of faith in Christ of iustifying faith of faith of remission of sinnes The like hath Ambing apud Hospin in Concord discordi fol. 140. Beza de Praedest cont Caste l. vol. 1. p. 393. There is no mētion in the law of this benefit of free redemption by Christ For the declaratiō of this will belongeth to an other parte of Gods word which is called the Ghospell Apol. Cōf. Augustan c. de Iustific The Ghospell preacheth iustice of faith in Christ which the law doth not teach THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Moises wrote in the law of Christ that Moises wrote things concerning Christ That Moise commanded the people to heare Christ in all things The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the law neuer knew faith in Christ that Moises cōmandeth not faith in Christ that the law knoweth nothing of faith in Christ that in the law there is no mention of free redemption in Christ that the law teacheth nothing of faith in Christ ART IX WHETHER ANY VNWRITTEN word or Traditions be to be kept SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 2. Thessal 2. v. 15. Therefore brethren stand and hould the traditions Traditions not written to be helde which you haue learned whether it be by word or by our epistle CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Coūcell of Trent Sess 4. The holie Coūcell doth with equall pious affection reuerently receaue and honour traditions belonging to faith or manners as ether deliuered by Christs mouth or the holie Ghost and by continuall succession conserued in the Catholik Church PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 3. cap. 10. We care not for vnwritten Not to be helde traditions And Contro 2. q. 5. c. 18. We acknowledge no other word then that which is written And what doctrine soeuer is not written we hould for bastard doctrine Perkins in Cathol ref Contr. 20. c. 2. We acknowledge the onely written word of God Luther Postil in ferias S. Stephani Nothing is to be affirmed Nothing but that which is expressed in Scripture which is not expressed in Scripture Iacobus Andreae l. cont Hosium p. 169. That faith is no faith but an vncertain opinion which is not grounded vpon an expresse testimonie of Scripture Wigand apud Scusselb to 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 681. Onely those doctrines whose very words or equiualent for sense are extant in the Scripture are to be tought and deliuered in the Church Caluin in Gratulat ad Praecentorem pag. 377. Nothing is to be beleiued which is not expressed in Scripture And cont versipellem pagin 353. There is no mention of vnwritten traditions Beza in Rom. 1. v. 17. Christians acknowledge no other object of this faith then the written word of God Etad Reprehens Castell p. 503. Whosoeuer beleiueth in doctrine of religion that which is not written I say he embraceth opinion for faith and an idol for God Vallada in Apol. cont Episc Luzon c. 13. In all the holie No speech of an vnwritten word Scripture there is no speech of an vnwritten word Daneus Controu 7. pag. 1350. The foundation of Christian faith is one onely to wit the word of God and that onely written Hospinian part 2. Histor Sacram. fol. 23. The Magistrates of Zurich commāded that hereafter nothing should be proposed or preached in their Church but the pure fined word of God contained in the bookes of the Prophets and Apostles THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that traditions as well they which are learned by word as they which are learned by writing are to be obserued Catholiks teach the same Protestants expressely teach that onely written doctrin is to be tought nothing to be beleiued but what is written onely the pure fined written word to be tought no obiect of faith but what is written nothing to be beleiued but what is expressed in Scripture and that in verie words or in equiualent sense that there is no mention of vnwritten traditions no speech of vnwritten word that they care not for vnwritten traditions A SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF THE WORD of God or Scripture What we haue rehearsed in this chapter doth clearly shew that Protestants do farre otherwise iudge of Scripture then the Scripture it selfe and Catholiks doe For the holie Scripture together with Catholiks teacheth that in it are some things hard to be vnderstood that it cannot be vnderstood without the light of the holie Ghost that the Ghospell is or containeth a law that it doth preach pennance and good workes reproueth sinne promiseth saluation vnder condition of good workes and is not contrarie vnto the law of God that the law of Moises commandeth faith in Christ and that vnwritten traditions are to be obserued And Protestants defend all the contrarie They shew also that Protestants steale from the Scripture Protestants steale from Scripture her excellencie wherewith she surpasseth the capacitie of mans wit and from the Ghospell that it containeth any law preacheth pennance or good workes reproueth sinne promiseth saluation vpon condition of well doing and agreement with Gods law whereby we see what a libertin Ghospell they bring in to wit such as containeth Libertin Ghospell of Protestants no law preacheth no pennance or good workes reproueth no sinne promiseth saluation without all condition of well doing and is quite contrarie to the law of God And that they steall from the law of Moises that it commandeth faith in Christ and finally they take away all the vnwritten word of God CHAPTER V. OF SAINT PETER AND THE APOSTLES ART I. WHETHER S. PETER WERE first of the Apostles SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. MATHEW 10. v. 2. And the names of the twelue S. Peter first of the Apostles Apostles be these The first Simon who is called Peter CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Pontif. c. 18. Peter was put first by reason his dignitie PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Contr. 3. q. 5. c. 3. Wheresoeuer mention is made Not first of Peter if we looke well into the place we shall find that nothing is giuen to him which agreeth not to the other Apostles And Controu 4. quaest 2. c. Paul maketh himselfe equall to Peter in all points Tindal in Fox his Acts p. 1139. S. Paul is greater then Peter by the testimonie of Christ Articuli Smalcaldici pag. 345. We giue no prerogatiue to Peter Luther in Gal. 2. to 5. This place clearely sheweth that all the Apostles had equall vocation and commission There was altogether equalitie amongst them no Apostle was greater then an other Illyricus in Praefat. lib. de Sectis It appeareth that Christ gaue no primacie at all in his Church to any man Caluinus in Matth. 20. v. 25. Christ shewed that in his kingdome No primacie or firstnesse there was no primacie for which they contended Beza in Matth. 10. v. 2. What if this word First were added of some who would establish Peters primacie Festus Homius disput 12. All the Apostles were equall in dignitie authoritie
and that we should rightly vnderstaÌ„d his meaning Finally Christs hearers do contest the same For they were his Apostles to whome he had made knowne the mysteries of God and therefore of their parte there was no cause to speake otherwise then men vse to do by such kind of words The seuenth head shal be taken from the nature or qualitie 7. From the matter of the matter of the foresaied articles in which Protestants contradict the expresse words of Scripture together with Protestants want of the like opposite words of Scripture which may seeme expressely and without any inference or exposition of Protestants to teach as Protestants doe For the matter of the foresaied articles partely is such as the very light of reason doth see that it is so as the expresse words of Scripture doth teach it to be to wit That God willeth not doth not commandeth not sinne That he tempteth not nor prodestinateth men to sinne that he iustifieth not the impious remaining impious that good workes are necessarie to saluation and the like Partely is knowne to be such by verie experience as That a man hath free will in good and badde that he cooperateth to his conuersion that faith is an act of man and such others Partely it is new neuer heard of before and farre beyond the reach of all reason as is the Eucharist and manie more Now Protestants in all kinds of matter What kind of words Protest want which is in controuersie and almost in all the foresaied articles want expresse words of Scripture which were of purpose spoaken to declare what a thing was and which of themselues plainly and directly without any inference or exposition of men may so much as seeme to say that it is so as Protestants teach Seing therefore that What kind of words Catholiks doe bring in all kind of matter in controuersie and in all the foresaied articles Catholiks do bring both expresse words of Scripture and spoaken of purpose to declare what we ought to beleiue touching that article and which plainely and directly according to their natiue and vsuall sense amongst men without any inference or exposition added to them pronounce that it is so as Catholiks teach and that the light of reason and experience also contest the same sense in such matters as they can reach vnto And that Protestants in none or very few articles can bring anie such expresse words of Scripture which may so much as seeme to be so plaine What Protest oppose against the expresse words of Scripture for them as those are for Catholiks but in all or all most all the saied articles onely bring their inferences or arguments and those composed at least of one humane principle and that in matters which humane reason no way can reach vnto it is mere madnesse to forsake the doctrine the doctrine of the Catholik Church holie Fathers and Councels and the most expresse words of Scripture in all the saied articles and the very light of reason and experience it selfe in manie of them and to harken to the inferences consequences and humane arguments of a few new and disagreing Heretiks For example Seing the Eucharist as it is a matter of faith to wit a Sacrament instituted of Christ and a guift giuen of him to the Church whether it be onely a seale of grace as ProtestaÌ„ts would or the true bodie of Christ as Catholiks beleiue is a new thing instituted first of Christ and neuer heard of before nor falleth vnder the reach of sense or reason but onely of faith and is such as Christ would haue it to be is it not Madnesse to follow mens consequences rather then Gods words madnesse to gather what it is rather by the humane inferences or arguments composed of some few new and disagreing men of one humane principle at least then by Christs owne words and those most expresse and spoakeÌ„ of him purposely for to tell vs most clearely what he would haue the Eucharist to be For who well in his witts will perswade himselfe ether that these men by their humane arguments perceaue better what a thing which falleth not vnder reason is then Christ who instituted it or that they know better what Christ would haue it to be then Christ himselfe or that they expresse Christs meaning more clearely by their arguments and consequences quite opposite to Christs words then he hath done by his owne expresse words speaking by himselfe of purpose for to declare his meaning or finally that Christ expresseth his meaning concerning the Eucharist by a humane principle no where deliuered of him and a humane argument neuer made of him and that also directly opposite to his owne expresse words better then by his owne most expresse and cleare words and those of purpose spoaken for to expresse clearely what he would haue the Eucharist to be Can any maÌ„ beleiue that a few new and disagreing men do vnderstand the supernaturall matters of faith better then God himselfe or that they declare better what they are by their humane inferences and arguments composed of humane principles theÌ„ God himselfe doth by his owne expresse words spoaken by him of purpose for to declare what they are what it is to preferre mans word before Gods word and man before God if this be not Or doth any wise man teach new Notethis things necessarie to be knowne of vs and which cannot be knowne but by his teaching and that but once in his life and a litle before his death onely by contraries to wit by saying that they are that which they are not indeed and neuer saying that they are that which truely they are And shall we thinke that Christ the wisdome of his Father did once onely in his life and neare vnto his death teach vs what the Eucharist is which was then a new thing neuer heard of before and necessarie to be knowne of vs and yet could not be knowne but by his teaching onely by the contrarie to wit by saying most expressely that it was his bodie giuen and broken for vs neuer saying that it was not his bodie but onely a figure thereof if indeed it onely were a figure as Protestants beleiue would God or Gods Scripture as S. Austin writeth â— 33. cont Faâ—stum c. 7. speake in an other manner to vs then ours is No surely vnlesse it would not be vnderstood of vs. And who will say that Is it mens custome to be taught by coÌ„traries it is our manner to be taught new things and that but once and which caÌ„not be knowne but by some Maisters teaching not by our Maisters expresse words spoaken by him of purpose for to tell vs what those things are but by a quite opposite discourse not made of him but of some other and consisting at least of one principle which he neuer allowed By these Reader thou seest clearly as I hope that if Ether Protest contradict the true sense of Scripture or
of the Anthropomorphites then thou canst obiect it to vs in this mysterie For the Anthropomorphites in no place of Scripture had an expresse word which directly saied God hath a bodie We haue a most expresse word wherewith Christ saied most directly of that which he gaue to his Apostles This is my bodie The Anthropomorphites had no expresse word which was of purpose spoakē to tell vs what God was we haue an expresse word spoaken purposely to this end and onely to this end to tell vs what the Eucharist is The Anthropomorphites had no expresse word which anie circunstances of moment did conuince to be vnderstood in their proper sense we haue an expresse word which all circustances do confirme ought to be vnderstood in their natiue and vsuall signification The Anthropomorphites had a word but as a thing which the very light of reason did shew to be otherwise then the word did signifie we haue the word of a new thing neuer heard of before and which can no way be knowne by the light of reason but onely by the word of God Finally to omit al other differences taken from the Church Fathers and Councels the Anthropomorphites had the word of a matter which the Scripture other where most manifestly denieth we haue the word of a matter which Deuter. 4. Actor 7. Ioan. 4. the Scripture no where directly ether clearely or obsculy denieth nether the deniall thereof can any way be wroūg out of the Scripture but by adding a false humane principle and by making a deceitfull humane argument Thus manie and thus great differences are there betwene the word wherewith we make the Eucharist the bodie of Christ and the word wherewith the Anthropomorphites made God to haue a bodie as I thinke are not betwene the word which the Anthropomorphites alledged and the word wherewith anie other article of Christian faith is proued And thus much touching the first argument taken from the opposition betwixt the words of the holie Scripture and of Protestants in 260. articles and such words of the Scripture as were spoaken of purpose for to tell vs what we were to beleiue and in their open and plaine sense which they manifestly shew and in which such words vse to be spoaken and vnderstood of men which argument as a foundation of all the rest that follow shal be included in euerie one of them CHAPTER II. THAT PROTESTANTS CONFESSE that they contradict the sense of those words which the Catholik Church manie ages agoe and manie of themselues beleiue to be the words of God THE second argument wherewith we will proue that Protestants contradict the true sense of the holie Scripture we will take from their confession wherein they confesse that they contradict the sense of those words of which some of them to let passe all other proofes are acknowledged by diuers Protestants and all of them were manie ages agoe iudged by the Catholik Lutherans confesse that their doctrine is against S. Iames Epistle Church to be a parte of the holie Scripture For Luther and the Lutheran Protestants do confesse that the cheifest point of Protestancie to wit of Iustification by onelie faith doth verilie contradict the Epistle of S. Iames where he saieth Yee see that a man is iustified by workes and not by faith onely For thus writeth Luther in his Preface vpon that Epistle I iudge it to be the writing of no Apostle for this cause First because directly against S. Paul and all other Scripture it attributeth iustification to workes And in Luther saieth S. Iames doated c. 22. Gen. tom 6. fol. 282. Iames concludeth ill It followeth not as Iames doateth Therefore the fruites do iustifie let our aduersaries therefore be packing with their Iames. Melancthon de Sacris Concion to 2. fol. 23. But if they cannot be mittigated by anie exposition as those words of Iames Yee see c. these absolutely are not to be admitted Magdelburgenses Cētur 1. l. 2. c. 4. col 54. The Epistle of Iames swarueth not a litle from the analogie of Apostolik doctrine whiles it ascribeth iustification not to faith onely but to workes And Centur. 2. c. 4. col 71. The Epistle of Iames attributeth iustice to workes contrarie to Paul and all other Scriptures Schlusselburg lib. 1. Theol. Caluin art 15. fol. 50. Iames contrarie to Paul attributeth iustice to workes And tom 8. Catal. Haeret. pag. 500. he saieth of S. Iames. He fighteth directly with Paul and all the rest of the Scripture by giuing iustice before God to mans workes The same confesse Pomeranus and Vitus Theodorus cited by Coccius to 1. lib. 6. art 23. and Pappus cited by Gretser l. 1. de verbo Dei c. 18. and the same is insinuated by Hunnius de Iustific pag. 219. Wherevpon Daneus in Enchirid. Augustini c. 67. saieth It troubleth manie now a dayes so that some haue cast out the Epistle of Iames others haue called it straweish And Pareus l. 4. de Iustif c. 18. Luther could not accord Iames with Paul but by casting away the whole Epistle Beza also in Iac. 2. v. 14. Manie haue cast away this Epistle for this cause as if it were contrarie to true doctrine Nether do onelie Lutherans iudge thus of S. Iames his Epistle but also some Sacramentaries For Musculus de locis tit de Some Sacramentaries reiect Sainct Iames. Iustificat saieth That impertinentlie he alledgeth the examples of Abraham That he confoundeth the word of faith and setteth downe a sentence different from Apostolicall doctrine And ib. tit de Scriptur pa. 172. plainelie professeth that he houldeth it not for authenticall Scripture And the Confession Heluet. c. 15. saieth The same saied he Iames not contradicting S. Paul otherwise he were to be reiected And neuerthelesse commonly all Sacramentaries account S. Iames Epistle to be a parte of holie Scripture in so much as the English French and Flemish Protestants haue put it in their Confessions as a point of their faith Wherefore thus I argue in forme what contradicteth the Epistle of S. Iames contradicteth the holie Scripture The cheifest point of Protestancie touching Iustification by onely faith cōtradicteth the Epistle of S. Iames Therefore it contradicteth the holie Scripture The Maior or first Proporsition is not onely beleiued and tought of all Catholiks but also commonelie of Sacramentaries And the Minor or second Proposition is graunted by the Lutherans In like sorte all Protestants acknowledge their doctrine Protestants confesse that they teach contrarie to Machab. Tobie c. of not praying for the dead to be contrarie to those words of 2. Machab. c. 12. It is a holie and holesome cogitation to pray for the dead that they may be loose from their sinnes Wherevpon Caluin in Antidoto Concil Trident. sess 4. p. 265. saieth Out of the 2. of Machabes both Purgatorie will be proued and the Intercession of Saints out of Tobie Satisfactions Exorcismes and what not They will borrow no few matters of Ecclesiasticus
his commaÌ„dements which it saieth plainely but onely that they ought to keepe them Wherefore I thus argue They who besides the foresaied direct opposition to the expresse words of holie writt are also forced to expound that by Ought to be which the Scripture plainely saieth Is contradict the true meaning of the holie Scripture Protestants doe so Thererefore c. CHAPTER XIV THAT WORDS OF SCRIPTVRE SIGnifying a true thing they expound of an apparent or shew MY 19. proof shal be because words of Scripture which signifie a true thing Protestants are compelled to expound of an apparent or shew before men Thus they delude the words of Scripture which teach that Sacraments or good works doe iustifie or redeeme sinnes that euill or reprobate men may beleiue or be in the Church that reprobates may be iustified doe good workes and the like When the Scripture saieth 10. v. 10. With the mouth confession is made to saluation Luther apud Schlusselburg to 7. To saluation 1. to a signe thereof Catal. p. 234. answereth to wit to testifie saluation obtained by faith Kemnitius ib. p. 559. Paul speaketh so that confession saueth to shew what kind of faith obtaineth eternall life to wit firme and effectuall Wigandus ib. p. 746. The sense is By faith saluation is apprehended but by month is manifested and confession of saluation vttered Et P. Martyr in 1. Cor. 12. Saluation is attributed to confession because thence it beginneth to be declared as by an outward signe He would 1. He made such shew Luther in Postilla in Festo Stephani writeth thus What he here saieth How often would I gather together thy children as c. signifith that God delt so with the Iews as no man could thinke or imagin otherwise then that the earnestly would gather them For he behaued himselfe as a man should who indeed would it And Postilla in Dom. 1. Aduentus those words Redeeme thy sinnes by almes he thus expoundeth Shew that they are blotted out And Dom. 4. post Trinit those words Luke 6. Forgiue and yee shall be forgiuen in this sorte If I forgiue that forgiuenesse maketh meassured of the sinceritie of my faith and certifieth me and declareth my faith And in Dom. 9. Make your selues freinds of the mammoÌ„ of iniquitie that is by outward almes openly shew your faith whereby you may get freinds that poore men may be witnesses of your manifest worke that you beleiue sincerely Schlusselburg tom 7. Catal. p. 235. writeth thus Sorrow Worketh 1. sheweth according to God worketh pennance of worke to saluation that is according to Luthers interpretation is such a worke as testifieth of saluation And pag seq The saying of Ioel Euerie one that calleth vpon the name of the Lord shal be safe hath this meaning that calling vpon the Lords name is a testimonie of saluation receaued by faith Brentius homil 1. in Dom. 13 post Trinit writeth that that speach of Iosias 4. Reg. 23. He returned to our Lord in all his heart is to be vnderstood what Iosias was in the iudgement of men for the gouernement of his kingdome not what he was in the iudgment of God for his priuate faultes Reineccius to 4. Armat c. 15. those words Rom. 2. Gentils who haue not the law doe naturally the things of the law expoundeth of politike philosophicall and Pharisaicalliustice Kemnitius in locis tit de Argument part 2. saieth that those words Deuter. 6. It shal be iustice to vs before God if Iustitie 1. in title we keeepe his commandments are ether meant of legall iustice or that though our iustice be vncleane yet God giueth it the title of Iustice He would say that the keeping of the commandements is ether onely legall iustice or onely iustice in name sake And of the fast of Phinees he saieth of it selfe it could not haue the title of iustice but was reputed as a deed iustly done Herbrand in Compend Theol. loco de bonis oper If the letter Redeeme thy sinnes by almes be vrged it is cleare that the sense of those words are contrarie to the scope of the whole Scripture and to the analogie of faith But this is the proper and true meaning of the place of Daniel Beleiue God to be Redeemâ— 1. Shâ—w â—hy faith be angrie with sinne and to be appeased with the iust that is the beleiuers and shew this faith to be true by workes In like sorte speaketh Hunnius l. de Iustif p. 198. of those words Tobie 4. Almes deliuereth from all sinne and from death Zuinglius respons ad Confess Lutheri tom 2. fol. 477. Those sayings of Paul which he allledgetb out of Ephes 5. and Cleanse 1. Signifie cleansing Tit. 3. of the waters cleansing by the word and of the lauer of regeneration they vndestand not to be enallages that is changings of functions by which it vseth to be attributed to signes which they signifie onely Caluin in Ioan. 15. v. 2. those words Euerie branch in me c. expoundeth thus I answere manie are held by the opinion of meÌ„ to be the vine which indeed haue no roote in the vine In c. 16. vers 27. We are saied to be loued of God whiles we loue In. 1. in mens opinion Christ because we haue a pledge of his fatherlie loue In Actor 8. v. 13. He beleiued he expoundeth He thought he beleiued In Iust 1. in outward shew Ezech. 18. ver 24. How doth Ezechiel meane that the iust fall away This question is soone answered because he treateth not of the liuelie roote of iustice but of the outward shew or apparence In Ephes 5. v. 26. That Paul saieth we are washed by baptisme is because there God testifieth our washing vnto vs and with all doth what he sheweth In Colos 2. v. 12. We are buried together with him by baptisme he speaketh after his manner attributing the efficacie to the Sacrament lest it should in vaine signifie that which is not In Iacob 2. vers 23. He is iustified by workes Iustified 1. Knowne that is by the fruites his iustice is knowneand approued De Praedest pag. 714. It is no meruaile if the Scripture esteeming Sauls workes by the outward shew commendeth his innocencie and honestie Et 3. Instit c. 4. § 36. That to redeeme Dan. 4. is rather referred to men then to God And the same he saieth of that of Salomon Charitie couereth sinnes and of other such places Beza in Colloq Montisbel p. 388. We say that baptisme of water is the lauer of regeneration that is signifieth the inward RegeneratioÌ„ 1. Signe thereof regeneration In 1. Tim. 4. v. 1. It is one thing truely to embrace Christ an other onely with mouth to professe Christ with Simon Magus and Iudas and yet these are saied euen to beleiue to wit according to the common vse of speach because they seeme to beleiue In Math. 19. ver 2. If thou wilt be perfect c. That is if thou wilt
Chiefe men of the people And the same saieth Iuel lib. cit p. 6. c. 11. sect 4. and Hunnius in Colloq Ratisbon sess 2. Where he addeth that Moyses did sacrifice as a Prophet of God and not as a Preist Luther to 1. f. 398. writeth in this sorte Paul in this place Faith 1. Guift of God 1. Cor. 13. If I had all c. taketh faith for the guift of the holie Ghost Et fol. 397. The sense of these words Redeeme thy Redeeme 1. Beleiue leaue apprehend sinnes c. Dan. is to beleiue that God is angrie with sinne and is pleased with the iust and shew this faith to be true by workes But Melacthon thus expoundeth these words leaue giue ouer sinning Et Martyr ibid. hom 21. Apprehend the Messias by faith Illyricus in Math. 7. v. 82. To performe the words of Christ Performe 1. Beleiue is to embrace him truely and from the heart and secondly to relie vpon his doctrine well vnderstood Bullinger Dec. 3. sermon 9. writeth that when S. Iames saieth a man is iustified by Workes 1. Faith workes he meaneth By faith fruitfull of good workes Et l. de Orig. Error c. 18. These sentences I will protect this cittie for my selfe and for my seruant Dauid And I will protect this cittie for my selfe and for promise made to Dauid are all one Sadeel Dauid 1. Promise to Dauid or Christ Sorrow Pietie ◠Faith ad Art 57. expoundeth For Dauid that is For Christ Hunnius tract de Iustif p. 145. saieth that by the word Sorrow in that 2. Cor. 7. Sorrow according to God c. and also by the word Pietie in that 1. Timot. 4. Pietie hath promises is vnderstood Faith But most of all this their manner of expounding by disparate or quite different things appeareth in their expounding the words of Christ his soules descent into hell where by Soule they vnderstand Dead bodie or Carcasse by Descended Suffered and by Hell Graue Death or Paines of hell and the like For thus Zuinglius in Hofmeister in Art Descended 1. Redeemed 3. Confess Aug. He descended into hell that is his death re-redeemed those which were in hell OEcolampadius ib. It is an Descended 1. Buried exposition of that He was buried Bucer in Math. 27. In the 2. of the Acts for the same is put that his soule is not forsaken in hell and the holie did not see the graue of corruption to wit for that which is Not to be forsaken in death What other thing is it here to descēd to hell then the bodie to be buried vnder earth In this sorce then descended life or a liuelie bodie into hell that is being truely dead was put in the graue Agayne That article of the Symbol He descended into hell is an explication of that which went before He was dead and burried P Martyr in locis Class 2. p. 428. He descended into hell signifieth nothing els Descended 1. In estate of the dead Descended 1. Suffered death Descended 1. Laied in the the graue Soule 1. Carcasse Hell 1. Graue but that he was in the very same estate in which other soules are that haue departed from their bodies Caluin 2. Instit c. 16. ser 10. If he be saied to haue descended into hell no meruaile seing he suffered that death wich by Gods wrath is inflicted vpon the wicked Beza in Act. 2. v. 27. To descend to hell properly signifieth to be laied in the graue Et ib. edit An. 1565. In my former edition I rightly translated it Thou shalt not forsake my carcasse in the graue In Defens cont Castel vol. 1. Theol. pag. 460. In the text My soule I translated my carcasse Et p. seq I still keepe the same sense Serranus cont Hayum part 3. p. 520. spendeth manie words to proue that by Soule Act. 2. v. 27. is not meat Soule but a Deade mā or carcasse and addeth Flesh. 1. Soule No man can doubt but by the word flesh is meat Soule So that by Soule shall not be meant Soule but Carcasse and agayne by Flesh not flesh but soule Vrsinus in Carechism q. 44. In this article Hell is taken for great affliction Whitaker l. 8. cōt Dur. sect 7. That the Prophet saieth Thou shalt not forsake my soule in hell is as much as if he had saied Thou shalt not forsake me lying in the graue Et Sect. 22. It is manifest that it is Descended 1. Buried the same sense in both words that to be buried is to descēd to hell and that to descend to hell is to be buried Perkins in Explic. Symboli tom 1. col 680. He descended into hell that is being dead and buried was detained captiue in the graue and kept of death for three dayes Et col 676. Others expound it thus He felt and bore the torments and anguishes of hell This saieth he is a good and true exposition Et in Serie Causarum c. 18. The descent into hell is the ignominious dominion of death ouer him being buried Daneus Contr. 2. p. 161. By the name of the death Death 1. torments of soule of Christ are meant the torments of soule and the curse of God which is felt in the mynd P. 169. It is apparent out of the Acts 2. that the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put for graue of the bodie Et pag. 172. he saieth Of the descent of Christ to hell that is of the sorrow in soule suffered by Christ Tilenus in Syntagm c. 6. vnderstandeth by the descent to hell the dominion of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which it obtained by thy continuate death of Christ oppressed and shut vp in a graue sealed and kept with souldiors for three dayes together Bucanus in loco 25. By Christs descent into hell are meant those great torments of mynd which he sustained in his agonie and on the crosse Polanus in Syntagm l. 6. c. 21. We declare that the descent of Christ into hell is his voluntarie demission of himselfe to abide and wrastle out the paines of hell Finally Vorstins in Antibel pag 40. Writeth thus All Protetestants do not wholy agree about the true sense of this article whilest some accommodate this phrase properly to the death and burriall of Christ as an explication thereof others metaphorically to the inward griefs of the mynd or infernall torments which Christ suffered at the time of his death or passion and others metonymically or effectiuely by a kinde of prosopopeia to the fruite of the death and passion of Christ exhibited vnto vs miserable and damned Et p. 41. We say that speach Descend to hell most truely doth signifie in Scripture nothing els thē simply to dye or to brought into the state of the dead and so buried Et p. 42. The sense of those words Thou shalt not leaue my soule in hell may most fitly be expressed thus Thou shalt not leaue my life in death or thou shalt not leaue me in the
as thou seest Christian Doctors to cōtend and disagree stick to him who bringeth a cleare euident and expresse oracle of God Caluin l. de ver ref p. 326. We denie that it is lawfull for vs to goe from the certaine words of Christ And 4. Instit c. 17. § 35. Our soules relie vpon the onely certaine word of God when they are called to account Sadeel libr. de Human. Christ I cannot sufficiently admire them who by those things which are not extant in Scripture will take awaye the things which are approued by most certaine and euident testimonies of Scripture And de ver peccat remissio No opinion is Theologicall which is against the expresse places of Scripture Fulk in Hebr. 6. not 3. Nether is the exposition of anie man to be receaued that goeth directly against the words of the text and the manifould testimonies of the Scripture Vorstius in Amica Collat. sec 101. Who simply so affirme and teach al these things they are secure before God because they can safely retire themselues vnder the sheild of the holie Scripture But who denie them or by meruailous glosses obscure or corrupt them thy finde no where sure footing There is nothing more secure thē simply to stick to the cleare word of God expounded by it selfe and contrariewise nothing more dangerous then to adde or detract neuer so litle of our owne especially in matters of so great moment Thus the cheife Protestant maisters which if ether themselues would haue followed or their disciples yet would follow soone would there be an end of these controuersies With what assurance ô God may Catholiks appeare Confidence of Cath. for their faith before thy tribunall for to answere for the faith which they maintaine against Protestants seing they finde it is auouched in so manie and so great articles by thy expresse words spoaken not by the way but of set purpose to tell vs what thou wouldest haue vs beleiue of these matters and in their cleare and plaine sense which they manifestly beare and in which such words vse to be taken of men so that vnlesse thou doe deceaue then or be deceaued they cānot in these points be deceaued But with what distrust Desperation of Protest or rather desperation will Protestants appeare seing they haue left that which so expresse words of God do auouch follow that which they most clearelie condēne onelie humane consequences humane glosses humane subtilities doe vphould Then these words of God wil be as Melancthon saied lightnings or as S. Austin speaketh thundrings Lib. 1. contr Parm. c. 2. and heauenly lightnings and Protestants cōsequences figures and glosses will vanish to nothing Then it will clearelie appeare that Protestants without all word of God without all diuine authoritie but onelie vpon their owne fancies haue preferred their consequences their conferences their idle reasons before Gods expresse word and that they might not seeme to haue done so haue changed the true and natiue sense of Gods words into a strange figuratiue and violent sense And shall we Neuer anie so contrarie to Scripture as Protestants thinke that these men are Ghospelers restorers of the Ghospel or sent of God and their doctrine the pure Ghospell Whereas neuer was there doctrine more opposit to the Ghospell nor euer anie who in so manie and weightie matters so directlie opposed themselues to the plaine words and open sense of the Ghospell O bouldnesse of men that durst do thus against the expresse word of God himselfe O impudencie of them who would auouch such doctrine for the Ghospell And ô blindnesses or madnesse of them who suffer themselues to be deceaued of such men in a matter so euident O bewiched and blinded mē awaken at lenght open your eyes consider your estate search the Scriptures here set before your eyes and compare them with the doctrine of your Maisters and consider whether they who in so manie and so great matters speak so contrarie can speake with the same spirit thinke the same thing Demand of your Maisters 1. by what authoritie Demands to be made to Ministers of God by what word of God they dare speake contrarie to the words and phrase of Scripture of so manie and so great matters 2. by what authoritie or word of God they dare thinke of so manie and so great matters otherwise then the expresse word of God spoaken purposelie and in it plaine and open sense taught them to thinke 3. By what authoritie or word of God they haue changed the proper vsuall and manifest sense of his words into figuratiue vnusuall and violent senses If they can alledge no expresse authoritie or word of Ministers draw men from Gods expresse word to their consequences God for their so doing as in trueth in most of these Articles they can giue no colour of Gods expresse word but oneliepretend their consequences their conferences their reasons suffer not your selues by this most deceitfull and fond humane pretext to be drawne from Gods expresse and their manifest sense Let vs saieth S. Austin heare our Lib. de peccat mer. c. 20. our Lord not the ghesses and suspicions of men But that God speaking to men speaking according to the manner of men speaking of diuine and supernaturall things which cannot be knowne of vs but by his words and speaking of them purposely for to declare his mynd concerning Note them should so often and in so manie and so wheigtie points thinke otherwise then he speaketh or otherwise thinke then his words do shew or otherwise then men to whome he speaketh vse to vnderstand them and yet not once should expressely say the cōtrarie is not Gods word but the ghesses and suspicions yea the impostures and lies of men In this point therefore consisteth almost all the The Summe whether Catholiks or Protest be to be followed summe of deliberation whether Catholiks or Protestants be to be followed to wit whether in supernaturall matters which cannot be knowne but by Gods expresse words we ought to follow rather the expresse words of God purposely spoaken of him for to tell vs those matters Is whether Gods word or mans reason rather then the consequences conferences reasons of some new slart vp men not well agreing among themselues Then the which consultation none can be easier For if euen in matters which are subiect to sense reason we ought to preferre Gods word before reason of what men soeuer how much more in things which farre surpasse the reach of mens sense or reason ought we to preferre it before the reasons of a few new and iangling fellows Let that faith liue florish and triumphe which Let that faith preuaile which Scripture most fauoureth in diuine matters that cannot be knowne but by Gods words is authorized by Gods expresse word spoaken of purpose to declare Gods mynd and in the plaine and opē sense wherein men vse to take such words and against which sense no
