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
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
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
according to their order and in euerie matter I distinguish manie articles which I propose in forme of question After I set downe the expresse words of Scripture Next I bring the decrees of the Councell of Trent or the Instructions of the Catechisme of that Councell And where I find not their determinations I alledge the doctrin of S. Thomas or of D. Stapleton or Cardinal Bellarmin Against these I produce the assertions of one or manie famous Protestants directly opposite to the doctrin of the Scripture and of the Catholiks Lastly I gather together a summe of the words of the holie Scripture together with a summe of the sayings of Protestants that thereby the opposition betwene the doctrin of them both may the better appeare As for the words of Scripture Plessie of the Church c. 5. p. 145. Let them bring one text that is cleare and euident and we are readie to yeeld vnto them I bring not all which might be brought of euerie article because nether is that necessarie to my purpose sith God is as much to be beleeued in one word as in manie nether as the Councell of Arausica saieth truly will manie testimonies of Scripture auaile any thing with him to whome few are not sufficient but I bring those onely testimonies which to me seemed most opposite to the words of Protestants Nether do I proue that the words of Scripture which I cite be cleare and vttered of purpose to declare vnto vs Gods mynd of that matter wherof they treate or do of themselues and according to their accustomed acception amongst men manifestly afford that sense in which Protestants gayne saye them because al thefe points are manifest by them selues and the shifts which Protestants vse to delude them do manifestly proue them Nether also do I proue that Protestants can not at least touching the most of these Articles produce any such testimonies of Scripture which in expresse words may seeme directly and without any inference conference or exposition of theirs to speake for them as in these 260. points the testimonies which I bring do speake for vs. First because this being a denial it is of it self sufficiently proued vnles the Protestants can demonstrate their contrarie affirmation Secondly because this is euident to euerie one who See Tertul. l. de Resur c. 3. Luther de verb. Caenae fol. 389. considereth the testimonies brought by ProtestaÌ„ts which in verie few and almost no matters at all in controuersie betwixt vs and them are such as of them selues without the addition of some humane principle or illation they may so much as seeme to be directly opposite vnto vs. Which if ProtestaÌ„ts would consider they should easily see almost in all controuersies as much difference betwene our proofes out of Scripture and theirs as there is betwixt the expresse word of God and humane discourse Nether may they saye that they are not bound to proue Why Protest are bound to prooue their negatiue points of doctrin those points wherin they contradict vs because their denial needeth no proof Both because in some controuersies they are the affirmers and we the deniers as when they say that God will and worketh sin tempteth and predestinateth to sin That Christ was truly a sinner feared his daÌ„nation suffered the paines of hel the like In which questions seing Catholiks proue their denial by expresse words of Scripture much more ought Protestants by the like expresse words to proue their affirmation As also because it is one thing simply to deny or not to beleeue the Catholik affirmation as euerie Iew Turk or infidel doth an other thing not onely to denie it or not beleue it but also to condemne it as an vntruth contrarie to See Tertul. de Corona c. 2. Scripture and to auouche the denial as a truth taught by Scripture For albeit a simple denial or not beleefe need no proofe yet such a mixt denial as denying the opposite affirmation affirmeth it self to be auouched by Scripture and the affirmation to be condemned thereby hath as great need of proofe out of Scripture as any other affirmation whatsoeuer Moreouer these denials are articles of faith with Protestants and as such are put in their Confessions of faith and therfore ether ought to be proued by Scripture as other articles are or they must confesse that they can not proue out of Scripture the greatest parte of their faith which principally consisteth of these negatiue articles or denials of our faith 9. As for Catholiks for the most parte I produce the Why one Cath. saying is alledged words of one onely of the foresaied Authors because the agreement of Catholiks in matters of faith is wel enough knowne I might if I would haue my self set downe the Catholik doctrin in euerie article in the same words in which the Scripture deliuereth her doctrin of the same or perhappes haue found the Catholike doctrine proposed by some Catholikâ— Author in the verie same words which the Scripture vseth But that Protestants should not saye that it was no maruel if the Catholik doctrin be deliuered in the Scriptures words by any Author whatsoeuer or when it is done of purpose I would not set it downe but in the words of some famous Catholik writer those spoaken not of purpose to accomodate their speech to the phrase of Scripture but spoaken to declare and expresse the Catholik doctrin And here by we may see that when the Catholik doctrin is to be sett downe most plainly and distinctly by theÌ„ who best know it of it nature it requireth to be deliuered with the very same or the likewords which the Scripture vseth Whence we may also gather as I shal herafter that the Catholik doctrin is in very deed one and the self same with the doctrin of the Scripture 10. For the like cause I haue alledged the words onely Why manie Protâ—stants sayingâ— alledged of famous Protestants such as almost all were not onely writers but also Professors of Protestant diuinitie lest any should attribute their words to ignorance And some times I haue cited diuers sayinges of the same Author partly lest any should think that such words fell from him vnawares partely also because some times they contradict the Scripture in so different manners of speech as if they would that none should be ignorant therof partely also to the end that the Catholik Reader may make choice amongst manie sayings of Protestants which he iudgeth most opposite to the Scriptures words Nether yet do I feare that the multitude of Protestants sayings opposed against the Scripture may scandalize any weake Catholik for seing the Scripture most directly contrarie to them and armed with this sheild he wil no more regarde the Protestants words then so many barkings of of doggs against heauen so many cries of Ieves against Christ so many blasphemies of damned men against God And if it be wearisome or irkesom to the Catholik Reader to read all the blasphemous
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
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
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
fable that it skilleth not greatly to know how he descended into Hell that some of them eagerly impugne this article of the Creed and would haue it put out of the Creed and that some haue put it out Which is so plaine a contradiction of Scripture as diuers Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART XXII WHETHER CHRIST SVFfered the paines of Hell of the damned and the second death of the soule SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Acts 2. v. 24. Whome God hath raised vp loosing the sorrows of Christ loosed the paines of Hell Free among the dead Hell according as it was impossible that he should be houldē of it Psal 87. v. 6. I am become as a man without helpe free among the dead CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE D. Stapleton in Promptuar Quadrages feria 4. Hebdom Sanctae It is a very diuelish speech and execrable blasphemie of Caluin that Christ in soule suffered the horrible torments of damned and lost man PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Whitaker l. 8. cont Dur. sect 20. Christ suffered the paines of Hell for a time Perkins in Explicat Symboli col 679. Others so expound Suffered the paines of Hell He felt and bore the torments and anguishes of Hell This is a good and true exposition Col. 680. Those words Crucified dead and buried are not to be vnderstood of a common and ordinarie death but of an execrable and cursed death by which Christ sustained the full wrath of God yea the anguishes of Hell both in bodie and mynd De Serm. Dom. col 575. Christ bore the sinnes The anguishes of Hell in mynd and bodie Suffered the second death of the elect together with the punishment due to them so much as appertaineth to the substance thereof to wit the first and second death Parkes cont Willet p. 114. Luther Illyricus Latimer tought that Christ descended into Hell bodie and soule and there sustained torments after death Willet Cōtr. 20. q. 3. p. 1083. I will shew in what tolerable sense Died in soule Christ is affirmed to die in the soule Et pa. 1112. That Hell flames are not eternall in Christ the worthines of his person obtained Luther in Psal 22. to 3. fol. 330. Christ suffered that which we should haue suffered for sinne and which the dāned now suffer In Gen. 42. to 6. f 586. I thinke that Christ sustained the sorrows of Hell Let vs know that Christ must haue borne the paine of Hell Hutterus in Analysi Confess Augustan art 3. Christ suffered the true sorrows of hell Lobechius disp 6. p. 136. Christ suffered the punishment of Suffered the paines of the damned the desperate and damned and euerlasting paines Caluin 1. Instit c. 16. § 10. He suffered that death which God in anger inflicteth vpon the wicked He suffered in soule the horrible torments of a desperate and lost man In Catechismo c. de fide he asketh How can it come to passe that Christ who is the saluation of the world should be subiect to this damnation and Answereth He was not so vnder Was subiect to damnation it as he remained vnder it In Rom. 10. v. 6. He suffered the horrors of hell for to deliuer vs from them Beza lib. Quaest vol. 1. p. 672. He was in the middest of the torments of hell Daneus Cont. 2. p. 165. Bellarmin saieth that the onely death which Christ suffered in bodie satisfied God for our sinnes This is false For the reward of sinne is death and that is twoe fould The Suffered the separation of God from his soule first is the separation of the soule from the bodie the second is the separation of God from the soule Both which Christ suffered therefore both death of soule and bodie and that wholie for vs and not onely the death of the bodie Vrsinus in Catechismo pag. 278. To beleiue in Christ who descended into hell is to beleiue that Christ suffered in his soule the hellish torments and sorrows Polanus in Sylloge thes par 3. p. 450. Christ died the eternall death And Pareus Colloq Theol. 2. disput 5. citeth Brentius saying Christ burnt in the flames of hell More like hellish Was burnt in the flames of hell speeches of theirs are in my Latin booke ca. 1. art 22. See Rogers vpon the 3. Article of English Confession THE CONFERENCE Scripture saieth that Christ was free among the dead that he loused the sorrows of hell and could not be held of it The same say Catholiks Protestants say that Christ suffered the paines the sorrows the anguishes of hell the true sorrowes of hell hellish torments that which the damned now suffer the torments of a desperate and lost man that he burnt in the flames of hell was in the middest of the torments of hell sustained the anguishes of hell both in bodie and mynd suffered the torments of hell both in bodie and soule that he suffered the execrable death the first and secōd death that death which God in his wrath inflicteth vpon the wicked the second death of the soule which is seperation from God that he died the eternall death that he was vnder damnation ART XXIII WHETHER CHRIST ENTRED vnto his disciples the doores being shut SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Ihon. 20. v. 19. When it was late that day the first of the Sabboths Christ entred the doores being shut and the doores were shut where the disciples were gathered together for feare of the Iews Iesus came and stood in the middest Et v. 26. After eight daies againe the disciples were within and Thomas with them Iesus cometh the doores being shut and stood in the middest and saied c. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Ioan. 20. v. 19. The Euangelist saieth that Christ entred the doores being shut which words exclude all opening of any entrance PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Willet Controu 20. q. 2. p. 1079. We graunt that Christs coming in the doores being shut was miraculous because one substance gaue place to an other for a time and after the passing of his bodie the place remained whole and shut as before but not in the very instant of passing Spalatensis lib. 5. Repub. cap. 6. num 180. Christ could He opened the dores truely open himselfe the doores and streight waies shut them and in the meane time hould the eyes of his disciples that they should not see ether the doores open or himselfe enter vntill he was in the middest Peter Martyr in dialogo col 97. When our Lord would The doores gaue place enter the doores of themselues gaue place Caluin Admonit vlt. ad Westphal p. 805. But if Christ by his diuine power did miraculously open the shut doores doth it therefore follow that his bodie was infinit Beza cont Westphal vol. 1. Theol. p. 231. Caluin thinketh He opened the doores rather that the Euangelist spake of the doores shut to giue to vnderstand that of themselues they opened to Christs entrance In Ioan. 20. v. 19.
