Christ nor to any other creature vnlesse it be turned into the diuinitie Lib. cont Brent col 1. pag. 527. he denieth that Christs humanitie forgiueth sinnes by vertue of the diuinitie which had giuen this power to it And p. 545. saieth Note that the power of sauing is not attributed to the flesh though assumpted but to the diuinitie of which it is assumpted And in Colloq cit p. 228. The raising of the dead is the worke of the diuinitie Nor to raise the dead onely which cannot be attributed to the humanitie of Christ Daneus Controu 4. q. 9. p. 195. Christ the Sonne of man liuing on earth remitted sinnes but not as man but as God as in Remitted not sinnes as maÌ„ the same diuine nature he wrought miracles not as man Sadeel respons ad Art abiurat 5. Our life firstly properly and precisely proceedeth from the diuine nature And the diuines Nor heareth our praiers of Heidelberg before cited Christ as man heareth not our praiers in heauen THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the Sonne of man had in earth power to forgiue sinnes that who eateth his flesh hath life euerlasting that in the name of Christ crucified miracles were wrought that his blood clenseth our consciences from sinnes The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely teach the contrarie that Christ as man was not profitable vnto vs that his flesh profiteth nothing at all that it is not viuificall not hath any vertue of quickning that the diuinitie hath not giuen it any power of forgiuen sinnes that our life proceedeth precisely from the diuinitie that Christ as man did not forgiue sinnes did not worke any miracle could not worke any miracle that the raising of the dead caÌ„not be attributed to his humanitie Which are so contrarie to the Scripture as diuers Protestants do acknowledge it See l. 2. c. 30. ART V. WHETHER CHRIST AS MAN or his humanitie were euerie where SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Mathew 28. v. 6. I know that you seeke Iesus that was crucified Christs bodie not in the Sepulcher after his resurrection He is not here Ihon 11. v. 15. Iesus saied to them plainly Lazarus is dead and Not where Lazarus died Not whereâ—e was sought I am glad for your sake that you may beleiue because I was not there And c. 6. v. 24. When therefore the multitude saw that Iesus was not there not his disciples they c. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE Card. Bellarmin l. 3. de Incarnat c. 11. That Christs humanitie is eueriewhere is against Scripture PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Luther in Defens verb. caenae to 7. fol. 394. Christ manifestly Christs bodie in heauen and earth testifieth that his bodie is at once in heauen and in earth or rather present euery where Which he oftentimes repeateth Wherevpon Zuinglius resp ad Confes Lutheri to 2. fol. 446. saieth that Luther affirmeth Christ to be in euerie In eueriâ— place place no lesse according to his humane nature then his diuine Brentius apud Bezam lib. cont ipsum vol. 1. Theol. p. 516. It is necessarie that wheresoeuer the diuinitie of Christ is Wheresoeuer his godhead is there also he haue with him his humane nature Gerlachius tom 2. disput 2. p. 25. We put the humane nature of Christ almightie and in all places Smidelin in Hospin part 2. Hist fol. 323. The Humanitie of Christ is euerie where Which he and his followers defended openly in the Conference at Mulbrun and Montbelgard THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ as man was not in the sepulcher after his resurrection that he was not where Lazarus died that he was not where the Iewes sought him The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that Christs bodie is euery where that his humanitie is wheresoeuer his diuinitie is that his humane nature is in all places Which is so opposite to Scripture as manie Protestants
The price of our redemption is the blood of Christ or his corporall life which consisteth in blood Stapleton in Prompt Quadrages fer 4. Hebdom Sanct. Caluin putteth not onely an other price beside the corporall death of Christ but also an other greater and more excellent Can Christian ears suffer this PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker lib. 8. cont Dur. sect 18. Caluin wrote most truely Christs death had done nothing That nothing had beene done if Christ had suffered onely corporall death Perkins de Serm. Dom. to 2. col 576. Reason it selfe teacheth Was not sufficient that onely corporall death of Christ was not sufficient to redeeme them who had deserued death of bodie and soule Willet Cont. 20. q. 3. p. 1088. The bodilie death of Christ was Was not the full price not in respect of Gods iustice the whole and full price of our redemption Caluin 2. Instit c. 16. § 10. Nothing had beene done if Christ There needed a greater price had suffered onely bodilie death There was an other greater more excellent price that he suffered in his soule the horrible torments of a damned and lost man Bezalib quaest vol. 1. Theol. Christ was in the midst of the torments of hell for to deliuer vs fully from both deathes c. Scarpe de Iustif Cont. 16. Writeth that diuers ProtestaÌ„ts say that those places of Scripture in which is saied that Christ dyed for vs are to be vnderstood onely of his feeling of the wrath of God and not of his bodilie death and that his bodilie death auailed nothing to our redemption nor was a parte of the satisfaction for sinnes THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that Christ hath reconciled vs in the bodie of his flesh by death hath pacified all things by the blood of his crosse hath sanctifieth vs by the oblation of his bodie hath found an eternall redemption by his blood hath redeemed vs by his blood with his blood in his blood hath purchased the Church with his blood The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that nothing had beene done if Christ had suffered onely corporall or bodilie death that his corporall death was not sufficient to redeeme vs that there was need of a greater and excellenter price that his corporall death auailed nothing to our redemption nor was any parte of the satisfaction for sinnes Which are so manifestly opposite to Scripture as some Protestants confesse it See lib. 2. c. 30. ART XVIII WHETHER CHRIST DIED for the impious and reprobats SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Christ died for the impious For him that perisheth For the vniust Rom. 5. ver 6. For why did Christ when we as yet were weake according to the time die for the impious 1. Cor. 18. ver 11. And through thy knowledge shall thy weak brother perish for whome Christ hath died 1. Peter 3. v. 18. Because Christ also died once for our sinnes the iust for vniust 2. Peter 2. v. 1. seq But there were also false Prophets in the people as also in you there shal be lying maisters which shall bring in sects of perdition and denie him that hath bought them the For those that goe to perdition Lord bringing vpon themselues speedie perdition vnto whome the iudgment now long since ceaseth not and their perdâ—tion slâ—mbereth not CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarmin l. 4. de Amiss Gratiae c. 7. Our Lord suffered and died for the vniust PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 2. q. 1. c. 9. p. 437. Christ did not giue Christ died not for the impious The wicked not redremed by Christ himselfe for the impious and reprobates Which he repeateth cap. 13. Rainolds thesi 4. q. 22. The wicked albeit they be termed faithfull for their profession of faith or for temporall faith yet are they not redeemed or founded in Christ. In Apologia thesium p. 246. Christ offered himselfe for the elect onely 247. Redeemed only the elect The elect onely were redeemed of Christ Perkins de Praedestinat tom 1. col 135. Whome at anie time he acknowledged not he neuer bought or redeemed with the price of his blood col 137. Of these Christ is onely a half-redeemer and therefore no redeemer And de Desertion col 1023. Christ is the redeemer onely of the elect and of none else So also D. Willet Contr. 9. q. 2. p. 893. Caluin l. cont Heshus p. 849. I would know how the impious Not crucified for the impious eate Christs flesh for which it was not crucified and how they drinke his blood which was not shed to redeeme their sinnes Beza in Colloq Montisbel p. 447. Christ died not for the sinnes of them that are damned He shed not his blood for the remission of the sinnes of the impious and damned Epist 28. It is false that Christ is the mediatour of the infidels also Zanchius in Summa Praelection to 7. col 272. Christ according to the purpose of his Father was borne praied suffered and died onely for the elect In Depulsion Calum col 253. The Reprobats not redeemed reprobats were not redeemed by Christ Piscator apud Gerlachium Disput 9. Christ no waye died for the reprobats other sufficiently or effectually THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that Christ died for the impious for the vniust for those that perish that he bought lying monsters who bring in sects of perdition and bring vpon themselues speedie perdition and whose perdition slumbereth not Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely teach the contrarie that Christ gaue not himselfe for the impious or reprobats that the wicked were not redeemed in Christ that Christs flesh was not crucified for the impious nor his blood shed for their sinnes that Christ offered himselfe onely for the elect that they onely were redeemed by Christ that Christ is redeemer of the elect and of none els no mediatour of Infidels was borne suffered and dyed for the elect onely that nether sufficiently nor effectually he died for the reprobats Which are so contrarie to Scripture as manie Protestants acknowledge it See l. 2. c. 30. ART XIX WHETHER CHRIST DIED for all SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 2. Corint 5. v. 14. For the charitie of Christ vrgeth vs iudging Christ died for all this That if one died for all then all were dead and Christ died for all 1. Timoth. 