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
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
but matter of doubting and despairing that if we looke to them we must not onely doubt but despaire of saluation ART XVII WHETHER GOOD WORKES be a cause why God loueth vs SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Ioan. 16. v. 27. For the Father himselfe loueth you because God loueth vs because we loue Christ Because we keepe his cōmandments you haue loued me and haue beleiued that I comeforth from God cap. 15. ver 10. If you keepe my precepts youe hall abide in my loue as I also haue kept my Fathers precepts and do abide in his loue Act. 10. v. 36. In euerie nation he that feareth him and worketh iustice is acceptable to him CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Ioan. 16. v. 27. Christ plainely saieth that his disciples loue was a cause why God loued them with this kind of loue PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Caluin in Ioan. 15. v. 10. The obedience which the faithfull Good workes no cause of Gods loue towards vs. giue to him is not so much a cause why he continueth his loue towards them as an effect of his loue Et in cap. 16. v. 17. We are here saied to be loued of God whiles we loue Christ because we haue a pledge of his fatherlie loue THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely teacheth that God loueth vs because we loue and beleiue in Christ that God continueth his loue towards vs if we keepe his commandments The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that our obedience is no cause why God continueth his loue towards vs that we are not loued of God because we loue Christ ART XVIII WHETHER WE OVGHT to do good workes SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Luc. 17. v. 10. When you shall haue done all things that are We ought to doe good workes commanded you say we are vnprofitable seruants we haue done that which we ought to do 1. Ioan 2. v. 6. He that saieth he abideth in him ought euen as he walked himselfe also to walke Et c. 3. v. 16. And we ought to yeeld our liues for the brethren Et c. 4. ver 11. If God hath so loued vs we also ought to loue one an other CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 6. Can. 20. If anie shall say that a man iustified and neuer so perfect is not bound to the keeping of the commandments of God and the Church but onely to beleiue be he accursed PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Tindal cited in Caluinoturcismo l. 4. c. 22. Thou owest nothing We owe nothing to God but faith to God but faith that thou maest confesse Christ Iesus and beleiue him to haue risen from the dead for so thou shalt be safe in all other things God hath made it free to the to follow thine owne will Luther Postilla in Dom. 3. Aduentus f. 39. All workes besides God requireth nothing but faith Workes are indifferent faith are to be done to our neighbour because God requireth nothing of vs but faith with which we giue him his honour In Gal. 2. to 5. f. 223. Christ hath so abrogated the workes of the law as they may be held indifferently but they bind no more Againe We are not tyed to any externall worke at all but free to any We are free to all workes To all things worke towards any man at any time or manner whatsoeuer A Christian is wholy free to all things doing or omitting as the occasion serueth or wanteth Psal 5. to 3. f. 171. Take this rule where Luthers rule of doing good the Scripture commandeth a good worke to be done do thou so vnderstand that it forbiddeth thee to do a good worke Et apud Kemnitium in locis part 2. tit de operibus p. 73. This phrase of the law A faithfull man ought to do good workes belongeth A Christian ought not to doe good not to Christians And apud Schlusselburg to 7. Catal. Haeret p. 193. We fight as well against good workes as against sinnes And l. de votis apud Coccium to 1. p. 1113. The doctrine Luther fighteth against good workes of workes is necessarily the doctrine of diuels Postilla in Natali Christi ib. Good workes are a couer of filthinesse and hypocrisie Et Serm. de Nouo testamento seu de Missa Let vs beware Bewareth of good workes of sinne but much more of good workes and laws and let vs attend to Gods promise and faith Ministri Electorales in Colloq Aldeburg p. 286. haue these words Gallus affirmed that Luther could hardly beare these propositions Good workes are necessarie A Christiā ought A