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 more by Bullinger in Hospin part 2. fol. 344. Where he saieth Who knoweth not that we are of their number who do not admit this word Substance nor euer would admit it THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ gaue to his Apostles his bodie to be eaten and his blood to be drunke that vnlesse we eate his flesh we shall not haue life that his flesh is truely meate The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that Christs flesh eaten profiteth nothing nothing at all that Christs true flesh cannot be eaten spiritually can be no way eaten that it is farre from Christs bodie to be truely eaten that Christs bodie is not exhibited in the Supper according to the substance thereof that those words Take eate are not spoaken of Christs bodie that Christs neuer gaue his bodie to be receaued the Euangelists neuer commanded vs to receaue and eate it that what is giuen to be eaten is Christs symbolicall bodie is but symbolicall bread is nothing but bread and wine onely a signe of Christs bodie that Christ gaue bread to the Apostles and not his bodie Which are so coÌ„trarie to the holie Scripture as themselues sometimes confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART III. WHETHER CHRIST GAVE the blood of the new testament to be drunke SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Mathew 26. v. 28. Drinke ye all of this For this is my blood The blood of the new testament to be drunâ—k of the new testament CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Mathew 26. vers 28. Christ professeth that what we drinke in the chalice is the blood of the new testament PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Zuinglius in Subsidio to 2. fol. 245. Christ did not giue the Not the blood of the new testament blood of the testament to drinke Which he repeateth againe And of the same opinion all the rest are who ether denie that Christ gaue his true blood to drinke as we haue seene in the former chapter for Christs true blood is the blood of the new testament or denie that the Eucharist is the testament as we shall heare art seq THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ gaue the blood of the new testament to be drunke The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely denie it ART IV. WHETHER THE EVCHARISticall Chalice be the testament of Christ SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. The Chalice was the new testament Luc. 22. v. 20. Christ saieth This is the chalice the new testament in my blood 1. Corinth 11. vers 25. This chalice is the new testament in my blood CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarm. l. 1. de Euchar. c. 11. As for the figure which they put in the word Testament I say there is none there and he auoucheth that the Eucharist is properly the testament of Christ PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Iuel art 10. sect 1. Nether was that cuppe in deed and really the It was not ths new testament new testament So also art 12. sect 16. Willet Cont. 13. q. 1. p. 595. The wine in the cuppe was not the new testament 596. The blood is not the testament Peter Martyr in Hospin part 2. Histor fol. 257. Nether the cuppe it selfe nor the liquor contained in it is indeed the testament Zuinglius in Subsidio to 2. fol. 245. This cuppe was not the blood of the testament nor the testament itselfe De Caena fol. 291. The blood of Christ is not the new testament and much lesse can we say that this drinke is the new testament howbeit it be called by this name And the reason why against the expresse word of God he denieth the chalice to be the testament of Christ he giueth l. de Relig. c. de Eucharist in these words If the cuppe be the testament it followeth that it is the true and sensible blood of Christ Oecolampadius apud Zuinglium to 2. fol. 499. It must needs be that this chalice or cuppe be the signe of the couenant or new testament not the new testament itselfe indeed Beza in Lucae 22. v. 20. edit An. 1565. Wine is called the couenant it selfe whereas it is onely a symbol or badge of the couenant or rather of that wherewith the couenant is made to wit of the blood of the Lord. In Colloq Montisbel pag. 38. I maruail that you call the Supper of the Lord a testament which seemes very strange to me The Supper of the Lord is not the testament itselfe but onely a parte of the testament that is the seale thereof The Cuppe cannot be the testament THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the chalice of the Eucharist is the new testament Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that nether the chalice nor the liquor therein contained is the new testament that nether the wine nor the blood of Christ is the new testament that the Cuppe cannot be the new testament but is onely a symbol or badge thereof or rather of the blood wherewith the testament was made That the Lords Supper is not the testament and that it were strange to call it so Which contradictioÌ„ of Scripture is so euident as diuers Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART V. WHETHER AT THE VERIE time of Christs celebration of the Eucharist his bodie was giuen and deliuered and his blood shedde for vs SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Luc. 22. v. 19. And taking bread he gaue thanks and brake Christs bodie was giueÌ„ and his blood shed at Supper and gaue to them saying This is my bodie which is giuen for you And S. Paul 1. Corinth 11. vers 24. in Greek hath which is broken as also S. Mathew 26. vers 28. S. Mark 14. v. 24. S. Luke c. 22. v. 20. speake of the blood or of the Chalice in the present tense Which is shedde CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Math. 26. v. 28. Those words Which shal be shedde for you are to be redde in the present tense according to all the Euangelists in the Greek text and the sense is which is now distributed for you and is by reall participatioÌ„ sprinkled and inwardely powred into euerie one of you PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Iuel art 17. sect 4. Christ gaue his bodie to be broken and his blood to be shedde not at his last supper but onely vpon his crosse and not where else Spalatensis l. 5. cap. 6. sect 229. saieth that the forecited words can be no way true of the present time Peter Martyr cont Gardiner col 354. But I pray you tell vs once what that is which remaineth and is broken If you say Not giuen or shedde at the Supper Accidents you wil be laughed at by children If you say The bodie of Christ you wil be blasphemous Col. 812. But who will say that Christ himselfe or his bodie is broken in the Supper Moulins in his Bucler part 2. pag. 91. Christ did not say that his blood was shedde in the Eucharist Pag. 87. He speaketh of a shedding which was not yet made but to
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
Church there is Sacrifice and offering of a cleane oblation and Sacrifice in iustice The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that there is no more Sacrifice in the Church And yet Whitaker Controu 3. quaest 6. pag. 2. 615. writeth thus Without Preisthood there is no Church And Vallada Apologia cont Episcop Luzon c. 26. No man denieth but the celebration of the Eucharist is a true Sacrifice ART XII WHETHER THERE BE AN altar in the Church SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Hebrewâ— 13. v. 10. We haue an altar whereof they haue no Christians haue an altar power to eate which serue the tabernacle Isaie 19. ver 10. In that day there shal be an altar of our Lord in the middest of the land of Egypte and a title of our Lord to the border thereof CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 24. c. 1. The Apostle Paul writing to the Corinthians when he saieth that they who are polluted with participation of the table of Diuels cannot be made partakers of the Table of our Lord by a table in both places vnderstandeth an altar PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Caluin in 1. Corinth 9. vers 19. There are no altars to They haue noÌ„â—â—tar sacrifice Beza in Colloq Montisbel p. 350. Paul maketh mention Paul speaketh not of an altar of a table of the Lord and not of an altar Ad Repetit Sanctis c. 4. I confesse there is no altar in the Christian Church And l. Quaest Resp vol. 3. In the Apostolicall writings there is no mention of an altar but onely of a table of the Lord. Peter Martyr in Rom. 11. Altars haue no place in the time of the Ghospel Herein also the Protestants doctrine is well knowne THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that we haue an altar The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that we haue no altar that Paul maketh no mention of an altar that there is no mention of an altar in the writings of the Apostles ART XIII WHETHER THE PASCHAL lambe was sacrificed SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Marc. 14. v. 12. And the first day of the Azimes when they Pascal lambe sacrificed sacrificed the Pasche Exod. 12. ver 6. And the whole multitude of the children of Israel shall sacrifice him Pascal lambe at euen CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 24. c. 1. The multitude of the children of Israel did sacrifice the ould Pasche in remembrance of their going out of Egypt PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Perkins in Cathol reform Controu 11. c. 5. The Paschal No sacrifice lambe was a sacrament but no sacrifice The same hath Plessie l. 2. de Missa c. 2. Reineccius to 4. Armaturae c. 19. The holie Bible no where Not sacrificed teacheth that the Paschal lambe was immolated and sacrificed Tilenus in Syntagmate c. 64. We do not graunt that the Paschal lambe was a sacrifice properly called yea Moises expressely denieth that it was a sacrifice Pareus in Colloq Theol. 9. disput 27. The Minor is false That the Paschal lambe was a sacrifice properly called Beza in Marci 14. v. 12. I vsed the word of Killing rather then of Sacrificing that the domesticall bankets of the Pasche might be distinguished from those Sacrifices which in the temple were done of the Preists THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the Paschal lambe was sacrificed Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that it was not sacrificed that it was no proper sacrifice that it was a domesticall banket that Moises expressely denieth it to be a Sacrifice Which is so repugnant to Scripture as same Protestants confesse it See lib. 2. c. 30. THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF the Eucharist Out of all which hath beene rehearsed in this chapter it is cleare how different an Eucharist Protestants haue from that which the holie Scripture proposeth For the Scripture and Catholiks with it teacheth that the holie Eucharist is the true bodie and blood of Christ that it is his testament that Christs flesh is to be eaten that whilest the Eucharist was instituted Christs bodie was giuen and his blood shedde for vs that the chalice was shedde in remission of sinnes that bread is a necessarie matter of the Eucharist that vnleauened bread is a couenient matter and that we must prepare our selues to receaue the Eucharist Moreouer the Scripture teacheth that there is a Sacrifice and altar in the Church and that the Paschal lambe which was a figure of the Eucharist was sacrificed all which Protestants do denie It is cleare also that Protestants do steale from the What Protest steale from the Eucharist Eucharist the trueth of the bodie and blood of Christ the nature of his testament the necessitie of bread the conueniencie of vnleauened bread to make it of and necessitie of our preparation to receaue it They steale also eating and drinking from the flesh and blood of Christ oblation and shedding of them when the Eucharist was instituted And from the Church they steale both Sacrifice and altar and sacrificing froÌ„ the Paschal lambe And thus much of the Eucharist Now of the other Sacraments CHAPTER XI OF THE OTHER SACRAMENTS ART I. WHETHER PREISTS CAN forgiue sinnes SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. MATHEW 16. v. 19. And I will giue to the the keyes Preists can forgiue sinnes of the kingdome of heauen And whatsoeuer thou shalt loose on earth it shal be loosed in heauen Math. 16. v. 19. Amen I say vnto you whatsoeuer you shall binde vpoÌ„ earth shal be bound also in heauen and whatsoeuer you shall loose vpon earth shal be loosed also in heauen Ihon. 20. v. 24. And he saied to them receaue ye the Holie Ghost Whose sinnes you shall forgiue they are forgiuen them and whose you shall retaine they are retained CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 14. Can. 9. If anie shall say that the Sacramentall absolution of the Preist is not a iudiciall act but a bare ministerie of pronouncing or declaring that sinnes are forgiuen be he accursed PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Perkins Galath 4. tom 2. The Pope challengeth to They cannot himselfe proper and iudiciall power of forgiuing and reteining sinnes Zuinglius in Art 51. to 1. Who attributeth remissioÌ„ of sinnes to a creature robbeth God of his glorie and is an idolater In resp ad Luther to 2. f. 430. These words whose sinnes you shall forgiue c. haue not that sense as if Christ in speaking theÌ„ would giue his disciples power to forgiue sinnes In Exposit fidei They cannot certifie a man of forgiuenes of his sinnes ib. f. 557. Wherefore all these things seeme friuolous I absoluethee I certifie thee that thy sinnes are forgiuen This is deceit and mere trifles Et in Hebr. 6. to 4. he saieth that Christ spooke the words cited out of Math. 18. by hyperoche or ouerlashing Bullinger in Marci 2. Men do not forgiue sinnes but teach that they are or haue beene forgiuen in Christ by faith Caluin in Ioan. 20. v.