pastors as is shewed in the saied booke c. 2. cit and Caluin in Ezechiel c. 3. v. 9. saieth that Papists chalenge the name of the Church because they pretend a continuall succession And indeed saieth he we are forced to confesse that they haue the ordinarie ministerie And who can denie but the true Pastors of Gods Church are true owners of Gods worde which they haue authoritie to preach Thereby they confesse that Catholiks are true possessors of the holie Scripture For thus writeth Luther to 2. Germ. fol. 279. cited by Scarpius in Eccles c. 6. VVe confesse that vnder Poperie are manie Christian goods yea all Christian good and that it came from thence to vs. Namely we confesse that in Poperie is true holie Scripture true baptisme true office of preaching true Sacrament of the altar true keyes to forgiue sinnes true Catechisme Nay I say that in Poperie is true The kernell of Christianitie in Poperie Christianitie yea the very kernell of Christianitie and manie great Saintes And Hall Chalmeley and Batterfeild graunt that Luther wrote thus and seeme to allow it Luther also to 6. in c. 28. Genes saieth we confesse that Papists haue the Church because they haue baptisme absolution the text of the Ghospel and there are manie godlie men amongest them The eight proofe shal be from the Confession of such 8. title Confession of strangers as nether are Catholiks nor Protestants For as Vorstius writeth in Antibell p. 181. Iewes Turkes and Pagans do think that the Christian religion consisteth cheefly in Poperie And Whitaker Cont. 2. q. c. 2. No other famous Church can be named in these latter times which was thought to be the Church and was called the Church but the Roman Church Nether let anie think that such as want faith can not be sufficient iudges in this matter For albeit they be not sufficient iudges in the question of the trueth of doctrin yet are they sufficient in question of facte as this is And in this Ioseph lib. Antiq. Euseb l. 7. c. 24. sorte the Heathens in the time of the ould law iudged betwene the Iewes and the Samaritans and in the time of the Ghospel betwene the Catholiks and the Samosatenians And as Christians can iudge what kind of Mahometans are the true owners of the Alcoran though they think not the Alcoran to conteyne true doctrin So may Infidels iudge what kinde of Christians be true owners of the Ghospel though they beleeue not the Ghospel to be the worde of God The ninth proof may be taken from the agreement of 9. title Agreement with Scripture the Cath. doctrin both in words and sense with the holie Scripture as shall appeare in this booke Which proofe though taken alone doe not conuince that Catholiks are true owners of the Scripture yet in conuinceth that they are true owners rather then Protestants who so farre disagree from the Scripture both in words and sense The tenth proofe shal be that Protestants against these 10. title weaknes of Protest Proofes so manie and so forcible proofes for the Catholiks can bring no other proofe for their right to Scripture then that they haue the true doctrin of Scripture Which argument taken alone is as I shewed at large in my saied booke De Authore c. lib. 2. c. 15. a fond Sophisme or Foularie First because Schismatiks haue the true doctrin of Scripture as I there proued by reason by the testimonie of holie Fathers and the confession of Protestants and yet are no true owners of the Scripture because they are no true mēbers of the Church as I there also proued Secondly for Protestants to proue that they be true owners of the Scripture because they haue the true doctrin thereof is to proue one vnknowne and false thing by an other as vnkowne and false Which is not to proue at all because all proofe must be from a thing more knowne Thirdly they nether proue that they haue the doctrin of the Scripture by expresse words of Scripture for these are quite against them as shal be shewed in this booke nor by plaine inference out of the words of Scripture as appeareth by the Catholiks answers vnto all their proofes nor finally they haue proued any thing before a lawfull iudge but all their proofes are such as euerie Heretike maketh Besides if truth of doctrin doe proue true right to Scripture it farre more maketh for Catholiks and no more for Protestants then for anie other Heretiks Out of all which hath beene saied in this Chapter it is most euident that if the light of reason may be iudge in this matter Catholiks must needs be counted the true owners of the holie Scripture because they haue all the foresaied Titles then the which both fewer and weaker would make a claime to worldlie matters out of all question of all which Protestants can pretend none but the last Secondly it is euident that if Catholiks be the true If Cath. be true owners of the Scripture all controuersies are ended owners of the Scripture the sacred testament of Christ they are also true owners of the holie Sacraments of the keyes of heauen to binde and loose sinnes of the means of saluation and of all the goods which Christ hath by his will and testament bequeathed to his Church For vndoubtedly all these things pertaine to them to whome Christs testament doth belong Thirdly it is euident that if Catholiks be true owners of the Scriptures Protestants be vniust vsurpers of them as Iewes Turkes and Infidels are and haue no more right to keep or vse them against Catholiks then theeues haue to vse true mens goods or weapons against them For cleare it is that Catholiks and Protestants are opposite Churches as I haue shewed in the foresaied booke De Authore lib. 1. c. 2. and lib. 2. c. 6. and that one of them is a false Church whereas the Scriptures were giuen and belong to one onely Church Wherefore we may well say to Protestants as Tertullian de Prescript c. 37. saied to Heretiks of his time VVho are you when and whence came you what doe you in mine being not mine By what right Marcion Luther doest thou fell my woods By what licence Valentin Caluin doest thou turne away my water By what authoritie Apelles Zuingle doest thou charge my bounds It is my possession what doe you strangers here sow and feed at your pleasure And the same say we to Protestants Let them first shew what right they haue to Scriptures before they argue out of them let them render vs our weapons or shew what iust title they haue to them before they fight with them against vs. For as the same Tertull. saieth c. 15. Here we first stop them that they are not to be admitted to anie dispute of Scriptures VVe must see whether they may haue them or no to whom belongeth the Scripture that he be not admitted to it to whom it appertaineth not And c. 19. The
the Pharises THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that manie Princes who confessed not Christ and loued the glorie of men more then of God did beleiue in Christ that manie beleiued in Christs name whome Christ trusted not that a euill man doth well in beleiuing The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that the foresaied Princes did not beleiue had not true faith were no beleiuers that those whome Christ trusted not did not beleiue in the sight of God that their faith was not true not sincere but hypocrisie that onely the godlie and the adopted sonnes of God are partakers of true faith that the faith of the impious and wicked is feigned dissembled an imagination or image of faith not true faith that the impious are not faithfull ART XXI WHETHER FAITH BE proper to the Elect SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Act. 8. ver 13. Then Simon Magus also himselfe beleiued Simon Magus had faith and being baptized he cleeued to Philippe Seing also signes and very great miracles to be done he was astonished with admiratiō Heb. 6. v. 4. For it is impossible for them that were once illuminated Also some reprobates haue tasted also the heauenlie guift and were made partakers of the Holie Ghost c. and are fallen to be renewed againe to pennance CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE D. Stapleton in Actor 8. v. 13. Simon Magus had true faith Card. Bellarm. l. 3. de Iustificat c. 14. Faith is not proper to the elect PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Whitaker l. 8. cont Dur. sect 48. True faith is proper to the the elect In Concion vlt. In no reprobate true faith is found Zuinglius in Math. 19. tom 4. The Scripture sometimes Simon Magus had no faith indeed Beleiued not all saieth that some beleiued who professed faith which indeed they had not as appeareth of Simon Magus in the Actes In exposit Fidei to 2. fol. 558. There are some who beleiue not at all as were Iudas and Simon Magus Caluin in Actor 8. v. 3. c. The mynd of Simon was wrapped in dissimulation of faith Beza cont Illyric vol. 2. p. 131. Simon Magus was quite faithlesse Was quite faithlesse In Colloq Montisbel p. 379. Indeed he wanted faith indeed he beleiued not Volanus l. 3. cont Scargam p. 1070. Scarga foolishly attributeth true faith to Simon Magus Daneus Contr. de Baptismo c. 14. He obiecteth that Simō Magus lost faith and that other Apostates did the like But I denie that they haue or euer had true faith Pareus l. 3. de Iustif c. 14. Simon was an hypocrite beleiuing onely with mouth not with harte And he addeth Nether maketh it any matter that Luke absolutely saieth that he beleiued And as for reprobats Caluin 3. Institut c. 2. § 11. None are illuminated vnto faith None but the predestinate haue faith Faith peculiar to the Elect but they who are predestinated to saluation In Confessione p. 106. I acknowledge that faith is a peculiar guift giuen to the elect alone Beza in Conf. c. 4. sect 20. Faith is the guift of God proper and peculiar to the elect alone Bucer in Matthaei 16. They are safe for euer who once haue gotten true faith Musculus in locis titul de fide Faith in Christ is onely of the elect Zanchius de Praedestinat c. 4. to 7. The reprobates neuer Reprobates neuer beleiue truely truely beleiue in Christ And the same is the common doctrine of the Protestants THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that the reprobate Simon Magus did beleiue was baptized cleeued to Philippe and was astonished at the miracles wrought by S. Philippe that euen they who cannot be recalled to pennance were once illuminated Catholiks say the same Protestants plainely say that Simon Magus did not beleiue at all was wholy faithlesse indeed wanted faith indeed beleiued not had not true faith beleiued onely with mouth not with hart that onely the elect are illuminated vnto faith that reprobates neuer truely beleiue and that it maketh no matter that the Scripture absolutely saieth the contrarie These are so opposite to Scripture as some Protestants confesse it See lib. 2. c. 30. ART XXII WHETHER FAITH BE by hearing SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Rom. 10. ver 15. Faith then is by hearing and hearing is by Faith is by hearing the word of Christ. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 6. c. 6. They are disposed to iustice whiles stirred vp and holpen by Gods grace conceauing faith by hearing they are freely moued to God PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker l. 1. de Scriptura c. 11. sect 4. All true faith cometh Faith not by preachers from the Scripture not by the labour of the Preachers Againe All the Fathers with one voice teach that faith riseth of the Scriptures onely not of the authoritie of the Church Et c. 13. sect 8. Reading maketh that we may know the Scriptures and the doctrine of the Scriptures Et Cont. 145. cap. 8. Faith riseth of the Of the Scripture onely Scripture alone And in the same place thus expoundeth the aforesaied wordes of the Apostle By hearing that is by the sense of the Scripture rightly vnderstood Zuinglius in Exegesi to 2. fol. 347. We do not thinke that faith can be gotten by words but that faith being mistresse the words which are proposed may be vnderstood De Prouidentia cap. 6. tom 1. When Paul writeth to the Romans that faith is Not by outward hearing by hearing after the same manner he attributeth that to the nearer and more knowne cause to vs which belongeth onely to the Holie Ghost not to outward preaching The like words hath Oecolampadius apud Schlusselburg libro 1. Theol. Caluin art 1. Caluin in Ioan. 5. vers 9. 3 Christ is not otherwaies rightly knowne but by the Scripture THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that Faith is by hearing and addeth there also that it is not without a Preacher The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that faith is not otherwaies then by Scripture that it is by onely Scripture by reading that it is not by the labour of the preachers not by the authoritie of the Church that it is by the Holie Ghost and not by externall preaching that it cannot be gotten by words ART XXIII WHETHER FAITH IS or can euer be lost SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Luke 8. vers 13. For they vpon the rock Such as when they Some beleiue for a time heare with ioye receaue the word and these haue no rootes because for a time they beleiue and in time of temptation they reuoult Ioan. 20. vers 29. Then he saieth to Thomas Be not incredulous S. Thomas lost his faith but faithfull And v. 25. Thomas saied Vnlesse I see c. I will not beleiue 1. Tim. 1. v. 19. Certaine haue made shipwrak about faith c. 4. Others leese faith v. 1. In the last times certaine shall departe from the faith c. 6. v. 10. Certaine haue erred from the faith
none euer anie haue contradicted the true sense of the Scripture the Protestants haue done it First because they haue as often and in as manie and as weightie matters contradicted the expresse words of Scripture as euer anie haue Secondly because they haue contradicted as expresse and cleare words and those as purposely spoaken to declare the Scriptures meaning as euer anie words were which anie haue cōtradicted Thirdly because they haue contradicted them in as plaine cleare and vsuall sense and which is confirmed by as manie circunstances and by light of reason and experience as euer anie words of Scripture were contradicted in Fourthly because they contradict these kind of words in this kind of sense with as euident want of the like words which may seeme plainly and directly of themselues without all inference or exposition of man to beare the contrarie sense as euer anie did Thou seest also what a maine difference there is betwene The differēce betwene the grounds of the Cath. and Protest faith the foundations of the Catholik and Protestant beleefe touching these articles For whereas the foundation of the Protestant beleife concerning the Eucharist is no expresse word of God which is purposely spoaken to declare this matter and which of it selfe without all helpe of man doth plainely and directly pronounce that it is such as they beleiue but ether mans word onely or mans discourse framed at least out of one humane principle the foundation of the Catholik faith is Gods expresse and cleare word spoaken of him purposely for to declare what the Eucharist is which of it selfe without anie helpe of vs clearely and directly auoucheth that the Eucharist is such as Catholiks beleiue it to be and against which words no other expresse words of God directly contrarie to these can be opposed but onely humane arguments and discourses These as S. Austin speaketh are the proofes of our course these the foundations these the strength Whatsoeuer Lib. de vnit c. 19. In Psal 21. they gayne say men say but this God saieth Yet let vs heare what it is which men say against God They except saieth Caluin that they haue the word by 4. Instit c. 17. §. 25. which the will of God is made manifest A most iust exception doubtles especially in matters of faith and such as cannot be knowne but by Gods word and against them who so much brag of Gods word For if we haue Gods word we haue also Gods meaning vnlesse they can demonstrate the contrarie Whereupon well saied Tertullian Ether denie that these are written or who art thou that Contr. Praxeam c. 23. thou thinkest that they are not to be vnderstood as they are written Forsooth saieth Caluin if we giue them leaue to banish out Loco cit §. 20 of the Church the guift of interpretation which may bring light to the word Againe We vsing daily studie do embrace that sense which the Holie Gost doth suggest And once more The reuerence of Christs words is not a pretext iust enough why they should so reiect all the reasons which we obiect Behould Reader once more the difference betwene the Catholik and Caluins faith The Catholik faith by the aduersaries confession What Caluin opposeth against the expresse word of God is grounded vpon the expresse and plaine words of God Caluins faith relieth vpon his guift of interpretation his studie the suggestions of his spirit his reasons which he dare oppose yea prefer before the expresse word of God But we demand that seing we haue for vs the expresse word of God wherewith Gods will touching the Eucharist is made manifest he produce the like word of God whereby it may be made manifest that the Caluinists haue the guift of interpretation rather then the Catholiks or the Lutherans or anie sorte of Christians or that that guift of interpreting which interpreteth Gods expresse words spoaken by him of supernaturall matters of purpose to declare what they are contrarie to their vsuall sense is the guift of God But if he cannot produce anie such word of God it were starke madnesse to forsake Gods expresse word and the plaine meaning thereof which besides Sacramentaries all Christians els do embrace and to follow a guift of interpretation ether vncertaine or feigned Besides Protestants do banish the guift of infallible interpretation out of the Church in saying that she may erre in matters of faith and interpretatation of Scripture why then do they in this matter pretend such a guift and oppose it against Gods expresse words Moreouer to expound words which by their owne confession are most cleare is no other thing then as S. Austin saieth to cast darknesse vpon cleare light Nether Serm. 14. de verbis Apost banish we the guift of interpretation out of the Church which neuer interpreted these words but in their natiue and vsuall sense but we denie that Heretiks haue the guift of interpreting the Scripture and affirme that their new expositiō directly contrarie to Gods words both expresse and of purpose spoaken to declare this matter and condemned by Gods Church is no interpretation but a deprauation and corruption Furthermore we reiect no interpretation which may bring light to the word but we denie that Caluins interpretation is such but rather quite extinguisheth the cleare light of the word For what greater darknesse can be cast vpon light then in expresse words spoaken of purpose to declare a matter and by which a new doctrine is deliuered a new Sacrament instituted a last will is made and which were spoaken of the Maister of trueth vnto his disciples when he was to forsake them to expound Is by Is not and Body giuen for you by A bare figure or Signe thereof And thus we haue heard what Caluin opposeth against Gods expresse word now let vs see how he would diminish the force and authoritie of the same I confesse saieth he that they haue the word A confession surely much to be esteemed especially proceeding In Act. 9. v. 21. from such an aduersarie as is accustomed to crie That Papists find no weapons for them in the Scripture But he should also haue confessed as the trueth is that Protestants haue not such a word to wit which plainely and directly denieth the Eucharist to be the bodie and blood of Christ For thereby it would haue appeared more clearelie whether Catholiks or Protestants find the better weapons in the Scripture But he addeth Yet such a word as the Anthropomorphites had when they made God to haue a bodie Yea such a word as thou or anie Christian hath when he maketh God to haue beene incarnated to haue suffered to haue risen againe and to haue ascended to heauen and as I dare say a clearer word also if the words themselues and the foresaied circunstances be considered So that Differences betwene the Cath. and the Anthropomorphites more iustly may anie Heretik who denieth the foresaied mysteries obiect to thee the example
the citizens of the outward Church that is all that professe faith to be faithfull But charitie beleiueth all things and therefore is deceaued which is farre from the certaintie of faith Which is as much as to say S. Paul or the Scripture was deceaued in these sayings If we proue that God would haue some to be conuerted who will not because he saieth Math. 23. vers 37. Hierusalem Hierusalem how often would I gather together thy children as the hen doth gather together her chickins vnder her wings and thou wouldst not Beza de Praedestinat cont Castel vol. 1. pag. 398. answereth If we will attribute this speach to Christ as he was God doste thou not know that God for to allure his children to him through his infinite goodnesse by taking vpon him humane affections doth sometime stammer with vs God stammereth Fiftly therefore I proue that Protestants contradict the true sense of Scripture in this sorte Who not onely gainesay the expresse words of holie writ so as we haue seene but also are forced in manie and great misteries of faith to say that the Apostles Christ and God himselfe did not certainely foresee what they saied and that the holie Ghost did not speake of certaine knowledge but by coniectures as men do they gaynesay the true meaning of the holy Scripture But Protestants do so Therefore c. CHAPTER VI. THAT PROTESTANTS AFFIRME manie weightie sayings of the Scripture not to haue beene spoaken according to the mynd of the Authors MY sixt argument shal be because Protestants are driuen to say that Scripture speaketh not according to it owne mynd and according to trueth but according to the errour and opinion of others and that in manie and great matters as of faith of good workes of sacraments of the very meane of attayning saluation and the like For if we proue that wicked men may haue faith because S. Iames speaketh not according to his owne mynd S. Iames cap. 2. vers 18. speaketh thus to such a one Thou hast faith and I haue workes v. 19. Thou beleiuest that there is one God thou doest well Caluin on that chapter v. 14. saieth Let vs remember that he speaketh not according to his owne mynd as oft as here he nameth faith If we proue that the keeping of the commandements Nor Christ is necessarie to saluation because Christ saieth Math. 19. v. 17. If thou wilt enter to life keepe the commandements Pareus l. 3. de Iustificat c. 12. p. 812. answereth The Lord sendeth him to the workes of the law not that he thinketh this way of saluation possible but for to confund his hypocrisie Brentius in Pareus l. 4. de Iustificat c. 2. and in Gerlachius tom 2. disput 13. saieth Christ so answered as he rather shewed him the way to He shewed the way to perdition eternall damnation Which answere saieth Pareus c. 2. cit is no lesse true then that saying of the Apostle yee are euacuated from Christ who are iustified by the law If we proue that iustice is necessarie to saluation because Christ saieth Mat. 5. ver 21. Vnlesse your iustice abound more then that of the Scribes and Pharises you shall not enter into the kingdome of heauen Pareus l. 4. de Iustif c. 4. p. 964 answereth Not that this inward iustice was possible to the He shewed an impossible way disciples or to anie other man but that the exactnesse of the law and there impossibilitie being acknowledged they might forsake the endlesse way of the law and seeke life in the Ghospell If we proue that God rewardeth good workes because the Scripture often speaketh so Zuinglius l. de relig c. de Merito answereth There are some so doltish that whatsoeuer thou criest they thinke God giueth all things to merits and where these are not that there his grace is in vaine hoped for whose weaknesse or rather perfidiousnesse God abuseth and inuiteth to good workes by hope of reward that so nothing may be wanting to his seruants And Ochinus in Schlusselburg lib. 1. Theol. Caluin art 23. dareth call in question whether Christ spoake those words which he would haue spoaken We answere saieth he that it may be that when He spoake not that he would Christ saied This is my bodie he would haue saied The bread signifieth my bodie The like they meane when they say that the holie Scripture speakeâ—h by graunt or concession Scripture speaketh by concessioÌ„ or grauÌ„t For thus Caluin in lac 2. v. 12. That he termeth it faith is by way of concession orgraunt And 3. Instit c. 17. § 11. That the Apostle calleth faith a vaine opinion which is farre from the nature of faith is by way of graunt Beza in Iac. 2. ver 14. Iames calleth it faith by way of graunt that he may not seeme to striue about words In like manner Illyricus and others Kemnitius in locis part 2. tit de Argumentis writeth that in those sayings If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandments Who shall doe these shall liue in them Doe this and thou shalt liue The doers of the law shal be iustified Christ and Paul answere by way of concession or graunt If we proue that we can clense our selues from sinne because 2. Cor. 7. v. 1. it is saied Let vs clense our selues from all inquination of the flesh and spirit perfecting sanctification in the feare of God Caluin 2. Instit c. 5. § 11. answereth By concession or graunt it is attributed to vs which belongeth to God And if we proue that there are some litle precepts because Christ saieth Math. 5. v. 19. One iot or tittle shall not passe of the law till all be fulfilled Caluin vpon that place saieth Where Christ termeth litle precepts it is a kind of concession or graunt If we proue that God will render eternall life according to the patience of good workes because Rom. 2. v. 7. is saied God will render to euerie man according to his workes to them truely that according to patience in good worke seeke glorie honor and incorruption life eternall Beza vpon that place answereth In this description of iust iudgment this is saied of the Apostle by way of graunt or concession as also when streight after he saieth ver 13. Not hearers but doers of the law are iustified If we proue that some do keepe the law because it is written Rom. 2. v. 26. If then the prepuce keepe the iustices of the law shall not his prepuce be reputed for circuncision Beza vpon that place answereth These things are saied of the Apostle by way of graunt or concession as also I noted before verse 9. If we proue that the sacraments of the new law be Scripture speaketh by contention better then the sacraments of the ould because S. Paul in the Epistle to the Hebrews preferreth them before these Caluin 4. Instit c. 14. § 25. saieth This we must especially note that in all these places
Fratres Finally Luther in Postilla domest Dom. 1. Aduentus saieth Oh sorrow The world dayly becometh worse by The world worse by Luthers doctrine this doctrine and Castalio in Caluin de Prouident These are the things Caluin which thy aduersaries reporte of thy doctrine and warne men to iudge of this doctrine by the fruits thereof For they say that thou and thy disciples carrie manie fruits of thy God that most of you are contentious reuengefull myndfull of wrong and endowed with such vices as thy God doth suggest Where thus I argue in the 27. place Whose doctrine is not onely so opposite to the expresse words of Scripture as was seene in the first booke but also taketh away encouragements to vertue yea all vertue out of the world and remoueth impediments of sinne and giueth allurements theertoe that is opposite to the true sense of holie Scripture But such is the doctrine of Protestants Therefore c. CHAPTER XXVIII THAT PROTESTANTS HAVE NO infallible interpretation of Scripture THE 28. Argument to proue that Protestants must needs contradict the true sense of holie Scripture is because they haue no sure and infallible means to attaine to the true meaning thereof But before we proue that they haue no infallible mean to come to the right sense of Scripture we must proue that Scripture at lest in some points of faith needeth some means to interpret or expound it to wit ether because no where it deliuereth some points of faith so clearely that the onely words thereof sufffice to captiuate the vnderstanding or because though some where it deliuer clearly enough some points of faith yet other where it seemeth so to teach the contrarie as without some infallible interpreter it would seeme vncertaine whether of the twoe it did teach That therefore Scripture doth not of it selfe teach That Scripture needeth an Interpreter clearely all points of faith so as it need no interpreter for that purpose I proue first out of the Scripture it selfe For the holie Eunuch did read the Scripture speaking of the passion of Christ Actor 8. and yet being asked of Philip whether he vnderstood what he read answered And how can I if none shall shew me You see that the Scripture did not clearely foretell the passion of Christ as that a pious man by the onely words thereof without an interpreter could vnderstand the meaning thereof And Luk. vlt. v. 27. And beginning from Moyses and all the Prophets he did interprete vnto them in all the Scriptures the things that were concerning him Et v. 45. Then he opened their vnderstanding that they might vnderstand the Scriptures But if Christs disciples did not vnderstand the Scriptures which spoake of him and the Apostles had need that Christ should open their vnderstanding for to vnderstād the Scriptures it is euident that the Scriptures by themselues doe not so plainely teach all matters of faith as they need no interpretation for to be rightly vnderstood of the faithfull Besides 2. Pet. vlt. it is saied that in S. Pauls epistles there are some things hard to be vnderstood And that these hard things do containe points of faith is cleare both because without cause they should be limited to other things as also because it is added that the learned and vnstable doe depraue these hard things to their owne destruction but such things are especially matters of faith Moreouer if the Scripture did so clearely teach all points of faith that for them it needed no interpreter it would follow that the guift of interpretation had beene superfluously giuen to the Church for to expound Scripture in matters belonging to faith Secondly I proue this out of the Fathers but for breuities sake I will content my selfe with one testimonie of S. Austin He lib. de Vtil cred c 7. to one that saied When I read the Scriptures by my selfe I vnderstood them thus answereth Is it so Without some skill in poetrie thou darest not read Terentian Maurus Asper Cornutus Donatus and manie more are necessarie for to vnderstand anie Poet and thou fallest vpon those bookes without a guide and darest giue thy opinion of them without a teacher Loe how plainely he saieth that we can not vnderstand the Scriptures by our selues and by how familiar an example he proueth it Thirdly I proue it by the verie cōfession of Protestāts For Protest confesse that Scripture alone sufficeth not thus writeth Whitaker Cōt 1. q. 4. c. 1. When Bellarmin maketh this to be the state of the questiō Whether the the Scripture by it selfe be so cleare as without anie interpretatiō it sufficeth of it selfe to determine and decide all controuersies of faith he fighteth without an aduersarie for surely in this point we are not against him Agayne They say that we thinke but falsely that all things in Scripture are plaine and that they without anie interpretation are sufficient to determine all controuersies without Behould how plainely he denieth that Protestants think that Scripture of it selfe without anie interpretatiō is sufficiēt to end all controuersies of faith And the like hath Iunius l. 3. de verb. Dei c. 3. When he graunteth that Scripture needeth an interpreter Kemnice 1. part Exa p. 104. It hath need of the guift and helpe of interpretatiō And the Magdeburgiās Cēt. 1. l. 2. c. 4. The Apostles thought that the Scripture cānot be vnderstood without the holie Ghost and an interpreter and the same meā all other Protestāts who admit that the Scripture is obscure or that the guift of interpretatiō is needfull for the expositiō thereof For doubtles they meane that as well of such places of Scripture wherein points of faith are deliuered as of others this Caluin 4. Inst c 17. § 25. clearely enough insinuateth where whē Catholiks obiected that they had the word of God wherein he affirmeth that the Eucharist is his bodie he answereth Indeed if they may banish the guift of Interpretatiō out of the Church Wherefore he thinketh that there is in the Church the guift of Interpretation euen for to expound Scriptures touching points of faith such as the Eucharist is Furthermore Plessie l. 3. de Eccl. c. 3. writeth that the cōtrouersie of Schisme cānot be properly decided by the Scripture because it is rather a question of fact then doctrine If therefore Scripture by it selfe can determine nether the questiō of Schisme nor yet all controuersies of faith it is manifest that the interpretation of some is necessarie and that also infallible because fallible interpretatiō is not sufficiēt to put vs out of doubt And surely Protestants must needs teach that Scripture by it selfe alone is not sufficient to decide all controuersies of faith both because els it had decided all controuersies amongst themselues or betwene anie that are not obstinate as also because scarce in anie controuersies that are betwixt vs and them Scripture doth so much as in shew directly and immediatly giue sentence for them but they haue need to