2. v 6. Christ Iesus who gaue himselfe a redemption for all Chap. 4. v. 10. Who is the Sauiour of all men especially of the faithfull Hebrews 2. v. 9. We see Iesus because of the passion of death crowned wiâ—h glorie and honour that through the grace of God he might taste death for all 1. Ioan. 2. v. 2. We haue an aduocate with the Father Iesus Christ the iust and he is the propitiation of our sinnes and not of ours onely but also for the whole worlds Ca. ver 14. The Father hath sent his Sonne the Sauiour of the world CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess
1. Bernen f. 532. As if the Apostle should say this is the meaning of those things which we haue tould It is not flesh which is set afore vs albeit now I haue vouchsafed it that name nor likewise blood but bread and drinke OEcalampadius in Hospin lib. cit f. 41. Not without follie Not the selfe same bodie would we binde men to confesse that this selfe same bread is the bodie of Christ. And f. 118. Some do vrge that the Lords bread is the very bodie of Christ But we say the contrarie Not his verie bodie Bucer in Hospin l. cit fol. 191. Nether is bread the very bodie of Christ but a Symboll of it And 192. All acknowledge that bread and wine are symbols and not the very things themselues of this great misterie Peter Martyr cont Gardiner col 147. The Sacrament of Not lawfull to say This is c. the Eucharist being shewne it is not lawfull for them to say of it all This is my bodie Col. 359. Manifest it is that the Eucharisticall bread is not properly the bodie of Christ And in Dialog col 137. This is my bodie is thus to be expoūded This to wit that which was shewed signifieth my bodie Caluin in Math. 3. ver 16. The bread of the holie Supper is Not Christs bodie called the bodie of Christ not that it is it but because it testifieth to vs that it is truely giuen to vs for meate Beza in Catechismo sect 9. This bread and this wine are Not our spirituall food they not our spirituall food No but they signifie to vs that from which life euerlasting proceedeth And lib. quaest quaest 207. pag. 356. So if you properly vnderstand this saying it wil be no lesse false that bread is the bodie of Christ then that a gourd As false that it is his bodie as that a gourd is a man Not Christs true bodie is a man Daneus Cont. de Euchar. c. 10. That Sacramentall bread is not the true and reall bodie of Christ The bread which Christ reached to the Apostles was not the true bodie of Christ And c. 1. Whēce it followeth that the signes remaine signes and seales and neuer become the thing it selfe which is signified to wit the true flesh and true blood of Christ Volanus l. 1. cont Scargam p. 793. Surely bread is not that Not the naturall bodie true and naturall bodie of Christ albeit it be called but sacramētally his bodie Musculus in locis tit de Signis The bread of the lords Not the verie bodie Supper is not the verie bodie of Christ CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that the Eucharist or that which our Sauiour after his last supper gaue with his hands to his Apostles to eate and drinke was his bodie blood and to put vs out of doubt what bodie and blood he added His bodie giuen for vs deliuered for vs His blood of the new testament and shed for remission of sinnes And otherwhere that the bread which he would giue vs was his flesh which he would giue for the life of the world The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the bread the holie bread the bread of the Sacrament the Sacramētall bread the lords bread the bread of the supper the bread of the holie supper the bread of the lords supper the bread which Christ reached to his Apostles the Symbols the Signes the Eucharist the sacrament of the Eucharist the Eucharisticall bread is not the bodie of Christ not his very bodie not his bodie it selfe not his true bodie not his substantiall bodie not flesh not Christs true flesh an other thing and much different from Christs flesh not the thing it selfe of this misterie not our spirituall food that Christs words can no way be vnderstood of Christs substantiall flesh that his meaning is not This my naturall bodie That the Eucharist being shewed we may not say if it This is my bodie that though it be called Christs bodie yet it is not his bodie Which are so directly contrarie to the Scripture as many of these men sometimes confesse it as shal be seene cap 30. of the 2. booke But because they do not onely contradict the Scripture in denying the Eucharist to be the bodie of Christ which the Scripture so often and clearly affirmeth but diuers other waies also I will likewise set them downe Secondly therefore they contradict the Scripture in saying that the Eucharist is nothing but a simple ceremonie onely bread onely a type or figure onely a seale or signe of the bodie and blood of Christ which the Scripture so oftentimes saieth is his true bodie and blood Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 5. c. 19. Sacraments are onely seales of Onely aseale those goods which are proposed to vs in the word Cartwright in disput Oxonien apud Martyrem p. 134. Onely a signe The Eucharist is onely a signe Spalatensis l. 5. de Rep. c. 6. n. 113. The bread is not the bodie of Christ indeed but onely a signe of it Perkins de Caena to 1. col 858. The bread is called the bodie Onely a signe and seale whereas it is onely a signe and seale of the bodie Melancthon as Luther reporteth in Hospin part 2. Histor A simple ceremonie fol. 194. Accounted the Eucharist no better then a simple ceremonie Confessio Czinge in Syntagmate pag. 196. The Eucharisticall Hath onely the name signes haue not the substance of the things signified but onely their names Helueti in Hospin libr. cit fol. 153. The bread is not the Onely a signe verie bodie of Christ but onely a signe and Sacrament of it Iuel art 10. sect 1. p. 313. The bread in it selfe is very naturall Very naturall bread bread art 21. sect 1. p. 443. The misticall bread is not Christ himselfe but onely a sacrament of Christ Zuinglius de Caena to 2. f. 286. The bread is onely a figure Onely a figure wherewith is signified that bodie which we ought to remember f. 291. This drinke was nothing else indeed but wine 293. Nothing Nothing els but a signe Nothing but bread and wine else but a signe and figure And. 296. The Apostles themselues neuer called this bread the bodie of Christ but onely bread And in Respons ad Lutherum fol. 431. It is nought els but bread OEcolampadius apud Zuinglium to 2. fol. 503. These particles This that we denie not to be certaine infallible tokens No hing but commō bread but such they are as teach that here is nothing els but common bread And ibid. 510. The drinke is a pure and bare creature and nought els beside Caluin de administr Caenae p. 41. Let vs account it enough Nothing but a note and signe if bread and wine be giuen vs for a note and signe In admonit vlt. ad Wesphal p. 826. What other is the bread As the Doue was the Holie