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
it might departe from me and he saied to me My grace sufficeth the. In like sorte Abraham praied for Sodom Gen. 18. Dauid for the life of his child 2. Kings 12. Hieremie for the sauing of Hierusalem Hier. 32. and yet had no promise of that for which they praied CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. de bonis operibus c. 9. Sometime the praier is meritorious and not impetratorious as when a iust man of charitie asketh that which perhaps is not expedient for him as when S. Paul praied thrice that the prick of the flesh might be taken from him In praier is not required faith wherewith we certainly beleiue that absolutely God will do that which we aske PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Perkins reform Cathol Contr. 4. pag. 79. That which we are to aske God in praier we must beleiue it shall be giuen vs as we aske it It is a rule of Gods word requiring that in euerie petition we bring a particular faith whereby we beleiue that the thing lawfully asked shal be giuen accordingly Tindal in Fox his Acts pag. 1139. To aske of God more then he hath promised cometh of a false faith and is plaine idolatrie Idolatrie to pray for more then God hath promised Melancthon in Disput to 4. p. 487. As often as thou callest vpon God in any busines first of all thinke certainly that thy praiers are heard for the Sonne of God Vnlesse this faith goe before thy praier is vaine ib. p. 555. Let faith assure vs that our Praier for corporall goods euer heard Euerie good man assured to be heard No praier to be made with out Gods promise praier for corporall goods is heard and neuer frustrate Illyricus in Marci 5. v. 28. Euerie godlie man in praying perswadeth himselfe by the word and promise of God that in his petition he is heard no lesse then if he heard God answering with a cleare voice that he had heard him Luther Postilla in Dom. 5. post Phasca fol. 261. Who pray without a promise of God they imagin that God is angrie with them whome by praiers they endeauour to appease There God heareth not and our praeier and labour is lost Daneus in Exam. Kemnitij c. 29. We ought to aske nothing Nothing to be asked but what is promised of God but what he hath promised Caluin in Iacobi 1. v. 6. As we cannot pray but the word must goe before so must we beleiue before we pray For by praying we testifie that we hope for the grace which he hath promise Wherefore it is faith which relying vpon Gods promise assureth vs to obtaine that which we aske This is a notable place for to refute that doctrine of Poperie to wit that we must pray with doubt and vncertaine opinion of successe The like he hath 3. Instit c. 20. § 15. Confession of Saxonie cap. 22. The praier which is without faith that is where a man assureth not himselfe that God alloweth and heareth his praier is vaine Apologia Confessio Augustanae cap. de Tradition Of our praier we must be assured that it is effectuall that it is heard THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ praied for the taking away the cuppe of his passion S. Paul for taking away the pricke o the flesh Abraham for Sodom and the like and yet they had no promise nor particular faith that they should obtayne those things Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that it is lost labour and idolatrie to pray for anie thing which God hath not promised that we ought not to pray for any thing which God hath not promised ART XI WHETHER ANIE OBTAINE some thing of God for his owne or his praiers worth SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 1. Ioan. 3. vers 21. If our hart do not reprehend vs we haue We obtaine because we keepe the cōmandments Good heareth the iust confidence toward God and whatsoeuer we shall aske we shall receaue of him because we keepe his commandments 1. Peter 3. v. 12. The eyes of our Lord are vpon the iust and his eares vnto their praiers Iames 5. vers 16. The continuall praier of a iust man auaileth much CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. lib. 1. de bonis operibus c. 9. Scripture in diuers places witnesseth that iustice is required in him that praieth for to obtaine assuredly PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther Postilla in Dom. 5. post Pascha fol. 263. Whence None heard for his worthinesse it followeth that none receaueth any thing of God for his owne worth or the worth of his praier Thy worthines doth not helpe thee thy vnworthines doth not hinder thee Of the same opinion are other Protestants who denie that there is any worth in vs or in our workes THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that a good conscience breedeth confidence in God that they who keepe Gods cōmandments receaue what they aske that Gods eares are vnto the praiers of the iust that a iust mans praier auaileth much Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that the worthinesse of him that praieth profiteth nothing that no man obtaineth any thing of God for his owne or his praier worthinesse ART XII WHETHER IT BE LAWFVLL to pray publikely in the Church in an vnknowne tongue SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 1. Cor. 14. ver 17. the Apostle thus saieth of one that publikely praied in the Church in an vnknowne tongue For Praying in a strāge tongue is good thou indeed giuest thanks well CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in 1. Corint 14. v. 17. The Apostle condemneth not but approueth praier in an vnknowne tongue PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Scotica Confessio generalie We detest his Popes praiers It is detestable in an vnknowne tongue The like hath Cōfess Austria art 14. Heluet. c. 22. Iuel art 3. sect 1. saieth that it is not onely repugnant to the Repugnant to Scripture and commō sense Scriptures of God but also contrarie to the sense of nature Caluin 3. Instit cap. 20. § 33. Who can sufficiently wonder at the vnbridled licence of the Papistes who feare not to roare out their praiers in an vnknowne tongue Peter Martyr in 1. Cor. 14. vers 17. The Apostle in this his saying doth not approue the action But saieth Thou giuest thāks well because the words vttered by thee being of the Holie Ghost cannot but haue a good sense Et in ver 14. The idiots are reprehended Praying in Latin is reprehended Not to be suffered who pray in Latin Pater noster Aretius in locis part 3. fol. 21. It is manifest that a strange tongue is not to be suffered in Christs Church Beza in Respons ad Acta Colloq Montibel part 2. p. 26. Doth not the Apostle in expresse words forbidde to pray in a Forbidden tongue which is not vnderstood of those that are present THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that he who praieth in the Church in a strange tongue giueth thanks well The same say Catholiks
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
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
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
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
of Machabes which forceth all Protestants to reiect those bookes which S. Austin and other do witnesse to haue beene anciently held of the Church for Canonicall Wherefore let this be one argument Who not onely in manie and weightie articles do contradict the expresse words of holie Scripture and those spoakē of purpose that we might know the true meaning thereof touching those articles but also are forced to reiect manie bookes of Scripture whereof some euen manie of themselues and all of them the holie Church manie ages since hath iudged to be partes of the holie Scripture those contradict the very true sense of Scripture But Protestants doe so Therefore they contradict the true sense of Scripture CHAPTER III. THAT PROTESTANTS ARE FORCED to vse violence to the text of that parte of Scripture which they receaue IN the former chapter we saw how Protestants were forced to reiect a good parte of the holie Scripture now we shall see how they deale with that parte which they seeme to admit by adding to it by detracting from it by changing some words by calling others in doubt by false translating some by changing the order of others and such like dealings And let the Reader note What falsifications of Scripture are here touched that whereas Protestants corrupt the words or sense of holie Scripture for twoe ends whereof the one is that it may seeme to make for them the other is that it may not seeme to make against them I will in this and the next chapters relate onely their fashions of corrupting the Scripture that it may not seeme to make against them because these make more to my purpose which is to shew that Protestants contradict the true sense of the holie Scripture And by that which shal be saied of this their manner of corrupting it will easily be gathered what their other manner of corrupting Scripture is Let him also note that I intend not to bring all the examples of Protestants corrupting Scripture in anie kind whatsoeuer but onely so manie as may suffice to proue that they vse to corrupte Scripture in such sorte For as Tertullian obserued l. Praescript c. 38. Who meane to teach new doctrine are forced by necessitie to alter the instruments of doctrine Et c. 17. Heresie if it admit anie Scripture doth change it by addition and detraction for to serue her turne Wherefore because these words of the Apostle Rom. They adde to the text 11. v. 32. For God hath concluded all things into incredulitie that he may haue mercie on all do proue that God hath a will to haue mercie an all Beza twise addeth to the text the Pronoune Them in this manner For God hath concluded all them in obstinacie that he might haue mercie on all them Lest the Apostle should seeme to speake simply of all and not of the elect onely as Beza would Because those words Rom. 2. v. 27. And that which of nature They adde is prepuce fulfilling the law shall iudge thee who by the letter and circumcision art a preuaricatour of the law Proue that some do fulfill the law Beza addeth twise the particle If in this sorte If it fulfill the law And so of an absolute proposition maketh a conditionall The same doth Caluin the Kings and Queen Elizabeths Bible and the French Geneua Bible of the yeares 1562. 1568. 1605. and 1610. Because those words of the Apostle ad Philemon v. 14. They adde But without thy counsaill I would do nothing that thy good might be not as it were of necessitie but voluntarie proue good workes to be voluntarie and not done necessarily the French Bibles An. 1605. and 1610. adde this particle As and make the Apostle to say But as voluntarie The Kings Bible for voluntarie hath willingly Because those words Tit. 5. v. 3. According to his mercie he hath saued vs by the lauer of regeneration and renouation of the holie Ghost proue that Baptisme concurreth to worke our saluation the French Bibles An. 1562. 1568. 1605. and 1610. take away those words He hath saued vs and put them in the former verse where they make not so much against them The Kings Bible putteth a comma betwixt He hath saued vs and By the lauer c. Lest the Apostle should seeme to say that God worketh our saluation by baptisme and as Catholiks teach and not onely signifie it thereby as Protestants would Because those words 2. Pet. 1. v. 10. Wherefore brethren labour They take from the text that by good workes you may make sure your vocation and election proue good workes to be necessarie to saluation and to breed assurance thereof Luther in his Dutch Bible and in his Commentarie vpon that place tom 5. blotteth out those words By good workes And so doth the Kings Bible Beza Tremellius and other Schioppius also in Ecclesiastico c. 12. writeth that Luther in his Bible left out those words Mark 11. v. 26. If so be that you will not forgiue nether will your Father that is in heauen forgiue you your sinnes Which teach that our good workes are necessarie to remission of sinnes Because the verbe Is in the words of the institution of They change the words of the text the holie Eucharist do proue that it is the bodie and blood of Christ the Protestants of Zurich in their Dutch Bibles haue changed is into this verbe Signifieth as Schlusselburg l. 2. Theol. Caluin c. 6. witnesseth that he hath seene and read Yea Zuinglius l. de ver relig c. de Euchar. to 2. was so audacious as to write thus Thus hath Luke which Euangelist onely we will alledge This signifieth my bodie which is giuen for you For as he saieth l. de Caena tom 2. fol 274. If Is be put substantiuely we must needs confesse that the true substance of the true fllesh as Christ is present in the supper And Respons ad Billican tom 2. fol. 261. If you take Is substantiuely then the Papists haue wone A goodly excuse surely for to corrupt the holie text For if it must be corrupte it must be done for to vp hould heresie But this corruption of Scripture is so great and so manifest as Schlusselburg l. cit saied iustly This onely corruption of the words of the Sōne of God ought to driue all men from the companie and impietie of Caluinists Because the words Benediction and we do blesse in that They change speach of S. Paul 1. Corinth 10. The Cuppe of benediction which we do blesse c. do insinuate that the wine in the Cuppe ought to be blessed Zuinglius l. de Caena tom 2. fol. 294. saieth The words of Benediction and blessing ought not to be vsed in this place For commonely they vse to be taken for the word of Consecration And 1. Corinth 5. to 4. thus he writeth Thus are the words The Cuppe of thanks giuing wherewith we giue thanks is it not c. And in like sorte he hath l.