other expresse words are directly contrarie And let that faith or rather infidelitie fall perish vanish which in more then 260. articles is condemned of such words of God and in such a sense and in most points is onely supported by humane consequences humane conferences and humane reasons or arguments These are the points Christian Reader taken out of How Protest handle the letter of Scripture the first booke which I desire to fasten and engraue in thy memorie which yet will be more forcible if thou adde to them things which I haue set before thy eyes in thy second booke For there I haue shewed that the holie Scripture doth so manifestly condemne the Protestants doctrine as that touching the letter thereof they are forced to reiect some openly others priuilie to scrape out to call some in doubt to adde some to translate some wrong and change the order of others Touching the propositiōs How the sayings of Scripture they are compelled to say that some of them were certainlie knowne of God himselfe others not spoaken according to his owne mynd others spoaken ironically mimeticallie hyperbolicallie by fiction and amplification and to change vniuersall propositions into particulars vnlimited into limited absolute into conditionals these that were spoakē simply into those that were spoakē in parte and those that were spoaken of one time into those that were spoaken of an other Touching the single How the simple words words of Scripture they are forced those words which signifie the doing of a thing to expound of endeauour to doe it those which signifie the cause to expound of the way or means to an end Which signifie that a thing is to expound that it ought to be Which signifie a true thing to expound of an apparent or signe thereof to expound words by diuerse by disparate or vnlikelie yea by opposites or contraries to deuise all kinde of figures when the proprietie of the word is against them to find out new and neuer heard of distinctions to reiect the vnanimous exposition of Fathers Church and Councels to frustrate the ends of the passion of Christ to take out of the world all true vertue and to open the way to all vice to confesse that they hould opinions her to fore condemned for heresies of the Church and Fathers to acknowledge that some of their opinions are plainely blasphemous and finally which is the end of this worke directly opposite to holie Scripture Who I say in more then 260. articles of cōtrouersie not onelie oppose themselues to the expresse words of Scripture spoaken of purpose to tell vs Gods meaning cōcerning matters that farre passe all mās reach in their proper sense and in which men vsuallie vnderstand them and to which no other places of Scripture are directlie opposite but also laie violent hands vpon the sacred letter or word change almost all the kinds of propositions which the Scripture vseth impiouslie depraue the sense of the words reiect the exposition of Fathers Church and Councells make voide the ends of Christs passion take away all vertue and bring in vice and finallie confesse that diuers of their opinions are blasphemous contrarie to scripture they are to be accounted auoided and eschewed not onely as Heretiks condemned by the Scripture and holie Church but euen of themselues A note to the Reader I HAVE not set downe the editions of the Protestants bookes which I cite in this worke because I haue done that in my booke de Authore Prot. Ecclesiae put forth An. 1619. Where he that list may see them as also he may there see the laws which I prescribe to him that will answere ether that booke or this Moreouer in this English worke I doe not cite the English words of our English Protestant writers because I had not their English works at hand but translate them out of their Latin works Besides I am not so curious to cite the leafe or page as I was in the Latin edition because the vnlearned will not be able to seeke the Latin and the learned Reader will rather I suppose peruse my Latin copie where he shall find the leaues or pages as carefully cited as I could doe by the errors of the Scribe or Printer whose fault no discret reader will impute to me and whose error I hope is no where to be found both in the number of the chapters and of the leaues or pages together So that the one of them may bring the Reader to the place which I alledge if the other chance to be misprinted Laus Deo Virginique Matri AN INDEX OF THE CHAPTERS and Articles contained in the first booke CHAPTR 1. Of the owners of Scripture Whether Catholiks or Protestants be true owners of the Scripture CHAP. 2. Of God ARt 2. Whether God willeth sinne page 45. 2. Whether sinne pleaseth God p. 49. 3. Whether God hateth sinne p. 50. 4. Whether God worketh sinne p. 51. 5. Whether God ordaineth sinne to be p. 33. 6. Whether God commandeth sinne p. 56. 7. Whether God tempteth to sinne p. 57 8. Whether God necessitateth to sinne p. 59. 9. Whether God hateth all that sinne p. 61. 10. Whether God iustifieth the sinner remaining a sinner p. 62. 11. Whether God be angrie with the faithfull when they sinne p. 65. 12. Whether God be delighted with good works p. 67. 14. Whether God be serued by good works p. 69. 15. Whether God esteeme of good works which are not commanded 70. 16. Whether God be appeased by good workes p. 71. 17. Whether God will haue his commādements kept p. 73. 18. Whether God loueth all men p. 75. 19. Whether God would haue all men to be saued p. 77. 20. Whether God would haue some cōuerted who will not conuert p. 78. 21. Whether God call all men p. 80. 22. Whether God of himselfe will the death and damnation of men p. 81. 23. Whether God dāneth men for sinne p. 85. 24. Whether God can doe all things p. 86. 25. Whether God can make a Camell passe through a needls eye p. 88. 26. Whether God can doe that which shall neuer be p. 90. 27. Whether Gods miracles be a sufficient proof of trueth p. 91. Chap. 3. Of Christ Art 1. Whether God the Sonne had his being of his Father p. 96. 2. Whether Christ was predestinated the Sonne of God p. 97. 3. Whether Christ as man is to be adored p. 98. 4. Whether Christ as man could worke miracles p. 100. 5. Whether Christs humanitie be euerie where p. 102. 6. Whether Christ as man be head of the Church p. 104. 7. Whether Christ as man made lawes p. 105. 8. Whether Christ as mā be Iudge 107. 9. Whether Christ made a new testament p. 109. 10. Whether as man he were ignorant p. 111. 11. Whether as man he were a sinner p. 113. 12. Whether he refused to doe the office of a Redeemer p. 116. 13 Whether he was assured of his saluation 118 14 VVhether he had commandment
A CONFERENCE OF THE CATHOLIKE AND PROTESTANTE DOCTRINE WITH THE EXPRESSE WORDS OF HOLIE SCRIPTVRE WHICH IS THE SECOND PARTE OF THE Prudentiall Balance of Religion VVHEREIN IS CLEARELY SHEWED THAT IN MORE then 260. points of controuersie Catholiks agree with the holie Scripture both in words and sense and Protestants disagree in both and depraue both the sayings words and sense of Scripture WRITTEN FIRST IN LATIN BVT NOW AVGmented and translated into English ACTS IV. VERSE XVII IF IT BE IVST IN THE SIGHT OF GOD TO heare you rather then God iudge yee S. Athanasius Apol. de Fuga WHAT MVST WE STICK TO TO GODS words or these mens Fables AT DOWAY By the widdowe of MARKE WYON at the signe of the Phenix M.DC.XXXI The argument of the first booke VVHo in more then 260. points of controuersie speake with the holie Scripture in the very selfe same or equiualeÌ„t words when it speaketh of those matters expressely and of purpose and in that sense also which the words of Scripture of themselues without anie exposition of man do afforde and in which sense such words vse to be spoken and vnderstood of men they touching those points agree both in words and meaning with the holie Scripture And who speake of those points both in such words and sense as are contrarie to the foresaied words and sense they in those points disagree both in words and sense from the holie Scripture But Catholiks doe that and Protestants this Therefore c. The Maior semeth to be manifest by it selfe and is largely proued in the second booke Cap. 1. The Minor is shewed to the eye in all the first booke The argument of the second Booke VVHo not onely in more then 260. points of controuersie disagree from the foresaied words and sense of Scripture but also are forced openly to reiect some of the words thereof to blot out some to call others in question to change the order of others to change almost all kinds of the Scriptures speaches to expound her words by quite different and plaine contraries to reiect the vnanimous exposition of holie Fathers to confesse that some of their opinions were long since condemned for heresies that some are blasphemous and playne contrarie to Scripture such contradict not onely the words but also the true sense of Scripture But Protestants doe thus Therefore c. The Maior is manifest by it selfe and the Minor shewed to the eye in the second Booke APPROBATIO HOc opus cui titulus Collatio doctrinae Catholicorum ac Protestantium cum expressis sacrae scripturae verbis duobus libris comprehensa Latino serm one olim editum à duobus S. Theol. Doctoribus Parisiensibus approbatum nunc verò auctum in Anglicum sermonem fideliter conuersum nihil habet fidei Catholicae aduersum aut bonis moribus sed plurimum valet ad confutationem doctrinae haereticorum praesentis temporis proinde rectè praeli beneficio in lucem edetur Datum Duaci die 2. Ianuarij 1631. GEORGIVS COLVENERIVS S. Theol. Doctor eiusdem Regius ordinarius ac primarius Professor insignis Ecclâ—siae Collegiatae S. Petri Praepositus Canonicus Duacen sis Academiae Cancellarius librorum Censor THE PREFACE TO THE READER WHEREIN THE SCOPE MANNER OF PROCEDING AND PROFIT OF THIS BOOKE IS DECLARED REQVISITE TO BE READ BEFORE THE BOOKE THERE are now diuers years Gentle Reader since I published the first parte of the Prudential Balance of Religion in which by the weights of Prudence and Right Reason I weighed together the Catholik and Protestant religion according to their first Founders in our English nation to wit S. Austin and Martin Luther which booke hath neuer since bene answered by anie Protestant albeit diuers ministers and superintendents haue carped at it both in Pulpits and printed books shewing thereby that they wanted no will to answere it if they could haue performed it In the preface thereof I promised a second parte in which I would after the same manner weigh the forsaied religions according to their claimes to the holie Scripture and the expresse words thereof which here now I offer vnto thee The causes why I haue so long differred the publishing of this second parte are well enough knowne to them who know me and not needfull to be known of them who know me not And therfore I will not trouble thee with the rehearshall of them but here propose vnto thee the scope manner of Proceding and Profits of this second parte 2. As a man consisteth essentially of a Soule and Bodie and can neither be nor be imagined without them both So the true Church of Christ essentially consisteth Two things wholy necessarieto Christs Church of his true Doctrine which is the forme and as it were the soule of his Church and of lawfull Pastors and People who teach and embrace his Doctrine which Pastors and People make as it were the bodie of Christes Church And without both these partes to wit Christs true Doctrine and true Pastors teaching and People embracing it Christs true Church can no more be or imagined to be then a true man can either be or imagined to be without both the true bodie and true soule of a man And albeit the manifest need of both these partes to the true Church of Christ doth enforce Protestants to make some clame to them both and to pretend that they haue alvaies had both true Pastors who taught and People who beleiued their Doctrine yet their pretense to this parte of the Church is so weake and slender as but seldome and vpon mere necessitie they insist thereon But their greatest pretense and claime is to the true Doctrine of Christ and think thereby to proue that they haue alwaies had true Pastors and People who taught and beleiued their Doctrin as I haue shewed in a Booke of the Author of the Protestant Church and Religion wherein also I haue conuinced by ten Demonstrations all taken out of the open Confessions of the best learned Protestants both of England and other Countries that they neuer had anie one Pastor who taught or man who beleived the very fundamentall and most substantiall points of their religion before Luther arose but that he was first Author Inuentor and Father therof as some of them in plaine termes do call him 3. And although this Booke haue bene now these manie years published both in Latin and English and doth by the open confessions of the best learned Protestants ouerthrow the very foundation of their Church or rather shew that it hath no foundation at all besides their owne imagination yet hitherto no Protestant hath made anie shew of a solid answere vnto it I saie no shew of a why D. Prideaux lecture is no answer to the Author of Protest religion solid answere because that florish which Doctor Prideaux the Kinges diuinitie Reader in Oxford hath made in a lecture deserueth not the name of shew or shadow of an answer First because
he nether mentioneth the lawes of answering my saied booke which I set downe and proue by reason testimonie of holie Fathers and confession of Protestants ought to be kept in answering such a booke And which lawes I tell him before hand that vnles he ether keepe or refute I would accounte his answer no solid or lawfull answere but the babling of one who could neither sufficiently answere nor yet hould his peace Secondly because he maketh no other answere to the manifold and manifest depositions of the best learned Protestants which I haue my self brought and clearly confuted by the depositions or testimonies them selues against which confutation of myne he replieth nothing but standeth mute Thirdly because he so miserably mangleth the answere which I make to their Sophisme wherewith they by pretense of true Doctrin would proue that they haue alwaies had true Pastors and People who taught and beleiued it and so pittifully replieth to the saied answere as he plainly sheweth him self to be a true Heretike that is conuicted in his owne iudgement as I think euerie one that compareth his lecture with my Booke will clearly perceiue 4. But sith the Protestants cheife and almost whole pretense of the truth and euer being of their Church is the pretense of the truth of their doctrin by the Scripture I will euidently shew euen by the light of Reason and Prudence that they haue no reasonable or colourable pretense of Scripture but that it maketh expresly clearly and directly against theÌ„ and for Catholiks almost in all points of coÌ„trouersie For whereas there be twoe waies to shew Twoe waies to proue that the Scripture is against Protest that the holie Scripture is plainely against Protestants the one by conferring of diuers places together by bringing the exposition of the holie Fathers decrees of Councels and tradition of the Church the other by onely comparinge the expresse words of Catholiks and ProtestaÌ„ts with Protest Doctrin as clearly contrarie to Scripture as yea is to no. expresse words of holie Scripture touching the same matter I take not the first way which hithertoe Catholike writers haue followed because it is not so fit to the capacitie of commun people for whome especially I compose this worke but the second which is as cleare for euerie one that hath reason to see as it is cleare to see that Yea and Yea of the same matter agree and that Yea and Nay do disagree 4. This perhaps may seeme strange nay impossible to simple Protestants whose eares haue bene still accustomed to heare their ministers vaunt and brag of the word of God of the Scripture and Bible and to auouch that Catholiks haue nothing to alleadge for theÌ„ selues but traditions and word of men But I beseech such to suspend a while their iudgment and sith they wil haue the Protestants doctrin to be tried or iudged by nothing but by Scripture onely let them grant me these two conditions Two conditions to proue the Scripture to be against Protest 1. Touching the letter 2. Touching the sense of trying their doctrin by the Scripture which the very light of reason the authoritie of holie Fathers and the Confession of the best learned Protestants will enforce them to graunt The first condition is touching the words or letter of the holie Scripture The second is touching the sense or meaning of the saied words or letter For as the holie Scripture consisteth of two partes whereof the one is the word or letter the other is the sense therof so I require one condition for the word and an other for the sense 5. The condition touching the word or letter is that the words of holie Scripture be taken as they be in the The 1. coÌ„ditioÌ„ toâ—ching the letter proued Bible or booke of God without anie addition subtraction or transposition breefly without anie chopping or changing whatsoeuer This condition is so iust and reasonable as I think no reasonable man will denie it and neuertheles I wil proue it First because where God alone is Iugde there it is reason that all men be silent and onely harken what God saieth nor interrupt or corrupt his words Let vs heare Lib. 1. peccat c. 20. De vnit c. 13 Serm. 27. de verb. Apo. saieth S. Austin our lord and not ghesses or suspitions of men Againe I beleiue that which I read in holie Scripture not that which vaine Heretiks say And other where There is a controuersie risen let is goe to the Iudge let the Prophet iudge yea let God iudge by the Prophet let vs both hold our peace And yet againe let vs not heare This I say This thou saiest but let vs Lib. 6. cont Iul. c. 4. In Confutat Latomito 2. fol. 234. heare This our lord saieth Yea Luther writeth That mans word added vnto Gods word is a couer nay mans dung wherwith pure truth is hidden Moreouer seing Protestants impose silence to the Church Councells Fathers and all Catholiks in decision of matters of faith and therin admit onely the written word of God it were impudencie for them to request to speake Agayne if Protestants will mingle their owne words with the words of God they admit not the onely word of God for iudge of controuersies but partely also their owne and make one entire iudge of them both Finally Protestants are wonte to crie that the Scriture is the onely and profest rule of faith that they will heare Beza cont Heshus Daneus Cont. 3. 6. 7. Hospin part 2 Caluin cont versipel cont Cathalon nothing besides Scripture that nothing is to be taught but the pure written word nothing to be beleiued but that which is expressely conteined in the Scripture Let them heare therefore in these twoe hundred and sixte points in which I will compare their doctrine with the Scripture mere Scripture onely Scripture and let them harken to nothing but Scripture let all their owne words whatsoeuer be set aside let the Scriptures pure and onely words shew and iudge whether Catholik or Protestant doctrin in these 260. points here set downe be agreable or disagreable vnto it 6. The second condition touching the sense is That The 2. condition touching the sense proued the pure written word of God may iudge betwixt vs according to the pure sense therof which when it is spoken clearly or of purpose to tell vs what Gods meaning is of it self and according to the vsual acception of men it doth afford and this is euident also especiallie if the Church must not be admitted to be the infallible Interpreter of the true sense of Scripture But neuertheles I proue it First because Protestants cannot set downe anie condition which is so reasonable or indifferent to both partes Secondly because ether the Scripture in matters of controuersie clearly declareth her meaning by her self without any help or exposition of man or she doth not If she clearly declare her meaning by her self then needeth she no help of man
at all For what need she help of others to declare her meaning who clearly declareth it her self And vndoubtedly if in any place she clearly declareth her meaning she doth it in those places in which she speaketh both clearly and of set purpose for to expresse her meaning But if by her self she doe not clearly declare her meaning in matters in controuersie without some help of man especially without the help of one of the opposite parties who contend about her meaning certainly she is A iudge must be able by himself to declare his mynd not fitt to be the onely iudge of controuersies as Protestants would haue her For who will saye that she alone is fitt to be iudge who alone and by her self is not able to vtter clearly her mynd Besids if the pure word of God may not iudge according to the pure sense which of it self it clearly yeeldeth but according to a different nay quite opposite sense which being conferred expounded wrested by man it is forced to yeeld who shall assure vs that Gods sense and not the sense of man whose and not Gods that conference inference and wresting is is made Serm. 14. de verb. Apost Tractat. 2. de Cant. c. 17. L. 6. cont Iulian c. 5. L. 2. de Baptismo c. 6. iudge of controuersies Let mens ghesses saieth S. Austin giue place for a time let vs take in hand diuine weapons Againe This is humane inference not dinine authoritie The arguments which you bring are humane these are diuine munitions And otherwhere let vs not bring false scales with which we may weigh what we will and how we will and saye as we please This is heauie This is leight But let vs bring the diuine scale of the holie Scripture and in that let vs weigh which is heauiest or rather let not vs wheigh it but let vs aknowledg it weighed of God Let vs set aside a while mens ghesses or imaginations of the conference or exposition of this or that place of Scripture let vs not bring deceitfull scales of mans conference inference or exposition of Scripture with which we may weigh what we will and how we will saying according as we please This is the meaning That is not the meaning This followeth That followeth not This is true that is false againe all which we may oppose those words of S. Austin This is mans inference mans conference mans exposition mans ghesse not diuine authoritie and let vs bring the diuine and sure scale of the pure meaning of Gods pure word and in that let vs weigh the doctrin of both partes or rather let vs acknowledge that which is weighed and allowed by God him self in this his scale Moreouer if mans help be necessarie to Scripture for the conference and expositiō of the places therof or inference of that which is to be inferred out of them so that without mans help it can not sufficiently decide questions of faith I aske of Protestants what men these must be whether we or they or some third who nether are Catholiks nor Protestants Sure I am they will nether admit ours nor other mens expositions of Scripture for their iudge and I think they wil be ashamed to exact of vs that we should admit their interpretatiō especially sith they refuse the conference inference and exposition of the holy Councells and Fathers Wherfore vnles they will stand to Protestants must be tried by the natiue and vsual sense of he words or thy no sense that sense of Scripture which is no way partial to wit which the Scripture it self by it self without any conference or exposition of man giueth they can name no sense of Scripture which both parties may admit for their iudge and to refuse all sense of Scripture whervpon both parties may reasonably agree is plainly to refuse all reasonable triall by scripture For seing the soule and kernel of the Scripture is the sense therof and that the letter or words is but the shell or bark of it as is euident and both holie Fathers and Protestants agree manifest it is that whosoeuer will not reasonably agree vpon any sense of the Church Councells or Fathers where it is spoken of set purpose to declare Gods meaning of it self without any mans exposition and according to the vsual vnderstanding of men it doth afford rather then the quite contrarie sense which by the wresting of Protestants it is compelled to carrie Let but this right reason and true prudence lift vp this Balance wherein I weigh the Doctrin of Catholiks and Protestants according to holie Scripture in more then 260. points and I nothing doubt but it will clearly see and iudge the Catholik doctrin agreable to Scripture and the Protestant quite opposite and contrarie And this is my purpose Scope and butte in this 1. The Scope of the first booke And of the second booke to which I adde a second wherin I manifestly shewe that Protestants Doctrin is not onely quite opposite in more then 260. points both in words and meaning to the holie Scripture but also that they are forced to reiect many and great partes of the Scripture to alter that parte which they admit to weaken all force of Scripture to say that much of the Scripture was not spoken of certaine knowledge or not according to the meaning of the speaker to teach that most weightie sentences of the Scripture were spoken ironically mimetically and hyperbolically to change the most vniuersall propositions of the Scripture into particulers to limitate speeches not limited by the Scripture to alter absolute speeches into conditionall to make causall propositions not causall to expound words in some sorte which were spake simply The contents of the second booke which were spaken of one time to interprete them of an other to make one saying of many to vnderstand words that signifie the doing of a thing of an endeauour to doe it which signifie working a thing of the way or meane therto which signifie that a thing is to expound that it ought to be words which signifie a true thing to expound them of a shew or apparent thing to expound the words of Scripture of different yea wholy diuerse contrarie matters to deuise improprietes and all figures of speeches to feigne friuolous and neuer before heard of distinctions to reiect the exposition of the Fathers Councells and Church to confesse that they teach Doctrin damned in ould time for heresie to frustate the ends of the incarnation and passion of Christ to take out of the world all vertue and giue free scope to all vice and finally to confesse that much of the Protestant doctrin is contrarie to holie Scripture All which clearly shewe that Protestant leaders doe not onely teach doctrin contrarie to the Scripture but also do in very deed mock and contemne it 8. The manner of my proceeding is this First I deuide Manner of proceeding in this booke the matters which are in controuersie
speeches of Protestants as it was to me to write them out let him runne ouer the Summe which I make of their words or by the notes in the margent chuse which are fittest to his purpose And thus much for the māner of my proceeding in this booke 11. The profit of this work is manifould First because by it a short and easie way may be taken to make an end The profits of this worke of all controuersies and that out of Scirpture alone as Protestants desire to wit by mere rehearsall of the expresse words of Scripture of Catholiks and of famous Protestants touching 260. articles of controuersie For if it appeare that catholikes in 260. articles agree both in word and sense with the expresse words of Scripture and these spoken of purpose to declare her meaning vnto vs and that Protestants in those 260. articles directly contradict the said words and sense of the holie Scripture no man will doubt but that all Protestant doctrin for as it is contrarie to the Catholik is also contrarie to the holie Scripture An other commoditie is that in this booke are gathered those places of Scripture and they ranked according to order of their matters which in 260. articles directly and in their proper and vsual sense do approue the Catholik doctrin and condemne the Protestant A third commoditie is that hereby are at hand in euerie kind of controuersie such sayings of famous Protestants as not onely directely crosse the Scripture but also many of them are so blasphemous against God against Christ against the Saints the Church Sacraments Faith Good works so opposite to pietie vertue and religion so fauorable to vice and all licenciousnes so repugnant to reason as some Protestants will deny and others scarse beleeue that euer any of theirs taught such doctrin Whome I request The Authors fidelitie in citing Protetestants sayings to take the paines to looke vpon the bookes and places by me alledged and then to beleeue their owne eyes For I not onely gathered their sayings out of their owne bookes but also after I had my self gathered them and caused them to be faire copied out I diligently conferred them with their books and admitted none which he that read their bookes did non find to be truly cited out of them Wherfore I say for my self as Caluin said for him self against Gentilis There shal be no colour for them to cōplaine that they are slandered seing I request that iudgmēt be made of their impietie out of their owne mere words And they who haue had to deale with Protestants ether by word or writing know well how important a thing it is to be able to conuince them that they teach that which in in very deed they teach which may clearly be done by their sayinges here rehearsed 12. The fourth commoditie of this worke is thar hereby shall appeare that almost in all controuersies which betwene Catholiks and Protestants Catholiks do stick fast to the very words of Scripture and religiously keepe her letter and forme of speech and Protestants goe fare from the words at lest of Scripture and bring in a different yea quite opposit forme of speech Nether ought they to think this to be a small fault both because they boasting of the pure and expresse word of God ought also to keep the very letter thereof and not to reiect it and to vse the contrarie as also because the Apostle commandeth to auoide profane nouelties of words and to keepe the 1. Timoth. 6. 2. Timoth. 1. forme of holesome words which we haue learned of him which commandment they do not follow who forsake the Scriptures forme of speech and embrace the contrarie and finally because not onely the sense but also the words and forme of speech vsed by the Scripture did proceed from the holie Ghoste and therefore it is sacrilegious audacitie to reiect Gods words and Gods forme of speaking and to bring in mans words and fashion of speaking quite contrarie As if these new Ghospelers should teach God how to deliuer his mind or he ment to speake otherwise by them then he did by his Prophets Apostles and Euāgelists wherefore their impietie is not to be borne withall who when the Scripture most often and most plainly calleth the beleefe of wicked men or reprobats faith and neuer denieth it to be faith yet dare say that it Caluin 3. Instit c. 2. §. 10. is vnworthie the name of faith When the Scripture often times and most directly calleth the Eucharist the bodie of Christ and not once directly denieth it to be his bodie yet dare say it is not his bodie And the like they doe in many other matters wherin if they controll not the meaning of the holie Ghoste at least they correct his speech and reforme it according to the square of their new doctrin Far otherwise proceeded the holie Fathers who would not suffer so much as a letter or syllable of the holie Scripture to be altered And as S. Austin grauely aduertized Philosophers may speake as they please but we speake according Lib. 10. de Ciuit. c. 23. to a certaine rule lest licencie in words breed impious opinions of the thing which they signifie Yea Protestants them selues some times will seeme to be very carefull of the words and phrases of Scripture For thus speaketh Luther If the In Confutat Latomi f. 227 Scripture terme any thing sin beware thou beest not moued by any words of theirs who as if they could speake better deny it to be sin And Caluin There is to be taken out of Scripture a 1. Instit c. 13. §. 3. certaine forme of thinking speaking by which all the thoughts of our mynd and words of our mouth are to be examined Beza Ad defens Castell also I see that all godlie and learned Diuines haue euer taught that the holie Ghost gouerned not onely the mynd but also the tongue and pen in so much as concerning the wonders of God not onely nothing can be saied of any mā more truly or more habily but also nether so grauely nor so properly Likewise Bucer Prefat in Math. No wisdom of the flesh can reach to these misteries of the kingdome of God Therefore then we speake most plainly most perspicuously and most surely of matters of faith when we speake according to the rule and forme of Scripture And otherwhere we In Hospin part 2. Histor must learne of the Scripture and the holie Ghoste how to speake and think of euerie matter Wherefore the holie Ghost his formes of speaking ought not to be corrected according to the iudgment of our reason Thus they which if they and theires had followed we should not haue had so much speech contrarie to the Scripture 13. The fift and that no small cōmoditie is that by this worke wil be taken from ministers all their false pretense of Scripture and of the worde of God wherewith perpetually they crie that the Catholik