Ghost and wine of the Supper then a visible word Cont. Heshus pag. 861. The bread of the Eucharist in the same maner is called the bodie of Christ as the doue is called the holie Ghost And 4. Instit c. 17. § 14. The Supper is nothing els but a visible testificatiō of that promise which is Ioan. 6. to wit that Christ is the bread of life which came from heauen Beza in Colloq Montisbel p. 42. The disciples saw that Mere bread and wine Christ held bread and that it was mere bread and wine which he gaue with his hands Cont. Illy ric col 2. Theol. p. 149. I say No better then water of baptisme that the water of baptisme is as well the blood of the Lord as that bread is his bodie Cont. Heshus vol. 1. p. 308. The bread is no otherwise the bodie and wine no otherwise the blood then the water of baptisme is blood And in 1. Corint 5. vers 7. The No otherwise then the pascall lambe Pascall lambe is called Christ in the selfe same manner that that bread is saied to be the bodie of Christ which was giuen for vs. Daneus Cont. de Euchar. cap. 13. The Fathers will haue the Onely symbol and signe bread and wine to be onely symbols and signes of the true and essentiall bodie and blood of Christ Peter Martyr apud Coccium to 2 l. 6. art 1. The bread and Onely type and signe wine are onely types and signes of the bodie and blood of Christ And hereupon albeit as Zanchius confesseth in Resp ad Arian col 876. the Roman Church doth keepe baptisme and the Supper or as Caluin speaketh the halfe parte of the Supper is remaining in Poperie yet neuerthelesse they sometime terme our Eucharist a Crust of bread as doth Whitaker Contr. 1. q. 2. c. 16. and Perkins de Sermon Dom. col 554. Sometimes a small crust of bread as Caluin Admonit vlt. p. 800. cont Versipel p. 358. in Math. 19. v. 13. Sometimes a Crust as Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 6. c. 3. Beza in Confess c. 7. sect 11. Sometimes a gobbet of bread as Whitaker in place last cited Sometime a most profane crust as Beza li. quaest vol. 3 p. 355. Sometime a cake and crust as Peter Martyr orat 1. Tigurin Sometime a wafer of pastie as the same Martyr cont Gardiner col 422. Thus reproachfully they terme that which in their owne opinion is the lords Supper or at least the halfe parte thereof but no meruaile if they so speake so of our Eucharist who say that theirs is nothing els but bread nothing but common bread nothing but a bare creature nothing but a bare signe or figure nothing but mere bread and wine But farre otherwise saied Christ that his Eucharist was his bodie giuen for vs his blood shedde for remission of sinnes and not as Protestāts say onely a signe onely a seale onely a figure onely a tokē onely a testificatiō onely a symbol onely a type of Christs bodie which onely hath the name of Christs bodie onely a simple ceremonie and no otherwise the bodie of Christ Then the Pascal lambe was Christ the doue the Holie Ghost or the water of baptisme the blood of Christ Thirdly they contradict the Sripture in saying that the Eucharist is onely figuratiuely and in some sorte the bodie and blood of Christ which the Scripture in the places cited simply and absolutely saieth to be his bodie and blood and addeth Ihon 6. v. 55. My flesh is truely meate and my blood truely drinke Which is most clearly opposite to mere figuratiuely Spalatensis l. 5. de Repub. c. 6. n. 45. The wine in the Chalice is the blood of the lord onely ostensiuely or in shew that is figuratiuely Onely figuratiuely and typically And num 115. The Eucharist is not Christ substantially but onely significantly and figuratiuely And 118. It is but figuratiuely and typically called the bodie of Christ Perkins in Cathol ref Cont. 11. c. 2. We take the bread to By resemblance and no otherwise be the bodie of Christ sacramentally by resemblance and no otherwise And Cont. 10. cap. 4. These words must not be vnderstood properly but by a figure Rogers on the 28. Article of Protest Confess pag. 174. Abhominable be the Popish errours that substātially and really the bodie and blood of Christ is contained in the Sacrament Eucharisticall Iuel art 5. sect 10. p. 255. As Christ is herbes or milke euen so As he is herbs or milke As manna and none otherwise he is bread or flesh Art 8. sect 25. p. 303. As the bread is Christs bodie euen so was manna Christs bodie Vsher in his Answere to a Chalenge p. 58. Nothing in this Not substantially world is more plaine then when our Sauiour saied It was his blood he could not meane it to be substantially And ib. pag. 60. Not really The things which he honoured with those names cannot be really his bodie and blood but figuratiuely Whitaker l. 2. cont Du. sect 10. The bread is the true bodie Metonimycally of Christ and the wine the true blood of Christ but mistically metonymicall Sacramentally Melancthon apud Hospin lib. cit fol. 69. This is my blood is a metonimie as if you should say The ensigne or Maze is the Roman Empire Caluin cont Heshus p. 844. Bread may truely be saied to Symbolically be symbolically the true bodie of Christ Which also he hath Admonit vlt. ad Westphal pag. 836. Where also pag. 821. he saieth It appeareth that to them bread was symbolically the bodie and p. 830. In some sorte it is the bodie And 4. Instit c. In some sorte 17. § 23. The bread is figuratiuely the bodie And cont Heshus Improperly l. cit p. 847. Could he more clearly testifie that bread is improperly called the bodie of Christ in respect of likenes Beza respons ad Selneccer vol. 2. pag. 270. The names But metonymically of the bodie and blood are but metonymically giuen to the bread and wine Daneus Cont. de Euchar. c. 10. The bread is tropically called Tropically the bodie of Christ Peter Martyr l. cont Gardin col 293. We say that speach Not properly This is my bodie is not proper but metaphoricall and tropicall And in Hospin l. cit f. 259. The words This is c. cannot be taken simply and without a figure Peucer apud Hospin in Concordia discordi fol. 206. The Not simply consecratea bread and chalice are the bodie and blood of Christ Relatiuely relatiuely as figures and signes Wolfius in Schusselburg l. 1. Theol. Caluin art 22. The Significantly bread is the bodie and the wine the blood of Christ significātly no other waies then a keye deliuered is a house More of their mere figuratiue expositiōs of these words may be seene in my Latin booke l. 2. c. 20. But by that which here we haue rehearsed it clearly appeareth
cleare that they say that Christs bodie is not in the sacrament is not present in the Sacrament is not in substance present is absent in bodie is not in the Sacrament nor can be in it is not in the Supper according to substāce is not present in the bread is remoued from the Eucharist that there is no word in the scripture of the presence of Christs bodie in the Supper that his blood is in the chalice as the people are there that he is no otherwise in the Eucharist then in baptisme that he is not there otherwise then a thing is present to our cogitation or a thing to the name thereof or our bodies are now present in heauen finally onely present by speculation and mere imagination Fiftly they contradict the Scripture by saying that no other thing is receaued in the Eucharist or Supper then in baptisme or in the simple word Caluin cont Heshus p. 860. There is no cause why Christ No more present in the Supper then in baptisme Then in the word should be saied to be more present in the Supper then in baptisme p. 847. Surely there is a plaine solution That God giueth not more to the visible symbols then to the word Therefore communication is no lesse truely giuen vs by the Ghospell then by the Supper 4. Instit c. 14. § 14. He is deceaued who thinketh that any thing more is giuen him by the Sacraments then which offered by the word of God he receaueth by true faith § 17 There is no other function of the Sacraments then of the word of God And c. 16. § 5. he saieth that the Sacrament is inferiour to the word Beza in Colloq Montisbel p. 136. There is the same receauing of Christ in the Sacrament which is in the simple word In 2. part respons ad Acta Colloq p. 109. Nothing more is to be sought in the Sacraments then in simple word l. cont Heshus p. 287. Nothing more is giuen in the Supper then in baptisme or in the preaching of the word Bucer in Hospin l. cit p. 161. The memorie of this bodie may More in the word then in the Sacramēt be refreshed by the bread but more fully by the word Peter Martyr in 1. Cor. 11. This is the summe that we vnderstand the bodie and blood of Christ to be offered to vs no lesse by the words of God then by Sacraments In Disput Oxonien pag. 225. We receaue no lesse the bodie and blood of Christ in the word of God then in this Sacrament And cont Gardiner col 1041. I denie not that that is our speach Christs bodie is receaued no lesse in words then in the Sacraments Nether am I afraied to say that we come much better to them by words then by Sacraments Willet Cont. 11. q. 3. c. 557. There is the same substance of both Sacraments Iuel art 5. diuis 5. The word of God is the bodie and blood of Christ and that more truely then is the Sacrament Art 21. diu 1. As Christ entreth into vs by a minister by his word euen so he entreth into vs by the Sacrament of his bodie and no otherwise Defense of the Apol. p. 221. As Christ is present in the one Sacramēt euen so and no otherwise is he present in the other Hereupon Apologia Confess Augustanae cap. de vsu Sacrament saieth that the Sacrament is as it were a picture of the word Melancthon in Disputat tom 4. pag. 513. The Sacrament is like a picture of the promise And lib. contr Anabaptistas As the will of God is shewed in the worde or promise so also it is shewed in the Sacrament as in a picture And oftentimes they say that there is no other presence of Christs bodie in the Eucharist then there is in the simple word as you may see in Beza Apol. 1. cont Sanctem p. 297. in Hospin l. cit fol. 36. 