2. in what manner 3. who shall be iudged 1. Christ shall be the Iudge as here it is called the tribunall seat of God and whereas to the Corinth 2. ep 5.10 it is named the throne or tribunall seat of Christ thence is it gathered that there is the same tribunall of Christ and God as Christ saith in the Gospell all which the father hath is mine but if any thinke there is any difference to be made between these two it may be this the name of Christ properly est indicium verbi in carne positi signifieth the word placed in our flesh that then is the tribunall seat of Christ wherein he sitteth till he haue put downe all his enemies vnder his feete and perfectly reconciled the world and gathered together all that shall be conuerted then shall he deliuer vp the kingdome to his father and then shall it be the tribunall seate of God c. But here Origen somewhat misseth for beside that in both places it is called the tribunall of Christ this tribunall of Christ is the seat of iudgement wherein Christ shall sit and iudge in the last day not as God onely but as God and man and after this iudgement finished though Christ shall not raigne in that manner as nowe he doth because all his enemies shall be subdued yet he shall haue a celestiall kingdome still and the same to continue for euer though not to be administred in that manner as it is now in his Church 2. Touching the manner here an allusion is made vnto the tribunall seates of terrene iudges who sit aloft in their throne ne lateant conspectui c. that nothing be hid from their sight either touching the punishment of the guiltie and clearing of the innocent so nothing shall be hid vnto that supreame Iudge in that day but all things shall be manifested vnto him euen the secrets of the conscience not onely vnto God but vniuersae creatura rationabili to euery reasonable creature the Angels shall read the booke of conscience which then shall be vnfolded atque ita criminum nostrorum in quibus nunc vnum saltem testem pati confundimur c. and so of our sinnes whereof we are now ashamed to haue our witnes we shall then haue the innumerable companies of Angels witnesses c. This is true that there is nothing now so hid and secret euen the thoughts of our hearts which shall not then be made manifest for God shall discouer mens secret thoughts and acts but the Angels shall not then reade the bookes of the conscience of themselues as knowers of the heart but first discouered and vnfolded by Christ. 3. Origen also in the same place touching those which shall be iudged mooueth this doubt how euerie one is said to be iudged according to their workes 2. Cor. 5.10 seeing there is no man but hath both good workes and bad to this doubt he supposeth two answears 1. that some may be imagined to be so good that no euill be found in them some so euill that no good hath place in them but this he refuseth for neither is any so perfectly good nor yet so absolutely euill no not Iudas that is void of all goodnes 2. and to say that one and the same man shall goe to paradise for his good workes and to hell for his euill is more vnreasonable 3. so then he concludeth and insisteth vpon this answear that there is no good accounted in them vbi praeponderant mala in whom the euill things doe weigh downe in number nor yet any euill in them in quibus praeponderant bona in whom the good things are more in weight and number but this is no sufficient answear neither for euen in the Saints their sinnes are more in number then their good workes as Iob saith If God should call him to account he was not able to answear him one thing of a thousand Iob. 9.2 4. wherefore God shall iudge men according to their workes not the quantitie and number of them but the qualitie whether the good things which they doe proceede from aliuely faith and the euill which they commit be done rather of infirmitie and weaknes then of wilfulnes and obstinacie and wherein they fayle if they are restored by repentance which is the most speciall worke of faith Quest. 20. Whether the saying of the Prophet alleadged v. 11. be rightly cited by the Apostle There appeareth a twofold difference betweene the Prophets words as they doe stand in the prophecie and as they are here cited by the Apostle both as touching the words sense 1. Isay saith 45.23 I haue sworne by my selfe but here the Apostle I liue saith the Lord but this in effect is all one for whereas the Prophet saith God hath sworne the Apostle setteth downe the forme of Gods oath who because he hath not a greater to sweare by sweareth by himselfe and whereas the Apostle saith euerie tongue shall sweare by me the Apostle following the Septuagint saith euerie tongue shall confesse which is a consequent of the other for he that sweareth confesseth God and calleth him to witnesse and to be a iudge against him that sweareth falsely 2. Concerning the sense that which is there generally spoken of God is here particularly applied vnto Christ for beside that the glorie which is due vnto the Godhead belongeth vnto the person of Christ as beeing one God with his father these reasons may be giuen of the particular application of this place vnto Christ. 1. because the Apostle maketh speciall mention of his person and vpon this occasion that which is common to him with the father and the holy Ghost is specially applied to Christ. 2. because that Christ seemed by his death to be abased this is inserted to shew that there was no imminution or decrease by that his humiliation and abasing in his humane nature of his diuine glorie at all 3. because mention is here made of iudgement which is committed to Christ this place is specially applied to him who is appointed to be iudge of the world see Iunius further parallel 25. lib. 2. 21. Quest. When this prophesie shall be fulfilled that euery tongue shall confesse vnto God v. 11. 1. Haymo vnderstandeth it onely of the elect not of the wicked for the praise of God becommeth not their mouth but the Apostle by this Scripture prooueth that which he said before we shall all appeare before the iudgement seat of Christ this then is spoken generally of all 2. Gorrhan following the interlin glosse referreth it to the inward conscience which is one and the same in euery one and so he obserueth three things here in this great Iudge his eternitie I liue his generall power euery knee shall bow and his infallibilitie for knowledge the very conscience shall confesse him but it is euident that the Apostle speaketh not onely of the internall but of the externall confession because the Prophet saith whence this sentence is taken euery tongue
which Bellarmine out of Adrianus Finus lib. 6 flagell Iudcor c. 80. and Damasus pontifical would prooue that S. Marke writ his Gospel first at Rome and afterward turned it into Greeke at Aquilea But this is verie improbable 1. Because the Greeke tongue was then more generally vsed then the Latine and S. Paul writing to the Romanes spake in the Greeke tongue for the reason so also would S. Matthewe haue done 2. If the Greeke were translated out of the Latine why then doe not the Romanists vse a Latine translation answerable to the Greeke whereas their vulgar translation much differeth from the Greeke some where it addeth as Mark. 1.1 the name Isaia the Prophet is inserted sometime it leaueth out as Mark. 6.11 all that clause is omitted verily verily I say vnto you it shall be easier for Sodome and Gomorrha in the day of iudgement then for that citie sometime it choppeth and changeth as c. 5.1 Garasenes for Gadarens It remaineth then that the Newe Testament was originally written in the Greeke tongue for the reasons before alleaged 3. The questions discussed Quest. 1. Of the word Testament what it signifieth and of what things it must be vnderstood 1. The Hebrew word berith signifieth both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a compact or couenant made betweene parties as Aquila translateth as Hierome witnesseth in Malach. 2. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a testament or disposition of ones last will as the word is vsed by the Apostle Heb. 9.17 2. Both these acceptions and takings of the word agree vnto the holy Gospel first it is a couenant betweene God and his people the Lord offring reconciliation on his part and requiring conditions to be performed on our part as in the Law obedience and perfect keeping of the lawe so now the obedience of faith in Christ our Mediator and Reconciler It is also a Testament not with any relation vnto vs but onely in respect of the Testator and will-maker Christ Iesus who ratified and confirmed both the Old and New Testament by his death in the one prefigured and promised in the other exhibited and performed the testamentorie tables are the holy Scriptures both of the Old and Newe Testament the witnesses are the Prophets and Apostles the writers also of this Testament the seales are the Sacraments both of the one and the other 3. The Old and newe couenant and Testament are one and the same in substance both in respect of the parties betweene whom the couenant and conuention is made God and his Church and of the ende and scope which is to bring vs vnto the euerlasting inheritance but the manner of dispensation is diuerse according to the condition of the times and the qualitie of the persons 4. This couenant made betweene God and man some distinguish into the couenant of nature and grace but euerie couenant now indeede is rather of grace the naturall couenant made betweene the Creator and Man in Paradise was violated by his transgression and disobedience the couenant which now remaineth is wholly to be ascribed vnto grace and it is either of some temporall grace and benefit and that either generall as was that which the Lord made with Noah not to destroy the world any more with waters Gen. 9. or particular as was the promise made to Abraham to inherite the land of Canaan Gen. 15.18 and that made to Phineas concerning the priesthoode Numb 25.12 either of spirituall graces as of the remission of sinnes and the inheriting of euerlasting life in Christ. 2. Quest. Of the diuerse significations of the old and newe Testament 1. The old Testament is 1. either taken for the doctrine of the lawe which required exact obedience to the commandements vnder the most grieuous commination of malediction vnto the transgressors yet couertly was propounded vnto them the doctrine of repentance and faith in Christ vnder the shadowes and rudiments of the Law which were imposed vpon that people partly to humble them and to bow downe their stiffe necks partly to discerne them from other nations and partly to lead them by the hand as vnto Christ so in this sense the old Testament 1. comprehendeth the doctrine of legall obedience 2. the ceremoniall and ministeriall part of their legall rites and seruice 3. the externall policie and regiment in these respects the old Testament is abolished and the Lord saith he will make a newe couenant with the house of Israel Ierem. 31.31 2. the old Testament is taken for the writings and tables of the scriptures in which sense it is not abolished one iotte thereof shall not perish Matth. 