faith is grounded onely vpon mens authoritie and all their doctrin forsouth vpon the expresse Scripture and word of God and In c. 1. Galat. In Assert art 2. thereby draw the simple people to follow them The Pope faieth Luther hauing no Scripture wherewith to defēd himself vseth this onely and perpetuall argument against vs. The Church the Church Agayne Our opinion is deliuered by these words of God the contrarie by the words of men And otherwhere All the Scripture standeth an our sides through all letters and tittles Caluin Papists find no weapons in Scripture yea they In Actor 9. v. 22. In Antid sess 6. c. 8. see it wholy against them Agayne I haue the whole Scripture on my side And Sadeel Our doctrin doth relie vpon the expresse worde of God And in an other place we professed in the fift article of our French Confession that our faith is onely and wholie and expressly grounded vpon the word of God as it is contained De vocat Ministr Ad art 1. abiurat in the Scripture Fulk in Ioan. 5. note 2. Papists can not find a iote of Poperie allowed ether by expresse wordes of the Scripture or by necessarie cōclusiō out of the same And the like most vaine pretence this most impudent boast is most Apol. Anglic p. 20. Pareus praefat lib. de Grat. Caluin epist 193. Whitak praefat ad Demonst manifestly refuted in this booke wherein is clearly shewed that the Catholik doctrin in more then 260. points denied by Protestants is in expresse termes and most directly taught and deliuered by the Scripture and in the same points the Protestants doctrin condemned and that these in very deed do relie vpon their owne inferences out of Scripture their owne conferences of places of Scripture and oppose their owne expositions glosses tropes and figures against the expresse words and thunders of almightie God 14. The sixt commoditie is that though some obstinatly will not confesse that in all these 260. points or in most of them the Scripture or word of God doth expresly approue the Catholik doctrin and condemne the Protestant yet this he can not denie but in all these points the holie Scripture both for word and for sense fauoureth more the Catholik doctrin then the Protestant which if ignorant Protestants would mark they would not be so easily misled For as for words in all these 260. points we Catholiks aduantage ouer Protestants For words of Scripture vse the very same or equiualent words with the Scripture what she calleth faith we call faith what she calleth the bodie of Christ we call the bodie of Christ And so in others whereas Protestants do the quite contrarie as hath beene touched before and shall appeare in the whole booke And as for the forme of speach where the Scripture For phrase of Scripture affirmeth we affirme where the Scripture denieth we deny And contrarie wise the Protestants affirme where the Scripture denieth and deny where the Scripture affirmeth as shal be most euident to him that will read this booke Besids no parte or parcell of the Scripture forceth For partes of Scripture Catholiks to denie it but they hould all that Protestants account for Scripture and some what more whereas Protestāts are compelled to reiect manie bookes of those which Catholiks and the holie Church heretofore hath beleeued to be Gods word and fouly also to mangle and corrupt these bookes which they admit Moreouer Catholiks refuse no authenticall edition or translation of the For translations of Scripture Scripture but Protestants will sland to no translation And thus much touching the words of Scripture As for For the sense of Scripture the sense thereof Catholiks in all these 260. points do admit that sense which the expresse words of Scripture and they spoaken of purpose to declare Gods mynd doe of them selues proporse which sense Protestants reiect and force the quite contrarie Agayne scarce in any of these 260. articles Catholiks are driuen to any answere which hath any shew of a shift or euasion because in them as I saied they embrace the natiue and proper sense of the words of Scripture but Protestants in euerie one of them are driuen to sundrie and foule shifts because they refuse the naturall and plaine sense of Gods word Besids Catholiks in all these 260. points dare stand to the iudgment of the expresse worde of God according to that sentence which of them selues with out all helpe force or pressing of Catholiks they doe pronounce Protestants dare not in these articles stand to the iudgment of Gods expresse worde vnles they may wrest wring and interprete it as they thinke best Finally Catholiks in none of all these questions reiect that sense of Scripture which is deliuered by vnanimous consent of the holie Fathers Councells or Church Protestants refuse it in manie Seing therefore Catholiks haue the aduantage ouer Protestants not onely for Fathers Councells Church miracles the like but also that they haue such and so great aduantages ouer them in more then 260. points of controuersie both for the expresse worde and plaine sense of the Scripture it is plaine willfulnes and carelesnes of saluation to leaue Catholiks for to follow Protestants I would to God that Protestants would as they pretend follow the expresse word of God and embrace that Religion Note which the expresse word of God most fauoureth reiect that which it most disliketh and enquire diligently whether the Catholik or Protestant religion can in more points of controuersie proue her doctrin by the pure and expresse written word of God without the mixture of any word of man and by the pure sense therof which of it self it affordeth without any help or exposition of man when it is spoaken of purpose to declare Gods meaning vnto vs. Let that religion florish and be embraced which in this conflict ouercomet let that perish and be reiected which is ouercomen And what more reasonable then to preferre Gods pure word before that which is not pure mixt partely of Gods words partely of mans What more reafonable then to preferre Gods direct speech before mans inference or collection out of his speech What more reasonable then to follow rather Gods expresse words then mans glosses tropes and figures And finally what more reasonable then to follow that religion which in more then 260. points of controuersie is grounded vpon the pure word the direct word the expresse word of God and hath against it nothing but mans mixt word mans inference mans glosses rather then that which in all those points is condemned by the pure direct and expresse word of God and supported onely by mans mixt word mans inference and mans glosses For example That the Eucharist is the bodie of Christ we haue for vs in foure places of Scripture the pure direct and expresse word of God saying This is my bodie and against vs there is not so much as once any pure word of God
saing directly and expresly This is not my bodie But onely mens inference out of a mixt word to wit Christs bodie is in heauen and can not be in two places which word is mixt partely of Gods word for the former parte and of mens word for the latter And shall we thinke that in a matter of faith which we can not know but by Gods teaching his pure and expresse word is not to be preferred before mens inference out of a mixt word which is in parte mens word What els can we thinke vnles we will euen in Gods matters preferre men before God 15. The seauenth cōmoditie is that in this word are discouered all or the most vsuall shifts wherewith Protestāts vse to delude the testimonies of holie Scripture Which surely is no lesse profitable then to know the deceits of enemies with whom we are to fight And as Tertullian saieth VVoe be to him who whiles he is in this life knoweth not De resur c. 19. the secrets of Heretiks And these are the especiall profits and commodities which may be reaped by this work Now let vs remoue certaine scruples or hinderances of the reaping of them 16. The first scruple may be about the vulgar Latin trāslation Obiections or difficulties remoued which I follow in citing the words of Scripture But to omit all which Catholiks produce for to proue that translation to be authenticall because this is no place to treate of that matter Protestants cōfessions hereof may suffice which may be seene in the Protestants Apologie for the Rom. Church Treat 1. Sect. 10. subd 4. to which I add that Casoubon writeth I acknowledg the Latin translation of the bible to be holie Scripture and I account an vnperdonable fault to so much as doubt thereof That Iuel art 17. sect 4. saieth It hath bene euer more generally receaued in the Church That Beza in Luc. 1. confesseth That the ancient interpreter did most religiously translate the Scripture And in Luc. 8. v. 54. That him self had twoe ancient Greek copies which meruailously agreed with the vulgar Latin And Prefat in Testam That the vulgar interpreter had a truer Greek copie then theirs now are Whitaker also Cont. 1. q. 2. c. 7. graunteth that the Latin Fathers commend it and iustly Hounfrey l. 1. de Rat. interpret affirmeth That the old Interpretor seemeth enough addicted to the proprietie of the word Moreouer Luther and Protestants commonly confesse that Catholiks haue the word of God that the Fathers vsed the Latin translation in their disputes for maintenance of the Catholik faith and confutation of Heresies Besids Fulk in his preface to the Testament saieth that none of them calleth the vulgar translation of the new testament Papisticall as though it were translated by Papists or els made so greatly for Papists when it is rightly vnderstood Finally the vulgar Latin translation differeth not from the originall Hebrew or Greek text but in very few of those places which here I cite and therefore it wil be but vayne to cauil here about this matter 17. The secōd scruple may be that some times the very why Protest can not excuse them selues by the Scripture Scripture contradicteth it self in shew of words and neuertheles in sense and meaning is neuer repugnant to it self And therefore it is not so great meruail if Protestāts some time contradict the words of Scripture nether can it be thereof inferred that the contradict the sense To this I answer that the Scripture nether so often nor in so many and so weightie matters nor so manifestly and directly contradicteth it self in words as Protestants doe Nether need we so many and so incredible shifts for to reconcile the words of Scripture as Protestants need to reconcile their sayings with the Scripture Besids God may speak as he pleaseth therefore may for to exercise our faith and studie mingle some shew of contradiction in his words but Protestants are bound to speak as God speaketh and not to gaine say so much as his words as doubtles they would not if their meaning were not repugnant to his Agayne we may not out of anie seeming contradiction in Gods words infer anie opposition in his meaning because we know that he can not be contrarie to him self but we know that Protestants can not be contrarie to Gods meaning as we see that they be contrarie to his words and therefore out of their so frequent so manifest so direct contradicting of his words we iustly inferre that they also contradict his meaning as we would inferre the same of anie Heretiks whatsoeuer Moreouer this cauil will no more help Protestants then it will help anie other Heretiks sith there were euer scarce anie who so often so plainly so directly contradicted the expres word of God as Protestants haue done And therefore ether we may inferre out of the Protestants contradicting the words of God that they also contradict his true meaning or we can not inferre that of anie Heretiks whatsoeuer But of this more in the second booke cap. 1. 18. The third scruple may be that perhaps also VVhy they can not excuse them selues by Catholiks some Catholik writers haue in shew of words contradicted the Scripture But to this I answere that this is to accuse others not to cleare them selues Let them first answere for them selues before they recriminate others And if anie of them will goe about to lay the like fault vpon Catholiks let him keep these most iust and equal conditions First let him not medle with other matters then such as are in controuersie betwixt vs and them as I touch no other matters Secondly let him bring forth in so manie controuersies so manifest and so direct testimonies of holie Scripture agreeing with their doctrin both in wordes and sense and opposite to our doctrin as I haue brought Thou must proue saieth Tertullian as euidently as we proue Giue me a proof which I demand like to Cont. Prax. c. 11. De vnit c. 6. 24. mine And S. Austin Produce as cleare testimonies as these are which we produce to you We demande some manifest place which needeth no interpreter Thirdly let him shew that the Councell of Trent contradicteth as directly so many and so expres places of Scripture and that in so weightie matters as we haue shewed that theire confessions of faith of which as they say they make almost as great account of as Vorstius praefat Antilpraefat Syntagm we doe of the Councell of Trent Fourthly let him shew that so many and so famous Catholik writers haue in so many and so great controuersies contradicted the expres propositions or assertions of the holie Scripture as we haue shewed of the Protestant writers I say Propositions or Assertions because it is a farre greater matter to contradict the proportions of Scripture in which it pronounceth a thing to be or not to be to be such or not to be such then to varie onely from some of the
words wherewith here or there it signifieth this or that thing As for example it is a farre greater matter to deny the Eucharist to be the bodie of Christ which the Scripture often times plainly affirmeth then not to call it bread as some times the Scripture doth but neuer directly saieth that it is bread Wherevpon Spalatensis l. 5. de repub c. 6. writeth thus It is one thing for a seeming thing to be called by the name of the true thing which the appearence doth shew An other to be said This is that The first may and is borne withall in all equiuocall termes but not the latter Wherefore let him omit these kinds of matters Fiftly let him shew that Catholiks haue done thus not by the way treating of other matters but of set purpose as Protestants haue done who most often then contradict the Scripture in plaine termes euen then when they answere it or comment vpon it Lastly let him shew that Catholiks haue beene forced for the maintenance of their doctrin to denie so many bookes to corrupt so many places of holie Scripture to deuise so many and so incredible shifts as we haue shewed the Protestants haue done or let him be ashamed to say that Catholiks are as faultie in this kind as Protestants be Moreouer though they could proue that some Catholiks haue bene as faultie herein as they are which they can neuer proue yet that would nothing preiudice the Chatholik Church because her faith is not the doctrin of one or of many Catholiks but the common of them all But the Protestant faith is in many points the doctrin of some or of manie of them euerie one of them making that a point of faith which him self gathereth out of Scripture whether his fellows beleeue it or no. Besids the Catholik Church if she find anie thing in the writinges of her children contrarie to holie Scripture she nether alloweth nor dissembleth it but commandeth it to be blotted out as is euident by the Expurgatorie Indices but the Protestant ether approueth or dissembleth the errors of her writers and so maketh them her owne VVhy all CoÌ„tradictioÌ„s here related may be abiected to the Prot. Church 19. The fourth scruple may be that all the CoÌ„tradictions against holie Scripture which are here rehearsed out of Protestant writers were not made nor allowed of all Protestants or of their Church and therefore all of them are not to be imputed to all ProtestaÌ„ts or to their Church I answere First that very many of the Contradictions against holie Scripture here set downe are found in their Confessions of faith and in other writings set forth in their common name which Contradictions are most iustly attributed to their Church and these alone suffice to shew that the very faith and common doctrin of Protestants is directly opposite both to the word and sense of holie Scripture Secondly almost all these Contradictions are taken out of the writings of the first the chiefest and famousest teachers guides and leaders of Protestants and therefore ether Protestants must acknowledge these Contradictions or reiect the doctrin of their first and chefest Maisters as directly contrarie to Gods word Thirdly all the Contradictions or Antitheses here produced are taken out of famous writers and mainteiners of the Protestant faith whose doctrin the Protestant Church hath not publikly condemned nor compelled the Authors thereof to recall it nor commanded it to be taken out of their writings and therefore if not by publike consent yet by silence and dissembling approueth it and so as I saied before maketh it her owne Fourthly Protestants obiect to the Catholik Church whatsoeuer any Cotholik writer though neuer so obscure hath written why then may not we better obiect vnto their Church what many and the most famous of their writers haue published Finally my intention in this workes not to shew the Contradictions of this or that Protestant man or Church against the holie Scripture but of the Protestants in generall especially of the cheefest and most famous But whether the Contradictions of Scripture made by And though they could not yet that would suffice many and famous Protestant writers and not condemned but dissembled by their Church be to be obiected to their Church or no these points ensuing will suffice to my purpose First that the commun fairh of Protestants is in many and weightie articles directly contrarie to the expresse word and cleare meaning of holie Scripture as is euident by that which in diuers articles I recite out of their Confessions of faith and other their common writings The second is that touching many other matters that self same doctrin which I cite out of other Protestants is conteined in their Confessions of faith though it be not deliuered there in termes so expresly opposite to the words of holie Scripture as it is by other Protestants The third is that much of that Protestant Doctrin which here if cite as opposite to holie Scripture is in very deed the common beleef of Protestants albeit it be not inserted in their Confessions The fourth point is that those Protestants whose words I alledge knew the common Apol. Anglic Cont. 2. q. 5. c. 8. L. 3. de Eccles c. 42. doctrin of Protestants as well as anie who now will denie or reiect that doctrin The fift is that Iuel Whitaker Feild and diuers other Protestants auouch that there is no materiall difference in doctrin amongst the cheefe ProtestaÌ„ts which ether they must confesse to befalse or maintaine the doctrin which here I cite out of their cheefest writers The sixt point is that housoeuer the doctrin which I cite is not in all points the Doctrin of this Protestant man or Church yet it is as I saied Protestant doctrin taught and maintained by famous Protestants such as our English Protestants hould communion withall and account them their brethreÌ„ in Christ And therefore ether let theÌ„ defend their doctrin or refuse their coÌ„munion The seuenth point is that whether all or most of the Protestant doctrin which here I cite as opposite to holie Scripture be the coÌ„mon doctrin or beleefe of ProtestaÌ„ts or no this alone would suffice to my purpose that the doctrin of the first chefest and famousest Protestant preachers and leaders is in more then Note 260. points of controuersie quite opposite to the expresse words of holie Scripture For thereby euerie one may see that the first cheefest ProtestaÌ„t preachers did not teach the word of God but the word of the Diuel quite contrarie thereâ—o were not ministers of the word of God but ministers of the Diuel not Reformers but Deformers not sent of God but thrust on by the Diuel not lightned from heaune but blinded from hel not Apostles but Apostatas not Pastores but wolues who vnder a most false pretence of the word of God did most directly impugne it drew Cristians from Gods truth to the Diuels lies from the lap of the Catholik
order of the matter did require that to be first proposed which alone is now to be disputed Fourthly whose is the faith whose is the Scripture Fourthly it is euident that if anie Protestant will notwithstanding all that hath beene saied iudge that Protestants are the true owners of Scripture rather then Catholiks he will giue that iudgment in a matter of such great moment which he would be ashamed to giue in a question of the least trifle in the world For who seing that one hath nine titles to a peece of ground of all which titles his aduersarie hath no pretence and that he hath as good if not farre better shew also of the tenth title as his aduersarie hath would not be ashamed to adiudge the land to his aduersarie and cast him out of possession who was actuall possessor when the matter came first in question was peacable possessor for manie ages was the ancienter possessor and of whose possession no Note this beginning can be found but from the true lord and from whom his aduersarie hath whatsoeuer he hath whose lawfull possession thereof all kinde of aduersaries do some time confesse and put his aduersarie in possession who can pretend no title but that which alone sufficeth not and which also for better agreeth to the ancient possessor If anie say that in wordly matters reason would giue iudgment for the ancient possessor but not in heauenlie or deuine matters as the Scripture is I demand what Scripture what worde of God teacheth vs to checke the light of reason concerning the true possession of the Scripture If none why then doe we not follow reason in this matter of fact concerning the true possession of Scripture as well as in others Besides this were to grante that the light of reason is in this matter with Catholiks against Protestants and consequently that to be a Protetestant one must first cast away reason euen in a matter which is vnder the reach of reason as is who are the true owners of the Scriptures Moreouer the very end of this Balance is no other then to shew that if we will follow the light of reason and true prudence we ought to imbrace the Catholik religion and reiect the Protestant and that to doe otherwise is to cast away reason and prudence and to become vnreasonable and imprudent men and to say that Christ hath giuen vs a Religion which is not onely aboue reason but euen contrarie to reason and that also in matters subiect to reason and that we can not become faithfull men but we must first become vnreasonable men not receaue his light of faith before we put out his light of reason wherewith he hath made vs like to him selfe and superiours to beasts Thus we see how farre in all reason and prudence Catholiks are aboue Protestants for the right claime or iust possession of holie Scripture Now let vs see in the rest of this booke how farre also they are aboue them for the letter or wordes of Scripture and in the second booke how farre they are aboue them for the true sense thereof A SVMME OF THE MORE MANIFEST CONtradictions betwene the expresse wordes of the holie Scripture and of Protestants with the Chapter and Article where they may be read more at large which will much serue to vnderstand and remember better those which follow CHAPTER II. OF GOD. SCRIPTVRE Thou are not a God that willeth iniquitie God willeth not iniquitie He willeth iniquitie Protestants God will haue iniquitie to be committed God willeth iniquitie with a hidden will He willeth sin He willeth sin to be done He would haue Adam to sin to fall to reuoult See more c. 2. article 1. Scripture Our iust lord in the middes thereof will not doe God doth not iniquitie iniquitie Protestants God worketh euill in vs The euils of sin are He doth iniquitie done by the effectuall working of God Dauids adulterie is properly Gods worke Iudas his treacherie is his proper worke as the vocation of S. Paul Pharao his crueltie is attributed to Gods counsell in no other sense then the Egiptians fauoure towards his people God procureth sin it selfe Se more c. 2. art 4. Scripture He God hath commanded no man to doe impiously God commaÌ„deth not to sin He commandeth to sin Protestants God biddeth Sathan goe to be a lying spirit By Gods commandment Sathan is a lying spirit God giueth him a plaine commandment to deceaue Sathan was sent to deceaue by the expresse commandment of God See art 6. Scripture God is not a tempter of euils and he tempteth no God tempeteth not to sin man Protestants God is the author of temptation God moueth He tempâ—eth to sin the offenders to sin pushed the Iewes to kill his Sonne stirreth vp the theefs will to kill driueth to sin by tempting inclineth the wills of wicked men into greeuous sins See more art 7. Scripture Thou hatest all that worke iniquitie Protestants God is angrie with the elect when they sinne but God hateth all that worke iniquitie He hateth not all such God iustifieth not the impious He iustifieth the impious neuer hateth them He hateth all iniquitie but not all in whome iniquitie is See art 9. Scripture He that iustifieth the impious is abhominable before God Protestants Seing God forbiddeth to iustifie the impious Prou. 17. can he be saied to do that rightly which him self forbiddeth Rightly Albeit we be wicked yet are we accounted of the lord for iust A wicked man may be pronounced iust according to the Ghospell Christ can iustifie such as are impious and want all good workes See more art 10. Scripture Against Aaron God being exceeding angrie God is angrie with the faithfull wheÌ„ they sin He is not angrie with theÌ„ God is pleased with good workes He is not pleased with them God is serued with good workes He is not serued with them he would haue destroied him Protestants God alwaies withouldeth his anger from the faithfull God is not angrie with sinners See art 11. Scripture VVe doe these thinges which are pleasing before him with such hostes God is pleased Protestants God careth not for workes we foolishly feigne that God is much delighted with our workes There is no such God which is delighted with our good workes To wash dishes and to preach is all one as for pleasing God See more art 13. Scripture By fastings and praiers seruing God day and night Protestants The true God is not serued with workes There is one only worship pleasing to God to wit true faith God is serued by faith only Faith is the onely true worship of God See art 14. Scripture Phinees stoode pacified and the slaughter ceased God is pacified by good workes He is not pacified by theÌ„ God will haue his commaÌ„dments kept He will not haue theÌ„ kept Protestants There is no such God that can be pacified with our good workes The workes which I do according to Gods law
AFFIRMETH. Exod. 4. vers 14. Our Lord being angrie at Moises saied c. God angered at Moises and Aaron Deuteronom 9. v. 20. Against Aaron also being exceeding angrie he would haue destroied him Michee 7. v. 9. I will beare the wrath of our lord because I haue sinned to him Roman 2. v. 9. Wrath and indignation tribulation and Gods wrath on all that doe euill anguish vpon euerie soule of man that worketh euill CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Catechismus ad Parochos in orat Dom. Albeit the act of sinne be past yet sinne remaineth by guilt and staine ouer which Gods anger euer hanging doth follow it as the shadow the bodie PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther in c. 42. Gen. to 6. fol. 575. Nether must we beleiue him when he is angrie For in deed Christ that is God incarnate is not angrie Doth he not seeme to be angrie No surely he is not angrie Nor suffer thy selfe to be so persuaded for it is not true but God but feignedlie angrie feigned anger In c. 3. Galat. to 5. fol. 336. Follow not the iudgment of reason which saieth that God is angrie with sinners Et in argum Epistolae fol. 272. Thou canst not be saued vnles thou forget the law and determine certainly in thy hart Not angrie with sinners that there is no law or anger of God but mere mercie and grace for Christs sake Caluin 3. Instit cap. 4. § 31. God is not so rigorous in his iudgmeÌ„t of chastyzing the faithfull as he becometh angrie § 32. God alwaies withhouldeth his anger from the faithfull Item Neuer angrie with the faithfull Nether hindreth it that the lord is often saied to be angrie with his Saintes when he chastizeth their sinnes For that is not ment of Gods counsell or affection when punisheth but of the vehement feeling of sorrow wherewith they are affected who sustaine how litle soeuer of his seueritie CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that God was angrie with Moises exceeding angrie against Aaron had wrath against Micheas and that wrath and indignation is vpon euerie soule that worketh euill The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely saye that God is not angrie with sinners is not angrie indeed his anger is not true but feigned hath anger but mere grace and mercie alwaies withhouldeth his anger from the faithfull that what is saied of Gods anger against the faithfull is not meÌ„t of his mynd but of their feeling of his chastisment Which are so opposite to the holie Scripture as euen Protestants some times confesse See lib. 2. c. 30. ART VIII WHETHER GOD DOTH punish sinners for sinnes past SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Genes 3. vers 17. God saieth to Adam Because thou hast God punished Adam and Euer for sinne post heard the voice of thy wife and hast eaten of the tree whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eate cursed is the earth in thy worke with much toiling shalt thou eate thereof all the dayes of thy life 2. Kings 12. vers 14. Our lord hath taken away thy sinne Also Dauid thou â—halt not dye Neuerthelesse because thou hast made the enemies of our lord to blaspheme for this thing the sonne that is borne to thee dying shall dye Ihon. c. 5. v. 14. Iesus saied to him Behould thou art made whole sinne no more lest some worse thing chance to thee CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarmin l. 2. de Paenitent c. 2. We see that the punishment inflicted vpon Dauid had respecte to that which was past rather then to that which was to come PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Caluin 3. Inst cap. 4. § 33. Whiles the reprobates are scourged of God with whippes they begin in some sorte to taste the punishments of his iudgment But his children are beaten with God punisheth not his children for sinnes past rods not for to paye to God the penaltie of their offences but to increase thereby in repentance Wherefore we gather that they respect more the time to come then the time past Et § 30. What I pray you had Christ done for vs if yet punishment were exacted for sinne Zanchius de Perseuerant q. 1. c. 2. This is most certaine that God neuer imputeth sinne to the elect The same say others as we shall see hereafter c. 16. art 1. CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that Adam was punished because he had eaten of the aple and Dauid because he had made Gods enemies blaspheme The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that Gods children are not punished for sinne past that no sinne is imputed to the elect That no punishment is exacted of vs for sinne And hitherto we haue seene that the Scripture teacheth vs how God carieth him selfe towards sinnes and sinners plaine contrarie to that which Protestants teach Now we will see the like touching good workes ART XIII WHETHER GOD REGARD good workes or be delighted with them SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Genes 8. v. 20. Noë built an altar to our lord and taking of all cattle and foules that were cleane offered holocausts vpon Noes sacrifice a sweet smell to God the altar and our lord smelled a sweet sauour 4. Kings c. 22. v. 2. And he Iosias did that was liked before our Lord. Malachie 3. v. 4. And the sacrifice of Iuda and Hierusalem Sacrifice pleaseth God shall please our lord Actes 10. vers 4. And he saied to him Thy praiers and thy almes deeds are ascended into remembrance in the sight of God Hebrewes 13. ver 16. And forget not beneficence and communication for with such hostes God is promerited Or as the Greek hath is pleased 1. Ihon. 3. v. 22. We do those things which are pleasing before him CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarmin l. 4. de Iustificat c. 15 The seuenth testimonie is taken out of those places of Scripture which teach that the workes of the iust do please God And l. 5. c. 2. He saieth that the sense of the forecited words Hebr. 13. is this With such hostes God is delighted or God is pleased with such hostes PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther de Captiuit Babilon to 2. fol. 69. Nether can God careth not at all for workes we any time deale otherwise with God then by faith in the word of his promise He careth nothing at all for works nor needeth them by which we are to deale rather with men and with our selues Et Postilla in Domini 1. Aduentus fol 8. God careth Respecteth not yea loatheth them not for workes In festo S. Stephani fol. 376. God respecteth not workes We foolishly feigne that God is much delighted with our workes whereas he greatly loatheth them In festo Assumpt fol. 435. Truly workes are of no accounte before God In cap. 1. Ionae to 4. fol. 411. The Papists haue a conceit of God as if he were a God that is delighted and may be appeased with our good No God that is delighted with
be made at his death Bucanus in Institution loco 48. Which is giuen is not saied but by change of time present for that which is streight to come for Which shal be giuen to wit on the crosse not in the Eucharist Reineccius to 4. Armaturae c. 19. Christ vsed the time present for the future The same saieth Caluin Admonit vlt. p. 836. Beza in Math. 26. v. 28. Tilenus in Syntagm c. 61. Micronius in Hospin part 2. f. 236. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that at the verie present time of the celebration of the Eucharist Christs bodie is giuen Chrysostom Theophilact Oecum in 1. Cor. 10. is deliuered is broken and his blood is shedde for vs. And the holie Fathers declare how it is most true The Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that it is blasphemie to say that Christs bodie is broken in the Eucharist that his bodie is not brokeÌ„ in the Supper that his blood is not shedde in the Eucharist that Christ saied which is giuen for which shal be giuen and tooke the present time for the future Which are so coÌ„trarie to the Scripture as diuers ProtestaÌ„ts confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART VI. WHETHER THE CHALICE of the Eucharist was shedde for vs SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Luc. 22. vers 20. This is the Chalice the new testament in my blood which Chalice as is euident in the Greek text shal be The Chalice shedde for vs. shedde for you CATHOLIKS EXPRâ—SSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Math. 26. v. 28 Keeping the grammaticall and right sense of the words of S. Luke as they are in Greek where the Chalice it selfe is saied to be shedde in remission of sinnes by the name of the Chalice we must needs vnderstand not wine but blood in the chalice PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker ad Ration 1. Campiani The Chalice was not Not shedde for vs. shedde for vs And yet he confesseth that if we stick to the words of the Euangelist we must ether say that the Chalice was shedde for vs or we must make false Greek Beza in Lucae 22. v. 20. These words cannot be vnderstood of the wine much lesse of the Cuppe Musculus in locis titul de Caena But if in Luke we reade Which is shedde for you that is not referred to the Cuppe but to the blood Againe I thinke that the word of Shedding in Saint Luke is not to be referred to thâ— Cuppe of the Sacrament but to the blood THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that the Chalice was shedde for vs as is manifest by the Greek text which alone Protestants account authenticall in so much as not onely Lutheran Protestants confesse it but also D. Willet though a a Caluinist For thus he writeth Controu 13. quaest 1. pag. 595. The Paticiple shedde agreeth with the Cuppe not with my blood as the Euangelist saieth The Cuppe was shedde The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the chalice was not shedde for vs that these words cannot be vnderstood of the Cuppe that the word Shedde in S. Luke is not referred to the Cuppe Which contradiction of Scripture is so plaine as manie Protestants confesse it nor can it he auoided by any better colour then by changing the Greek text or by saying that Saint Luke wrote false Greek who yet was an excellent Grecian as is euident by all his writings ART VII WHETHER BREAD BE NEcessarie to make the Eucharist SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Math. 26. v. 26. And whiles they were at supper Iesus tooke bread and blessed and brake and he gaue to his disciples and saied Bread necessarie to the Eucharist Take ye ad eate This is my bodie Ioan. 6. vers 51. If anie man eate of this bread he shall liue for euer and the bread which I will giue is my fâ—â—h for the life of the world 1. Cor. 10. v. 16. The bread which we breake is it not the participation of the bodie of our Lord CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME S. Thomas 3. part q. 74. art 4. There must needs be bread of wheate without which the Sacrament is not made PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Beza Epist 2. vol. 3. Where there is no vse of bread or wine or no plentie at sometime may no Supper of the Lord be celebrated yes it may be well celebrated if that which is in steed of Bread not necessarie bread and wine ether by common vse or by occasion of the time be taken in place of bread and wine Which very words are repeated by Hospin part 1 Histor c. 2. Tilenus in Syntagmate c. 61. In these countries in which there is no plentie no vse of wheaten bread or wine pressed out of of grapes we doubt not but the Sacrament may be well celebrated if that be vsed for this Symbol which there is in steed of bread and wine Bucanus in Institut Theol. loco 48. What if bread such as we haue and wine wante in any countrie with what signes is the Supper to be celebrated With those earthlie elements and corporall meats which all men in that countrie vse for bread and wine meate and drinke So also teacheth Homius Disput 47. nether is it disliked of Peter Martyr in 1. Cor. 10. Caluin also apud Bezam epist 25. alloweth other drinke in steed of wine in places where wine wanteth THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that the Eucharist is to be made of bread Catholiks say the same Protestants plainely say that bread is not necessarie That where bread wanteth there it may be made of other meats ART VIII WHETHER THE EVCHARIST may be made of azime or vnleauened bread SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Math. 2. ver 17. is saied that Christ celebrated the Eucharist the first day of the Azimes Et Marc. 14. v. 12. The first Christ vsed azime bread day of the Azimes when they sacrificed the Pasche Luc. 22. v 7. the day of the Azimes wherein it was necessarie that the Pasche should be killed Now in the dayes of the Azimes it was forbidden Exod. 12. and 13. that there should be anie leauen bread amongst the Iewes and commanded that he should die who in that time had eaten leauen bread CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME S. Thomas 3. part q. 74. art 4. The custome of celebrating in azime bread is more agreable to reason PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Beza l. quaest respons vol. 3. I say freely that there is a To vse azime is a blemish sauoureth Iudaisme duble blemish in those Churches which rather vse azime then leauen bread For that sauoureth Iudaisme and is lesse agreable to our daily meat Lobechius Disput 12. thus writeth The Zuinglian Caluinists LeaueÌ„ bread necessarie despising azime bread with a Pharisaicall pride yea cursing it do thrust leauen bread vpon the Church vnder opinion of necessitie Pareus Colleg. Theol. 9. disput 26. It must be houshould bread for analogies sake THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that Christ instituted the Eucharist the first day
