Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	peter_n	pope_n	successor_n	2,110	5	8.9988	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A17442	Adelphomachia, or, The warrs of Protestancy being a treatise, wherein are layd open the wonderfull, and almost incredible dissentions of the Protestants among themselues, in most (if not all) articles of Protesta[n]cy, and this proued from their owne wordes & writinges / vvritten by a Cath. priest ; whereunto is adioyned a briefe appendix, in which is proued, first, that the ancient fathers, by the acknowledgments of the learned Protestants, taught our Cath. and Roman fayth, secondly, that the said fathers haue diuers aduantages about the Protestant writers, for finding out the true sense of the Scripture.	B. C.	1637 (1637)	STC 4263.7; ESTC S1838	109,763	196

(h) Luth. in Confess maiore in cana Domini Luther contrary to all Christians both Protestants and Catholiks Luther thus speaking of this point When I belieue that the only Humane Nature suffered for me then is Christ a Sauiour but of a base and small worth and himselfe needeth a Sauiour 4. That Christ did not dye for all the world but only for the Elect being most contrary not only to the sacred Scripture which sayth Christ (i) 1. Ioan. 2. 1. Tim. 2. dyed for the sinnes of the whole World but also almost to all learned Protestants is maintayned by (k) Calu. de arcana Dei Prouident p. 155. Caluin (l) Beza in respons ad Act. Colloq Montisbelgar part alt●ra p. 215. 221. Beza 5. That men not belieuing in Christ may be saued a most horrid blasphemy is maintayned by Swinglius who thus writeth thereof (m) Swingl in l. Ep. Swinglij Oecol l. 1. p. 39. Ethnicus si piam mentem domi fouerit Christianus est etiamsi Christum ignoret A Heathen if he beare within him a pious mind is a Christian though he be ignorant of Christ And herevpon Swinglius concludeth That (n) Swing tom 2. fol. 18. 559. Hercules Theseus Socrates Arist des c. are now in Heauen A point so euident that Echarius a learned Protestant thus writeth thereof Quod (o) In his Fasciculut Controu printed Lipsiae anno 1●●9 Socrates Aristides Numa Camillus Hercules Scipiones Catones alij Gentiles c. That Socrates Aristides Numa Camillus Hercules the Scipio'es the Cato'es and other Gentills are partakers of Heauen or eternall lyfe Swinglius writeth to the King of France whom the Tigurin Deuines Bullinger Gualterus and Hardenburgius c. do defend for this his Doctrine Thus far this Protestant That (p) In his Apol. fol. 27. prafix ● tom Swingl Gualterus (q) In Confess Eccles Bullinger (r) In vita Bulling Simlerus the (s) Bullinger in his preface of allowance to Swinglius his Exposition Tigurin Deuines maintayned this former Heresy with Swinglius appeareth from the references here set downe in the Margent From Christ. I come to Christs Successour to wit S. Peter Now the Primacy of S. Peter is maintayned by Caluin thus confessing The (t) Caluin is alledged thus to say in D. Whitguifts Defence p. 173. twelue Apostles had one among them to gouerne the rest Musculus thus teacheth The (u) Musculus so alledged by Whit. guift vbi sup à pag. 66. Celestiall spirits are not equall The Apostles themselues were not equall Peter is found in many places to haue beene chiefe among the rest And D. Whitguift himselfe thus auerreth Among (x) D. Whitguift vbi su●rd pag. 1●● the Apostles themselues there was one Chiefe c. that had chiefe authority ouer the rest c. that Schismes might be compounded Yet is this doctrine wholy denyed by most other Protestant writers The VII Paragraph TOuching more particularly the Bishop or Pope of Rome being S. Peters successour that the Popes Primacy is aboue other Bishops is maintayned by Melancthon thus writing Quemadmodum (y) Melanct in the Booke entituled C●nturia Epistolar Theologie Epist 74. sunt aliqui Episcopi qui prasunt pluribus Ecclesijs c. As certaine Bishops are president ouer many Churches so the Bishop of Rome is President ouer all Bishops And this Canonicall policy no wise man I thinke doth or ought to disalow The same Doctrine is also defended by Iohn Husse as Luther writeth thus saying Ioannes Husse (z) In. 