v. 5. he was wounded for our transgressions and it followeth he was broken for our iniquities and againe the chasticement of our peace was vpon him and with his stripes are wee healed verse 6. the Lord hath laied vpon him the iniquities of vs all verse 8. For the transgression of my people was he plagued v. 10. he shall make his soule an offering for sinne v. 11. he shall beare their iniquities v. 12. he bare the sinnes of many and praied for the transgressors what could be more euidently expressed or how in more full and effectuall tearmes could the force and efficacie of Christs death redeeming and iustifying vs from our sinnes be described 3. Controv. Against the enemies and adversaries to the Scriptures the Marcionites Libertines with others v. 4. Whatsoeuer is written c. Those heretikes which impugne the Scriptures doe either condemne them as vnnecessarie or of no vse or reiect them as superfluous for such as are perfect or hold them as defectiue and imperfect and such as haue neede of other helps and supplies the first are the Manichees and Marcionites which condemne the bookes of Moses and the old Testament the second the Libertines which doe cleaue vnto their fantasticall dreames which they call revelations and say the Scriptures are onely for such as are weake the third are the Romanists which doe beside the Scriptures receiue many traditions which they call verbum Dei non scriptum the word of God not written which they make of equall authoritie with the Scriptures 1. Against the first Origen in his commentarie here sheweth how the things written aforetime in the old Testament were written for our learning and giueth instance of these places Thou shalt not muzle the mouth of the oxe c. which S. Paul applieth to the Ministers of the Gospel 1. Cor. 9. and that allegorie of Abrahams two sonnes the one by a free woman the other by a bond which S. Paul expoundeth of the two testaments Gal. 4. and that of Manna and the rocke which signified Christ 1. Cor. 10. by this induction Origen confuteth those heretikes which refused the old Testament 2. The Libertines also and Anabaptists are confuted which thinke the Scriptures serue onely for the weake seeing the Apostle who counteth himselfe among the strong v. 1. here saith whatsoeuer is written is written for our learning the Apostle confesseth that he among the rest receiued instruction and learning from the Scriptures Those then are impudent and shamelesse creatures which doe take themselues to be more perfect then S. Paul as needing not the helpe of the Scriptures 3. Our adversaries the Papists are here in an other extreame for as the Libertines allow the Scriptures onely for the vse of the simple so they contrariwise denie them to the simple and vnlearned and challenge a propertie in them onely to themselues that are professed among them of the Clergie and to such other to whome they shall permit the reading of the Scriptures But S. Paul here writing to the whole Church of the beleeuing Romans both learned and vnlearned both Pastors and people saith generally they are written for our learning and so our blessed Sauiour speaking vnto the people of the Iewes saith Search the Scriptures Ioh. 5.39 And as for that other part of Pharisaicall leauen in adding vnwritten traditions beside the Scriptures it is also reiected by warrant of the Apostles words here whatsoeuer things are written are written for our learning things then not written are not for our learning as hauing no certentie nor foundation And S. Paul els where setting forth the manifold vse and profit of the Scriptures addeth That the man of God may be absolute and made perfect c. 1. Tim. 3.17 if perfection of knowledge and to euery good worke may be attained vnto out of the Scriptures all other additions are superfluous See further hereof Synops. Centur. 1. err 12. 4. Controv. Of the authoritie of the Scriptures that it dependeth not vpon the approbation or allowance of the Church Whatsoeuer is written c. From hence also may be confuted an other point of Popish doctrine that the Scriptures receiue their authoritie and allowance from the Church for the word of God in the Scriptures is sufficient of it selfe and we doe beleeue the Scriptures because we are perswaded by the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures that they are the word of God 1. For if the Scriptures should receiue their authoritie from the Church then it would follow that God must submit himselfe to the iudgement and approbation of men and the Prophet Dauid saith Euery man is a lyer can they then which are natura mendaces lyers by nature giue approbation and authoritie to the truth and further seeing faith commeth by hearing of the word of God Rom. 10.17 and the faithfull are begotten by the immortall seede of Gods word as the holy Apostle Saint Peter saith how can they that are begotten beget credite and authoritie vnto that which first begat them 2. We graunt that there are certaine motiues and externall inducements to prepare vs to this perswasion of the Scriptures that they are the word of God as 1. That they were written by Prophets which were stirred vp of God and inspired with his spirit for how otherwise could plaine and simple men as Amos that was a keeper of cattel the Apostles that were fisher men be made able to such great workes 2. they were confirmed by miracles 3. the predictions of the Prophets as of Daniel and the rest were fulfilled in their time and place but God onely can foretell and foreshew things to come 4. Beside the Scriptures haue beene miraculously preserued as the bookes of the Law in the time of the captiuitie and vnder the tyrannie of Antiochus that committed them to the fire so since both the old and new Testament haue beene by impious Tyrants as Iulian the Gothes and Vandales sought for to be vtterly extinguished but yet God hath preserued them whereas many humane writings of Philosophers Historiographers and others haue perished by fire as when Ptolomes librarie was burned at Alexandria and by other casualities 5. adde hereunto the consent of all nations that haue receiued the Christian faith who with one consent haue acknowledged the Scriptures for the word of God All these and such other motiues may be inducements vnto vs at the first to receiue the Scriptures but the full perswasion is wrought in vs by the spirit of God in the reading and learning of the Scriptures themselues that we may say touching these motiues as the Samaritanes did vnto the woman that called them to see Christ that they beleeued him not so much vpon her report as for that they had heard him themselues Ioh. 4. 3. But that saying of Augustine will be obiected Evangelio non crederem nisi Ecclesiae Catholicae me commoverit authoritas I had not beleeued the Gospel if the authoritie of the Catholike Church had not mooued mee I answer
vnsound opinion 1. Bellarmine thus reasoneth that the Apostles did reach the Church at the first without Scriptures therefore they are not simply necessarie but onely for the greater profit of the Church like as an horse is necessarie for ones iourney for his more speedie trauaile but not simply necessarie because he may go a foot Bellar. l. 4. de verb. c. 4. Contra. 1. True it is that the writing of the Scriptures are not simply necessarie in respect of God for he by his absolute power could find a way to teach his Church otherwise but in respect of Gods ordinance which hath appointed the Scriptures for edifying of his Church they are necessarie as bread is necessarie for mans sustentation though God can nourish and maintaine life without bread 2. It is not true that the Apostles did teach without Scriptures for they had the prophetical writings first and afterward their owne and while the Apostles themselues were liuing and present the writing of the Gospel was not so necessarie as afterward 3. The writing then of the Gospel was necessarie 1. both in respect of that age present for the preuenting and stay of heresies which might be more strongely resisted and gainesayed by an euident and extant rule of faith 2. in regard of those Churches to whom the Apostles preached not by liuely voice it was necessarie that they should haue some perfect direction by writing 3. and that the ages also to come might haue a rule of their faith Arg. 2. The Church may as well now be instructed without the Scriptures as it was for the space of 2000. yeares before the lawe was written Bellar. ibid. Contra. 1. In the first age of the world the light of nature was not so much obscured as afterward when the law was written and therefore the argument followeth not the Scriptures were not necessarie then therefore not now 2. because the old world wanted the Scriptures to direct them that was the cause why they were giuen ouer generally to all kind of prophanenesse and therefore to preuent the like mischiefe afterward the Lord thought good to giue his written word to his Church Argum. 3. The Apostles did preach much more then they did write and many things they deliuered to the Church by tradition so that not the Scriptures by themselues are a totall rule and direction of the faith but partiall together with the traditions and ordinances of the Church Contra. 