at all For what need she help of others to declare her meaning who clearly declareth it her self And vndoubtedly if in any place she clearly declareth her meaning she doth it in those places in which she speaketh both clearly and of set purpose for to expresse her meaning But if by her self she doe not clearly declare her meaning in matters in controuersie without some help of man especially without the help of one of the opposite parties who contend about her meaning certainly she is A iudge must be able by himself to declare his mynd not fitt to be the onely iudge of controuersies as Protestants would haue her For who will saye that she alone is fitt to be iudge who alone and by her self is not able to vtter clearly her mynd Besids if the pure word of God may not iudge according to the pure sense which of it self it clearly yeeldeth but according to a different nay quite opposite sense which being conferred expounded wrested by man it is forced to yeeld who shall assure vs that Gods sense and not the sense of man whose and not Gods that conference inference and wresting is is made Serm. 14. de verb. Apost Tractat. 2. de Cant. c. 17. L. 6. cont Iulian c. 5. L. 2. de Baptismo c. 6. iudge of controuersies Let mens ghesses saieth S. Austin giue place for a time let vs take in hand diuine weapons Againe This is humane inference not dinine authoritie The arguments which you bring are humane these are diuine munitions And otherwhere let vs not bring false scales with which we may weigh what we will and how we will and saye as we please This is heauie This is leight But let vs bring the diuine scale of the holie Scripture and in that let vs weigh which is heauiest or rather let not vs wheigh it but let vs aknowledg it weighed of God Let vs set aside a while mens ghesses or imaginations of the conference or exposition of this or that place of Scripture let vs not bring deceitfull scales of mans conference inference or exposition of Scripture with which we may weigh what we will and how we will saying according as we please This is the meaning That is not the meaning This followeth That followeth not This is true that is false againe all which we may oppose those words of S. Austin This is mans inference mans conference mans exposition mans ghesse not diuine authoritie and let vs bring the diuine and sure scale of the pure meaning of Gods pure word and in that let vs weigh the doctrin of both partes or rather let vs acknowledge that which is weighed and allowed by God him self in this his scale Moreouer if mans help be necessarie to Scripture for the conference and expositiō of the places therof or inference of that which is to be inferred out of them so that without mans help it can not sufficiently decide questions of faith I aske of Protestants what men these must be whether we or they or some third who nether are Catholiks nor Protestants Sure I am they will nether admit ours nor other mens expositions of Scripture for their iudge and I think they wil be ashamed to exact of vs that we should admit their interpretatiō especially sith they refuse the conference inference and exposition of the holy Councells and Fathers Wherfore vnles they will stand to Protestants must be tried by the natiue and vsual sense of he words or thy no sense that sense of Scripture which is no way partial to wit which the Scripture it self by it self without any conference or exposition of man giueth they can name no sense of Scripture which both parties may admit for their iudge and to refuse all sense of Scripture whervpon both parties may reasonably agree is plainly to refuse all reasonable triall by scripture For seing the soule and kernel of the Scripture is the sense therof and that the letter or words is but the shell or bark of it as is euident and both holie Fathers and Protestants agree manifest it is that whosoeuer will not reasonably agree vpon any sense of the Church Councells or Fathers where it is spoken of set purpose to declare Gods meaning of it self without any mans exposition and according to the vsual vnderstanding of men it doth afford rather then the quite contrarie sense which by the wresting of Protestants it is compelled to carrie Let but this right reason and true prudence lift vp this Balance wherein I weigh the Doctrin of Catholiks and Protestants according to holie Scripture in more then 260. points and I nothing doubt but it will clearly see and iudge the Catholik doctrin agreable to Scripture and the Protestant quite opposite and contrarie And this is my purpose Scope and butte in this 1. The Scope of the first booke And of the second booke to which I adde a second wherin I manifestly shewe that Protestants Doctrin is not onely quite opposite in more then 260. points both in words and meaning to the holie Scripture but also that they are forced to reiect many and great partes of the Scripture to alter that parte which they admit to weaken all force of Scripture to say that much of the Scripture was not spoken of certaine knowledge or not according to the meaning of the speaker to teach that most weightie sentences of the Scripture were spoken ironically mimetically and hyperbolically to change the most vniuersall propositions of the Scripture into particulers to limitate speeches not limited by the Scripture to alter absolute speeches into conditionall to make causall propositions not causall to expound words in some sorte which were spake simply The contents of the second booke which were spaken of one time to interprete them of an other to make one saying of many to vnderstand words that signifie the doing of a thing of an endeauour to doe it which signifie working a thing of the way or meane therto which signifie that a thing is to expound that it ought to be words which signifie a true thing to expound them of a shew or apparent thing to expound the words of Scripture of different yea wholy diuerse contrarie matters to deuise improprietes and all figures of speeches to feigne friuolous and neuer before heard of distinctions to reiect the exposition of the Fathers Councells and Church to confesse that they teach Doctrin damned in ould time for heresie to frustate the ends of the incarnation and passion of Christ to take out of the world all vertue and giue free scope to all vice and finally to confesse that much of the Protestant doctrin is contrarie to holie Scripture All which clearly shewe that Protestant leaders doe not onely teach doctrin contrarie to the Scripture but also do in very deed mock and contemne it 8. The manner of my proceeding is this First I deuide Manner of proceeding in this booke the matters which are in controuersie
A CONFERENCE OF THE CATHOLIKE AND PROTESTANTE DOCTRINE WITH THE EXPRESSE WORDS OF HOLIE SCRIPTVRE WHICH IS THE SECOND PARTE OF THE Prudentiall Balance of Religion VVHEREIN IS CLEARELY SHEWED THAT IN MORE then 260. points of controuersie Catholiks agree with the holie Scripture both in words and sense and Protestants disagree in both and depraue both the sayings words and sense of Scripture WRITTEN FIRST IN LATIN BVT NOW AVGmented and translated into English ACTS IV. VERSE XVII IF IT BE IVST IN THE SIGHT OF GOD TO heare you rather then God iudge yee S. Athanasius Apol. de Fuga WHAT MVST WE STICK TO TO GODS words or these mens Fables AT DOWAY By the widdowe of MARKE WYON at the signe of the Phenix M.DC.XXXI The argument of the first booke VVHo in more then 260. points of controuersie speake with the holie Scripture in the very selfe same or equiualeÌ„t words when it speaketh of those matters expressely and of purpose and in that sense also which the words of Scripture of themselues without anie exposition of man do afforde and in which sense such words vse to be spoken and vnderstood of men they touching those points agree both in words and meaning with the holie Scripture And who speake of those points both in such words and sense as are contrarie to the foresaied words and sense they in those points disagree both in words and sense from the holie Scripture But Catholiks doe that and Protestants this Therefore c. The Maior semeth to be manifest by it selfe and is largely proued in the second booke Cap. 1. The Minor is shewed to the eye in all the first booke The argument of the second Booke VVHo not onely in more then 260. points of controuersie disagree from the foresaied words and sense of Scripture but also are forced openly to reiect some of the words thereof to blot out some to call others in question to change the order of others to change almost all kinds of the Scriptures speaches to expound her words by quite different and plaine contraries to reiect the vnanimous exposition of holie Fathers to confesse that some of their opinions were long since condemned for heresies that some are blasphemous and playne contrarie to Scripture such contradict not onely the words but also the true sense of Scripture But Protestants doe thus Therefore c. The Maior is manifest by it selfe and the Minor shewed to the eye in the second Booke APPROBATIO HOc opus cui titulus Collatio doctrinae Catholicorum ac Protestantium cum expressis sacrae scripturae verbis duobus libris comprehensa Latino serm one olim editum à duobus S. Theol. Doctoribus Parisiensibus approbatum nunc verò auctum in Anglicum sermonem fideliter conuersum nihil habet fidei Catholicae aduersum aut bonis moribus sed plurimum valet ad confutationem doctrinae haereticorum praesentis temporis proinde rectè praeli beneficio in lucem edetur Datum Duaci die 2. Ianuarij 1631. GEORGIVS COLVENERIVS S. Theol. Doctor eiusdem Regius ordinarius ac primarius Professor insignis Ecclâ—siae Collegiatae S. Petri Praepositus Canonicus Duacen sis Academiae Cancellarius librorum Censor THE PREFACE TO THE READER WHEREIN THE SCOPE MANNER OF PROCEDING AND PROFIT OF THIS BOOKE IS DECLARED REQVISITE TO BE READ BEFORE THE BOOKE THERE are now diuers years Gentle Reader since I published the first parte of the Prudential Balance of Religion in which by the weights of Prudence and Right Reason I weighed together the Catholik and Protestant religion according to their first Founders in our English nation to wit S. Austin and Martin Luther which booke hath neuer since bene answered by anie Protestant albeit diuers ministers and superintendents haue carped at it both in Pulpits and printed books shewing thereby that they wanted no will to answere it if they could haue performed it In the preface thereof I promised a second parte in which I would after the same manner weigh the forsaied religions according to their claimes to the holie Scripture and the expresse words thereof which here now I offer vnto thee The causes why I haue so long differred the publishing of this second parte are well enough knowne to them who know me and not needfull to be known of them who know me not And therfore I will not trouble thee with the rehearshall of them but here propose vnto thee the scope manner of Proceding and Profits of this second parte 2. As a man consisteth essentially of a Soule and Bodie and can neither be nor be imagined without them both So the true Church of Christ essentially consisteth Two things wholy necessarieto Christs Church of his true Doctrine which is the forme and as it were the soule of his Church and of lawfull Pastors and People who teach and embrace his Doctrine which Pastors and People make as it were the bodie of Christes Church And without both these partes to wit Christs true Doctrine and true Pastors teaching and People embracing it Christs true Church can no more be or imagined to be then a true man can either be or imagined to be without both the true bodie and true soule of a man And albeit the manifest need of both these partes to the true Church of Christ doth enforce Protestants to make some clame to them both and to pretend that they haue alvaies had both true Pastors who taught and People who beleiued their Doctrine yet their pretense to this parte of the Church is so weake and slender as but seldome and vpon mere necessitie they insist thereon But their greatest pretense and claime is to the true Doctrine of Christ and think thereby to proue that they haue alwaies had true Pastors and People who taught and beleiued their Doctrin as I haue shewed in a Booke of the Author of the Protestant Church and Religion wherein also I haue conuinced by ten Demonstrations all taken out of the open Confessions of the best learned Protestants both of England and other Countries that they neuer had anie one Pastor who taught or man who beleived the very fundamentall and most substantiall points of their religion before Luther arose but that he was first Author Inuentor and Father therof as some of them in plaine termes do call him 3. And although this Booke haue bene now these manie years published both in Latin and English and doth by the open confessions of the best learned Protestants ouerthrow the very foundation of their Church or rather shew that it hath no foundation at all besides their owne imagination yet hitherto no Protestant hath made anie shew of a solid answere vnto it I saie no shew of a why D. Prideaux lecture is no answer to the Author of Protest religion solid answere because that florish which Doctor Prideaux the Kinges diuinitie Reader in Oxford hath made in a lecture deserueth not the name of shew or shadow of an answer First because
faith is grounded onely vpon mens authoritie and all their doctrin forsouth vpon the expresse Scripture and word of God and In c. 1. Galat. In Assert art 2. thereby draw the simple people to follow them The Pope faieth Luther hauing no Scripture wherewith to defēd himself vseth this onely and perpetuall argument against vs. The Church the Church Agayne Our opinion is deliuered by these words of God the contrarie by the words of men And otherwhere All the Scripture standeth an our sides through all letters and tittles Caluin Papists find no weapons in Scripture yea they In Actor 9. v. 22. In Antid sess 6. c. 8. see it wholy against them Agayne I haue the whole Scripture on my side And Sadeel Our doctrin doth relie vpon the expresse worde of God And in an other place we professed in the fift article of our French Confession that our faith is onely and wholie and expressly grounded vpon the word of God as it is contained De vocat Ministr Ad art 1. abiurat in the Scripture Fulk in Ioan. 5. note 2. Papists can not find a iote of Poperie allowed ether by expresse wordes of the Scripture or by necessarie cōclusiō out of the same And the like most vaine pretence this most impudent boast is most Apol. Anglic p. 20. Pareus praefat lib. de Grat. Caluin epist 193. Whitak praefat ad Demonst manifestly refuted in this booke wherein is clearly shewed that the Catholik doctrin in more then 260. points denied by Protestants is in expresse termes and most directly taught and deliuered by the Scripture and in the same points the Protestants doctrin condemned and that these in very deed do relie vpon their owne inferences out of Scripture their owne conferences of places of Scripture and oppose their owne expositions glosses tropes and figures against the expresse words and thunders of almightie God 14. The sixt commoditie is that though some obstinatly will not confesse that in all these 260. points or in most of them the Scripture or word of God doth expresly approue the Catholik doctrin and condemne the Protestant yet this he can not denie but in all these points the holie Scripture both for word and for sense fauoureth more the Catholik doctrin then the Protestant which if ignorant Protestants would mark they would not be so easily misled For as for words in all these 260. points we Catholiks aduantage ouer Protestants For words of Scripture vse the very same or equiualent words with the Scripture what she calleth faith we call faith what she calleth the bodie of Christ we call the bodie of Christ And so in others whereas Protestants do the quite contrarie as hath beene touched before and shall appeare in the whole booke And as for the forme of speach where the Scripture For phrase of Scripture affirmeth we affirme where the Scripture denieth we deny And contrarie wise the Protestants affirme where the Scripture denieth and deny where the Scripture affirmeth as shal be most euident to him that will read this booke Besids no parte or parcell of the Scripture forceth For partes of Scripture Catholiks to denie it but they hould all that Protestants account for Scripture and some what more whereas Protestāts are compelled to reiect manie bookes of those which Catholiks and the holie Church heretofore hath beleeued to be Gods word and fouly also to mangle and corrupt these bookes which they admit Moreouer Catholiks refuse no authenticall edition or translation of the For translations of Scripture Scripture but Protestants will sland to no translation And thus much touching the words of Scripture As for For the sense of Scripture the sense thereof Catholiks in all these 260. points do admit that sense which the expresse words of Scripture and they spoaken of purpose to declare Gods mynd doe of them selues proporse which sense Protestants reiect and force the quite contrarie Agayne scarce in any of these 260. articles Catholiks are driuen to any answere which hath any shew of a shift or euasion because in them as I saied they embrace the natiue and proper sense of the words of Scripture but Protestants in euerie one of them are driuen to sundrie and foule shifts because they refuse the naturall and plaine sense of Gods word Besids Catholiks in all these 260. points dare stand to the iudgment of the expresse worde of God according to that sentence which of them selues with out all helpe force or pressing of Catholiks they doe pronounce Protestants dare not in these articles stand to the iudgment of Gods expresse worde vnles they may wrest wring and interprete it as they thinke best Finally Catholiks in none of all these questions reiect that sense of Scripture which is deliuered by vnanimous consent of the holie Fathers Councells or Church Protestants refuse it in manie Seing therefore Catholiks haue the aduantage ouer Protestants not onely for Fathers Councells Church miracles the like but also that they haue such and so great aduantages ouer them in more then 260. points of controuersie both for the expresse worde and plaine sense of the Scripture it is plaine willfulnes and carelesnes of saluation to leaue Catholiks for to follow Protestants I would to God that Protestants would as they pretend follow the expresse word of God and embrace that Religion Note which the expresse word of God most fauoureth reiect that which it most disliketh and enquire diligently whether the Catholik or Protestant religion can in more points of controuersie proue her doctrin by the pure and expresse written word of God without the mixture of any word of man and by the pure sense therof which of it self it affordeth without any help or exposition of man when it is spoaken of purpose to declare Gods meaning vnto vs. Let that religion florish and be embraced which in this conflict ouercomet let that perish and be reiected which is ouercomen And what more reasonable then to preferre Gods pure word before that which is not pure mixt partely of Gods words partely of mans What more reafonable then to preferre Gods direct speech before mans inference or collection out of his speech What more reasonable then to follow rather Gods expresse words then mans glosses tropes and figures And finally what more reasonable then to follow that religion which in more then 260. points of controuersie is grounded vpon the pure word the direct word the expresse word of God and hath against it nothing but mans mixt word mans inference mans glosses rather then that which in all those points is condemned by the pure direct and expresse word of God and supported onely by mans mixt word mans inference and mans glosses For example That the Eucharist is the bodie of Christ we haue for vs in foure places of Scripture the pure direct and expresse word of God saying This is my bodie and against vs there is not so much as once any pure word of God