39. and in Concordia discordi f. 205. So that they plainly say that Christ is no more present in the Supper then in baptisme no more cōmunicated in the Supper thē in the Ghospell no more receaued in the Sacramēt them in the word that there is the same receauing of Christ in the Sacrament and in the simple word nothing more giuē in the Supper them in preaching no more offered by the sacrament then by the word yea that the Sacrament is inferiour to the word the memorie of Christs bodie more fully refreshed by the word then by this Sacrament that we may better come to Christs bodie by words then by this Sacrament Which are so contrarie to Scripture as sometimes themselues confesse it See lib. 2. cap. 30. Sixtly they contradict the holie Scripture whiles they say that they Iewes receaued Christs bodie before it was borne as truely as we receaue it in the Eucharist Willet Cont. 11. q. 2. p. 544. We do hould and constantly affirme The Fathers no lesse receaued the bodie of Christ thou we and teach that the Fathers in the law receaued no lesse the substance of Christ by faith in their Sacraments then we do in ours Christ was as well exhibited to them in their Sacraments as he is in ours Beza in Colloq Montisbel p. 96. He was as present in their Sacraments as he is to vs in ours p. 69. The Fathers were no lesse partakers of the bodie and blood of Christ then we are in the Lords Supper Respons ad Acta Colloq p. 119. The Fathers as truely receaued Christs true bodie and true blood in the word and in their Sacraments as we by the instrument of the same faith now receaue them Peter Martyr cont Gardiner col 150. The Fathers in the ould testament did no lesse then we eate and drinke the bodie and blood of Christ for so much as pertaineth to the thing it selfe Seuenthly they contradict the holie Scripture in saying that the Eucharist is a symbolicall mysticall and Sacramentall bodie of Christ which the Scripture plainely saieth to be his true bodie Zuinglius de ver falsa relig c. de Euchar. to 2. f. 208. We are here compelled plainely to confesse that this selfe same which Christ gaue with so great diligence and maiestie is his symbolicall Christs symbolicall bodie Sacramentall bodie bodie Respons ad Luther ib. fol. 514. It is easie to vnderstand that this bread which Christ giueth vs is Christs sacramentall bodie that is the signe of his bodie in that manner and forme of speach wherewith shewing the statue of Cocles we say Behould Cocles that stout champion of his countrie Epistola ad Principes fol. 548. The bread is made the sacramentall bodie of Christ Againe Our aduersaries say that Christs naturall and substantiall bodie is giuen we say his sacramentall Hereupon the contention And in Hospin l. cit fol. 143. We are forced will we nill we to confesse that these words This is Misticall bodie my bodie are thus to be vnderstood that is A sacrament of my bodie
Church there is Sacrifice and offering of a cleane oblation and Sacrifice in iustice The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that there is no more Sacrifice in the Church And yet Whitaker Controu 3. quaest 6. pag. 2. 615. writeth thus Without Preisthood there is no Church And Vallada Apologia cont Episcop Luzon c. 26. No man denieth but the celebration of the Eucharist is a true Sacrifice ART XII WHETHER THERE BE AN altar in the Church SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Hebrewâ— 13. v. 10. We haue an altar whereof they haue no Christians haue an altar power to eate which serue the tabernacle Isaie 19. ver 10. In that day there shal be an altar of our Lord in the middest of the land of Egypte and a title of our Lord to the border thereof CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 24. c. 1. The Apostle Paul writing to the Corinthians when he saieth that they who are polluted with participation of the table of Diuels cannot be made partakers of the Table of our Lord by a table in both places vnderstandeth an altar PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Caluin in 1. Corinth 9. vers 19. There are no altars to They haue noÌ„â—â—tar sacrifice Beza in Colloq Montisbel p. 350. Paul maketh mention Paul speaketh not of an altar of a table of the Lord and not of an altar Ad Repetit Sanctis c. 4. I confesse there is no altar in the Christian Church And l. Quaest Resp vol. 3. In the Apostolicall writings there is no mention of an altar but onely of a table of the Lord. Peter Martyr in Rom. 11. Altars haue no place in the time of the Ghospel Herein also the Protestants doctrine is well knowne THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that we haue an altar The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that we haue no altar that Paul maketh no mention of an altar that there is no mention of an altar in the writings of the Apostles ART XIII WHETHER THE PASCHAL lambe was sacrificed SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Marc. 14. v. 12. And the first day of the Azimes when they Pascal lambe sacrificed sacrificed the Pasche Exod. 12. ver 6. And the whole multitude of the children of Israel shall sacrifice him Pascal lambe at euen CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 24. c. 1. The multitude of the children of Israel did sacrifice the ould Pasche in remembrance of their going out of Egypt PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Perkins in Cathol reform Controu 11. c. 5. The Paschal No sacrifice lambe was a sacrament but no sacrifice The same hath Plessie l. 2. de Missa c. 2. Reineccius to 4. Armaturae c. 19. The holie Bible no where Not sacrificed teacheth that the Paschal lambe was immolated and sacrificed Tilenus in Syntagmate c. 64. We do not graunt that the Paschal lambe was a sacrifice properly called yea Moises expressely denieth that it was a sacrifice Pareus in Colloq Theol. 9. disput 27. The Minor is false That the Paschal lambe was a sacrifice properly called Beza in Marci 14. v. 12. I vsed the word of Killing rather then of Sacrificing that the domesticall bankets of the Pasche might be distinguished from those Sacrifices which in the temple were done of the Preists THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the Paschal lambe was sacrificed Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that it was not sacrificed that it was no proper sacrifice that it was a domesticall banket that Moises expressely denieth it to be a Sacrifice Which is so repugnant to Scripture as same Protestants confesse it See lib. 2. c. 30. THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF the Eucharist Out of all which hath beene rehearsed in this chapter it is cleare how different an Eucharist Protestants haue from that which the holie Scripture proposeth For the Scripture and Catholiks with it teacheth that the holie Eucharist is the true bodie and blood of Christ that it is his testament that Christs flesh is to be eaten that whilest the Eucharist was instituted Christs bodie was giuen and his blood shedde for vs that the chalice was shedde in remission of sinnes that bread is a necessarie matter of the Eucharist that vnleauened bread is a couenient matter and that we must prepare our selues to receaue the Eucharist Moreouer the Scripture teacheth that there is a Sacrifice and altar in the Church and that the Paschal lambe which was a figure of the Eucharist was sacrificed all which Protestants do denie It is cleare also that Protestants do steale from the What Protest steale from the Eucharist Eucharist the trueth of the bodie and blood of Christ the nature of his testament the necessitie of bread the conueniencie of vnleauened bread to make it of and necessitie of our preparation to receaue it They steale also eating and drinking from the flesh and blood of Christ oblation and shedding of them when the Eucharist was instituted And from the Church they steale both Sacrifice and altar and sacrificing froÌ„ the Paschal lambe And thus much of the Eucharist Now of the other Sacraments CHAPTER XI OF THE OTHER SACRAMENTS ART I. WHETHER PREISTS CAN forgiue sinnes SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. MATHEW 16. v. 19. And I will giue to the the keyes Preists can forgiue sinnes of the kingdome of heauen And whatsoeuer thou shalt loose on earth it shal be loosed in heauen Math. 16. v. 19. Amen I say vnto you whatsoeuer you shall binde vpoÌ„ earth shal be bound also in heauen and whatsoeuer you shall loose vpon earth shal be loosed also in heauen Ihon. 20. v. 24. And he saied to them receaue ye the Holie Ghost Whose sinnes you shall forgiue they are forgiuen them and whose you shall retaine they are retained CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 14. Can. 9. If anie shall say that the Sacramentall absolution of the Preist is not a iudiciall act but a bare ministerie of pronouncing or declaring that sinnes are forgiuen be he accursed PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Perkins Galath 4. tom 2. The Pope challengeth to They cannot himselfe proper and iudiciall power of forgiuing and reteining sinnes Zuinglius in Art 51. to 1. Who attributeth remissioÌ„ of sinnes to a creature robbeth God of his glorie and is an idolater In resp ad Luther to 2. f. 430. These words whose sinnes you shall forgiue c. haue not that sense as if Christ in speaking theÌ„ would giue his disciples power to forgiue sinnes In Exposit fidei They cannot certifie a man of forgiuenes of his sinnes ib. f. 557. Wherefore all these things seeme friuolous I absoluethee I certifie thee that thy sinnes are forgiuen This is deceit and mere trifles Et in Hebr. 6. to 4. he saieth that Christ spooke the words cited out of Math. 18. by hyperoche or ouerlashing Bullinger in Marci 2. Men do not forgiue sinnes but teach that they are or haue beene forgiuen in Christ by faith Caluin in Ioan. 20. v.