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
grosse error as also he doth in his Epistle to the Galathians If we exhort to do pennance in hairecloth and ashes because Christ saieth Math. 11. ver 21. If in Tyre and Sidon had beene wrought the miracles that haue beene wrought in you they had done pennance in hairecloth and ashes lōg agoe Caluin ib. answereth Pennance is described by the externall signes which were then solemnely vsed in Gods Church not as if Christ vrged this matter but because he turneth his speach to the capacitie of the common people If we proue that we shall haue life euerlasting for giuing all our goods to the poore because Christ saieth Math. 19. v. 21. If thou wilt be perfect goe sell the things that thou hast and giue to the poore and thou shalt haue treasure in heauen Beza ib. answereth These words of Christ declare not how life euerlasting is of it self to be gottē but are spoakē to reproue him that was deceaued with false hope of his iustice Caluin ib. in v. 20. saieth Christs answere was directed according to the To the mans disposition mans disposition Gerlachius tom 2. disput 13. saieth The Lord in the places alledged Math. 19. and Luc. 10. accommodated To men be wicked with false doctrines To mēs errors his speach to them who asked him who were bewiched with an opinion of legall iustice and Pharisaicall doctrines And againe Christ might easily accommodate his speach to those errours Illyricus in Claue part 2. tract 1. col 32. writeth thus Christ after an other manner sheweth the way to the kingdome Christ shewed one way to some an othe◠to others of heauen to the Pharise to the lawyer and to that yong man vaunting of the fulfilling of the law and in other manner vnto Nicodemus boasting of his discipline and good habits gotten by long tyme and time goodnesse of nature and free will and yet in an other manner vnto miserable sinners wrastling with their conscience with the wrath of God and their sinnes Author respons ad Theses Valent. p. 800. thus teacheth That we may graunt that oftentimes in Scripture iustification is denied to the ould and attributed to the new testament Yet According to the Iews supposition none seeth not but that this is saied of the Apostle by supposition of the Iews who like to Papists did speake of the ould testament as of the law which should giue iustice by workes And p. 813. In that Gregorie is deceaued that he thinketh it followeth out of Pauls discourse that prepuce keepeth the law which in trueth the Apostle spoake vpon supposition not as if it were indeed or could be but to shew boasting of the law circumcision and all the other ceremonies was very vaine Nor content to haue thus deluded so manie and so weightie sentences of Scripture they giue a generall rule so to delude them Caluin in 1. Corinth 10. ver 3. It is the Generall rule to delude Scripture thus manner of the Scripture when it speaketh of Sacramēts or other things sometimes to speake according to the capacitie of the hearers and so it doth not respect the nature of thing but what the hearers thinke amisse And l. de Praedest p. 713. The Scripture when it talketh of the Sacraments vseth to speake in twoe sortes If it talke with hypocrites according to their wrong meaning it deuideth the trueth from the signes The like he hath Gal. 3. v. 27. in Ioan. 6. v. 32. Daneus tom 2. Corinth 4. pag. 217. Peter Martyr in locis closs 2. c. 16. § 14. in 1. Cor. 10. Et Polanus in disput priuat 32. saieth God oftentimes Scripture calleth iust who indeed are not so speaketh according to their opinion with whome he speaketh So are they in the Scripture called iust who indeed are not iust but onely in opinion ether of themselues or of others By these and manie such like sleights Protestants vse to delude the holie Scripture which if they be admitted nothing at all can be proued out of Scripture Wherefore I thus make my sixt argument Who not onely in 260. articles do contradict the expresse words of Scripture in their cleare sense but also in manie and weightie matters are forced to say that the Scripture speaketh not accordig to her owne mynde meaneth not as she speaketh speaketh by way of graunt concession or argument according to the mynd capacitie grosse opinion error of others and after a humane fashion not according to the nature of the thing they are to be thought to gain say the true meaning of the holie Scripture But Protestants do so Therefore c. CHAPTER VII THAT PROTESTANTS ARE FORCED to say that the Scripture speaketh ironically mimetically hyperbolically and by amplification and fiction MY seuenth argument to proue that Protestants contradict the true sense of the Scripture shal be because they are forced to say that manie and most weightie sentences of Scripture of faith good workes Sacraments redemption of sinnes meanes of purchasing heauen and the like were spoaken not in earnest but ironically mimetically hyperbolically by amplification and fiction Precepts ought to be kept Ironically For if we proue that Gods commandments can be done because Leuit. 18. Rom. 10. Gal. 3. is saied Who shall doe those things shall liue in them Luther in Gal. 3. tom 5. fol. 347. Answereth I wnderstand that this speach is an ironie or scoffe If anie proue the same because Christ saieth Luc. 10. v. Ironically 26. Doe this and thou shalt liue Luther loc cit answereth I vnderstand this place in common that this saying of Christ Doe this and thou shalt liue is a kinde of ironie and mockage Poach in Schlusselburg l. 4. Catal. Haeret. 4. 301. Albeit the lawyer do inquire of life euerlasting yet if Christs answere be vnderstood according to the law that is without speaciall faith life cannot be ment of eternall life without an ironie Et p. 312. I do not denie but Christs answere may he wnderstood of eternall life not according to the law but an other way to wit ether according to the Ghospell or by ironie Againe That saying and the like may be expounded three wayes First by ironie as Luther saieth Gen. 9. and Galat. 3. Secondly according to the law c. And Gerlachius tom 2. disput 13. There is a secret ironie of Christ If we proue that the commandments must needs be kept because Christ sayeth Math. 19. v. 17. If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandments Pareus l. 4. de Iustificat c. 2. p. 967. answereth Luthers ironie about this place may be defended And pag. 969. It was a serious conference and yet that hindereth not but that the Lord might vse an ironie And Gerlachius to 2. disp 13. cit It was a serious conference and yet there is a secret ironie If we proue that an ill man may haue faith because S. Iames cap. 2. speaketh thus to such a one Thou hast faith
iustification and life euerlasting were to be gotten by workes And in Iacob 2. p. 549. he saieth that when S. Iames termeth faith that which is without workes he speaketh by imitation imitating them Faith without workes Mimetically who bragged of dead faith which is no faith as of liuelie and true faith Illyricus also in Claue tract 4. col 332. saieth that by imitation the Ghospell is called the law of faith Rom. 3. and faith a The Ghospell law of faith Mimetically worke Ioan. 6. and in like manner it is saied Make to your selues freinds of the mammon of iniquitie If we proue that those things which are written in the booke of wisdome were spoaken of Salomon because the praier to God which is in the 9. chapter can agree to no other Whitaker Controu 1. quaest 1. c. 12. answereth That might be done mimetically by imitation of the writer Salomon praieth to God Mimetically whosoeuer he was And the same saieth Rainolds Praelect 20. and. 21. As if imitations which are grounded in lyes and that in praiers to God were to be admitted in Scripture What other thing were this for Scripture but to imitate others in lyes and euen then when it speaketh to God And thus much of their Mimeses or imitation Now let vs see some of their hyperboles If we proue that faith may moue mountaines because Faith may moue mountaines Hyperbolically Christ saieth Math. 17. ver 20. If you haue faith as a mustard seed you shall say to this mouÌ„taine Remoue from hence thither and it shall remoue Caluin ib. in v. 19. answereth It is certaine that it is an hyperbolicall kind of speach wheÌ„ he saieth that by faith trees and mountaines may be remoued The same hath Illyricus vpon this place If we haue proue that almes deliuereth from sinne because Almes deliuereth from sinne Hyperbolically it is saied Tobie 4. v. 11. Almes deliuereth from all sinne and from death Vallada in his Apologie cit pag. 304. answereth This kind of speach of Tobie is hyperbolicall And Apologia Confess August c. de respons ad argum We will not say that it is an hyperbole albeit it must be so taken least it detract from the praise of Christ whose proper office is to deliuer from death and sinne If we proue that one man by his praier may procure One man procureth life to an oâ—her Hyperbolically life to an other because it is saied 1. Ioan. 5. vers 16. He that knoweth his brother to sinne a sinne not to death let him aske and life shal be giuen him sinning not to death Caluin ib. answereth If you vnderstand of man that he giueth life to his brother it is an hyperbolicall speach If we proue that God hath promised reward to good God rewardeth works Hyperbolically workes Zuinglius de Prouident c. 6. answereth These are hyperboles and hyperoches If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandements Who shall doe the will of my father c. and what promises soeuer els are made to workes Thus they deuise hyperboles in Scripture and yet Pareus lib. 1. de Iustific cap. 15. and in Galat. 1. Lect. 9. saieth I dare not say that there is an hyperbole in Scripture sith it ouerlas heth the trueth and seemeth to be a kind of lie If we proue that faith can be without charitie because Faith without charitie A fiction S. Paul saieth 1. Cor. 13. v. 2. If I haue all faith so as I remoue mountaines and haue not charitie I am nothing P. Martyr ib. answereth The Apostle speaketh by fiction for to exaggerate the dignitie of charitie Who seeth not that Paul speaketh here hyperbolically And in Rom. 11. When the Apostle Impossible Charitie extolled by fiction by all means extolled charitie he vsed a fiction for to extoll it But Luther Postilla in Domin Quinquagesimae saieth Paul brought an impossible example If we proue that faith may be without workes because S. Iames saieth cap. 2. v. 18. Shew me thy faith without Faith without workes workes Caluin ib. answereth In that he biddeth shew faith without workes he argueth from an impossible thing And in v. 17. It is cleare enough that the Apostle doth reason from an impossible thing If we proue that widdows marrying after they haue giuen their faith to the contrarie are damned because as S. Paul speaketh 1. Timoth. 5 vers 12. they haue made voide their first faith Caluin 4. Instit c. 13. § 18. answereth The Widows leese their first faith By Amplification Apostle for amplification sake addeth that they haue broken or made voide their first faith Wherefore in forme thus I argue Who not onely in so manie and so great matters contradict such words of Scripture and in such a sense as we haue seene but also in manie and great matters are forced to say that the Scripture seaketh ironically mimetically hyperbolically by way of fiction and of amplificatioÌ„ and by impossibilities they are to be thought to contradict the true sense of the Scripture But Protestants do so Therefore c. CHAPTER VIII THAT PROTESTANTS ARE COMpelled to turne the most generall propositions of the Scripture into particulars THE eight argument wherewith I will proue that Protestants coÌ„tradict the true sense of holie Scripture shal be because in manie and weightie mattie to wit of God of Christ of the Church of Sacraments of faith and the like they are forced to turne the most vniuersall propositions of Scripture into particulars For touching God If we proue that he hath a will to haue mercie on all because Rom. 11. v. 32. it is saied God Touching God hath concluded all into incredulitie that he may haue mercie on all Beza ib. answereth The vniuersall particle All is to be restrained to wit as he saieth l. de Praedest cont Castel All that is Some p. 360. All who shall beleiue The like he hath in Colloq Montisbel p. 421. and in Resp p. 216. 223. and Caluin 3. Instit c. 24. § 17. But Zanchius l. 1. de Nat. Dei c. 2. tom 2. cal 562. saieth that this place and also that other Preach the Ghospell to euerie creature and the like belong onely to the elect If we proue the same because Sapient 11. v. 24. it is saied Thou hast mercie on all c. P. Martyr in Rom. 9. answereth But it easily appeareth that these things are to be vnderstood All that is Some of the vniuersall companie of the elect If we proue that God hath a will to saue all because 1. Timot. 2. v. 4 it is saied of God Who will all men to be saued Bucer in Math. 6. answereth That he saieth All is as much as if he had saied some of all Et Idem apud Zanchium l. de Perseuerant to 2. col 343. That place 1. Timoth. 2. Who will all and 1. Ioan. 2. He is the propitiation c. cannot be vnderstood but synechdochically for manie that is for
they change into particulars whensoeuer they make against them Which is so great and so manifest an abuse of Scripture as What some Protestants thing of turning vniuersall propositions into particulars some of themselues crie out against it For thus Iacobus Andreae in Colloq Montisbel p. 418. speaketh to Beza It is impietie to exclude anie man from this vniuersall promise p. 419. It is manifest impietie and abhominable doctrine contrarie to the expresse letter to make a particular promise of an vniuersall Et pag. 421. It is horrible to heare so manifest an vniuersall proposition to be made a particular Wherefore I thus frame my eight argument Who besides the foresaied opposition to the expresse words of Scripture are compelled in so manie and so great matters to change so manie and so manifest vniuersall propositiōs of the holie Scripture into particulars they are to be iudged to gainsay the true sense of the Scripture But Protestants do so Therefore c. And the more forcible this argument ought to be against them because themselues teach That as often as there is an vniuersall proposition in Scripture it must not be limited by anie distinction vnlesse that be grounded vpon certaine and cleare words of Scripture For otherwise euerie doctrine may be deluded by subtilitie of distinctions So Gerlachius tom 2. disp 24. CHAPTER IX THAT PROTESTANTS DO LIMITATE manie vnlimited Propositions of the Scripture MY ninth argument that Protestants contradict the true sense of Scripture I will take frō thence that they are forced to limitate manie vnlimitated propositions of Scripture touching great matters as of God of Christ of the Church and the like For if we proue that God doth not at all tempt to euil Touching God because S. Iames saieth absolutely c. 1. v. 13. God is no tempter of euill and he tempteth no man P. Martyr in locis clas 1. c. 15. § 9. answereth When Iames denieth that God tempteth he denieth it not altogether but in that sorte in which those carnall Christians of his time did affirme him to tempt as if they when they sinned had not beene in fault Caluin vpon this place He speaketh here of inward temptations which are nothing but inordinate desires which prouoke vs to sinne And he rightly denieth God to be author of them Pareus l 2. de Amiss Grat. c. 8. Iames doth not remoue from God simply all temptation but onely the inward temptation and such as may make a man excusable If we proue that God willeth not iniquitie at all that is nether for it selfe nor for anie other thing because ps 1. v. 5. it is saied without anie limitation Thou wilst not iniquitie they limitate this saying manie waies as that God willeth not iniquitie for it selfe or by his word or by allowance or delighte in it as appeareth by what we rehearsed l. 1. c. 2. art 1. If we proue that God of himselfe willeth not the death of anie man because he saieth Ezech. 33. v. 11. I will not the death of the wicked and c. 18. v. 32. I will not the death of him that dieth Zanchius l. 3. de Nat. Dei c. 4. q. 4. answereth If thou vrgest the word I will not the death of a sinner and that God speaketh of his good pleasure I say that place is to be vnderstood of the elect onely Beza 2. art resp ad Acta Montisbel p. 196. That restriction of conuersion sheweth that this is to be vnderstood onely of them to whome is graunted the grace of conuersion which surely is proper to the elect Piscator in Thesib l. 2. p. 187. The Prophet speaketh not here of euerie sinner but of him onely that is conuerted But Luther lib. de seru arbitr tom 2. fol. 450. saieth God willeth manie things which by his word he sheweth that he willeth not So he will not the death of a sinner to wit by word but he willeth it by his vnsearchable will If we proue that God willeth the conuersion of euerie sinner because he saieth without limitation Ezech. 33. v. 11. I will not the death of the wicked but that he be conuerted and liue Caluin l. de Praedest p. 786. and de Prouident p. 737. answereth God is saied to will life as he is saied to will pennance and this he willeth because by his words he inuiteth all to it but this is not contrarie to his secret counsaile wherein he hath decreed to conuert none but his elect Piscator in Thesibus lib. 2. pag. 236. saieth That God speaketh there of the wicked who is conuerted If we proue that Christ euen as he is God would gather those who will not be gathered because he saieth absolutely Math. 23. v 37. How often would I gather together thy children as the hen doth goth gather together her chickins vnder her wings and thou wouldest not Perkins de Praedest tom 1. col 157. answereth I say that Christ speaketh here not as he was God but as he was minister of the circumcision The same saieth Luther lib. cit fol. 451. and others If we proue that God calleth euen the reprobate because he saieth without limitation Apocal. 3. v. 20. I stand at the dore and knock Perkins loc iam cit answereth Those at whose dore Christ standeth are the faithfull and the conuerted If we proue that God euen by inward vocation calleth the reprobate because without all limitation it is saied Math. 23. v. 37. How often would I gather thy Children And Isaiae 65. v. 2. I haue spred fourth my hands all the day to an incredulous people And c. 5. v. 4. What is there that I ought to doe more to my vineyard and haue not done to it Et Prou. 1. v. 24. I haue called and you haue refused Contra-remonstrantes in Collat. Hagae p. 245. seq limitate all these sayings onely to outward calling And Pareus l. 1. de Grat. lib. arb c. 11. to onely calling by outwarde means After which manner Protestants also limitate those words Math. 22. v. 14. Manie are called but few are chosen If we proue that men may resist the holie Ghost speaking within them because without limitation it is saied Acts 7. v. 51. You haue alwaies resisted the holie Ghost Caluin ib. answereth They are saied to resist the holie Ghost who obstinately reiect him speaking by the Prophets for here is no speach of inward reuelations which God inwardly inspireth to anie but of the outward ministerie If we proue that Christ did not teach his Apostles all Touching Christ the points of faith because himselfe saieth Ioan. 16. v. 12. Yet manie things I haue to say to you but you cannot beare them now But when he the Spirit of trueth cometh he shall teach you all trueth they limite this to rites and discipline Beza ib These words are to be vnderstood of those things which pertained to the execution of the Apostolicall function and foundation of Churches If we proue that Christ was Mediator of
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.