5.18 2. The Newe Testament also is taken diuersely 1. either for the spirituall doctrine which requireth obedience of faith in Christ without any legall obseruations 2. or for the Sacraments as Christ calleth the Eucharist the Newe Testament in his blood in the institution of his last supper 3. or for the writings of the Euangelists and Apostles So it is new 1. because it succeeded the old 2. because it setteth forth the newe doctrine of faith without legall rites 3. it hath new sacraments a new forme of worship a new kind of Church 4. it is confirmed after a newe manner not by the blood of beasts but by the most holy blood of the Blessed Mediator 3. Quest. Of the bookes of the newe Testament their number and authoritie 1. Concerning the number and authoritie of the bookes of the Newe Testament there is no question among the Christians though the obstinate Iewes wilfully refuse them all they are 27. in number which Athanasius in Synops. distinguisheth into these fiue orders 1. the foure Euangelists 2. the Acts of the Apostles 3. the 7. Canonicall Epistles one of S. Iames 2. of S. Peter 3. of S. Iohn and one of S. Iude 4. the 14. Canonicall epistles of S. Paul 5. the Propheticall booke of the Reuelation But all these may be reduced to 3. kinds the historicall doctrinall propheticall bookes as is before shewed in the argument 2. But these books of the New Testament were not alwaies receiued with the same approbation 1. Some were euer held to be of vndoubted authoritie as the 4. Euangelists the Acts of the Apostles the 1. of S. Peter the 1. of S. Iohn all S. Pauls Epistles excepting onely that to the Hebrewes 2. Some were doubted of by a fewe but of the most receiued as the 2. of Peter the 2. and 3. of Iohn one of Iames one of Iude that to the Hebrewes and the Apocalypse But at the length these bookes were receiued and acknowledged for Canonicall by a generall consent 3. Other bookes besides these were priuately receiued by some in the Church and were called Ecclesiasticall as the Acts of Paul the Epistle of Barnabas the Reuelation of Peter the Gospell according to the Hebrews 4. Some bookes were foisted in by Heretikes and more generally reiected of the Church as the Gospell of Andrew Thomas Matthias the Acts of Peter Thomas Matthias and of the
other Apostles which were iudged to be Apochryphall bookes and of no authoritie 1. because in the writings of those which succeeded the Apostles no mention is made of them 2. the stile is diuerse from the stile of the Apostles 3. and the doctrine contained in those bookes dissenting from the doctrine of the Apostles 3. Beside these two latter sorts of bookes all the rest are vndoubtedly held to be Canonicall and of equall authoritie and therefore that distinction of Sixtus Senensis is to be taken heede of who calleth some bookes of the New Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 canonicall of the first sort some 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 canonicall of the second sort which were sometime doubted of for by this meanes should they not be of equall and the like authoritie And beside he saith that these latter were held by some of the fathers to be Apochryphall bookes vnderstanding Apochryphal bookes for such as had an hid and vnknowne author But indeede the Apochrypha are so called not for that their author was vnknowne for then diuerse of the Canonicall bookes should be Apochrypha but because they were of an hid and obscure authoritie in which sense none of the fathers euer held any of the Canonical bookes of the New Testament to be Apochrypha 4. As the Heretikes brought in counterfeit bookes of their owne into the New Testament so they reiected diuerse parts of the Canonical bookes 1. Faustus the Manichie held diuerse things to be false in the New Testament Augustin lib. 33. cont Faust. c. 3. 2. The Ebionites receiued none but the Gospel according to Saint Matthew Iren. l. 1. c. 26. 3. the Marcionites onely allowed S. Lukes Gospel Epiphan haeres 42.4 the Acts of the Apostles and S. Pauls epistles the Tatiane and Seueriane heretikes reiected Euseb. l. 4. c. 29. 5. Marcion and Basilides the epistles to Timothie Titus and to the Hebrewes Hierom. praefat ad Titum 4. Places of doctrine in generall 1. Doct. Of the excellencie of the Newe Testament aboue and beyond the Old 1. It excelleth in the the matter and doctrine the law promiseth life onely to those that keep it the Gospel vnto those which beleeue in Christ Rom. 10.5 6. 2. In the subiect the lawe was written in tables of stone but the Gospel is written by the spirit of God in the fleshie tables of our hearts 2. Cor. 3.2 3. In the end the old Testament was the ministration of death and the killing letter the other is the ministration of the spirit which giueth life 2. Cor 3.6 7. 4. In the condition and qualitie the law imposed the hard yoke and seruitude of ceremonies which was impossible to be borne Act. 15.10 but Christs yoke is easie Math. 11. which of seruants adopteth vs to be the sonnes of God Rom. 8.15 5. In the minister Moses was the typical Mediator of the Olde Testament but Christ the Lord and builder of the house is the Mediator of the New Heb. 3.3 6. In the fruites and effects the Old Testament could not purge the conscience from sinne but the sprinkling of the blood of Christ purgeth the conscience from dead workes Heb. 9.13 14. 7. In the manner the old Testament was folded vp in types and figures as Moses vailed the glorie of his face but now we see the glorie of the Lord in the Gospell with open face 2. Cor. 3.18 8. In the ratification the old Testament was confirmed with the blood of beasts the New by the death of Christ quest 17.18 9. In the seales the old was attended vpon by bloodie sacrifices and other such like hard Sacraments as circumcision which was painefull to the flesh the New hath easie and vnbloodie sacraments as the seales neither so many in number namely Baptisme and the Eucharist 10. Another excellencie is in persons whom this New Testament concerneth which is not giuen onely to one people and nation as the old was but vnto the Catholike Church of God dispersed ouer the face of the earth as the Apostles are commanded to goe and teach all nations Matth. 28.19 In these respects the Apostle thus giueth preheminence to the New Testament before the old Heb. 8.6 he hath obtained a more excellent office in as much as he is the Mediator of a better Testament which is established vpon better promises Not that Christ was not Mediator also of the old Testament for without him neither can there be any Church nor couenant made with the Church but because Christ but shadowed forth in the old Testament is more fully reuealed and manifested in the New 5. Places of confutation 1. Controv. Against those which thinke it is against the nature of the New Testament to be committed to writing Of this opinion are certaine of a fantasticall spirit which to this purpose abuse that place of Ieremie 32.33 I will write my lawe in their hearts and that of S. Paul 2. Cor 3.3 You are our epistle written not with inke but with the spirit whence they would inferre that the Newe Testament is not to be written but that it consisteth in reuelation and the instinct of the Spirit Contra. 1. If the Newe Testament were not to be extant in writing then the Apostles had done a superfluous and vnnecessarie worke in writing the bookes of the Newe Testament whereunto they were directed by the spirit of God and S. Iohn is directly commanded to write Apocal. 14.13 and S. Paul saith that all Scripture is giuen by inspiration 2. Tim. 3.16 The spirit of God then mooued them to put in writing these holy bookes of the Newe Testament which are part of the Scripture 2. It followeth not because the Lord writeth the Gospel in our hearts by his spirit that therefore it is not to be written for by the writing thereof which is preached and read saith is wrought in the heart by the operation of the spirit as the Apostle saith Rom. 10.17 that faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the word And againe the Prophet there sheweth a difference betweene the lawe and the Gospell the law gaue Precepts but could not incline the heart to obedience but the Gospel doth not onely command faith but by the operation of the spirit worketh the same thing which it requireth 3. In the other place of the Apostle 1. they would make the Apostle contrarie to himselfe as though he should speak against the writing of Euangelical precepts whereas the Apostle did write that very epistle with inke 2. he speaketh not of the Gospel but of the Corinthians whom he calleth his Epistle 3. and by the latter in that place he vnderstandeth not the writing with inke or such like but the externall doctrine without the grace and life of the spirit such as the doctrine of the Law was 2. Controv. Against the Romanists which hold that the writing of the Gospel and other Scriptures is not simply necessarie to saluation First we will examine the arguments which are brought by them to confirme this their
weakenesse came vpon them by their owne apostasie and falling away from God and that light which they had they depraued neither did they acknowledge their infirmitie but became vaine and foolish in the opinion of their owne strength neither is God debter or bound vnto any but bestoweth his graces freely 2. Pererius disput 16. insisteth onely vpon the first part of this answeare shewing that there is a double kind of ignorance vna est causa culpae one kind of ignorance is that which is the cause of fault or sinne and this excuseth there is an other cuius causa culpa est the cause whereof is our fault and this excuseth not and such was the ignorance of the heathen which was caused by their owne wilfull neglecting and abusing of the light of nature giuen vnto them 3. Peter Martyr hath yet a further answer he distinguisheth between the ignorance of the heathen and their imbecillitie or weakenesse this the heathen would not haue pretended because they ascribed all vnto freewill and therefore they would not haue complained of want of strength the Apostle then toucheth that which was most likely to haue beene obiected by thē namely their ignorance sheweth how euen in that behalf they were also inexcusable c. But seeing as is shewed before euē their natural knowledge was insufficient to saluation the same doubt remaineth stil therfore those two other exceptions concerning their imbecillitie which P. Martyr mentioneth as that it happened by their owne default and that they did not practise that little knowledge which they had but abused it may also be admitted touching their ignorance as before Pareus answeared sufficiently 4. Hereunto further may be added that distinction of ignorance which Gryneus borroweth from Augustine not eueris one which is ignorant is excused sed is solùm qui non habuit vnde disceret but he onely that had not whence to learne And therefore S. Paul excuseth himselfe by his ignorance that he persecuted Christ I did it ignorantly thorough vnbeleefe 1. Tim. 1.13 But such was not the ignorance of God which the Gentiles had hauing naturall meanes offred vnto them which they depraued and abused Quest. 