or This is my sacramentall or mysticall bodie Oecalampadius in Beza Resp ad Repet Sanctis pag. 48. That bread is a symbolicall bodie Zanchius lib. 1. Epistolarum pag. 280. These three bodies Misticall bodie of Christ we reade in the holie Scriptures His true and naturall his Misticall which is the Church and sacramentall which is bread Daneus Cont. de Euchar. c. 10. Austin confesseth that the Onely Sacramentall bodie bread is onely the sacramentall bodie of Christ but not his naturall bodie Againe The bread which Christ gaue to his Apostles was his sacramentall bodie Vrsinus in Miscellaneis p. 172. There is a bodie of Christ properly so called and a sacramentall which is the Eucharisticall bread Thus we see how plainly they say that the Eucharist is Christs symbolicall bodie his sacramentall bodie his mysticall bodie and not his true bodie Which himselfe saieth most plainly to be his true bodie that very bodie which was giuen and deliuered for vs. Finally we see how manie wayes the Caluinists do contradict the expresse word of God in this one matter First in expressely denying the Eucharist to be the bodie of Christ which the Scripture so often and so plainely affirmeth Secondly in saying that it is onely a signe or figure of Christs bodie which the Scripture plainely and often saieth is his true bodie Thirdly in saying that it is but onely figuratiuely his bodie which the Scripture simply and absolutely saieth is his bodie Fourthly in saying that Christs bodie is but figuratiuely or by faith and imagination in the Eucharist Which the Scripture directly affirmeth to be the substance of the Eucharist Fiftly in saying that Christs bodie is no more receaued in the Eucharist then in the simple word whereas Christ bidde vs take and eate his bodie in the Eucharist but not in his word Sixtly by saying that the Fathers in the ould law receaued Christs bodie in their Sacraments as truely as we do in the Eucharist when as they were neuer bidden to take and eate Christs flesh in their Sacraments as we are in the Eucharist Finally in saying that the Eucharist is Christs symbolicall sacramentall and mysticall bodie which the holie Scripture saieth is his bodie which was giuen and deliuered for vs. ART II. WHETHER CHRISTS FLESH be to be eaten and his blood to be drunke SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Math. 26. ver 26. Take ye and eate This is my bodie ver 28. Christs bodie and blood to be eaten and drunck Drinke ye all of this For this is my blood c. Ihon 6. v. 53. Vnlesse you eate the flesh of the Sonne of man Truely and drinke his blood you shall not haue life in you Et 56. My flesh is truely meate and my blood is truely drinke CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Math. 26. v. 28. For to perfect the new testament and couenant of which Christ speaketh betwixt vs and him no spirituall eating or drinking of the bodie and blood of Christ sufficeth but there is plainely required an externall reall and corporall receauing of them both PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Zuinglius l. de Relig. c. de Euchar. to 2. Christs flesh eaten Christ flesh eaten profiteth not profiteth nothing at all Which he often repeateth in Exegesi fol. 333. 334. 336. 346. and in Ioan. 6. to 4. in so much as Hospin part 2. Histor fol. 181. writeth that Zuinglius euerie where inculcateth that Christs flesh eaten profiteth nothing And c. cit de Euchar. Nether do we thinke that they are to be Not be eaten spiritually heard who determin thus we eate the true and corporall flesh of Christ but spiritually for they do not see that it can not stand together to be a bodie and to be spiritually eaten Againe What is giuen to be eaten is Christs bodie but symbolicall In Exegesi fol. 329. Christ did not command his bodie to be eaten but symbolicall bread Respons ad Luther fol 435. We eate and drinke We eate and drinke nothing but bread and wine nothing but bread and wine In Apol. f. 370. We teach that the onely signe of Christs bodie is eaten in this Eucharisticall Supper Respons ad Billican fol. 264. We are taught that Christs corporall flesh can be no way eaten And as Hospin lib. cit fol. 181. saieth Zuinglius euerie where inculcateth that the true and reall flesh of Christ cannot be eaten so much as spiritually and that to eate Christs flesh is nothing els but to beleiue Oecolampadius in Hospin l. cit f. 75. Flesh eaten profiteth nothing but the spirit And in Schusselburg lib. 1. Theol. Caluin Mistica artic 22. I do not read in the Euangelists that they bidde receaue and eate Christs bodie Carolstadius in Scusselburg l. cit art 28. This I know that Christ neuer gaue his bodie that we should receaue it For he saieth My flesh profiteth you not Tigurins in Schusselburg lib. cit artic 23. His flesh on earth profited for to accomplish our saluation now it profiteth no more Peter Martyr cont Gardiner col 146. It is farre from the Christs bodie not to be truely eaten He gaue not his bodie but bread He exhibited not his bodie in substance bodie of the Lord to be truely eaten Confessio Czengerina c. de Caena p. 193. Yea after the pronouncing of Christs words Christ gaue bread to the Apostles and not his bodie Caluin defens 2. cont Westphal pag. 774. I saied that Christs bodie was exhibited effectually in the Supper not naturally according to vertue not according to substance Beza Resp ad Acta Torgens vol. 3. p. 68. What is eaten with the mouth auaileth nothing to eternall and spirituall life Perkins in Cathol reform Cont. 10. c. 3. Though the bodie may be bettered with spirituall food of the soule yet cannot the soule be fedde with bodily food Polanus in Grauer in Absurdis Caluin cap. 3. Those words of Christ Take eate are not spoaken of Christs bodie for nether The words not ment of his bodie tooke he that into his hands nether brake nor gaue it to his disciples And albeit sometimes they say in words that they eate the bodie of Christ yet they adde that to eate is nothing but to beleiue as we haue already repeated out of Zuinglius and haue cited more places of their like sayings in my Latin booke c. 10. art 2. or by word Body or Flesh they vnderstand not Christs true body or flesh but some other thing as the same Zuinglius doth Respons ad Luther tom 2. fol. 390. In Exegesi fol. 350. and 333. and in Explicat art 18. tom 1. fol. 37. In like sorte how beit sometimes in words they say they eate the substance of Christs bodie yet Beza confesseth Apolog. 1. cont Sainctem pag. 294. that vnwillingly they vse the name Substance and as he addeth Respons 3. ad Selneccer pag. 271. Manie of them refuse it and not without cause and that is euident by the words now cited out of Caluin
other expresse words are directly contrarie And let that faith or rather infidelitie fall perish vanish which in more then 260. articles is condemned of such words of God and in such a sense and in most points is onely supported by humane consequences humane conferences and humane reasons or arguments These are the points Christian Reader taken out of How Protest handle the letter of Scripture the first booke which I desire to fasten and engraue in thy memorie which yet will be more forcible if thou adde to them things which I haue set before thy eyes in thy second booke For there I haue shewed that the holie Scripture doth so manifestly condemne the Protestants doctrine as that touching the letter thereof they are forced to reiect some openly others priuilie to scrape out to call some in doubt to adde some to translate some wrong and change the order of others Touching the propositiōs How the sayings of Scripture they are compelled to say that some of them were certainlie knowne of God himselfe others not spoaken according to his owne mynd others spoaken ironically mimeticallie hyperbolicallie by fiction and amplification and to change vniuersall propositions into particulars vnlimited into limited absolute into conditionals these that were spoakē simply into those that were spoakē in parte and those that were spoaken of one time into those that were spoaken of an other Touching the single How the simple words words of Scripture they are forced those words which signifie the doing of a thing to expound of endeauour to doe it those which signifie the cause to expound of the way or means to an end Which signifie that a thing is to expound that it ought to be Which signifie a true thing to expound of an apparent or signe thereof to expound words by diuerse by disparate or vnlikelie yea by opposites or contraries to deuise all kinde of figures when the proprietie of the word is against them to find out new and neuer heard of distinctions to reiect the vnanimous exposition of Fathers Church and Councels to frustrate the ends of the passion of Christ to take out of the world all true vertue and to open the way to all vice to confesse that they hould opinions her to fore condemned for heresies of the Church and Fathers to acknowledge that some of their opinions are plainely blasphemous and finally which is the end of this worke directly opposite to holie Scripture Who I say in more then 260. articles of cōtrouersie not onelie oppose themselues to the expresse words of Scripture spoaken of purpose to tell vs Gods meaning cōcerning matters that farre passe all mās reach in their proper sense and in which men vsuallie vnderstand them and to which no other places of Scripture are directlie opposite but also laie violent hands vpon the sacred letter or word change almost all the kinds of propositions which the Scripture vseth impiouslie depraue the sense of the words reiect the exposition of Fathers Church and Councells make voide the ends of Christs passion take away all vertue and bring in vice and finallie confesse that diuers of their opinions are blasphemous contrarie to scripture they are to be accounted auoided and eschewed not onely as Heretiks condemned by the Scripture and holie Church but euen of themselues A note to the Reader I HAVE not set downe the editions of the Protestants bookes which I cite in this worke because I haue done that in my booke de Authore Prot. Ecclesiae put forth An. 1619. Where he that list may see them as also he may there see the laws which I prescribe to him that will answere ether that booke or this Moreouer in this English worke I doe not cite the English words of our English Protestant writers because I had not their English works at hand but translate them out of their Latin works Besides I am not so curious to cite the leafe or page as I was in the Latin edition because the vnlearned will not be able to seeke the Latin and the learned Reader will rather I suppose peruse my Latin copie where he shall find the leaues or pages as carefully cited as I could doe by the errors of the Scribe or Printer whose fault no discret reader will impute to me and whose error I hope is no where to be found both in the number of the chapters and of the leaues or pages together So that the one of them may bring the Reader to the place which I alledge if the other chance to be misprinted Laus Deo Virginique Matri AN INDEX OF THE CHAPTERS and Articles contained in the first booke CHAPTR 1. Of the owners of Scripture Whether Catholiks or Protestants be true owners of the Scripture CHAP. 2. Of God ARt 2. Whether God willeth sinne page 45. 2. Whether sinne pleaseth God p. 49. 3. Whether God hateth sinne p. 50. 4. Whether God worketh sinne p. 51. 5. Whether God ordaineth sinne to be p. 33. 6. Whether God commandeth sinne p. 56. 7. Whether God tempteth to sinne p. 57 8. Whether God necessitateth to sinne p. 59. 9. Whether God hateth all that sinne p. 61. 10. Whether God iustifieth the sinner remaining a sinner p. 62. 11. Whether God be angrie with the faithfull when they sinne p. 65. 12. Whether God be delighted with good works p. 67. 14. Whether God be serued by good works p. 69. 15. Whether God esteeme of good works which are not commanded 70. 16. Whether God be appeased by good workes p. 71. 17. Whether God will haue his commādements kept p. 73. 18. Whether God loueth all men p. 75. 19. Whether God would haue all men to be saued p. 77. 20. Whether God would haue some cōuerted who will not conuert p. 78. 21. Whether God call all men p. 80. 22. Whether God of himselfe will the death and damnation of men p. 81. 23. Whether God dāneth men for sinne p. 85. 24. Whether God can doe all things p. 86. 25. Whether God can make a Camell passe through a needls eye p. 88. 26. Whether God can doe that which shall neuer be p. 90. 27. Whether Gods miracles be a sufficient proof of trueth p. 91. Chap. 3. Of Christ Art 1. Whether God the Sonne had his being of his Father p. 96. 2. Whether Christ was predestinated the Sonne of God p. 97. 3. Whether Christ as man is to be adored p. 98. 4. Whether Christ as man could worke miracles p. 100. 5. Whether Christs humanitie be euerie where p. 102. 6. Whether Christ as man be head of the Church p. 104. 7. Whether Christ as man made lawes p. 105. 8. Whether Christ as mā be Iudge 107. 9. Whether Christ made a new testament p. 109. 10. Whether as man he were ignorant p. 111. 11. Whether as man he were a sinner p. 113. 12. Whether he refused to doe the office of a Redeemer p. 116. 13 Whether he was assured of his saluation 118 14 VVhether he had commandment
speeches of Protestants as it was to me to write them out let him runne ouer the Summe which I make of their words or by the notes in the margent chuse which are fittest to his purpose And thus much for the māner of my proceeding in this booke 11. The profit of this work is manifould First because by it a short and easie way may be taken to make an end The profits of this worke of all controuersies and that out of Scirpture alone as Protestants desire to wit by mere rehearsall of the expresse words of Scripture of Catholiks and of famous Protestants touching 260. articles of controuersie For if it appeare that catholikes in 260. articles agree both in word and sense with the expresse words of Scripture and these spoken of purpose to declare her meaning vnto vs and that Protestants in those 260. articles directly contradict the said words and sense of the holie Scripture no man will doubt but that all Protestant doctrin for as it is contrarie to the Catholik is also contrarie to the holie Scripture An other commoditie is that in this booke are gathered those places of Scripture and they ranked according to order of their matters which in 260. articles directly and in their proper and vsual sense do approue the Catholik doctrin and condemne the Protestant A third commoditie is that hereby are at hand in euerie kind of controuersie such sayings of famous Protestants as not onely directely crosse the Scripture but also many of them are so blasphemous against God against Christ against the Saints the Church Sacraments Faith Good works so opposite to pietie vertue and religion so fauorable to vice and all licenciousnes so repugnant to reason as some Protestants will deny and others scarse beleeue that euer any of theirs taught such doctrin Whome I request The Authors fidelitie in citing Protetestants sayings to take the paines to looke vpon the bookes and places by me alledged and then to beleeue their owne eyes For I not onely gathered their sayings out of their owne bookes but also after I had my self gathered them and caused them to be faire copied out I diligently conferred them with their books and admitted none which he that read their bookes did non find to be truly cited out of them Wherfore I say for my self as Caluin said for him self against Gentilis There shal be no colour for them to cōplaine that they are slandered seing I request that iudgmēt be made of their impietie out of their owne mere words And they who haue had to deale with Protestants ether by word or writing know well how important a thing it is to be able to conuince them that they teach that which in in very deed they teach which may clearly be done by their sayinges here rehearsed 12. The fourth commoditie of this worke is thar hereby shall appeare that almost in all controuersies which betwene Catholiks and Protestants Catholiks do stick fast to the very words of Scripture and religiously keepe her letter and forme of speech and Protestants goe fare from the words at lest of Scripture and bring in a different yea quite opposit forme of speech Nether ought they to think this to be a small fault both because they boasting of the pure and expresse word of God ought also to keep the very letter thereof and not to reiect it and to vse the contrarie as also because the Apostle commandeth to auoide profane nouelties of words and to keepe the 1. Timoth. 6. 2. Timoth. 1. forme of holesome words which we haue learned of him which commandment they do not follow who forsake the Scriptures forme of speech and embrace the contrarie and finally because not onely the sense but also the words and forme of speech vsed by the Scripture did proceed from the holie Ghoste and therefore it is sacrilegious audacitie to reiect Gods words and Gods forme of speaking and to bring in mans words and fashion of speaking quite contrarie As if these new Ghospelers should teach God how to deliuer his mind or he ment to speake otherwise by them then he did by his Prophets Apostles and Euāgelists wherefore their impietie is not to be borne withall who when the Scripture most often and most plainly calleth the beleefe of wicked men or reprobats faith and neuer denieth it to be faith yet dare say that it Caluin 3. Instit c. 2. §. 10. is vnworthie the name of faith When the Scripture often times and most directly calleth the Eucharist the bodie of Christ and not once directly denieth it to be his bodie yet dare say it is not his bodie And the like they doe in many other matters wherin if they controll not the meaning of the holie Ghoste at least they correct his speech and reforme it according to the square of their new doctrin Far otherwise proceeded the holie Fathers who would not suffer so much as a letter or syllable of the holie Scripture to be altered And as S. Austin grauely aduertized Philosophers may speake as they please but we speake according Lib. 10. de Ciuit. c. 23. to a certaine rule lest licencie in words breed impious opinions of the thing which they signifie Yea Protestants them selues some times will seeme to be very carefull of the words and phrases of Scripture For thus speaketh Luther If the In Confutat Latomi f. 227 Scripture terme any thing sin beware thou beest not moued by any words of theirs who as if they could speake better deny it to be sin And Caluin There is to be taken out of Scripture a 1. Instit c. 13. §. 3. certaine forme of thinking speaking by which all the thoughts of our mynd and words of our mouth are to be examined Beza Ad defens Castell also I see that all godlie and learned Diuines haue euer taught that the holie Ghost gouerned not onely the mynd but also the tongue and pen in so much as concerning the wonders of God not onely nothing can be saied of any mā more truly or more habily but also nether so grauely nor so properly Likewise Bucer Prefat in Math. No wisdom of the flesh can reach to these misteries of the kingdome of God Therefore then we speake most plainly most perspicuously and most surely of matters of faith when we speake according to the rule and forme of Scripture And otherwhere we In Hospin part 2. Histor must learne of the Scripture and the holie Ghoste how to speake and think of euerie matter Wherefore the holie Ghost his formes of speaking ought not to be corrected according to the iudgment of our reason Thus they which if they and theires had followed we should not haue had so much speech contrarie to the Scripture 13. The fift and that no small cōmoditie is that by this worke wil be taken from ministers all their false pretense of Scripture and of the worde of God wherewith perpetually they crie that the Catholik