〈◊〉 sert Act. ●0 ●on repugnare videtur c. Iohn Husse seemeth not to contradict why the Monarchy of the Pope should not be So much different are these former Authorities to the iudgments of all other Protestants who wholy reiect the Popes Primacy Now touching the Pope being Antichrist the Protestants do thus differ from among themselues First some of them teach Antichrist is not yet come to wit (a) In Ep. ●auli Cole los Thessal pag. ●40 Zanchius Franciscus (b) In his Prognosti●on f●nis noudi p. 74. Lambertus and some others And hereupon it is that M Doue (c) In his Sermon of his second comming of Christ versus fin●m chargeth some Protestants in this sort Some Protestants make a doubt whether Antichrist be yet reuealed or no. Now some others do thinke that Antichrist is come but that the Turke is this Antichrist Of this opinion is Melancthon for so he is alledged to thinke by M. (d) In his Theolog. Discourses p 1●8 Haruey Of the same iudgmēt also i● Bucer who tearmeth the Turke Ipsissimus (e) In his lib. psalm 5. psalm 22. f● 146. Antichristus as also M. Fox (f) In Act. Mon. of anno 1●76 pag. ●●● The VIII Paragraph TOuching those Protestants who belieue that the Pope is Antichrist obserue heere their great Dissentions concerning the tyme of Antichrists comming And first D. Willet (g) In Syn. p. ●00 placeth Antichrists first comming in the yeare 607. making Boniface the third to be the first Antichrist With whom agrees D. Whitaker saying (h) De Eccl. contr● Bellar. Contro 8● Quaest 4. pag. 141. Gregory the Great was the last true and holy Bishop of that Church c Therefore because our Aduersaries demand of vs the tyme of Antichrists first comming we designe and set downe to them the very tyme of his comming With whom conspires (i) In his Answere to a Counterfayte Catholike p. 36. D. Fulke Iulius (k) Vpon the Reuel 5.10 the great Protestant maketh Hildebrand who was Pope anno 1074. to be the first Antichrist with whom D. Downam seeme to conspire in these wordes (l) In his Treatise concerning Antichrist pag. 1●0 Gregory the seauenth alias Hildebrand was the first of the Popes who was openly acknowledged to be Antichrist Beza teacheth that Leo who was Pope anno Domini 440. did clearly (m) Beza Confess gener 7. Sect. 21. breath forth the arrogancy of the Antichristian Sea But M. Napper (n) Vpon the Reuel p. 66. ascendeth to higher tymes affirming that Antichrist came in anno Domini 313. and maintayning that Siluester the Pope was the first Antichrist But the Reformed Churches of (o) So relateth M. Hooker in his Ecclesiestic Policy Transiluania ascribe a greater antiquity to the comming of Antichrist who confidently auer that his first comming was in the yeare 200. Yet Sebastianus Francus no vulgar Protestant riseth higher placing Antichrists first comming in the dayes immediatly after the Apostles for thus he writeth For certaine (p) In Epist. de abrogundis in vniuersum statutis Ecclesiast throgh the worke of Antichrist the externall Church together with the Fayth and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure Spectatum admissi risum teneatis So incredible and indeed ridiculous are the Dissentions of the Protestants touching who is Antichrist and at what tyme

so to ascend to the Old we find touching Luthers Condemnation of the Apocalyps Bullinger thus to complayne Doctour Martin (e) Vpon the Apocalips Englished cap. 1. serm 1. fol. 2. Luther hath as it were sticked this booke by a sharpe Preface set before his first Edition of the New Testament in Dutch for which his iudgment good and learned Men were offended with him With Luther herein agree Kempnitius and Brentius in the places next herea●ter noted in the Margent and yet Caluin and the Protestants in England admit it for Canonicall In like sort the Epistle of Iames is tearmed by Luther Epistola (f) In pro legom b●ius Epist straminea An Epistle swelling Contentions Strawy and vnworthy altogether an Apostolicall spirit In the same manner the Magdeburgenses (g) Cent. l. 2. c. 4. col 55. Kempnitius (h) Exam. 4. Sess Concil Trident. and Brentius (i) Confess Witiemberg l. de sacra Scriptura do condemne the same Epistle with Luther as Apocryphall notwithstanding Caluin the Church of England acknowledge it for Canonicall Scripture In like sort Luther (k) Luther in Annotat. in hanc Epistol the Centurists Kempnitius and Brentius in the places aboue noted in the Margent condemne as Apocryphall the Epistle of Iude the second Epistle of Peter they rest vncertaine and doubtfull of the Authority of the second and third Epistle of Iohn But Erasmus more fully speaketh thereof his words are these The (l) In Prolegem ad hanc Epist Second and Third Epistle of Iohn are not to be taken as his Epistles but as written by some other man And yet all these are acknowledged for Scripture by Caluin the Caluinists and the Church of England Beza reiecteth the History of the adulterous Woman recorded in the Gospell of S. Iohn c. 