59. v. 21. How the Gentiles are said to haue knowne God and yet glorified him not as God 1. Some thinke that in Scripture that ignorance which is caused by a mans owne fault when he may haue knowledge if he will himselfe it is called by the name of science and knowledge in Scripture as Ioh. 7.28 Christ saith to the Iewes ye both know me and whence I am because they might haue knowne if they would Iustin. resp 140. ad 44. Gentium so also Photius and Sedulius But this is not the Apostles meaning here for he saith not when they might haue knowne God but when they knewe God they therefore had some knowledge of him 2. Some thinke that they had the true knowledge of God but they against this knowledge malitiously and against their owne conscience worshipped other gods so Ambrose Anselm But 1. it cannot be shewed that any of the Philosophers no not they which come nearest vnto the truth had the true knowledge of God for euen Socrates Plato Seneca allowed the worship of the heathen gods and practised it as is before shewed qu. 57. and if any of them thought that the images were no gods yet those which they worshipped were either deuils or Angels as Athanas. sheweth orat cont idol 2. the Apostle here saith that they became vaine in their imaginations which sheweth that they were without the true knowledge of God Anselm answereth that they had once the true knowledge of God and afterward lost it But the Apostle saith otherwise that they did withhold the truth in vnrighteousnesse v. 18. they lost not that knowledge of the truth which they had but suppressed it and kept it vnder with their vaine imaginations 3. Origen seemeth to thinke that they were vtterly voide of all true knowledge of God dum formas imagines requirunt in Des in semetipsis imaginem Dei perdiderunt while they imagined formes and images to be in God they lost in themselues the image of God for there were some Philosophers which held God to be a spirit without any forme or image 4. Some whereas it is said Ioh. 1. the world knewe him not and yet here the Apostle saith when they knewe God c. giue this solution that the world knewe the onely God but not the Sonne Gorrham But the Apostle speaketh here onely of such knowledge of God as naturally may be attained vnto but the knowledge of the Trinitie exceedeth the strength of nature 5. Wherefore the Apostle is thus to be vnderstood that they knewe the true God in part but not perfectly they held some truths concerning the diuine nature but they mingled many vntruthes and falsities therewith they acknowledged a God but they either denied his prouidence and power or they communicated the duine honour vnto others which were not gods and thus they knewe him and yet knew him not In this sense Christ said to his Apostles Ioh. 14.4 Whether I goe ye knowe and the way ye knowe and yet Thomas saith immediately Lord we knowe not whether thou goest how then can we knowe the way So they knewe Christ because they sawe him and he was among them but yet they knewe him not perfectly his power they as yet did not fully vnderstand So the Gentiles knew God in some sort but such an one as he was they did not knowe Augustine to this purpose giueth instance in one of their chiefe Philosophers Hermes Trismigestus how he confesseth many things of the true God the maker of the world tamen obscuritate cordis ad ista delabitur c yet by the darkenesse of his heart he falleth to say that he would haue men subiect vnto those gods which are made by men Beda ex Augustin so they kept the truth as the same Augustin saith in doctrina multis falsitatibus permixta in doctrine mingled with many falshoods And though some among the heathen did hold certaine true principles of God yet there were others more grosse and foolish and were vtterly ignorant of the diuine nature taking the fire wind starres and such like to be gouernours of the world as it is in the booke of wisdome c. 13.1 2. see before of this matter quest 52. Quest. 60. v. 21. How the Gentiles did not glorifie God neither were thankefull but became vaine 1. Did not glorifie him as God this word to glorifie is taken two wayes either to conceiue an honourable opinion of God and to magnifie him and set forth his praise as Ioh. 11.4 this sickenesse is not vnto death but for the glorie of God that the Sonne of God may be glorified thereby or it signifieth the worship due vnto God as Isay. 43.23 Neither hast thou honoured or glorified me with thy sacrifices Theodoret so likewise Chrysostome and Origen seeme to take it in the first sense
the father Sonne and holy Ghost c. Therefore if no creature is to be worshipped much lesse an image which is the work of mans hands if not the liuing are to be adored much lesse the dead But here this obiection will be mooued if no creature is to be worshipped how then doe we adore Christ Chrysostome answeareth Nemo veneraturus regem dicit illi exuas purpuram c. no man comming to doe reuerence to the king saith put off thy robes So Christ beeing cloathed with our flesh is worshipped in and with our humanitie which is vnited vnto his Godhead in one person yet the originall and first cause of this adoration giuen vnto Christs humanitie proceedeth from his diuine nature adoration then beeing due vnto the person of Christ is yeelded vnto him both God and man Martyr Controv. 11. Of the vaine vse of popish pilgrimages v. 13. That I might haue some fruit Paul desireth to see Rome to the intent that he might receiue some fruit by them and they by him this was the ende of this his iourney and peregrination Much vnlike herein were the pilgrimages which in times past and now in many countreys are made to Rome Ierusalem and other places which are onely of a superstitious meaning to offer before some idol and to performe their vowes But the end of the travaile comming together of Christians should be for their mutuall edifying Mar. Controv. 12. None to be barred from the knowledge of Gods word v. 14. I am detter both to the Grecians and Barbarians seeing there was no nation so barbarous to whom the Apostle was not willing to impart the knowledge of the Gospell the Romanists are euidently conuinced of error that will not admit their lay people generally to the reading of the Scripture If the gospel of saluation must be communicated to all then the Scriptures also which containe the knowledge of saluation should be common to all Hyperius the booke â—â— the lawe was appointed to be read in the hearing of the people that they might learne and feare God Deuter. 31.12 see more Synops. Centur. 1. error 3. Controv. 13. Against diuerse hereticall assertions of Socinus touching the iustice of God v. 17. For by it the iustice of God is reuealed because in this place the iustice of God is taken for his benignitie and mercie shewed by Christ in the Gospell Socinus that blasphemous heretike taketh occasion thus to broach his errors 1. he saith that iustice beeing vndestood of God is neuer in Scripture set opposite to Gods mercie but the contrarie is euident Psal 5.6 thou shalt destroy them that speake lies here the Prophet speaketh of Gods reuenging iustice and in the next verse he compareth it with Gods mercie But I will come into thine house in the multitude of thy mercies 2. he affirmeth that that which is opposed to Gods mercie is not called the iustice of God but wrath indignation seueritie which is euidently refelled v. 31. they knowing the iustice of God that they which commit such things are worthie of death here the vengeance of God vpon sinners is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iustice And yet more euidently Psal. 145.17 the Lord is iust in all his wayes and mercifull in all his workes here the iustice and mercie of God are compared together 3. further he saith that this iustice of God as it is set against his mercie is of two sorts there is one whereby he punisheth the wicked and obstinate sinners an other whereby he chasteneth euen those that are not altogether impenitent But herein is his error he maketh them two kinds of iustice which are but diuerse degrees of one and the same iustice for when God sheweth seueritie in punishing the wicked therein he exerciseth his strict and rigorous iustice and when he chastiseth sometime his owne children for their amendment he vseth the same iustice but in an other degree tempering his iustice with mercie and fauour Pareus Controv. 14 Against inherent iustice v. 17. The iustice of God is reuealed the Rhemistes apply this place against imputatiue iustice alleadging out of Augustine how it must be vnderstood of that iustice not which God hath in himselfe sed qua induit hominem but wherewith he endueth man when he iustifieth him Contra. 1. They doe not well translate the word induit which signifieth here not to endue but to cloath with and so man beeing iustified by faith is cloathed with Christs righteousnesse he is not iustified by any inherent righteousnesse in himselfe but by an imputed righteousnesse Rom. 4.6 2. And the Apostle doth expound himselfe Rom. 3.22 shewing that the iustice of God is by the faith of Iesus and Philip. 3.9 the Apostle renounceth his owne righteousnesse that he might haue the righteousnesse of God through faith Controv. 15. That the Sacraments doe not conferre grace Kemnitius out of this place v. 16. the Gospel is the power of God to saluation inferreth that the Sacraments doe no otherwise iustifie then the word preached that is excitando fidem by exciting and stirring vp our faith as in this sense the Gospell is said to be Gods power to saluation Bellarmine answeareth 1. that the Gospel is not here taken for the preaching of the Gospel but for the historie of the Gospel as of Christs incarnation and passion 2. if it be taken in the other sense it followeth not because the preaching of the word iustifieth onely by stirring vp faith that therefore the Sacraments iustifie the same way Bellar. lib. 2. de effect sacram c. 11. ration 4. Contra. 1. The Apostle speaketh not onely of the historicall narration of the Gospel but of preaching and publishing the same as it appeareth both by the words before going v. 15. I am readie to preach the Gospel to you that are at Rome and by the words following it is the power of God to saluation to euerie on that beleeueth but they cannot beleeue vnlesse they heare neither can they heare without preaching 2. the argument thus followeth from the greater to the lesse if that which is more principall in the worke of our saluation doe iustifie no otherwise then instrumentally in stirring vp faith namely the preaching of the word then that which is lesse principall cannot iustifie more but the word and preaching of the Gospell is the more principall for they beget faith which the Sacraments onely confirme and seale therefore the Sacraments doe not iustifie men us by conferferring of grace by the worke wrought Controv. 16. That faith onely iustifieth v. 17. The iust by faith shall liue out of this place where the verie iustice life and actiuitie of the soule is ascribed to faith we doe conclude that a man is iustified onely by faith for all is ascribed vnto faith Now the Romanists seeing this place of the Apostle to be so pregnant for iustification by faith onely seeke diuerse shifts to obscure the truth of this testimonie 1. Costerus Euchirid 170. saith that these words