saing directly and expresly This is not my bodie But onely mens inference out of a mixt word to wit Christs bodie is in heauen and can not be in two places which word is mixt partely of Gods word for the former parte and of mens word for the latter And shall we thinke that in a matter of faith which we can not know but by Gods teaching his pure and expresse word is not to be preferred before mens inference out of a mixt word which is in parte mens word What els can we thinke vnles we will euen in Gods matters preferre men before God 15. The seauenth cōmoditie is that in this word are discouered all or the most vsuall shifts wherewith Protestāts vse to delude the testimonies of holie Scripture Which surely is no lesse profitable then to know the deceits of enemies with whom we are to fight And as Tertullian saieth VVoe be to him who whiles he is in this life knoweth not De resur c. 19. the secrets of Heretiks And these are the especiall profits and commodities which may be reaped by this work Now let vs remoue certaine scruples or hinderances of the reaping of them 16. The first scruple may be about the vulgar Latin trāslation Obiections or difficulties remoued which I follow in citing the words of Scripture But to omit all which Catholiks produce for to proue that translation to be authenticall because this is no place to treate of that matter Protestants cōfessions hereof may suffice which may be seene in the Protestants Apologie for the Rom. Church Treat 1. Sect. 10. subd 4. to which I add that Casoubon writeth I acknowledg the Latin translation of the bible to be holie Scripture and I account an vnperdonable fault to so much as doubt thereof That Iuel art 17. sect 4. saieth It hath bene euer more generally receaued in the Church That Beza in Luc. 1. confesseth That the ancient interpreter did most religiously translate the Scripture And in Luc. 8. v. 54. That him self had twoe ancient Greek copies which meruailously agreed with the vulgar Latin And Prefat in Testam That the vulgar interpreter had a truer Greek copie then theirs now are Whitaker also Cont. 1. q. 2. c. 7. graunteth that the Latin Fathers commend it and iustly Hounfrey l. 1. de Rat. interpret affirmeth That the old Interpretor seemeth enough addicted to the proprietie of the word Moreouer Luther and Protestants commonly confesse that Catholiks haue the word of God that the Fathers vsed the Latin translation in their disputes for maintenance of the Catholik faith and confutation of Heresies Besids Fulk in his preface to the Testament saieth that none of them calleth the vulgar translation of the new testament Papisticall as though it were translated by Papists or els made so greatly for Papists when it is rightly vnderstood Finally the vulgar Latin translation differeth not from the originall Hebrew or Greek text but in very few of those places which here I cite and therefore it wil be but vayne to cauil here about this matter 17. The secōd scruple may be that some times the very why Protest can not excuse them selues by the Scripture Scripture contradicteth it self in shew of words and neuertheles in sense and meaning is neuer repugnant to it self And therefore it is not so great meruail if Protestāts some time contradict the words of Scripture nether can it be thereof inferred that the contradict the sense To this I answer that the Scripture nether so often nor in so many and so weightie matters nor so manifestly and directly contradicteth it self in words as Protestants doe Nether need we so many and so incredible shifts for to reconcile the words of Scripture as Protestants need to reconcile their sayings with the Scripture Besids God may speak as he pleaseth therefore may for to exercise our faith and studie mingle some shew of contradiction in his words but Protestants are bound to speak as God speaketh and not to gaine say so much as his words as doubtles they would not if their meaning were not repugnant to his Agayne we may not out of anie seeming contradiction in Gods words infer anie opposition in his meaning because we know that he can not be contrarie to him self but we know that Protestants can not be contrarie to Gods meaning as we see that they be contrarie to his words and therefore out of their so frequent so manifest so direct contradicting of his words we iustly inferre that they also contradict his meaning as we would inferre the same of anie Heretiks whatsoeuer Moreouer this cauil will no more help Protestants then it will help anie other Heretiks sith there were euer scarce anie who so often so plainly so directly contradicted the expres word of God as Protestants haue done And therefore ether we may inferre out of the Protestants contradicting the words of God that they also contradict his true meaning or we can not inferre that of anie Heretiks whatsoeuer But of this more in the second booke cap. 1. 18. The third scruple may be that perhaps also VVhy they can not excuse them selues by Catholiks some Catholik writers haue in shew of words contradicted the Scripture But to this I answere that this is to accuse others not to cleare them selues Let them first answere for them selues before they recriminate others And if anie of them will goe about to lay the like fault vpon Catholiks let him keep these most iust and equal conditions First let him not medle with other matters then such as are in controuersie betwixt vs and them as I touch no other matters Secondly let him bring forth in so manie controuersies so manifest and so direct testimonies of holie Scripture agreeing with their doctrin both in wordes and sense and opposite to our doctrin as I haue brought Thou must proue saieth Tertullian as euidently as we proue Giue me a proof which I demand like to Cont. Prax. c. 11. De vnit c. 6. 24. mine And S. Austin Produce as cleare testimonies as these are which we produce to you We demande some manifest place which needeth no interpreter Thirdly let him shew that the Councell of Trent contradicteth as directly so many and so expres places of Scripture and that in so weightie matters as we haue shewed that theire confessions of faith of which as they say they make almost as great account of as Vorstius praefat Antilpraefat Syntagm we doe of the Councell of Trent Fourthly let him shew that so many and so famous Catholik writers haue in so many and so great controuersies contradicted the expres propositions or assertions of the holie Scripture as we haue shewed of the Protestant writers I say Propositions or Assertions because it is a farre greater matter to contradict the proportions of Scripture in which it pronounceth a thing to be or not to be to be such or not to be such then to varie onely from some of the
pastors as is shewed in the saied booke c. 2. cit and Caluin in Ezechiel c. 3. v. 9. saieth that Papists chalenge the name of the Church because they pretend a continuall succession And indeed saieth he we are forced to confesse that they haue the ordinarie ministerie And who can denie but the true Pastors of Gods Church are true owners of Gods worde which they haue authoritie to preach Thereby they confesse that Catholiks are true possessors of the holie Scripture For thus writeth Luther to 2. Germ. fol. 279. cited by Scarpius in Eccles c. 6. VVe confesse that vnder Poperie are manie Christian goods yea all Christian good and that it came from thence to vs. Namely we confesse that in Poperie is true holie Scripture true baptisme true office of preaching true Sacrament of the altar true keyes to forgiue sinnes true Catechisme Nay I say that in Poperie is true The kernell of Christianitie in Poperie Christianitie yea the very kernell of Christianitie and manie great Saintes And Hall Chalmeley and Batterfeild graunt that Luther wrote thus and seeme to allow it Luther also to 6. in c. 28. Genes saieth we confesse that Papists haue the Church because they haue baptisme absolution the text of the Ghospel and there are manie godlie men amongest them The eight proofe shal be from the Confession of such 8. title Confession of strangers as nether are Catholiks nor Protestants For as Vorstius writeth in Antibell p. 181. Iewes Turkes and Pagans do think that the Christian religion consisteth cheefly in Poperie And Whitaker Cont. 2. q. c. 2. No other famous Church can be named in these latter times which was thought to be the Church and was called the Church but the Roman Church Nether let anie think that such as want faith can not be sufficient iudges in this matter For albeit they be not sufficient iudges in the question of the trueth of doctrin yet are they sufficient in question of facte as this is And in this Ioseph lib. Antiq. Euseb l. 7. c. 24. sorte the Heathens in the time of the ould law iudged betwene the Iewes and the Samaritans and in the time of the Ghospel betwene the Catholiks and the Samosatenians And as Christians can iudge what kind of Mahometans are the true owners of the Alcoran though they think not the Alcoran to conteyne true doctrin So may Infidels iudge what kinde of Christians be true owners of the Ghospel though they beleeue not the Ghospel to be the worde of God The ninth proof may be taken from the agreement of 9. title Agreement with Scripture the Cath. doctrin both in words and sense with the holie Scripture as shall appeare in this booke Which proofe though taken alone doe not conuince that Catholiks are true owners of the Scripture yet in conuinceth that they are true owners rather then Protestants who so farre disagree from the Scripture both in words and sense The tenth proofe shal be that Protestants against these 10. title weaknes of Protest Proofes so manie and so forcible proofes for the Catholiks can bring no other proofe for their right to Scripture then that they haue the true doctrin of Scripture Which argument taken alone is as I shewed at large in my saied booke De Authore c. lib. 2. c. 15. a fond Sophisme or Foularie First because Schismatiks haue the true doctrin of Scripture as I there proued by reason by the testimonie of holie Fathers and the confession of Protestants and yet are no true owners of the Scripture because they are no true mēbers of the Church as I there also proued Secondly for Protestants to proue that they be true owners of the Scripture because they haue the true doctrin thereof is to proue one vnknowne and false thing by an other as vnkowne and false Which is not to proue at all because all proofe must be from a thing more knowne Thirdly they nether proue that they haue the doctrin of the Scripture by expresse words of Scripture for these are quite against them as shal be shewed in this booke nor by plaine inference out of the words of Scripture as appeareth by the Catholiks answers vnto all their proofes nor finally they haue proued any thing before a lawfull iudge but all their proofes are such as euerie Heretike maketh Besides if truth of doctrin doe proue true right to Scripture it farre more maketh for Catholiks and no more for Protestants then for anie other Heretiks Out of all which hath beene saied in this Chapter it is most euident that if the light of reason may be iudge in this matter Catholiks must needs be counted the true owners of the holie Scripture because they haue all the foresaied Titles then the which both fewer and weaker would make a claime to worldlie matters out of all question of all which Protestants can pretend none but the last Secondly it is euident that if Catholiks be the true If Cath. be true owners of the Scripture all controuersies are ended owners of the Scripture the sacred testament of Christ they are also true owners of the holie Sacraments of the keyes of heauen to binde and loose sinnes of the means of saluation and of all the goods which Christ hath by his will and testament bequeathed to his Church For vndoubtedly all these things pertaine to them to whome Christs testament doth belong Thirdly it is euident that if Catholiks be true owners of the Scriptures Protestants be vniust vsurpers of them as Iewes Turkes and Infidels are and haue no more right to keep or vse them against Catholiks then theeues haue to vse true mens goods or weapons against them For cleare it is that Catholiks and Protestants are opposite Churches as I haue shewed in the foresaied booke De Authore lib. 1. c. 2. and lib. 2. c. 6. and that one of them is a false Church whereas the Scriptures were giuen and belong to one onely Church Wherefore we may well say to Protestants as Tertullian de Prescript c. 37. saied to Heretiks of his time VVho are you when and whence came you what doe you in mine being not mine By what right Marcion Luther doest thou fell my woods By what licence Valentin Caluin doest thou turne away my water By what authoritie Apelles Zuingle doest thou charge my bounds It is my possession what doe you strangers here sow and feed at your pleasure And the same say we to Protestants Let them first shew what right they haue to Scriptures before they argue out of them let them render vs our weapons or shew what iust title they haue to them before they fight with them against vs. For as the same Tertull. saieth c. 15. Here we first stop them that they are not to be admitted to anie dispute of Scriptures VVe must see whether they may haue them or no to whom belongeth the Scripture that he be not admitted to it to whom it appertaineth not And c. 19. The
order of the matter did require that to be first proposed which alone is now to be disputed Fourthly whose is the faith whose is the Scripture Fourthly it is euident that if anie Protestant will notwithstanding all that hath beene saied iudge that Protestants are the true owners of Scripture rather then Catholiks he will giue that iudgment in a matter of such great moment which he would be ashamed to giue in a question of the least trifle in the world For who seing that one hath nine titles to a peece of ground of all which titles his aduersarie hath no pretence and that he hath as good if not farre better shew also of the tenth title as his aduersarie hath would not be ashamed to adiudge the land to his aduersarie and cast him out of possession who was actuall possessor when the matter came first in question was peacable possessor for manie ages was the ancienter possessor and of whose possession no Note this beginning can be found but from the true lord and from whom his aduersarie hath whatsoeuer he hath whose lawfull possession thereof all kinde of aduersaries do some time confesse and put his aduersarie in possession who can pretend no title but that which alone sufficeth not and which also for better agreeth to the ancient possessor If anie say that in wordly matters reason would giue iudgment for the ancient possessor but not in heauenlie or deuine matters as the Scripture is I demand what Scripture what worde of God teacheth vs to checke the light of reason concerning the true possession of the Scripture If none why then doe we not follow reason in this matter of fact concerning the true possession of Scripture as well as in others Besides this were to grante that the light of reason is in this matter with Catholiks against Protestants and consequently that to be a Protetestant one must first cast away reason euen in a matter which is vnder the reach of reason as is who are the true owners of the Scriptures Moreouer the very end of this Balance is no other then to shew that if we will follow the light of reason and true prudence we ought to imbrace the Catholik religion and reiect the Protestant and that to doe otherwise is to cast away reason and prudence and to become vnreasonable and imprudent men and to say that Christ hath giuen vs a Religion which is not onely aboue reason but euen contrarie to reason and that also in matters subiect to reason and that we can not become faithfull men but we must first become vnreasonable men not receaue his light of faith before we put out his light of reason wherewith he hath made vs like to him selfe and superiours to beasts Thus we see how farre in all reason and prudence Catholiks are aboue Protestants for the right claime or iust possession of holie Scripture Now let vs see in the rest of this booke how farre also they are aboue them for the letter or wordes of Scripture and in the second booke how farre they are aboue them for the true sense thereof A SVMME OF THE MORE MANIFEST CONtradictions betwene the expresse wordes of the holie Scripture and of Protestants with the Chapter and Article where they may be read more at large which will much serue to vnderstand and remember better those which follow CHAPTER II. OF GOD. SCRIPTVRE Thou are not a God that willeth iniquitie God willeth not iniquitie He willeth iniquitie Protestants God will haue iniquitie to be committed God willeth iniquitie with a hidden will He willeth sin He willeth sin to be done He would haue Adam to sin to fall to reuoult See more c. 2. article 1. Scripture Our iust lord in the middes thereof will not doe God doth not iniquitie iniquitie Protestants God worketh euill in vs The euils of sin are He doth iniquitie done by the effectuall working of God Dauids adulterie is properly Gods worke Iudas his treacherie is his proper worke as the vocation of S. Paul Pharao his crueltie is attributed to Gods counsell in no other sense then the Egiptians fauoure towards his people God procureth sin it selfe Se more c. 2. art 4. Scripture He God hath commanded no man to doe impiously God commaÌ„deth not to sin He commandeth to sin Protestants God biddeth Sathan goe to be a lying spirit By Gods commandment Sathan is a lying spirit God giueth him a plaine commandment to deceaue Sathan was sent to deceaue by the expresse commandment of God See art 6. Scripture God is not a tempter of euils and he tempteth no God tempeteth not to sin man Protestants God is the author of temptation God moueth He tempâ—eth to sin the offenders to sin pushed the Iewes to kill his Sonne stirreth vp the theefs will to kill driueth to sin by tempting inclineth the wills of wicked men into greeuous sins See more art 7. Scripture Thou hatest all that worke iniquitie Protestants God is angrie with the elect when they sinne but God hateth all that worke iniquitie He hateth not all such God iustifieth not the impious He iustifieth the impious neuer hateth them He hateth all iniquitie but not all in whome iniquitie is See art 9. Scripture He that iustifieth the impious is abhominable before God Protestants Seing God forbiddeth to iustifie the impious Prou. 17. can he be saied to do that rightly which him self forbiddeth Rightly Albeit we be wicked yet are we accounted of the lord for iust A wicked man may be pronounced iust according to the Ghospell Christ can iustifie such as are impious and want all good workes See more art 10. Scripture Against Aaron God being exceeding angrie God is angrie with the faithfull wheÌ„ they sin He is not angrie with theÌ„ God is pleased with good workes He is not pleased with them God is serued with good workes He is not serued with them he would haue destroied him Protestants God alwaies withouldeth his anger from the faithfull God is not angrie with sinners See art 11. Scripture VVe doe these thinges which are pleasing before him with such hostes God is pleased Protestants God careth not for workes we foolishly feigne that God is much delighted with our workes There is no such God which is delighted with our good workes To wash dishes and to preach is all one as for pleasing God See more art 13. Scripture By fastings and praiers seruing God day and night Protestants The true God is not serued with workes There is one only worship pleasing to God to wit true faith God is serued by faith only Faith is the onely true worship of God See art 14. Scripture Phinees stoode pacified and the slaughter ceased God is pacified by good workes He is not pacified by theÌ„ God will haue his commaÌ„dments kept He will not haue theÌ„ kept Protestants There is no such God that can be pacified with our good workes The workes which I do according to Gods law