1. The Apostles did indeed speake more then they did or could write but yet they preached the same things and deliuered no other precepts concerning faith and manners but the same which they committed to writing 2. many things concerning orders and especially in particular Churches the Apostles left by tradition but no other precepts and rules of faith then they had written 3. The Scriptures are no partiall but a totall and perfect rule of faith for mensura adaequata esse debet mensurate the measure must be equall vnto that which is measured it must neither be longer nor shorter if then the Scripture should come short of faith it were no perfect rule nay it were no rule at all Pareus Now on the contrarie that the Scriptures are necessarie thus it is made plaine 1. From the author the Prophets and Apostles did write by the instinct of the spirit but the spirit mooueth not to any vnnecessarie or superfluous worke 2. from the office of the Apostles which was to teach all nations Matth 28.19 which seeing they could not doe in their owne persons it was necessarie that they should preach vnto them by their writings 3. from the ende and vse of the Scriptures 1. whether for instruction in doctrine for all Scriptures are written for our learning Rom. 15.4 or direction vnto vertuous liuing or decision of Questions and confuting of errors it was necessarie that the Scriptures should be writen to these vses as the Apostle sheweth 1. Timoth. 3.16 that the man of God may be perfect The Scriptures then were necessarie to be extant for the aforesaid purposes in so much that the Apostle saith if any Angel from heauen doe preach any other Gospel c. let him be accursed whereupon Chrysostome saith Paulus etiam Angelis de coelo descendentibus proponit Scripturas Paul euen propoundeth the Scriptures to the Angels descending from heauen in Galat. c. 1. 6. Morall observations 1. Observ. Of the happinesse of these times vnder the Gospel in comparison of the former times vnder the Lawe In that the Lord hath clearely manifested and opened vnto his Church by Iesus Christ the high mysteries which lay hid before therein appeareth the singular loue of God to his Church and the great preheminence which the faithfull now haue in comparison of the people of God vnder the Law as our Sauiour saith vnto his Apostles Blessed are your eyes for they see and your eares for they heare for verily I say vnto you that many Prophets and righteous men haue desired to see those things which you see and could not see them c. Matth. 13.16 17. the vse hereof is to stirre vs vp vnto thankefulnesse vnto God for this so great mercie shewed vnto his Church 2. Observ. The dangerous estate of those which are found to be contemners of the Gospel and Newe Lawe The greater light is reuealed and the more knowledge that men haue the greater obedience doth God looke for at their hand disobedience then now vnto the Gospel of truth is so much more greiuous then was transgression vnder the law as the times of light and knowledge in brightnesse exceede the dayes of ignorance and blindnesse thus the Apostle reasoneth the night is past and the day is at hand let vs therefore cast away the workes of darkenesse and put on the armour of light Rom. 13.12 So also Hebr. 2.2 the Apostle saith if the word spoken by Angels was stedfast and euerie transgression c. receiued a iust recompence of reward how much more if we neglect so great saluation c. More special obseruations vpon the whole Epistle 1. The Argument and Methode of S. Pauls epistles in generall and specially of this Epistle 1. Nicephorus lib. 2. c. 34. maketh the end and scope of Saint Paules Epistles to consist in these two things 1. that the Apostle what he preached beeing present he committed to writing to put them in memorie when he was absent 2. And that which he did more obscurely deliuer by word of mouth or passed ouer in silence he did in his writings handle and set forth more fully and plainely But the Apostle had diuerse other occasions offred him in his epistles then fell out in his sermons and therefore it is to be thought that although his sermons and writings agreed in the substance of doctrine yet he as occasion did mooue him in his epistles otherwise handleth matters then he did in his preaching 2. His Epistles then may be reduced to these fiue kinds 1. Some belong vnto doctrine wherein he layeth
seemed rather to be common brothelhouses Gualter Controv. 2. The Church not alwaies visible and consisting of multitudes v. 5. The Apostle saluteth the Church which was in the house of Aquila and Priscilla so also he maketh mention of the Church in Philemons house Phil. 2. whereby it is euident that the name of a Church agreeth euen vnto a fewe gathered together in Christs name as our Blessed Sauiour promiseth that where two or three are gathered together in Christs name he will be in the middes of them Matth. 28. We must not then looke alwaies to finde out a Church by the outward pompe and glorie of it or by the multitude and great troupes and number of people as the Romanists make these the notes and markes of the Church see further Synops. Cent. 1. err 18.19 Controv. 3. All doctrine is to examined by the Scriptures Whereas the Apostle v. 17. willeth the Romanes to take heede of those which cause divisions contrarie to the doctrine which they had receiued the Rhemists giue this corrupt glosse in their annotations tht he biddeth them not to examine the case by Scriptures but by their first forme of faith and religion deliuered to them before they had or did reade any booke of the newe Testament Contra. 1. The doctrine which had beene preached among the Romanes was agreeable to the old Scriptures though there had beene yet no bookes of the newe Testament extant as S. Paul professeth that he said none other things then Moses and the Prophets did say should come Act. 26.22 and therefore the brethen of Berca are commended Act. 17.11 for searching the Scriptures and examining the Apostles doctrine thereby 2. yet it is verie probable that some of the Gospels were written at this time as Ieraeneus l. 3. c. 1. thinketh that S. Matthewes was and Hierome in catalog S. Markes 3. but it followeth not before the Scriptures were written they receiued their doctrine and faith by tradition when they had immediate direction from the Apostles therefore now when the Sriptures of the old and newe Testament are extant and no Apostles to direct the Church who were priuiledged not to erre we should leaue the written word of God and flee vnto vnwritten traditions Origen hath here an excellent saying vide quam prope periculis fiunt hi qui exerceri in divinis Scripturis negligunt ex quibus solis huinsmodi examinationis agnoscenda discretio est see how neere they are vnto danger which neglect to be exercised in the diuine Scriptures out of the which onely this examination is to be discerned and acknowledged Controv. 4. That Papists not Protestants serue their owne bellie Whereas the Apostle giueth this as a note of false teachers and seducers that they seeke rather to serue their bellie then Iesus Christ v. 18. our vnkind countreymen the Rhemists doe glaunce here at Protestants whom they falsely and blasphemously call heretikes That they seeke onely their owne profit and pleasure what soeuer they pretend But it is as cleare as the Sunne that they here take themselues by the nose and that they are the heretikes if euer any that serue their bellie and are cunning kators for their kitchin They may remember what Erasmus answear was to the Duke of Saxonie when he was asked his opinion of Luther that he medled with two dangerous things the Popes crowne and the Monkes belly witnesse also that pitifull complaint and supâ—â—icatioÌ„ of certaine Monkes to Henry the second that whereas they had before 13. dishes of meate allowed them to a messe their Bishop cut off three of them And are the friers of these dayes thinke you more sparing and pinching of their bellie let that factious crue of those makebates the trayterous Iudasites rather then Iesuites speake who in few yeares at la-flesh in Fraunce beside the sumptuous building of their Colledge which cost an 100. thousand crownes bestowed as much in their revennue a reasonable proportion to keepe a fat table and to fill their bellies Controv. 5. That Protestants are no schismatikes Whereas the Apostle giueth a double caueat v. 17. concerning seducers and false teachers that first they must be examined and obserued how they do bring in strange and nouell doctrine contrarie to the receiued truth and then they must be avoided and declined this doth iustifie the departure of the Protestants from the Church of Rome because it is a false and Antichristian Church and hath fallen away and played the Apostata from the faith of Christ and therefore we are to leaue them according to S. Pauls rule Tit. 3.11 A man that is an heretike after the first and second admonition avoid Controv. 