with other Schoolemen in 2. sentent distinct 33. some doe thinke they shall haue internum animi dolorem the inward greese of minde for the losse of the heauenly beatitude as holdeth Pet. Lombard 2. sentent distinct 33. with some other schoolmen to whome Bellarmine subscribeth lib. 6. de amiss grat c. 6. 1. For the first opinion that infants dying in their originall sinne are not excluded heauen these arguments are brought 1. The infants shall be afflicted with no sensible punishments because they had no euill mind will or purpose while they liued here 2. Neither is there any contrition or sorrow in this life required for originall sinne much lesse in the next to this purpose Pighius 3. Cartharinus among other reasons vrgeth that place Dan. 12.2 that many shall awake out of the dust some to euerlasting life some to shame whereupon he inferreth that all shall not rise to one of these ends but some and so there should be a third sort that should neither goe to heauen nor hell but enioy a third place 4. There shall be a new heauen and a new earth as the new heauens shall not be without inhabitants so neither the earth which is most like shall be the place for such infants Contra. 1. Though infants actually in their life shewed no euill purpose will or intent yet it is sufficient to their condemnation that they had an euill inclination by nature which would haue shewed it selfe if they had liued to yeres of discretion the onely cause why their euill inclination appeareth not for that their mind hath not fit organes or instruments to exercise the faculties thereof like as the young cubbes of foxes and wolues are killed and destroied when they are yet young though they haue yet done no harme because it is certaine if they should be suffered to grow they would follow their kind so the Scripture saith that the imaginations of mans heart are euill from his youth Gen. 9.21 2. And holy men euen for their originall sinne haue shewed great contrition and sorrow in this life as Dauid confessing his sinne beginneth with his very sinnefull birth and conception Psal. 5.1 so S. Paul crieth out Rom. 7. wretched man that I am who shall deliuer mee from the bodie of this death 3. In that place of Daniel many is taken for all as Augustine and Theodoret expound that place as S. Paul in the fift chapter to the Romans v. 17. by many vnderstandeth all as by one mans disobedience many were made sinners for otherwise it would follow that all should not arise that sleepe in the dust but onely some 4. And it is a weake reason there shall be inhabitants of the new earth therefore infants shall inhabite it Bellarmine thinketh that the earth shall be couered with waters and so haue no inhabitants at all but this is an idle speculation for the earth shall then be restored to a perfect estate not to lie hid vnder the waters and to what end there shall be a new earth it is curiositie to enquire the scripture hauing not expressed it And if it be appointed for the habitation of the Saints to passe from heauen to earth and to follow the Lambe wheresoeuer he goeth it is a worke consequent that infants shall be those Saints thus much shall suffice for the answer vnto these reasons 5. And further the opinion it selfe to make any kind of happines out of the kingdome of heauen and to inuent a third place betweene heauen and hell is contrarie to the Scripture which forteth all men into two rankes or companies which are appointed to two places they are either of the sheepe at Christs right hand which shall enter into life or of the gootes at his left hand for whom hell fire is prepared Matth. 25. And the Scripture testifieth that all that shall be saued shall walke in the light of the celestiall Ierusalem Reuel 22.4 and without it shall be dogges c. 12.15 none then can be saued out of it 2. Now we come to the other opinion of the Romanists that send infants dying without baptisme to hell but they onely attribute vnto them a punishment without any sense vnlesse it be the inward greefe and dolor of mind to see themselues excluded the kingdom of God Contra. First it is an vncharitable opinion to send all infants to hell that die vnbaptised for the grace of God is not tied to the outward element God can saue without water it is not the want of baptisme but the contempt thereof that condemneth the Scripture saith Mark 16.16 he that shall beleeue and be baptised shall be saued but he that will not beleeue not he which is not baptised shall be damned here are three opinions 1. the Papists generally hold that all infants dying without baptisme are damned but this is a cruell and vncharitable opinion as is shewed before See else where more hereof Synops. Centur. 3. er 3. 2. Some thinke that many of the infants of the Saintes are saued euen without baptisme by the couenant of grace made vnto the faithfull and their seede but not all for some of the children of the faithfull doe not belong vnto election such were Ismael Esau. Thus Pet. Martyr 3. But the better opinion is that all the infants of faithfull parents dying in their innocent estate before baptisme are saued by the generall couenant of grace made to the righteous and their seede because there is now no barre or impediment put in to binder the efficacie of that couenant as in those which liue vnto the yeares of discretion and depriue themselues by their impietie and vnbeleefe of the benefit of that couenant Secondly that such infants as are not saued by Christ dying before baptisme or after doe suffer the sensible paines of hell fire though in the least and easiest degree of all it is thus prooued 1. The Scripture saith Reuel 10.15 Whosoeuer was not found written in the booke of life was cast into the lake of fire Infants then which are condemned shall be punished in hell fire 2. We see that infants euen in this life doe suffer in their infancie paine and torment of bodie it therefore standeth with Gods iustice that infants euen for originall sinne should feele sensible torments 3. If they will graunt that they shall haue the inward dolor of the minde to see others admitted into the kingdome of God and themselues excluded why not also paine of bodie seeing the Scripture saith that there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth when men shall see the Patriarkes entring into heauen and themselues excluded and thrust out at the doores Luk. 13.28 4. Christ died for infants as well as for others and bare the punishment due vnto them for their sinnes but he suffered both the torments of bodie and minde therefore both were due vnto infants 5. Gregorie is of this opinion perpetua tormenta percipient qui nihil ex propria voluntaâ—â— peccauerunt they shall receiue euerlasting
should bring forth fruit vnto God c. This place is well vrged by Pet. Martyr against the propitiatorie workes vnto iustification which the Romanists affirme may be done by men yet vnregenerate and not yet called Here the Apostle euidently sheweth that they which bring forth fruit vnto God must first be an others that is maried vnto Christ they cannot doe any thing that good is without him as our Blessed Sauiour himselfe saith Without me ye can doe nothing Ioh. 15.5 Controv. 6. Against the heretikes which condemned the lawe v. 5. The motions of sinnes which were by the lawe By these and such like places the Marcionites Valentinians Manichees tooke occasion to condemne the lawe as euill because thereby sinne was increased But Augustine answeareth de verbis Apostoli serm 4 that they doe imponere Christianis non simplicibus sed negligentibus c. deceiue Christians not so much simple as negligent for it is no hard matter saith he to refell their blasphemies by that which the Apostle writeth afterward in this chapter for v. 12. he saith the lawe is holy and the commandements iust and holy iust and good and in that the motions of sinne are said to be by the lawe id ex eo fit quia in carne sumus it commeth of this because we are in the flesh Mart. the lawe then tooke occasion by the weakenes of our flesh and so the euill motions did rise vp in vs. Controv. 7. That we are freed by grace from the strict and rigorous observation of the lawe Pererius disput 6. misliketh these assertions of M. Calvin and taketh vpon him to confute him diligenter meminerimus c. let vs diligently remēber that this is not a solution frō that righteousnesse which is taught in the lawe sed à rigida exactione ab ea quae iude sequitur maledictione but from the strict rigorous exacting of keeping the law the malediction and curse which followeth thereupon And he heapeth vp diuerse places of scripture to shewe that the obedience of the lawe is now exacted of vs as Rom. 2. Not the hearers of the lawe but the doers shall be iustified Rom. 3.31 Doe we destroy the lawe by faith God forbid yea we establish the lawe Perer. disput 6. Contra. 1. Pererius in confuting their opinion that hold we are freed from the obedience of the lawe fighteth with his owne shadowe and Calvin whom he refelleth as he is by him alleadged saith in expresse words that we are not freed from the righteousnesse of the lawe to keepe it And therefore he setteth downe his opinion falsly as though he or any other Protestant should affirme Christianos esse à legis observatione liberatos that Christians are freed from the observation of the law as he putteth the case 2. But their opinion that Christians are bound to keepe the lawe and are enabled to keepe it by grace and in keeping thereof are iustified is contrarie to the doctrine of the Apostle that we are iustified by faith without the works of the lawe Rom. 3.28 3. It is then a most true assertion that we are freed from the rigorous and strict obseruation of the lawe which was required of the Iewes to be iustified by the keeping of it and from the curse which followeth vpon the not keeping of the lawe for it is written Cursed is euerie one that continueth not in all things which are written in the booke of the lawe from which curse Christ hath deliuered vs beeing made a curse for vs as the Apostle sheweth Galat. 3.10.13 see further Synops. Centur. 4. err 60. Controv. 8. That concupiscence though it haue no deliberate consent of the will is sinne and forbidden by the commandement The contrarie is mentioned by the Romanists motus concupiscentia adres illicitas c. the motions of the concupiscence to vnlawfull things whereby man is stirred vp to desire any thing against the lawe of God vnlesse the will and consent be thereunto not to be sinne Pererius disput 8. with the rest of that ranke their reasons are these 1. Argum. That which is naturall in man non potest rationem habere mali cannot be counted euill but concupiscence is naturall and was in man before his fall and if any man should be now created of God in pure naturalls without originall sinne he should feele the motions of concupiscence not to be obedient vnto reason Pererius Stapleton addeth antidot p. 360. that the Scripture seemeth to command some concupiscence as the Apostle saith he that desireth the office of a Bishop he desireth a good worke 1. Timoth. 3.1 Contra. 