of the Azimes when there was no leauen bread to be found amongst the Iewes but onely azime And Beza himselfe loc cit confesseth that Christ celebrated the Eucharist in azime bread The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that we ought to make the Eucharist rather of leauen bread then of azime that to make it of azime is a blemish sauoureth Iudaisme and is to be accursed ART IX WHETHER THE BREAD and wine of which the Eucharist is made be to be blessed SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Mathew 26. vers 26. Iesus tooke bread and blessed and Bread and wine blessed brake and he gaue to his disciples and saied Take ye and eate This is my bodie 1. Cor. 10. v. 16. The chalice of benediction which we do blesse is it not the communication of the blood of Christ CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Math. 26. v. 26. An other circumstance is that he blessed the bread and chalice PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Zuinglius l. de Caena to 2. f. 294. They should not vse the The word of Blessing not to be vsed words of Benediction and Blessing in this place 1. Cor. 10. cit For commonly the vse to be taken for the word of Consecrating Caluin in Math. 26. v. 26. Mathew and Marke vse the word of Blessing but seing in place thereof we read in Luke the word Blessing for Thanks giuing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there is no doubt of the sense and seing also that in the Chalice they adde the word of thankes giuing they clearly interprete their former speach Whereby the ignorance of Papists is more ridiculous who expresse their blessing with the signe of the crosse as if Christ had vsed an exorcisme Musculus in loc tit de Missa To blesse is not to consecrate but to giue thanks and to speake well of one that I may not say that nether Mathew nor Marke nor Paul haue vsed the word of Nether Mathew nor Paule vsed the word Blessing Blessing in this matter Of the same opinion are others who will haue the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in S. Mathew to signifie nothing but thanks giuing And so haue the Bibles of K. Edward and of Q. Elizabeth 1562. translated it THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ blessed the bread and that we blesse the Chalice The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that blessing of bread is an exorcisme that by blessing nothing is ment but thankes giuing that we should not vse it here that nether Mathew nor Paul vsed it in this matter Which contradiction of the Scripture is so cleare as some Protestants confesse it See l 2. c. 30. ART X. WHETHER THERE OVGHT to be made any preparation to the receauing of the Eucharist SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 1. Cor. 11. v. 28. But let a man proue himselfe and so let him eate of that bread and drinke of the chalice For he that eateth and drinketh vnworthily eateth and drinketh iudgment to himselfe CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarm. lib. 4. de Eucharist cap. 17. The Catholik Church teacheth that preparation to the Eucharist is not faith alone but true pennance and confession of sinnes if a man after baptisme be fallen into mortall sinne PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther Postilla in die Pascae fol. 241. We taught that it Preparation of no moment is of no moment and of no valew at all whatsoeuer we prepare of our selues to receaue the Sacrament as they did who by their confession and by other workes would make themselues worthie to receaue the Sacrament Which is a horrible error and abuse Et. f. 242. We haue condemned them and not without cause who endeauour by their workes to come worthily The same Luther lib. de Captiuitat Babilon tom 2. Onely erroneous consciences worthily communicate cap. de Eucharist Out of these things we conclude who do worhily communicate to wit onely they who haue sadde afflicted troubled confounded and erroneous consciences Which doctrine Whitaker defendeth ad Ration 8. Campiani pag. 41. Againe By which thou seest that to haue Masse worthily The more wicked the nearer to grace no other thing is required but faith And apud Fabritium in artic 20. Augustan By how much the wickeder thou art by so much the sooner God giueth thee grace And in psalm 5. tom 3. fol. 172. I will say one thing rashly and bouldly In this Blasphemers most gratefull to God life there are none nearer to God then these haters and blasphemers of God nor anie more gratefull or louing children Which also Whitaker mantaineth loco citat And Concione de Praeparat ad Euchar. An. 1518. The best disposition Worst disposed best disposed is no other then that wherewith thou art worst disposed and on the contrarie then thou art worst disposed when thou art best disposed Schusselburg Catal. Haeret. tom 8. pag. 216. Papists do Faith sufficeth impudently denie that faith is a sufficient preparation to receaue the Sacrament of the Eucharist Kemnice 2. part Exam. tit De preparat p. 178. Faith alone is a sufficient Praeparation The like hath Caluin 4. Instit c. 14. § 26. THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainly saieth that a man must proue or prepare himselfe to receaue the Eucharist that who receaueth it vnworthily receaueth his iudgment The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that we must not make our selues worthie by workes not endeauour by workes to come worthily that they onely communicate worthily who bring troubled and erroneous consciences that we need nothing but faith that the best disposition is to be ill disposed that haters and blasphemers of God are nearest vnto him and most gratefull that the more wicked one is the sooner God giueth him grace that faith is a sufficient preparation to the Eucharist ART XI WHETHER THERE BE ANIE Sacrifice in the Church SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Malachie 1. v. 11. From the rising of the sunne to the going Sacrifice in the Church downe great is my name among the Gentils and in euerie place there is sacrificing and there is offered to my name a cleane oblation cap. 3. vers 3. He shall purge the Sonnes of Leui and will streyne them as gould and siluer and they shal be offering sacrifices to our Lord in iustice CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 24. c. 1. Christ in his last supper that he might leaue a visible sacrifice to his beloued Church as the nature of man requireth offered his bodie and blood to God the Father vnder the formes of bread and wine PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Cont. 4. q. 1. c. 2. There is now no more Sacrifice No Sacrifice in the Church remaining in the Church Caluin in 1 Cor. 9. v. 19. The Lord instituted no Sacrifices in which holie Ministers should be occupied And because the Protestants opinion in this matter is well enough knowne I will rehearse no more of their sayings THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that in the
Consciences are bound with Gods law onely Zuinglius in Explanat artic 28. It is no sinne which God forbiddeth not Mans additions cannot make anie thing to be good or euill Art 24. No Christian is bound to those workes which Christ hath not commaunded Caluin in Iacobi 4. vers 12. It is God alone who hath the conscience subiect to his laws In Refutat Cathalon p. 384. No mortall man can make lawes which binde the conscience and make men guiltie of Gods iudgment De necessitate reform pag. 58. We teach that consciences are free and quite from mens lawes In Confess fidei p. 109. Men haue no power to binde the consciēce vnder mortall sinne The like he hath 3. Instit c. 19. 4. c. 10. Beza in Confess c. 5. sect 33. God hath reserued to himselfe alone all this power of binding the conscience with lawes cap. 7. sect 9. It is lawfull to God alone to impose lawes vpon the conscience Peter Martyr in locis classe 4. cap. 4. § 5. The Apostles No sinne to breake the Apostles laws without scandall did decree that Gentils conuerted to Christ should abstaine from strangled meate and immolated to idols and from blood If anie had eaten of them without offense of others he had sinned nothing in conscience Daneus Controu 3. p. 509. Mens commandment can not bind our consciences Contr. 5 pa. g1125 No law but Gods can binde vs in consciencience THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that who resisteth the Magistrate resisteth Gods ordinance and purchaseth damnation and that we must be subiect to him for conscience sake Catholiks say the same Protestāts expressely say that Magistrates cannot binde the conscience that God alone can binde the conscience that breakers of the Apostles precept without contempt or scandall did not sinne THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER of mans law What hath beene rehearsed in this chapter plainely proueth that Protestants teach contrarie to the Scripture concerning mans law For the holie Scripture and Catholiks withall teacheth that there is superioritie among Christians that men haue power to make lawes and that their lawes may binde the conscience all which are denied of Protestants It proueth also that Protestants euen in this matter keepe their ould custome of stealing For they take from Christians all superioritie all power of makinge lawes and from their lawes all power of binding the conscience CHAPTER XX. OF FREE VVILL ART I. WHETHER MANS WILL BE free in indifferent matters SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. NVMBERS 30. v. 14. It shal be in the arbitrement Man free in things indifferent of her husband whether she shall do it or not do it Iosue 24. ver 15. Choice is giuen you chuse this day that which pleaseth you 2. Reg. 24. vers 12. Choice is giuen thee of three We haue choice things chuse one of them which thou wilt 1. Corint 7. vers 37. For he that hath determined in his hart being setled not hauing necessitie but hauing power of his owne will c. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Concil of Trent Sess 6. Con. 5. If anie shall say that mans free will is after Adams sinne lost and extinct or a thing onely in Title or a title without the thing finally a deuise of Sathan brought into the Church be he accursed PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Luther art 36. tom 2. Free will after sinne is a thing onely in No free will after sinne Title And in assert eiusdem articuli Free will is a deuise amongst things and a title without the thing because no man hath in his power to thinke any good or ill but all things fall out of absolute necessitie There is no doubt but that by Sathans teaching this name Free will came into the Church The same Luther de seruo arbit to 2. f. 434. Mans will is Mans will is like a beast set in the middest as a beast if God sitte vpon it it willeth and goeth whither God will if Sathan sitte vpon it it willeth and goeth whither Sathan will Nether is it in his power to runne to ether rider or to seeke him but the riders themselues striue about We do all things of necessitie him whether shall haue him fol. 435. It is certaine that we do all things of necessitie and nothing by free will The like he hath p. 461. 486. and otherwhere often Melancthon in locis editis An. 1521. apud Bellarm. l. 4. Men haue nether free will nor reason de Grat. lib. arbit c. 5. Men vse the name of free will which is most different from the holie scripture from the sense and iudgment of the Spirit And out of Plato his schole is added the word Reason as pernitious as that Againe Seing all things that fall out fall out necessarily according to Gods predestination there is no libertie of will What then will you say is there no chance in things no happe no fortune The Scripture say that all things fall out necessarily And if there seeme to thee to be some chance in humane matters thou must here command the iudgment of reason Which words of his also are repeated by Zanchius de Praedestinat c. 5. to 7. col 435. Zuinglius l. de Religione c. de Merito to 2. Gods prouidence taketh away both free will and merit The verie name of free will disliked Caluin l. 2. lib. arb p. 153. The name of free will displeaseth me and I would it were taken away Et p. 154. Who mantaineth free will vseth an other lāguage then the Holie Ghost doth 2. Instit c. 2. § 8. Because I thinke it name of free will cannot be kept without great danger and that it would be great good to Church if it were abolished nether will I vse it and I should wish others if they will heare me to forebeare it Et l. 1. cap. 15. § 8. Who do yet seeke will in mā lost and drowned in spirituall perditiō do plainely doate Et in confess p. 108. We nether grant merit nor free will No free will in indifferent things Polanus in Disput priuatis disput 34. A sinfull man hath no free will in indifferent and ciuill matters CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that man hath freedome in choice to doe that he hath choice to chuse what he will that he hath not necessitie but power of his will The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that free will is a deuise a thing onely in title or title without the thing that there is no libertie no chance in things that all things fall out of absolute necessitie that mans will is like a beast that a sinfull man hath no free will in indifferēt and ciuill things Which some Protestants confesse to be contrarie to Scripture See lib. 2. c. 30. ART II. WHETHER MANS WILL BE free in morall matters that are good or badde SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Gen. 4. v 6. Why art thou angrie and why is thy contenance Free will in
and Luther in Galat. 1. fol. 215. The Confession of Zwizerland addeth that they were holie Churches of God Author Respons ad theses Vadimont pag. 533. affirmeth that they fell not from true faith And Perkins tractat de Baptismo col 819. auoucheth that they were the sonnes of God But if they who denied the resurrection kept the name of a true Church remained the sonnes of God were not excluded from Gods mercie fell not from faith surely ether the resurrection is no article at all of faith or not necessarie ether to grace or saluation THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely teacheth that there shal be resurrection of the dead and that the contrarie doctrine denieth Christs resurrection and ouerthroweth all Christian faith The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely teach that the more wittie the Gentils were the more they laughed at the resurrection that the more learned men now are the more they thinke the resurrection to be a fable that Luther and Erasmus were not free from this leauen and that in this matter a faithfull soule is rare that Schegkius openly denied resurrection of this bodie which is indeed to denie all resurrection seing resurrection is not but of the same which died and yet was condemned of no Protestants yea excused of some that manie of them both drunke and sober let fall such speaches from them as do shew that they beleiue not the resurrection of the dead That amongst the Sacramentaries two principall Apostles Caluin and Farel did not beleiue the resurrection of this flesh and consequently not the resurrection of the dead that Sozinus was not satisfied about the resurrection of the flesh that manie of them denie the resurrection of the blood and lasty that they auouch that those Christians who denied the resurrection of the dead fell not from true faith not from the Church or fauour of God THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER of mans Soule What we haue rehearsed in this chapter plainely sheweth that Protestants thinke farre otherwise of mans soule then the holie Scripture doth For the Scripture and Catholiks with it teacheth that the soule of man is the forme of the bodie is immortall that there shal be resurrection of the dead which Protestants denie It sheweth also that Protestants play the theiues towards their owne soules whilest take from it immortalitie and the nature of the forme of the bodie and denie the resurrectioÌ„ of the dead And hitherto we haue shewed that Protestants in 260. articles contradict the expresse words of the holie Scripture it remaineth that we shew that they also contradict the true sense of the words which we will doe by twoe wayes the one by generall reasons the other by the plaine confession of The Scope of the second booke some Protestants touching manie of the foresaied articles End of the first booke THE SECOND BOOKE IN WHICH IT IS SHEVVED THAT PROTESTANTS CONTRADICT THE TRVE sense of holie Scripture CHAPTER I. THAT PROTESTANTS CONTRADICT the true sense of Scripture because in so manie things they gainsay the expresse words thereof FIRST of all we must consider that when the holie Scripture and Catholiks both of purpose intend clearely to declare their meaning touching the foresaied 260. articles in controuersie they do iumpe ether in the very selfe same or inequiualent words and that coÌ„trariwise wheÌ„ the Scripture and the learnedest of the Protestants intend to expresse their meaning coÌ„cerning the saied articles they vse quite opposite and contrarie speaches Which is a manifest signe that the Catholiks doctrine about the saied articles is the selfe same with the doctrine of the holie Scripture and the Protestants doctrine quite contrarie thereunto For sithence this agreemeÌ„t of Catholiks with the Scripture in words and speach and disagreement of Protestants in the same falleth out so often and in so manie and weightie matters it cannot be attributed to chaÌ„ce because chaÌ„ce as the Philosophers 2. Physâ—c teach is in those things onely which fall out seldome And therefore it proceedeth of the nature of these sentences or doctrines whose agreement or disagreement with the sentence of the holie Scripture breedeth this so frequent agreement or disagreement with the words or speaches of the same Wherefore thus I argue in forme of syllogisme These doctrines which when they are of purpose to be expressed clearely distinctly and as they differ from all other doctrines do of their nature require to be expressed with the very same or equiualent words are in deed one and the selfe same doctrine And contrariwise those doctrines which when they are to be so expressed of their nature require to be expressed with quite opposite and contrarie words or speaches are in deed opposite and contrarie doctrines But the Scriptures and the Catholiks doctrines touching the foresaied 260. articles are of the first kind and the Scripture and Protestants doctrines of the second Therefore they are all one and these quite contrarie The Maior of first propositioÌ„ is euideÌ„t For how could twoe doctrines or opinioÌ„s of their nature require to be expressed with the selfe same or equiualent words if there were any differeÌ„ce betwene them For vndoubtely that difference would exact some difference in the words and those words which clearely and fully expresse the one doctrine could not clearely and fully expresse the other And much lesse could one the selfe same speach clearely expressely theÌ„ both if they were contrarie one to the other And therefore certaine it is that twoe coÌ„trarie doctrines cannot of their nature require to be expressed by the selfe same or equiualent words And consequently also it is most certaine that the Scriptures and Catholiks doctrines which touching these 260. articles of their nature require to be expressed with the selfe same or equiualent words are not opposite one to the other But those doctrines which when they are to be clearely and distinctly expressed of their nature require to be expressed with opposite and contrarie speeches must needs also of their nature be contrarie one to the other For els why should they of their nature require to be expressed by contrarie speaches And the opposition which is betwene the speaches wherewith they require to be signified riseth of the oppositioÌ„ which is betwene the doctrines themselues The Minor or second proposition is proued First by the reason alreadie made Because it cannot come by chance that in so manie and so weightie matters when Catholiks and ProtestaÌ„ts do of purpose clearely distinctly expresse their opinioÌ„s those should agree in words and speach with the holie Scripture and these should disagree This agreement therefore and disagreement in words must needs rise of the very nature of their opinions Secondly it may be proued by examples but for breuities sake I will be content with one That the Protestants opinion touching the Eucharist or that which Christ after his last supper gaue with his hands to be eaten when it is clearely and dinstinctly to be expressed as it differreth from the
Catholik doctrine of the same matter of it nature requireth to be expressed by a proposition which is simply negatiue appeareth manifestly First because their opinion of that matter is simply negatiue to wit that it is not the bodie of Christ And an opinion which is simply negatiue requireth to be expressed by the like proposition such as this is This is not Christs bodie Secondly because manie and the learnedest of the Protestants and often times and in manie places haue expressed their opinion of this matter by such a proposition when they ment purposely to expresse it clearely and distinctly as it defferreth from the Catholike doctrine as I haue shewed before c. 11. art 1. who best knew with what kinde of proposition their opinion required to be expressed when it was most clearely and distinctly to be expressed when it was most clearely and distinctly to be declared And in the same manner it is euident that the Catholik doctrine of this matter of it nature requireth to be expressed by a proposition which is simply affirmatiue as this is This is Christs bodie because their doctrine of this matter is simply affirmatiue and because Catholiks vse to expresse their doctrine by this kind of proposition And that the doctrine of the Scripture concerning the same point of it nature requireth to be expressed by a proposition which is simply affirmatiue is manifest because she foure times of purpose expressing her meaning of this matter she vseth a proposition which is simply affirmatiue and neuer vseth a proposition negatiue Wherefore ether the Scripture neuer expressed her meaning of this matter in such a proposition as of it nature it required to be expressed withall but alwaies by a contrarie kinde of proposition and then also when of purpose she ment to expresse her meaning most clearely and distinctly or the Scriptures meaning touching this matter of it nature requireth to be expressed by a proposition which is simply affirmatiue as this is This is my bodie or This is Christs bodie And consequently it is one and the selfe same kinde of proposition wherewith the Scriptures and Catholiks doctrine of this point requireth to be expressed to wit a proposition simply affirmatiue and the propositions wherewith the meaning of the Scripture and of Protestants of the same matter are to be expressed are quite opposite to wit the one simply affirmatiue the other simply negatiue and the like are their meanings But that the force of this argumēt may better appeare 1. Head from the numbers of articles in which Protest contradict the Scripture I will deuide it into diuers heads The first shal be taken from the multitude of matters of articles in which Protestants do contradict the expresse words of Scripture which are as we haue seene 260 and more For though it may chance that one once or twise or seldome may contradict the expresse words of an other and yet not contradict his sense or meaning yet it can no way be thought that this can fall out so often Because so great and so frequent opposition betwene their words cannot as I saied before come by chance therefore it must rise of the opposition which is betwene their meaning For how should their tongues so often iarre whoses myndes alwaies agree How should they who alwaies meane the same so often speake cōtrariwise How should the same sense and mynd be expressed so often by contrarie signes The second head shal be taken from the qualitie and 2. From the number of Protest who doe cōtradict multitude of Protestants who haue crossed the expresse words of Scripture For admit that some one or few Protestants and those not the lest learned should crosse the expresse words of Scripture and yet the Protestants doctrine should not crosse the true meaning of the Scripture yet it is altogether incredible that so manie and so famous Protestants should so often fight with the expresse words of Scripture and yet their doctrine should not be contrarie to the meaning of the Scripture For this their crossing of the Scriptures words could not rise of chance because it is in so manie Protestants nor of ignorance because they were the learnedest amongst them and therefore it proceedeth of the verie nature of their doctrine And consequently their doctrine of it nature is opposite to the Scriptures doctrine The third head is taken of the manner wherewith 3. From the manner in which they contradict Protestants crosse the expresse words of Scripture Because for the most parte they crosse them so directly so plainely so manifestly as they crosse the verie words of Catholiks which of set purpose they contradict or as euer anie Heretik crossed the expresse words of Scripture or as anie man can crosse them Wherefore ether let them denie that the contradict the meaning of the Coūcel of Trent of D. Stapleton or C. Bellarmin which of purpose they do contradict or let them grant that they contradict also the meaning of the holie Scripture or els let them say that the contradictiōs of senses or meanings are not to to be gathered out of anie opposition in words though neuer so great and manifest but out of their pleasure Besides ether let them denie that euer anie Heretike cōtradicted the true meaning of the Scripture or let them graunt the same of themselues seing they haue often times as directly and as euidently crossed the expresse words of Scripture and those spoaken of purpose for to declare the Scriptures meaning as euer anie Heretike crossed the Scriptures words Moreouer they not onely crosse the expresse words of Scripture as ditectly and plainely as euer anie did but also they manie times crosse them in so manie and so different formes of speach as scarce anie who would haue it knowne that he did contradict the Scriptures meaning could diuise more manners how to contradict it The fourth head is taken out of the qualitie of the 4. From the qualitie of the words which they contradict words of Scripture which Protestants do contradict For they are expresse formall cleare not obscure nor doubtfull and spoaken not by the way but of purpose for to expresse the Scriptures meaning of those matters as is euident in all the articles And what can be the true sense of Scripture if that be not which such kind of words do of themselues most euidently afford Or who can be thought to contradict the Scriptures true meaning if he do not who contradicteth the euident sense of such kind of words Surely I doubt not but if these words were written in anie other booke then in the Scripture that the Protestants would confesse that they contradict the sense of them as well as they contradict the sense of Catholiks words For as S. Austin saied in the like case of Pelagians Lib. 1. de peccat mer. c. 9. If I should speake thus these would oppose and crie that I speake not well I thought amisse for they would vnderstand no
other meaning in these words of anie man who should speake them but this which they will not vnderstand in the Apostle 5. From the sense in which they contradict The fift head we will take from the sense of those words of Scripture which the Protestants contradict For the sense in which the Protestants oppose themselues againsts the Scriptures words is not forced or violent but obuious easie open and which the words of themselues do plainely shew and in which such words vse to to spoaken and vnderstood of men And euident it is that all words ought to be vnderstood according to such a sense and that such a sense is the true sense of them vnlesse the contrarie be manifestly proued For this is the verie rule of vnderstanding words which the †Luther de verb. cenae to 7. Melancthon in Hospin p. 74. Martyr in loc tit de Euchar Perkins in 1. Gal v. 8. Pareus l. 5. de Illyricus in Claue part 2. tom 7. Protestāts themselues sometimes do vehemently vrge and vnlesse it be obserued the vnderstanding of words wil be vncertaine and according to euerie ones fansie Wherefore vnlesse Protestants do euidently conuince that those words of Scripture which they contradict are to be vnderstood in an other sense then in that which of themselues according to their ordinarie acception amongst men they beare they cannot denie but in contradicting this ordinarie sense of the words of Scripture they contradict the true sense of them And therefore the Reader in this matter must diligently marke that Catholiks are not bound to proue that the words of Scripture or of Protestants be to be taken in their vsuall and ordinarie sense amongst men but that this is to be supposed as a rule and vndoubted principle of vnderstāding words vnlesse the contrarie be demonstrated And if anie denie it he is not to be admitted to anie disputation which is grounded in words or testimonies because he denieth the verie first principle of vnderstanding words which being denied all dispute grounded on words is vayne Wherefore that Protestants who say that Catholiks do begge that point which they ought to proue when they vrge that the words of Scripture are to be vnderstood according to the sense which they openly shew and in which men vse to speake and vnderstand such words know not what ought to be proued in disputations out of words and what is to be supposed as a principle thereof Whereupon Kemnitius himselfe in Examen parte 2. tit de Missa saieth What madnesse is it to leaue the plaine sense which hath certaine and manifest testimonies of Scripture and to deuise a new exposition And the same say other Prostants as we shall rehearse hereafter †In Perorat But if Protestants will haue ether the words of Scripture or anie other words whatsoeuer to be vnderstood in an other sense then that wherein they vse to be vnderstood of men all the burden of prouing lieth vpon them Which because they cannot proue we iustly conclude that they contradict the true sense of the words of Scripture which we before haue alledged and frame this argument Whosoeuer contradict that sense of the Scriptures words which of themselues they beare and in which they are vsually vnderstood of men and cannot demonstrate that they are to be vnderstood in an other sense they contradict the true sense of the words of Scripture But Protestants do so Therefore they contradict the true sense of the holie Scripture The Maior or first proposition is as I saied the principle and ground of all dispute out of words and the Minor or second proposition is euident by the answeres of Catholiks vnto the proofes which Protestants bring for to shew that the words of Scripture are to be vnderstood in an other sense then they shew or men vsually vnderstand them in The sixt head is taken out of the circunstances which 6. From the circunstances of the words make for the natiue and vsuall sense of those words of Scripture which Protestants contradict For example Christ saied simply of that which he gaue with his hands to his Apostles after his last Supper This is my bodie and the Protestants simply say of the same This is not Christs bodie and consequently contradict Christs words not onely in their plaine natiue and vsuall sense but also which is confirmed by all their circunstances of end of time of place of the speaker and of the hearers As for the circunstance of the end it is plaine that the end of these words was to tell clearely the Apostles what indeed that was which he then gaue them And all his other words were ether spoaken of other matters or if of the same matter yet they were spoaken to this end to tell the Apostles what it was which then he gaue them but to what end they should vse it or for some such like purpose And that the foresaied words do clearly expresse what that was which at that time Christ gaue to his Apostles is so euident as our aduersaries themselues confesse For thus a Admonit vlt. Caluin I denie not but Christment to speake most clearly And b Cont. Selnec Beza If the question be about the word of God surely we haue none more expresse and in which we more willingly rest then the institution of the Supper it selfe This is my bodie Authores Admonit de libro Concordiae c. 3. p. 91. The words of the Supper are most cleare and of themselues abundantly sufficient for to be rightly vnderstood And the same c Whitaker ad Rat. 3. Zuinglius in Expl. art 18. Riuet tract 3. sect 12. Polanus part 1. thes de caena others confesse The circonstance also of the time confirmeth the same For it was the last when Christ was to conuerse with his Apostles in humane māner and therefore it was behouefull that if euer he should then speake in must plaine and vsuall sense especially speaking of a matter newly then instituted by him and bequeathed by him by his last will and testament and necessarily to be knowne of them and yet which could no waie be knowne of them but by Christs words But euident it is that the most cleare manner of speaking is to speake in the plaine natiue and vsuall sense of words And consequently Christ who by our aduersaries confession ment to speake most clearely speake in the plaine natiue and vsuall sense of his words The circunstance of place also concurreth For the place where Christ spoake these words was free and void of strangers so that thereby no occasion could be to meane otherwise then the words vsually did beare The circunstance also of the Speaker doth much confirme the same For he was the word it selfe the wisdome of his Father who both best knew how he ought to expresse his meaning about a new thing which could not be knowne of vs but by his words was most desirous that we should know what it was