our hart See more art 4. Scripture Thy will be done in earth as it is in heauen Protestants We do not pray that we may fulfill the law See more art 5. Scripture If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandments Protestants Woe be to their Cathecumens if so hard a condition of keeping the law be imposed vpon them See more art 6. Scripture Do we then destroye the law by faith God forbid but we establish the law Protestants All the ceremoniall law or the Decalogue is abrogated It is abrogated from a Christian because he is dead to it And to be dead to the law is not to be bound with the law but free from it and not to know it See more art 7. CHAPTER XX. OF MANS LAVV. SCripture Who thinkest thou is a faithfull and wise seruant Superioritie amōgst Christians whome his lord hath appointed ouer his familie Protestants Among Christians there can be no superioritie Christ is my immediate Lord I know no other See more art 1. Scripture To the rest I say not our Lord If anie brother None amōgst them haue a wife an infidell and she consent to dwell with him let him not put her away Protestants They draw to themselues all the maiestie of God Man can command that which God doth not He cannot Conscience subiect to mās lawes Not subiect who chaleng authoritie to make lawes See more art 2. Scripture Be subiect of necessitie not only for wrathe but also for conscience sake Protestants The lawes of Princes bind not the conscience haue no power ouer the conscience See more art 3. CHAPTER XXI OF FREE WILL. SCripture It shal be in the arbitrement of her husband whether There is free will she shall do it or not do it Protestants Free vill is a title without the thing See more There is none art 1. Scripture Without thy counsell I would do nothing that thy Freedome to good good might not be as it were of necessitie but voluntarie Protestants Man after his fall hath no libertie to good There No freedome to good is no free will to good See more art 2. Scripture We are Gods coadiutours Gods coadiutors Protestants Papists make God the first and cheefest cause of all goodnes and vs coadiutours Which is craftily to withdraw Not his coadiutors themselues from God See more art 3. CHAPTER XXII OF MANS SOVLE SCripture Feare ye not them who kill the bodie and are not Mans soule immortall able to kill the soule Protestants I giue leaue to the Pope to make articles of faith Not immortall for his followers Such as are that breade and wine are transsubstantiated in the Sacrament That he is Emperour of the world and an earthlie God That the soule is immortall and all those infinit monsters in the Romish dunghill of decrees What Propositions I pray you shal euer be thought cōtradictions if these be not seing there can scarce be deuised more formall or more direct opposition then is betwixt the most of these But because perhaps the vulgar Protestante will say that he beleiueth not all or most of the Protestants propositions here set downe albeit this excuse will not suffice him as I haue shewed in the end of my Preface yet for his fuller satisfaction I haue gathered twelue principall articles which commonly all Protestants beleiue quite contrarie to the expresse word of God THE COMMON PROTESTANTS CREED CONSIsting of twelue Articles quite contrarie to the expresse word of God in the Scripture 1 PROTESTANTS beleiue that a man is Lib. 1. c. 16. art 2. iustified by only faith quite contrarie to the expresse word of God Ioannes 2. v. 4. Do you see that a man is iustified by workes and not by faith only 2 Protestants beleiue that we can not keep Goods commandments quite contrarie to his expresse word Ezechiel 36. v. 27. I will make Lib. 1. c. 18. art 1. that you walke in my commandments and keepe my iudgments and doe them 3 Protestants beleiue that the keeping of Gods commandments is not necessarie to come to life euerlasting quite contrarie to Gods expresse words Mathew 19. v. 17. Lib. 1. c. 18. art 6. If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandments 4 Protestants beleiue that no men can forgiue sinnes quite contrarie to the expresse word of God Ihon 20. v. Lib. 1. c. 11. art 1. 22. Receaue ye the holie Ghost whose sinnes ye shall forgiue they are forgiuen them 5 Protestants beleiue that we are not bound to confesse our sinnes to men quite contrarie to the expresse word of Lib. 1. c. 11. art 2. God Ioannes 5. v. 16. Confesse your sinnes one to an other 6 Protestants beleiue that men when they die are not to be anoiled quite contrarie to the expresse word of God Lib. 1. c. 11. art 7. Iames 5. v. 14 Is anie man sicke among you Let him bring in the preists of the Church and let them pray ouer him auoiling him with oile in the name of our lord 7 Protestants beleiue that the blessed Sacrament is not the true bodie and blood of Christ quite contrarie to the Lib. 1. c. 10. art 1. expresse word of God Luke 22. v. 19. This is my bodie which is giuen for you and Mathew 26. v. 28. This is my blood which shal be shed for remisson of sinnes 8 Protestants beleiue that the Church of God is not infallible in faith quite contrarie to Gods expresse word 1. Lib. 1. c. 8. art 6. Timothie 3. v. 15. Which is the Church of the liuing God the pillar and ground of trueth 9 Protestants beleiue that we must not beleiue Traditions quite contrarie to the expresse word of God 2. Thessalon Lib. 1. c. 5. art 9. 2. v. 15. Hould the Traditions which you haue learned whether it be by word or by epistle 10 Protestants beleiue it is ill done to pray in the Church in an vnknowne language quite contrarie to the expresse Lib. 1. c. 14. art 12. word of God 1. Cor. 14. v. 17. where it is saied of such a one Thou indeed giuests thankes well 11 Protestants Beleiue that there is no sacrifice in the Church quite contrarie to the expresse word of God Malachie Lib. 1. c. 11. art 11. 1. v. 11. In euerie place there is sacrificing and there is offered to my name a cleane oblation 12 Protestants beleiue that there is no altar in the Church quite contrarie to the expresse word of God Hebrewes Lib. 1. c. 11. art 12. 13. v. 10. We haue an altar whereof they haue no power to eate who serue the tabernacle THE FIRST BOOKE OF THE CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIKE AND PROtestant doctrine with the expresse words of the holie Scripture FIRST CHAPTER OF GOD. Article 1. Whether God willeth iniquitie or sinne SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. PSALME 5. verse 5. Thou art God will not iniquitie not a God that wilt iniquitie Abacuc
1. verse 13. Thine eyes are cleane from seing euill and thou canst not looke towarde iniquitie CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE Saint Thomas parte 1. Summae quaest 19. art 9. God will no waye the euill of sinne D. Stapleton lib. 11. de Iustificat c. 8 It is wholy repugnant to Gods nature to will sinne PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Caluin in c. 3. Gen. v. 1. 3. None of these things hinder but God would haue man to fall that God would haue man to fall for some certaine cause vnknowne to vs. And cont Franciscan libertin in opusculis page 441. We saye that the diuell and man both fell by the will of God vnknowne to vs. Beza in 2. par resp ad acta Colloquij MoÌ„tis Belgartensis p. 177 saieth that our first parents fell indeed with the will and Man fall with the will of God decree of God Agayne I saied and do saye that it câ—me not to passe but by the decree of God so willing that our first parents depriued themselues of their natiue goodnesse And l. de Praedest coÌ„t Castell volum 1. Theol. p. 340. hauing obiected to him selfe that if the causes of damnation come with God his will then man were out of all fault and all the fault were in God he denieth the sequele and admitteth the antecedent and addeth that God decreeth and ordaineth the causes of damnation Peter Martyr in c. 9. Rom. p. 348. God is saied to hate sinne God willeth sinne for some other end He would haue Adam to fall He would haue Adam to sinne because he willeth it not for it selfe but for some other end And in locis classe 1. c. 14. p. 116. It cannot be doubted but that God would haue Adam to fall Zanchius l. 5. de natura Dei c. 2. Would not God haue Adam to sinne and vs all together with him to fall into this corruption by which it cometh to passe that we cannot but sinne vnlesse he helpe vs with his grace He would Agayne By this omnipotent will he would and ordained the sinne of Adam that in him all should sinne Piscator apud VorstiuÌ„ in Parasceue c. 3. Sinnes are done with Gods procuremeÌ„t and will that they should be done God will iniquitie God will haue iniquitie to be committed to be coÌ„mitted albeit he do not delighte in it as a sick man will drinke a bitter potioÌ„ albeit he be not delighted with it Because God will declare his iustice and mercie therefore also he will that sinnes be coÌ„mitted And apud eundeÌ„ in Collat. sect 61. God will He will that sinne be done not onely that sinnes may be done but also will that they be done The same Piscator in Thesibus l. 2. p. 184 It is false and implieth contradiction that man fell not with Gods will but with He will sinne though he be no delâ—ghted with it his permission For if he permitted he also would not simply and of it selfe as if he were delighted with sinne but in some sorte and for some other thing Page 187. God can will some thing with which notwithstaÌ„ding he is not delighted As for exaÌ„ple he is not He willeth wickednes for some other end delighted with wickednes yet permitteth it and that willingly and therefore willeth it in some sorte and for some other end And p. 203. It is not ill doctrin to saye That Gods will is done euen by sinning that is euen sinnes are done by Gods will Bucanus in Institut Theol. loco 14. p. 145. Is God not willing God willeth sin with a hidden will iniquitie If you take it simply that God no way will it the scripture is against that Wherefore we must expound it so That God will it not with his allowing or reuealed or signified will but with his hidden or good pleasing will And the same hath Pareus lib. 2. de Amiss Gratiae c. 16. MelaÌ„cthon in cap. 9. Rom. This is a misterie vnspeakable to God willeth sinne Would AdaÌ„s fall Would AdaÌ„s reuolt wit that God willeth sinnes and yet truely hateth them Perkins in Exposit Symbol tom 1. col 773. God would Adams fall for a good end Et de praedestinat col 128. We must say that God would haue Adams reuolt to come to passe And p. 129. Albeit God willeth not sinne simply and for it selfe yet he doth decree it and willeth it to come to passe See more of the like sayings of Protestants if you please in my Latin booke of this matter Chapter 1. Art 1. THE CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS OF THE HOLIE SCRIPTVRE OF CATHOLIKS AND OF PROTESTANTS The Scripture expressely saieth that God will not iniquitie or sinne nay that he cannot looke toward it The same saye Catholiks Protestants expressely say that God would haue Adam to sinne would haue his fall his reuolt that God willeth sinne willeth wickednes for some other end will haue iniquitie to be coÌ„mitted though he delighte not in it as a sick man will drinke a bitter potioÌ„ though he take no delighte in it that the causes of damnation came with Gods will that he willeth sinne with a hidden and good pleasing will Which are as directly against the foresaied words of Scripture as any can be Nether will it auaile Ptotestants to saye as some times they doe that God willeth sinne as it is the occasion of some good to wit of manifesting his iustice in punishing it or his mercie in pardoning it Because in saying that God willeth sinne wickednesse iniquitie mans fall mans reuolt the causes of damnations as in plaine termes they doesaye they not onely affirme that God willeth the act in which iniquitie is but the very iniquitie malice or sinfulnes it self as is manifest both by the foresaied words as also because they some times teach as we shall see hereafter article 5. that sinne as it is sinne is preordinated of God And in saying that God willeth iniquitie or sinfulnes it selfe they directly contradict the aforecited words of holie Scripture For therein they meane that iniquitie or sinne is one of those things which are willed of God which the Scripture directly denieth Nether is this contradiction auoided by adding that though iniquitie be willed of God yet it is not willed of him for it selfe or as it is iniquitie but as it is an occasion of some good because still it is affirmed that iniquitie it selfe is one of the things which are willed of God as in their owne example True it is that a bitter potion is willed of the sicke though it be not willed of him for it selfe nor as it is bitter but as it is a meane to recouer health Wherefore in this matter we must distinguish twoe questions The one is simple or absolute to wit Whether God will iniquitie or sinne it selfe To which question the holie Scripture answereth negatiuely and the Protestants affirmatiuely The other is a redoubling question namely Whether God will iniquitie or sinne as it is iniquitie or sinne and
his idle permission The like he saieth de Praedestinat p. 727. And ibid. p. 726. Moises clearly affirmeth that hardnes of Pharao to haue Pharoes hardnes proper worke of God beene the worke of God Nether surely is Pharao his crueltie attributed here in any other sense vnto Gods counsell then otherwhere he is saied to giue fauour to his people in the sight of the. Egyptians And l. 3. Institut c. 23. § 1. Whence it followeth that the hidden counsell of God was the cause of this hardnes of harte Beza de Praedestinat cont Castell p. 400. Induration is the iust worke of God and the worke of Sathan Peter Martyr in lib. Iudic. c. 3. These kind of speeches plainly God worketh euerie way euill teach that God not onely by permitting but also by doing worketh euerie way euill in vs. Piscator apud Vorstium in Parasceue c. 3. c. in Amica Collat. sect 130. Because God procureth this manifestation of Procureth sinne it selfe of his iustice and mercie therefore also he procureth sinnes them selues God procured that Absalon rauished his father wiues Zanchius de Excaecat q. 1. to 7. col 204. It is certaine Author of induration that God as iust iudge was the chiefe Author of this induration See more of their like sayings in my Latin booke c. 1. art 4. THE CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that God will not doe iniquitie hath not done iniquitie that a good tree cannot yeeld euill fruits that who worketh who committeth sinne is of the diuell The same saye Catholiks Protestants expressely say that God worketh euill in vs and by vs punisheth his ill deeds in vs that Dauids adulterie was the proper worke of God and Iudas his treason was Gods worke as well as Pauls vocation that the euill of sinne is done by the effectuall working of God that God is the Author of Induration or hardnes of hart the cause of it that it is Gods worke that Pharaos crueltie against the Iewes is attributed to Gods counsell in the same sense that the Egyptians fauour towards them that God euery way worketh euill in vs that God it the Author of all those things which Catholike CeÌ„surers thinke to fall out by his permission that God procureth sinne it selfe Which sayings are so blasphemous as the holie fathers affirme that they make God to be no God and so Basil hom quod Deus noÌ„ sit causa mali contrarie to holie Scripture as the same Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. 25. 30. ART III. WHETHER GOD OERDAINE SINNE to be done and predestinate men to sinne SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Hieremie 19. v. 5. And they haue builtes the excelses of God ordaineth not sinne Baalim which I commanded not nor haue spaken of nether haue they ascended into my hart The same teacheth the Scripture where it denieth that God willeth sinne CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE Councell of Trent Session 6. Can. 17. condemneth this doctrin The reprobats are predestinate to euill PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Perkins de Praedestinat to 1. col 127. We say that Adams God decreed mans fall fall came God not onely foreseing but also willing and decreing it In Serie causarum c. 52. It is wicked to say that God did onely forsee Adams fall but did not ordaine it by an eternall Ordained it decree In Apocal. 1. to 2. God decreed by a generall will that men should fall and sinne Willet in Synopsi Contr. 8. q. 3. p. 859. The fall of Adam was both foreseene of God decreed to be not permitted onely As Adams fall decreed as Christs death Christ his death was decreed and determined so was the fall of Adam For the end of Christs death was to restore Adams fall and if the end be decreed then those things also which are necessarily referred to that end Caluin 3. Institut c. 23. § 8. Adam fell because God iudged it so expedient Man falleth Gods prouidence ordayning so De Prouident p. 736. I acknowledge this to be my doctrin that Ordained of God Adam fell not by Gods permission onely but also by his hidden counsell Et p. 738. I confesse I wrote so Adams fall was ordayned by the secret decree of God De Praedestinar p. 704. Let our faith with seemlie sobernes adore a far of the hidden counsell of God wherwith the fall of men was preordinated Beza de Praedestinat cont Castell p. 340. How God is not in fault if he ordayne the causes of damnation we thâ—nke it a God ordeineth the causes of daÌ„nation question vnexplicable to mans sense Page 4 7. We acknowledge it to be true that God hath predestinated whomsoeuer he pleased not onely to damnation but also to the causes of damnation In Absters calum Heshusij p. 319. We say that Adam could not fall but through the decree and ordination of God We think that Adams fall was decreed of God Zanchius de Praedestinat c. 4. to 7. As well they which Men predestinate to blindnes are blinded are predestinated to blindnes as they which are deliuered from sinne are predestinated to deliuerie De Excaecat q. 5. It is cleare that God hath predestinated some to excecation Sinne euen considered as sinne as it serueth to the glorie of Sinne euen as sinne is preordeined of God God not of it nature but by Gods goodnes so far forth is sinne and the euill of sinne preordayned of God Which words also Polanus hath l. 4. Syntax Theol. c. 10. And the same Zanchius l. 5. de natura Dei c. 2. to 2. This was that which God first decreeth daÌ„nation and then sinne God first decreed of the reprobates from all eternitie to will the euerlasting ordayning of some men to perdition to this were their sinnes ordained and to their sinnes forsaking and deniall of grace Piscator apud Vorstium in Parasceue c. 3. All things Sinne done by a speciall decree of God are done by the decree of God euen sinnes themselues and that by an absolute and speciall decree c 6. God destinated all and euerie maÌ„ to sinne Et in Amica Collat. sect 58. God decreed absolutely and of him selfe that sinnes should be done The same Piscator in thesib l. 2. loco 12. Reprobation deniall of grace followeth this sinnes follow sinnes punishment followeth to all God preordayned the reprobate from all eternitie See more of their like sayings in the Latin booke c. 1. art 5. THE CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely denieth that sinne ascendeth to the hart of God or that God willeth it The same Catholiks Protestants expreslely affirme that God ordayned decreed determined Adams fall that Adam fell by Gods counsell and because he thought it expedieÌ„t through the decree and ordination of God that God ordaineth the causes of damnation praedestinateth to the causes of damnation whom he pleaseth praedestinateth as well to blindnes or excecation as to deliuerie from sinne preordayneth sinne