1. As concupiscence is a naturall facultie it is neither sinne nor forbidden if the concupiscence be of things lawfull as of meate or drinke and in due manner not to couet them much and to a good ende to couet them to the glorie of God and our owne and our neighbours good but the concupiscence as it is tainted and corrupted with originall sinne is euill and forbidden by the commandement 2. This concupiscence in the vnregenerate is continually euill in the regenerate there may be a concupiscence of lawfull and indifferent things as either of those things which are proper and peculiar to a man as the desire of a man to his wife or of things which are common and appropriate to no man as to desire an office but yet euen the concupiscence in such things though it be lawfull yet it is not without some fault euen in the regenerate by reason of the corruption of their nature onely the concupiscence and desire of spirituall things is simply lawfull but such concupiscence is without the compasse of the commandement Thou shalt not couet 2. Argum. Involuntaria non sunt peccata c. that which is inuoluntarie is not sinne but such motions of concupiscence which haue not the consent of the will are inuoluntarie Pere Stapleton ibid. Contra. 1. The proposition is not generally true for not the will of man but the law of God is the rule of good and euill and originall sinne in infants is not voluntarie but it is propagated by a necessitie of nature corrupted by the fall of Adam and the Apostle saith Gala. 5.15 yee cannot doe those things which ye would 2. the sinnes which at the first are voluntarie afterward become necessarie as he that hath gotten an habite of intemperancie can hardly refraine though he would so that it is true which Aristotle saith lib. 3. Ethicor. c. 5. nemo volens malus nec invitus foelix no man is euill with his will not happie against his will So that it sufficeth that sinne was once voluntarie though it afterward became necessarie as originall sinne with the motions of concupiscence that doe proceed from it though now it be necessarie and cannot be auoided yet in Adam it was voluntarie by whose willing transgression a necessitie of sinning is transmitted to his posteritie 3. Argum. Whatsoeuer is truely and properly sinne is taken away in
that they put not downe the high places yet his heart was vpright with the Lord all his daies yet was he an enemie to idolatrie so might Salomon be after his repentance idolatrie could not be purged out all at one time 3. For matters of fact the argument followeth not negatiuely it is not in the Scripture mentioned therefore it was not done though in matters of doctrine it concludeth well for no mention is made of Daniels refusall of Nabuchadnezzers odors and sacrifices Dan. 2.46 and yet it is certaine he did refuse them And yet notwithstanding Salomons repentance may be found in Scripture the booke of Ecclesi istes was made after his fall as a monument of his repentance See more hereof Synops. Papis p. 3. Controv. 21. That the elect by faith may be assured of euerlasting saluation v. 38. I am perswaded c. The Romanists to elude this so euident a place for the certaine and sure perswasion which the elect haue by faith of their saluation doe frame vs diuerse answers 1. that Saint Paul had this by speciall reuelation it is not generally giuen to all beleeuers 2. in generall we are certaine that all the elect shall be saued but in particular it is not knowne 3. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I am perswaded signifieth a morall kind of assurance not certitudinem fidei a certaintie or assurance of faith as the Apostle vseth the same word Heb. 6.9 we are perswaded better things of you Rom. 15.14 I am perswaded of you that you are full of goodnes but Paul could not beleeue these things of others by a certaintie of faith to this purpose Bellarmine lib. de iustificat c. 9. Pererius disput 28.4 for Paul himselfe was not certaine of his election thus writing 1. Cor. 9.27 I doe beate downe my bodie c. left when I haue preached to others I my selfe should be a reprobate Staplet Antidot p. 503. Contra. 1. The Apostle such things as he had by reuelation faith could not be vttered 2. Cor. 12.4 they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 things not to be spoken but this thing touching the certaintie of saluation he vttered it was not therefore any of those secrets which were reuealed and 2. Tim. 4.8 the Apostle sheweth how he came to be assured of a crowne of righteousnesse euen by keeping the faith and faith it was not laid vp onely for him but for all other that loued the appearing of Christ. 2. This assurance was not in generall but in particular Christ gaue himselfe for me Gal. 2.10 and a crowne of righteousnesse is laid vp for me 2. Tim. 4.8 3. There is a double kind of perswasion persuasio fidei the perswasion of faith such as this of the Apostles was grounded vpon Gods promises which was most certaine there was persuasio charitatis a perswasion of charitie which S. Paul had of others this was not so certaine as the other yet neither of them was coniecturall for S. Paul who had the gift of discerning of spirits and could pronounce of the election of others that their names were written in the booke of life Philip. 4.4 had more then a coniecturall gesse of their estate and yet it followeth not one can not be certainly perswaded of an others saluation therefore not of his owne 4. To that place we answer 1. that S. Paul speaketh not there of his eternall election or reprobation but saith in effect that if his life and doctrine agreed not which he preached to others he might be worthily reprooued of men 2. and yet if it were admitted that Saint Paul should meane his reprobation with God it followeth not by this speech that be doubted of his saluation but was sollicitous and careful to doe nothing which might hinder it a godly care bringeth them to a greater certentie for it is a liuely and proper fruit of their election 3. Origen vpon this place expoundeth it of S. Pauls state in time past aliquando â—etuit c. he sometime feared his flesh but the former answers are better 4. howsoeuer the Apostle doth not there doubt of his saluation beeing most certainly perswaded here See more Synops. Centur. 4. err 21. 6. Morall obseruations Observ. 1. Sanctification must not be seuered from iustification v. 1. There is no condemnation c. which walke not after the flesh c. The Apostle here euidently sheweth that they which walke after the flesh are not in Christ Iesus not iustified by him and freed from condemnation although our sanctification be not any meritorious or efficient cause of saluation yet it is such a cause as sine qua non without the which there is no saluation 1. because regeneration is inseperably ioyned with iustification 2. sanctification is a testimonie and euidence of our faith without the which it is dead 3. it is a fruite of the spirit 4. and it doth necessarily follow true repentance Observ. 2. Sinne maketh vs enemies to God v. 7. The wisedome of the flesh is enmitie We see how Sathan hath poisoned the whole nature of man by sinne not onely the sensuall and carnall parts but euen the mind wisedome and vnderstanding that euery part of man by nature is rebellious vnto God so that iustly by nature we are the children of wrath for how can the Lord else doe but shew his anger and indignation vpon his enemies the consideration therefore hereof should worke in vs a detestation of sinne Observ. 3. The sonnes of God must be like their heauenly father v. 14. As many as are led by the spirit are the sonnes of God the Apostle vseth this as a forceable motiue to perswade vs to holinesse and pietie because we are the sonnes of God as children doe beare the image of their parents so the sonnes of God must expresse the image of their heauenly father in holines and righteousnesse their children men are whose workes they doe if they doe not the workes of God but of Sathan Gods children they are not but Sathans Ioh. 8.44 Observ. 4. Of the contempt of all worldly things v. 17. If children then also heires c. If we then doe hope for such a glorious inheritance in the kingdome of life we should contemne and trampie vnder our feete the glorie and pompe of the world vnlesse onely vsing them as transitorie things for our necessarie vse as S. Paul counted all things as dung in comparison of Christ. Phil. â— 8 Observ. 5. No suffering in this world can be answerable to the glorie to be reuealed v. 18. I count that the afflictions c. This difference there is betweene the sufferings of Christians and the labours which the heathen endured for their countrie their labours were greater then the end which they propounded Brutus killed his owne sonnes for the libertie of his countrie Torquatus put his owne sonne to death for transgressing militarie discipline Curtius cast himselfe into the pit for the safetie of his countrie these by their vtmost daungers onely sought the
alienum esse à spiritis c. he wisheth to be a straunger from the spirit and to be a false Prophet so that his people might escape all those plagues which were foretold as S. Paul here wisheth to be estraunged and separated from Christ In like manner Moses obiecit se exitio Moses did offer himselfe to destruction for the people sake thus Anselme But 1. though we allow Anselmes interpretation he is deceiued in his first proofe for though the vulgar Latine doe so read that place of Micah yet it is truely according to the originall translated thus If a man walking after the mind and lying falsly c. that is if there were one that were giuen vnto lies which would prophesie of prosperous things vnto the people he should be a meete Prophet for them And the Prophet was not to wish vpon any occasion to commit sinne in telling of lies 2. Concerning the other example of Moses it is rightly alleadged but because there is some question about Moses manner of wish how it is to be taken though elsewhere it be handled at large it shall not be amisse breefely to touch it here for it is a great hinderance to the studious reader in a point wherein he expecteth present satisfaction to make reference to another booke which it may be is not so readie at hand Quest. 