Christian ought not do doe good workes to do good workes Et p. 128. Gallus Otto and manie other men do openly and bitterly reiect as false and improper this speach Good workes are necessarie and denie that Christians ought to doe good workes Liber Concordiae c. 4. Some haue disputed that good workes Good workes are free are not necessarie but free and voluntarie And some haue earnestly contended that new obedience is not necessarie in the iustified Melancthon in Resp ad Art 24. Bauar to 4. Some Protestants New obediēce not due denie this proposition New obedience is due because it is voluntarie Illyricus apud Schiusselburg to 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 271. condemneth Maior because he teacheth Good workes are necessarie to saluation by reason of debt Et in Apologia cont No debt Tiletan c. 6. All the obedience which Christ properly requireth of those that are to be saued is onely to beleiue in him and to runne to free bankets to which we are inuited of him Pareus l. 4. de Iustific c. 1. confesseth that this is the doctrine Good workes pertaine not to the kingdome of Christ Belonge to Satan We must pray to haue no good workes of the rigid Lutherans Good workes and new obediēce partaine not to the kingdome of Christ but to the world Christiās with their good workes belong to Sathan good workes are so farre from being necessarie as that they hinder saluation and be pernitious We ought to pray God that we perseuere to the end in faith without all good workes And the same speaches of theirs are repeated out of Colloq Aldeburg by Coccius to 1. p. 1113. Zuinglius l. de Relig. c. de Merito The Prophets do vehemently vrge to good workes but whom those that beleiue not well Caluin in Ioan. 6. v. 29. This alone doth God aske of vs that God requireth onely faith we beleiue THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that we ought to do the workes which are commanded vs that we ought to walke as Christ walked that we ought to giue our liues for our brethren that we ought to loue one an other The same say Catholikes Protestants expressely say that a Christian ought not to doe good workes that good workes are indifferent free voluntarie not necessarie and compell no more that a Christian is indifferent to all good workes not tyed to doe good workes
would not giue them faith or Christ that he might surely bring theÌ„ to their end by infidelitie as by the fruite of this reprobation they adde p. 128. We obiect that this doctrine is of it selfe so absurd and horrible that to proue and refute the horror thereof in a manner sufficieth to point at it They teach also that God doth not daÌ„ne meÌ„ for sinne as That â—e damneth not for sinne is shewed l. 1. c. 2. art 23. And yet Vrsin in Miscel p. 87. giueth this censure hereof This wicked and absurde doctrine wherewith he concludeth an other no lesse false and absurd That as manie wicked as haue perished doe perish or shall perish haue not perished doe not perish or shall perish for their sinnes but for incredultie onely Et Beza resp ad Acta Montiâ— part 2. p. 215. saieth that it is an intolerable speach that men are not damned for sinne Finally they teach that God by his omnipotencie cannot make that Christs bodie should be at once in diuers places as is shewed l. 1. c. 2. art 23. And yet liber Concordiae c. 5. saieth that it is horrible to say and heare that God not with all his omnipotent power can make that Christs bodie at the same can be substantially present in more then one place Thus much of their confessed blasphemies against God Touching Christ they teach that his humanitie is not Touching Christ to be worshipped or praied vnto l. 1. c. 3. art 3. Which to be blasphemous thus teacheth Hutter in Anal. Confes Aug. Blasphemie that Christs humanitie is not to be worshipped art 3. Away with that impious speach of Daneus blasphemously saying that Christs humane nature albeit personally vnited to the diuinitie is not capable of whorshippe or religious hope Gerlachius tom 2. disput 5. Now all the faithfull see the execrable impietie of the Caluinists who wickedly blaspheme that Christ as man is not to be worshipped or praied vnto Reineccius tom 2. Armat c. 37. saieth that the impietie of Daneus who denieth that Christs humanitie is religiously to be worshipped is to be refuted not by words but by thunderbolts yea with the fire of hell They teach that the humanitie of Christ or Christ as That Christ as man