as sin as it is occasion of good first predestinated men to perditioÌ„ and after to sinne destinateth euery man to sinne decreeth sinne it selfe to be done by an absolute and speciall decree and that of him selfe Which doctrin is accursed of the Councell of Arausica can 25. and confessed by some Protestants to be contrarie to Scripture See l. 2. c. vlt. ART VI. WHETHER GOD COMMAND any to sinne SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Ecclesiasticus c. 15. v. 21. He God hath commanded no God commaÌ„deth none to sinne man to do impiously Hieremie 32. v. 35. They haue built the excelses of Baal c. Which I commanded them not CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE Card. Bellarmin l. 2. Amiss Grat. c. 8. The Scripture manifestly teacheth that God doth not command sinne PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Caluin de Praedestinat p. 727. You see that by Gods Sathan lieth by Gods commandment commandment Sathan is not onely a lying spirit in the mouth of all the Prophets but c. De Prouident pag. 739. What Where God sendeth for Sathan the minister of his reuenge and giueth him a plaine commandment to deceaue is not this different from bare permission And p. 746. God calling Sathan God biddeth Sathan to lie biddeth him goe to be a lying spirit in the mouth of all the Prophets for deceaue Achab. Beza in Absters calum Heshusij pag. 324. God being angrie with the wicked deliuereth them to Sathan and that with this commandment that by lying and all manner of deceit Expressely commandeth him to deceaue he destroy them miserably Pag. 382. Sathan was sent to deceaue Achab by the expresse commandment of God De Praedest cont Castel p. 403. Caluin wrote rightly and truly that by Gods commandment Sathan solliciteth to these desires which in regard of Sathan and the wicked are euill See more in the Latin booke c. 1. art 6. CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture saieth expressely that God commanded none to doe wickedly that he commanded not to build the excelses of Baal The same saye Catholiks Protestants expressely saye that Sathan was a lyer by Gods commandment that God giueth him a plaine command to deceaue that God biddeth him be a lying spirit for to deceaue that God commandeth Sathan to destroy the wicked by lying and all kind of deceit that God expressely sent him to deceaue and commandeth him to sollicite men to such desires as in them are euill ART VII WHETHER GOD TEMPTOR push any to sinne SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Iames c. 1. v. 13. Let no man when he is tempted say that he God tempteth none to sinne is tempted of God for God is not a tempter of euills and he tempteh no man Ecclesiasticus c. 15. v. 12. Say not He hath made me erre for impious men are not necessarie for him CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE Cardin. Bellarmin lib. 2. de Amiss Grat. cap. 4. If God did push me to that which is against his law he should denie him selfe PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Whitaker l. 8. cont Dureum sect 7. God pushed the â—indes of the Iewes to kill his sonne God moueth to sinne Zuinglius de Prouident c. 6. tom 1. God euen so moueth the iudge to punish the offenders as he moueth them to sinne Bucer in c. 6. Matth. The Scripture is not afraid to make God the Author of temptation God the author of temptation who some time bringeth the elect into temptation and that such as they truly fall and sinne Caluin 1. Institut c. 18. § 4. Man by Gods iust driuing doth that which is not lawfull for him De Praedestinat p. 727. Nether is Sathan the minister of Gods wrathe onely because he soliciteth soules to naughtie desires but also because he effectually draweth them Beza de Praedestinat cont Castell p. 401. God stirreth vp He stirreth the theefe to kill He tempteth to sinne the ill will of the theefe to kill an other Peter Martyr in locis classe 1. c. 15. § 9. It is no maruell that we can not vnderstand how it can agree with Gods iustice to punish sinne and yet to driue to it by tempting for God can do more then we can vnderstand ibid. p. 1010. We must not denie that God is the Author of temptations In Rom. 1. fol 34. Nether must God be accused of iniustice though he will incline Driueth meÌ„s wills into greeuous sinnes and driue the wills of wicked men into greeuous sinnes THE CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely sayeth that God is no tempter of euill that he tempteth none maketh none erre The same saye Catholiks Protestants expressely saye that God pushed the Iewes to kill his sonne moueth the offender to sinne is the author of temptation driueth man to that which is vnlawfull stirreth vp the theefe to kill tempteth to sinne driueth into greeuous sinne that the diuel is Gods minister in soliciting and drawing men to naughtie desires Which are so contrarie to Scripture as some times Protestants acknowledge it l. 2. c. 30. ART VIII WHETHER GOD MAKE men necessarily sinne SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Genesis 4. v. 7. If thou doest ill shall not thy sinne forthwith God imposeth not necessitie to sinne be present at thy dore but the lust thereof shal be vnder thee and thou shalt haue dominion ouer it 1. Cor. 10. v. 13. God is faithfull who will not suffer you to be tempted aboue that which you are able CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE Councell of Trent Sess 6. Can. 5. defineth that man hath free will in euill PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Whitaker l. 8. cont Dureum sect 1. On whome the holie Some haue necessitie to sinne Ghost is not bestowed they haue a miserable necessitie to sinne Willet Controu 18. q. 2. p. 855. Indeed Adam in respect of Gods appointment did sinne necessarily The same hath Perkins de Praedestinat col 134. Luther de seruo arbit to 2. fol. 460. If God did foresee that Iudas would be a traitor Iudas was necessarily a traitor nether Iudas a traitour of necessitie was it in the power of Iudas or of any creature to do otherwise or to change his will Fol. 434. This is the highest degree of faith to beleeue him to be iust who at his pleasure maketh men Some necessarily damned necessarily to be damned Zuinglius de Prouident c. 6 Nether let any say The theefe is guiltles because he slew God driuing him For he sinned against Some compelled to sinne the law But you will say He was compelled to sinne I graunt I say that he was compelled Caluin 3. Institut c. 23. § 9. The Reprobats would be excused in sinning because they cannot a void the necessitie of sinning Reprobates necessited to sinne especially sith this necessitie is imposed vpon them by Gods appointment But we denie that they can be iustly excused because Gods appointment is iust De Praedestinat p. 704. It sufficed to mans iust damnation to haue fallen of his accord froÌ„ the way
Sadeel speaketh Lib. de Sacrament Manducat p. 300. Beza l. de vnione hypostat vol. 3. p. 97. Apol. 1. cont Saintem Martyr in locis class 2. c. 16. § 12. in Disput Oxionensi p. 227. l. 1. epist Zanchij pag. 411. Whitaker l. 2. cont Dur. sect 8. Wherevpon iustly saied Smidelin the Lutheran vnto Bezâ— in Colloq Montisbel p. 26. They giue greater power to their faith then to God Tilenus in Syntagm c. 7. Who pretend that Christ with Someâ—hings repugne to Gods power his bodie did penetrate the stone that couered his tombe or the dores shut do affirme that which repugneth to the nature of a glorified bodie and to Gods power in working miracles Dareus cited by Smidelin in Colloq Montisbel p. 178. by Schusselburg l. 1. Theol. Caluin art 3. Christ could not so much as will that his bodie were at once in manie places because he could not performe it And when C Bellarmin did argue in this sorte God in the booke of Numbers ca. 5. did giue water power to kill adulteresse weomen and c. 21. gaue the brasen serpent vertue to cure therefore he can giue the word of baptisme vertue to change the water Daneus answereth Controu 3. c. 20. in these words God can not giue that power to any creatures vnlesse he make them true God cannot make water to kill and substantiall Gods and transfuse his power into them It is false that water Numb 5. had power to kill or the brasen serpent Numb 25. had power to cure Besides many Protestants say that God cannot giue to the Sacraments power to worke grace nor to men power to forgiue sinnes or to worke miracles and such like THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that God is almightie that he can do all things that all things are possible to him and nothing impossible The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say the contrarie that God hath no absolute power that the saying of Scripture All things are possible to God hath some exception that his omnipotencie is tied to an order that he can not put a bodie in manie places at once or not extensiuely in place that he cannot giue to water power to kill that his omnipoteÌ„cie beareth not some thing extendeth not to some thing and that some things repugne vnto it ART XXV WHETHER GOD CAN MAKE a Camelle passe through a needls eye SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Marke 10. v. 25. 26. It is easier for a Camelle to passe through God caÌ„ make a Camelle passe through a needls eye a needles eye then for a rich man to enter into the kingdome of heauen With men it is impossible And Matth. 19. This is impossble but not with God CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarmin lib. 3. de Euchar. cap. 6. The Pelagians saied that it was impossble for a Camelle remaining a Camelle to passe through a needls eye but not if he were lessened to the smalnes of a thred This is refuted because it is not impossible with men for a Camelle to passe through a needls eye if he cease to be a Camelle and be changed into a small thred PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Willet Controu 13. q. 1. pag. 609. It is not proued out of It is impossible to God this place that God caÌ„ draw the huge bodie of a Camelle through a needle remaining still of that bignesse no more then that it is possible for God to bring a proud rich arrogant man to heauen his affections not altered both these are impossible to God And the same say Spalatensis l. 5. de Repub. c. 6. nu 179. Bel in his Iesuits Antepaste p. 47. and others Beza in Marc. 10. ver 26. Can God make that a Camelle remayning such as it is by nature may passe through a needls eye No. Bucanus in institutio loc 48. pag. 797. God can make that a Camelle passe through a needls eye but not leauing him such as he is by nature but making him so small as is needfull THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that God can make a Camelle passe through a needls eye Catholiks say the same Protestants saie that God can not make a Camelle passe through a needls eye as long as he retaineth the bignesse of a Camelle ART XXVI WHETHER THAT BE possible to God which shall neuer be SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Mathew 3. ver 9. I tell you that God is able of these stones to God can do that which shall neuer be raise vp children to Abraham Mathew 26. vers 53. Thinkest thou that I cannot aske my Father and he will giue me presently more then twelue legions of Angels CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarmin lib. 3. de Euchar. cap. 2. The Scriptures do most plainly teach that God can do manie things which he will neuer do PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Beza in Colloq Montisbel p. 25. We say that God is so almightie for so much as belongeth to his power considered by it He cannot do that which he hath not decreed to doe His power must be measured by his will selfe as he cannot do that indeed which he hath decreed not doe Ministri in Colloq Parisiens die 5. The omnipotencie of God must be measured according to his will and things which belonge to his nature The same insinuateth Caluin 1. Institut c. 16. § 3. Where he will not admitt any omnipotencie of God but onely that which is effectuall operatiue and is continually working THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that God can doe that which he will not doe The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that he can not doe that which he hath decreed not to doe that his omnipotencie must be measured according to his will that he hath no omnipotencie but that which is continually working ART XXVII WHETHER GODS TRVE Miracles be a sufficient testimonie of truth SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Ihon. 5. vers 36. But I haue a greater testimonie then Ihon Gods miracles a sufficieÌ„t testimonie For the workes which the Father hath giuen me to perfit them the verie workes themselues which I doe giue testimonie of me that the Father hath sent me Cap. 10. ver 38. If I doe not the workes of my Father beleiue me not But if I doe and if you will no beleiue me beleiue the workes Luke 11. v. 20. But if I in the finger of God do cast out Diuels surely the kingdome of God is come vpon you Marke 16. v. vlt. But they going forth preached euerie where our Lord working withall and confirming the worke with signes that followed CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarmin lib. 4. de Ecclesiast cap. 14. A miracle is a sufficient testimonie and where is a true miracle there is true faith PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 2. quaest 5. cap. 12. pag. 528. I say No miracle is a sufficient testimonie that out of nether kind of miracles true or apparent there can be taken a sufficient testimonie or a certaine argument gathered
Virtue their power whiles they denie that they are capable of power to worke miracles steale away their perfect iustice in denying that they are perfectly iust or perfectly do the will of God Robbe them of their honour because they Honor. denie that we may honour them imitate them pray to them or pray to God in their names They spoile them Dignitie of their dignitie in saying that God doth not any good vnto vs for their merits or good deeds They bereaue Knowledge them of their knowledge in saying that they know not any thing that is done on earth They robbe them of Charitie their charitie because they say that they pray not for vs ether in generall or in particular haue no care of vs not exercise any offices of charitie towards vs. Finally they Happines take from them their heauenly felicitie because they teach that they enioy not that vntill the day of iudgment And hitherto we haue spoaken of those who are in heauē now let vs speake of these things which are on earth and first of the word of God CHAPTER IV. OF THE VVORD OF GOD OR SCRIPTVRE ART I. WHETHER ANIE PLACES OF Scripture be hard to be vnderstood SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. PETER 3. vers 16. As our most deere Some places of Scripture hard to be vnderstood brother Paul according to the wisdome giuen him hath written to you as also in all his epistles speaking in them of these things in the which are certaine things hard to be vnderstood which the vnlearned and vnstable depraue CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE D. Stapleton in Ioan. 17. v. 20. Catholiks denie that all the Scripture is plaine and cleare PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Whitaker Controu 1. q. 4. c. 3. p. 337. Peter saieth not that Paules epistles are obscure no nor that there are some obscure things in Paules epistles And c. 4. p. 340. It is manifest that the Scriptures are easie to be vnderstood And he addeth that the whole will of God which is declared in his whole word and Scriptures and the whole Scripture is easie The same he saieth p. 341. Of the whole Scripture of the vniuersall Scripture and whole word of God Luther l. de seru arbit to 2. fol. 426. It is spred abrode by No place of Scripture hard the impious Sophisters that there are some things obscure in the Scripture and that all things are not laied open Fol. 427. There is nothing at all left obscure or ambiguous but all things are brought into most cleare light by the word and declared to the whole world whatsoeuer is in Scripture And fol. 440. I speake of the whole Sripture I will not haue anie parte of it to be saied to be obscure The like he hath Postilla in festo S. Iacobi fol. 430. and Cont. Cocleum to 2. fol. 410. Neuer any thing was vttered more simply more purely more clearely more easily then the word of God Praefat. Assert art The Scripture is by it selfe No booke more cleare then the Scriture the most certaine the most easie the most cleare interpreter of it selfe prouing iudging and lightning all things And in psalm 37. to 3. fol. 10. If anie of them say that we need the Fathers interpretation the Scriptures are obscure Thou shalt answere That is false No booke in the whole world is most clearely writtē then the holie Scripture which compared to all other bookes is like the Sunne before all other lights Gerlachius disputat 1. tom 1. pag. 9. We say that the whole Scripture is so cleare as it needeth no interpretation at all Zanchius de Scriptura tom 8. col 408. How then can the Scripture be saied obscure in anie parte thereof col 409. If the Scripture be obscure in no parte as before we haue shewed much lesse in those things which are necessarie to saluation And l. 1. Epistol pag. 98. The places of holie Scripture from whence the decrees of Christian religion are drawne are so plaine and manifest as they need no more diligent or clearer exposition Serranus cont Hayum part 3. p. 267. saieth that there is not anie ambiguitie or obscuritie in the matter or words of the Scripture And p. 269. that the Lord hath plainly laied open in the Scripture all the misteries of our saluation Manie more of their like sayings may be seene in my Latin booke cap. 4. art 1. CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that in S. Paules epistles there be some things hard to be vnderstood The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the Scripture saieth not that there are some obscure things in S. Pauls epistles that the Scripture the whole scripture is easie that the whole scripture is so cleare as it needeth no interpretation at all that no parte of it is obscure that all things are cleare whatsoeuer is in the word and declared to the whole world that the Scripture is the easiest and clearest interpreter of it selfe that no booke in the whole world is so cleare as the Scripture and that being compared to them it is like the Sunne to other lights Which are so manifestly contrarie to Scripture as Protestants thēselues sometimes confesse it See lib. 2. c. 30. ART II. WHETHER SCRIPTVRE CAN BE vnderstood without the light of the holie Ghost SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. 2. Peter 1. v. 20. Vnderstanding this first that no prophetie Scripture not vnderstood of our selues or exposition of Scripture is made by priuat interpretation Matth. 13. v. 11. To you it is giuen to know the misteries of the kingdome of heauen but to them it is not giuen Luc. 24. v. 45. Then he opened their vnderstanding that they might vnderstand the Scriptures CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE D. Stapleton l. 11. de Principijs c. 2. The spirit of God of whome the vnderstanding of the Scriptures is to be asked and giuen is not to be sought in the Scriptures themselues PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Whitaker l. 1. de Scriptura c. 12. sect 8. The Scriptures may Scripture not vnderstood by onely reading without the holie Ghost be known by onely reading l. 2. c. 8. sect 16. I say that the Scriptures may be vnderstood before faith and without faith Againe But if thou thinkest that the Scriptures cannot be vnderstood at all without peculiar lightning of the holie Ghost thou art in a great errour And Controu 1. q. 6. c. 13. For so much as appertaineth to the knowledge of the letter the Church hath no priuiledge Morton in Apol. part 2. l. 5. c. 10. Anie one though neuer so Anie may vnderstand the Scripture so impious may search the Scriptures to knowledge though not to wisdome that is to the knowledge of truth though not to the attayning of saluation Beza l. de notis Eccles vol. 3. p. 137. But for to vnderstand what the Prophets and Apostles haue in summe thought and thought of euerie article of our religion there needeth onely a wit not wholy dull