places alledged doth not signifie cause but consequence And Caluin Math. 25. ver cit That they insist vpon the causall particle is a weake thing for we know that not alwaies the cause but rather the consequēce is meant when euerlasting life is promised to the iust And in the same manner doth Kemnice in locis tom 2. tit de Argum delude manie places of Scripture If we proue that Christ is cause of our election by those words Ephes 1. v. 3. As he hath chosen vs in him Christ In. before the constitution of the world Piscator in Thesibus loco 19. answereth Paul would say nothing but that he hath chosen vs to this end that he might adopte vs in Christ and saue vs for him and by him Which he repeateth libr. 2. p. 288. In like sorte Zanchius l. 5 de Natur. Dei c. 2. q. 4. If we proue that Saints shall haue glorie for their worthe or merit by those words Apocal. 3. ver 4. They Because shall walke with me in whites because they are worthie Pareus l. 5. de Iustif c. 2. answereth He signifieth not the cause meritorie but the condition in holie Martyrs agreing with the rule of iustice So that we may vnderstand not wherefore but what of kind men shall walke with Christ If we proue that good workes are the cause of glorie out of those words Rom. 8. v. 17. If we suffer with him that That we may be glorifid with him Caluin ibidem answereth This forme of speach sheweth the order which the Lord obserueth in bestowing saluation vpon vs rather then the cause He discourseth not frō whence saluatiō cometh but how the Lord gouerneth his seruants If we proue the same out of those words Hebr. 10. v. 36. For patience is necessarie for you that doing the will of God you may receaue the promise Pareus l. 4. de Iustific pag. 1032. answereth We denie not but some relation of patience vnto saluation is signified by the finall condition to wit relation of order of means or of condition without which not but false it is that thereby is signified a causall relation If we proue that good workes are cause of saluation as bad are the cause of damnation because it is often saied in Scripture He will render to euerie one according to his workes According Bucanus Institut loco 32. answereth The particle According in those speaches doth not signifie cause but conformitie And Martyr in 1. Corinth 3. saieth According doth not signifie Merit or cause but rather proportion forme or similitude If we proue that virginitie helpeth to heauen by those words Math. 19. v. 12. There are Eunuches which haue gelded For. themselues for the kingdome of heauen Musculus in locis tit de votis answereth We must not vnderstand it so as if this kind of gelding helped any thing to saluation Behould Reader how manie kinds of causall propositions are they forced to make not causall and how manie and expresse causall particles to wit For To That In According Because they make frustrate to no purpose Wherefore thus I argue who besides their opposition to the expresse words of Scripture are forced in so manie so great matters to make so manie and so cleare causall propositions to be not causals and to frustrate so manie and so euident causal particles they are also cōtrarie to the true sēse of Scripture But Protestāts doe so Therefore c. CHAPTER XIII THAT WHAT IS SPOAKEN SIMPLY they make to be spoaken in parte or respectiuely MY 13. argument shal be because Protestants are compelled to make that to be spoaken in parte which the Scripture speaketh simply or absolutely For if we proue that God simply will not the death of Of God a sinner because he simply saieth and sweareth it Ezech. c. 18. Perkins in Exposit Symbol to 1. col 777. answereth This place must not be taken simply but respectiuely to wit that Not simply but respectiuely of the twoe God would rather the one to wit that a sinner should rather liue then dye Finally so farre forth he willeth not death as it is the destructiō of his creature The like he hath in Serie Causarum c. 52. And Caluin de Prouid p. 737. So farre as So farre forth he exhorteth all to pennance the Prophet iustely denieth that he willeth the death of a sinner And in the same sorte he expoundeth that saying of S. Peter 2. c. 3. v. 9. Not willing that anie should die Indeed saieth Caluin as farre as God will receaue all to pennance he will none should perish If we proue that God taketh our sinnes from vs by those words 1. Ioan. 3. ver 8. For this appeared the Sonne of God that he might dissolue the workes of the Diuel Caluin ib. In a sorte answereth But if in this life there be no full and solid regeneration he freeth vs not from sinne and slauerie but in a sorte And Daneus Contr. de Baptismo c. 14. on earth sinne is not In parte quite taken away but in parte If we proue that there is nothing worthie of damnation Of Iustification in those that are iustified because simply it is saied Rom. 8. ver 1. There is no damnation to them that are in Christ Not simply Iesus Illyricus in Apol. pro Confess Antuerp answereth No damnation is in them who are in Christ Iesus not simply and in it selfe but by accident to wit continuall praier for forgiuenesse of sinnes being adioyned And Pareus l. 5. de Amiss Grat. c 7. It is most true that sinnes are not simply forgiuen but continuall praier for forgiuenesse being added If we proue that simply there are some things hard in Of Scripture Scripture because it is so saied 2. Pet. 3. v. 16. As also in all his Epistles speaking in them of these things in which are certaine things hard to be vnderstood Zanchius de Scriptura to 8. col 412. answereth He saieth not that they are hard to Not to anie anie but to twoe kinds of men to wit to the vnlearned and vnskilfull of the Scriptures and that are not taught of God and to the vnstable that is who are not firme in faith In like sorte Bullinger Serm. 3. de verbo Dei and others If we proue that Saints haue true iustice before God If iustification because Dauid offereth his iustice to be examined by the iudgement of God and desireth to be iudged thereby Caluin 3. Instit cap. 17. § 14. answereth Saints nether will Not wholy haue enquirie to be made of them wholy that according to the whole tenour of their life they may be quitted or damned nether challenge to themselues iustice of diuine perfection but in comparison of the wicked and impious If we proue that charitie is simply greater then faith Of good workes because the Apostle simply saieth 1. Cor. 13. v. 13. And now there remaine faith hope and charitie
If we proue that God doth now cleanse vs from all iniquitie because it is saied 1. Ioan. 1. v. 19. He is faithfull and iust to forgiue vs our sinnes and cleanse vs from all iniquitie Caluin ib. answereth If anie obiect that whilest we liue in this life we are neuer cleansed from all iniustice for so much as belongeth to reformation that is true indeed but Ihon teacheth not what God doth now perfect in vs. If we proue that in this life some are made iust by the merits of Christ as by Adams demerit they were made iniust by these words Rom. 5. v. 19. As by the disobedience of one man manie were made sinners so also by the obedience of one manie shal be made iust Pareus l. 2. de Iustificat cap. 3. answereth In this life we are made iust imperfectly in the next we shal be made perfectly iust Hereupon perchaunce Luther saied Disput 3. tom 1. We thinke that a man to be iustified is not to be yet iust but to be in the way and course to iustice If we proue that faith without workes is alwaies dead because it is saied Iames 2. vers vlt. Faith without workes is dead Schlusselburg to 8. Catal. p. 526. answereth The saying of Iames touching faith dead without workes is to be vnderstood of ehe time after iustification So that he will not haue faith to be dead without good workes whilest it iustifieth If we proue that God alwaies will all men to be saued by those words 1. Tim. 2. Who will all men to be saued Perkins in Cases of Conscience cap. 7. sect 3. answereth God will all men to be saued vnderstand now in this last age of the world If we proue that Saintes in heauen aske mercie for the faithfull because they aske reuenge vpon their persecutors by those words Apocal. 6. vers 9 I saw vnder the aultar the soules of them that were slanie for the word of God c. and they cried with a loud voice saying How long Lord holie and true iudgâ—st thou not and reuengest not our blood on them that dwell on the earth Confessio Wittember c. de Inuocat Sanctorum vnderstandeth this onely of praiers made whiles the Saints were on earth In the Apocalypse the soules of the Saints that were slaine do crie that their blood be reuenged not that now resting in the Lord they are desirous of reuenge after a humane manner but because the Lord euen after their death is myndfull of the praiers which whiles they yet liued on earth the made for the deliuerie of themselues and the Church If we proue that in this life we fulfill the law doe the will of God and obey Christ by those words Rom. 8. v. 4 God sent his Sonne c. that the iustification of the law might be fullfilled in vs. Et Math. 6. Thy will be done on earth And Hebr. 5. vers 9. Christ is made the cause of saluation to all that obey him Scharpius de Iustif Contr. 12. answereth Out of these places nothing followeth but that the faithfull fulfill the law but it followeth not that they fulfill it in this life Wherefore I thus make my fourtenth argument Who besides the foresaied opposition to the expresse words of Scripture will not expound the words of Scripture on that time whereof it speaketh do contradict the true sense thereof Protestants doe so Therefore c. CHAPTER XV. THAT PROTESTANTS OF MANIE sayings of Scripture make one MY fiftenth argument shal be because Protestants are forced to confound manie sayings of Scripture in one and so make one of manie For if we proue that God will not the death of a sinner but willeth his conuersion by those words Ezechiel 18. I will not the death of a sinner but that he be conuerted and liue Caluin l. de Praedest pag. 706. answereth If as we ought to doe those twoe be read ioyntly I will that a sinner which is conuerted liue the cauill is easily refuted The some hath Beza 2 part resp ad Acta Montisbel p. 196. If we proue that God would haue al to be saued and come to the knowledge of the trueth because it is so saied 1. Tim. 2. v. 4. Beza lib. quaest respons vol. 1. Theol. p. 684. saieth Those twoe To saue and to come to the knowledge of trueth are to be ioyned that so God may be vnderstood to will that they be saued whome he will haue to come to the knowledge of the trueth So also he answereth in Respons ad Acta Montisb p. 194. And there p. 196. in the same sorte expoundeth that Ezech. 18. I will not the death of a sinner but that be conuerted If we proue that Christs baptisme was different from S. Ihons because Actor 19. S. Luke telleth that some who haue beene baptized with S. Ihons baptisme were baptized againe of S. Paul Beza ib. ver 5. saieth that these are not the words of S. Luke telling who were baptized of S. Paul but of S. Paul telling what was the baptisme of Saint Ihon. Caluin l cont Anabap. p. 415. saieth There is saied that Paul baptized them in the name of Christ then to explicate what this meaneth is added that he laied hands vpon them and the holie Ghost descended Wherefore the same thing is diuersely expressed by twoe wayes as the Scripture vseth Et 4. Inst c. 15. § 18. Luke doth not tell twoe different things but keepeth the forme of relating vsed of the Hebrews who first set downe the summe of the matter and after explane it more at large If we proue that we must be borne againe both of water and of the holie Ghost by these words Ioan. 3. v. 5. Vnlesse one be borne againe of water and the holie Ghost c. Caluin ib. answereth It is one simple sentence that we must be borne a new for to be Gods children and that of this second birth the holie Ghost is author Therefore he put water and Spirit for the same thing And in this manner they confound manie things which the Scripture distinguisheth and say that ether they be Synonimies or that one exegetically expoundeth the other Wherefore this is my 15. argument Who besides the foresaied opposition to the expresse words of Scripture are compelled to confound manie different sayings of the Scripture in one those are also opposite to the true meaning of the holie Scripture Protestants doe so Therefore c. And hitherto we haue seene how manie and what kind of Propositions of Scripture almost in all kinds of controuersies Protestants doe change and depraue and that no kind of speach can be so plaine strong and forcible as it can recall them from their errours but that they break through delude depraue all Now let vs see how they deale will the wordes of Scripture For as Tertullian saieth cont Hermogenen It is the Heretiks custome to wreste all simple words CHAPTER XVI THAT WORDS OF SCRIPTVRE WHICH signifie the working or doing of a thing
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