iust or righteous to Seing and hearing as the text doth Because those words 1. Corinth 14. vers 17. Thou indeed They omit words giuest thanks well do plainely approue praier in an vnknowne tongue Zuinglius Caluin and Beza in their CoÌ„mentaries slippe ouer these words Yea Caluin 3. Instit c. 20. § 33. citing this sentence omitteth the word well In like sorte Caluin and Beza Luc. 22. v. 32. slippe ouer those words of Christ I haue praied for thee by which S. Peters Primacie is confirmed Wherefore thus I make my third argumeÌ„t Who beside the foresaied opposition to the expresse words of Scripture are forced many times to vse violence to the very sacred text by adding or taking away words by changing by calling in doubt by ill translating by omitting by changing the order of the words they are to be iudged to contradict the true sense of the holie Scripture But Protestants do so Therefore c. CHAPTER IV. THAT PROTESTANTS OVERTHROW all force of the words of holie Scripture yea contemne and deride them OVR fourth argument shal be that Protestants when they nether dare denie nor change the words of Scripture yet ouerthrow all the force of them yea sometimes contemne and scoffe at them The first way by which they delude the expresse word of God is that in what kind of matter soeuer to wit whether it be of precept or doctrine whether it can be knowne onely by Gods word or no and in what places soeuer to wit whether in them the matter be handled purposely or no in what kind of matter soeuer I say and in what kind of place soeuer the holie Scripture speaketh expressely against theÌ„ they crie that we must not stick to the letter nor vrge it Zuinglius in Math. 19. to 4. The words Protest will not haue the word of God vrged against them of Christ what God hath ioyned let not man seperate are so drie that it may seeme that married persons can be seperated for no cause Here because the letter clearely maketh against him he addeth But we will not after the Iewish manner sticke so superstitiously to the letter And in Mark 1. We must not stick fast to the bare letter but the letter is to be expounded and directed according to the rule of the Protestants Spirit Et Institut de caena tom 2. fol. 288. Is it fit in Scripture to vrge earnestly onely the letter or rather hauing consulted other places we ought to consider what the authoritie of it may admit Because in the matter of the Eucharist the words of Scripture are clare agaâ—â—st them Caluin 4. Instit cap. 17. § 20. saieth Christs words are not vnder the common rule nor are to be examined gramatically § 23. These good Maisters that they may appeare men of letters do forbidde to Caluin scoffeth at those who vrge the word of God goe any whit from the letter What monstruous absurdities caÌ„not phrentik men gather if they may obiect euerie tittle for confirmation of their opinions And he termeth it foolish stubbernesse to contend earnestly about Christs words And calleth vs Catchers of syllables froward and stubbern exactours of the letter foolish and ridiculous maisters of letters because in the matter of the Eucharist we stick close to the expresse words of Scripture and vrge them against him as if with scoffes and taunts he would beat vs from the expresse word and letter of almightie God Moreouer in Math. 3. v. 16. he saieth Some do foolishly and preposterously vrge the letter that they may include the thing in the signe And in Math 26. v. 28. The Papists and such like are foolishly superstitious whiles they lay fast hould vpon Christs words And Admonit vlt. ad Westphal pag. 8â—7 We must not earnestly insist vpon the words Beza cont Westphal p. 214. By what right is it not lawfull for vs to appeall as I may say so from the word to the sense P. Martyr l. de Euchar. p. 124. Yee must not alwaies obiect the clearnesse of the sense pag. 126. Yee must not take first sense which offereth it selfe p. 126. Yee should not so much vrge the plainenes of the sense and pag. 149. They obiect againe vs the simple sense and hould that firmely Zanchius l. 1. Epist p. 34. They haue cried to importunely and till they were hoarse The word the words Kerberman l 1. System Theol. pag. 169. They importunely vrge the letter or words of Scripture Willet in Synopsi Contr. 19. pag. 885. We must not take the letter but follow the sense where we find mention made of the vniuersalitie of Christs death pag. 886. It cannot literally be vnderstood that God would absolutely haue all meÌ„ to be saued Thus speake these men when the letter or plaine sense of Scripture maketh expressely against them In the meane tyme whensoeuer the letter of Scripture seemeth to fauour theÌ„ they most veliemently pressâ—â— As for example because S. Paul sometimes calleth the Eucharist bread they will needs haue it to be materiall bread Caluin in Math. 26. vers 28. The Papists denie that bread is shewed but Paul refuteth their Difference betwene the words which Protest and which Cath. vrge dotage affirming that the bread which we break is the communication of the bodie of Christ The like he hath 4. Instit c. 17. § 15. and others after him And neuerthelesse the Scripture neuer saieth directly of the Eucharist This is bread as four times it saieth most directly of it This is Christs bodie Nether doth it in anie place restraine the word Bread when thereby it signifieth the Eucharist to the proper signification of materiall bread as it doth manie waies restraine the word Bodie to signifie the true bodie of Christ by adding that it is the bodie giuen deliuered or broken for vs. Moreouer the Scripture it selfe Ioan. 6. clearely expoundeth that when by the word Bread it signifieth the Eucharist it meaneth the very flesh of Christ So that in the selfe same matter that word which is saied of the Eucharist in an identicall speach saying This is this and which ofteÌ„times and most clearely is tied to it proper signification nor is euer expounded in Scripture to be otherwise taken must not be vrged against Protestants because it maketh against them and an other word which nether is euer so saied of the Eucharist nor is any way restrained to it proper signification yea which the Scripture it selfe expoundeth figuratiuely must be vrged because it seemeth to fauour Protestants and consequeÌ„tly the letter or word of Scripture is to be vrged or not vrged according as it fauoureth or disfauoureth ProtestaÌ„ts Which is indeed to shape the Scripture to their opinions not to frame their opinions to the Scripture But if they cannot obtaine that the letter of the holie They call it begging of the question to vrge the letter Scripture be not vrged against them they take an other course to delude the authoritie or force thereof For they
call the open and plaine sense of it into controuersie and then crie that it is the begging of the question to argue against them out of a sense which is controuerted Thus do the Protestants when we vrge against them the words of the Eucharist as yee may see in Zuinglius in Exegesi to 2. fol. 338. Ad Epistol Amici fol. 322. Caluin Admonit vlt. ad Westphal p. 805. Beza cont Westphal pag. 232. P. Martyr 1. Corint 11. fol. 158. Iuel art 5. sect 5. and others Yea sometimes they goe so farre as to say that it is a manifest abuse follie vanitie and dotage to argue against them out of the words of the Supper or Eucharist Author orthodoxi Consensus in Schlusselburg lib. 4. Theol. Caluin art 20. pag. 125. It is a manifest abuse of the words of the Supper to proue that by the words which is question or controuersie Humfre ad Rat. 2. Campiani p. 118. He will play the foole who disputeth out of this place which is in controuersie Caluin Admonit vlt. cit p. 821. Let them leaue to pretend a vaine preiudice of words of whose sense and meaning the contention is betweene vs. And in Gratulat ad Precentor p. 379. We except that it is foolishly pressed as most certaine whereof doubt is But what argument taken out of the Scriptures words can be good and strong if that which is taken out of Christs expresse words which are both cleare and of purpose spoaken to declare what the Eucharist is which what it is cannot be knowne but by his plaine words and which alone were spoaken of him to this end be a begging of the question a vaine foolish and friuolous argument onely because it hath pleased some few new Heretiks to call the cleare sense of these words into question Thirdly if they dare not say that the words which They deuise manie senses make against them haue an other sense then that which they clearely afford yet they will deuise manie senses and say that it is vncertaine in which of those senses the words are to be vnderstood and consequently that nothing can be certainely gathered of them Thus dealeth Kemnice in Exam. tit de Baptismo pag. 69. Where hauing brought manie expositions of the word Baptisme Actor 19. Whence we proue that the baptisme of Christ was different from that of S. Ihon thus at last he concludeth Nothing cā be proued out of places that are obscure ambiguous and in controuersie Indeed if those places must be counted such of which it hath pleased new Hheretiks to deuise diuers senses Let them giue the like libertie to other Heretiks and they shall see how much they will preuaile against them by any words of Scripture whatsoeuer Their fourth shift is that when the words of Scripture They will haue Gods meaning rather out of by places then out of proper which are spoaken purposely of anie matter make against them they will not haue the question to be denied by them but ether by words which are not spoaken at all of that matter or but incidently and by the way and will haue these to be the rule of expounding to others and so gather the sense of Scripture rather out of a strange place then out of the proper place Thus the Sacramentaries will haue the question of the Eucharist to be tried rather out of the 6. of S. Ihon though commonly they teach that there Christ spoake not of Eucharist or out of words which speak of Christs ascension into heauen or out of words which speake of the end of the Eucharist then out of those which purposely and which onely speake of the substance of the Eucharist Zuinglius Epist ad Matheum Rutling tom 2. fol. 153. saieth that Christ speaketh not of the Eucharist in the 6. of S. Ihon and yet frō thence taketh as he speaketh fol. 155. his Buckler and l. de relig fol. 206. his brasen wall and sheeld and fol. 215. his hard adamant Note And saieth fol. 155. cit that we must onely stick to these words Flesh profiteth nothing or as he speaketh in Exegesi fol. 336. To them before all others And as for the words of the Supper which were spoaken purposely of this matter he saieth plainely l. de relig c. de Euchar. We relie not vpon them but onely vpon this word Flesh profiteth nothing And addeth What thinke yee of this subtill deuise which forsooth relieth vpon Christes words onely And Resp ad Billican fol. 264. This dispute doth not relie vpon those words This is my bodie For we would not seeme to ground our opinion vpō these letters For that were vnlawfull See more of the like stuffe in his Apologie tom 2. fol. 371. Bullinger cited by Schluslelburg loc cit We desire our Christs words of the Euchar. are no Protest ground of that matter aduersaries that they do not as heretofore they haue done make the words of the Lords supper which are in controuersie as the foundation of their doctrine Melancthon Epist ad Frideric Elector apud Martyrem in Dial. col 112. In this controuersie of the Eucharist the best is to bould the words of Paul The bread which we breake is the communication of the bodie Peter Martyr cont Gardiner col 440. It is fond which he addeth that in the mysterie of the Eucharist we must recurre to the words of our Lord instituting it Caluin Admonit vlt. ad Westphal pag. 818. In vaine they shall crie we must goe to the fountaine And de Rat. concordiae pag. 866. There is no reason to insist vpon the essentiall verbe Is. Yee see that in the very question what the Eucharist is they say that it is fond and contrarie to reason to recurre to the words of the Institution thereof to insist in them and make them our foundation and neuerthelesse the words of the Institution are spoake purposely and that onely to tell vs what the Eucharist is but will haue vs to runne to other places where it is not spoaken at all of the Eucharist or at least not of the substance thereof This plainely sheweth that in very deed they make not the Scripture the foundation of their faith nor gather their beleife from thence Which themselues sometimes do plainely confesse For thus P. Martyr Protest gather not their faith out of the Scripture praefat lib. de Eucharist pag. 26. This is the basis strength and foundation of the opinion of the Eucharist which I haue set downe That it is proper to God to be euery where and that the condition of humane nature is to be contained in some certaine Reason groūd of Protest in the Euchar. place nor can be diffused to manie places at once Caluin 4. Instit c. 17. § 20. The reuerence of Christs words is no sufficient pretext why they should so reiect all the reasons which we obiect Author Orthodoxi Consensus in Schlusserburg lib. 1. Theol. Caluin art 23. We must not simply behould the
Caluin Actor 17. vers 11. Where he saieth that the Thessalonians did not dispute whether Gods trueth were to be receaued onely they examined Pauls doctrine according to the rule of Scripture Plainely putting a difference betwene Gods trueth and Pauls doctrine Finally Zuinglius professeth Zuinglius will not beleiue what he cannot comprehend to beleiue nothing which he cannot comprehend For thus he speaketh in Hospin Part. 2. Histor fol. 72. God doth not propose to vs things that are incomprehensible Or as Melancthon reporteth ib. fol. 82. God doth not propose to vs such things to be beleiued as can no way be comprehended And in Schlusselburg l. 4. Theol. Caluin art 9. thus professeth his more then Diuelish infidelitie Albeit God with He will not beleiue God though he sware all his blessed Angels should come from heauen and sweare that in the Supper of the Lord the bodie and blood of Christ were giuē to all that receaue it yet nether could nor would I beleiue it vnlesse I should plainely see with my eyes and feel Christ with my hands The very same he insinuateth Respons and Bellicā tom 2. fol. What I pray you differ these men from the Protest imitate the libertins Libertins of whome thus writeth Caluin in Instructione cap. 9. We already saied that these men in the beginning were wont plainely to laugh if any alledged the Scriptures nor dissembled to hould them for fables yet they forbore not to vse thē if there were anie place which they could wrest to their purpose But when they perceaued that all good men did detest such sacrilege they put on this coate vnder which now they lurk to wit they professe not to reiect the holie Scriptures but feigning to admit them wrest and change them into allegories And do not the Protestants deride the Scripture when they call the words thereof a fiue-word speach beggerly letters impotent and magicall words and when they see that all good men detest such blasphemie do they not turne thē into figures or allegories Wherefore I make this my fourth argument Who not onely in so manie and so great matters contradict the expresse words of Scripture but also in manie and great points are compelled to forsake the letter thereof to call the manifeste sense into questiō to say that it is a begging of the question to argue out of it to deuise manie new senses for to reiect a place as ambiguous and to say that the sēse of Scripture is to be gathered rather out of a strāge then out of the proper place where it is purposely handled who finally deride the very kind of arguing out of the expresse words of Scripture and openly blaspheme them they are to be thought not onely to gainsay the true sense of Scripture but also to contemne the Scripture and God himselfe But so do Protestants Therefore c. CHAPTER V. THAT PROTESTANTS SAY THAT words of Scripture which make against them were not spoaken of certaine knowledge OVR fift argument to proue that Protestants repugne to the true sense of Scripture shal be because sometimes they denie that the words which were spoaken of God of Christ of the Apostles were spoaken by them of their certaine knowledge but onely by ghesse or coniecture For if out of that saying of God Ezechielis 3. vers 6. seq For not to a people of profound speach and of an vnknowne tongue art thou sent to the house of Israel nether to manie peoples of profound speach and of an vnknowne tongue whose words thou canst not heare and if thou were sent to them they would heare the We will proue that some can be conuerted which yet will not be conuerted Contra-remonstrantes in Collat. Hagae answere This is saied not in respect God did not certainely foresee what he saied of that which God did certainely forsee in these or those but in respect of that which according to all outward shew a man might iudge Forsooth God did not certainely foresee that other people would haue heard the Prophet if he had beene sent to them as he plainely affirmeth but like a man spoake by ghesse out of the externall appearance If we proue the same out of those words of Christ Math. 11. ver 21. If in Tire and Sidon had beene wrought the miracles that haue beene wrought in you they had done pennance Nor Christ in hairecloth and ashes Caluin vpon this place telleth vs that Christ disputeth not what God did foresee to become of these or those but what some of them would haue done for so much as could be gathered by the thing And ib. in v. 33. We admonished before that Christ speaketh after a humane manner and doth not tell out of the heauenlie oracle what he had foreseene was to be if he had sent to the Sodomits And lib. 6. de lib. arbitr pag 197. It is euident that Christ would by that kind of speach no other thing thē if one now should say There is no Turk so obstinate or rebellious to God or so impious who would not haue beene conuerted if he had read seene and heard those things with which Pighius will not amended The like haue Contra-remonstrantes loc cit So that Christ did not certainely foresee that the Tyrians and Sodomites would haue repented if they had seene the like miracles and yet he plainely affirmeth it If we proue that a man may fall from grace because S. Peter 1. cap. 1. vers 9. saieth For he that hath not these Scripture speaketh not of knowledge but of charitie tbings readie is blind and groping with his hand hauing foregotten the purgation of his ould sinnes Zanchius in Summa Praelect tom 7. col 276. answereth This place is to be vnderstood according to the iudgment of charitie The same he hath in Thesibus tom 8. col 700. and Piscator in Thesibus l. 2. p. 195. Forsooth S. Peter iudged charitably but not truely that such a man as he speaketh of had beene purged from his sinnes If we proue that God would haue all men to be saued because S. Paul 1. Timoth. 2. vers 4. Who will all men to be saued Perkins lib. de Praedest tom 1. col 139. saieth Paul Likewise S. Paul speaketh in this place according to the iudgment of charitie of Christians not according to the iudgment of secret and infallible certaintie In like sorte answereth Piscator loc cit and also to Hebr. 6. vers 5. cap. 10. vers 29. Where is it saied that some reprobates were sanctified with the blood of Christ If we proue that the wicked and reprobates may be in the bodie of Christ and put him vpon them because S. Paul saieth 1. Cor. 12. ver 13. We were all baptized into one bodie Gal. 3. v. 27. As manie of you as are baptized in Christ haue put on Christ Vorstius in Antibel p. 124. answereth The Apostle speakheth there out of the iudgment of charitie which accounteth all
from euill to good because it is saied absolutely Zacharie 1. ver 3. Conuert to me saieth the Lord of hostes and I will conuert to you they limitate this onely to outward conuersion Peter Martyr in Roman 11. The Prophet spoake not of inward iustification but of outward conuersion to good workes If we proue that we are not infallibly certaine of forgiuenesse Touching Iustification of sinnes or eternall punishment because it is saied absolutely Ioel. 2. v. 14. Who knoweth if he God will conuert and forgiue and the like is saied Ion. 3. v. 9. Kemnice in locis part 2. tit de Argum. limitateth this to forgiuenesse of temporall punishment and saieth All the speach of the Prophet tendeth to that he treateth of remission of temporall punishment In like sorte he limitateth manie other places of Scripture in which forgiuenesse is attributed to workes onely to forgiuenesse of temporall punishment That also of Tobie cap. 4. Almes deliuereth from death he restraineth to temporall death And in like manner promises made to good workes he limitateth to certaine blessings in this world or in the next but will not haue them extended to eternall life And finally wheresoeuer in the Scripture anie man praieth God to iudge or reward him according to his iustice he limitateth that to the iustice of his cause or quarell with other men If we proue that euerlasting happines is giuen for good Touching eternall life workes because S. Iames saieth cap. 1. ver 25. He that hath remained in it not made a forgetfull hearer but a doer of the worke this man shal be blessed in his deed they limitate this to blessednes in this life Schlusselburg to 8. Catal. Haeret. p. 497. thus answereth to this place To be blessed is not alwaies taken in holie writ for eternall saluation but for blessednes in this life If we proue that we must not onely beleiue but also keepe the law because Christ saieth Math. 5. ver 18. I am not come to break the law but to fulfill Caluin ibid. answereth Here is treated of doctrine not of life Touching doctrine we must not imagin anie abrogation of the law by the coming of Christ And v. 19. where is saied One iot or one tittle shall not passe of the law till all be fulfilled Caluin ibid. saieth I answere that word be done or fulfilled is not referred to mens liues but to the solide trueth of doctrine If we proue that our consciences are obliged by the particular Touching laws of men iust lawes of Princes because it is absolutely saied Rom. 3. v. 2. He that resisteth power resisteth the ordinance of of God and v. 5. Be subiect of necessitie not onely for wrath but also for conscience sake they limitate these words to the power of Magistrates in generall Daneus Contr. 5. p. 1127. To obey the Magistrate in generall is a matter of conscience but to obey this or that law of the Magistrate wholy and in all points we are not bound in conscience And Whitaker libr. 8. cont Dureum sect vlt. We must obey the Magistrate in generall for conscience sake because by a generall precept we are commanded to obey the Magistrate but particular lawes of Magistrates haue no command ouer our consciences In like sorte Caluin 4. Instit c. 10. § 5. Wherefore thus in forme I frame my ninth argument who not onely in so manie and so great matters do contradict such words of holie Scripture and in such sense as we haue seene but also take so much vpon them as limitate and restraine so manie and so weightie sentences of Scripture they are to be thought to gayne say the right sense of Scripture But Protestants do so Therefore c. CHAPTER X. THAT PROTESTANTS CHANGE manie absolute Propositions of Scripture into conditionals THE tenth argument shal be taken from that Protestants are forced to change manie and weightie absolute Propositions of Scripture into conditionals For if we proue that absolutely God will not the death Touching God of a sinner but rather his life and conuersion because he absolutely saieth Ezechiel 18. and 33. I will not the death of a sinner but rather that he be conuerted and liue Caluin l. de Praedestinat pag. 706. answereth Whereas the Prophets speach exhorteth to pennace no maruaile if God say he will haue all to be saued but the mutuall relation betwene threats and promises sheweth that such kind of speaches are conditionall So the promises which inuite all to saluation shew not what simply and precisely God hath decreed in his secret counsaile but what he is readie to doe to all that are brought to faith and pennance Touching the Church if we proue that the gates of Touching the Church hell shall not preuaile against her because Christ doth absolutely so promise Math. 16. ver 16. Besnagus l. de statu Eccles cap. 8. and others adde this condition If she forsake not her dutie and the word of God If we proue that simply we must heare the Pastors of the Church because Christ saieth Luk. 10. ver 16. He that heareth you heareth me and he that despiseth you despiseth me Caluin ib. addeth this condition If the Church do faithfully her dutie If we proue that the Church is simply infallible because 1. Timoth. 3. she is simply called the pillar and strength of trueth Vallada in Apol. cont Episcop Lusonensem cap. 20. answereth The visible Church cannot be the pillar of trueth but as it is grounded vpon the doctrine of the Apostles Vorstius in Antibell pag. 143. The Apostle speaketh conditionally to wit as long as the Church perseuereth to be the Church of Christ Academia Nemaus resp ad Tournon p. 546. Let it be a true and faithfull Church if it discerne trueth from falsitie by vndoubted and authenticall trueth If we proue that the Church is simply to be heard because Christ saieth Math. 18. ver 17. If he heare not the Church let him be to thee as an Ethnick and Publican White in his way p. 78. answereth The sense is that we must obediently heare the Church and obey her not simply in all things but conditionally as long as she speaketh agreably to Gods word And Author respons ad Theses Vademont pag. 688. The answere is easie and readie As long as the Church teacheth the word of God she is to be heard but her authoritie is none when she seperateth her selfe from Gods word And when Bellarmin had brought manie places of Scripture to proue that the Church cannot faile Vorstius libr. cit pag. answereth In them certaine conditionall promises are proposed vnto vs by which eternall saluation and securitie against Satan death c. is promised of God to all and euerie faithfull to wit as farre forth and as long as they shal be such or perseuer in true faith If we proue that there are some doers of the law as Touching Gods law well as there are hearers because Saint Paul saieth absolutely Rom. 2.
Protestants expound of onely endeauour or desire to do it THE 16. argument shal be taken from thence that words of Scripture which signifie the working or doing of a thing Protestants are compelled to expound of onely endeauour or desire to worke or doe it Thus they delude those words of Scripture which say that some men are iust are perfect auoide euill doe the will of God loue him with all their heart fulfill the law keepe the commandements worke their saluation and the like Caluin in Math. 12. vers 33. those words Ether make a Make good 1. aspire to good tree good c. expoundeth thus It cometh of the free indulgence of God that he vouchsafeth them so honorable a title of good who aspire to goodnesse In Math. 6. v. 9. Thy will be done This sufficeth saieth he to testifie by desire that we Keepé 1. applie their endeauour hate and are sorie for whatsoeuer we see contrarie to Gods will and desire to haue it destroied In Ioan. 15. v. 10. If yee keepe my commandements The faithfull saieth he are accouÌ„ted to keepe Christs commandements when they applie thereto their endeauour albeit they be farre from the marke Vpon that Rom. 8. v. 1. Who walke according to the flesh He saieth they walke according to the flesh not who haue quite cast of all sense of the flesh but who diligently labour to tame and mortifie the flesh that the desire of pietie may seeme to reigne in them Et vers 5. He testifieth that he accounteth not them carnall who aspire to heauenlie iustice but them who are wholy addicted to the world In Philip. 2. vers 3. Worke your saluation We are Worke. 1. aspire to it Iust 1. aspire to iustice saied to worke it when gouerned by the holie Ghost we aspire to heauenlie life In 1. Tim. 1. v. 9. The law is not set for the iust I answere that Paul here calleth them iust not who are wholy perfect as there is none to be found but who with a singular desire of heart aspire to goodnesse Et ib. c. 4. v. vlt. Thou shalt saue thy selfe The Pastour is saied to saue himselfe because that is Worke. 1. Goe forward vsuall that the faithfull worke their saluation when they goe forewarde in the course thereof In 1. Pet. 4. v. 18. If a iust man shall scarce be saued He calleth them iust not who are perfectly iust but who endeauour to liue well In 1. Ioan. 2. vers 3. If Keepe 1. Endeauour we keepe his commandements He meaneth not to keepe the commandements to fully satisfie the law which example can neuer be found in the world but who according to mans infirmitie doe endeauour to frame their life to Gods seruice And ib. v. 5. But who keepeth his word truely in him the loue of God is perfect I answere saieth Caluin that it sufficeth so euerie one according to the measure of grace giuen to him doe aspire to this perfection And ib in c. 3. v. 5. There is no sinne in him They are esteemed of the cheifest parte that is they are saied to be iust and to liue iustly because with a sincere affâ—ction of heart they aspire to iustice This and manie such like Caluin Bucer vpon that Math 7. v. 21. But who doeth the will Doeth 1. Endeauoureth of my Father That is saieth he who with his mynd doth endeauour to frame himselfe to the will of the Father In Math. 12 v. 50. Whosoeuer doth the will of my Father We must must note that to doe the will of the Father is all one as to heare the words of Christ and to doe them that is to endeauour from our heart to doe them And in Ioan. 14. he saieth To keepe the commandement of the Lord here is nothing els but to beleiue that it is true and holesome and to loue it with all our heart Zuinglius in Explanat art 14. Here we vnderstand to doe according to the rule of Christ and precepts of God to come neare to the rule of God and with all endeauour to conforme himselfe to the word of God as farre as a man can in this mortall bodie Et in Luc. 1. tom 4. p. 183. Manie trouble themselues here how they are saied to haue beene iust before God whereas before him no mortall man can be iust This knot is easily loosed if we Iust 1. Endeauour to be vnderstand simply according to the phrase of the Hebrew tongue which calleth them iust before God who for feare of God and loue of iustice endeauour to be innocent and holie Schlusselburg to 7. Catal. Haeret. pag. 235. expoundeth those words Philip. 2. ver 12. in this sorte To worke in this place signifieth to labour and to be carefull of the true way which God hath proposed for to obtaine saluation Pareus l. 4. de Iustif c. 15. saieth Iob indeed is saied to be iust perfect and fearing God and auoiding euill because he was a sincere worshiper of God hauing an earnest desire to doe well Tilenus in Syntagm c. 46. They are called iust and perfect Iust 1. Labour to be who labour for iustice and aspire to perfection Perkins vpon that Galat. 6. ver 2. So yee shall fulfill the Fulfill 1. desire law of Christ Here the Galathians are saied to fulfill the law because God accepteth the sincere affection of the mynd for the full effect And Whitaker libr. 8. contr Dur. sect 49. They are saied to keepe who endeauour to keepe And sect 39. They loued the law with their heart and for that cause they are accounted iust Musculus in locis tit de Peccato What other thing is it I haue kept my feet from all ill way but I haue carefully endeauoured to commit no euill hIaue done iudgement and iustice but I haue had a desire to doe iudgement and iustice Wherefore thus I conclude Who beside the foresaied opposition to the expresse words of holie Scripture are also forced in so manie and so great matters to expound the words thereof signifying effecting working or doing of onely desire to effect work or doe they contradict the true sense of Scripture But Protestants doe so Therefore c. CHAPTER XVII THAT WORDS SIGNIFYING A CAVSE Protestants expound of a way or meane and what the Scripture attributeth to one cause they giue to an other THe 17. argument shal be taken from that Protestants are forced to expound words that signifie a Cause of a way order or meane Thus they depraue those words of Scripture which teach that faith or good workes are the causes of our iustice or saluation Perkins in Cathol reform Controu 4. c. 4. expoundeth those words 2. Corin. 4. v. 17. For that our tribulation which presently is momentanie and light worketh aboue measure exceedingly an eternall weight of glorie in vs in this sorte AfflictioÌ„s Worke. 1. are â—eans worke saluation not as causes effecting it but as means leading vs to it And he addeth
withal Which we must vniuersally and alwaies obserue and hould of workes in the cause of our saluation to wit that they are as a way and certaine markes which lead vs to glorie but not by causing or working it Caluin vpon those words 2. Cor. 7. v. 10. For the sorrow that is according to God worketh pennance vnto saluation that is stable writeth thus Paul enquireth not of the cause of saluation but onely commending pennance of the fruite which it Worke. 1. is as a way bringeth forth doth say that it is like a way whereby we come to saluation In this sorte consequence is rather signified then anie cause And to the same place Pareus libr. 4. de Iustificat cap. 7. answereth No efficient cause but a meane or condition which helpeth ether by it selfe or by accident is signified And Scarpius de Iustification Controuers 12. Pennance is saied to worke saluation not by making it by it vertue but by leading as by a way to saluation The same Caluin in 1. Corinth 7. vers 19. Circumcision is nothing and prepuce is nothing but the obseruation of the commandements of God Here saieth he Paul disputeth not of the cause of iustice nor how we obtaine it but onely to what the faithfull ought to bend endeauour And vpon that Wash 1. feele Actorum 22. vers 16. Be baptized and wash away thy sinnes Ablution he saieth he signifieth not the cause but is referred to Paules feeling who hauing receaued the Symbol knew better that his sinnes were forgiuen And 3. Institution cap. 4. § 36. he saieth Where sinne is saied to be purged by mercie and bountifulnesse Prouerb 16. is not meant that by them it is recompensed in the sight of God but is shewed that they shall find God mercifull to them who forsaking vice are turned to pietie as if he had saied Gods wrath is appeased when we leaue our wickednesse And ibidem cap. 14. § vltim hauing obiected to himselfe that the Scripture declareth that good workes are the cause that God doth fauour them he answereth That which in order goeth first he calleth the cause of that which followeth In this manner he deriueth Cause 1. a step sometimes eternall life from good workes not that it is giuen for them but because whom God hath chosen he iustifieth that afterward he may glorifie the former grace which is a steppe to the later he after a sorte maketh a cause Finally by these kinde of speaches order is rather signified then cause Pareus l. 3. de Iustif c. 12. saieth that by those words 2. Timoth. 4. I haue fought a good fight the order and way to the crowne is noted not the cause So that what the Scripture maketh the cause according to these men is onely a meane a way steppe or order In like manner what the Scripture attributeth to one cause they giue to an other as what it atttibuteth to good workes they giue to faith onely what it ascribeth to faith or Sacraments they appropriate to God alone Zuinglius l. de Prouident cap. 6. When Paul writeth to Hearing 1. Spirit the Romans that faith cometh of hearing in the same manner he attributeth that to the nearer cause and more knowne to vs which cometh onely from the Spirit and not from outward preaching And in Math. 4. Oftentimes that is attributed to the later which belongeth to the former as to workes which rather belongeth to faith and againe to faith which most properly Workes 1. faith and truely belongeth to Gods election Sadeel de ver Peccat remiss p. 139. answering to those words Prouerb 16. Iniquitie is purged by bountie and mercie saieth That is attributed to the effects which is proper to the cause after the vsuall manner saieth he of Scripture That is attributed to their vertue which properly is to be attributed to the benefit of Christ alone Illyricus in Claue part 2. tract 6. Faith word and Sacraments Faith c. 1. God are saied to saue vs whereas God alone doth those things And ibid. Thy faith hath saued thee whereas onely Gods mercie and omni potēcie apprehēded by faith doth that And he addeth Scripture oftentimes attributeth things not to their true causes Oftentimes effects are attributed by the Scripture to not true or not principall causes Herevpon it cometh that there is often mention of Alleosis with Zuinglius and of Metalepsis with others by which figures what the Scripture giueth to one thing they transfer to an other Which Alleosis Zuinglius in Exegesi to 2. f. 350. calleth interchangable speach but Luther in Hospin part 2. Histor f. 57. termeth it the Diuels mask Wherefore thus I argue in forme Who gaynesay the expresse words of Scripture in such sorte as we haue seene in the first booke and besides in manie and weightie matters words which signifie a cause do expound of a way meane or order and what the Scripture attributeth to one cause do transferre to an other they contradict the true sense of holie Scripture Protestants doe so Therefore c. CHAPTER XVIII THAT WORDS OF SCRIPTVRE Which say a thing is Protestants expound by ought to be THE 18. argument shal be because what the Scripture saieth Is Protestants expound It ought to be Pareus l. 2. de Iustif c. 7. those words 1. Ioan. 2. v. 5. But he that keepeth his word in him the charitie of God is Is. 1. ought to be perfected expoundeth thus The sentence of S. Ihon as others such like is to be vnderstood of right or dutie not of fact What kinde of charitie ought to be not what kinde is in vs. And ibid. those words Coloss 3. v. 14. Haue charitie which is the bound of perfection he glosseth thus Charitie is called the bound of perfection not which we haue but which we ought to haue and which we shall haue in euerlasting life Et l. 4 c. 11. those words Deuter. 30. v. 6. Our Lord God shall circumcise thy heart and the heart of thy seed that thou maist loue thy Lord God with all thy heart He interpreteth in this sorte The promise to loue God with all thy heart ether speaketh of dutie how we ought to loue God to wit sincerely and perfectly or it speaketh of sinceritie And the same Pareus l. 4. de Grat. lib. arbit c. 6. that sentence of the Apostle 1. Tim. 3. he thus expoundeth The Church is called the pillar and strength of trueth of dutie because she ought alwaies to be so albeit she be not so alwaies in act The same he hath in Gal. 2. lect 18. Moulins in his Bucler pag. 50. and others Tilenus in Syntagmate cap. 46. writeth that in those places Ioan. 14. v. 21. Rom. 13. 8. and Gal. 5. 14. Where the Scripture affirmeth that those who loue God doe keepe his commandements it meaneth not of mans power to performe the law but of our dutie His meaning is that the Scripture meaneth not that who loue God keepe