6. Why the Gospel was kept secret so many yeares vnder the kingdome of Antichrist against the obiection of the Papists v. 25. By the revelation of the mysterie which was kept secret from the beginning of the world whereas the Papists obiect against the Protestants where was your Gospel 60. or 70. yeares agoe how commeth it to passe that it was so long kept secret and hid in the world is it like that God would haue his truth so long coÌ„cealed Herevnto we answear that as the Gospel of Christ was a long time folded vp in a mysterie till Christ came but then reuealed at Gods own appointment So it pleased God that the Gospel once preached to the world being by mens vnthankfulnes obscured shold liehid as a punishmeÌ„t of their ingratitude that loued lies rather then the truth yet should againe for the gathering together of the elect be revealed vnto the world at such time as seemed good vnto our gracious God Contr. 7. Against the Popish doxologie ascribing glorie with Christ vnto the virgin Marie v. 27. To God onely wise be glorie thorough Iesus Christ c. This was the holy vse of the Apostles to conclude with giuing praise to God only through Iesus Christ we may then iustly wonder at the superstitious impietie audacious presumption of the Romanists which vse a contrary stile ioyning Christ and the Virgin Marie together in their doxologies as Tolet thus concludeth his commentarie vpon this epistle sit gloria omnipotenti Deo gloriosâ—ssima mâ—tri eius glorie be to the omnipotent God and to his most glorious mother so Pererius concludeth laus Deo Dei genetrici semper virgini Mariae praise be to God and to the mother or bringer forth of God the euer virgin Marie And before him Bellarmine thus shutteth vp his controversiall disputes Praise be to God and to the Virgin his mother Marie But this superstitious doxologie of Papists may thus be refelled 1. the Creator and the creature are not to be coupled or sorted together in any religious act as it is in the Psalme 115. 1. not vnto vs Lord c. but vnto thy name giue the praise and S. Paul thus writing Rom. 1.25 who serued the creature rather then the Creator who is blessed for euer denieth all such praise and blessing to be done vnto
those which beleeue vnto vnbeleeuers therefore they doe not appertaine Pareus But it will be further obiected that the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 11.27 that he which eateth and drinketh vnworthily shall be guilty of the bodie and blood of Christ but they could not be guilty vnlesse they were partakers Answ. It doth not followe one may be guiltie of a thing which he is not partaker of as many may be guilty of violating the princely maiestie which had no interest therein neither were partakers thereof so then the wicked and vnbeleeuers are guilty non manducati sed non dâ—â—dicati corporis c. not of the eating but of not discerning the Lords bodie Gryneus Controv. 4. That the Romane Church hath not the promise of the perpetuall presence of Gods spirit The Romanists alleadge this place for themselues that the vnbeleefe of some make not the promises of God of no effect and therefore seeing the Lord hath promised to be present with and to giue his spirit to his Church they cannot faile thereof notwithstanding their sinnes and corruptions Answ. Christ promised the presence of his spirit to his disciples they must then first prooue themselues to be the disciples of Christ in following his doctrine and keeping his word in adding nothing thereto nor decreeing any thing against it before they can haue any interest in this promise God indeede hath promised to be present with his Church but a companie of mitred Bishops following humane traditions and leauing the word of God doe not make the true Church of Christ Martyr Controv. 5. The Virgin Marie not exempted from sinne v. 10. There is none that is righteous no not one Chrysostome handling these words in his commentarie vpon the 13. Psalme giueth instance how that when Christ was crucified this saying was then most of all verified that there was not one that did good discipuli omnes fugerunt c. all the disciples fledde Iohn went away Peter denied Mariae animam gladius dubitationis incredulitatis pervasit and a sword of doubtfulnesse and vnbeleefe did pierce the soule of Marie c. the like is affirmed by Chrysostome hom 49. in Genes and by Origen hom 17. in Luc. and by Augustine lib. question veter nov Testam qu. 73. But Pererius refusing the iudgement of these fathers confidently affirmeth that the Virgin Marie fuisse expertem omnis peccati etiam minimi levissimi per omnem vitam was free from the least and lightest sinne all her life and of Chrysostome he is bold to say veritatis pietatis terminos excessisse that he exceeded the bounds of veritie and pietie Perer. 〈◊〉 6. numer 33. Contra. But Pererius in thus affirming will make not Chrysostome onely and other ancient writers liers but Christ himselfe and his blessed mother for if Mary were without the least sinne why did our Blessed Saviour reprooue her for taking so much vpon her saying Iohn 2.4 Woman what haue I to doe with thee would he checke her without any fault and againe Marie her selfe saith in her song Luk. 2.47 My spirit reioyceth in God my Sauiour what needed she a Sauiour if she were free from sinne see further hereof Synops. Centur. 2 â—â—â— 79. Controv. 6. The reading of Scripture is not to be denied vnto any v. 10. As it is written c. in that the Apostle alleadgeth testimonies of Scripture to prooue all men to be sinners thereupon appeareth the necessitie of the reading of Scripture 〈◊〉 of the generall vse for all both laymen and others for by the Scriptures commeth the knowledge of sinne which concerneth all Chrysostome in his homilie of Lazarus and the rich man exhorteth all men to reade the Scriptures euen such as did trade in the world and kept families further shewing that they could not attaine vnto saluation vnlesse both day and night they were conuersant in the Scriptures yea he affirmeth that such of the common sort had more neede to reade the Scriptures then men of more holy life quod perpetus versantur in maiori discrimine because they are conversant in greater danger Here then that corrupt vsage of the Romane Church is to be taxed who denie the generall vse of the Scriptures vnto the people neither doe permit them to reade them shutting the Scriptures vp in an vnknowne language Martyr Controv. 7. Against the adversaries of the Lawe the Marcionites and other heretikes v. 20. By the lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne hereupon those wicked heretikes tooke occasion to speake against the lawe malaradix lex c. the law then is an euill root and an euill tree by the which commeth the knowledge of sinne to this Origen vpon this place answeareth well non dexit ex lege agnitio peccati sed per legem vt scias non ex ipsa â—tum sed per ipsam cognitum he saith not of the lawe is the knowlede of sinne but by the lawe to knowe that sinne did not spring of it but is onely knowne by it As physicke by the which we come to haue the knowledge of our diseases is not therefore euill thus Origen Controv. 8. Against the Counsels of perfection v. 19. That euerie mouth may be stopped c. here the opinion of the Romanists is euidently conuinced that beside the precepts which are commanded there are Euangelicall counsels which are more then one is bound to doe notwithstanding he that doth them is worthie of a greater reward such are these counsels of perfection as they call them â—â— vowe single life to giue all to the poore and to take vpon them voluntarie pouertie and such like and Origen hath the like conceit who in his commentarie vpon this third chapter giueth this corrupt glosse vpon these words of our Sauiour Luk. 17.10 When ye haue done all these things which are commanded you say we are vnprofitable seruants as long as a man saith he doth that which he is bound to doe he is an vnprofitable seruant si aâ—â—m addas aliquid praeceptis iam non eris invtilis servus but if you adde any thing to the precepts then are you no longer an vnprofitable seruant Contra. 1. Concerning Origens glosse we haue as great libertie to refuse it as Pererius had before to reiect Chrysostomes opinion concerning the Virgin Marie and to accuse him of falshood and impietie especially seeing that his glosse corrupteth the text for if we cannot doe those things which are commanded much lesse beside the commandement can any doe more then is required 2. the Apostle here in saying That euerie mouth may be â—â—ped ouerthroweth this arrogant and presumptuous opinion of such counsels of perfection for then a man should haue wherein to reioyce if he could doe more then is commanded and his mouth would not be stopped Controv. 9. Against the Pelagians which established freewill Augustine c. 9. lib. de spirit liter handling these words confuseth that presumptuous error of the Pelagians who affirme that the lawe onely sheweth what should be