cannot giue life c. man hath no power to giue life to forgiue sinnes to worke miracles as we related l. 1. cap. 3. art 4. Which to be blasphemous thus confesseth Hutter in Anal. cit art 3. For not as the SacrameÌ„taries do wickedly auouch the of power miracles is to be attributed onely to the diuinitie of Christ but to his whole person and therefore to both natures together Gerlachius to 2. disp 4. By these now may appeare the impietie of the Caluinists for they take from Christ power to giue life Musculus in Hospin part 2. Hist f. 323. There is none but a plaine wicked Atheist who can denie that to forgiue sinnes is imparted to the finit humanitie of Christ They teach that Christ was ouerwhelmed with desperation That he despaired as is to be seene lib. 1. c. 3. art 11. Which Zuinglius in Histor passionis to 4. coÌ„fesseth to be blasphemie saying Away with their doctrine out of the Church of Christ who affirme that Christ on the Crosse despaired And Tilenus in Syntagm cap. 65. They are extremely infidels who despaire of their saluation They teach also that Christ died for the elect onely as That he died but for the elect hath beene shewed l. 1. c. 3. art 18. Which Lobechius disp 6. confesseth to be blasphemous in these words The Caluinists affirme that Christ died for the elect onely and not for all men By which blasphemie they not onely depriue Christ of a great parte of his honor and the Church of comfort but also coÌ„tradict the holie Ghost to his face The like hath Adamus Francisci loco 17. and Gerlachius disput 16. And Grauerus in Absurdis Caluin c. 5. sect 58. saieth that it is an absurd and blasphemous Caluinisticall doctrine Iames Andreae in Beza resp ad acta Montisb p. 212. saieth It is a horrible doctrine of Beza that Christ died not for the sinnes of the whole world Finally they teach that the blood of Christ wherewith That his blood is corrupted he redeemed vs is corrupted and now no more in being as appeareth l. 1. c. 3. art 20. of which doctrine thus pronounceth Schlusselburg lib. 1. Theol. Caluin art 2. This is a horrible blasphemie dishonorable to the blood of the Sonne of God with which we were redeemed Touching the Scripture they teach that it can be vnderstood Touching Scripture without the holie Ghost as is proued l. 1. c. 5. art 2. Which doctrine thus condemneth Casaubon Exercit. 16. cont Baron sect 215. Baronius addeth that the Scriptures cannot be vnderstood without the helpe of God and this he confirmeth with some testimonies of the Fathers as if there were anie Christian who denieth this or calleth it in doubt Concerning the Church they teach that she doth not Touching the Church perpetually continew as is proued l. 1. cap. 8. art 4. Which Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 3. c. 2. confesseth to be basphemous in these words Who denieth or doubteth that the Church is founded for euer and is to continew for euer he is no Christian Concerning Baptisme they teach that when water Touching Baptisme wanteth it may be ministred in anie other liquor as is to be seene l. 1. cap. 10. art 1. Which as blasphemous thus condemneth Hutter in Anal. Confess p. 466. Beza is blasphemous who affirmeth that he doth not against the will and pleasure of Christ who ether in administring baptisme vseth milke or anie other liquor whatsoeuer or in these countries where there is no vse of wine or if be nature he abhorre wine doth in the Lords supper vse anie other kinde of drinke Et p. 490. The liceÌ„ce which Beza of his owne head taketh was sacrilegious saying If there want water and yet the baptisme of some cannot be differred with edification nor ought not surely I would as well baptize with anie other liquor as with water The like iudgement hereof giueth Grauer in Absurdis Caluin c. 4. sec 6. They teach that Baptisme doth not giue grace and that the childreÌ„ of the faithfull are in the grace of God before they be baptized l. 1. c. 10. art 79. Which doctrine thus censureth Hutter in Anal cit art 13. It is the madnesse of the Sacramentarians who will haue that the grace of regeneratioÌ„ is not giuen by the vse of SacrameÌ„ts but that the children of the faithfull and elect haue it before The like saieth Grau l cit sect 10. Touching the holie Eucharist they say that it is not the Touching the Eucharist bodie and blood of Christ lib. 1. c. 11. art 1. Which to be blasphemie thus iudgeth Hutter in Anal. cit pag. 536. It is extreme impudencie desperate bouldnesse horrible blaspemie to oppose