ver 13. Not the hearers of the law are iust with God but the doers of the law shal be iustified Caluin ibidem answereth This sentence hath onely this meaning If iustice be sought by the law we must fulfill the law because the iustice of the law consisteth in the perfection of workes Peter Martyr ibid. That which he saieth hath this meaning If anie were to be iustified before God by the iustice of the law he must fulfill the law Pareus libr. 4. de Iustificat cap. 14. The Apostlesaieth indeed Doers of the law shal be iustified but he meaneth conditionally if there be anie And Illyricus in Claue part 2. tract 4. writeth thus Roman 2. When Gentils doe those things which are of the law that is if they did them Againe Doe this and thou shalt liue is put for If thou doest them thou shalt liue If we proue that there are some which loue their neighbour and fulfill the law because it is saied Rom. 13. v. 8. Who loueth his neighbour hath fulfilled the law Caluin ib. answereth Paul saieth not what men doe or not doe but speaketh vpon condition which you shall not find any where fulfilled And if you proue that the law may be fulfilled because the Apostle saieth Galat. 6. v. 2. Beare yee one an others burdens and so yee shall fulfill the law of Christ Caluin ibid. answereth Because none performeth altogether that which Paul requireth therefore we are all farre from perfection If we proue that single life is simply good because S. Paul saieth absolutely 1. Cor. 7. v. 1. It is good for a man not to touch a woman P. Martyr in locis Classe 3. cap. 7. § 17. answereth They should see that what Paul hath of the praises of single life are neuer spoaken absolutely If we proue that virginitie may be absolutely counselled Of good workes to men because S. Paul 1. Corinth 7. v. 7. saieth absolutely I would all men to be as my selfe And ver 25. A concerning virgins a commandement of our Lord I haue not but counsaile I giue And ver 28. Art thou loose from a wife seeke not a wife Caluin in ver 25. cit answereth Because it is a slipperie matter and full of difficulties he speaketh alwaies vnder condition And in v. 27. This second member must be taken vnder condition If we proue that some may fall from grace because S. Of Iustification Paul saieth Gal. 5. v. 4. You are fallen from grace Pareus in Galat. 1. lect 7. answereth The Apostle speaketh that conditionally And in cap. 5. vers 4. lect 61. For the Apostle affirmeth not that the Galathians were fallen but threatneth that if that if they will be iustified by the law that it will come to posse that they fall wherefore thus I make my tenth argument Who beside the foresaied opposition on to so manie and such words of holie Scripture are forced to change manie and weightie absolute sayings of Scripture into conditionals they contradict the true meaning of the holie Scripture But Protestants doe so Therefore c. CHAPTER XI THAT PROTESTANTS CHANGE Conditionall Propositions of the Scripture into Absolute and delude them diuers other waies THE eleuenth argument for to proue that Protestants contradict the true sense of holie Scripture shal be because they are sometimes forced to change conditionall propositions thereof into absolute and to delude them diuers other waies For if we proue that our freindshippe with God dependeth of our keeping the commandements because Christ saied conditionally Ioan. 15. v. 14. Yee are my freinds if yee doe the things that I command yee Caluin ibid. answereth He meaneth not that we obtaine so great honor by anie merit of ours but onely admonisheth vs vpon what condition he receaueth vs into fauour and vouch safeth to reckon vs amongst his freinds But this wil be more euident by that we shall shew in the next chapter how they of causall propositions make no causall Diuers others waies they delude and frustrate the conditionall propositiōs of holie Scripture For if they can by anie colour they expound them of onely faith or of the holie ghost So they delude those places Ioan. 6. vers 53. Vnlesse yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood yee shall not haue life in yee and Ioan. 3. ver 5. Vnlesse a man be borne agayne of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdome of God Which teach that Sacraments are necessarie to saluation Or if they must needs expound them of good workes they will not expoūd thē of doing all necessarie good workes and auoiding all necessarie euill but of some onely or in parte or of endeauor to doe or auoid them so they delude those sayings of the Scripture Rom. 8. v. 13. If you liue according to the flesh you shall die but if by the spirit you mortifie the deeds of the flesh you shall liue Caluin ib. He promiseth vs life if we endeauour to mortifie the flesh For he doth not exactly require the death of the flesh but onely biddeth vs endeauour to tame the lustes thereof And the like he doth in manie other places as may be seene hereafter c. 16. And in like manner they delude all other sentences of Scripture which teach that if we wil be saued or iustified we must doe good workes and eschew euill And according to this they say that we must doe some good or haue some good workes that we must haue a begun or imperfect newnesse of life and keepe the lawe in some sorte or fashion Luther in Isaiae 8. to 4. f. 83. The holie Ghost is giuen that we may satisfie the law in some parte In some parte And in Psal 51. to 3. fol. 455. We will fulfill and keepe the law but with a large that is with a true Euangelicall dispensation Confessio Saxon. c. 9. It is needfull that there be some obediēce Protest dispensation Some obedience Some beginning In some sorte In some kind To begin in those that are iustified Schlusselb to 4. Catal. p. 176. The iustified are free from the accusation and damnation of the law not from beginning of obedience Bucer in Rom. 8. Christ giueth that spirit whereby we auoid sinne in some sorte Pareus l. 3 de Iustif p. 645. Saints doe not doubt of some kind of inherent iustice and l. 4. c. 7. It is enough if we endeauour to begin the new obedience of the law according to all the commandements So that wheresoeuer the Scripture saieth conditionally If thou wilt be iustified or saued doe this or doe not that they vnderstand it with a large dispensation that is doe somewhat or doe not somewhat of it or begin or endeauour to doe or not doe it But if this shift will not serue because the Scripture speaketh conditionally of keeping the whole law as Math. 9. v. 17. If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandements and the like thē they say it is the
Iustification writeth thus Sanctification by the blood of the couenaÌ„t Heb. 10. v. 29. is not the inward cleansing of the heart from sinne To receaue the holie Ghost Act. 19. v. 2. With them is not to receaue grace but some speciall guifts Caluin ibid. Here is not spoaken of the spirit of regeneration but of speciall guifts In like sorte by The holie Ghost ib. Nether haue we heard that there is a holie Ghost is not meant the holie Ghost For thus Caluin ib. How could it be that Iews had not heard of the holie Ghost Et Beza ibid. It were most absurd to thinke that they knew not that there was anie holie Ghost To be sanctified Hebr. 10. v. 29. is not to be truely sanctified For thus Contraremonstrantes in Collat. Hagae p. 391. Nether yet can it be concluded thereof that they were truely faithfull and indeed sanctified To fall from grace Gal. 5. ver 5. With them is not to fall from grace but to fall from the hope of obtaining it Contrare monstrantes loc cit p. 388. These are saied to fall from the grace of iustification not that euer they were partakers thereof but because they are excluded from al hope of obtaining it so long as they wil be iustified by the law Touching baptisme To be baptized Act. 19. v. 3. In whome Touching Baptisme then were you baptized with them is not to haue receaued baptisme but other guifts Beza ib. We must needs graunt that here is not treated of baptisme but of guifts wherewith God was wonte specially to adorne those whome he made rulers of Churches Gualâ—erus ib. hom 125. These words must not be expouÌ„ded of the baptisme of water but of the baptisme of fire Likewise Baptisme 1. Pet. 3. with them signifieth not baptisme but Christ Zuinglius resp ad Huber tom 2. It is certainely euident that Peter in that place by Baptisme vnderstandeth no other thing but Christ. Water also Ioan. 3. v. 5. Vnlesse one be borne agayne of water signifieth not water but the holie Ghost Caluin ibid. I can no way be persuaded to beleiue that Christ speaketh of baptisme And in Refutat Serueti This pertaineth nothing to baptisme but the name of water is metaphorically attributed to the holie Ghost Zuinglius vpon this place By water here he meaneth not that element but the word of God grace of God heauenlie water that is the illustration of the noâ—â—e Ghost And in the same manner other Protestants commonlie Touching the Eucharist Is in the words of consecratioÌ„ Touching the Eucharist with them is not Is but Signifieth nor Bodie giuen for vs Blood shed for vs is the true bodie and blood of Christ but onely figures of them as appeareth by what hath beene saied lib. 1. cap. 11. art 1. To eate the flesh and drinke the blood of Christ so often repeated Ioan. 6. is not to eate or drinke but onely to beleiue P. Martyr cont Gardiner part 1. col col 866. We still say that to eate to wit the flesh of Christ is nothing els then to apprehend it by faith as giuen for vs as price of our redemption Which also he hath col 863. And Luther Postil in Dom. post Natiuit To eate and drinke his flesh and To eate 1. not to eate but to beleiue blood is no other thing then to beleiue that Christ truely tooke these for our sake and repaied them agayne at death The like hath Zuinglius in Ioan. 6. and in Histor passionis and l. de Relig. c. de Euchar. Bullinger Dec. 5. serm 9. Vrsinus in Catechism q. 76. Flesh in those words of Christ Ioan. 6. My Flesh. 