them a way into heauen not to descend to suffer death and deliuer them from hell 2. There is not then any question remaining in the faithfull of their saluation either debitando by doubting how they shall goe to heauen or trepidando in beeing afraid of hellâ— but because our faith is not here perfect there may be some strife and wrastling in the soule betweene the assurance of faith and carnall infirmitie sometime the faithfull may aske question luctando in wrestling and striving against carnall distrust saying if God be with vs who can be against vs but at the length faith prevayleth and triumpheth resoluing that with the Apostle who shall separate vs 3. But here we must make a difference of feare faith expelleth not all feare but onely the slauish and seruile feare of hell and damnation ioyned with distrust and torment of conscience yet a filiall feare and reverent awe of God remaineth in the servants of God which is chiefely for the time past they feare to offend so gracious a God and mercifull a father they feare not for the sinnes alreadie committed which they are assured are forgiues â—â— Christ. 4. And this assurance and firme perswasion of saluation the Apostle insinuateth afterward where he speaketh in the second person to euerie faithfull person If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth c. thou shalt be saued signifying thus much that euerie one examining himselfe by the beleefe of his heart and confession of his mouth may vndoubtedly conclude that he is saued This maketh against the Popish vncertaintie and doubting of saluation Whereof see more Synops. Controv. 5. Against vnwritten traditions v. 8. This is the word of faith which we preach c. The Apostle here sheweth that the Gospel which he preached was agreeable to the Scriptures he preached no other thing then he here writeth and he writeth nothing but was consonant to the old Scriptures as Ireneâ— thus testifieth per Apostolos Evangelium pervenit ad nos c. by the Apostles the Gospell came vnto vs which they then preached but afterward by the will of God in the Scriptures they deliuered fundamentum columnam fidei nostra the foundation and piller of our faith c. lib. 3. c. 1. The Romanists then may be ashamed to flie vnto that vile and base refuge of the old Manichees to say that the Apostles preached some things and committed other to writing See Synops. Controv. 6. Against freewill v. 8. The word is neere thee c. Erasmus in his defense of freewill against Luther vrgeth this place to shew the power and strength of freewill in keeping the commandements and he presseth those other words of Moses non est suprate it is not aboue thee that is beyond thy strength Contra. 1. But the Latine translator there fayleth in the rendring of the right sense of the words which are is not hid from thee not which is not aboue thee 2. he speaketh of the facilitie of the commandements not by the power of freewill but by faith in Christ who hath fulfilled the law for vs and by whose grace we are enabled in some good measure to keepe the commandements of God which are not greeuous vnto vs which are iustified by faith and sanctified by the spirit 3. and if it be admitted that Moses there speaketh of the law his meaning onely is that the knowledge of the law was not hid from them neither was it farre off that they had neede fetch it from heauen or from the vtmost partes of the Sea it was present with them and continually in their mouth beeing rehearsed by the Priests and Levites so that nulla ignorantiae excusatio sit reliqua their remained no excuse of ignorance thus Luther answeareth Erasmus and Bellarmine also acknowledgeth that Moses there speaketh de facilitate non observandae sed cognoscendae legis of the facilitie of knowing not doing the law lib. 5. de grat c. 6. Controv. 7. Against Limbus Patrum that Christ went not downe thither to deliuer the Patriarkes v. 7. Say not who shall descend into the deepe that is to bring Christ againe from the dead the ordinarie glosse would inferre vpon these words that Christ descended into Limbus to fetch the Fathers from thence for he that saith who hath descended in a manner denieth that none descended thither and so not the Patriarks and consequently neither Christ who descended not nisi pro illis liberandis but to deliuer them Contra. 1. But Lyranus refuseth this interpretation vpon these two reasons because it is neither agreeable to that place of Moses Deuter. 30. which will beare no such sense nor yet vnto the words following where he expoundeth the descending into the deepe of the raysing of Christ from the dead v. 9. 2. Some of our owne expositors doe interpret this clause descending into the deepe thus that Christ subierit inferâ—â— dolores hath vndergone the verie dolours of hell for vs Calvin Martyr expoundeth it of the place of hell as if one of curiositie should aske who should goe downe to hell to certifie vs that Christ hath ouercome hell and damnation for vs. some vnderstand it of the graue as Lyranus Osiander to say who shall descend into the deepe is all one as to denie that Christ is risen from the dead but Moses for the deepe saith Sea which cannot properly be taken for the graue Some thinke that by going to heauen and descending to the deepe are meant things of great difficultie and impossible to shew that the Gospel requireth no such thing of vs to goe to heauen or hell Faius But beside this last it may be added further that by the confession of the death of Christ we are consequently deliuered from the feare of descending to hell that is of beeing condemned because by Christs death we are deliuered from the feare of hell so that he which remaineth stil fearefull of hell doubteth of the truth of Christs death and resurrection to this purpose Pareus See before qu. 12. Controv. 8. Whether the righteousnesse of faith and the righteousnesse of the law be one and the same or contrarie the one to the other 1. Stapleton affirmeth them to be the same Antidot p. 618. by these arguments 1. the law leadeth vs to no other righteousnesse but to the righteousnesse of the law but it leadeth also to faith in Christ therefore faith in Christ is that righteousnesse 2. the end of the law is the righteousnesse of the law and Christ is the end of the law therefore faith in Christ is the end of of the law 3. that which is perfect and imperfect doe not differ in kind as an infant and a man of perfect age the iustice of the law is imperfect the iustice of faith perfect they then differ no otherwise Contra. 1. The law directly intendeth the iustice of the law and indirectly it leadeth vnto Christ so it is false that it leadeth and directeth onely to the iustice of the law it
or by the law and the Apostle herein maketh no difference 4. And as for that exact righteousnesse which the law requireth which indeed is that which is called iustitia legis the righteousnesse of the law it is no otherwise fulfilled in vs then by faith in Christ Rom. 8.4 the faithfull also receiue grace by the spirit of sanctification to keepe the law in some measure but they are said rather to walke according to the law and in Saint Iohns phraise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the commandements then to fulfill or keepe the law and commandements Controv. 10. That Baptisme doth not giue or conferre grace v. 8. This is the word of faith c. The ordinarie glosse out of Augustine doth inferre hence and out of that place Ioh. 15.1 Yee are cleane through the word c. that it is not the water which saueth in baptisme but the word for he saith not ye are cleane because of baptisme but through the word detrahe vorbum c. take away the word and what is water but water accedat verbum ad elementum c. let the word come to the element and it becommeth a Sacrament vnde est ista tanta virtius aquae c. where is this great vertue of the water that it toucheth the bodie and the heart is washed nisi faciente verbo c. but because the word worketh not because it is rehearsed but beleeued c. this iudgement of Augustine here cited in the glasse is agreeable to Saint Pauls doctrine Ephes. 5.26 cleansing it by the washing of water through the word the water then washeth not of it selfe but by the word then the element it selfe-confesseth not grace as the Romanists hold See further Synops. Centur. 2. err 69. Controv. 11. Against the dissembling of our faith and profession v. 9. If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth c. It is then necessarie to confesse the faith of Christ which is beleeued in the heart contrarie to the opinion of the Libertines which renew the old error of the Priscillianists and Carpocratian heretikes which thought it lawfull to dissemble their faith before the Magistrate so doe the familie of loue the Libertines of these daies and such carnall Gospellers which thinke it sure for them to goe vnto the Popish Masse and other superstitious rites keeping their conscience to themselues they are the Nicodemites of these daies But the Apostle reprooueth them all requiring this as necessarie vnto saluation to confesse Christ with the mouth And our Sauiour saith that who so is ashamed of him here he will be ashamed of him in his kingdome Markâ—â—â— 38. Controv. 12. That faith is not onely in the vnderstanding The Romanists as namely Bellarmine doe affirme that faith onely hath the seate in the intellectuall part lib. 1. de iustificat c. 6. and so they hold faith to be an act onely of the vnderstanding Rhemist annot 2. Cor. 13. sect 1. But the contrarie is euident here the Apostle saith with the heart man beleeueth c. now the heart is not the seate of vnderstanding but of the affections and yet the heart is taken according to the phrase of Scripture not for that vitall part of the bodie but for the soule and all the faculties thereof wherefore though knowledge and vnderstanding be requisite vnto faith yet the principall part thereof is an assured confidence and beleefe which is in the heart and affections not in the braine onely and vnderstanding See further Centur. 