Rainolds thes 2. He insinuatcth the the gates of Hell shall vaile against the Church but not preuaile Caluin de Ration Concordiae The word Bodie is by a figure transferred to bread but not figuratiuely Beza respons ad Act. part 2. pag. 104. To euerie one of the baptized grace is offered but not giuen p. 123. The elect dying children are renouated but not regenerated p. 177. I did not say that the first man did sinne by Gods will but that he fell by Gods will Perkins de Serm. Dom. to 2. col 575. Christ did not properly die the second death but yet he suffered it Scarpius de Iustific cont 14. It is one thing to keepe the commandments an other to fulfill them Pareus l. 4. de Amiss Grat. c. 10. It is true that Infants doe not actually sinne but it â—â— false that they doe inclinatiuelie sinne l. 1. de Iustif c. 13. The Scripture requireth the Sacraments and pennance to conuersion and regeneration but not to iustificatioÌ„ Et l. 2. c. 3. It is manifest that we shal be iustified and we shal be made Iust is not all one with the Apostle Et c. 9. To be constituited iust is not the same that is to be made iust in this life In Colleg. Theol. 7. disp 7. It is a farre other thing for God to will that all be saued and to will to saue all l. 2. de Amiss Grat. c. 4. Sinne and the fall of Adam were neuer the same thing Voluntarie distinctions I call those by which for their Voluntarie distinctions pleasure they draw the same words into diuerse senses As when the Scripture biddeth vs loue God with all our heart then they will haue that with all the heart signifieth all kind of degree of loue so that this precept be impossible for vs but when it saieth that anie hath loued God with all the heart then they will haue with all the heart to signifie onely sincerely and without hypocrisie So Caluin in Actor 8. v. 9. Pareus l. 1. de Iustif c. 10. l. 2. c. 7. and others In like sorte when the Scripture 1. Cor. 11. affirmeth the Eucharist to be the bodie of Christ then the word Bodie is taken for a figure But when in the same place it saieth that vnworthie receauers are guiltie of the bodie of Christ theÌ„ it is taken for the true bodie of Christ And so of innumerable other words which they expouÌ„d diuersely as it pleaseth them Their distinctions which destroie themselues are of Distinctions destroying themselues this sorte Pareus l. 4. de Iustific c. 4. distinguisheth stipend into a free stipend and a due and saieth that eternall life is a free stipend but not due As if it could be imagined how a stipend could not be due Like to this is their distinction of reward into due and vndue For if it be no waies due it is no reward but a mere gift Whereupon Eucan Instit loc 32. saieth Reward properly is nothing els but which is giuen of debt Et Scarpius de Iustif Controu 15. In morall matters where there is reward there is merit Musculus in locis titul de Meritis Surely there can be no reward but in respect of merit Yea and Pareus himselfe in Prooem l. 5. de Iustific Reward properly called is due The same man l. 4. cit c. 10. addeth that iust men can fulfill the law by an inchoate fulfilling but not by a perfect Which he repeateth c. 13. as if there could be a fulfilling which is onely inchoate or begun And neuerthelesse by this distinction doe they delude all those testimonies of Scripture which teach that some doe fulfill the law loue God doe good workes and the like Which they interpret of an imperfect fulfilling louing and doing Beza in Dial. cont Heshuss vol. 1. saieth The fathers before Christ were one thing with the flesh of Christ then to come but not actually And in Colloq Montisbel p. 27. We confesse that Christ God and man was not actually a man before his reall incarnation yet we say that he was truely present to these Fathers And p. 63. I will not say that Christs bodie was not at the time Abraham For it was but not actually Gerlachius to 2. disp 17. Noë indeed was perfectly iust but not absolutely iust But as for distinctions neuer heard of before they haue deuised innumerable For as it appeareth by what Distinctions vnheard of Of God hath beene related lib. 1. cap. 2. they distinguish of God that he will sinne for some other end but not for it selfe That he willeth that is decreeth it but not willeth that is not approueth it That the hidden God willeth death but not the reuealed That he will haue all to be saued by his reuealed will but not by his hidden will or as speaketh Beza part 2. respons ad Colloq Montisbel He will haue all saued by his open will but not by his pleasure And agayne He will not the death of a sinner by his open will but by his secret will That he inuiteth all to him by words but not by his mynd That he punisheth the faithfull lest they sinne not because they haue sinned that he iustifieth a wicked man remaining wicked by the Ghospell not by law And manie other such distinctions as may be gathered out of the saied chapter c. To which I adde these Beza cont Heshus vol. 1. Alie pleaseth God not as it is a lie but as it is a iust punishement Musculus in locis titul de iustific God iustifieth a wicked man abiding such in his throne of grace not in his throne of iustice Tilenus in Syntagm cap. 46. God iudgeth iust mens workes to be good according to the Ghospell not according to law Perkins in Apoc 2. tom 2. Gods reuealed will hath with it adioyned a condition but not his secret will Touching Christ they distinguish that he is aÌ„ sinner Of Christ by imputation but not by inherence That he died for all but not for euerie one That sometime he speaketh as others thought not as himselfe That he is a lawmaker head of the Church to be adored to be inuocated can forgiue sinnes and worke miracles not as man but as God onely See more l. 1. c. 3. Of Saints they distinguish in this new manner They Of Saints wish for vs heauen but pray not we may wish that they praied for vs but may not pray They pray for vs in generall but not in particular They may be worshipped of vs after a ciuill or profane maÌ„ner but not after a religious And as Perkins saieth in Cathol reform Contr. 14. cap. 2. When Angels appeared they were lawfullie honored but not now Touching Scripture they haue coined these new distinctions Of Scripture In Paulsome things are hard not of themselues but by accident So Reineccius to 1. Arm. c. 10. In Scripture there are some things hard to be vnderstood and obscure to vs though all the Scripture
who aâ—ouÌ„d with iustice according to the doctrine of the law not of the Ghospell Scarpe de Iust CoÌ„t 1. IustificatioÌ„ effectiuely is immediatly of Christ alone but sanctificatioÌ„ is of the holie Ghost IustificatioÌ„ quitteth vs in the iudgemeÌ„t of God not sanctificatioÌ„ Et CoÌ„t 7. There is a twoefould ablutioÌ„ of sinne the first is of the guilt and this is iustâ—ficatioÌ„ the second is of the inherence thereof and this is sanctâ—fication Bullinger dec 3. serm 9. There is a duble iustice iustificant and obediâ—nt Polanus part 2. thes The grace which Adam receaued in creation was not grace which maketh gratefull Et in Disp priuat Sinnes are blotted out by pennance not causatiuely but osteÌ„siuely Riuet tract 3. sec 26. We are perfectiuely imputatiuely iust but inhereÌ„tly iust onely imperfectly Touching the law they distinguish in this new sorte It is Of Gods law abrogated from the faithfull according to rigor and imputatioÌ„ no according to obligation There is a twoefould fulfilling of the law legall and Euangelicall Mans law bindeth in generall not in particular Whitaker libr 8. cont Dur. sect 96. saieth The Decalogue is taken away in parte but not simply Caluin in Actor 15. vers 10. The commandements are an vnsupportable yoake for to be exacted not for doctrine Pareus l. 2. de Iustif cap. 7. They are heauie concerning perfection not for inchoation Reineccius to 4. Arm. cap. 13. They are light in respect of imputation and inchoation but not of perfect fulfilling Bucan in Instit loco 19. To the regenerate the law is possible by imputation of the satisfaction of Christ and by inchoation of newnesse Scarpius de Iustif CoÌ„t 12. The law is possible for outward precepts not inward in parte not in whole or by inchoation or in Christ not in our selues Musculus in locis titul de Legibus Christians fulfill the law perfectly in Christ imperfectly in themselues Polanus in disput priuat 40. The regenerate keepe the precepts of God by by imputation but themselues keepe them not Reineccius tom 4. Armat cap. 13. According to the law none is worthie before God but according to the Ghospell the godlie are worthie before God These and manie such other distinctions neuer heard What onely distinctions Protestants say they allow of before among Christians haue Protestants deuised against which at this present I obiect onelie this that themselues teach that no distinctions are to be admitted in Diuinitie which are not gathered out of expresse and plaine places of Scripture For thus Whitaker Contr. 4. quaest 1. cap. 3. That rule is much to be esteemed That in diuinitie no distinctions are to be allowed but such as are proued by plaine passages of Scripture And lib. 2. de Concupisc cap. 7. We may say and defend what we will if such distinctions be accepted Sadeel ad Repetit Sophism Turriani It is a theologicall rule All distinctions in diuinitie must be proued by expresse places of Scripture The like hath Perkins l. de Caena to 1. col 861. and others Their most vsuall distinctions wherewith most coÌ„monly Most vsuall distinctions with Protest they delude the testimonies of Scripture are these though perhaps all of them vse not the verie selfe same termes To wit Before men not before God or which cometh all to one It seemeth so but is not By this distinction they delude all those testimonies of Scripture which teach that reprobate or euill men may beleiue doe good workes be in the Church that reprobates may be iustified that good workes doe iustifie redeeme sinnes or the like Which they expound before men not before God or in shew not in deed An other vsuall distinction of theirs is In it selfe or in an other thing By this they delude those testimonies of Scripture which say that good men are iust worthie of God fulfill the law that baptisme forgiueth sinnes Almes deliuereth from death and such like which they expound in an other not in themselues as that good men are iust worthie of God fulfill the law in Christ not in themselues that almes deliuereth from death not in it selfe but in faith as saieth Confessio Augustana c. de Implet legis and that baptisme remitteth sinnes not in it selfe but in faith So Caluin in Act. 2. v. 38. A third vsuall distinction of theirs is SignificaÌ„tly not Causally By this they delude those testimonies of Scripture which teach that Sacraments worke grace Preists remit sinnes good works doe iustifie doe cause life euerlasting and the like Which they expound Significantly or ostensiuely not Causally Their fourth accustomed distinction is In parte not simply or wholy Thus they delude those testimonies which auouch that there is inherent iustice that sinners are taken away that good mens good workes are good and such like which they expound In parte not simply or wholy Their fift vsuall distinction is A saying of the law not of the Ghospell Thus they delude all the sentences of Scripture which declare that iustice and life euerlasting is to be purchased by good works that the keeping of the law is necessarie to life and such like For these kind of sayings they will haue to be onely of the law not of the Ghospell But their most vsuall distinction of all is Figuratiuely not Properly which kind of deluding the Scripture is most ample and containeth almost all the former kinds For what seemeth to be is not is figuratiuely not properly Likewise what is in parte and not simply what is not in it selfe but in another is figuratiuely and not properly Yet because this their distinction would wax stale if it were vsed vnder the same termes in all places and the vanitie thereof would easily appeare if nakedly it were applied to some places therefore at least in words and with some litle differences they haue deuided it into diuers Peculiarly by this distinction they delude all those testimonies of Scripture which teach that the Eucharist is the bodie and blood of Christ that eternall life is a reward that the Apostles are the foundations of the Church that the Ghospell is a law Christ a law giuer descended into hell that there is in the Church an altar a sacrifice and the like These forsooth are their fine plaisters which they applie to cure all the wounds which are giuen them by the sword of the word of God which if they will let other Heretiks vse in such sorte as they doe nothing at all will be proued out of Scripture Wherefore thus I frame my 22. argument They who besides their opposition to the expresse words of holie Scripture related in the first booke are forced in manie and great matters to deuise friuolous and verball distinctions and such as destroye themselues and were neuer heard of before among Christians they contradict the true sense of holie Scripture Protestants doe so Therefore c. CHAPTER XXIII THAT PROTESTANTS CONFESSE THE vniforme consent of Fathers Councels and of the Church to be against