a contradictorte proposition to the words of Christs institution For Christ saieth This which I giue you to eate is my bodie The Sacramentaries denie it and say That which thou giuest vs to eate is not thy bodie The like hath Musculus art cit They teach that Christ is not in the Supper l. 1. c. 11. art 1. And neuerthelesse thus writeth Beza in Hospin part 2. Histor fol. 301. Manie thinke that we would exclude Christ from the Supper which is plainely impious We are so farre from saying that Christ Iesus is absent from the Supper that aboue all men we most repugne this blasphemie Concerning faith they teach that it is not simply necessarie to saluation l. 1. c. 13. art 15. Which is blasphemous Touching Faith in the iudgement of Luther in Genes 47. tom 6. Zuinglius saieth he wrote of late that Numa Pompilius Hercules Scipio Hector do enioy euerlasting happines in heauen with Peter and other Saints Which is nothing els then plainely to confesse that they thinke there is no faith no Christianitie The like saieth Beza l. de puniend Haeret. Touching good works they denie that it is necessarie Touching good workes they should be present when we are iustified l. 1. c. 14 art 12. Of which doctrine thus pronounce the Electorall Ministers in Colloq Aldel p. 343. It is horrible dishonor to God and a barbarous doctrine to professe that in the very instant and act of iustification not onely merit but also necessitie of the presence of good works is excluded They say that all the good works of iust men are sinnes and mere iniquities lib. 1. cap. 14. art 2. Of which doctrine Zuinglius giueâ—h this verdict in Exposit Fidei to 2. Some of ours haue saied paradox like that euerie worke of ours is abhomination They say also that we may not doe good for reward l. 1. c. 14. art 19. Of which doctrine Remonstrantes in Collat. Hagae p. 95 giue this censure Who denie that the faithfull may doe good workes in regard of reward due to good works he peruerteth and denieth the nature of faith of Gods law of eternall life and death Touching sinne they teach that in the faithfull it doth Touching sinne not expell grace l. 1. c. 16. art 6. Of which Hutter thus writeth They plainely make the Apostle a liar who with open mouth pronounceth that euerie fornicator vncleane and couetous man is excluded out of the kingdome of heauen and also Christ our Sauiour who pronounceth this sentence against those that denie him whosoeuer shall denie me c. They teach that men shall not be damned for their sinfull works but onely for incredulitie l 1. c. 16. art 10. And yet Beza in 2. part Resp ad Acta Montisb pag. 218. after he had recited these positions of Iames Andrews Onely incredulitie damneth men Men are not damned because they haue sinned addeth Durst euer man before this so impudently bring into Gods Church so false so monstrous so abhominable doctrine Et p. 215. Surely your speach seemed into lerable to vs that men are not damned for sinne The like hath Vrsin in Miscellan p. 84. Touching Iustification they teach that a iustified man Touching Iusication cannot leese grace by any sinne that he committeth lib. 1. c. 17. art 12. Which doctrine is thus censured by Wittembergenses in Schlusselb lib. 1. Theol. art 7. It is a great madnesse of the Anabaptistes and other frantike men who say that the iustified cannot fall or at least not leese the holie Ghost and become againe guiltie of Gods wrath albeit they breake Gods commandments against their conscience Hutter in Anal. cit p. 562. It is a blasphemous speach of Zanchius saying that forgiuenesse of sinnes once obtained is not made voyde by sinnes folowing and that the holie Ghost once giuen to the iustified remaineth with him for euer And of Beza writing that Peter denying Christ and Dauid falling into adulterie did not leese the holie Gost Adamus Francisci loc 6. The Caluinists with a horrible madnesse imagin that the regenerate caÌ„not fall into mortall sinne and that if they fall notwithstanding they retaine Gods grace the holie Ghost and faith Et Confess August c. 11. condemneth the Anabaptistes who denie that they who are once iustified can againe leese the holie Ghost They teach that a Sinner doth not cooperate to his conuersesion but that he is iustified doing nothing as a logge or els rebelling lib. 1. c. 17. art 15. Which doctrine thus the Wittembergians condemne in Schlusselb to 5. Catal. Haer. With all our hearts we