4. err 48. Controv. 13. The Scriptures the onely sufficient rule of faith v. 11. For the Scripture saith c. S. Paul hether to hath prooued the whole doctrine of saith by him deliuered by the testimonie of Scripture and Act. 26.22 he professeth that he taught none other things then Moses and the Prophets did we are then onely in matters of faith to haue recourse vnto the Scriptures not vnto vnwritten traditions whether the Papists would send vs for they are vncertaine mutable variable and therefore can be no rule of faith And further whereas the Apostle addeth the Scripture saith as before c. 9.17 hereby that cauill of the Iesuites is remooued which say that the Scripture is mute and dumbe and cannot be a iudge of controversies but the Apostle saith the Scripture speaketh that is God speaketh in the Scriptures and it speaketh and proclaimeth the truth to euery one therefore it is not a dumbe but a speaking iudge and therefore is sufficient to determine all controversies of religion and matters of faith See further Synos Centur. 1. err 5. Controv. 14. How the Apostle saith there is no difference betweene the Iew and the Grecian v. 12. Obiect The Apostle before gaue the prioritie vnto the Iewes c. 1.17 to the Iew first and also to the Grecian how then doth he say here there is no difference Ans. 1. We must distinguish the times there was in the old Testament a difference made because the Lord then had made choise onely of Israel before all the people in the world but now vnder the kingdome of the Messiah this difference is taken away Christ hath broken downe the wall of partâ—ing and of both made all one so distingue tempora concilaibis Scripturas distinguish the times and you shall reconcile the Scripture Pareus 2. Adde hereunto that because euen at the first preaching of the Gospel the Iewes had a preheminencie and the Gospel was first offered vnto them the distinction of times will not fully satisfie the Iews were not preferred quoad bona gratia in respect of spiritual grace but quoad praerogativam c. in respect of some prerogatiues they had which S. Paul sheweth what they were Rom. 3.2 and c. 9.5.6 Gorrhan Controv. 15. Against the maintainers of Vniversall grace Obiect Whereas the Apostle saith v. 12. rich vnto all he may seeme to fauour their opinion which hold that God hath vniuersally and indifferently decreed to shewe mercie vnto all and so in his owne purpose he hath not reiected any Answ. We must vnderstand the Apostle here not to speake absolute absolutely of all in generall but with these two qualifications he speaketh of all distributive by way of distribution all both Iewes and Gentiles he is rich to all not in particular but of what nation or kindred whatsoeuer Iew or Gentile for that the Apostle taketh vpon him to prooue that not to the Iewes onely but to the Gentiles also the promises of mercie in Christ doe belong secondly the Apostle nameth all limitate with a certaine limitation vnto all that call vpon him that is all beleeuers for they onely call vpon God that doe beleeue in him Controv. 16. That faith iustifieth not by the act thereof but onely as it apprehendeth Christ. Whereas the Apostle saith v. 13. Whosoeuer calleth vpon the name of the Lord shall be saâ—â—â—â— c. Bellarmine would hence inferre that faith doth not iustifie relative by way of reâ—ation vnto Christ by beleeuing in him but
in seeking asking invocating as here the Apostle saith lib. 1. de iustific c. 17. Contra. 1. The Apostle saith not neither can it be concluded out of his words that we are saued by calling vpon God but invocation is a sure note and argument of saluation because it is an euidence of their faith whereby they are iustified and saued 2. but faith iustifieth onely passiuely as it apprehendeth Christ not actively in respect of the work and merit thereof for we are iustified by the righteousnes of God by faith in Christ Rom. 3.22 but the act and work of faith is a part of mans righteousnes not of Gods therefore so faith iustifieth not but as it apprehendeth the righteousnes of God in Christ See further Synops. Centur. 4. err 53. Controv. 17. That faith onely iustifieth not invocation Bellarmine out of this place whosoeuer calleth c. would confirme an other of his errors that faith pro parte sua for it part iustifieth if other things be not wantings for saluation is here ascribed to invocation lib. 1. de iustif c. 12. Contra. 1. The same answer may suffice for here saluation is not ascribed vnto invocation neither doth the Apostle shew how but who they are which shall be saued namely they which call vpon him which is an act and effect of faith for without faith there is no invocation the argument then followeth not they which call vpon God shall be saued therefore for their calling vpon God they shall be saued for this were like as if one should reason out of these words of S. Paul Act. 27.31 Except these abide in the shippe ye can not be safe all that did abide in the shippe were safe therefore because they did abide in the shippe they were safe for the shippe brake and some were saued by swimming some vpon boards and other pieces of the shippe Controv. 18. Against the invocation of Saints v. 14. How shall they call on him in whom they haue not beleeued c. This place is strongly vrged against the Popish inuocation of Saints by our Protestant writers as Pareus Faius and others for if we are to call vpon none but in whom we must beleeue and we are onely to beleeue in God Ioh. 14.1 Ye beleeue in God beleeue also in mee it followeth that God onely must be called vpon The Rhemists in their annotation here answer by a distinction of beleefe that none can inuocate Christ as their Lord and Master vnlesse they beleeue him so to be but they may trust also in Saints that they can helpe them and so also may beleeue in them as their helpers and this phrase they say to beleeue in men is found in Scripture as Exod. 14.31 they beleeued in God and in Moses for so it is in the Hebrew Contra. 1. Seeing the Scripture curseth him that trusteth or putteth any confidence in man Ierem. 17.5 how can Papists escape this curse that are not ashamed to professe their trust and confidence in man 2. though that in the Hebrew phrase the preposition beth which signifieth in be vsed yet it is no more then is expressed in the Latine phrase in the datiue case and so the Latine translator well obserueth crediderunt Deo Mosi they beleeued God and Moses the meaning is no more then this that they beleeued Moses as a true Prophet of God that it came to passe as he had foretold 3. and seeing all our faith and confidence must be grounded vpon the Scripture but in the Scripture men haue no warrant to trust in Saints that they can helpe them this is but a vaine confidence 4. Neither are there diuers kinds of a religious beleefe and confidence there is a ciuill kind of assurance which is the good perswasion that one may haue of another but all our religious beleefe must be onely setled vpon God 5. And so to conclude Augustine saith in Psalm 64. non potest esse Deo grata oratio quam ipse non dictavit c. that prayer cannot be acceptable to God which he that is Christ hath not indited But Christ hath not endited any praier vnto any but vnto God onely therefore that forme of prayer is onely acceptable to him See further hereof in D. Fulkes answer to the Rhemists vpon this place Controv. 19. That we must pray with confidence and assurance Mr. Calvin also vpon these words how shall they call on him in whom they haue not beleeued c. confuteth the opinion of the schoolemenâ— qui se dubitanter Deo offerunt which doubtfully offer their prayers to God and so Bellarmine saith that it is not necessarie for a man in his prayer to beleeue and be perswaded that God will heare him lib. 1. de â—onis operib c. 9. Contra. But the Apostle here requireth an assured beleefe in him that prayeth and our Sauiour saith Whatsoeuer ye desire when ye pray beleeue that ye shall haue it and it shall be don vnto you Mark 11.24 See further Synops. Centur. 4. err 88. Controv. 20. Against the vaine pompe of the Pope of Rome in offering his feete to be kissed v. 15. How beautifull are the feete c. This maketh nothing at all to countenance the pride of the Romane Antichrist who hath offered his feete to be kissed of Kings and Emperours 1. the Prophet first and the Apostle following him meaneth not any such particular gesture to be offered to the feete but by a figure is vnderstood the reuerence due to the person of those which preached the Gospel and this rather confoundeth the pride of the Pope and his Cardinals that ride in state on their trapped horses whereas the Apostles trauailed on foote preaching as they went and therefore it is saide how beautifull are the feete 2. and this honour is onely belonging to them which preach the Gospel but the Pope and his Cardinals are so farre from preaching the Gospel that they by all meanes suppresse it and persecute with sword and fire the professors of it Martyr See hereof more Synops. Centur. 2. err 29. Controv. 21. Against humane traditions v. 17. Faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the word of God c. Hence it is euident that nothing must be preached but the word of God and that saith onely is builded thereupon all humane traditions must giue place and whatsoeuer is vrged beside the word of God The Papists indeed are not ashamed to call their traditions verbum Dei non scriptum the word of God not written which is not farre from blasphemie to make their own inuentions and traditions equall with the word of God which is not to be found but onely in the Scriptures for the word of God is certaine we know who is the author thereof it is consonant to it selfe and remaineth for euer but their traditions are of obscure and vncertaine beginning they are contrarie to themselues and are chaungeable Basil hath this notable testimonie concerning the authoritie of the Scriptures calling it the