of faith in Christ of iustifying faith of faith of remission of sinnes The like hath Ambing apud Hospin in Concord discordi fol. 140. Beza de Praedest cont Caste l. vol. 1. p. 393. There is no mētion in the law of this benefit of free redemption by Christ For the declaratiō of this will belongeth to an other parte of Gods word which is called the Ghospell Apol. Cōf. Augustan c. de Iustific The Ghospell preacheth iustice of faith in Christ which the law doth not teach THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Moises wrote in the law of Christ that Moises wrote things concerning Christ That Moise commanded the people to heare Christ in all things The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the law neuer knew faith in Christ that Moises cōmandeth not faith in Christ that the law knoweth nothing of faith in Christ that in the law there is no mention of free redemption in Christ that the law teacheth nothing of faith in Christ ART IX WHETHER ANY VNWRITTEN word or Traditions be to be kept SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 2. Thessal 2. v. 15. Therefore brethren stand and hould the traditions Traditions not written to be helde which you haue learned whether it be by word or by our epistle CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Coūcell of Trent Sess 4. The holie Coūcell doth with equall pious affection reuerently receaue and honour traditions belonging to faith or manners as ether deliuered by Christs mouth or the holie Ghost and by continuall succession conserued in the Catholik Church PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 3. cap. 10. We care not for vnwritten Not to be helde traditions And Contro 2. q. 5. c. 18. We acknowledge no other word then that which is written And what doctrine soeuer is not written we hould for bastard doctrine Perkins in Cathol ref Contr. 20. c. 2. We acknowledge the onely written word of God Luther Postil in ferias S. Stephani Nothing is to be affirmed Nothing but that which is expressed in Scripture which is not expressed in Scripture Iacobus Andreae l. cont Hosium p. 169. That faith is no faith but an vncertain opinion which is not grounded vpon an expresse testimonie of Scripture Wigand apud Scusselb to 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 681. Onely those doctrines whose very words or equiualent for sense are extant in the Scripture are to be tought and deliuered in the Church Caluin in Gratulat ad Praecentorem pag. 377. Nothing is to be beleiued which is not expressed in Scripture And cont versipellem pagin 353. There is no mention of vnwritten traditions Beza in Rom. 1. v. 17. Christians acknowledge no other object of this faith then the written word of God Etad Reprehens Castell p. 503. Whosoeuer beleiueth in doctrine of religion that which is not written I say he embraceth opinion for faith and an idol for God Vallada in Apol. cont Episc Luzon c. 13. In all the holie No speech of an vnwritten word Scripture there is no speech of an vnwritten word Daneus Controu 7. pag. 1350. The foundation of Christian faith is one onely to wit the word of God and that onely written Hospinian part 2. Histor Sacram. fol. 23. The Magistrates of Zurich commāded that hereafter nothing should be proposed or preached in their Church but the pure fined word of God contained in the bookes of the Prophets and Apostles THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that traditions as well they which are learned by word as they which are learned by writing are to be obserued Catholiks teach the same Protestants expressely teach that onely written doctrin is to be tought nothing to be beleiued but what is written onely the pure fined written word to be tought no obiect of faith but what is written nothing to be beleiued but what is expressed in Scripture and that in verie words or in equiualent sense that there is no mention of vnwritten traditions no speech of vnwritten word that they care not for vnwritten traditions A SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF THE WORD of God or Scripture What we haue rehearsed in this chapter doth clearly shew that Protestants do farre otherwise iudge of Scripture then the Scripture it selfe and Catholiks doe For the holie Scripture together with Catholiks teacheth that in it are some things hard to be vnderstood that it cannot be vnderstood without the light of the holie Ghost that the Ghospell is or containeth a law that it doth preach pennance and good workes reproueth sinne promiseth saluation vnder condition of good workes and is not contrarie vnto the law of God that the law of Moises commandeth faith in Christ and that vnwritten traditions are to be obserued And Protestants defend all the contrarie They shew also that Protestants steale from the Scripture Protestants steale from Scripture her excellencie wherewith she surpasseth the capacitie of mans wit and from the Ghospell that it containeth any law preacheth pennance or good workes reproueth sinne promiseth saluation vpon condition of well doing and agreement with Gods law whereby we see what a libertin Ghospell they bring in to wit such as containeth Libertin Ghospell of Protestants no law preacheth no pennance or good workes reproueth no sinne promiseth saluation without all condition of well doing and is quite contrarie to the law of God And that they steall from the law of Moises that it commandeth faith in Christ and finally they take away all the vnwritten word of God CHAPTER V. OF SAINT PETER AND THE APOSTLES ART I. WHETHER S. PETER WERE first of the Apostles SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. MATHEW 10. v. 2. And the names of the twelue S. Peter first of the Apostles Apostles be these The first Simon who is called Peter CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Pontif. c. 18. Peter was put first by reason his dignitie PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Contr. 3. q. 5. c. 3. Wheresoeuer mention is made Not first of Peter if we looke well into the place we shall find that nothing is giuen to him which agreeth not to the other Apostles And Controu 4. quaest 2. c. Paul maketh himselfe equall to Peter in all points Tindal in Fox his Acts p. 1139. S. Paul is greater then Peter by the testimonie of Christ Articuli Smalcaldici pag. 345. We giue no prerogatiue to Peter Luther in Gal. 2. to 5. This place clearely sheweth that all the Apostles had equall vocation and commission There was altogether equalitie amongst them no Apostle was greater then an other Illyricus in Praefat. lib. de Sectis It appeareth that Christ gaue no primacie at all in his Church to any man Caluinus in Matth. 20. v. 25. Christ shewed that in his kingdome No primacie or firstnesse there was no primacie for which they contended Beza in Matth. 10. v. 2. What if this word First were added of some who would establish Peters primacie Festus Homius disput 12. All the Apostles were equall in dignitie authoritie
title and power Againe Peter had no primacie amongst the Apostles CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that S. Peter was the first of the Apostles Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that S. Peter had no primacie at all and suspect that the word First is added to the Scripture they say also that Saint Peter had nothing which was not common to the other Apostles that all the Apostles were equall in dignitie authotitie title and power that there was altogether equalitie amongst thē and none greater then an other that S. Paul was equall to S. Peter in all points nay greater then he by the testimonie of Christ ART II. WHETHER THE CHVRCH was built vpon S. Peter himselfe PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Math. 16. v. 18. And I say to thee That thou art Peter and vpon The Church built vpon S. Peter this rock will I build my Church And I will giue thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Promptuar Cath. in Festo Petri Pauli S. Chrisostome doth diligently teach that twoe things were here giuen to Peter The one the guift of the Father to wit the reuelalation of the word incarnate The other the proper guift of the Sonne to be the rock of the Church PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 4. q. 2 c. 2. Peter is not the rock because Not vpon S. Peter Christ doth not build his Church vpon Peter Luther in Matth. 16. to 5. vpon this that is vpon me not vpō thee Item He cannot be vnderstood to build vpon Peter Zuinglius l. de vera falsa relig cap. de Clauibus I will build my Church vpon this rock not vpon thee for thou art not the rock Againe Onely Christ not Peter is the rock vpon the which the Church standeth Bucer in Matth. 16. Faith in Christ is that rock vpon which the Church is saied to be built not that man Peter Caluin in Math. 16. v. 19. He faigneth that Peter is called the foūdation of the Church But who seeth not that he giueth that to the person of a man vhich was spoaken of Peters faith Beza in Matth. 16. v. 18. But Mathew or whosoeuer was his interpretour seemeth by this difference of words to distinguish Peter from that rock on which the building relieth Zanchius l. de Eccles c. 9. The opposition of the Fathers is not admitted in this place vpon this rock that is vpon Peter Vorstius in Antibell p. 64. Our men vse to answere that by the name of Rock not the person but the faith or confession of Peter or Christ himselfe is to be vnderstood More of their like sayings may be seene in my Latin booke c. 5. art 2. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that Christ speaking to Peter himselfe hath in the words which immediatly goe before that clause vpon this rock c as also in the which immediatly follow it and designing S. Peters person both by his Father and by his proper name Peter which he had giuen to him Which both in the Syriack tongue in which Christ spoake and in the Hebrew tongue in which Saint Mathew wrote his Ghospell is wholy one and the selfe same word that Rock is and also in the Greek language is equiualent or synonimall with it as Protestants confesse and finally designing him by that pronoune This saied vpon this Rock which is as much as is he had saied vpon this Peter I will build my Church The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that S. Peter is not the Rock of the Church not the foundation not he vpon whome the Church is built Which is so manifest a contradiction of Scripture as manie Protestants confesse it See libr. 2. cap. 30. ART III. WHETHER THE KEYES OF the kingdome of heauen were giuen to S. Peter himselfe SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Mathew 16. vers 18. 19. And I say to thee That thou The keyes giuen to S. Peter art Peter And I will giue to thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Prompt Cathol in Festo Petri Pauli The power of the keyes was promised by Christ to Peter alone and therefore it was truely giuen PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 9. quaest 5. c. 3. Surely the keyes of the Not to any one men Church were not giuen to any one singular man but to the Church it selfe Bucher in Matth. 16. This power of the keyes is in the whole Church but the authoritie of administring it is in the Preists and Bishops as in ould time in Rome the power was in the people the authoritie in the Senate Articuli Smalcaldici We must needs confesse that the keyes belong not to the person of any one man hut to the Church Daneus Contr. 3. c. 10. p. 244. Christ called faith the rock Not to Saint Peter to which rock not to Peter he gaue these keyes and the strength against the power and gates of Hell THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that Christ promised and consequently gaue the keyes of Heauen vnto S. Peter The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that the power of the keyes is not in the priests and Bishops that they were not giuen to Peter nor to any one singular man Which contradiction of the Scripture is so plaine as some Protestants acknowledge it See l. 2. c. 30 ART IV. WHETHER S. PETERS faith failed SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Luc. 22. v. 31. And our Lord saied Simon Simon behould Saint Peters faith failed not Sathan hath required to haue you for to sift as wheat But I haue praied for thee that thy faith faile not CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Lucae 22. v. 32. Christ doth in those words manifestly teach that S. Peters faith should not faile PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Cont. 4. q. 2. c. 2. Whē Bellarmin had saied Peter lost charitie but not faith when he denied Christ answereth It seemeth that a greater wound was giuen to his faith then to his Saints Peters faith failed charitie Againe That was surely a short apostasie Hutterus in Analysi Cōfess Augustan art 12. It is a blasphemous speech of Beza when he writeth That Peter denying Christ did not loose his faith Reineccius to 1. Armat c. 22. Peter retained not faith And to 3. c. 4. For a time Peters faith surely failed whiles he denyed Christ Daneus Contr. 3. c. 10. Bellarmin dreameth when he saieth that Peters faith could not faile For by the deniall which afterward he made it appeareth to be false which he impudently affirmeth of the indefectibilitie of Peters faith The same he hath ibid. lib. 4. cap. 3. Lambertus and Schusselb l. 1. Theol. Caluin art 14. saieth that Peter when he fell had not that true faith wherewith we trust in God alone and the infidelitie preuailed against Peter Iunius Contro 3. l. 1. c. 10. Certainly Peter erred from faith THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely
maintaineth Luther l. de votis to 2. f. 279. To teach that workes are holesome Not profitable or profitable is diuelish and Apostaticall from faith seing faith alone is necessarie and profitable In 1. Petri. 1. to 5. fol. 453. All which tend to that end that we may learne that we cannot be holpen by workes In c. 40. Isaiae in Schlusselburg tom 7. Catal. Haeret. fol. 320. When workes are condemned they are Vnprofitable so condemned as vnprofitable to Christian iustice and likewise to saluation Postilla in Dom. 3. post Pascha fol. 257. Nether will anie workes helpe thither he meaneth to iustification In die AsceÌ„sionis f. 267. Workes do nothing at all for pietie and iustification Doe nothing In dom 13. post Trinit Albeit I had all the workes of Abraham Noë and all the beloued fathers they would profit me nothing In Dom. 13. he saieth that workes profit a man nothing In festo S. Annae that they doe nothing Et Serm. de 10. Leprosis to 7. he writeth Let him know that his workes are not necessarie and profitable to himselfe but onely to his neighbour Nor yet content to haue taught that good workes are vnprofitable he addeth that they are pernitious to saluation For thus writeth Hospin in Concordia discordi c. 20. Rorarius sheweth that Luther alwaies vsed this proposition Good workes pernicious to saluation Good workes are pernitious to saluation And the same confesse the Ministers of Saxonie in Colloq Aldeburg p. 205. and Luther himselfe intimateth in c. 40. Isaiae to 3. in these words The iustice and wisdome of the flesh is condemned as vnprofitable yea pernitious to obtaine iustice and saluation For by iustice of the flesh he vseth to vnderstand good workes And so Schlusselburg in the place now cited vnderstood him The Ministers of the Elector in Colloq Aldeburg p. 293. speake thus Amsdorfius hath written and after him or Pernitious to saluation by him Flacâ—ius workes are not onely not necessarie but also pernitious to saluation and his words are at large related by Coccius to 1. p. 1113. Besides they adde p. 121. that the saied Amsdarfius wrote a booke with this title Good workes are hurtfull to saluation And that no man may say that Amsdorfius spoake or wrote this onely of the trust of workes himselfe declareth saying That good workes euen according to their nature or Perniâ—ious euen of their nature and substance substance as they are commanded of God are pernitious to saluation And the same euasion reiecteth also Hospinian in place before alledged Kemnitius also in Schlusselburg to 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 529. confesseth that in their Church this doctrine is spread The good workes of the iust are pernitious to saluation The same confesseth liber Concordiae c. 4. Hutterus in Analysi Confess Augustan disput 13. Adamus Francisci in Margarita Theol. loco 10. Reineccius tom 4. Armaturae c. 15. Lubeccenses apud Schlusselburg to 7. Catal. Haeret. p. The law vnprofitable to iustification 607. The law is not onely not necessarie to iustification but altogether vnprofitable Gerlachius to 2. disput 14. The morall now since the fall of man is so vnprofitable to iustifie and saue as c. Caluin in Resp ad Sadolet p. 126. Surely we denie that in iustifying mans workes are worth a haire Againe we denie that workes haue any thing to doe in iustifying a man In Rom. 8. v. 3. The law hath no force at all to giue iustice Coccius tomo 1. pag. 1113. repeateth these words of Rather hindreth Luther out of his Sermon in Natali Christi It is now made euident that to this new natiuitie worke nothing but rather hinder precepts laws doctrine free will good workes innocent life c. THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that pietie is profitable to all things and hath promise of the life to come The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that good helpe nothing to iustification or saluation are not worth a haire haue nothing to doe there that they are not profitable worke nothing to saluation profit nothing to saluation that they are vnprofitable yea pernitious to iustice and saluation and that of their owne nature as they are commanded of God and that to teach that workes are profitable is diuelish and Apostaticall from faith ART XV. WHETHER GOOD WORKES be a cause of saluation SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Math. 25. v. 23. Because thou hast beene faithfull ouer a few Workes cause of entrance into ioye And of possessing the kingdome things I will place the ouer maniethings enter into the ioy of thy Lord. Et v. 34. Possesse you the kingdome prepared for you from the foundation of the world for I was an hungred and you gaue me to eate Rom. 8. v. 10. The bodie indeed is dead because of sinne but the spirit liueth because of iustification 2. Cor. 4. v. 17. For that our tribulation which presently is momentarie and light worketh aboue measure excedingly an eternall Tribulation worketh glorie weight of glorie in vs. Et c. 7. v. 10. The sorrow that is according to God worketh pennance vnto saluation that is stable but the sorrow of the world worketh death Gal. 6. v. 8. He that soweth in his flesh of the flesh also shall Life reaped of sowing in spirit reape corruption but he that soweth in the spirit of the spirit shall reape life euerlasting Philippens 1. v. 27. And in nothing be ye terrified of the aduersaries Men worke their saluation which to them is cause of perdition but to you of saluation and this of God Et c. 2. v. 12. With feare and trembling worke your saluation CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton l. 8. de Iustific c. 34. Good workes are truely and properly the cause ether of reconciliation or of saluation PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker lib. 2. de Scriptura cap. 14. sect 5. The iust The iust not rewarded for for workes are not rewarded for the workes of iustice which they haue done Perkins in Serie Causarum c. 57. Saluation dependeth not of workes but of our faith Luther in Gal. 2. to 5. f. 308. Thus are we deliuered from sinne Saluation dependeth not of workes Life not giuen for workes Nons saued for workes iustified and life euerlasting is giuen vs not for our merits and workes but for faith In Catechismo f. 687. Surely our workes do nothing to saluation Illyricus in Claue part 2 tractat 6. None shal be saued for his workes Herbrandus in Compendio theol loco de bonis operibus Life euerlasting is giuen to vs freely by Christ and not for our good workes Zuinglius in Ioan. 5. tom 4. Workes do not saue do not Workes saue not iustifie Caluin in Rom. 4. v. 16. If the heauenlie inheritance come to Heauen cometh not by workes Affliction no cause of saluation Workes not in parte cause of saluation No true cause vs by workes faith will fall the