6. How Moses wished to be blotted out of the booke of life for Israels sake Moses words are these Exod. 32.31 If thou wilt not pardon their sinne blot me out of the booke which thou hast written Because that desire of Moses and this of Paul here are verie like as Hierome saith If we consider Moses voice making request for his people we shall see eundem fuisse Mosi Paulo erga creditum gregem affectum c. that both Moses and Paul had the same affection toward the flocke committed to them it shall not be amisse to insert somewhat here touching Moses wish Two things doe here breede question the manner of Moses wish and the matter and sense thereof 1. for the manner Moses vseth that bouldnes of speach that a subiect will scarcely vse speaking to his Prince non solum claâ—â—â— apud Deum sed reclamat he doth not onely crie vnto God but he reclaymeth and crieth as it were against his minde But Philo remooueth this doubt because the Scripture saith that God talked with Moses as with his friend he speaketh therefore freely and boldly as to his friend this libertie then and freedome of his speach is not to be attributed vnto his arrogancie but vnto his friendship and familiaritie arrogantis est audacia amici est fiducia boldnes and rashnes sheweth arrogancie but confidence is in friendship 2. But there remaineth a greater doubt as touching the matter and meaning of Moses vowe and desire for whereas Gods booke of life signifieth his ordaining of some vnto eternall life which is of two sorts either secundum praedestinationem according to the decree of predestination which cannot be altered or secundum praesentem iustitiam according to mens present iustice in the first sense it would seeme to be stulta petitio a foolish request to desire that which was impossible to be blotted out of Gods decree of predestination and in the other it would be thought to be impia an vngodly desire to wish to fall from the present state of iustice now for the solution of this doubt there are diuerse answears framed 1. Rabbi Salomon taketh this to be the booke of Moses law that it should haue no denomination from him but that his name might be taken out thence but it appeareth in the Lords answer I will blot out of that booke him that sinneth that this booke belonged vnto more then Moses onely 2. Rab. Moses Gerundens thinketh Moses extra se captum to haue beene as it were beside himselfe and in his great zeale to his people to haue spoken he knew not what But seeing Moses prayer was so well accepted of God it is not to be thought that he offended in making so rash and inconsiderate a prayer 3. Paulus Burgensis varieth not much from the first interpretation he taketh the booke here for the historicall narration in Scripture of the acts and doings of the Saints and so he thinketh that Moses onely desired that the great workes which God had wrought by his hand should not be written of him But this had beene to pray against the setting forth of Gods glorie which was manifested in those great workes 4. Caietan vnderstandeth it de libro principatus of the book of principalitie that whereas God had appointed Moses to be gouernour of a greater nation and people if he should destroy Israel Moses desireth rather to be no gouernour at all then that Israel should perish But the words of the Lord I will blot out him that sinneth shewe that Moses speaketh not of a personall writing in any such booke which concerned him alone but of such a booke wherein others were written as well as himselfe 5. Augustine maketh this sense qu. 147. in Exod. as thou hast made it certaine that I can not be raced out of the booke which thou hast written so let me be as sure and certaine that thou wilt remit the sinne of this people But Gods answear I will blot out c. ouerthroweth this sense for there the Lord answeareth negatiuely vnto Moses that he should not be blotted out then Moses wish was to be blotted out 6. Lyranus saith that Moses did thus wish secundum desiderium partis inferioris animae according to the desire of the inferiour part of his minde not in the superiour part which was his iudgement and vnderstanding as Christ prayed that the cup might passe from him but yet there is a more sufficient answear then this see answ 6. following 7. Thostatus qu. 44. in 32. Exod. thinketh that it is an hyperboricall speach as that of Rachel giue me children or else I die and yet shee had rather haue had no children then to haue died yet in such passionate speeches they shewe their seruent and exceeding great desire But in this sense Moses should haue had no such meaning to be blotted out of Gods booke the contrarie whereof appeareth in the Lords answear 8. Oleaster will haue this to be the meaning blot me out of thy booke that is obliuiscere 〈◊〉 perpetuo forget me for euer for as we vse to commit those things to writing which we would remember so the things which we desire to forget we blot out But it is more then a metaphoricall speach as is euident by the Lords answear to Moses 9. Heirome epist. 151. ad Algas and Grego lib. 10. Moral c. 7. Euthym. in Psal. 68. vpon these words let them be blotted out of the booke of the liuing doe take this booke to be the decree onely of this temporall life and those to be blotted out which are depriued of life so Moses in their opinion
other the first is of one and the same thing that is measured the other is betweene two things proportioned and compared together Pareus and further this clause then according to the proportion and measure of faith should not onely be ioyned vnto prophesying as it is but it should be required also in all the other gifts here named 2. Much lesse was this analogie of faith a rule without writing according to the which all the bookes of the new Testament were tried as the Rhemists here note in their corrupt glosse for the writings of the Prophets and Apostles were the rule it selfe of faith they were not ruled by any other direction for their doctrine is called the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Eph. 2.20 4. Many doe take this analogie of faith to be axiomata prima religionis the first principles of Christian religion Calvin such as are contained in the Symbole of the Apostles which from the beginning euen from the Apostles time was appointed to be a rule of faith though it be vncertaine by whome it was collected Faius Gualter Beza and so Tertullian lib. de velandis virginib saith of the Symbole regula fidei est sola immobilis c. the rule of faith is onely immooueable But as we denie not but that there might be in the Apostles time some such rule of faith consisting of certaine principles collected out of the Scriptures so because this is but a coniecture and there is no certaine ground thereof it can not be precisely determined that this should be the rule of faith here mentioned 5. Therefore I consent rather vnto Gryneus that this analogie of faith was Scriptura sancta the holy Scriptures according to the rule whereof the brethren of Berea examined the Apostles doctrine Act. 17.11 and S. Paul himselfe preached none other thing then the Prophets and Moses had prophesied of Act. 26.22 According to this rule were the false prophets of old time discerned if they perswaded vnto idolatrie contrarie to the doctrine of the law Deut. 13.2 yet withall it is probable that there were certaine principal heads of religion which were collected out of the Scriptures euen in the Apostles time which is called the doctrine of beginnings Heb. 6.1 from the which the Prophets and preachers were then not to swarue 16. Quest. Of these seuerall offices here rehearsed by the Apostle in particular 1. whether prophesying 1. Haymo taketh it for the prediction of things to come such a Prophet was Agabus but this was an extraordinarie gift the Apostle seemeth to speake of the ordinarie functions of the Church 2. some vnderstand it to be noticia occultorum the knowledge of secrets Lyran. Gorrhan but this was also extraordinarie 3. most take it for the gift to vnderstand and interpret the Scriptures Gualter Osiander Faius 4. But it signifieth rather generally whatsoeuer belonged to doctrine and exhortation Mart. and before him Origen prophetia dicitur apud Paulum c. that is called prophesie with S. Paul when one speaketh to edifying exhortation or comfort 1. Cor. 14.3 so that this prophesying is the generall facultie to the which doctrine and exhortation afterward mentioned by the Apostle doe appertaine so Beza Pareus see before qu. 14.5 2. By ministrie called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. neither generally are vnderstood all Ecclesiasticall functions euen those which are occupied in teaching as Faius 2. nor yet that speciall office of Deacons as Gualter 3. nor the office of such as ministred the Sacraments Lyran. but thereby generally are vnderstood such offices as concerned the discipline of the Church specially conuersant about the bodie and temporall things either to releeue their pouertie which was the office of Deacons in the distribution of almes or to cherish them in sicknes which was the charge of widowes whose office S. Paul describeth 1. Tim. 5. or to watch ouer their manners which belonged vnto the spirituall gouernours 3. He that teacheth be that exhorteth c. 1. Chrysostome and Origen doe in a manner confound these two saying that exhortation est species doctrinae is a kind of doctrine 2. Calvin will haue them to be distinct offices they haue great affinitie yet they remaine still varia officia diuers offices 3. Some will haue them to be distinct gifts but not diuers offices as Pellican seemeth to thinke 4. I incline then to their opinion that thinke they are both distinct functions and offices and yet may be ioyned together in one man so P. Mart. sometime both these gifts are graunted to one man sed magna ex parte dividuntur but for the most part they are diuided to the same purpose Olevian for we see that some haue the gift to teach that are cold in exhorting and contrariwise These positions then we will set downe concerning the gifts of teaching and exhorting 1. That they are two distinct and sundrie gifts against Chrysostome for the Apostle calleth them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 differing gifts 2. Yet are they not neither haue beene alwaies distinct offices in the Church for the Apostles excelled both in teaching and exhorting and yet the Apostle ioyneth them together as both belonging to the propheticall and pastorall office 1. Cor. 14.3 3. Yet it must be confessed that there were also such distinct offices in the primitiue Church sometime and that they did not alwaies concurre in vse in one and the same man for the Apostle nameth Pastors and Doctors as two distinct offices Eph. 4.11 for then they were distinguished both to shew the varietie of 〈◊〉 gifts of the spirit and because a great multitude of beleeuers then assembled together which did occupie many ministers there was not then a diuision of seuerall congregations and parishes as now and yet where it shall be thought meete and the necessitie of the Church so requireth these two distinct offices of Doctors and Pastors may be retained the one to be exercised chiefly in laying downe found doctrine and confuting of errors as the Professors doe in Schooles and the Catechists in parochiall congregations the other to applie doctrine to the manners of the people which specially is the office of the Pastor Pareus Obiect But whereas the Apostle els where 1. Cor. 14.3 maketh three distinct parts of prophesying to edifie to exhort and to comfort how is it that here onely two are named teaching and exhorting Answ. Consolation is a kind of exhortation and so is also here comprehended and the rather because the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth as well to comfort as exhort Tolet. annot 14. Faius 4. He that distributeth with simplicitie c. Some doe vnderstand this generally of the giuing of almes as Origen Chrysostome Lyran. Gorrhan but seeing the Apostle speaketh here of the functions and offices of the Church it is better vnderstood of such which were called Deacons who did distribute the treasure of the Church to the necessitie of the poore such were those seuen chosen by the Apostles Act. 6.