adoration and humble prostrating of himselfe 3. All idololatricall worship is forbidden but all religious adoration giuen vnto the creatures is such as tendeth to idolatrie because it ascribeth vnto the creature that which is peculiar to the Creator as to knowe the heart to be present euerie where to haue power to helpe and such like for they which pray vnto Angels and Saints and prostrate them before their images haue this opinion of them that they are present to heare and helpe them which onely God can doe Ergo such religious adoration is idolatrous See further of this question Synops. Controv. 4. Of the comparison betweene virginitie and mariage The Rhemists in their annotation 1. Cor. 7.31 doe extoll virginitie in such sort that they doe much disgrace marriage for these are their words virginitie hath a gratefull puritie and sanctitie of bodie and soule which mariage hath not c. and for this cause they say that Priests are forbidden marriage That they may be cleane and pure from all fleshly acts of copulation c. But this were to make mariage vncleane whereas it is not the matrimoniall act but the lasciuious and wanton minde which abuseth mariage that bringeth vncleanenesse with it Origen is more equall who vpon these words v. 1. giue vp your bodies a liuing sacrifice â—â—â—â—ly c. thus writeth quoniam videmus nonnullos sanctorum aliquas etiam Apostolâ—◠〈◊〉 buisse coniugium c. because we see that certaine of the Saints and some of the Apostles were married we cannot vnderstand the Apostle here to meane virgintie onely c. but that they which are in coniugijs positi c. placed in mariage and by consent for a time doe giue themselues to prayer corpora sua exhibere posse hostiam viuentem c. may exhibite their bodies a liuing sacrifice if in other things sanctè agant iustè c. they deale holily and iustly c. and concerning virgins he further saith that if they be polluted with pride or couetousnesse or such like they are not to be thought ex sola virginitate corporis c. by the onely virginitie of their bodies to offer vp a liuing sacrifice vnto God c. Thus then there may be both puritie and sanctitie in mariage and as the Apostle saith an vndefiled bed Heb. 13.4 which the Rhemists denie and there may be pollution and vncleanesse in virginitie See further Synops. Papis Centur. 3. er 97. Controv. 5. The minde it selfe and not the sensuall part onely hath neede of renovation v. 2. Be changed by the renewing of your mind this is against the position of the Philosophers as Aristotle affirmeth Ethic. 1.13 that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reason alway perswadeth and mooueth vnto the best things the Romanists doe iumpe with them herein who thinke the sensuall part of the minde onely to be corrupted But 1. the Apostle here sheweth that the verie minde and spirituall part of the soule hath neede of renouation 2. indeede in ciuill things and morall duties the reason may be a guide but in diuine and supernaturall it is blind and erroneous 3. and if it be here obiected that the Philosophers as Socrates Plato did many excellent things by the light of reason I answear that yet in those things they failed of the true ende for they respected not the honour and glorie of God but sought perfection by their owne endeauour and herein they shewed the error and corruption of their mind 4. yea the reason is so farre off from beeing a perfect guide that euen in the regenerate it hath neede still to be renewed as in the Romanes here to whom S. Paul writeth how much more in the vnregenerate Controv. 6. Of the perfection of the Scriptures against traditions v. 2. To prooue what the will of God is acceptable and perfect this perfect will of God is no where els reuealed but in the scriptures if they containe a perfect reuelation of the will of God then there neede no other additaments what vse then of humane traditions such as many the Church of Rome is pestered with which haue no warrant out of the Scripture which beeing able to make the man of God perfect to euerie good worke 2. Tim. 3.17 all other helpes and supplyes are superstitious and superfluous See further hereof Synops. Centur 1. err 11.13 Controv. 7. Against freewill v. 2. And be not fashioned c. Tolet hence collecteth because the vulgar Latine thus readeth nolite configurari c. haue you no will to be conformed c. that it is positum in arbitrio hominis placed in the will of man whether thus to be fashioned or not whereas there is no such word in the originall for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth be not fashioned not be ye not willing to be fashioned and beside the verie next words be ye changed by the renewing of your mind doe confute this opinion and euidently shewe that a man hath no free-will of himselfe vnto that which is good Indeede the Scriptures doe vse exhortations to the regenerate to shewe that it must be the worke of the spirit to stirre them vp to doe those things whereunto they are exhorted See further Synops. Papis Centur. 4. err 46. Controv. 8. Against the arrogancie of the Pope v. 3. According as God hath dealt to euerie man c. Then euerie man hath his certime measure and stint of gifts one hath not receiued all as the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 7.7 Euerie man hath his proper gift of God c. Then that man of pride here sheweth himselfe in his colors who arrogateth to himselfe authoritie ouer the whole Church and boasteth to haue all knowledge locked vp in his breast wherein he sheweth not himselfe to be a seruant of Christs for all his seruants haue receiued a portion and measure of gifts one alone hath not all Pareus Controv. 9. Against the superstitious orders of the Popish Clergie v. 7. Or he that teacheth on teaching c. Pet. Martyr and Gualter vpon this place do shew what was the oeconomie ecclesiasticall policie and discipline of the Primitiue Church how first they had praesides doctrinae the presidents of doctrine then they had assistants the Seniors and Elders qui disciplinam publicam conservabant which did preserue the publike discipline the next were the deacons which dispensed the treasure of the Church vnto whom were ioyned such as attended the sicke as in this place the Apostle setteth downe fiue offices of the Church pastors and teachers that attended the spirituall edifying of the Church then distributors rulers shewers of mercie whose care was for the externall discipline but now ne nominaÌ„ quidem extant c. not so much as the names remaine of these functions Martyr or as Gualter praeter inauia nomina c. beside vaine names and titles nothing is left in the Popish Church but they substituted other orders as Acoluthists exorcistes doorekeepers candlebearers and such like See more hereof
ex conspectu mutuo maior laetitia oriatur by the mutuall sight one of an other greater ioy is caused in 4. ad Galatas See further Synops. Centur. 2. err 63. 5. Controv. That festivall daies ought not to be consecrated to the honour of Saints The Romanists hold the contrarie reasoning thus for their opinion 1. Argum. God is honoured in his Saints the festivals therefore which are instituted to the honour of the Saints are referred to and determined in God Ans. 1. No will-worship tendeth to the honour of God but the odoration of Saints is a will-worship therefore God can not thereby receiue honour 2. God rather is thereby dishonoured for they giue the honour due vnto God vnto creatures inuocating the name of Saints saying O S. Peter S. Paul heare vs. 2. Argum. The memorie of the Saints is to be honoured but festivals are dedicated to the memorie of Saints Ergo. Ans. 1. Popish festivals are not dedicated onely to the memorie of Saints but to their worship which is idolatrie 2. and the Saints may better be remembred then by erecting holy daies in their names namely by imitating of their godly zeale and setting before our eyes their good example see Hebr. 13.7 3. Argum. These festivals of the Saints haue beene receiued and confirmed by long custome and therefore are not to be reiected Ans. Cyrpian saith epist. ad Pompeium writing against the epistle of Stephanus Bishop of Rome consuetudo sine veritate vetustas erroris est custome without truth is but the oldnes of error Our arguments for the contrarie part that no festivals are to be consecrated to the honour of Saints are these and such like 1. All religious worship is due vnto God onely him onely shalt thou serue Matth. 