Reg. 15. Luc. 1. Actor 13. he saieth this is not meant of true iustice or perfection but of apparent So that with these men nothing is true if it be against them but onely apparent as is indeed their religion Wherefore thus I argue in forme Who beside the foresaied opposition to the expresse words of Scripture in manie and great matters words which signifie true things are forced to expound them of apparence outward shews testifications and significations before men they contradict the true sense of Scripture Protestants doe so Therefore c. CHAPTER XX. THAT PROTESTANTS ARE FORCED to expound the words of holie Scripture by diuers disparates and contraries THE 20. argument wherewith we will proue that Protestants doe contradict the true meaning of holie Scripture shal be because they are coÌ„pelled to expound the words thereof by things that are quite different yea disparate or nothing like and plaine concrarie of which doings of theirs amongst innumerable I will note some few examples They expound the words of Scripture by things different or diuerse For thus dealeth Zuinglius in Marci 1. to 4. p. 141. All were baptized that is saieth he were taught in Baptized 1. Taught the Ghospell In Ioan. 3. v. 5. The kingdome of God is here taken for heauenlie doctrine and preaching of the Ghospell In histor resur pag. 401. The sense is Whose sinnes you forgiue that is Forgiue 1. Preache to whome you shall tell the forgiuenesse of sinnes In Roman 5. pag. 419. Sinne in this place As sinne by one man c. is Sinne. 1. Disâ—ase Faith 1. Preaching taken for a disease In cap. 10. pag. 434. Faith is by hearing Here marke that Faith is taken of Paul for the manifested will of God and for the manifest and publike preaching of faith amongst the Iews and Gentils In 1. Cor. 7. p. 463. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Good is here taken for commodious and quiet Et tom 2. in Elencho Faith 1 Gods election Which 1. Whiles Blessed 1. Bad Fairewell fol. 34. Faith iustifieth that is the election of God In Subsidio f. 245. Which is powred out for manie that is whiles or as it is powred out for manie In Exegesi f 355. And it happened as he blessed that is bidde them fairewell Et in Exposit fidei fol. 558. It is cleare that the name of Merit or Reward is in holie Scripture but insteed of a Free guift Caluin in Luc. 1. ver 15. Replenished with the holie Ghost expoundeth To be indued with greater grace aboue che common vulgar sorte In c. 7. ver 48. he expoundeth Forgiue vs Forgiue 1. Seale our trespâ—sses thus Seale more and more mercie in our hearts In c. 8. v. 13. They beleiue for a time thus They giue an honor to the Ghospell like to faith In Math. 7. vers 21. By doing Doe Gods will 1. Beleiue the will of the Father he vnderstandeth Philosophically to frame his life and manners to the rule of virtue and to beleiue in Christ In cap. 21. vers 32. The name of Iustice here signifieth Iustice 1. Doctrine nothing els but that Ihons doctrine was pure and right In cap. 23. vers 22. To sit in the chaire of Moises is nothing els then to deliuer out of the law of God how men ought to liue In Ioannis 3. vers 5. By water he vnderstandeth Water 1. Holie Ghost Charitie in vs. 1. Towards vs. the Holie Ghost In Actor 8. ver 18. by the Holie Ghost Singular guifts In Rom. 5. v. 5. by the Charitie of God diffused in vs he vnderstandeth our knowledge of Gods charitie towards vs. In 2. Co. 2. v. 10. I haue giuen in the person of Christ that is saieth he sincerely and without simulation In 1. Timot. 1. and 6. by Faith he expoundeth Holesome doctrine Faith 1. Holesome doctrine In Tit. 1. v. 16. Appoint Bishops that is Be president in the choice of them And in Hebr. 9. v. 26. Destruction of sinne he expoundeth freing from the guilt of paine Sinne. 1. Guilt of paine Beza in Math. 3. v. 1. by Desert vnderstandeth A hillie countrie And in vers 6. by Confessing their sinnes Professing Desert 1. Hillie place themselues to be sinners And in cap. 5. vers 20. Vpon that Vnlesse your iustice abound c. by the Kingdome of heaueÌ„ he meaneth the Church militant and by Enter Teach Peter Martyr in Roman 18. saieth When the Scripture Faith 1. Gods mercie saieth that we are iustified by faith when we heare the name of faith we must vnderstand the obiect of faith to wit the mercie of God Polanus in Syntagm l. 6. c. 36. Faith is imputed to iustice Faith 1. Christs iustice that is the iustice of Christ which faith apprehendeth is imputed Sadeel ad art 44. abiurat When we are saied to be iustified by faith by the name of faith we must vnderstand Christ And so also Bullinger dec 3. serm 9. The Confession of Saxonie c. de Remiss Peccat This saying is to be vnderstood correlatiuely we are iustified by faith that is we are iustified by confidence of the Sonne of God Zanchius de Perseuerant tom 7. col 143 by that You are Faith 1. Confidence fallen from grace vnderstandeth you are fallen from the doctrine of grace or from the Ghospell Pareus l. 2. de Iustif c. 7. Grace 1. Doctrine by Perfect charitie vnderstandeth sincere Et lib. 4. c. 7. by worke your saluation Doe those things which are necessarie for to obtaine saluation Perkins in Cathol reform Contr. 5. c. 3. saieth In all the promises of the Ghospell in which God doth voluntarily binde himselfe to reward our workes the obligation doth not directly pertaine to vs but in respect of the person and obedience of Christ Apologia Confess Aug. c. de Implet legis Because Loue. 1. Beleiue she loued much that is say they because she truely worshiped me with faith and with exercises and signes of faith Et de Resp ad Argum. When the text saieth that eternall life is rendered to workes it meaneth that it is rendered to those that are iustified Agayne Almes is saied to deliuer from death and to purge from sinne not in it selfe but in the cause thereof that is in faith Almes i. Faith Brentius hom 1. in festum om sanctorum To hunger after iustice is to haue a iust cause and yet not be able to follow it in law Reineccius to 4. Armaturae c. 19. by Sacrifice the Phase vnderstandeth Kill it lest he should be confessed that the pascal lam be was sacrificed Illyricus 1. Ioan. 2. v. 3. The keeping Keeping 1. Knowing of the coÌ„mandements in this place signifieth the true knowledge of his doctrine Piscator in Thesibus l. 2. p. 192. 2. Pet. 2. They denie the Lord who hath bought them that is whome before they had professed that he had bought them Et p. 472. he Buye 1. Professe to buye
Which 1. As farreforth saieth that which in the words of Consecration signifieth As farreforth As saieth he the Pronoune which in those words The bread which I shall giue is my flesh which I shall giue for the life of the world Moulins in his Bucler part 2. pag. 51. saieth that those words Iacob 5. If he be in sinne they shal be forgiuen him signifie as much as health shal be restored to him all sinnes being forgiuen for which God had afflicted him And he addeth in the next page Christ doth teach vs Math. 9. Forgiuen 1. Arise that to say to the sicke Thy sinnes are forgiuen thee and to say Arise and walke are equiualent things Let then he and his fellow Mynisters say Arise and walke when they preach of remission of sinnes They expound also by disparate or quite differeÌ„t things For thus Zuinglius in Schlusselburg lib. 1. Theol. Caluin art 2. Bodie in the words of the Supper may be taken also for the Bodie 1. Churche Church Et in Ioan. 6. to 4. he saieth By which also the words of Christ wax cleare This is my bodie where Bodie is put for Bodie 1. Death Death In lib. de Relig. cap. de Euchar. to 2. Now followeth a rite whereby it appeareth that this is the sense and that Bodie here Is it not a participation of the bodie of our Lord. 1. Cor. 10. is otherwise taken then for the Symboll of his bodie to wit for the Church In lib. de Caena fol. 294. he saith that by Communication of the bodie of Christ by Communion Communion 1. Sermon Chalice 1. Our selues you may vnderstand a sermon or the Church Et 1. Cor. 10. that the sense of these words The Chalice of blessing which we blesse c. is The Cuppe of thankesgiuing with which we giue thanks what other thing I pray you is it but our selues Agayne Blood 1. Christians He calleth the blood of Christ those who trust in his blood Et in Exegesi f. 359. Flesh in this place Ioan. 6. is put for the Diuine Flesh. 1. Diuinitie Bodie and blood 1. Faith Nature In Explic. art 18. to 1. f. 37. Thou seest here Ioan. 6. that the bodie and blood of Christ is nothing els but the word of faith to wit that his bodie dead for vs his blood shed for vs redeemed vs. And in other places oftentimes saieth that the word Bodie in the words of Consecration signifieth a Figure or Symboll of Christ his bodie The same Zuinglius in Exegesi tom 2. fol. 350. thus writeth Eate 1. â—eleiue Vnlesse yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of man c. is as much as who beleiueth not to wit the Ghospell being preached shal be condemned In Ioan. 6. tom 4. To eate bread and flesh is Eate 1. Trust nothing els but to beleiue Againe To eate is to trust In Elenc fol. 30. When faith is saied to saue faith is taken for the election of God In lib. de baptis fol. 61. In the 6. of the Acts the Beleiue 1. Heare word of Beleiuing is taken for to heare the doctrine or to adioyne himselfe to the number of the beleiuers The same man Epist ad Lindouer to 1. fol. 204. Thou seest here 1. Pet. 3. Baptisme Baptisme 1. Faith hath made vs safe fiâ—st that baptisme is taken for faith In lib. de Relig. c. de Baptis to 2. fol. 201. It was cleare to him that they had beene baptized by Apollo that is taught In lib. de Baptis f. 61. We saied that baptisme was taken for the inward Baptisme Faith Baptisme 1. Doctrine faith 1. Pet. 3. Et f. 63. We must note that the words of Baptizing in these words of Paul Act. 16. is taken for doctrine Et f. 81. In what then were yee baptized must not be vnderstood of the externall baptisme of water but of doctrine and instruction In Subsidio ib. f. 254. Baptisme 1. Pet. 3. is taken for Christ when Baptisme 1. Christ he saieth that we are saued by baptisme Et in Resp ad Huber fol. 107. he addeth that Baptisme 1. Pet. 3. is taken for Christ or for the very Ghospell Moreouer l. de Baptis to 2. fol. 73. Baptisme 1. Ghospell he thus writeth They haue oftentimes learned of vs that by water in this place Ioan. 3. ought to be vnderstood the knowledge Water 1. Knowledge Keyes 1. Words of Keyes 1. Faith Keyes 1. Preaching Loose and binde 1. Preach Binde 1. Leaue in error Binde 1. Not beleiue Forgiue 1. Assure of Christ and the comfort of faith Et in Explic. art 50. to 2. f. 92. The keyes are nothing els but the pure word of God and the sincere preaching of the Ghospell In Exegesi ib. f. 258. The keyes are not other thing but faith of the Ghospell Resp ad Luther ib f. 378. It is cleare that the keyes are nothing but the preaching of the Ghospell Agayne in Explic. art 50. to 1. f. 93. We learne that in Luke to loose and binde is nothing els but to preach the Ghospell lib. de Relig. c. de Clauibus to 2. f. 191. It appeareth here that to Binde is nothing els but to leaue in error And in Schlusselb l. 1. Theol. Caluin art 9. The words of Binding and loosing signifie nothing els but to beleiue and not beleiue Perkins in Cathol ref Contr. 3. c. 3. writeth thus I answere that we doe not aske remission of sinnes because we are not certaine of it but rather because that certaintie is weake and infirme that continually indued with new grace of Christ we may dayly increase and be comforted Daneus Contr. 7. pag. 1317. Saints are saied to gouerne the Saintes 1. Christ world Apoc. 2. and 3. We graunt saieth he that the godlie both now and after death doe gouerne the wicked world in so much as Christ gouerneth it of whose kingdome they are partakers as being his members Et to 2. Contr. de Baptis c. 4. he saieth that in those wordes Vnlesse a man be borne of water and the And. 1. Oâ— holie Ghost the particle And is to be taken for the disiunctiue particle Or. Et Contr. de Euchar. c. 10. 11. he will haue the verbe Is in the words of Consecration to stand for Is. 1. Signifieth Signifieth Representeth Sealeth Rainolds in Apol. Thes p. 333. saieth that the Apostle 2. Thessalon 2. in those words Hould traditions c. by the Speach 1. Scripture word Speach comprehendeth other Scriptures or as Iuel in Defens Apol. part 2. cap. 9. sec 1. Will haue it The very substance of the Ghospell Others in Whitaker Contr. 1. q. 6. c. 10. will haue whether put for Also as Beza putteth in the very Whether 1. Also text of that place Whitaker Contr. 11. q. 5. c. 4. by Preists in those words of Preists 1. Chiefe men the psal 99. Moyses and Aaron in his preists will haue to be meant
that is a Hedge sparow all and whole It not this a trick of arte Yes surely not vnknowne nor vnsemely to stage plaiers Thus Luther who as being best practised in this arte could best of all others describe it Finally it appeareth that Protestants haue not onely forged a new faith but also a new tongue a new Grammar a new frame of speach For concerning Propositions they bidde vs vnderstand an Affirmation by a Negation and a Negation by an Affirmation and words they bidde vs expoūd by diuerse by disparate and contraries to these which they signifie with other men And this new Grammar of theirs Luther acknowledgeth in these words Gal. 3. tom 5. fol. 345. Those words To doe To worke are to be taken Protestants new Grāmar or language three manner of waies Substantially or naturally Morally and Theologically Insubstances natures and morall matters these words are taken in their vsuall and naturall signification but in diuinitie they are made plainely new words and get a new signification Wherefore when thou readest in Scripture of Fathers of Prophets of Kings that they wrought iustice c. remember that such and the like sayings are to be vnderstood according to the new and Theologicall Grammar of Protestants wherefore I admonish yee agayne that the sentences which the aduersaries obiect out of Scripture of workes and reward be alwaies to be vnderstood Theologically by the definition As if they obiect that saying of Daniel 4. Redeeme thy sinnes by almes streight we must runne to the Theologicall grammar and not to the morall The like he hath in cap. 4. Genes fol. 60. Nor much otherwise writeth Kemnice libr. de origin Iesuit pag. 47. When he saieth It is most certaine that the Holie Ghost would that in this article of Iustification not onely the things themselues and the meaning but also the very names should be by a peculiar signification distinct from the words of Philosophers Schlusselburg also Praefat. libr. Theolog. Caluin distinguisheth betwene the Grammar of Nations and of Deuines and saieth that that taketh the word of Iustice actiuely but this taketh it passiuely The like hath Gesnerus loc 2. de Iustif pag. 47. But what we ought to thinke of these inuentors of Luthers Censure of these new word mongers a new Grammar themselues doe sometimes tell vs. For thus writeth Luther lib. de seruo arbitr tom 2. fol. 435. Whoe will not mock or rather hate this vnsemely changer of words who against all vse endeauoureth to bring in such kinde of speach as to call a begger a rich man By this abuse of speach anie man may bragge of anie thing But this is not the parte of Diuines but of Cooseners and Stageplayers And Caluin libr. contr Libertin cap. 3. The libertines at Libertines the first bouldly reiected the Scriptures but when they saw that thereby they were abhorred of all men they meant to deale more closely and more couertely that making shew not to cast away Scripture they might turne it into allegories and wrest it into diuerse and strange senses changing a horse into a man and as the common speach is feigning the horne of a lanterne to be a cloude And capit 7. Like as Egyptians and other vagabonds such as those who going out of Bohemia wander vp and downe the whole world vse a certaine peculiar speach which none vnderstand but those of their owne crew and brotherhood So c. I denie not but they vse the common words but so they alter their signification as no man can vnderstand what the matter is which is proposed nor what they would affirme or denie Beza also l. de puniend Haer. vol. 1. Theol. Sathan when he could not quite cast the Scripture out of the Church yet by vaine allegories made it altogether vprofitable which course now the libertines and Anabaptistes do take Bullinger Concion Anabaptiste Arians Seruetians Familistes 25. in Apocal. thus writeth of the Arians and Seruetians They turne and winde the words of God with their Giganticall bouldnesse as they list Whitaker l. 1. de Script c. vlt. sect 4. The Familists do leaue almost no article of our faith vntouched whilest with their allegories they turne and corrupt all things And Reinolds in his Conference cap. 2. sect 2. The Familists for to saue their phrensies from the Scripture reiect the literall sense which is the very edge thereof and put that vp into the scabarde of their fanaticall dreames and allegories The like hath Perkins in Conflictu Christi tom 2. This they note in the Libertines Familists Anabaptists and others whereof themselues are no lesse guiltie then those be as appeareth by what hath beene already related But as Luther him selfe saieth Genes 6. tom 6. fol. 84. Who would suffer this libertie in deprauing the true sense in the fables of Terence or Virgils Ecloges and shall we suffer it in the Church And Defension verb. Cenae tom 7. fol. 397. Surely I cannot see that they can be excused by anie plausible pretext as if vpon a good meaning they had beene deceaued by some curiofitie or spirituall blindnesse as it happeneth to most Heretiks But it appeareth that they mocke the word of God vpon obstinacie and malice For I doe not thinke that it can be that these sillie trifles and toies should in earnest moue a man in his wittes whether he were a Turk or Iew much lesse a Christian Thus the Protestants owne Prophet and Father speaketh of Protestants Wherefore thus I argue in the 20. place Who not onely gaynesay the words of holie Scripture so directly and so often as is shewed in the first booke but also in so manie and so great matters expound the words thereof by diuerse by disparates and by contraries so that they bring in a new grammar a new language and signification of words neuer heard of before they manifestly contradict nay mock the true sense of holie Scripture But Protestants doe so Therefore c. CHAPTER XXI THAT PROTESTANTS ARE COMpelled to deuise improprietie of words and all kinds of figures THE 21. Argument wherewith we will proue that Protestants doe contradict the true sense of holie Scripture is because when the proprietie of the word is against them they deuise improprieties and all kind of figures Caluin 4. Instit c. 8. § 2. Authoritie is not properly giuen to Not properly men Beza in Confess c. 5. sect 27. Nether Pastors nor Doctors can properly binde or loose anie man Zanchius de Eccles c. 9. Power of forgiuing sinnes is not properly giuen to the Apostles or to others for they doe not properly forgiue sinnes Vorstius in Resp ad Homium p. 31. I doe not say that faith it selfe doth properly iustifie vs. Perkins in Cathol Reform Cont. 5. c. 3. The kingdome of heauen is called a reward not properly but by a figure Et Cont. 10. c. 4. These words This is my bodie must not be vnderstood properly but by a figure Pareus l. 5. de Iustif
be taken metaleptically Zuinglius in Math. 24. tom 4. Saluation is to be attributed Metaleptically to nothing how holie soeuer but to the pure and mere grace of God And if in Scripture any thing be attributed to those things that is done by metalepticall and synecdochicall speaches Vrsinus in Catechis q. 63. Faith is our iustice is vnderstood correlatiuely and metaleptically and otherwise falsely Agayne Faith is correlatiuely imputed to iustice by metalepsis Scarpius Contr. 7. de Iustific It is taken correlatiuely and by metalepsis Tilenus in Syntagm c. 56. We attribute the cause of saluation not to faith it selfe properly but onely metaleptically To those I adde that Zuinglius in Hebr. 6. tom 4. saieth We thinke that these things are rightly saied by hyperoches as Christ speaketh that Math. 18. of power to binde and loose And when the Angel praieth for the people Zachariae 1. Bullinger l. de orig Erroris c. 8. saieth It is in hypotyposis suffiguration of a thing present Oftentimes they will haue the words of Scripture opposite Metonymically to them to be taken metonymically Zuinglius lib. de Pec. orig to 2. f. 156. This is that which I would That originall sinne is not truely but metonymically termed sinne That Paul saieth All haue sinned the word of sinning is put metonymically Caluin in Math. 26. v. 26. None that is conuersant in Scripture will denie but that a sacramentall speach is to be taken metonymically Beza in Resp altera ad Selnener p. 270. The names of Bodie and Blood are not attributed to bread and wine but metonymically Daneus Cont. 4. c. 4. This speach Faith iustifieth vs is metonymicall for the continent is taken for the contained Et Cont. de Euchar. c. 1. The sacramentall bread is here metonymically termed the bodie of Christ Whitaker Contr. 4. q. 1. c. 2. The Church is saied to be founded in the Apostles metonymically not properly Bucanus in Institut loco 48. This proposition is figuratiue and that not simply metaphoricall or allegoricall but metonymicall Piscator in Thes l. 2. p. 512. God to haue saued vs by the lauer of regeneration Tit. 3. ether is not meant of baptisme or if it be it is spoaken metonymically Agayne Regeneration is made by baptisme metonymically Sometimes they will haue them to be spoaken metaphorically Metaphorically Zuinglius in Subsid tom 2. fol. 247. We say that the figure of this speach of the Supper is to be expounded by a metaphor Thou saiest there is a metonymie where no metonymie is properlie Caluin in Math. 3. v. 12. The speach of euerlasting fire is metaphoricall In Refutat Catalani There is no speaâ—h here Ioan. 3. of baptisme but the name of water is metaphorically attributed to the Spirit Musculus in locis tit de Caena The bodie of the Lord is eaten improperly and metaphorically But it is wonderous how manie and what kinds of figures How manie figures they find in foure words The Lutherans they deuise in those foure plaine words of consecration This is my bodie For the Lutherans albeit the will haue theÌ„ to be vnderstood according to the letter yet in Hosp part 2. Hist f. 352. say In this proposition This is c. the affirmation is beside nature and not according to nature Selneccer ib. will haue it to be an vnusuall speach Heshusius in Beza in dial cont eum I say quoth he that it is an vnusuall kinde of speach contrarie to all the rules of Logicians and RhetoriciaÌ„s Hemingius in Enchir. clas 3. saieth It is not a philosophicall kind of speach but diuine Lobechius disput 12. The words are taken properly but the manner of speaking is singular and vnusuall Hutter in Anal. CoÌ„f. Aug calleth it an vnusuall speach that is mysticall and singular and that the letter is kept in regard of euerie word but that the manner of speaking is vnusuall in regard of the whole propositioÌ„ AdaÌ„ FraÌ„ in Margarita Theol. loc 16. It is a speach not regular nor figuratiue but vnusuall contrarie to the order of nature And the like hath Reineccius to 4. Arm. c. 16. Finally Grauerus in Absurdis Caluin c 1. sec 7. vlt. saieth that it is a dominatiue speach But in Antithes p. 410. saieth that Lutherans put a gramaticall synecdoche not rhetoricall Amongst the Sacramentaries as appeareath by The Sacramentaries what hath beene alreadie rehearsed some will haue to be here a Catachresis some a synechdoche some alleosis others a metaphor and others a metonymie Likewise some will haue the figure to be in the word This others in the word Is and others in the word Bodie And as Kikerman writeth libr. 3. System Theol. p. 445. There are manie that say There is no figure nether in the Predicate nor in the verbe but in the connexion of the Predicate with the Subiect that is in the forme of this proposition Polanus in Sylloge thes part 1. de Caena There is a threfould figure in these words This is c. Synechdoche of the gender a metaphor and a metonymie of the Subiect Ramus in Schlusselb l. 1. Theol. Caluin artic 22. will haue three figures in these words Aretius ib. saieth that this speach of Christ is ether metaphoricall or catachresticall or metonymicall Pencier ib. In these words of Christ ether there is a metaphor or a metonymie or a synechdoche or alleosis Et Zuinglius in Hospin part 2. f. 143. These words This is c. are not to be vnderstood naturally and in the proper sense of the words but symbolically denominatiuely and metonymically Thus as Tertullian saied Cap. 27. of the Valentinians They turne all into figures and images being themselues imaginarie men And as Illyricus in Claue part 2. tract 4. writeth Nothing is more easie then to say It is a trope a figure a phrase of speach an Hebraisme as Austine grauely noteth Wherefore I argue thus in the 21. place Who beside their foresaied opposition to the expresse words of Scripture doe also in so manie and so weightie matters delude the proper sense of the words of Scripture by so manie kinds of figures they contradict the true sense of the holie Scripture But so doe Protestants Therefore c. CHAPTER XXII THAT PROTESTANTS ARE FORCED to coine manie distinctions friuolous voluntarie opposite to themselues and vnheard of before THE 22. argument which we will make for to shew that Protestanrs contradict the true meaning of the holie Scripture is because they are coÌ„pelled to deuise manie distinctions friuolous voluntarie contrarie to themselues and neuer heard of before Their friuolous distinctions are of this sorte Dauid sinned indeed but neuer committed sinne It is an other thing to sinne and an other to commit sinne As we related lib. 1. c. 16. art 12. Zanchius de Perseuer tom 7. maketh this distinction Friuolous distinctions Saintes slide into sinne but doe not foreslide Lambert ib. The elect oftentimes doe erre but yet are neuer lead into error
dead of praier to the dead of forbiddacne of marriage and other such like doctrines This consent we denie to be a note of the Church for in all these things they did dot consent with the Ancient fathers with mutuall consent Apostolicall Church Duditius in Beza epist 1. saieth thus If it be trueth which the ancient Fathers haue professed with mutuall consent that is all on the Papists side Thus they touching their dissent from the Fathers In like manner they confesse that they dissent from the Church and Councells For thus P. Martyr in 1. Cor. 3. That The Church alwaiâ—s praied for dead The ancient Church The Church at 500. also vseth to be obiected to vs. That the Church hath alwaies praied for the dead which truely I doe not denie Whitaker CoÌ„t 2. q. 5. c. 7. I answere True it is that Caluin saieth and the Centurie writers that the ancient Church erred in manie things as of limbus of free will of merit of works and the other things before rehearsed Agayne I say that the Church which was 500. or 600. years after Christ did not hould in all points the doctrine of the Apostles For she held some errors Casaubon epist ad Cardin. Perron It was a most ancient custome that in the publike praiers of the Church remembrance should be made of the The ancient Church dead and rest praied for them of God The ancient Church by this means approued her faith of the resurrection to come Zuinglius in Elencho tom 2. speaking of the ceremonies In the beginning of the Church Generall Councells of baptisme saieth We know that in the beginning of the Church these things were vsed The like they confesse touching Councells For thus Confessio Anglica art 21. Generall Councells may erre and sometimes haue erred euen in the things which belonge to the rule of pietie Vrban Regius in Interpret All Councells The ancient Councels loc to 1. It is more cleare then the light that all Councells haue pernitiously erred Caluin 4 Insit c. 9. § 10. There is some thing wanting euen in those ancient and purer Councells There was a notable example hereof in the Councell of Nice Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 7. c 7. auoucheth that the Councell of Nice and Chalcedon haue erred Nether doe Protestants onely dissent froÌ„ the vniforme consent of Fathers Councels and Church but also they make small account thereof For thus P. Martyr in loc Tit. Not Fathers euen agreing Script § 16. But at least say they then are the Fathers to be allowed when they agree amongst themselues No not then alwaies Et lib. de votis As long as we abide in the Fathers we shall alwaies remayne in the same errors Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 5. c 8. The agreing exposition of the Fathers is no rule of expouÌ„ding Not witnesses without exceptioÌ„ Scriptures Cont. 2. q. 7. c. 7. We denie not but the Fathers be witnesse of the trueth but so as they be not without exception for all haue erred l. 6. cont Dur. sect 3. The consent of Fathers is not sure and free from error Et ad Demonst 7. Sanderi Not the whole Senate of Fathers Nether will we thinke that thou hast demonstrated any thing though thou couldest bring the whole Senate of Fathers against vs. Rainolds in his Conference p. 151. Trueth is not to Not all be tried by consent of Fathers Psal 150. If not one or twoe of the Fathers but all haue thought it nor thought it onely but haue written it nor written it onely but thought it not obscurely but clearely nor seldome but often nor for a time but perpetually yet their consent were not secure And he termeth vniuersalitie antiquitie consent rotten postes Yea in his 5. Thesis he will haue the Roman Church to be no true Church because she forbiddeth the Scriptures to be expounded contrarie to that sense which our holie mother the Church doth hould or contrarie to the vniforme consent of Fathers By which forbiddance saieth he are often reiected those senses which the spirit by the tenor of the words and sentences doth teach to be the meaning of the holie text MortoÌ„ in Apol. part 1. l. 1. c. 69. Sometimes neglecting the persons of the Fathers it is most safe to fech the prime antiquitie out of the Apostolicall writings Which is saieth he the Protest defense to reiect the Fathers prore and puppe of the Protestants defense Caluin 4. Instit c. 9. § 12. Let no names of CouÌ„cells of Pastours of Bishops hinder vs that we trie not all the spirits of them all with the square of Gods word for to finde whether they be of God Daneus CoÌ„tr. p. 289. Touching the saying of the Fathers this is our breif answere to them all We regard not what the Fathers haue saied but how Saying of Fathers not reguarded truely Et Cont. 5. p. 698. We must not looke what the Fathers haue written but what they should haue writteÌ„ Vorstius in Antib p. 395. The Protestants doe not thinke that they ought much to care what the ancient Fathers haue thought or written of this Not to be cared for matter Pareus l. 5. de Iust c. 5. I say that Scripture is to be expouÌ„ded by Scripture not by Fathers Et l. 2. de Grat. c. 14. Though all the Fathers agreed well yet were it weake Reineccius to 1. Arm. Not all fathers together c. 9 WheÌ„ all Doctors of the Church with a common consent doe teach some thing to come from Apostolicall tradition is that to be beleiued to be Apostolicall tradition No. Gerlachius disp 22. de Eccles The Fathers haue straied from the path of trueth not in these onely wherein they disagree with themselues and with others but in those also which they haue vniformely deliuered Celius Secundus de Amplit regni Dei lib. 1. Should then the Their authoritie nothing at all authoritie of so manie ancient Fathers the consent of ages auaile nothings Nothing at all Polanus in thes part 3. p. 546. We cite them â—estimonies of Fathers â—specially when we handle points of religion controuerted with Papists not for our sake but for Papists that we may refute Papists by the Fathers whome they haue Fathers cited as Heathens made their iudges as in ould time the Fathers refuted the HeatheÌ„ by the testimonies of the Sybills of Poets Philosophers orators and Heathen Historians As therefore the Fathers vsed the testimonies of Heathens against HeatheÌ„s So we produce the testimonies of Fathers against Papists Muscul in loc tit de Scrip. As for me I require not the testimonies of Fathers for to giue authoritie to Canonicall Scripture and to make distinction betwene it and the Fathers writings contenting my selfe with the authoritie and canon of the Scripture it selfe But because our aduersaries endeauour to trouble the trueth by pretext of Fathers I well alledge them where they are against their endeauours but when they cite any thing