1. not flesh but diuinitie flesh is truely meate with them is not flesh but the Godhead Zuinglius in Exegesi to 2. fol. 333. He saieth his flesh is truely meate meaning surely not his flesh but his better nature which had taken flesh The Bodie of our Lord in those words 1. Cor. 10. The bread which we breake is it not the participation of the bodie of our Lord with these men is not the bodie of Christ 1. Christians Christ but Christians Zuinglius lib. cit Thou mights haue seene at the first how that Communion and Bodie are not taken Bodie of Christ 1. men for distribution of Christs bodie but for men themselues Finally Luther was so bould as to set downe a Canon Luthers CanoÌ„ of expounding Words by coÌ„traries of expounding the words of holie Scripture by coÌ„traries For thus he writeth in Ps 5. to 3. fol. 171. Let this be a Canon for thee Where the Scripture commandeth a good worke to be done do thou so vnderstand it that it forbiddeth thee doe good workes seing thou canst not but that thou maiest sanctifie the Lord be dead and buried and suffer God to worke in thee Which Canon Protestants do well follow as appeareth by what hath beene related in this chapter and before in the sixt and seuenth chapter where we shewed that in the weightieste matters they expounded the words of holie Scripture ironically and according to others meÌ„s mynde These and innumerable the like doe Protestants of which we might easily gather not onely a chapter but a booke full But out of these which we haue rehearsed it clearely appeareth First how great hereticall libertie as Tertullian speaketh is which turneth the words of holie Scripture this way and that way in to this forme and that and tosseth them vp and downe like tenis balls Secondly how easie it may be for euerie idiote with this libertie for to defend what heresie soeuer though neuer so contrarie to Scripture For who cannot expound the words of Scripture by diuerse by disparate and contrarie things Thirdly how impossible it is if this libertie be admitted to refute by Scripture any heresie at all or to proue anie thing by anie words whatsoeuer ether of God or man Fourthly how that Protestants by this kinde of dealing do more dishonor God and the holie Scripture then if they should quite reiect it For if they should reiect the Scripture they should onely reiect Gods word and trueth But by this manner of dealing they doe not onely reiect Gods trueth and meaning but also in steede thereof foist in the contrarie vntrueth and so as S. Hierome speaketh In Galat. â— of the word of God they make the word of the Diuel Fiftly it appeareth that these expositions of Protestants are like to that which Luther merly deuised for to shew the Sacramentaries how they expounded the words of consecration in Defens verb. cenae to 7. fol. 384. where he A fit exaÌ„ple of Protest expositions writeth thus Surely they doe a great and weightie matter But no otherwise then if I should denie that God made heauen and earth wheÌ„ one should obiect that of Moises In the beginning God created heauen and earth I should expound Moises words in this sorte God that is a Cuccou Made that is deuoured Heauen and earth
to giue his life for vs 120 15 VVhether he merited any thing for himselfe 121 16 VVhether he sufficiently redeemed vs 123 17. VVhether he redeemed vs with his blood 125 18. VVhether he died for reprobates 127 19. VVhether he died for all 129 20. VVhether his blood be corrupted 131 21. VVhether his soule descēded to hell 132 22. VVhether he suffered the paines of hell 134 23. VVhether he entred to his disciples the doores being shut 136 24. VVhether he penetrated the heauēs 138 25. VVhether he praieth for vs in heauen 139 Chap. 4. Of Angels and Saints Art 1. VVhether Angels and Saints doe the will of God 144 2. VVhether Saints enioye their felicitie 145 3. VVhether the glorie of Saints be equall 147 4. VVhether Angels and Saints pray for vs. 148 5. VVhether Saints haue care of vs 150 6. VVhether they heare our praiers 152. 7. VVhether Angels offer our praiers to God 153 8. VVhether they be to be praied vnto 155 9. VVhether God be to be praied vnto by the names of Saints 156 10. VVhether God haue mercie on vs for Saints sake 158 11. VVhether Angels or Saints be to be bowed vnto 159 12. VVhether Saints be to be imitated of vs 161 13. VVhether holie men receaue vs into heauenlie tabernacles 162 14. VVhether anie Saint may be termed our hope 163 15. VVhether anie had power to worke Miracles 164 16. VVhether Saints do reigne with Christ 166 17. VVhether anie was full of grace 167 Chap. 5. Of the Scripture or worde of God Art 1. VVhether anie place of Scripture be hard to vnderstand 170 2. VVhether Scripture can be vnderstood without the holie Ghost 172 3. VVhether the Ghospel containe any law 174 4. VVhether the Ghospell preach pennance 167 5. VVhether the Ghospell reproue sinne 178 6. VVhether the Ghopell promise saluation without conditiō of works 180 7. VVhether the Gospell be contrarie to the law 182 8. VVhether the law of Moyses commanded faith in Christ 184. 9. VVhether anie vnwritten traditions be to be kept 186 Chap. 6. Of S. Peter and the Apostles Art 1. VVhether S. Peter were first of the Apostles 189. 2. VVhether the Church was built on S. Peter 190. 3. VVhether the keyes were giuen to him 192. 4. VVhether his faith failed 193. 5. VVhether the Apostles were foundations of the Church 195. 6. VVhether the Apostles were simply to be heard 196. 7. VVhether they were sufficient witnesses of the trueth 198 8. VVhether they learned anie point after Christs ascension 200. 9. VVhether Iudas was truely a disciple 201. 10. VVhether Iudas was a Bishop 202. Chap. 7. Of Pastors of the Church Art 1. Whether Pastors alwaies continew 204. 2. VVhether authoritie be in the Pastors 206. 3. VVhether one Pastor can excommunicate 208. 4. VVhether Pastors can make lawes 209. 5. VVhether Bishops be rulers of the Church 210 6. VVhether they rule the Church 211. 7. VVhether Pastors be to be called Priests 213. 8. VVhether a Pastor can be without calling 214. 9 Whether a Pastor may haue temporall iurisdiction 216. 10 VVhether Moyses were a Preist 218. Chap. 8. Of the Church Art 1. VVhether the Church be one 220. 2. VVhether ill men be of the Church 223. 3 Whether reprobats be of the Church 225. 4 VVhether the Church euer continew 226. 5. VVhether it be alwaies visible 228. 6. VVhether it be infallible 230. 7. VVhether it be simply to be heard 231. 8. VVhether trueth relieth on the Church 232. Chap. 9. Of Temples or materiall Churches Art 1. VVhether Churches be for priuat Praiers 235. 2. VVhether Churches be to be adorned 237. 3. VVhether Images may be set in Churches 4. VVhether Heatens thought their idols to be Gods 240 Chap. 10. Of Baptisme Art 1. Whether water be necessarie to baptisme p. 242. 2. Whether inuocation of the Trinitie be necessarie to baptisme p. 243. 3. Whether baptisme be necessarie as by precept p. 245. 4. VVhether it be necessarie as a meane p. 246. 5. VVhether Simon Magus and such were baptized p. 248. 6. VVhether baptisme be effectuall in reprobats p. 150. 7. VVhether baptisme clenseth sinne p. 252. 8. VVhether it pardonneth sinnes to come p. 256. 9. VVhether before baptisme children be in state of damnation p. 258. 10. VVhether the baptisme of S. Ihon and of Christ were different p. 261. 11. VVhether certaine Ephesians had receaued S. Ihons baptisme p. 262. 12. VVhether they had heard of the holie Ghost p. 264. Chap. 11. Of the Eucharist Art 1. VVhether the Eucharist be the bodie and blood of Christ p. 266. 2. VVhether Christs flesh be to be eaten and his blood to be drunk p. 280. 3. VVhether Christ gaue the blood of the new testament to be drunk p. 283. 4. VVhether the Eucharisticall Chalice be Christs testament p. 284. 5. Vhether at the time of his Supper his blood was shed p. 286. 6. VVhether the Eucharisticall Chalice was shed for vs p. 288. 7. VVhether bread be necessarie to the Eucharist p. 289. 8. VVhether the Eucharist be to be made of azime bread p. 290. 9. VVhether bread and wine whereof the Eucharist is made be to be blessed p. 292. 10. VVhether there ought to be anie preparation to the Eucharist p. 293. 11. VVhether there be anie Sacrifice in the Church p. 295. 12. VVhether is there anie altar in the Church p. 296. 13. VVhether the Paschal lambe was sacrificed p. 297. Chap. 12. Of the other Sacraments Art 1. VVhether Preists can forgiue sinnes p. 300. 2. VVhether we must cōfesse our sinnes p. 302. 3. VVhether grace be giuen by imposition of hands p. 305. 4. VVhether hands be to be imposed vpon those that are baptized p. 305. 5. VVhether Matrimonie be a Sacrament p. 306. 6. VVhether one may marrie after diuorce p. 307. 7. VVhether the sick are to be anoiled p. 310. 8. VVhether the new Sacraments excell the ould p. 311. Chap. 13. Of faith Art 1. VVhether faith be a worke 314. 2. VVhether faith beleiue onely God his promises 315. 3. VVhether to beleiue that Christ is God be iustifying faith 317. 4. VVhether faith be one 319. 5. VVhether all articles of faith may be beleiued without the holie Ghost 321. 6. VVhether faith differ from hope and charitie 322. 7. VVhether faith be greater then charitie 324. 8. VVhether faith be without charitie 325. 9. VVhether it be without confession 328. 10. VVhether without good works it be dead 329. 11. VVhether faith whereof S. Iames speaketh be iustifying faith 331. 12. VVhether anie faith be perfect 333. 13. VVhether faith be perfected by good works 331. 14. VVhether by faith we onely know that we are iustified 336. 15. VVhether faith be necessarie to iustification or saluation 338. 16. VVhether faith be anie cause of iustificatien 340. 17. VVhether faith alone cā iustifie 342. 18. VVhether faith iustifie as it is beleife 344. 19. VVhether faith it selfe be imputed to iustice 346 20. VVhether faith be proper to the iust 348 21 VVhether it be