4. but to dedicate daies vnto the honour of any is a religious worship Ergo. Augustine saith honoramus sanctos charitate non servitute we honour Saints with charitie not seruice de vera relig c. 55. 2. Argum. Festivall daies are not onely for the rest of the bodie but for the sanctifying of the soule but this is onely Gods worke therefore to him onely the right of festivall daies belongeth 3. In the old Testament there were no holy daies consecrated to the Patriarks as Abraham Isaak Iacob nor to any of the Prophets therefore neither ought any be so dedicated in the New 4. Christians are not to imitate Pagans in the rites of religion but in dedicating daies vnto Saints they imitate the Pagans apparently for so the Pagans did consecrate feasts to their inferiour gods as the Saturnals to Saturne the Bacchinals to Bacchus and such other herein Papists doe follow their example changing onely the names and this was done by the authoritie of one of their owne Popes Greg. l. 9. ep 71. festa Paganorum sensim esse c. the Pagan feasts are by little and little to be changed into Christian feasts and some things must be done to the similitude of theirs that they may more easily be brought to the Christian faith c. 6. Controv. Whether all the festivalls of Christians are alike arbitrarie to be altered and changed as shall seeme good to the Church Herein not onely the Papists are our aduersaries but some of our owne writers seeme to incline vnto this opinion The Papists affirme that the Sabbath is but an Apostolicall tradition and that it was charged from the last day of the weeke to the first by the authoritie of the Church Rhemist whereupon it will follow that the Church may alter it by the same authoritie if it shall so seeme good vnto an other day Learned Pareus hath also this position dub 4. hypoth 3. feriae Christianorum quantum ad genus sunt necessariae vt tamen quantum ad speciem maneant liberae c. the holy daies of Christians though they be necessarie in generall yet in particular are free that they may be changed and transferred if there be cause from one day to an other c. and he seemeth to account the dominicall day inter res medias among things indifferent hypoth 4. But I preferre herein the iudgement of that excellent diuine D. Fulke who concerning other festiuals of Christ and the holy Ghost thinketh that they may be changed as the Church shall see cause from certaine daies vnto other occurrent times and occasions or from the daies now observed to other as things in themselues indifferent but concerning the Lords day he writeth in these words But to change the Lords day and to keepe it on monday twesday or any other day the Church hath none authoritie for it is not a matter of indifferencie but a necessarie prescription of Christ himselfe deliuered to vs by his Apostles annot Revel c. 1. sect 7. The reason hereof is 1. because we finde that in the Apostles time the first day of the weeke was appointed to be the Lords day Act. 20.7 1. Cor. 16.2 Revel 1.10 who beeing directed by the spirit of God no doubt but herein also they followed either the expresse commandement of Christ or the speciall direction of the spirit 2. because there can not come the like reason of the altering of the Lords day while the world endureth as was in the first change namely for the commemoration of Christs resurrection 3. the Sabbath could not be changed but by the same authoritie whereby it was first instituted which was by God himselfe Wherefore to conclude this point the festiuals of Christians may be diuided into three sorts 1. some are of necessitie to be kept and bind in conscience as the Lords onely 2. other festiuals though not so necessarie yet are conuenient to be retained and can not be remooued without great scandall as the feasts of the Nativitie Circumcision Annuntiation Ascension of Christ and of the comming of the holy Ghost 3. some are meerely arbitrarie in the Church as all other festiuals of the Apostles See further hereof Synops. Centur. 2. err 87. and Hexapl. in Genes c. 2. 7. Conntrov Against Purgatorie v. 8. Whether we liue or die we are the Lords hence may be confuted the Popish opinion of purgatorie for they which are the Lords are alreadie purged by the blood of Christ and neede no other purgation by fire if they be not purged they are not the Lords for no vncleane thing can come into his sight so the Spirit saith Blessed are they which die in the Lord they rest from their labours Revel 14.13 all that die in the faith of Iesus die in the Lord if they die in the Lord they rest from their labours but they which are in purgatorie are in labour and sorrow still See further Synops. Centur. 2. err 11. 8. Controv. Whether Christ by his obedience and suffering merited for himselfe eternall glorie and dominion 1. It is the opinion of the Schoolemen that as Christ merited by his death for his members redemption from death and sinne so by his perfect obedience and most holy passion he
shew that he is God because euerie knee shall bowe vnto him and euery tongue shall confesse him to be God adoration and praise which doe belong onely vnto God are giuen vnto Christ and in that place the Prophet yet speaketh more euidently am not I the Lord and there is no God beside me And here where the Apostle said v. 10. we must all stand before the iudgement seat of Christ v. 12. he saith We must giue account vnto God the tribunall seate then of Christ is the tribunall of God Doct. 7. Of the authoritie of the Scriptures v. 11. For it is written c. The Apostle speaking of our appearing before the iudgement seat of Christ doth not affirme it onely but prooueth it by the Scriptures teaching vs thereby that the Scriptures and written word of God are the only rule and line of our faith and that nothing ought to be imposed vpon the Church as a matter of beleefe but that which is warranted from thence the Scriptures are able to make the man of God perfect 2. Tim. 3.17 he then that seeketh any doctrine beside that which is taught in the Scriptures as not content with that which is perfect would adde further that which is superfluous idle and vnnecessarie Doct. 8. That no kind of meate is vncleane in it selfe v. 14. I knowe c. that there is nothing vncleane in it selfe c. All kind of meats then which are appointed for the food and nourishment of mans bodie are in themselues lawfull and cleane beeing receiued with giuing of thankes And if they be lawfull and cleane the restraint of them by any prohibition for religion and holines sake is superstitions and inclining to Iudaisme It is the mind onely and opinion that polluteth and defileth meats so the superstition of Papists in making conscience of some kind of meates is so farre from making them more holy and acceptable vnto God that they thereby defile and pollute the good creatures of God they should therfore remember that charge which was giuen vnto Peter from heauen Act. 10.15 What God hath cleansed pollute thou not 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. Whether to abstaine from certaine meates be an act of religion and a part of Gods worship or a thing in it selfe indifferent The latter is affirmed and maintained by Protestants the other is stifly defended by the Romanists but that the state of the question may better appeare first the diuerse kinds of fasting and abstinence are to be considered 1. There is a naturall abstinence which is onely from such meates as agree not with the stomack and are enemies to the helth of the bodie 2. A morall abstinence is from such meates and drinkes as a man findeth to distemper him and to disturbe his memorie and other faculties of his minde as the drinking of wine and strong drinke 3. A ciuill and politike abstinence is to refraine eating of flesh some certaine daies for the maintenance of navigation and the vtterance of fish and for sparing the breed of cattell as the Lenton fast is now kept in England 4. There was beside these a Iudaicall fast which was of two sorts either a totall and generall abstinence as from swines flesh and other meates counted vncleane by the law or an abstinence for a time which was either generall of the whole nation as to abstaine from eating of vnleavened bread for seauen daies in the feast of the Passeouer or particular of some professed persons as of them which had taken vpon them the vow of the Nazarites which was neither to take wine nor any strange drinke See the law of the Nazarites Numb 6. 5. Beside these there was an hereticall fast and abstinence of such as abstained from certaine meates counting them euill and vncleane in themselues which was the opinion of the Manichees and Tatiane heretikes which kind of impious abstinence the Apostle speaketh against 1. Tim. 4. 