out of the Fathers writings against vs I plainely say that I will not binde my selfe to their authoritie In like sorte they make litle reckoning of the Church Authoritie of the Churche auaileth nothing Councels For thus writeth Whitaker ad Rat. 3. Camp Can the Church afford vs no confirmation of doctrine no arguments of faith None Et Cōt 1. q. 5. c. 10. The practise of the Church is the opinion of men The sentences of the Fathers is an opinion of Merely humane men The definition of Councels is the iudgement of mē Vorstius in Antib pag. 1. saieth that the testimonie of the Church is merely humane Et p. 382. An Argument from the practise of the ancient Church concludeth nothing Protest contemne Fathers Church and Councels Not to be regarded Contemned Finally they professe to cōtemne both Fathers Church and Coūcells For thus writeth Luther de ser arb to 2. fol. 433. The Fathers authoritie is not to be regarded Et l. de Concil Twentie years agoe I was forced to contemne the Fathers commentaries Melancthon in loc edit An. 1523. I am of opinion that in matters of religion mens commentaries are to be fled like the plague Reineccius to 4. Armat cap. 15. There are Fathers who hould the same error with the Papists whose testimonies we reiect as false and fond Bullinger dec 5. Serm. 4. We answere in one word to the ancient writers of the Church whome they obiect vnto vs testifying I know not what of Peters primacie we doe not so much care what the Fathers thought Litle moued as what Christ hath instituted Caluin 3. Institut cap. 14. § 38. I am litle moued with those things which euerie where are to be found in the writings of the Fathers touching satisfaction Et de ver reform Nether care I for the sentences of the Fathers which these Moderators bring for to tread downe the trueth What to doe with Father◠Humfrey in Proregom What haue we to doe with Fathers with flesh and blood or what pertaineth it to vs what the false synods of Bishops doe decree Whitaker lib. 8. cont Dur. sect 62. I care litle for the Fathers Sect. 69. I care not what We care not What to doe with Coūcels the Fathers thought of Ihons baptisme Cont. 1. q. 5. c. 10. What haue we to doe with Churches or Councells vnlesse they shew that those things which they define be aggreable to Scripture Et l. de Script c. 1. sect 7. An argument which is taken from the bare testimonie of the Church to confirme the Scriptures or anie parte of them or anie point of our faith I say is inualide vneffectuall and vnfit to perswade Iuel in Apol part 4. saieth that Way of the Church fanaticall the way to find the trueth by God speaking in the Church and Councels is very vncertaine very dangerous and in a manner fanaticall Thus thou seest Reader that Protestants confesse that in manie and great matters the Fathers the ancient all Fathers all from the Apostles time the ancient Fathers with mutuall consent all antiquitie likewise the ancient Church the Church of the first 500. or 600. yeares the Church in the very beginning Finally generall Councells all generall Councells are opposite to them and that the Catholik doctrine doth consist of the sentences of the Fathers hath beene beleiued and receaued since the Apostles time and all deliuered by the Fathers with mutuall consent Moreouer thou seest how litle they esteeme the vniforme consent of Fathers Church and Councells yea in plaine termes professe to contemne it I dispute not now how the vniforme cōsent of Fathers of the Church and Councells is infallible in matters of faith which hath beene manifestly proued by many Catholiks writers onely I propose to the Readers consideration how much Note Protestants doe preiudice their cause in the iudgement of all reasonable men by reiecting and contemning the vniforme consent of Fathers of the Church and Councells touching the exposition of Scripture Forsooth yong mē contemne most ancient few very manie disagreing those that most agree men of meane wit or learning those that were most wittie and learned men of small diligēce those that haue beene most diligent vulgar yea profane men those that were most holie nether will admit such and so manie men now happily reigning with Christ who nether knew vs nor them so that could not be partiall ether for iudges or arbiters or witnesses sufficient of the sense of Scripture but quite reiect them as insufficient to decide this controuersie Surely hereby it is euident that the sense which Protestants attribute to the Scripture is not euidēt and cōsequently no point of faith seing so manie so learned so wittie so holie so diligent searchers of Scripture in so manie ages could not finde it For as Andrews saieth in Tortura Torti It is monstrous if among so manie eyes eagles eyes eyes dayly conuersant in Scriptures I adde eyes lightened by the holie Ghost none perceaued this sense grounded as they say must plainely If it had beene most plainely grounded I thinke some Father would haue seene through a lattise at least he would not haue denied it and taught the contrarie Yea it followeth that the sense in which Catholiks expound the Scripture is manifest seing so manie and so great Fathers haue vniformely deliuered it nor deliuered it onely but also condemned those who followed that sense which the Protestants embrace as Heretiks as shall appeare in the Chapter following I adde also that Casaubō in his epistle to Card Perron thus writeth The King will willingly graunt that now it is not lawfull No end of controuersies without the Fathers for anie to condemne those things which are euident to haue beene approued by the Fathers of the first ages by an vniforme consent for good and lawfull Agayne If the testimonie and weight of the primitiue Church be taken away the King willingly graunteth that amongst men the controuersies of these times will neuer haue an end Luther also in Defens verb. Caenae to 7. If this frame of the world shall continew some ages humane means wil be agayne set downe after the manner of the Fathers for to take away distinctions and laws and decrees wil be made for to reconcile and to keepe agreement in religion In forme therefore thus I make my 23. argument Who not onely gainesay the expresse words of holie Scripture in such sorte as hath beene set downe in the former booke but also confesse that in manie and gerat matters they contrarie to the vniforme consent of holie Fathers of the Church and Councels yea reiect and contemne it they are also contrarie to the true sense of holie Scripture Protestants doe so Therefore c. CHAPTER XXIV THAT PROTESTANTS CONFESSE that their doctrine was in ould time condemned for Heresie THE 24. argument for to proue that Protestants cōtradict the right sense of holie Scripture shal be because it is
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
away or exhaust our sinnes but leaueth thē in vs. An other end of his coming and passion was to destroie and dissolue sinne Hebr. 6. v. 6. this that our ould man is Nor destroied sinne crucified with him that the bodie of sinne may be destroied And cap. 9. ver 26. But now once in the consummation of the worlds to the destruction of sinnes he hath appeared by his owne hoste And 1. Ioan. 3. vers 8. For this appeared the Sonne of God that he might dissolue the works of the Diuel But Protestants say that sinne is not destroied in the regenerate but that it abideth and liueth in them as is to be seene l. 1. c. 17. art 5. A third end was to cleanse vs from sinne Tit. 2. v. 14. Nor cleansed sinne Who gaue himselfe for vs that he might redeeme vs from all iniquities and might cleanse to himselfe a people acceptable Et 1. Ioan. 1. v. 7. And the blood of Iesus Christ his Sonne cleanseth vs from all sinne But Protestants say that the regenerate are not cleansed from sinne but remaine vncleane impure filthie as is to be seene l. 1. c. 17. art 4. A fourth end was that we might be truely sanctified Nor truely sanctified vs. and become holie and immaculate in the sight of God Ioan. 17. v. 19. And for them I do sanctifie my selfe that they also may be sanctified in trueth Ephes 1. v. 4. As he chose vs in him before the constitution of the world that we should be holie and immaculate in his sight in charitie But Protestants denie that we are truely sanctified or holie and immaculate in the sight of God See li. 1. c. 17. art 3. A fift end was that we should follow or doe good Nor made vs to follow good workes works Tit. 2. v. 14. That he might cleanse to himselfe a people acceptable a pursuer of good works But Protestants denie that our workes are truely good and say that they are mere sinnes See l. 1. c. 14. art 2. A sixt end was that we should liue iustly and piously in Nor mad vs liue in holinesse before God holinesse and iustice before God Luc. 1. v. 74. That without feare being deliuered from the hand of our enemies we may serue him in holinesse and iustice before him all our dayes Tit. 2. v. 12. For the grace of God our Sauiour hath appeared to all men instructing vs that denying impietie and wordly desires we liue soberly and iustly and godly in this world But Protestants denie that the workes or liues of the iust are pious holie or iust before God See lib. 1. cap. 14. art 5. A seuenth end of Nor made vs to fulfill the law Christs coming was that the iustification of the law might be fulfilled in vs. Rom. 8. v. 3. God sending his Sonne in the similitude of the flesh of sinne euen of sinne damned sinne in the flesh that the iustification of the law might be fulfilled in vs. But Protestants say that the law cannot be fulfilled in vs but onely in Christ See lib. 1. c. 19. art 1. An eight end was to preach a day of retribution Luc. 4. v. 19. To Euangelize vnto the pore he sent me to preach the acceptable yeare of our Lord and the day of retribution But Protestants denie that there is anie day of reward or retribution but onely of mere bountie and liberalitie See l. 1. c 18 art 1. To these I adde that thus writeth Perkins in Gal. 1. v. 3. It is the fault of our age that all professe Christ yet manie admit not Christ but their owne deuises to wit a Christ who must be a Sauiour to deliuer them from hell but not a Lord to giue them commandements this they cannot suffer But Protestants as we shewed l. 1. c. art 7. denie Christ to be a lawgiuer or Lord to giue commandements according to Perkins admit not Christ but their owne deuises Wherefore thus I make my 26. argument Whose doctrine Nor preached reward not onely in so manie and so great points is against the expresse words of God and in their vsuall sense but also doth make voide and frustrate so manie ends of the coming and passion of Christ it doth contradict the true sense of Scripture Such is the Protestants doctrine Therefore c. CHAPTER XXVII THAT PROTESTANTS TAKE AWAY encouragements to vertue yea all vertue and in steed of them put allurements to vice and remoue the impediments thereof MY 27. argument that Protestants contradict the true meaning of holie Scripture shal be because they take away the encouragements to vertue yea all vertue out of the world and in place of them put allurements to vice and remoue the impediments thereof They take away encouragements to vertue because as Protest take away encouragements to vertue we shewed l. 1. c. 2. art 13. they teach that God careth not for good workes art 14. that he is not honored with thē art 16. that he is not appeased with them And c. 14. Art 6. that there is no dignitie or worth in them Art 7. that there is no reward promised to them Art 10. that all good workes are equall before God Art 12. and 13. that they are not necessarie to iustification or saluation Art 15. that they are not cause of saluation Art 16. Not so much as a testimonie of iustification or saluation Art 18. that we ought not to doe them Cap. 17. artic 15. That a sinner doth not cooperate to his iustification Cap. 18. art 1. That saluation is no reward or retribution Art 2. No crowne of iustice Art 3. That it is of faith onely And cap. 21. art 1. That our will is not free in morall works Art 3. That it doth not cooperate with the grace of God to good works But who can denie but that Gods fauour towards good works their worth and reward their efficacie and necessitie to iustification and saluation mans freedome and cooperation to acts of vertue and saluatiō be great spurres and encouragements to vertue Which notwithstanding all and others such like Protestants take away They take also away all vertue For first they denie to fulfill the law diuers particular vertues as faith the roote of all vertue which they say is vitious and vnworthie the name of vertue l. 1. c. 13. art 12. They take away the highest degree of Chastitie to wit virginitie c. 15. art 2. and the perfectest part of Temperancie to wit Fasting ib. art 5. and all choice of meates artic 7. They takeaway also praier for all men art 8. Vows art 14. and Eremiticall life art 15. Besides they takeaway all inherent iustice c. 17. art 8. and denie that the iustified are truely iust art 3. or cleane art 4. but retaine sinne in them art 5. Finally they take away all vertue For they teach that all the good works of sinners or of good men are sinnes yea mere sinnes c. 14. art 1. and 2. that
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