abhor from that doctrine dishonorable to God and full of Blasphemies against the Sonne of God A man is conuerted not onely as a logge but also resisting and we say that by such speach not onely securitie and profane contempt of God but also horrible sinnes of men are bolstered Of free will they teach that man hath no freedome in good or euill deeds l. 1. c. 21. art 2. Which doctrine Melancthon lib. de Causa Peccati to 2. thus condemneth We doe not applaude the madnesse of the Stoickes or Maniches who are dishonorable to God and pernitious to mans life feigning that men do necessarily commit sinne Finally Iames Andrews in Colloq Montisb condemned manie doctrines of Beza as blasphemous as pag. 381. That the elect though they sinne grieuously doe retaine the holie Ghost pag. 393. That onely the elect infants are adopted in baptisme p. 447. That Christ died not for the sinnes of the whole world p. 422. That God will haue some to perish Et p. 423. That God will not haue mercie on some and that he created some to this end to shew his wrath in them Vorstius also in Parasceue oftentimes condemneth Piscators doctrine of blaphemie And scarce is there anie Protestant that writeth against an other who doth not accuse him of blasphemie Wherefore let this be my 25. argument Whose sundrie doctrines are not onely so opposite to the expresse words of Scripture as hath beene shewed in the first booke but also so blasphemous as sometimes the very Authors of them partely other learned Protestants their brethren do confesse it they are opposite to the true meaning of holie Scripture But manie doctrines of the Protestants are such Therefore c. CHAPTER XXVI THAT PROTESTANTS DOE FRVSstrate and make voide the ends of the coming and passion of Christ MY 26. argument wherewith I will proue that ProtestaÌ„ts coÌ„tradict the true sense of holie Scripture shal be because manie of their positions doe frustrate and make voide the coming and passion of Christ For one end of the coming and passion of Christ was Protest say Christ tooke not away sinne to take away and exhaust our sinnes 1. Ioan. 3. v. 5. And you know that he appeared to take away our sinnes Hebr. 9. v. 28. Christ was offered once to exhaust the sinnes of manie But Protestants as we shewed l. 1. c. 17. art 5. say that Christ did not take
they are filth dūgge and stinke in the face of God art 3. But if all If all good workes be sinne there can be no vertue good works be sinnes and mere sinnes surely there is no vertue at all For as Whitaker saieth l. 2. de Pec. orig c. 14. Tell vs how sinnes can be good workes Which is much more true if they be mere sinnes They set also allurements to sinne For as is shewed l. Protest set allurements to sinne 1. c. 2. art 1. they teach that God willeth sinne art 2. That sinne pleaseth God art 4. That God worketh sinne art 5. That God predestinateth to sinne artic 6. That he commandeth to sinne art 7. That he tempeth to sinne art 8. That he necessitateth to sinne art 10. That he iustifieth the wicked remaining wicked artic 17. That he will not haue his commandements kept And cap. 3. artic 11. That Christ was truely a sinner c 4. art 1. That the Angels in heauen do sinne c. 13. art 17. That faith being alone doth iustifie art 23. That it can neuer be lost c. 16. artic 4. That sinne must not be ouercomen of vs. art 13. That the Elect doe not sinne art 16. That all vsurie is not sinne Et c. 19. art 1. That the law of God is not possible art 2. That neuer anie kept it art 3. That none euer loued God with all his heart But what man in his witts can denie that these Positions Sinne pleaseth God God willeth doeth commandeth sinne He predestinateth necessitateth tempteth to sinne He will not haue his commandements kept Christ and the Angels in heauen doe sinne The wicked is iustified remayning wicked faith being alone doth iustifie it can neuer be lost sinne must not be ouercomen of the faithfull they themselues neuer sinne and such like be great enticements to sinne They take away also the obstacles or impediments They remoue impediments of sinne of sinne in teaching as we haue shewed l. 1. c. 2. art 3. That God hateth not sinne art 9. That God hateth not the faithfull when they worke wickednesse art 11. That he is not angrie with the faithfull whilest they sinne art 12. That he neuer punisheth for anie sinne committed art 23. That he damneth not men for sinne And c. 3. art 7. That Christ gaue no laws art 8. That