Christ merited to him selfe exaltation THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ was exalted and had a name giuen him aboue all names because he humbled him selfe that he was crowned with glorie because of his passion The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that Christ did not merit his exaltation did not merit any thing to him selfe could not merit to be iudge of the world and head of Angels ART XVI WHETHER CHRIST REDEEmed vs with a sufficient price or truely merited our redemption SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 1. Cor. 6. v. 20. You are bought with a great price Christ bought vs with a great price 1. Timoth. 2. v. 6. For there is one God one also mediatour of God and men man Christ Iesus who gaue him selfe a redemption in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for all 1. Peter 2. ver 18. Knowing that not with corruptible things gould or siluer you are redeemed from your vaine conuersation With his pretious blood of your fathers tradition but with the pretious blood as it were of an immaculate and vnspotted lambe Christ 1. Ihon 3. v. 16. In this we haue knowne the charitie of God because he hath yeelded his life for vs. c. 4. v. 10. He hath loued vs and sent his sonne a propitiation for our sinnes Mathew 20. ver 28. The Sonne of man is come to giue his life a redemption in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for manie Rom. 3. v. 24. Iustified gratis by his grace by the redemption in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is in Christ Iesus Psalm 129. v. 7. Because with our Lord is mercie and with him plenteous redemption CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME S. Thomas 3. part artic 2. Christ suffering of charitie and obedience did giue God some thing more then the recompence of the offence of all mankinde did exact The passion of Christ was not onely a sufficient obut also a superaboundant satisfaction for the sinnes of mankinde PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Tindal in Fox his Acts printed An. 1610. pag. 1136. Christ Christ merited not heaueÌ„ with all his works did not merite heauen Daneus Controu 2. lib. 5. p. 210. Three necessarie conditioÌ„s of merite do faile in the workes of a creature and of Christ man towards God For by the vnion hypostaticall Christ doth not He did not merit merite Page 200. Christ as man properly merited nothing with God P. 202. Yea not in this forme of a seruant could Christ merite any thing to himselfe because in this forme he was a credture But a creature can merite nothing of his Creator Caluin 2. Instit c. 17 § 1. Truely I confesse that if any would simply and by himselfe oppose Christ vnto the iudgment of God there were no place for merite because there will not be found in man any worth which may merite before God § vlt. With what merits could man obtaine to be iudge of the world and head of Angels 3. Instit c. 11. § 12. It is fondly obiected of him that the power of iustifying farre supasseth both men and Angels seing this dependeth not vpon the worth of any creature but of Gods ordination If the Angels would satisfie God they would auaile nothing because they were not destinated to this end but this was proper to Christ man who was subiect to the law for to redceme vs from the curse of the law And Respons ad quaest Sozin Christ could merit nothing but through the pleasure of God Et in Ioan. 4. v. 10. When Christ is sated to haue appeased the Father towards vs this is referred to our sense For as we are guiltie to our selues we cannot conceaue God but as angrie and offended till Christ absolue vs from the guilt Wherefore touching the feeling of our faith God beginneth to loue vs in Christ Spindlerus apud Scusselburg l. 4. Theol. Caluin c. 5. The His death no sufficient redemption for all sinnes Lutherans erre in saying that Christs death was a sufficient redemption 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the sinnes of all and euerie man Piscator apud Vorstium in Parasceue c. 6. Christ died not sufficiently much lesse effectually for all Welsingius apud Homium in Specim Controuer Belgic His blood satisfied not Gods iustice art 21. That Christs blood satisfied Gods iustice for our sinnes is no where extant and it is plainly contrarie to the free and iust remission of sinnes which God hath offered to vs by Christ And the same say other Protestants as Caluin reporteth 2. Instit c. 17. § 1. and Beza in Absters calumn Heshusij p. 324. Slatius apud Homium loc cit There is question whether Christ properly satisfied not Christ properly satisfied for vs. We denie it And the same hath Vorstius ib. Who also addeth That Christ satisfied by a certaine acceptation not by exact identitie Pareus l. 5 de Iustific c. 3. To merit is the parte of seruants To merite is serutle and sordid serutle and sordid THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ bought vs with a great price that he gaue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is a ransom or price of redemption for vs that he redeemed vs with his pretious blood that God gaue his life for vs sent his sonne a propitiation for our sinnes that with God there is plentuous redemption Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say the contrarie that Christ could not merite heauen had no place for merit if we respect the iudgment of God did not merite three conditions necessatie to merite wanted in his works that power of meriting in him depended of Gods pleasure and ordination That properly he did not satisfie for vs that his blood did not satisfie Gods iustice that his death was not a sufficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or ransom for all that to merite is seruile and sordid ART XVII WHETHER CHRIST REDEEmed vs by his blood or corporall death SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Coloss 1. ver 22. And you whereas some time alienated and Christ redeemed vs by his death By his blood By he oblacion of his bodie enemies in sense in euill works yet now he hath reconciled in the bodie of his flesh by death vers 20. Pacifying by the blood of his crosse whether the things in earth or the things that are in heauen Hebrews 10. v. 10. In the which will we are sanctified by the oblation of the bodie of Iesus Christ once c. 9. vers 12. By his owne blood entred once into the Holies eternall redemption being found Ephes 1. v. 6. In whome we haue redemption by his blood the remissâ—on of sinnes 1. Peter v. 19. You are redeemed with the pretious blood as it were of an immaculate and vnsported lambe Christ Acts 20. v. 28. The holie Ghost hath placed you Bishops to rule the Church of God which he hath purchased with his owne blood Apocalips 5. v. 9. Thou hast redeemed vs to God in thy blood CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME S. Thomas 3. part q. 48. art 5.
with the baptisme of S. Ihon and after with the baptisme of Christ Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that they were not baptized againe were not baptized with Ihons baptisme and that it is madnesse to say it that in the foresaied place of the Acts there is no speech of baptisme or baptizing Which are so contrarie to Scripture as Protestants sometime confesse it See lib. 2. cap. 30. ART XII WHETHER THE FORESAIED Ephesians had heard of the Holie Ghost SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Act. 19. v. 2. And he S. Paul saied to them Haue ye receaued The Ephesiās had not heard of the holie Ghost the Holie Ghost beleiuing But they saied to him Nay nether haue we heard whether there be a Holie Ghost CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE D. Stapleton in Actor 19. v. 5. S. Paul saied to these Ephesians because they had answered that they had heard nothing of the Holie Ghost In what then were you baptized PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Caluin in Actor 19. v. 2. How could it be that Iewes had heard They had heard of the holie Ghost nothing the Holie Ghost Surely hence we gather that Paul spoake not so much as in generall of the Holie Ghost and therefore there is a figure in the word Ghost Beza in Actor 19. v. 2. It were most absurd to beleiue that they who had beene baptized of Ihon and professed themselues disciples of Christ were ignorant that there was anie holie Ghost Bucanus in Instit loco 47. What those twelue men denie that they had heard that there was a Holie Ghost is not to be vnderstood of the being or person of the Holie Ghost but figuratiuely of the visible manner of powring downe his guifts Reineccius to 4. Armaturae c. 18. If demaund and answere had beene simply made of the Holie Ghost in respect of his person and grace it would follow that they had had no knowledge of the person of the Holie Ghost But the consequent is absurd THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that the saied Ephesians had not so much as heard that there was a Holie Ghost Catholiks say the same Protestants plainely say that it could not be that they had not heard of the Holie Ghost that it is absurd most absurd to thinke that they were ignorant of the Holie Ghost THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF BAPTISME The things which we haue in this Chapter rehearsed do clearly shew how differently Protestants beleiue of baptisme from the Scripture For the Scripture together withe Catholiks teacheth that water and the inuocatiō of the holie Trinitie be necessarie to baptisme that baptisme is necessarie by necessitie both of precept and of meane to saluation that Simon Magus and reprobats receaue whole baptisme that baptisme is effectuall in the reprobates that baptisme cleanseth sinnes but pardoneth not sinnes that are to be done that children of the faithfull are in state of damnatiō before they be baptized that Christs baptisme is different from S. Ihons baptisme All which Protestats denie They shew also that Protestants play the theiues with baptisme and steale from it the necessitie of water and of the inuocation of the holie Trinitie the necessitie of precept and meane to saluation the integritie and efficacie thereof in the reprobates the vertue of cleansing sinnes in anie whomsoeuer the difference and excellencie aboue the baptisme of S. Ihon which being taken away Christs baptisme remaineth