8. And Bullinger (m) He is so charged by Laurentius Valla. a Sacramentary reiecteth that addition to our Lords Prayer For thyne is the Kingdome the power and glory c. And yet these parcells are taken for Scripture by other Sacramentaries Luther in like manner discanoneth the Epistle to the Hebrews (n) Prolegom Epist ad Haebreos maintayning that it was not written either by S. Paul or by any other Apostle for it contayneth sayth Luther certaine things contrary to the Apostolicall Doctrine With him conspire in iudgment Brentius Kempnitius the Magdeburgians in the places aboue quoted Touching the Foure Ghospells Luther to (o) Luth. Praefat. in Nouum Testam lib. de Scripturae Ecclesiae authoritate c. 3. extenuate depresse the Authority of three of them cēsureth that the Gospell of Iohn is the only fayre and true Gospell and to be preferred before the other three by many degrees he further maintayning that the generall Opinion of foure Gospells ought to be abandoned and relinquished he protesting that he ascribeth more Reuerence to the Epistles of Paul and Peter then to the other three Euangelists To come to the Old Testament The Booke of Baruch is accounted as Apocryphall by (p) L. 3. Instit. c. 10. §. 8. Caluin and (q) In Exam. 4. Sess Concil Trid. Kempnitius and yet is taken as Canonicall by most other Protestants since we do not find it in their writings to be reiected by them The Canticles is wholy reiected by (r) In Translat Latin suorum Bibliorum Castalio who maintaynes that it contaynes matter of wanton loue for which his Censure he is grieuously and sharpely reprehended euen by Beza (s) Beza in Praefat. in Iosue The Booke entituled Ecclesiastes is thus scurrilously traduced by Luther The Authour (t) Luther in Conuiuialibus titulo de Patriarchis Prophetis of Ecclesiastes seemes to ryde without spurrs or bootes only with bare stockings Yet is it taken for Scripture generally by the Caluinists The Booke of Iob is reuerenced for Canonicall Scripture by the Protestants of Englād and by Caluin and the Caluinists and yet Luther so contemneth it as that he thus plainly condemneth the said Booke The Argument (u) In Conuiuialibus ser titulo de Patriar● is Prophetis of Iob is a meere fiction inuented only for the setting downe of a true and liuely example of Patience Thus far of such parts only of the New and Old Testament which some Protestants repute as Apocryphall and therefore reiect them other Protestants acknowledg them as Canonicall and therefore take them for the true and vndoubted word of God Here before I leaue speaking of the reiecting or approuing of the Scripture I will adioyne thereto that whereas the most learned and moderate Protestants do so reuerence Moyses and the Apostles teaching and belieuing that their Pens were so directed by the Holy Ghost as that they did not nor could erre in their writings yet heare what is said to the contrary by other Protestants And first Luther thus conuitiateth Moyses Moyses (x) Luth●● tom 3. Wittenberg in Psalm 41. fol. 423. tom 3. German fol. 40. in Colloq mensal German fol. 152. 153. had his lipps vnpleasant stopped angry c. Do you collect all the Wisdome of Moyses and of the Heathen Philosophers and you shall fynd them to be before God either Idolatry or Hypocriticall Wisdome or if it be politick the wisdome of wrath c. Moyses had his Lips full of gaule and anger c. Away therefore with Moyses Luther and other Protestants further rayle in great acerbity of language and intemperate words at the Apostles for thus he writeth expresly against S. Peter Peter (y) Luther in Epist. ad Galat. c. 1. after the English Translation fol. 33. 34. tom 5. Wittenbeg anno 1554. fol. 290. the chiefe of the Apostles did liue and teach extra verbum Dei besides the Word of God The Centuristi thus taxe S. Paul Paul doth turne (z) Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 10. col 580. to Iames the Apostle and a Synod of Presbyters being called together he is perswaded by Iames and the rest that for the offended Iewes he should purify himselfe in the Temple whereunto Paul yeeldeth which certainly is no small slyding of so great a Doctour D. Bancroft alledgeth out of Zanchius his Epistles that a Caluinist thus said Yf (a) In his Suruey of the pretended Discipline pag. 37● Paul should come to Geneua and preach the same houre that Caluin did I would leaue Paul and heare Caluin Caluin thus bouldly affirmeth of S. Peter Peter (b) In Comment in omnes Pauli Episto●as p. 510. erred to the schisme of the Church to the endangering of Christian liberty and the o●erthrow of the grace of God Conradus Schluffeth 〈◊〉 chargeth Caluin to maintayne and say that The Apostles (c) In Theolog. Caluinist l. 2. fol 40. alledged the Prophets in anoth●● sense then was meant Brentius playnely writeth thus S. Peter (d) In Apol Confess de Con●t●ijs p. 900. chiefe of the Apostles and Barnabas after the Holy Ghost receaued