6. Adde vnto this the superstitious abstinence of the Papists which make the fasting and refraining from fleshmeates vpon the fift and sixt day of the weeke and in the time of Lâ—uâ— to be a necessarie part of Gods worship and a thing meritorious and satisfactorie This is the abstinence that now is in question 7. Yet a religious fast we acknowledge which is when vpon some daies appointed by the Church publikely or when any are disposed priuately to fast the more feruently to giue themselues vnto praier which the Apostle speaketh of 1. Cor. 7.5 But this is done without any opinion of merite or holines in the act it selfe but as it helpeth and confeâ—â—eth to a spirituall end the more earnest invocation of God and humble supplication before him 8. There was also a scrupulous kind of abstinence in the primitiue Church when some Christians did abstaine of conscience from eating things which were consecrate to Idols of the which S. Paul entreateth 1. Cor 8.10 Now the fast and abstinence which is controverted betweene vs and the Papists is the superstitious fast before the 6. whose opinion is this that to abstaine from flesh and other kinds of meates in the time of lent and vpon other daies of restraint is a necessarie part of the diuine worship meritorious and satisfactorie habet meritum satisfactionem apud Deum it meriteth and satisfieth before God c. Tolet in his annotations here and the precept of fasting obligat sub peccato mortali bindeth vnder the daunger of mortall sinne we will examine some of their reasons Argum. 1. The Apostles by their synodicall decree prouided that they should abstaine from certaine meates as strangled and blood Ans. 1. The Pastors of the Church haue not now the same power and authoritie to make Canons to bind the conscience which the Apostle had who were guided by the immediate direction of the spirit 2. they did not enioyne abstinence from flesh-meate egges milke and such like as the Romanists doe but onely from such meates as were forbidden by the law 3. neither did they enioyne this abstinence as a part of the divine worship for then it should bind still but onely for a time to avoid offence in respect of the Iewes newly conuerted Argum. 2. Those things which the Church commandeth are necessarily to be kept and observed for our Sauiour saith he that heareth you heareth mee c. But such is the Ecclesiasticall law and precept of fasting Ergo c. Ans. 1. Not euery thing the Church commandeth is to be obserued as a part of Gods worship but those things onely which the Church propoundeth by the warrant and authoritie of Gods word and so is our Blessed Sauiour to be vnderstood otherwise whosoeuer preacheth any other Gospel or any thing contrarie thereunto is to be held accursed 2. neither are we to regard what the false and Antichristian Church now commandeth no more then our B. Sauiour and his Apostles did hold themselues bound to the superstitious decrees of the Pharisies Argum. 3. The law of fasting is
a tradition Apostolicall therefore necessarie to be oserued and kept Ans. We graunt that the free vse of fasting to be ioyned as an helpe vnto praier was taken from the Apostles but not this necessarie kind of fasting tied vnto certaine daies which may thus appeare 1. Eusebius lib. 5. c. 24. sheweth the libertie and varietie of fasting in the Church and maketh mention how Irenaeus reprooued Victor Bishop of Rome for excommunicating the East Churches for obseruing an other kind of forme in celebrating of the Pasch and in fasting 2. Sozomen lib. 7. c. 19. declareth how at Rome they fasted onely three weekes before the Pasch in Greecia six and Telesphorus in his decretall ordained the fast of seauen whole weekes it was not then an Apostolike tradition 3. Chrysost. hom 47. in Matthew denieth the Lenton fast to haue beene instituted by Christ non dicit ieiunium suum esse imitandum c. he saith not his fasting is to be imitated though he might haue propounded his fourtie daies fast but he saith Learne of mee for I am humble and meeke c. Argum. 4. In the new Testament there is no other abstinence from meates forbidden but the legall and Iudiciall Ans. 1. The argument followeth not it is not forbidden therefore it is a part of the diuine worship the contrarie is inferred therefore it is no part of the diuine worship beeing neither commanded nor forbidden for all necessarie parts of the worship of God is prescribed in the word if then it were not forbidden it should remaine free and therefore is not to be imposed as a necessarie thing 2. the antecedent is false for not onely the Iewish abstinence but all other superstitious kindes of fasting and abstinence are forbidden Coloss. 2. 1. Tim. 4. and if such abstinence as was sometime commanded by the law by the libertie of the Gospel be taken away much more such as is the meere invention of man 5. Argum. The taming and mortifying of the flesh is a necessarie thing but abstinence from flesh doth helpe to the taming and subduing of the flesh Ergo c. Ans. 1. The continuall mortifying of the flesh is a necessarie thing which is to be practised all the life long but to tame and subdue the flesh for a time as in fasting certaine daies is but a superstitious and hypocriticall mortification which is reprooued by the Prophet Isai. 58.5 Is it such a fast that I haue chosen that a man should afflict his soule for a day and to bow downe his head as a bulrush c. 2. neither by such Popish abstinence is the flesh â—amed when they abstaine from fleshmeate and eate of other confected meates as of marmaled and sucker and such like things and drinke wine which doe more inflame and instigate the flesh then the eating of flesh-meates Thomas answer is ridiculous that flesh doth increase the humors of the bodie which are of long continuance wine doth but nourish the spirits which doe soone passe away for the Phisitians will refute him who affirme that as meate doth engender the solid nutriment of the bodie so drinke doth encrease the liquide nutriment which in effect is all one Arg. 6. The abstinence of the Rechabites by the coÌ„mandement of their father pleased God in so doing as a part of his worship much more abstinence which is inioyned by our mother the Church Ans. 1. The argument followeth not for there is great difference betweene the abstinence of the Rechabites and the ceremoniall abstinence 1. in the matter that was not from flesh egges and such like but from wine tillage dwelling in cities 2. in the forme they abstained all their life time and with a libertie in time of necessitie for in Ieremies time they dwelt in Ierusalem because of the warre Ierem. 35.11 3. and further by the law the parents might either confirme or disanull the vowes of their children Num. 30. but now vnder the Gospel such legall rites are ceased 2. The antecedent is false for they did not keepe their fathers precept as an act of religion but for some politike and morall respects as they are forbidden inhabiting in cities least they might be corrupted with the vices thereof and were commanded to dwell in tents to put them in minde that they were straungers beeing descended of the Kenites these and such other arguments are produced by Bellarmine lib. 4. de verb. Dei c. 3. lib. 2. de bonis operib c. 71. c. 11. Now on the contrarie against such superstitious abstinence vrged by the Papists as a necessarie part of Gods seruice the same meritorious some of our arguments are these 1. Argum. The Apostle saith c. 14.17 The kingdome of heauen is not meate nor drinke and Heb. 13.9 It is good to haue the heart established with grace and not with meates which haue not profited them that haue bin occupied therein therfore to be occupied in abstinence froÌ„ meats is a thing indifferent not in it selfe meritorious or a part of Gods worship 2. Argum. That which God hath purified and made cleane no man must pollute Act. 20.15 but he which for religion and conscience sake maketh meates vnlawfull which God hath made cleane doth pollute them Ergo. 3. Arg. All will worship is no part of Gods seruice but the choice of meates touch not tast not handle not is a voluntarie and will worship Coloss. 2.21.23 therefore no part of Gods seruice Bellarmine answeareth that the Apostle doth not speake against all ecclesiasticall abstinence but onely the Iudaicall or the Philosophicall abstinence which was practised among the heathen Contra. The Apostles reason is generall against all choice of meates and other humane inuentions which are according to the doctrines of men v. 22. but this ecclesiasticall and Popish canonicall fast is an humane invention meerely and according to the doctrines of men therefore euen against such speaketh the Apostle 4. Argu. Our Blessed Sauiour saith that which entreth in by the mouth defileth not the man Matth. 15.17 therefore flesh at all times eaten and entring in by the mouth is lawfull in it selfe because it defileth not so it be done without scandale and offence our Blessed Sauiour giueth a generall rule as well against Pharisaicall traditions as all other invented by man that the conscience before God is not defiled with the breach thereof 5. Argu. The doctrine of Deuils is no part of the diuine worship but the forbidding of meates is the doctrine of Deuils 1. Tim. 4.3 Ergo. Bellarmine telleth vs that the Apostle there noteth such heretickes as the Manichees Tatians Eucratites which condemned flesh as euill and so did dishonour the Creator Contra. The Apostle onely noteth not those heretickes but euen the Papists which should forbid meates for he prophecieth of the latter times and not onely they which simply condemne meates but doe place an holinesse in merite in some meates rather then others are these forbidders of meates and how doe not they condemne meates which thinke