and Luther in Galat. 1. fol. 215. The Confession of Zwizerland addeth that they were holie Churches of God Author Respons ad theses Vadimont pag. 533. affirmeth that they fell not from true faith And Perkins tractat de Baptismo col 819. auoucheth that they were the sonnes of God But if they who denied the resurrection kept the name of a true Church remained the sonnes of God were not excluded from Gods mercie fell not from faith surely ether the resurrection is no article at all of faith or not necessarie ether to grace or saluation THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely teacheth that there shal be resurrection of the dead and that the contrarie doctrine denieth Christs resurrection and ouerthroweth all Christian faith The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely teach that the more wittie the Gentils were the more they laughed at the resurrection that the more learned men now are the more they thinke the resurrection to be a fable that Luther and Erasmus were not free from this leauen and that in this matter a faithfull soule is rare that Schegkius openly denied resurrection of this bodie which is indeed to denie all resurrection seing resurrection is not but of the same which died and yet was condemned of no Protestants yea excused of some that manie of them both drunke and sober let fall such speaches from them as do shew that they beleiue not the resurrection of the dead That amongst the Sacramentaries two principall Apostles Caluin and Farel did not beleiue the resurrection of this flesh and consequently not the resurrection of the dead that Sozinus was not satisfied about the resurrection of the flesh that manie of them denie the resurrection of the blood and lasty that they auouch that those Christians who denied the resurrection of the dead fell not from true faith not from the Church or fauour of God THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER of mans Soule What we haue rehearsed in this chapter plainely sheweth that Protestants thinke farre otherwise of mans soule then the holie Scripture doth For the Scripture and Catholiks with it teacheth that the soule of man is the forme of the bodie is immortall that there shal be resurrection of the dead which Protestants denie It sheweth also that Protestants play the theiues towards their owne soules whilest take from it immortalitie and the nature of the forme of the bodie and denie the resurrectioÌ„ of the dead And hitherto we haue shewed that Protestants in 260. articles contradict the expresse words of the holie Scripture it remaineth that we shew that they also contradict the true sense of the words which we will doe by twoe wayes the one by generall reasons the other by the plaine confession of The Scope of the second booke some Protestants touching manie of the foresaied articles End of the first booke THE SECOND BOOKE IN WHICH IT IS SHEVVED THAT PROTESTANTS CONTRADICT THE TRVE sense of holie Scripture CHAPTER I. THAT PROTESTANTS CONTRADICT the true sense of Scripture because in so manie things they gainsay the expresse words thereof FIRST of all we must consider that when the holie Scripture and Catholiks both of purpose intend clearely to declare their meaning touching the foresaied 260. articles in controuersie they do iumpe ether in the very selfe same or inequiualent words and that coÌ„trariwise wheÌ„ the Scripture and the learnedest of the Protestants intend to expresse their meaning coÌ„cerning the saied articles they vse quite opposite and contrarie speaches Which is a manifest signe that the Catholiks doctrine about the saied articles is the selfe same with the doctrine of the holie Scripture and the Protestants doctrine quite contrarie thereunto For sithence this agreemeÌ„t of Catholiks with the Scripture in words and speach and disagreement of Protestants in the same falleth out so often and in so manie and weightie matters it cannot be attributed to chaÌ„ce because chaÌ„ce as the Philosophers 2. Physâ—c teach is in those things onely which fall out seldome And therefore it proceedeth of the nature of these sentences or doctrines whose agreement or disagreement with the sentence of the holie Scripture breedeth this so frequent agreement or disagreement with the words or speaches of the same Wherefore thus I argue in forme of syllogisme These doctrines which when they are of purpose to be expressed clearely distinctly and as they differ from all other doctrines do of their nature require to be expressed with the very same or equiualent words are in deed one and the selfe same doctrine And contrariwise those doctrines which when they are to be so expressed of their nature require to be expressed with quite opposite and contrarie words or speaches are in deed opposite and contrarie doctrines But the Scriptures and the Catholiks doctrines touching the foresaied 260. articles are of the first kind and the Scripture and Protestants doctrines of the second Therefore they are all one and these quite contrarie The Maior of first propositioÌ„ is euideÌ„t For how could twoe doctrines or opinioÌ„s of their nature require to be expressed with the selfe same or equiualent words if there were any differeÌ„ce betwene them For vndoubtely that difference would exact some difference in the words and those words which clearely and fully expresse the one doctrine could not clearely and fully expresse the other And much lesse could one the selfe same speach clearely expressely theÌ„ both if they were contrarie one to the other And therefore certaine it is that twoe coÌ„trarie doctrines cannot of their nature require to be expressed by the selfe same or equiualent words And consequently also it is most certaine that the Scriptures and Catholiks doctrines which touching these 260. articles of their nature require to be expressed with the selfe same or equiualent words are not opposite one to the other But those doctrines which when they are to be clearely and distinctly expressed of their nature require to be expressed with opposite and contrarie speeches must needs also of their nature be contrarie one to the other For els why should they of their nature require to be expressed by contrarie speaches And the opposition which is betwene the speaches wherewith they require to be signified riseth of the oppositioÌ„ which is betwene the doctrines themselues The Minor or second proposition is proued First by the reason alreadie made Because it cannot come by chance that in so manie and so weightie matters when Catholiks and ProtestaÌ„ts do of purpose clearely distinctly expresse their opinioÌ„s those should agree in words and speach with the holie Scripture and these should disagree This agreement therefore and disagreement in words must needs rise of the very nature of their opinions Secondly it may be proued by examples but for breuities sake I will be content with one That the Protestants opinion touching the Eucharist or that which Christ after his last supper gaue with his hands to be eaten when it is clearely and dinstinctly to be expressed as it differreth from the
Catholik doctrine of the same matter of it nature requireth to be expressed by a proposition which is simply negatiue appeareth manifestly First because their opinion of that matter is simply negatiue to wit that it is not the bodie of Christ And an opinion which is simply negatiue requireth to be expressed by the like proposition such as this is This is not Christs bodie Secondly because manie and the learnedest of the Protestants and often times and in manie places haue expressed their opinion of this matter by such a proposition when they ment purposely to expresse it clearely and distinctly as it defferreth from the Catholike doctrine as I haue shewed before c. 11. art 1. who best knew with what kinde of proposition their opinion required to be expressed when it was most clearely and distinctly to be expressed when it was most clearely and distinctly to be declared And in the same manner it is euident that the Catholik doctrine of this matter of it nature requireth to be expressed by a proposition which is simply affirmatiue as this is This is Christs bodie because their doctrine of this matter is simply affirmatiue and because Catholiks vse to expresse their doctrine by this kind of proposition And that the doctrine of the Scripture concerning the same point of it nature requireth to be expressed by a proposition which is simply affirmatiue is manifest because she foure times of purpose expressing her meaning of this matter she vseth a proposition which is simply affirmatiue and neuer vseth a proposition negatiue Wherefore ether the Scripture neuer expressed her meaning of this matter in such a proposition as of it nature it required to be expressed withall but alwaies by a contrarie kinde of proposition and then also when of purpose she ment to expresse her meaning most clearely and distinctly or the Scriptures meaning touching this matter of it nature requireth to be expressed by a proposition which is simply affirmatiue as this is This is my bodie or This is Christs bodie And consequently it is one and the selfe same kinde of proposition wherewith the Scriptures and Catholiks doctrine of this point requireth to be expressed to wit a proposition simply affirmatiue and the propositions wherewith the meaning of the Scripture and of Protestants of the same matter are to be expressed are quite opposite to wit the one simply affirmatiue the other simply negatiue and the like are their meanings But that the force of this argumēt may better appeare 1. Head from the numbers of articles in which Protest contradict the Scripture I will deuide it into diuers heads The first shal be taken from the multitude of matters of articles in which Protestants do contradict the expresse words of Scripture which are as we haue seene 260 and more For though it may chance that one once or twise or seldome may contradict the expresse words of an other and yet not contradict his sense or meaning yet it can no way be thought that this can fall out so often Because so great and so frequent opposition betwene their words cannot as I saied before come by chance therefore it must rise of the opposition which is betwene their meaning For how should their tongues so often iarre whoses myndes alwaies agree How should they who alwaies meane the same so often speake cōtrariwise How should the same sense and mynd be expressed so often by contrarie signes The second head shal be taken from the qualitie and 2. From the number of Protest who doe cōtradict multitude of Protestants who haue crossed the expresse words of Scripture For admit that some one or few Protestants and those not the lest learned should crosse the expresse words of Scripture and yet the Protestants doctrine should not crosse the true meaning of the Scripture yet it is altogether incredible that so manie and so famous Protestants should so often fight with the expresse words of Scripture and yet their doctrine should not be contrarie to the meaning of the Scripture For this their crossing of the Scriptures words could not rise of chance because it is in so manie Protestants nor of ignorance because they were the learnedest amongst them and therefore it proceedeth of the verie nature of their doctrine And consequently their doctrine of it nature is opposite to the Scriptures doctrine The third head is taken of the manner wherewith 3. From the manner in which they contradict Protestants crosse the expresse words of Scripture Because for the most parte they crosse them so directly so plainely so manifestly as they crosse the verie words of Catholiks which of set purpose they contradict or as euer anie Heretik crossed the expresse words of Scripture or as anie man can crosse them Wherefore ether let them denie that the contradict the meaning of the Coūcel of Trent of D. Stapleton or C. Bellarmin which of purpose they do contradict or let them grant that they contradict also the meaning of the holie Scripture or els let them say that the contradictiōs of senses or meanings are not to to be gathered out of anie opposition in words though neuer so great and manifest but out of their pleasure Besides ether let them denie that euer anie Heretike cōtradicted the true meaning of the Scripture or let them graunt the same of themselues seing they haue often times as directly and as euidently crossed the expresse words of Scripture and those spoaken of purpose for to declare the Scriptures meaning as euer anie Heretike crossed the Scriptures words Moreouer they not onely crosse the expresse words of Scripture as ditectly and plainely as euer anie did but also they manie times crosse them in so manie and so different formes of speach as scarce anie who would haue it knowne that he did contradict the Scriptures meaning could diuise more manners how to contradict it The fourth head is taken out of the qualitie of the 4. From the qualitie of the words which they contradict words of Scripture which Protestants do contradict For they are expresse formall cleare not obscure nor doubtfull and spoaken not by the way but of purpose for to expresse the Scriptures meaning of those matters as is euident in all the articles And what can be the true sense of Scripture if that be not which such kind of words do of themselues most euidently afford Or who can be thought to contradict the Scriptures true meaning if he do not who contradicteth the euident sense of such kind of words Surely I doubt not but if these words were written in anie other booke then in the Scripture that the Protestants would confesse that they contradict the sense of them as well as they contradict the sense of Catholiks words For as S. Austin saied in the like case of Pelagians Lib. 1. de peccat mer. c. 9. If I should speake thus these would oppose and crie that I speake not well I thought amisse for they would vnderstand no
of Machabes which forceth all Protestants to reiect those bookes which S. Austin and other do witnesse to haue beene anciently held of the Church for Canonicall Wherefore let this be one argument Who not onely in manie and weightie articles do contradict the expresse words of holie Scripture and those spoakē of purpose that we might know the true meaning thereof touching those articles but also are forced to reiect manie bookes of Scripture whereof some euen manie of themselues and all of them the holie Church manie ages since hath iudged to be partes of the holie Scripture those contradict the very true sense of Scripture But Protestants doe so Therefore they contradict the true sense of Scripture CHAPTER III. THAT PROTESTANTS ARE FORCED to vse violence to the text of that parte of Scripture which they receaue IN the former chapter we saw how Protestants were forced to reiect a good parte of the holie Scripture now we shall see how they deale with that parte which they seeme to admit by adding to it by detracting from it by changing some words by calling others in doubt by false translating some by changing the order of others and such like dealings And let the Reader note What falsifications of Scripture are here touched that whereas Protestants corrupt the words or sense of holie Scripture for twoe ends whereof the one is that it may seeme to make for them the other is that it may not seeme to make against them I will in this and the next chapters relate onely their fashions of corrupting the Scripture that it may not seeme to make against them because these make more to my purpose which is to shew that Protestants contradict the true sense of the holie Scripture And by that which shal be saied of this their manner of corrupting it will easily be gathered what their other manner of corrupting Scripture is Let him also note that I intend not to bring all the examples of Protestants corrupting Scripture in anie kind whatsoeuer but onely so manie as may suffice to proue that they vse to corrupte Scripture in such sorte For as Tertullian obserued l. Praescript c. 38. Who meane to teach new doctrine are forced by necessitie to alter the instruments of doctrine Et c. 17. Heresie if it admit anie Scripture doth change it by addition and detraction for to serue her turne Wherefore because these words of the Apostle Rom. They adde to the text 11. v. 32. For God hath concluded all things into incredulitie that he may haue mercie on all do proue that God hath a will to haue mercie an all Beza twise addeth to the text the Pronoune Them in this manner For God hath concluded all them in obstinacie that he might haue mercie on all them Lest the Apostle should seeme to speake simply of all and not of the elect onely as Beza would Because those words Rom. 2. v. 27. And that which of nature They adde is prepuce fulfilling the law shall iudge thee who by the letter and circumcision art a preuaricatour of the law Proue that some do fulfill the law Beza addeth twise the particle If in this sorte If it fulfill the law And so of an absolute proposition maketh a conditionall The same doth Caluin the Kings and Queen Elizabeths Bible and the French Geneua Bible of the yeares 1562. 1568. 1605. and 1610. Because those words of the Apostle ad Philemon v. 14. They adde But without thy counsaill I would do nothing that thy good might be not as it were of necessitie but voluntarie proue good workes to be voluntarie and not done necessarily the French Bibles An. 1605. and 1610. adde this particle As and make the Apostle to say But as voluntarie The Kings Bible for voluntarie hath willingly Because those words Tit. 5. v. 3. According to his mercie he hath saued vs by the lauer of regeneration and renouation of the holie Ghost proue that Baptisme concurreth to worke our saluation the French Bibles An. 1562. 1568. 1605. and 1610. take away those words He hath saued vs and put them in the former verse where they make not so much against them The Kings Bible putteth a comma betwixt He hath saued vs and By the lauer c. Lest the Apostle should seeme to say that God worketh our saluation by baptisme and as Catholiks teach and not onely signifie it thereby as Protestants would Because those words 2. Pet. 1. v. 10. Wherefore brethren labour They take from the text that by good workes you may make sure your vocation and election proue good workes to be necessarie to saluation and to breed assurance thereof Luther in his Dutch Bible and in his Commentarie vpon that place tom 5. blotteth out those words By good workes And so doth the Kings Bible Beza Tremellius and other Schioppius also in Ecclesiastico c. 12. writeth that Luther in his Bible left out those words Mark 11. v. 26. If so be that you will not forgiue nether will your Father that is in heauen forgiue you your sinnes Which teach that our good workes are necessarie to remission of sinnes Because the verbe Is in the words of the institution of They change the words of the text the holie Eucharist do proue that it is the bodie and blood of Christ the Protestants of Zurich in their Dutch Bibles haue changed is into this verbe Signifieth as Schlusselburg l. 2. Theol. Caluin c. 6. witnesseth that he hath seene and read Yea Zuinglius l. de ver relig c. de Euchar. to 2. was so audacious as to write thus Thus hath Luke which Euangelist onely we will alledge This signifieth my bodie which is giuen for you For as he saieth l. de Caena tom 2. fol 274. If Is be put substantiuely we must needs confesse that the true substance of the true fllesh as Christ is present in the supper And Respons ad Billican tom 2. fol. 261. If you take Is substantiuely then the Papists haue wone A goodly excuse surely for to corrupt the holie text For if it must be corrupte it must be done for to vp hould heresie But this corruption of Scripture is so great and so manifest as Schlusselburg l. cit saied iustly This onely corruption of the words of the Sōne of God ought to driue all men from the companie and impietie of Caluinists Because the words Benediction and we do blesse in that They change speach of S. Paul 1. Corinth 10. The Cuppe of benediction which we do blesse c. do insinuate that the wine in the Cuppe ought to be blessed Zuinglius l. de Caena tom 2. fol. 294. saieth The words of Benediction and blessing ought not to be vsed in this place For commonely they vse to be taken for the word of Consecration And 1. Corinth 5. to 4. thus he writeth Thus are the words The Cuppe of thanks giuing wherewith we giue thanks is it not c. And in like sorte he hath l.