he is no iudge c. 5. art 6. That the Ghospell promiseth saluation without anie condition of workes art 5. That it doth not reproue sinne c. 10. art 8. That in baptisme al sinnes past present and to come are forgiuen c. 16. art 1. That sinnes are not imputed to the faithfull art 2. That they are not mortall to them art 5. That seruing the flesh we may serue God art 6. That no sinnes cast of grace art 7. That sinnes can stand with grace artic 9. That to abstaine from sinnes is not necessarie to saluation artic 10. That sinne is not the cause of damnation artic 11. That we must not giue account of sinnes cap. 17. artic 12. That iustification is neuer lost artic 13. That the iustified need not feare to fall artic 16. That he is to suffer no punishment at all c. 18. art 4. That the faithfull are not to be iudged art 4. That Hell is no place art 7. That hell fire is no true fire And cap. 19. art 7. That the law is abrogated from the faithfull But it is most euident that taking away Gods wrath hatred and punishment of sinnes and sinners taking away Christs law-giuing and iudgement taking from men all feare of iudgement damnation wrath and hatred of God and of losse of iustice and saluation and putting securitie that men euen committing heynous sinnes are certaine of Gods loue of grace and eternall saluation and free from all punishment whatsoeuer all impediments of sinne on Gods parte are taken away and if anie beleiuing this doctrine do forbeare sinne it proceedeth not but from a naturall engrafted horror of sinne or els from feare or or shame of men Yea so euident it is that diuers positions of Protestants Protest confesse that some of their opinions allure to sinne are allurements to sinne as some Protestants confesse it For thus write the Wittembergians cited before cap. 25. That to denie a man to cooperate to his conuersion doth settle horrible wickednesse Which yet Protestants denie lib. 1. cap. 17. artic 15. Remonstrantes apud Hom. in Specim Cont. Belg. pag. 126. say The doctrine of their perseuerance in faith who haue once beleiued is of it nature and condition sufficiet to engender a securitie in men for to serue them as a cushion in midst of their sinnes Againe Of it selfe it is hurtfull to true pietie and good manners And yet Protestants teach thus libr. 1. cap. 13. art 23. Schlusselburg tom 7. Catal. writeth thus To pardon sinnes to come which one doth studie to commit is surely to graunt an Epicurean licence to sinne And yet this is Protestants doctrine l. 1. cap. 10. art 8. Melancthon in Cocleus in art 6. Confess August thus speaketh Now it is vsuall to speake of faith and faith cannot be vnderstood vnlesse pennance be preached Surely they poure new wine into ould vessels who preach faith without pennance without doctrine of the feare of God without the doctrine of the law accustome the people to a carnall kind of securitie That securitie is worse then all the errors vnder Poperie were And yet Protestants say that the Ghospell doth not reproue sinne doth not preach pennance promiseth saluation vpon condition of faith onely as is shewed l. 1. c. 5. art 5. 6. Hutter in Anal. Cōfess August p. 571. writeth that The error of the Anabaptists who denie that men once iustified can leese the holie Ghost doth giue full licence to commit all kind of villanie vnder the absolute perseuerance of those that are once iustified And yet this is the doctrine of Protestants l. 1. c. 17. art 12. other Protestants in Zanchius de Perseuer to 7. col 159. say that the opinion which teacheth that the faithfull cannot fall from grace taketh away pennance looseth the reines to concupiscence maketh a man secure that he dare sinne euen against his conscience And Liber Concord Luther c. de bonis oper That false and Epicurean opinion is sharpely to be reproued wherewith some feigne that faith and grace once receaued or saluation cannot be lost by anie sinne or wickednesse whatsoeuer albeit it be most freely committed Also other Protestants as Gualterus Praefat. Epist Rom. reporteth when they thinke seriously of pietie doe feare that we deuise to easie a way to saluation and least this doctrine breed a licēce to sinne and opē a gappe for men to dare to doe any thing Moreouer diuers of them confesse that men take occasion to sinne by their doctrine as Luther tom 5. in Gal. 6. Iames Andrews Conc. 4. in Luc. 21. Perkins de Serm. Dom. to 2. and in Gal. 5. ver 13. and others in Erasmus in Epist ad