onely in name and they likewise Christians in name onely Thus much of Baptisme Now of the Eucharist CHAPTER X. OF THE EVCHARISTE ART I. WHETHER THE EVCHARIST or that which Christ after his last supper gaue with his hands vnto his Apostles was his bodie and blood SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. MATHEW 26. v. 26. Christ saied of that which with his hands he gaue to his Apostles to eate This is my bodie The same is Marc. 14. v. The Eucharist is the bodie of Christ 14. And Luc. 22. ver 19. This is my bodie which is giuen for you And 1. Cor. 11. v. 24. This is my bodie which shal be deliuered for you Moreouer Ihon. 6. ver 15. he saieth The bread which I will giue is my flesh for the life of the world Mathew 26. v. 28. Christ saieth of that which he gaue The blood of Christ his Apostles to drinke This is my blood of the new testament which shal be shed for manie vnto remission of sinnes Marc. 14. v. 24. This is my blood of the new testament that shal be shed for manie Luc. 22. v. 20. This is the Chalice the new testament in my blood which shal be shed for you 1. Cor. 11. v. 25. This chalice is the new testament in my blood CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent sess 13. c. 3. The Apostles had not yet receaued the Eucharist of the hands of our Lord and yet he truely affirmed that to be his bodie which he gaue And cap. 4. Because Christ truely saied that that was his bodie which he offered vnder forme of bread therefore c. PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Iuel in Denfense of the Apologie part 2. c. 10. diuis 1. p. Not the flesh of Christ 209. The bread of the Sacrament is one thing and the flesh of Christ is an other There is great difference betweene the bread of the Sacramēt and the flesh of Christ Art 8. sect 5. The sacramentall bread is called Christs bodie although indeed it be not Not indeed his bodie Christs bodie So also art 21. sect 1. Bel in his Iesuits Antepast p. 44. The meaning of Christ is Not his reall blood not This is my naturall bodie and my reall blood Spalatensis l. 5. de Repub. c. 6. n. 108. The holie bread is not Not the bodie of Christ the bodie of Christ n. 112. The bread is called the bodie of Christ not that it is the bodie of Christ The Eucharist though it be Not truely called the bodie of Christ Yet it is not truely and really the bodie of Christ ibid. pag. 165. It is false to say The bread is the bodie of Christ Melancthon epist ad Com Palatin apud Hospin part 2. Not the true bodie of Christ Histor f. 260. Paul doth not say as they of Breme do Bread is the substantiall bodie of Christ nor as Hes husius doth Bread is the true bodie of Christ Hospinian himselfe lib. cit f. 261. The bread of the Supper Not his substantiall bodie is not the substantiall bodie of Christ Which he repeateth fol. 254. The verie like words of the Heluetians her rehearseth f. 161. 153. of the Tigurins 161. of the Strasburgians f. 100. of the Witenbergians fol. 292. of Hardenberg 297. and of Engelhard fol. 25. Zuinglius l. de Caena to 2. f. 283. These words of Christ This Not corporall flesh is my bodie can no way be vnderstood of substātiall and corporall flesh Which he hath againe l. de relig c. de Euchar. and in Subsidio to 2. fol. 247. And Sermon
and more by Bullinger in Hospin part 2. fol. 344. Where he saieth Who knoweth not that we are of their number who do not admit this word Substance nor euer would admit it THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ gaue to his Apostles his bodie to be eaten and his blood to be drunke that vnlesse we eate his flesh we shall not haue life that his flesh is truely meate The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that Christs flesh eaten profiteth nothing nothing at all that Christs true flesh cannot be eaten spiritually can be no way eaten that it is farre from Christs bodie to be truely eaten that Christs bodie is not exhibited in the Supper according to the substance thereof that those words Take eate are not spoaken of Christs bodie that Christs neuer gaue his bodie to be receaued the Euangelists neuer commanded vs to receaue and eate it that what is giuen to be eaten is Christs symbolicall bodie is but symbolicall bread is nothing but bread and wine onely a signe of Christs bodie that Christ gaue bread to the Apostles and not his bodie Which are so coÌ„trarie to the holie Scripture as themselues sometimes confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART III. WHETHER CHRIST GAVE the blood of the new testament to be drunke SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Mathew 26. v. 28. Drinke ye all of this For this is my blood The blood of the new testament to be drunâ—k of the new testament CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Mathew 26. vers 28. Christ professeth that what we drinke in the chalice is the blood of the new testament PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Zuinglius in Subsidio to 2. fol. 245. Christ did not giue the Not the blood of the new testament blood of the testament to drinke Which he repeateth againe And of the same opinion all the rest are who ether denie that Christ gaue his true blood to drinke as we haue seene in the former chapter for Christs true blood is the blood of the new testament or denie that the Eucharist is the testament as we shall heare art seq THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ gaue the blood of the new testament to be drunke The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely denie it ART IV. WHETHER THE EVCHARISticall Chalice be the testament of Christ SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. The Chalice was the new testament Luc. 22. v. 20. Christ saieth This is the chalice the new testament in my blood 1. Corinth 11. vers 25. This chalice is the new testament in my blood CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarm. l. 1. de Euchar. c. 11. As for the figure which they put in the word Testament I say there is none there and he auoucheth that the Eucharist is properly the testament of Christ PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Iuel art 10. sect 1. Nether was that cuppe in deed and really the It was not ths new testament new testament So also art 12. sect 16. Willet Cont. 13. q. 1. p. 595. The wine in the cuppe was not the new testament 596. The blood is not the testament Peter Martyr in Hospin part 2. Histor fol. 257. Nether the cuppe it selfe nor the liquor contained in it is indeed the testament Zuinglius in Subsidio to 2. fol. 245. This cuppe was not the blood of the testament nor the testament itselfe De Caena fol. 291. The blood of Christ is not the new testament and much lesse can we say that this drinke is the new testament howbeit it be called by this name And the reason why against the expresse word of God he denieth the chalice to be the testament of Christ he giueth l. de Relig. c. de Eucharist in these words If the cuppe be the testament it followeth that it is the true and sensible blood of Christ Oecolampadius apud Zuinglium to 2. fol. 499. It must needs be that this chalice or cuppe be the signe of the couenant or new testament not the new testament itselfe indeed Beza in Lucae 22. v. 20. edit An. 1565. Wine is called the couenant it selfe whereas it is onely a symbol or badge of the couenant or rather of that wherewith the couenant is made to wit of the blood of the Lord. In Colloq Montisbel pag. 38. I maruail that you call the Supper of the Lord a testament which seemes very strange to me The Supper of the Lord is not the testament itselfe but onely a parte of the testament that is the seale thereof The Cuppe cannot be the testament THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the chalice of the Eucharist is the new testament Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that nether the chalice nor the liquor therein contained is the new testament that nether the wine nor the blood of Christ is the new testament that the Cuppe cannot be the new testament but is onely a symbol or badge thereof or rather of the blood wherewith the testament was made That the Lords Supper is not the testament and that it were strange to call it so Which contradictioÌ„ of Scripture is so euident as diuers Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART V. WHETHER AT THE VERIE time of Christs celebration of the Eucharist his bodie was giuen and deliuered and his blood shedde for vs SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Luc. 22. v. 19. And taking bread he gaue thanks and brake Christs bodie was giueÌ„ and his blood shed at Supper and gaue to them saying This is my bodie which is giuen for you And S. Paul 1. Corinth 11. vers 24. in Greek hath which is broken as also S. Mathew 26. vers 28. S. Mark 14. v. 24. S. Luke c. 22. v. 20. speake of the blood or of the Chalice in the present tense Which is shedde CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Math. 26. v. 28. Those words Which shal be shedde for you are to be redde in the present tense according to all the Euangelists in the Greek text and the sense is which is now distributed for you and is by reall participatioÌ„ sprinkled and inwardely powred into euerie one of you PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Iuel art 17. sect 4. Christ gaue his bodie to be broken and his blood to be shedde not at his last supper but onely vpon his crosse and not where else Spalatensis l. 5. cap. 6. sect 229. saieth that the forecited words can be no way true of the present time Peter Martyr cont Gardiner col 354. But I pray you tell vs once what that is which remaineth and is broken If you say Not giuen or shedde at the Supper Accidents you wil be laughed at by children If you say The bodie of Christ you wil be blasphemous Col. 812. But who will say that Christ himselfe or his bodie is broken in the Supper Moulins in his Bucler part 2. pag. 91. Christ did not say that his blood was shedde in the Eucharist Pag. 87. He speaketh of a shedding which was not yet made but to