presently they dissent in ech ones particular construction giuen thereof They resembling many lynes which meet together in one Center but then presently they breake of and runne seuerall wayes The Protestants do no lesse disagree touching the manner of receauing the body of Christ for First all the Lutherans mantaine with the Catholiks that the body of Christ is receaued with the Corporall mouth But Caluin teacheth it is truly present and receaued with the mouth of Fayth in regard whereof as placing a great Mystery therein Caluin thus breaketh forth in words Nihil (1) Caluin l. 4. Instit c 17. §. 7. restat c. Nothing remaineth but that I breake forth into admiration of this mistery the which neither the vnderstanding is able to conceaue nor the tongue to deliuer in words With Caluin agree herein D. (2) D. Whitak contra Duraeum pag 109. Whitaker The Confession (3) The Confession of Belgia in the English Harmony pag. 4●1 of Belgia M. (4) Hooker Eccles pol. l. 5. sect 67. pag. 174. Hooker (5) Bucer inscript Anglic. p. 548. 549. Bucer and many others Yet this doctrine is impugned by Peter (6) Peter Martyr in his Epistles annexed to his Common places in English p. 107. epist. 25. Martyr (7) Aretius serm 1. de Coena Aretius Ludouicus (8) Alamannus in positionib apud Lugdunens editis anno 1566. Alamannus reproouing it in these words Neque etiam per fidem c. Neither is the body taken by the mouth of Fayth after an incomprehensible manner as they say for this is clearely imaginary and is euidently repugnant to the word of God Finally the former doctrine is denyed by all our English (9) In their Christian letter to M. Hooker pag. 35. Puritans Touching those words Thou art (t) Math. 16. Peter and vpon this rocke will I buyld my Church c. Now heere the Protestants to auoyde this pressing Authority for the proofe of Peters Primacy do answere seuerally and most distractedly For Caluin (u) Lib. 4. Instit c. 6. §. 6. sayth that here by the word Rock is vnderstood Christ figuratiuely (x) Eras in hunc locum Erasmus maintayneth that euery one of the faythfull is vnderstood thereby But (y) Lib. de Potestate Papae Luther that the Word Rock there signifyeth The Confession of our Fayth So disparate the Protestants are in themselues in the construction of this Text. In like sort they are not much lesse various in expounding that Article of the Creed Descendit ad inferos He descended into Hell For (*) Bucer in Math. ●● Bucer by the word Hell vnderstandeth the Graue by the Figure Epexegesis or rather by an idle Tautology Yet Caluin and most though not all of the Caluinists do interprete by the word Hell that Christ suffered really and truly the paynes of Hell For thus Caluin discourseth of this text and the sense thereof Since (z) Calu. l. 1. Instit. c. 16 ●um ●0 11. Christ only by corporall Death could profit vs nothing his soule therefore ought to fight with euerlasting Death that by this meanes be might expiate our wickednes and punishment To whose construction herein (a) In Ca●●ches an●● 155● Brentius subscribeth Yea Caluin is so pre●ipitious and resolute in his exposition of the former words as that he tearmeth all others Perditos (b) L. ● Iustit c. 26. num ●1 nebulenes qui doctrinam istam solatij plenam exagitant Lost and damned fellowes who should call in question this most Comfortable Doctrine So iust reason had that Blessed Martyr Father Campian to burst out in a Christian and Zealous feruour saying (c) In ratio redd Academ rat 8. O Tempora Tempora cuiusmodi monstrum aluistis Touching that place of Scripture I and my Father are one (*) Caluin in Ioan ●● Caluin differently from all others affirmeth thus This text sheweth not that Christ is Consubstantiall with his Father Which exposition of Caluin is also defended by D. Whitaker contra Campian rat 8. pag. 123. In like sort that Sentence in Psalm 2. Thou art my sonne this day I haue begotten thee Which text proueth the Diuinity of Christ euen in the iudgment of most Protestants Yet Caluin differently expoundeth it from them thus w●●●ing in Hebr. c. 1. Friuola Augustini argutia est c. The subtility of Austin is here friuolous who by the word H●di● interpreteth Eternall and Continuall