maintainers of the trueth These are such things as that now it may onely seeme to be wanting to set the Diuel himselfe in the throne of God and of trueth And Epist 16. What I Good counsell of Beza admonished before I admonish now in the Lord agayne and agayne to wit that at lest they would consider with themselues from whome and to whome are they gone For that I may imitate the words of S. Austin l. 2. cont Iulian. c. 10. Hath long time so confounded the highest with the lowest Shall light so be termed darkenesse and darkenesse light that Aërius Iouinian Vigilantius become to see and Austin Hierome Epiphanius be blinde But in some I thus argue in the 24. place whose doctrine in manie and greatest points is opposite to the expresse words of Scripture and besides as themselues confesse was condemned of the ancient Church and holie Fathers for heresie that is repugnant to the true sense of Scripture But such is the doctrine of Protestants Therefore c. CHAPTER XXV THAT PROTESTANTS THEMSELVES sometimes confesse that diuers of their opinions be blasphemous THE 25. argument wherewith we will proue that Protestants contradict the true sense of the Scripture shal be because it is so manifest that diuers of their doctrines which in the former booke I shewed to be opposite to the expresse words of Scripture are blasphemous as partely the very Authors of them partely other learned Protestants being compelled by their conscience and the euidencie of the matter doe confesse it Concerning God Protestāts teach that he willeth sinne Blasphemie that God willeth sinne as hath beene seene l. 1. c. 2. art 1. Which doctrine to be blasphemous thus confesseth Caluin in Resp ad Nebulon. p. 732. Was it a doubtfull blasphemie to make God the author of of sinne to will sinne to thrust to sinne Beza de Praed cōt Castel vol. 1. Theol. p. 372. Out of these things none of these blasphemies followeth to wit ether that God is the author of sinne or is delighted with sinne or also willeth sinne Et p. 397. It cānot be saied without blasphemie that God willeth iniustice Ib. l. Quest Resp p. 681. What then Shall we say that God willeth iniquitie God forbidde For this is the most horrible blasphemie of all Zanchius l. 3. de Nat. Dei c. 4. We should surely say that God is the cause and author of sinne if we should say that properly speaking he willeth sinne or would haue sinne to be done Hutterus in Analysi Cōf. Aug. p. 625. The blasphemie of Sacramentaries is execrable who are not ashamed to referre the most dolefull fall of our first parents and all that world of euils which thereō insued not in regard of the punishmēt but of the sinne vnto an absolute and eternall decree of God and to his effectuall working and immutable will Et p. seq But let heauē be astonished the elements amazed at such mostrous blasphemies whereof no pious man should suffer to heare the onely outward noise without shaking much lesse should assent vnto them in his heart And Ioannes Andrae in Colloquio Montisb p. 422. This assertion that man fell by Gods will is impious and horrible to heare and so contrarie to the expresse and reuealed word of God They teach also that God willeth sinne euen as it is That God willeth sinne as sinne sinne as hath beene shewed lib. 1. cap. art 2. But that this is blasphemous is acknowledged by Beza l. de Praedest p. 410. in the words If euer we had thought to speake or write that sinnes as sinnes proceed from the will of God we would confesse that we were worthie of all punishment Lobechius also Disp 21. This principle of Diuinitie is firmely to be held and to be beleiued with all our heart that God nether willeth nor commandeth ill deeds as they are such much lesse worketh or helpeth them or by an eternall decree doth destinate or secretly driue men to commit them They teach also that God worketh sinne and is the That God is cause of sinne cause and author of it as is to be seene l. 1. c. 2. art 4. And yet Caluin l. de Prouident p. 742. aliâs 736. confesseth that it is a monstrous blasphemie that wickednesse is done not onely by the will of God but also he being the author thereof And pag. 471. Thou wranglest with me as if I had saied that sinne is the iust worke of God which in all my writings I euer more detest Instruct contr Libertin cap. 14. God must denie himselfe and become a Deuil if he did worke euill which these men doe attribute vnto him The like he hath libr. de Praedestin pag. 711. And in Actor 2. ver 23. saieth I denie that God is the author of euill because in this word an euill affection is insinuated Beza in Absters Calumn Heshus pag. 316. calleth it blasphemie That God worketh the wickednesse of the wicked And de Praedest cont Castel p. 401. God forbidde that anie of ours should haue saied or written as thou auonchest that God ether giue or permit or worke an euill will or anie wicked or filthie desires when as euen our thoughts doe altogether abhorre from these kinde of blasphemies P. Mart. in locis classe 1. c. 14. If God wrought sinne he were a sinner Kemnice in locis part 1. tit de Causa Peccati All mens mynds and eares do so abhorre from that speach God is the cause of sinne that therefore the Maniches did feigne an other God Vrsin in Miscellan p. 72. Thou saiest that these are the speaches of manie of men God doth effectually worke in the reprobate that they sinne With all our heart we accurse this speach and doctrine Whitaker ad Rat. 9. Campia That is horrible Campian and not to be spoaken which thou saiest that anie should make God the Author of sinne He deserueth that God should streigth with a thunder boult cast him into the bottomlesse pit of hell Pareus in Colleg. Theol. 1. disput 2. The Fathers iustly condemned that impious doctrine of the Maniches and Libertins ascribing the cause of fall and sinne to God the Creator And Disput 3. God was not nor is not the efficient cause of sinne which heretofore was the blasphemie of the Maniches and now is of some Libertines They teach that God doth predestinate and ordaine That he predestinated men to sinne mē to sinne as is related l. 1. c. 2. art 5. Which to be blasphemous confesseth Vorstius in Amica Collat. sect 89. in the words which doctrine that God doth destinate men to sinne I scarce beleiue that thy selfe wilt thinke to be voide of blasphemie if thou doest well consider it Hutter in Anal. Confes August c. 9. The troupe of Sacramentaries Beza Caluin Renecher doth not feare to write with a most execrable and most wonderfull blasphemie that some are fatally and absolutely destinated not onely to their last end to wit damnation but also to the
conferre places and adioyne thereto some humane principle and make an argument for to draw in what manner soeuer their doctrine out of Scripture which conference of places adiunction of a humane principle and discourse seing it is not made by the Scripture but by Protestants by their guift of Interpretatation they must needs graunt that the Scripture hath need of Interpretation for to determine all the controuersies that are betwixt vs and them And for this cause albeit Whē Protest will haue expresse Scripture when consequence thereof when they put vs to the proofe they vse to crie Nothing is to be beleiued which is not expressely in Scripture yet when they are to proue they will haue it suffice that it may be gathered out of Scripture by good cōsequence For so say the Lutherans in Colloq Ratisbon Sess 3. 13. Kemnice in 1. part Exam. p. 320. Beza in Resp ad Acta Mōtisb part 2 p. 46. l. de Notis Eccles Daneus Cont. 1. p. 86. Pareus l. 1. de Iustif c. 16. Piscator de Iustif l. 1. c. 5. Riuet in Contr. tract 1. sect 18. and others commonly And seing this Inference by good consequence is not made by the Scripture but by themselues by their Interpretation they must needs say that besides the Scripture there is necessarie some Interpreter for to know all points of faith Now that Protestants haue no infallible interpretation of Scripture is manifest First because they confesse that Protest haue no infallible interpreter that they haue no infallible Interpreter of Scripture Pareus in Colleg. Theol 2. disp 1. The word of God cannot abide anie infallible Interpreter besides God himselfe who inspired the Scripture Secondly because they denie that the whole Senate of Fathers the Catholik Church or generall Councels haue the guift of infallible interpretation in all points of faith and therefore ridiculously should they arrogate this guift to themselues And seing they teach that all Pastors together and all the true Church whichsoeuer it is may erre in matters of faith they cannot chalenge to their Pastors this infallible guift Thirdly for if they doe infallibly interprete the Scripture in all points of faith ether they doe it by means or without means Not without means for such interpretation were Propheticall by immediate reuelation from God or rather Enthusiasticall by illusion from the Diuel Whereupon saieth Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 4. c. 5. If the holie Ghost teach the Church to interprete these places of Scripture without means Protest require means to interprete this is Enthusiasticall and Anabaptisticall and extraordinarie For the Spirit teacheth now onely by meanes nether must we now looke for new inspirations or reuelations Et Cōt 1. q. 5. c. 9. Now must we treate of the meās to finde the sense of Scripture For sith the Scripture hath not a liuely voice for vs to heare we must vse some means for to finde out which is the sense and meaning of the Scripture Agayne The Church hath alwaies vsed some means for to expound the Scripture But if they expound the Scripture by means then according to their owne opinion if their means be fallible their interpretation also must be fallible For thus Whitaker c. 3. cit If by means then such as the means be such must needs the interpretation be But the means which Protestants haue are but humane and fallible For as they graunt they are no other then such as the Catholik Church holie Fathers generall Coūcels haue vsed For thus Whitaker c. 3. cit But the means of the Church to expound obscure places are vncertaine doubtfull and ambiguous And they must needs say so because otherwise they must confesse that the Church is infallible in expounding the Scripture Secondly because the means Protest meās but humane which Protestants vse are these Pondering of circumstances of the stile and Phrase of Scripture conference of places recurring to the Hebrew and Greek text praier and the like as yee may see in Rainolds Confer lib. 2. diuis 2. Confes Heluet. c. 2. Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 5. c. 9. Humfrey ad Rat. 1. Camp and others But all these means are humane for they be our pondering our conference our recurring our praier And all humane means are fallible as euerie man is subiect to lie Thirdly because no where in Scripture is there promised infallible assistance to them that vse these means And if anie say that it is promised to praier whatsoeuer we aske first he maketh onely praier an infallible meane Agayne it sufficeth not to pray how soeuer but we must pray well and perseuerantlie For Iac. 4. v. 3. it is saied Yee pray and obtayne not because yee pray ill But it is not praied well that euerie priuat man by him selfe should vnderstand the Scriptures but rather ill because the Scripture saieth Malac. 2. The lippes of the Priest keepe knowledge and they shall require the law out of his mouth and Ephes 4. He hath giuen Pastors and Doctors for the consumnation of Saints Fourthly because all vse these means Catholiks Heretiks Iews and yet all doe not attaine to the right sense of Scripture by them Fiftly because Protestants themselues doe insinuate Their means not infallible that these means are not infallible For Whitaker besides the words already related saieth Cōt 1. q. 5. c. 9. 10. That we must vse these means rightly and thereby declareth that these means are not infallible vnlesse they be rightly vsed and yet he doth not set downe the meane how to vse thē rightly Et c. 10. cit addeth that all these means must be accommodated to the rule of faith Which be clearely enough sheweth that of themselues they are not infallible Rainolds also loc cit saieth that all their means are vaine Vnlesse God giue eyes to see Sixtlie these means are not onelie fallible but also insufficient Their means not common to all For we must not onelie know to conferre places but also what places are to be conferred and what not and with what places they are to be conferred and with what not Besides we must know how we must cōferre For otherwise as Tertullian saied of examining Scriptures we may say of conferring As if hauing ill examined all we may not fall into error by making choice of some euill But the foresaied means teach vs not this Finally these means are not common to all the faithfull For thus writeth Whitaker c. 9. cit The vnlearned know not how to vse these means rightly and Rainolds libr. cit cap. 5. diuis 1. Because the infirme and vnlearned sorte of Christians haue no skill to discerne the right sense of Scripture from the false he Vincent accommodateth himselfe to their infirmitie and giueth them externall sensible means to know it I aske therefore whether vnlearned Protestants do truely know the right sense of Scripture by means or without means If without means they are Enthusiasts If by means there are others then those
conceaue how God in different manner willeth and willeth the same thing Againe Where we conceiue not how God will haue that to be done which he forbiddeth to doe let vs remember our weaknesse Et 3. Instit c. 24. § 17. When he had saied that God willeth that which he professeth that he will not he addeth Albeit according to our vnderstanding Gods will be manifould yet in himselfe he willeth not this and that but by his manifould wisdome maketh our vnderstanding astonished till it shal be graunted to vs to know that wonderfully he willeth that which now seemeth contrarie to his will And cap. 11. § 11. This is a meruailous manner of iustifying that they that are couered with Christ iustice feare not the iudgement which they deserue and whilest iustly they condemne themselues they are iudged iust out of themselues De Praedest pag. 704. Let our faith adore a farre of with decent sobrietie the hidden counsail of God wherewith the fall of man was preordained And pag. 711. How it was appointed by the foresight and decree of God what was to become of man and yet God is not to be madde partaker of the sinne as if he were ether author or allower thereof seing it is clearely a secret farre beyond the reach of mans wit let vs not be ashamed to confesse our ignorance In Ioan. 12. ver 27. But it seemeth that this doth not become the Sonne of God that an inconsiderate desire escapeth him which he must streight renounce for to obey his Father I confesse saieth he that truely this is the follie of the crosse which is a scandall to proud men Nay it is not the follie of the crosse but the impietie of Caluin to attribute an in cōsiderate desire to Christ And in Math. 26. vers 39. If anie obiect that the first motion which should haue beene bridled before it went further was not temperate as it beseemed I answere saieth he that in this corruption of our nature there cannot be seene the feruor of passions with that temper which was in Christ but we must yeeld this honor to the Sonne of God that we iudge not of him by our selues Forsooth the impostures of Caluin not onelie wāting all word of God but also quite cōtrarie thereto must be beleiued though they cannot be vnderstood and the Catholik doctrine of the Eucharist and the like must not be beleiued because it cannot be vnderstood Beza in Explicat Christianismi c. 3. After a wonderfull and incomprehēsible manner it pleaseth God that euen that which as it is sinne he alloweth not yet is not done without his will De Praedest cont Cast p. 340. When he had saied that God decreeth the causes of damnation and that none can resist his decree he asketh Is not then all the falut in God and answereth This difficultie is vnexplicable for men Agayne How God is not in fault if he ordayne the causes of dānation we thinke with the Apostle that it is a question vnexplicable for mans wit Et in Colloq Montisb p. 427. There is no parte of Christian doctrine from which sense and humane reason doth more abhorre Pareus l. 2. de Amiss Grat. c. 13. after he had saied p. 358. that God doth enforce mē to sinnes as they are his secret iudgements addeth p. 363. that this manner is vnexplicable Indeed this their excuse of the inexplicabilitie of the thing were tolerable if the Scripture did clearely teach what they say but seing it doth not clearelie teach so as appeareth by the answers of Catholiks yea so clearely teach the contrarie as Protestants are forced to confesse that they know not how to reconcile so manie of their positions with the Scripture it is a verie great proofe that in verie deed their doctrine is repugnant to Scripture An other manner whereby implicitlie they cōfesse that Protest confesse that the words of Scripture seeme against them their doctrine is repugnāt to Scripture is because in manie and great matters they acknowledge that the words of Scripture and such as are of purpose spoakē for to declare vnto vs what we ought to beleiue of such matters seeme to fauour vs more then them are hard to them and torment them shrewdly Luther in Postill Dom. 9. post Trin. This dayes Ghospell if it be nakedly looked into without the Protestant spirit is plainely Papisticall Zuinglius l. de Rel. c. de Merito None denieth but that in Scripture there are almost more places which attribute merit to our works then denie it And in Explanat art 20. The places of Scripture at first sight seeme to attribute some what to Merit Bullinger Dec. 3. Serm. 9. We acknowledge that the Scripture euerie were doth seeme to attribut life and iustice to good works Rainolds in Confer c. sect 1. What if in that other place the Scripture in shew do fauour you more then vs. And he addeth that he easilie graunteth that the shew of the words of Scripture maketh more for vs then for them Agayne I will graunt 〈◊〉 the words of Christ This is my bodie in shew do fauour more your reall presence then that sacramentall which we mantaine And in an other place In shew of words our Sauiour seemeth to haue promised the keys to Peter onely Herbrand in Compendio Theol. pag. 340. saieth If the letter be vrged in those The letter against Protestants words of Daniel Redeeme thy sinnes by almes they be contrarie to their doctrine The same confesseth Hunnius l. de Iustif of those words of Tobie Almes deliuereth from all sinne and from death And the same is euident by infinit places of Scripture which Protestants are forced to expound figuratiuelie because the proprietie of the word is for vs. Zuinglius Epist ad Matthaeum Rutling to 2. thus speaketh Now remaineth that which in this matter is the hardest A hard matter for Protest to wrest the words of all to wit how we may wrest the words of Christ which they terme words of consecration Here verily we must stretch all the veyns of faith Et in Resp ad Billican he saieth that he vseth pulleis and presses to wring out the sense of the words of consecration and addeth We denie that anie one They need pullies and presses litle droppe at least sincere and pure will come from them vn-vnlesse they be prest with the weight of other places And againe How manie had we some years agoe who could acquit themselues handsomely of those words of Christ Thou art Peter c. and shew the figure of the speach And yet it was no hindrance that we could not handsomely dispatch our selues of the word Caluin 3. Instit c. 2. § 11. I know it seemeth hard to some where faith is attributed to the reprobates In Luc. 3. vers 9. As for Merit that knot is to be loosed which hindreth manie For the Scripture so often promising reward to works seemeth to attribute some merit to them Peter Martyr in Dom. 4. Hom.
in manie places refuteth In like sorte Grauer in Absurdis Caluin c. 14. ser 10. Touching the Eucharist they denie that it is the bodie Of the Eucharist and blood of Christ l. 1. c. 11. art 1. Which is against Scripture For thus Muscul in loc tit de Caena I may not say the bread of the Supper is not the bodie of the Lord. For in so saying I should contradict the Lord saying This is my bodie Againe Otherwise bread should not be the bodie of the Lord against his expresse word Beza in Hosp part 2. f. 300. being asked whether he disliked that one should say The bread of the Supper is the bodie of Christ answered No for they are the words of Christ Et Hosp ib. f. 136. We denie not that bread and wine are the bodie and blood of Christ For Christ himselfe saied This is my bodie They say that those words This is my bodie must be thus expounded This signifieth my bodie Of which exposition Musculus in Schlusselb l. 1. Theol. Caluin art 22. giueth this iudgement We must beware of that exposition wherewith Christs words are thought to be the same as if he had saied This signifieth my bodie For this is not Christs meaning to shew that this bread signifieth his bodie They denie that Christ gaue vs his bodie to eate or his blood to drinke l. 1. c. 11. art 2. Which doctrine thus censureth Caluin l. de Neces ref Christ saied in plaine termes that he gaue them his bodie Beza epist 5. But I answere that is all one as to make Christ a lyer as who in cleare and plaine words saieth he gaue them that bodie which was deliuered for vs. Et Apol. 1. contr Saintem p. 292. To denie all eating of flesh were plainely to denie the very words of Christ They denie that the Cuppe is the new testament l. 1. c. 11. art 4. And yet Simlerus in Hosp part 2. f. 348. saieth The proper sense of these words is The Cuppe is the new testament or the blood of the new testament Iames Andreae in Colloq Montisbel p. 38. To me it seemeth altogether new and vnheard of that the Supper is denied to be the testameÌ„t of Christ against the plaine words alledged out of Luke Et Musculus in locis titul de Caena In Luke and Paul it is saied of this Cuppe that it is the new testament They denie that the Cuppe of the Eucharist was shed for vs. l. 1. c. 11. art 6. And yet Illyricus in Luc. 22. v. 20. writeth Which is powred out for you in the Greek text must needs be referred to the Cuppe Touching Matrimonie they denie that it is a SacrameÌ„t Of Matrimonie c. 12. art 5. And yet thus professeth the Confession of Wittemberg c. de Coniugio We confesse that Mariage is a kind of life instituted and approued by God and a mysterie as commonly it is expounded a great Sacrament in Christ and the Church as Paul saieth Touching faith they denie that it can be without good Of Faith works l. 1. cap. 13. art 8. which doctrine thus condemneth Schlusselburg l. 1. Theol. art 15. Aretius saieth that faith and good works are conioyned as the species and her proprietie as a man and reason But we out of the word of God teach and learne that this doctrine is false They denie that faith it selfe is imputed to vs for iustice l. 1. c. 13. art 19. And yet thus iudgeth Vrbanus Regius in loc fol. 46. Sincere faith on the mercie of God and Iesus Christ is our verie iustice Faith is imputed for iustice to the beleiuer Abraham beleiued and it was imputed to him for iustice They denie that the faith of the Hemorroïssa was pure libr. 1. capit 13. articul 25. And yet thus Bullinger in Marci 5. The power of true faith is singularly expressed Touching good works they denie that they are necessarie Of good workes to saluation l. 1. c. 14. art 13. And yet Piscator saieth in Thes loc 10. The Scripture teacheth that good works are necessarie to saluation The same say the Electorals in Colloq Aldeburgico They denie also that good works are cause of saluation lib. 1. cap. 14. art 15. And yet thus writeth Illyricus in Claue tractat 6. titul de Var. bonum operum praed We heare that to manie effects and praises and euen saluation it selfe is attributed in Scripture to good works It is plaine that oftentimes somewhat to much praise is ascribed to good works which doth not agree to them nor is to be ascribed to them if we will speake exactly truely and properly They denie that they are meritorious lib. 1. cap. 14. art 8. And yet thus professeth Apollog Confession in Melancthon tom 3. Seing works are some fulfilling of the law they are truely saied to be meritorious reward is rightly saied to be due to them Agayne The text of Scripture saieth that life euerlasting is rendered to them Which Protestants denie lib. 1. cap. 14. articul 7. They denie also that they are to be done for God lib. 1. cap. 14. art 20. Of which point thus iudgeth Kemnice in locis tit de bonis oper The testimonies of Scripture most clearely teach that good works are to be done for Gods sake Touching virginitie they denie that it is counsailed in Scripture l 1. c. 15. art 4. And neuerthelesse Vrbanus Regius in locis fol. 372. saieth Virginitie is counsailed in the Ghâ—spell not commanded And in Interp. loc 49. Virginitie is onely a counsaile not a precept Concerning sinne they teach that it can remayne with Of sinne iustice l. 1. c. 16. art 17. Yet thus pronuonceth Luther in Gal. 3. These are directly opposit That a Christian is iust and loued of God and yet with all is a sinner Againe How are these twoe coÌ„tradictories true at once I hâ—ue sinnes am most worthie of the wrath of God and the Father loueth me They denie that sinne putteth a man out of grace l. 1 c. 16. art 6. And yet thus writeth Hemingius in Enchir class 2. If a penitent sinne against his conscience as Dauid did with murder and adulterie he casteth of the holie Ghost and becometh guiltie of Gods wrath and vnlesse he doe pennance falleth into eternall punishment It is a horrible madnesse to say that such retaine the holie Ghost wheÌ„ as Paul saieth plainely Gal. 5. The works of the flesh are manifest and they that doe such shall not possesse the kingdome of God They denie that the widdows whereof S. Paul speaketh 1. Timoth. did sinne in marrying l. 1. c. 16. art 15. And yet thus Bullinger in Tim. 5. Surely to marrie of it selfe is no sinne But because they haue once giuen their promise to Christ the spouse and to the Church and of their owne accord haue left marriage hereupon their marriage turneth to the disgrace of Christ which is that which Paul termeth to become wanton against Christ Bucer lib. 2. de Regno
Christi c. 23. They who haue giuen their first promise to God of a single life haue indeed iudgement and reprehension Caluin vpon this place saieth that these widdows gaue away their libertie to marrie and did free themselues from the bound of marriage for all their life and did depriue themselues of the libertie to marrie How then did not they sinne by marrying Touching Iustification they teach that it is neuer last Of Iustification l. 1. c. 17. art 15. Which is contrarie to Scripture to Scripture as Confess Saxon. cap. 11. confesseth in these words By the saying of Luke He goeth and bringeth other spirits and the like sayings it is manifest that some regenerate do contristate and cast of the holie Ghost and are afterward cast away of God and become guiltie of his wrath and eternall punishment Touching eternall life they denie that it is a reward l. 1. Of eternall life c. 18. art 1. And yet thus speaketh Apologia Confess Aug. in Melancthon tom 3. The Scripture calleth eternall life areward Agayne The name of reward in this manner agreeth to eternall life because eternall life rewardeth good works Touching Hell they denie that it is a place l. 1. c 18. act Of Hell 7. Which to be contrarie to Scripture thus confesseth Bucanus loc 4. Hell is a certaine place hid and horrible appointed of God for damned men and Angels to their eternall paine Nu. 16. 30. Math. 8. 12. Et Piscat or l. 1. loc 22. The Scripture euerie where testifieth that the damned shall suffer these torments in hell to wit a place vnder earth appointed for their punishment And Regius in loc tit l de Peccato The Scripture expressely deputeth twoe places for soules heauen for the good and hell for the badde Touching the law of God they denie that we may pray Of Gods law for the fulfilling of it lib. 1. c. 19. art 5. And yet thus writeth Perkins in Explic. orat Dom. Be done that is let obedience be giuen to it let it be fulfilled of all men Concerning mans will they denie that it is free in euill Of mans will l. 1. c. 21. art 2. And yet thus writeth Regius in locis tit de Peccato To say with Maniche that man cannot auoide sinne this error is heresie Rogers on the 10. Article The Maniches affirmed how man is not voluntarily brought but necessarilie driuen vnto sinne These and manie moe Protestanticall doctrines Protestants themselues confesse to be contrarie to the true sense of holie Scripture Why then may not we conclude that ProtestaÌ„ts do contradict the holie Scripture seing besides all the foresaied arguments they themselues plainely confesse it of manie points of their doctrine Which was the end and scope of this worke PERORATION Or Conclusion to the Reader THov hast seene good Reader in this worke Catholiks aduantages for Scripture ouer Protestants what great aduantage Catholiks haue ouer Protestants euen for the written word of God or holie Scripture Thou hast seene that the Catholik doctrine in more then twoe hundred and sixtie points of coÌ„trouersie relieth vpon the expresse word of God whereas the Protestants Doctrine relieth vpon humane principles humane conferences humane consequences that is vpon the word of man Thou hast seene that the holie Scripture in all these foresaied articles giueth sentence for the Catholik doctrine and condemneth the Protestant in expresse words and those purposely spoaken and in their plaine vsuall sense in which such words vse to be spoakeÌ„ and taken of men then the which no sentence can be giueÌ„ clearer or manifester Thou hast seene how manie how voluntarie how intollerable corruptioÌ„s both of the words and sense of Scripture Protestants are forced to make lest they should seeme to be condemned by the sentence of holie Scripture They haue now that Iudge to whome alone they appeale let them heare him let them submit themselues to his sentence He speaketh plainely directly and purposely and as I saied in the plaine and vsuall sense in which men vse such words that I may not say also in the sense in which he is vnderstood of the holie Fathers and the Catholik Church Now all and the onelie pretext of Protestants touching the Scripture is taken away For who vnlesse he will shut his eyes doth not see but that they are most plainelie condemned of the Scripture who are condemned of it in so manie and so weightie articles in such plaine words and so cleare sense and that it is but a vaine strugling to seek to obscure the clearnesse of such a sentence by humane glosses and expositions such as were neuer wanting nor euer wil be wanting to anie Heretik The Protestants haue often cried that the Scripture is the onelie rule and foundation of faith that faith relieth onelie vpon Scripture which I would to God they would follow in the foresaied 260. articles and let goe their owne glosses and consequences which are not sound in Scripture and follow them who produce the expresse word of God against the word of man Which counsail though it of it selfe be most reasonable yet because they will more willinglie follow it when they shall heare it approued by their owne Maisters I will here set downe the words of some of them Luther in Postilla in Festo Assumpt Alwaies Protest aduise vs to follow them that follow Scripture sticke to thâ—se things which are clearely deliuered by the Scriptures and relie not vpon that which hath not manifest authoritie in Scripture The Protestante Princes in Praefar libr. Concordiae In true simplicitie of faith they shall firmely insist in the plaine words of Christ which is the surest manner and fittest to teach the ignorant Melancthon in Actis Wormat. tom 4. When the letter is plaine it is manifest we must not goe from it Et ib. in Resp ad Staphilum Nether is it to to be doubted but that the letter when there is no obscuritie or anbiguitie is to be preferred before all the decrees of all men Againe Where the word is manifest and without obscuritie or ambiguitie it is impietie to teach or thinke the contrarie And in Hospin part 2. Histor fol. 115. What wil be in time of tentation Harken to this Protestants when the conscience shall aske what cause it had to goe from the recaued doctrine of the Church Then these words This is my bodie wil be lightnings What will the terrified mynd oppose against these with what Scripture with what word of God will she strenghthen and perswade her selfe that it was need to interpret them by a metaphor They seeme not to be well acquainted with these disputes who so much delighte in wit as them more admire subtilly deuised reasons then the words of Scripture Iames Andrews in Colloq Montisbel pag. 456. Let them examine and iudge the doctrine of both partes not by humane glosses but by the word of God Zuinglius libr. de Author sedit tom 2. As often
proper to the Elect 350 22. VVhether faith come by hearing 352 23. VVhether faith be euer lost 353 24. VVhether faith be rewarded 355 25. VVhether the faith of those who toucht Christs garments were pure 356 Chap. 14. Of good workes in generall Art 1. VVhether anie worke of a Sinner may be good p. 360 2 VVhether euerie good worke be sinne 362 3 VVhether good works be a sweet smell to God 364 4 VVhether good works be fully good 366 5 VVhether they be iust or iustice in the sight of God 369 6 VVhether in good works there be anie worth 371 7 VVhether eternall life be promised to good works 373 8 VVhether good works be meritorious 374 9 VVhether there may be glorie in good works 376 10 VVhether all good works be equall before God 378 11 VVhether good works be commanded of God 379 12 VVhether they be necessarie to iustification 381 13 VVhether they be necessarie to saluation 384 14 VVhether they be profitable to saluation or iustification 387 15 VVhether they be anie cause of saluation 390 16 VVhether they be a testimonie of iustification or predestination 393 17 VVhether they be a cause of Gods loue towards vs 395 18 VVhether we ought to doe good works 396 19 VVhether they may be done for reward 399 20 VVhether they be to be done for the glorie of God 401 Chap. 15. Of workes in particular Art 1. VVhether it be good not to marrie 406 2 VVhether virginitie be a vertue 406. 3. VVhether the state of virginitie be better then marriage 408 4. VVhether God would haue men to liue single 410 5. VVhether Fasting be a vertue 412. 6. VVhether fasting be a preseruatiue against the Diuel 414. 7. VVhether choice of meats be laudable 415. 8 VVhether we may pray for all 416. 9. VVhether we may pray for the dead 417. 10 VVhether we may pray for that which God hath not promised 419 11. VVhether anie obtaine for the worth of their praier 421. 12. VVhether we may pray in an vnknowne tongue 422. 13. VVhether we be commanded to say our lords praier 423 14. VVhether we may make vows 424 15. VVhether almes deliuer from death and sinne 426 16. VVhether we may giue all to the poore 427 17. VVhether pennance be commanded to all 428 18 VVhether affliction of the bodie be a parte of pennance 429. 19 VVhether pennance of the Niniuites was good 431 20. VVhether Eremitical life be lawfull Chap. 16. Of Sinnes Art 1. VVhether sinnes be imputed to the faithfull 435. 2. VVhether anie sinne be mortall to the Elect and faithfull 437. 3. VVhether onely incredulitie be sinne 438. 4. VVhether sinne ought to be ouercomen of vs 440. 5. VVhether anie that serue the flesh can serue God 441. 6 VVhether by greuous sinnes we fall from grace 442. 7 VVhether sinne can staÌ„d with iustice 8. VVhether sinne may be redeemed by good works 447. 9. VVhether to abstaine from great sinnes be necessarie to saluation 448 10. VVhether sinne be the cause of damnation 451. 11. VVhether we must giue account of our sinnes 453. 12. VVhether the iustified commit ill p. 454. 13. VVhether the iustified commit sinne 455. 14 VVhether the iustified euer do sinne wilfully 457. 15 VVhether the widows 1. Tim. 5. did sinne in marrying 458. 16 VVhether vsurie be sinne 459. 17. VVhether all sinned in Adam 460. 18. VVhether there is originall sinne 461. Chap. 17. Of Iustification Art 1. VVhether Iustification be of works 465. 2. VVhether it be of faith onely 467. 3. VVhether the iustified be iust in Gods fight 469. 4. VVhether the iustified be cleane 472 5. VVhether sinne remaine in the iustified 474. 6. VVhether sinnes be simply forgiuen 477. 7. VVhether all the iustified be equally iust 478. 8. VVhether there is anie inherent iustice 478. 9. Whether inherent iustice can be imputed 481. 10. Whether the iustified be infallibly certaine of their iustice 482. 11. Whether pennance goe before iustification 845. 12. Whether iustificatioÌ„ can be lost 487. 13. Whether the iustified may feare to fall 489. 14. Whether iustification be proper to the Elect 492. 15. Whether we cooperate to our iustification 493. 16. Whether after iustification anie punishment remaine 496 Chapt. 18. Of life and death euerlasting ART 1. Whether life euerlasting be a reward p. 499. 2. Whether it be a crowne of iustice 501. 3. Whether it be of faith onely 503. 4. Whether all men be to be iudged 505 5. Whether eternall life be to be rendered to anie 506. 6. Whether the soules of the Reprobates doe now suffer in Hell 507. 7. Whether Hell be anie place 509. 8. Whether Hell fire be true fire 510. Chapt. 19. Of Gods law ART 1. Whether Gods law be possible 513. 2. Whether euer anie kept Gods law 515. 3. Whether anie loued God in all theâ—â— heart 517. 4. Whether Gods law be in thâ— heart of anie 519. 5. Whether we ◠〈◊〉 â— that we may keepe Gods law 520. 6. Whether the keeping of Gods law be necessarie to saluation 521. 7. Whether the law of God be abrogated from the faithfull 522. Chapt. 20. Of mans law and superioritie ART 1. Whether there be anie Superioritie among Christians 526. 2. Whether man can make laws 527. 3. Whether mans law bindeth the conscience 529. Chapt. 21. Of free will ART Whether man be free in indifferent matters 532. 2. Whether man be free in morall matters 534. 3. Whether man cooperate with Gods grace to good 536. Chap. 22. Of mans Soule ART 1. Whether mans Soule be immortall 539. 2. Whether Mans soule be the forme of his bodie 545. 3 Whether there be anie resurrection of the dead 547. THE INDEX OF THE CHAPTERS CONTAINED in the second booke CHAPTER 1. That Protestants contradict the truâ— sense of Scripture because iâ— so manie points they gaynesay the expresse words thereof pag. 549. Chapt. 2. That Protestants confesse they contradict the sense of those words which the Cathol Church long since and manie of themselues now beleiue to be the words of God p. 611. Chapt. 3. That Protestants are forced to vse violence to that parte of Scripture which they receaue p. 615. Chapt. 4. That Protestants ouerthrow all force of the words of Scripture yea contemne and deride them p. 620. Chapt. 5. That Protestants say that words of Scripture which make against them were not spoaken of certaine knowledge p. 630. Chapt. 6. That Protestants saye that manie weightie sayings of the Scripture were not spoaken according to the mynd of the speakers p. 633. Chapt. 7. That Protestants are forced to say that the Scripture speaketh ironically c. p. 640. Chapt. 8. That Protestants are forced to turne the most generall speaches of the Scripture into particulars p. 647. Chapt. 9. That Protestants limitate manie propositions not limitated by the Scripture p. 654. Chapt. 10. That Protestants change manie absolute speaches of Scripture into conditionals p. 665. Chapt. 11. That Protestants change conditionall speaches of Scripture