that Augustine was then a Manichee and we denie not but by this and the like meanes one may be at the first mooued and induced but the firme beleefe of this point is a worke of the spirit See further Synops. Centur. 1. err 5. Controv. 5. Against the invocation of Saints v. 13. Now the God of hope fill you c. The Apostle teacheth vs onely to put our trust in God in calling him the God of hope and so the Prophet Ieremie saith c. 17.5 Cursed is the man that trusteth in man and maketh flesh his arme and in that he wisheth God to fill them with ioy we also learne onely to direct our prayers to God who is the author of all grace hence then is refelled the Popish invocation of Saints which both doth derogate from the honour of God who biddeth vs to call vpon him in the daie of trouble Psal. 50.15 and it deceiueth them with vaine hope that place any confidence in such prayers for Saints cannot helpe vs nor furnish vs with graces necessarie as here ioy peace faith hope are ascribed vnto God as his peculiar gifts it is then in vaine to pray O Saint Paul or Saint Peter helpe mee and haue mercie vpon mee as Papists vse to pray See further of this point Synops. Centur. 2. err 30. Controv. 6. Of the certaintie of saluation against the Popish diffidence and doubtfulnesse v. 13. That yee may abound in hope c. This word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to abound sheweth a fulnes and certaintie of hope which is nothing else but beeing armed with a costant and assured hope to continue vnto the end and out of this place we haue three speciall arguments for this certaintie of hope and assurance of saluation 1. The Apostle saith the God of hope fill you with all ioy but where is doubtfulnesse of mind and perplexitie of conscience there is no assured hope but such vncertaintie rather bringeth anxietie feare and greefe so Origen saith he which beleeueth and is armed by the vertue of the spirit certum est quod plenitudinem gaudij semper habet it is certaine that he hath alwaies fulnes of ioy where then there is fulnes of ioy there is abounding also in hope but by faith we haue fulnes of ioy therefore also fulnes of hope 2. the word here vsed to abcund in hope sheweth a certaintie of hope as Haymo well interpreteth that by the vertue of the holy Ghost plenam habeatis spem aeternae remunerationis yee may haue full hope of the eternall reward so also the ordinarie glosse which Gorrhan followeth vt per ista habita certiores sitis de aeterna beatitudine that by these things beeing once had yee may be certaine of eternall happines 3. the prayers of the faithfull cannot be in vaine but are effectuall to obtaine things appertaining to saluation but the Apostle here prayeth for abundance of hope and perseuerance to the end therefore the faithfull are sure so to abound and to perseuere see further also hereof Synops. Pap. Centur. 4. err 25. Controv. 7. Against the power of free will in spirituall things v. 13. The God of peace c. in that the Apostle prayeth vnto God to fill them with ioy and peace in beleeuing an argument may be framed against that old Pelagian heresie touching the power of mans free-will in things belonging to eternall life which argument is much vrged by Augustine against the Pelagians for if it were in mans power to attaine vnto these graces as faith hope then it were superfluous assidiuis precibus à Deo emendicare to begge them of God by continuall prayer Martyr See further hereof Synops. Cen. 4. err 43. Controv. 8. Whether the Apostles excusing of himselfe doe derogate from the authoritie of this epistle v. 16. I haue somewhat boldly after a sort written this may seeme to extenuate the authoritie of this Epistle for he which excuseth himselfe confesseth a fault but in the Canonicall writings no fault or error at all is to be admitted And yet if this excuse made by the Apostle doe not extenuate the authoritie of this Epistle no more can that excuse of the author of the booke of Macchabees preiudice the authoritie thereof 2. Maccha 15.39 where the Author saith thus If I haue done well and as the storie required it is the thing that I desired but if I haue spoken slenderly and barely it is that I could what doth this our Author say more then Saint Paul 2. Cor. 11.6 If I be rude in speach yet am I not rude in knowledge to this purpose Bellarm. lib. 1. de verb. c. 15. Contra. 1. Euery one which vseth excuse doth not acknowledge a fault but he that so excuseth as that he craueth pardon for his fault But so doth not Paul here he maketh an excuse to preuent an obiection as if he should haue said it may seeme vnto you that I haue written somewhat boldly but indeed I haue not I haue onely vsed that boldnes which became mine office according to the grace giuen vnto mee he therefore doth not craue pardon of a fault but defendeth and iustifieth that which might seeme to haue beene a fault 2. But the author of the bookes of the Macchabees doth excuse himselfe farre otherwise for he doubteth whether he haue well written or not as he ought and he craueth pardon if he faile saying it is that I could as if he should say he were worthie to be pardoned because he did it as well as he could this sheweth that he writ not by a diuine spirit for the spirit of God vseth not to craue pardon of any thing done amisse 3. And beside other arguments there are which doe make against the authoritie of this booke as 1. because all the Canonicall Scriptures were written by Prophets but in the Macchabees time there was no Prophet 2. Eusebius and Hierome thinke that Iosephus was the writer of those bookes but his writings are not canonicall 3. the author saith that he did epitomise the worke of Iason the Cyrenian but the spirit of God vseth not the help of others writings 4. this booke was not receiued into the Canon of the Iewes to whom all the oracles of God were committed 5. and it containeth diuerse things contrarie to the Canonicall Scriptures as is shewed else where Synops. Centur. 1. p. 15. 4. S. Paul in that place to the Corinthians excuseth not the slendernes of his writing as though he had written otherwise then he should but he iustifieth the simplicitie of his stile as his aduersaries did take it because he would not by humane eloquence obscure the vertue of the crosse of Christ which consisted not in the vaine shew of words but in the power and euidence of the spirit 1. Cor. 2.4 Controv. 9. That the Scriptures are perfect and absolute conteining whatsoeuer is necessarie to saluation both touching doctrine and manners v. 15. I haue written to you after a sort to put you in remembrance
Hence the Romanists inferre 1. That the Scriptures are not perfect as not conteining all necessarie points of doctrine but onely certaine partes not all as the Apostle saith he hath written in part Stapleton antid p. 804. 2. whereas the Apostle saith to put you in remembrance Bellarmine concludeth that the Scriptures were not appointed to be a rule of faith and doctrine but onely commentarium quoddam a certaine remembrance to preserue the doctrine receiued by preaching his reasons are these 1. the Apostle here saith he did write to put them in remembrance 2. If the Scriptures were a rule of faith they should containe onely those things which are necessarie vnto faith but now there are many things in the Scripture as the histories of the old Testament which are not so necessarie beeing not written to that ende to be beleeued but therefore to be beleeued because they are written 3. If it were a rule of faith it should be totalis a totall rule whereas it is onely partialis a rule in part not containing all necessarie points of doctrine Contra. 1. These words in part are not to be ioyned with the former word written but with the other boldly so the Syrian interpreter doth well put them together paulo audacius scripsi I haue written somewhat boldly therefore it is a meere cauill to apply it to the imperfection of Scripture See before qu. 20. vpon this chapter 2. And Bellarmines collection is as sophisticall 1. it doth not follow the Scripture serueth to admonish or put in remembrance therefore it is not a rule of faith for it is both and that it serueth more then onely to put vs in remembrance the Apostle shewed before v. 4. that by the Scriptures we attaine vnto doctrine patience consolation hope and elsewhere 2. Tim. 3.16 the Apostle saith the Scripture is profitable to teach to improoue to correct and instruct in righteousnes it is not then profitable onely to put vs in remembrance 2. neither doth it followe that the Scripture should be no rule of faith if it should containe other things which are not necessarie vnto faith for although other matter should be there found not simply necessarie vnto faith yet may it containe all things necessarie vnto faith nay the contrarie would followe better it containeth more then is requisite to faith Ergo whatsoeuer is necessarie to faith but we rather denie the antecedent that nothing is expressed in Scripture which is not in some sort necessarie vnto faith doctrine or manners though euerie thing is not in the same degree and measure so necessarie for the Apostle had said before v. 4. that whatsoeuer is written is written for our learning he speaketh of all the Scripture excluding no part thereof no not those historicall bookes 3. And we denie that the Scripture is a partiall rule for if it were not totall it were no rule at all neither is there any doctrine necessary vnto faith and saluation which is not deliuered in the Scriptures See more hereof Pareus dub 6. and Synops. Centur. 1. err 12. Controv. 