Againe where we read 1. Ioan. 5. There be three which giue testimony in Heauen The Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and those three b● one alledged not only by the Fathers and Catholiks but also euen by most Protestants to proue the Diuinity of Christ yet Caluin vpon this place thus differently from them all expoundeth these words saying Quod dicit tres esse v●um ad essentiam non refertur sed ad consensum Whereas it is here said these three are one this is to be referred not to the essence but rather to consent Lastly to auoyd prolixity concerning the word Eloim in Genes c. 1. M. Willet vpon Genes in c. 1. thus vrgeth 11 Against the Iewes who deny the Trinity we haue euident proofe in this Chapter where the word Eloim c. Which Interpretation Peter Martyr and Zanchius in Hunnius his Anti-paraus pag. 16. 19. and many other Protestants of note do approue yet Caluin diss nteth in the Construction thereof from them all thus writing in Genes c. 1. Ex verbo Eloim colligero solent c. They are accustomed to infer from the Word Eloim that there are three persons in God but because the proofe of so great a matter seemeth to me but weake I will not insist in that word but rather will admonish my Readers that they take heed of such violent Glosses and interpretations Thus far of Caluins constructions of the former Texts against the iudgment almost of all other Protestants to impugne with the Arians the Diuinity of Christ And thus far for a tast of some few texts of Holy Scripture receauing from our Aduersaries Pens most contrary constructions So as admitting one of the said Constructions to be true it followeth necessarily that all the rest are false for they are in sense and in the inferences thereof most incompatible one with another This point shall be made more euident hereafter by setting downe many points of Catholike Religion maintayned by learned Protestants from the Scriptures and therfore the said Protestants dissent wholy in interpreting the Scriptures touching those Doctrines from other Protestants not belieuing the said Doctrines The V. Paragraph I Will in this next place insist in our Aduersaries disagreements touching their Liturgy or booke of Common Prayer chiefly peculiar to England shewing how often the Protestants through diuersity of Iudgments at seuerall tymes haue altered the same the later Edition thereof euer condemning the former And to begin The Reformed Communion Booke of Prayer begun by

Luther and the Lutheran Churches the oblation of the Sacrifice excepted was so agreable and consenting with the Roman Church that the Confession of Augusta thus speaketh thereof Our (d) Cap. de missa s● also Osiander Cent 16. pag. 163. Churches are wrongfully accused for abolishing the Masse for the Masse is still retayned among vs and celebrated with great Reuerence c. But this Liturgy or Common Booke of Prayer being reiected in England another was made in King Edward the Sixt his raigne by the aduice of Bucer Peter Martyr and Cramner and presumed as the (e) In the Statutes 2.3 of K. Edw. 6.6.1 Statutes affirme to be done by the ayde of the Holy Ghost and ratifyed by the Authority of the high Court of Parlament This Booke of Common prayer printed by Edward Whitchurch Cum priuilegio ad imprimendum solùm anno 1549 maketh speciall defence of (f) Fol. 116. Prayer for the Dead and Intercession (g) Fol. 117. and offering of our prayers by Angells of (h) Fol. 129. Baptisme by Lay persons in tyme of necessity and of the (i) Ibidem Grace of that Sacrament of the (k) Fol. 137. 139. Priests absolution of the Sicke Penitent and the Priests blessing of the bryde brydegrome Of the (l) Fol. 144. Annointing of the Sicke Of Confirmation (m) Fol. 132. of Children Of (n) Fol. 116. consecrating the Eucharist with the signe of the Crosse Finally to omit some other Catholike points confirmed and practised in that Communion Booke Of the (o) Fol. 1●8 Chrisme and the Childs annoynting and of (p) Fol. 126. Exorcisme Now no sooner Queene Elizabeth came to the Crowne but that the former Liturgy of King Edward being wholy abolished another was made Yet not so perfect in all points but that M. Parker thus speaketh hereof The Day (q) Against Symboli●ing part 1. ca. 5. sect 1. pag. 4. starre was not risen so high in their dayes when yet Queene Elizabeth reformed the defects of King Edwards Communion Booke And further he sayth It is (r) Ibidem Sect. 17. pag. 39. not the same Booke with tha● of King Edwards but it is altered in very many sundry Places Yea so altered as when it was proposed