which Protestants assigne I let passe that the Lutherans say that the Sacramētaries had their exposition of the Scripture frō the Diuell and that Luther professeth that he was taught of the Diuell as perhaps we shall proue an other time at large Wherefore thus I make my 28. argument They who in so manie and weightie matters do expressely contradict such plaine words of Scripture and yet haue no infallible way to attaine to the true sense thereof must needs contradict the true sense of Scripture But Protestants be such Therefore c. CHAPTER XXIX THAT PROTESTANTS ARE FORCED to admit no Iudge in the Church to whose iudgement they will stand THE 29. Argument wherewith we will proue that Protestants are against the true sense of Scriptrue shal be because their doctrine is so plainelie against Scripture as they dare not admit anie Iudge thereof For thus Zuinglius tom 1. in Explanat artic 67. Protest admit Iudge I suffer no man to be iudge in the matter of trueth and faith Whitaker Contr. 1. quaest 5. c. 4. God hath reserued to himselfe the iudgement of religion and hath not graunted it to anie man And Contr. 4. q. 1 c. 2. There is now no infallible iudge on earth which is man Vorstius in Antibel pag. 80. We haue proued that onely Christ or the holie Ghost speaking plainely in Scripture is to be accounted this supreme iudge of controuersies of faith Pareus in Colleg. Theol. 4. Disputatio 2. The supreme iudge of interpretations of Scripture and controuersies of faith from whome there is no Appeale is is no man now nor since the Apostles nether Church nor Councell c. Lutherans in Colloq Ratisb Session 9. Proue this that besides the written law there must be an other visible iudge appointed The like saieth Academia Nemausiensis Resp ad Tournon Eliensis resp ad Apol. Bellarm. c. 14. Feild l. 3. de Eccles cap. 13 16. Moulins in his Bucler art 3. sect 6. and other Protestants commonly But that there must needs be admitted a iudge in the Church to whose iudgement we must stand I proue First out of Scripture For Deut. 17. it is saied If thou perceaue that There must needs be a Iudge the iudgement with thee be hard and doubtfull thou shalt come to the Preists of the leuiticall stock and to the Iudge that shal be at that time and thou shalt aske of them who shall shew thee the trueth of the iudgement and thou shalt doe whatsoeuer they that are presidents of the place which our Lord shall chuse shall say and teach thee according to the law and shalt follow their sentence nether shalt thou decline to the right hand nor to the left hand But he that shal be proud refusing to obey the commandement of the Preist who at that time ministreth to our Lord thy God and the decree of the Iudge that man shall die Behould a Iudge instituted in the Church vnder the law and him to be obeyed vnder paine of death Likewise Math. 18. Christ saieth If he will not heare the Church let him be to the as an Ethnik and Publican And Actor 15. When the Christians did disagree about the obseruation of Iewish ceremonies they apointed that Paul and Barnabas should goe vp and certaine others of the rest to the Apostles and Preists in Hierusalem vpon this question and all true Christians submitted themselues to their decree and S. Paul commanded it to be kept And the like practise hath beene euer obserued in the Church and they held for Heretiks who did not submit themselues to the iudgement of a lawfull Councell Secondely I proue it out of the Fathers For thus S. Ciprian Epist 55. For nether are Heresies risen or Schismes sprung from anie other roote then because the Preist of God is not obeyed nor beleiued that there is one preist for a time in the Church and one Iudge for a time in steed of Christ Loe to denie that there is a iudge in the Church in steed of Christ is the occasion of all Heresies and Schismes And S. Austin l. 1. cont Crescon c. 33. Whosoeuer feareth to be deceaued in the obscuritie of this question let him aske the Church of it whome the holie Scripture doth shew without anie doubt Thirdly because it was euer the custome of Heretiks Heretiks denie a Iudge to denie that there is a Iudge in the Church Whereupon the Donatists in Breuic Collat. say that Christ must be the iudge of this cause stirring vp enuie to Catholiks because they had requested a man to be iudge Fourthlie I proue it by reason because it is a plaine argument of an euill cause that the Patrons thereof dare not submit it to the iudgment of anie Iudge in the common wealth Besides there can be no peace in anie societie or commonwealth vnlesse beside the laws there be some Iudge who may determine matters and to whose iudgement men must stand And who denie such Iudges ether mantaine an ill cause or loue not peace but continuall braules For these and the like arguments Protestants sometime Protest sometime admit a Iudge in Words in words doe admitt a Iudge in the Church For thus Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 5. c. 4. I confesse that in euerie common wealth there ought to be Iudges who may make an end of contentions amongst men Et c. 7. God indeed hath left a Iudge to his Church but who it is now is question and debate betwene vs and the Papists Eliensis cap. 14. cit But beside the law there is need of another liuely Iudge Who denieth that Melancthon in Resp ad Ant. Bauar tom 3. We openly confesse that there must be iudgments in the Church But indeed they will haue the Scripture onelie to be this Iudge For thus Zuinglius disput 1. to 1. I will neuer admit any other iudges beside the holie Scriptures Which is in word to admit a Iudge and in effect But not in effect to denie him For the Scripture is the law of Christians and therefore not their Iudge who is to giue sentence according to the law And the Lutherans in Colloq Ratisbon sess 1. when they had saied that Scripture is the rule and square of faith afterward doe adde It is one thing to shew the Iudge◠another to shew the rule Wherein they plainelie distinguish the Scripture and the Iudge Moreouer the testimonies of Scriptures of Fathers and the reasons before alledged do proue that there must be a liuelie or speaking Iudge in the Church which is different from the law or Scripture Finallie it is fond to make Protest iudge can nether heare nor speake such a Iudge and him onely who is both deafe and dūbe and who can nether heare those that contend nor pronounce sentence nor compell them to obey it Furthermore as hath beene often saied in most controuersies betwixt vs and Protestants Scripture doth not so much as seeme to giue sentence for Protestants vnlesse it be
conferred by them and ioyned with some humane principle and brought into sillogisticall forme Whereas a Iudge must be such as by himselfe without anie helpe of ether of the parties he can giue sentence Besides the sentence of the Iudge and especiallie if there can be no appeale from him must be so cleare as no man can doubt for whether partie it is But such is not the sentence of Scripture in manie controuersies Agayne there is controuersie betwene vs about diuers bookes of which the rest of the Scripture saieth nothing Finallie before Moises the Church had no Scripture and for sometime after Christ it had no parte of the new testament and yet she neuer wanted a Iudge And as we saw in the Chapter before Protestants confesse that Scripture of it selfe is not sufficient to determine all controuersies of faith and therefore not to iudge all Wherefore we must needs haue some other Iudge For these and the like causes some Protestants seing how absurd it is that Scripture is the onely Iudge in the Church say that Christ or the holie Ghost speaking in the Scripture is the Iudge Whitaker c. 7. cit We say that this Iudge is the holie Ghost speaking in the Scripture In like sorte Confes Heluet. c. 12. Academia Nemaus loc cit Lutherans in Colloq Ratisb sess 9. and others But seing Christ or the holie Ghost is no otherwise in the Scripture then as in a signe of his will to say that the holie Ghost as he is in Scripture is Iudge is no other thing indeed then to say that the Scripture is iudge And as the King as he is in his written laws is not a sufficient iudge of the common wealth because els eueÌ„ after his death he should be iudge but besides there must be a liuing iudge who both heareth and speaketh who can heare the parties and giue senteÌ„ce So nether is the holie Ghost a sufficient iudge is in the holie Scripture Others therefore acknowledge that there must be in the Church a speaking iudge or man For thus Eliensis loc cit Wherefore we all of long time demand a free and lawfull synod Protest admit a liuing Iudge in words And Lutherans in Colloq cit sess 9. We professe that God hath giuen some power to the Ministers and Doctors of the Church to iudge of controuersies of religion Neuerthelesse in trueth they denie the verie nature of the Iudge For ether they will not admit such a Iudge as we are bound to obeyâ— as appeareth by that they denie the vniuersall Church all Pastors or generall Councels to be infallible yea Moulins in the preface of his Bucler saieth that there But not in effect can be no greater temeritie then to desire that men sinners may be infallible iudges of the seÌ„se of the law And the LutheraÌ„s loc cit It is simply and absolutely certaine that the Ministerie may erre But this in trueth is to denie the Iudge whose end is The iudge in the Church admitteth not appeale to make peace and to compose debates which he cannot doe vnlesse men be bound to obey him and all the foresaied authorities reasons which proue that there ought to be a iudge in the Church proue also that he ought to be such from whome we may not appeale Wherevpon Whitaker CoÌ„t 1. q. 5. c. 4. thus writeth I answere that those words Deuteron 17. cit are to be vnderstood of authoritie to define hard contentions and controuersies as Ecclesiasticall by the Minister and politicall by the Magistrate that there might be in both some from whome there should be no appeale els there would be no end of contending But this he meaneth onely in the Nether in outward nor inward Courte externall or outward courte not in the inward courte of conscience For thus he addeth A great weight of iudgement was in the Priest and what he had once determined was good in the externall courte that so controuersies and debates might be ended And Cont. 4. q 1. cap. 2. Controuersies may be brought to the externall Courte and there defined but conscience resteth not in that Courte But this shift is easilie refuted First because the distruction of the externall Courâ—e is without cause deuised in this matter Secondlie because the peace of the Church especially consisteth in the internall courte to wit in faith Wherefore in this Courte we may not appeale from the Iudge of the Church otherwise there would neuer be peace of conscience Thirdly the practise of the Church in the Councell of the Apostles and in other generall Councels sheweth that the Iudge of the Church hath power to end controuersies euen in the inward courte of conscience Finallie if one were bound to obey the iudgement of the Church in the outward Courte and not in the inward it would follow that sometimes he were bound to denie Gods trueth before men to wit if the Church should define against Gods trueth Besides the authoritie of the Church is spirituall and ouer the soule and therefore her power of iudging extendeth it selfe euen to the inwarde Courte of the â—oule Wherefore let this be our 29. argument Whose doctrine in manie and weightie matters doth so contradict the expresse words of Scripture as they dare not admit anie Iudge in the Church they are to be thought to contradict the true sense of the Scripture But such are Protestants Therefore c. CHAPTER XXX THAT PROTESTANTS DOE SOMEtimes confesse that their doctrine doth contradict the holie Scripture THE last proof which we will make to shew that Protestants doe contradict the true sense of Scripture shal be taken from their owne confession wherewith sometimes they confesse it implicitlie sometimes plainelie and expressely Implicitly they confesse it diuers wayes First because they acknowledge that they Protest cannot reconcile their doctrine with the Scripture know not how to reconcile their doctrine with the holie Scripture Luther de seru arbit to 2. fol. 466. How this is iust that he God condemneth those that deserue it not is now incomprehensible yet it is beleiued till the Sonne of man be reuealed Et f. 486. In the light of grace it is vnanswerable how God condemneth him who with all his power can doe nothing but sinne and be guiltie Here both the light of nature and the light of Grace teach that it is not the fault of wretched man but of vniust God Et to 1. f. 390. It is a wonderfull probleme that God rewardeth iustice which himselfe reputeth iniustice Melancthon in Rom. 9. edit 1. This misterie is inexplicable that God both willeth sinnes and yet truelie hateth them Peter Martyr in locis Class 1. c. 16. § 9. It is no meruaile that we cannot vnderstand how it is not contrarie to Gods iustice to punish sinnes and by tempting to enforce them because God can doe more then we can vnderstand Caluin 1. Institut capit 18. § 3. By reason of the weaknesses of our vnderstanding we doe not
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
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
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