10. Against the Popish sacrifice of the Masse which the Papists make the peculiar act of their Priesthoode v. 16. Ministring the Gospell of God Pet. Martyr M. Calvin Osiander Pareus doe fitly apply this text against the Popish sacrificing priesthood and their sacrifice of the Masse Paul maketh himselfe a sacrificing Priest of the Gospel for so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to consecrate to sacrifice this was Pauls sacrifice to offer vp the obedience of the Gentiles a spirituall sacrifice vnto God as Chrysostome here saith ipsum mihi sacerdotium est praedicare Evangelizari this is my priesthood to preach the Gospel machaera mea Euangeliū my sword is the Gospell so Origen also sanctificale opus esse praedicare Euangelium this is the sanctified and priestly worke to preach the Gospel The Papists will haue an externall sacrifice of the Masse beside wherein the bodie of Christ is offered vp in sacrifice if this had beene the principall act of S. Pauls Priesthood he had occasion to speake of it here when he setteth forth the dignitie and excellencie of his ministerie and further the principall act of his priesthood was to winne the Gentiles to the obedience of the Gospel but this is not performed by the Masse men are not thereby taught to mortifie their flesh by faith in Christ Osiand and this oblation of S. Paul and the other of Popish Priests is farre vnlike he offreth vp the Gentiles but they presume to offer vp Christ in sacrifice so they are not ministri Christi sed mactatores not the Ministers of Christ but the manslayers not the imitators of Paul but of Iudas rather that deliuered vp Christ to be slaine Pareus See further hereof Synops. Papis Centur. Controv. 11. Against the superstitious orders of Monkes and Friers v. 18. For the obedience of the Gentiles S. Paul by his preaching laboured to bring the Gentiles to the obedience of faith his end was not to bring them to the obedience of men and to make sects in religion as some among the Papists hold of Frauncis some of Dominike some of Bernard and other such patrones they haue this diuision of sects S. Paul directly condemned among the Corinthians one saith I am Pauls an other Apollos an other of Cephas is Christ devided was Paul crucified for you either were you baptised into the name of Paul 1. Cor. 1.13 If Paul would not arrogate this honour to himselfe to haue any called by his name Paulians or Peter Petrians how much more vncomely is it for them to be called Franciscans Dominicans Bernardines and such like And all these are sworne to the obedience of their orders vnder which colour and pretense they maintaine their superstitions but it was obedience to Christ and his Gospel wherevnto S. Paul perswaded not to the obseruance of the precepts of men S. Paul saith 1. Cor. 7.23 Ye are bought with a price be not the seruants of men See further Synops. Controv. 12. That miracles are not now necessarie in the Church v. 19. With the power of signes and wonders Though it pleased God that for the better confirmation of his truth to furnish his Apostles with the gift and power of miracles yet it is not necessarie now 1. Miracles were then necessarie when as the Scriptures were beleeued and receiued of fewe and the doctrine of the Gospel was accused of noueltie but now he is not worthy the name of a Christian which beleeueth not the Scriptures and embraceth the Christian faith signes are not for them which beleeue but for them which beleeue not 1. Cor. 14.22 2. it were as a part of infidelitie now to require miracles so also a part of curiositie for like as the Iewes required a signe of our blessed Sauiour when he wrought nothing else but signes and wonders among them so is it with them who heare out of the Scriptures of the great signes and wonders
mother in affection as Iesus and Iohn had to whom our Blessed Sauiour commended his mother Quest. 12. Of S. Pauls generall salutations without any speciall note of commendation v. 14.15 1. Lyranus this distinguisheth the persons here saluted by S. Paul that as v. 10.11 he commended some for their faith in Christ as Apelles with others and v. 12.13 others for their labour and ministerie in the Church as Thryphena and Tryphosa so now he propoundeth exempla concordiae certaine examples of concord ioyning many together of one societie and companie 2. Tolet obserueth well that these two companies the one named v. 14. the other v. 15. might belong vnto two families and so Origen thinketh they dwelled together Philologus and Iulia are thought to be the husband and wife 3. Touching some particulars 1. Origen thinketh that Hermas was the author of the booke called pastor which Scripture or writing he holdeth to haue beene divinitus inspirata written by inspiration But it was held of others to be an Apochryphal booke See Euseb l. 3. c. 2.5 2. there is one Hermas and an other called Hermes whom Beza translateth Mercurius but the same name would haue beene retained in the Greeke as Vrbanus and Rufus which are Latine names 3. Philologus is thought by S. Andrew to haue been made the first Bishop of Synope 4. Olympas not Olympius as the vulgar Latine readeth is the name here of a man not of a woman as Erasmus and Beza obserue 4. Origen thinketh this was the reason why Saint Paul giueth no speciall commendation to these and namely none to Hermas quia post multa peccata ad poenitentiam conversus c. because he was converted vnto repentance after many sinnes But I rather allowe here of Chrysostomes iudgement that although they are not set forth by their seuerall commendations as the rest yet this is to be considered that these beeing inferiour to the rest the Apostle salutatione sua non dedignatur doth vouchsafe to salute them and he also calleth them brethren and Saints 5. And least any might haue been grieued that they were not by name saluted illos commiscet c. he mingleth them together salute one another c. Chrysostome so the Greeke scholiast omnes promiscue ponit he putteth all together least any should haue beene offended cuius nomen expressum non fuerit whose name was not expressed Quest. 13. Of the custome then vsed to kisse one an other v. 16. 1. Chrysostome and Theophylact here obserue because the Apostle had giuen diuerse commendations vnto them to whom he sendeth greeting that the lesse commended should not envie the greater nor the greater dispise and contemne the lesse osculo sancto permiscet pares facit he putteth them together with an holy kisse and so maketh them all alike 2. This vse was then taken vp in the Church for one to kisse an other in their holy meetings and assemblies in token of mutuall loue and goodwill as is euident both in this place and 1. Cor 16.20 2. Cor. 13.12 1. Thess. 5.26 in all these places it is called an holy kisse and 1. Pet. 5.14 the kisse of loue this vse was frequented in their assemblies as in their generall prayers as Tertullian testifieth lib. de orat and specially in receiuing of the Sacrament as Chrysost. hom 77. in Ioan. 16. bene in mysterijs osculamur vt vnum efficiamur we doe well to kisse in the mysteries that we may become one for as Gellius noteth out of Plato lib. 19. c. 11. anima animae coniungitur vsque ad labia progressa per osculum one soule is ioyned to an other by a kisse meeting as it were at the lippes And not onely then but vpon other occasions as when they receiued any epistle from the Apostle they vsed to salute one an other with a kisse Hugo whereof Haymo giueth this reason because I am not present to kisse you all salute ye one an other with a kisse met amoris causa for my loue sake 3. Concerning the originall of this custome 1. Neither did it take beginning from this and the like places of the Apostle as Haymo saith ex hoc loco alijsque similibus mos traditus est ecclesiae out of this place and the like was deliuered this custome to the Church for the Apostle did not first bring in this custome it was in vse before 2. neither yet was it mos Romanae gentis the fashion of the Romanes so to doe Osiander but as Calvin saith it seemeth among them to haue beene minus vsitatum lesse in vse for it was not lawfull for women to kisse any but of their owne kinred and Tiberius made a lawe against it Sueten in Tiber. c. 39. 3. It was then an olde custome among the Hebrewes taken from the Patriarkes and other holy men and women which vsed one to salute an other with a kisse as we reade Gen. 27.26 Gen. 29.12 and in other places from them then was this custome descended And among them it was not onely amoris benevolentiae sed honoris reverentiae signum not onely a signe of loue and goodwill but of honour and reuerence as it is said Psal. 2. Kisse the sonne least he be angrie as where the kissing of the Princes hand is vsed as a signe of loyaltie and subiection Gualter 4. It is called an holy kisse to shewe both vt casta sint oscula deinde non simulata that kisses giuen in the Church should be chast and then without dissimulation not as Iudas kisse was Origen but Lyranus more distinctly maketh these fiue kind of kisses adulatorium a flattering kisse as was Absaloms who would take the people to him and kisse them semulatorium a dissembling kisse as was Ioabs when he kissed and embraced Abner and killed him proditorium a treacherous and betraying kisse as was that of Iudas given to Christs impudicum an vnchast kisse such as the harlot giueth to the young man Prov. 7. then there is osculum fidile sanctum a faithfull and holy kisse whereof the Apostle speaketh here 5. From this custome of kissing came that foolish and superstitious ceremonie of kissing the Pax in the Popish Masse whereof Hugo taketh vpon him to giue this reason the Priest first kisseth the Pax himselfe and then giveth it vnto all the people to signifie that he is in loco Dei à quo omnis pax in the place of God from whom commeth all peace that all are reconciled by Christ who then is in the altar wherein they shew great presumption in the one for a mortall man to take vpon him to be in Gods place and great falshoode in the other to make the people beleeue that Christs verie bodie is in the altar which the heauens shall containe vntill his comming Act. 3.21 6. Wherefore concerning this vse it was onely of those times referendum est ad illius temporis morem it must be referred to the manner of those times Beza it is not