to be Confirmed by the Parlament it was refused This point of altering the Communion Booke of Prayer is so euident that M. Cartwright acknowledgeth it in these words The (s) 2. Reply part 1. pag. 41. Church of England changed the Booke of Common Prayer twyce or thryce after it had receaued the knowledge of the Ghospell Now all what is aboue set downe touching the Communion Booke I thinke good briefly to recapitulate in the words of Doctour Doue an eminent Protestant thus fully discoursing of this point (t) Persuasion to English Recu●ants pa. ●● Concerning the Booke of Common Prayer when the Masse was fi st put downe King Henry had his English Liturgy and that was iudged absolute and without exception But when King Edward came to the Crown● that was condemned and another set forth in the place which Peter Martyr and Bucer did approue as very consonant to the word of God When Queene Elizabeth began her reigne the forsaid Booke was iudged to be full of imperfections and a new deuised and allowed by the Consent of the Clergy But about the middle of her reigne we grew weary of that Booke and great meanes haue beene wrought to abandon that and establish another which although it was not obtayned yet we do at the least at euery change of Prince change our Booke of Common Prayers We be so wanton that we know not what we would haue Thus far D Doue touching our English Protestants disagreements for the approuing or reiecting of their Liturgy or Common Booke of Prayer Now how yet the Puritans rest affected towards the last Edition of the Communion Booke in Queeene Elizabeth her Dayes may appeare from their censuring it in these words The (u) These words are related by D. Whitguift as spoken by the Puritans in his Defence pag. 474. forme of the Communion Booke is taken from the Church of Antichrist as the reading of the Epistles the Gospells c. The most of the Prayers the manner of ministring the Sacraments c. Againe our more late Puritans do thus Syndicate and condemne the Communion Booke Many (x) In the booke entituled The Petition of twenty two Preachers in London things in the Communion Booke are repugnant to the word of God And more In the Communion Booke there are things of which there is no sense there is Contradiction in it euen of necessary and essentiall points of Religion Other Puritans thus write against it The (y) These words are alledged in the Suruey pag. ●0 14. Communion Booke is not agreeable to the Word of God in many things And yet more The (z) Certaine Considerations printed anno 1605. f. 10 11. 17. Protestants Communion Booke and seruice is naught it hath grosse and palpable repugnancy in it This point is further made euident by the Authority of Doctour Couell who being an Aduersary to the Puritans deliuereth their Sentence touching their extreme dislyke of the Communion Booke in these words The (a) D. Couell in his Exam pa. 1●8 Communion Booke is bouldly despised Grosse errours and manifest impietyes meaning in the iudgment of the Puritans are in the Communion Booke Thus far of the Protestants irreconciliable Disagreements touching the seuerall Formes of Liturgyes or Cōmunion Bookes of Prayer since the Catholike Religion was first abolished in England From whence it ineuitably followeth that during all these seuerall yeares of alterations of their Communion Bookes they neuer enioyed if their owne Censures and iudgments be perfect a true forme how to pray to Allmighty God The VI. Paragraph I Will next come to their Disagreements touching Christ our Redeemer And 1. touching Christs Nature (b) Beza l. de Vnitate Eccles Beza differently from most other Protestants teacheth that two Hypostaticall Vnions are constituted in Christ the one of the Soule with the Body the other of the Diuinity with the Humanity (c) Beza in Hesbusium Beza further teacheth that Christ is not begotten of the Substance of the Father That Christ is not Consubstantiall with his Father Luther thus writeth Anima (d) Luth. contra Latimer mea odit hoc verbum Homousion My very Soule hateth this word Homousios or Consubstantialis 2. That Christ by his Workes did merit nothing to himselfe contrary to the iudgments almost of all Christians is maintayned by Caluin who tearmeth this Doctrine A Foolish (e) Instit l. 2. c. 17. §. 10. Curiosity and rash Opinion The same blasphemy is maintayned by (f) In his booke entituled the wicked Mammon Tindall and by Iohn (g) Act. Mon. pag. 487. Teuxbury 3. That Christ suffered not only according to his Humane Nature but also according to his Diuinity is defended by