withal Which we must vniuersally and alwaies obserue and hould of workes in the cause of our saluation to wit that they are as a way and certaine markes which lead vs to glorie but not by causing or working it Caluin vpon those words 2. Cor. 7. v. 10. For the sorrow that is according to God worketh pennance vnto saluation that is stable writeth thus Paul enquireth not of the cause of saluation but onely commending pennance of the fruite which it Worke. 1. is as a way bringeth forth doth say that it is like a way whereby we come to saluation In this sorte consequence is rather signified then anie cause And to the same place Pareus libr. 4. de Iustificat cap. 7. answereth No efficient cause but a meane or condition which helpeth ether by it selfe or by accident is signified And Scarpius de Iustification Controuers 12. Pennance is saied to worke saluation not by making it by it vertue but by leading as by a way to saluation The same Caluin in 1. Corinth 7. vers 19. Circumcision is nothing and prepuce is nothing but the obseruation of the commandements of God Here saieth he Paul disputeth not of the cause of iustice nor how we obtaine it but onely to what the faithfull ought to bend endeauour And vpon that Wash 1. feele Actorum 22. vers 16. Be baptized and wash away thy sinnes Ablution he saieth he signifieth not the cause but is referred to Paules feeling who hauing receaued the Symbol knew better that his sinnes were forgiuen And 3. Institution cap. 4. § 36. he saieth Where sinne is saied to be purged by mercie and bountifulnesse Prouerb 16. is not meant that by them it is recompensed in the sight of God but is shewed that they shall find God mercifull to them who forsaking vice are turned to pietie as if he had saied Gods wrath is appeased when we leaue our wickednesse And ibidem cap. 14. § vltim hauing obiected to himselfe that the Scripture declareth that good workes are the cause that God doth fauour them he answereth That which in order goeth first he calleth the cause of that which followeth In this manner he deriueth Cause 1. a step sometimes eternall life from good workes not that it is giuen for them but because whom God hath chosen he iustifieth that afterward he may glorifie the former grace which is a steppe to the later he after a sorte maketh a cause Finally by these kinde of speaches order is rather signified then cause Pareus l. 3. de Iustif c. 12. saieth that by those words 2. Timoth. 4. I haue fought a good fight the order and way to the crowne is noted not the cause So that what the Scripture maketh the cause according to these men is onely a meane a way steppe or order In like manner what the Scripture attributeth to one cause they giue to an other as what it atttibuteth to good workes they giue to faith onely what it ascribeth to faith or Sacraments they appropriate to God alone Zuinglius l. de Prouident cap. 6. When Paul writeth to Hearing 1. Spirit the Romans that faith cometh of hearing in the same manner he attributeth that to the nearer cause and more knowne to vs which cometh onely from the Spirit and not from outward preaching And in Math. 4. Oftentimes that is attributed to the later which belongeth to the former as to workes which rather belongeth to faith and againe to faith which most properly Workes 1. faith and truely belongeth to Gods election Sadeel de ver Peccat remiss p. 139. answering to those words Prouerb 16. Iniquitie is purged by bountie and mercie saieth That is attributed to the effects which is proper to the cause after the vsuall manner saieth he of Scripture That is attributed to their vertue which properly is to be attributed to the benefit of Christ alone Illyricus in Claue part 2. tract 6. Faith word and Sacraments Faith c. 1. God are saied to saue vs whereas God alone doth those things And ibid. Thy faith hath saued thee whereas onely Gods mercie and omni potēcie apprehēded by faith doth that And he addeth Scripture oftentimes attributeth things not to their true causes Oftentimes effects are attributed by the Scripture to not true or not principall causes Herevpon it cometh that there is often mention of Alleosis with Zuinglius and of Metalepsis with others by which figures what the Scripture giueth to one thing they transfer to an other Which Alleosis Zuinglius in Exegesi to 2. f. 350. calleth interchangable speach but Luther in Hospin part 2. Histor f. 57. termeth it the Diuels mask Wherefore thus I argue in forme Who gaynesay the expresse words of Scripture in such sorte as we haue seene in the first booke and besides in manie and weightie matters words which signifie a cause do expound of a way meane or order and what the Scripture attributeth to one cause do transferre to an other they contradict the true sense of holie Scripture Protestants doe so Therefore c. CHAPTER XVIII THAT WORDS OF SCRIPTVRE Which say a thing is Protestants expound by ought to be THE 18. argument shal be because what the Scripture saieth Is Protestants expound It ought to be Pareus l. 2. de Iustif c. 7. those words 1. Ioan. 2. v. 5. But he that keepeth his word in him the charitie of God is Is. 1. ought to be perfected expoundeth thus The sentence of S. Ihon as others such like is to be vnderstood of right or dutie not of fact What kinde of charitie ought to be not what kinde is in vs. And ibid. those words Coloss 3. v. 14. Haue charitie which is the bound of perfection he glosseth thus Charitie is called the bound of perfection not which we haue but which we ought to haue and which we shall haue in euerlasting life Et l. 4 c. 11. those words Deuter. 30. v. 6. Our Lord God shall circumcise thy heart and the heart of thy seed that thou maist loue thy Lord God with all thy heart He interpreteth in this sorte The promise to loue God with all thy heart ether speaketh of dutie how we ought to loue God to wit sincerely and perfectly or it speaketh of sinceritie And the same Pareus l. 4. de Grat. lib. arbit c. 6. that sentence of the Apostle 1. Tim. 3. he thus expoundeth The Church is called the pillar and strength of trueth of dutie because she ought alwaies to be so albeit she be not so alwaies in act The same he hath in Gal. 2. lect 18. Moulins in his Bucler pag. 50. and others Tilenus in Syntagmate cap. 46. writeth that in those places Ioan. 14. v. 21. Rom. 13. 8. and Gal. 5. 14. Where the Scripture affirmeth that those who loue God doe keepe his commandements it meaneth not of mans power to performe the law but of our dutie His meaning is that the Scripture meaneth not that who loue God keepe
Iustification writeth thus Sanctification by the blood of the couenaÌ„t Heb. 10. v. 29. is not the inward cleansing of the heart from sinne To receaue the holie Ghost Act. 19. v. 2. With them is not to receaue grace but some speciall guifts Caluin ibid. Here is not spoaken of the spirit of regeneration but of speciall guifts In like sorte by The holie Ghost ib. Nether haue we heard that there is a holie Ghost is not meant the holie Ghost For thus Caluin ib. How could it be that Iews had not heard of the holie Ghost Et Beza ibid. It were most absurd to thinke that they knew not that there was anie holie Ghost To be sanctified Hebr. 10. v. 29. is not to be truely sanctified For thus Contraremonstrantes in Collat. Hagae p. 391. Nether yet can it be concluded thereof that they were truely faithfull and indeed sanctified To fall from grace Gal. 5. ver 5. With them is not to fall from grace but to fall from the hope of obtaining it Contrare monstrantes loc cit p. 388. These are saied to fall from the grace of iustification not that euer they were partakers thereof but because they are excluded from al hope of obtaining it so long as they wil be iustified by the law Touching baptisme To be baptized Act. 19. v. 3. In whome Touching Baptisme then were you baptized with them is not to haue receaued baptisme but other guifts Beza ib. We must needs graunt that here is not treated of baptisme but of guifts wherewith God was wonte specially to adorne those whome he made rulers of Churches Gualâ—erus ib. hom 125. These words must not be expouÌ„ded of the baptisme of water but of the baptisme of fire Likewise Baptisme 1. Pet. 3. with them signifieth not baptisme but Christ Zuinglius resp ad Huber tom 2. It is certainely euident that Peter in that place by Baptisme vnderstandeth no other thing but Christ. Water also Ioan. 3. v. 5. Vnlesse one be borne agayne of water signifieth not water but the holie Ghost Caluin ibid. I can no way be persuaded to beleiue that Christ speaketh of baptisme And in Refutat Serueti This pertaineth nothing to baptisme but the name of water is metaphorically attributed to the holie Ghost Zuinglius vpon this place By water here he meaneth not that element but the word of God grace of God heauenlie water that is the illustration of the noâ—â—e Ghost And in the same manner other Protestants commonlie Touching the Eucharist Is in the words of consecratioÌ„ Touching the Eucharist with them is not Is but Signifieth nor Bodie giuen for vs Blood shed for vs is the true bodie and blood of Christ but onely figures of them as appeareth by what hath beene saied lib. 1. cap. 11. art 1. To eate the flesh and drinke the blood of Christ so often repeated Ioan. 6. is not to eate or drinke but onely to beleiue P. Martyr cont Gardiner part 1. col col 866. We still say that to eate to wit the flesh of Christ is nothing els then to apprehend it by faith as giuen for vs as price of our redemption Which also he hath col 863. And Luther Postil in Dom. post Natiuit To eate and drinke his flesh and To eate 1. not to eate but to beleiue blood is no other thing then to beleiue that Christ truely tooke these for our sake and repaied them agayne at death The like hath Zuinglius in Ioan. 6. and in Histor passionis and l. de Relig. c. de Euchar. Bullinger Dec. 5. serm 9. Vrsinus in Catechism q. 76. Flesh in those words of Christ Ioan. 6. My Flesh. 1. not flesh but diuinitie flesh is truely meate with them is not flesh but the Godhead Zuinglius in Exegesi to 2. fol. 333. He saieth his flesh is truely meate meaning surely not his flesh but his better nature which had taken flesh The Bodie of our Lord in those words 1. Cor. 10. The bread which we breake is it not the participation of the bodie of our Lord with these men is not the bodie of Christ 1. Christians Christ but Christians Zuinglius lib. cit Thou mights haue seene at the first how that Communion and Bodie are not taken Bodie of Christ 1. men for distribution of Christs bodie but for men themselues Finally Luther was so bould as to set downe a Canon Luthers CanoÌ„ of expounding Words by coÌ„traries of expounding the words of holie Scripture by coÌ„traries For thus he writeth in Ps 5. to 3. fol. 171. Let this be a Canon for thee Where the Scripture commandeth a good worke to be done do thou so vnderstand it that it forbiddeth thee doe good workes seing thou canst not but that thou maiest sanctifie the Lord be dead and buried and suffer God to worke in thee Which Canon Protestants do well follow as appeareth by what hath beene related in this chapter and before in the sixt and seuenth chapter where we shewed that in the weightieste matters they expounded the words of holie Scripture ironically and according to others meÌ„s mynde These and innumerable the like doe Protestants of which we might easily gather not onely a chapter but a booke full But out of these which we haue rehearsed it clearely appeareth First how great hereticall libertie as Tertullian speaketh is which turneth the words of holie Scripture this way and that way in to this forme and that and tosseth them vp and downe like tenis balls Secondly how easie it may be for euerie idiote with this libertie for to defend what heresie soeuer though neuer so contrarie to Scripture For who cannot expound the words of Scripture by diuerse by disparate and contrarie things Thirdly how impossible it is if this libertie be admitted to refute by Scripture any heresie at all or to proue anie thing by anie words whatsoeuer ether of God or man Fourthly how that Protestants by this kinde of dealing do more dishonor God and the holie Scripture then if they should quite reiect it For if they should reiect the Scripture they should onely reiect Gods word and trueth But by this manner of dealing they doe not onely reiect Gods trueth and meaning but also in steede thereof foist in the contrarie vntrueth and so as S. Hierome speaketh In Galat. â— of the word of God they make the word of the Diuel Fiftly it appeareth that these expositions of Protestants are like to that which Luther merly deuised for to shew the Sacramentaries how they expounded the words of consecration in Defens verb. cenae to 7. fol. 384. where he A fit exaÌ„ple of Protest expositions writeth thus Surely they doe a great and weightie matter But no otherwise then if I should denie that God made heauen and earth wheÌ„ one should obiect that of Moises In the beginning God created heauen and earth I should expound Moises words in this sorte God that is a Cuccou Made that is deuoured Heauen and earth
that is a Hedge sparow all and whole It not this a trick of arte Yes surely not vnknowne nor vnsemely to stage plaiers Thus Luther who as being best practised in this arte could best of all others describe it Finally it appeareth that Protestants haue not onely forged a new faith but also a new tongue a new Grammar a new frame of speach For concerning Propositions they bidde vs vnderstand an Affirmation by a Negation and a Negation by an Affirmation and words they bidde vs expoūd by diuerse by disparate and contraries to these which they signifie with other men And this new Grammar of theirs Luther acknowledgeth in these words Gal. 3. tom 5. fol. 345. Those words To doe To worke are to be taken Protestants new Grāmar or language three manner of waies Substantially or naturally Morally and Theologically Insubstances natures and morall matters these words are taken in their vsuall and naturall signification but in diuinitie they are made plainely new words and get a new signification Wherefore when thou readest in Scripture of Fathers of Prophets of Kings that they wrought iustice c. remember that such and the like sayings are to be vnderstood according to the new and Theologicall Grammar of Protestants wherefore I admonish yee agayne that the sentences which the aduersaries obiect out of Scripture of workes and reward be alwaies to be vnderstood Theologically by the definition As if they obiect that saying of Daniel 4. Redeeme thy sinnes by almes streight we must runne to the Theologicall grammar and not to the morall The like he hath in cap. 4. Genes fol. 60. Nor much otherwise writeth Kemnice libr. de origin Iesuit pag. 47. When he saieth It is most certaine that the Holie Ghost would that in this article of Iustification not onely the things themselues and the meaning but also the very names should be by a peculiar signification distinct from the words of Philosophers Schlusselburg also Praefat. libr. Theolog. Caluin distinguisheth betwene the Grammar of Nations and of Deuines and saieth that that taketh the word of Iustice actiuely but this taketh it passiuely The like hath Gesnerus loc 2. de Iustif pag. 47. But what we ought to thinke of these inuentors of Luthers Censure of these new word mongers a new Grammar themselues doe sometimes tell vs. For thus writeth Luther lib. de seruo arbitr tom 2. fol. 435. Whoe will not mock or rather hate this vnsemely changer of words who against all vse endeauoureth to bring in such kinde of speach as to call a begger a rich man By this abuse of speach anie man may bragge of anie thing But this is not the parte of Diuines but of Cooseners and Stageplayers And Caluin libr. contr Libertin cap. 3. The libertines at Libertines the first bouldly reiected the Scriptures but when they saw that thereby they were abhorred of all men they meant to deale more closely and more couertely that making shew not to cast away Scripture they might turne it into allegories and wrest it into diuerse and strange senses changing a horse into a man and as the common speach is feigning the horne of a lanterne to be a cloude And capit 7. Like as Egyptians and other vagabonds such as those who going out of Bohemia wander vp and downe the whole world vse a certaine peculiar speach which none vnderstand but those of their owne crew and brotherhood So c. I denie not but they vse the common words but so they alter their signification as no man can vnderstand what the matter is which is proposed nor what they would affirme or denie Beza also l. de puniend Haer. vol. 1. Theol. Sathan when he could not quite cast the Scripture out of the Church yet by vaine allegories made it altogether vprofitable which course now the libertines and Anabaptistes do take Bullinger Concion Anabaptiste Arians Seruetians Familistes 25. in Apocal. thus writeth of the Arians and Seruetians They turne and winde the words of God with their Giganticall bouldnesse as they list Whitaker l. 1. de Script c. vlt. sect 4. The Familists do leaue almost no article of our faith vntouched whilest with their allegories they turne and corrupt all things And Reinolds in his Conference cap. 2. sect 2. The Familists for to saue their phrensies from the Scripture reiect the literall sense which is the very edge thereof and put that vp into the scabarde of their fanaticall dreames and allegories The like hath Perkins in Conflictu Christi tom 2. This they note in the Libertines Familists Anabaptists and others whereof themselues are no lesse guiltie then those be as appeareth by what hath beene already related But as Luther him selfe saieth Genes 6. tom 6. fol. 84. Who would suffer this libertie in deprauing the true sense in the fables of Terence or Virgils Ecloges and shall we suffer it in the Church And Defension verb. Cenae tom 7. fol. 397. Surely I cannot see that they can be excused by anie plausible pretext as if vpon a good meaning they had beene deceaued by some curiofitie or spirituall blindnesse as it happeneth to most Heretiks But it appeareth that they mocke the word of God vpon obstinacie and malice For I doe not thinke that it can be that these sillie trifles and toies should in earnest moue a man in his wittes whether he were a Turk or Iew much lesse a Christian Thus the Protestants owne Prophet and Father speaketh of Protestants Wherefore thus I argue in the 20. place Who not onely gaynesay the words of holie Scripture so directly and so often as is shewed in the first booke but also in so manie and so great matters expound the words thereof by diuerse by disparates and by contraries so that they bring in a new grammar a new language and signification of words neuer heard of before they manifestly contradict nay mock the true sense of holie Scripture But Protestants doe so Therefore c. CHAPTER XXI THAT PROTESTANTS ARE COMpelled to deuise improprietie of words and all kinds of figures THE 21. Argument wherewith we will proue that Protestants doe contradict the true sense of holie Scripture is because when the proprietie of the word is against them they deuise improprieties and all kind of figures Caluin 4. Instit c. 8. § 2. Authoritie is not properly giuen to Not properly men Beza in Confess c. 5. sect 27. Nether Pastors nor Doctors can properly binde or loose anie man Zanchius de Eccles c. 9. Power of forgiuing sinnes is not properly giuen to the Apostles or to others for they doe not properly forgiue sinnes Vorstius in Resp ad Homium p. 31. I doe not say that faith it selfe doth properly iustifie vs. Perkins in Cathol Reform Cont. 5. c. 3. The kingdome of heauen is called a reward not properly but by a figure Et Cont. 10. c. 4. These words This is my bodie must not be vnderstood properly but by a figure Pareus l. 5. de Iustif
maintainers of the trueth These are such things as that now it may onely seeme to be wanting to set the Diuel himselfe in the throne of God and of trueth And Epist 16. What I Good counsell of Beza admonished before I admonish now in the Lord agayne and agayne to wit that at lest they would consider with themselues from whome and to whome are they gone For that I may imitate the words of S. Austin l. 2. cont Iulian. c. 10. Hath long time so confounded the highest with the lowest Shall light so be termed darkenesse and darkenesse light that Aërius Iouinian Vigilantius become to see and Austin Hierome Epiphanius be blinde But in some I thus argue in the 24. place whose doctrine in manie and greatest points is opposite to the expresse words of Scripture and besides as themselues confesse was condemned of the ancient Church and holie Fathers for heresie that is repugnant to the true sense of Scripture But such is the doctrine of Protestants Therefore c. CHAPTER XXV THAT PROTESTANTS THEMSELVES sometimes confesse that diuers of their opinions be blasphemous THE 25. argument wherewith we will proue that Protestants contradict the true sense of the Scripture shal be because it is so manifest that diuers of their doctrines which in the former booke I shewed to be opposite to the expresse words of Scripture are blasphemous as partely the very Authors of them partely other learned Protestants being compelled by their conscience and the euidencie of the matter doe confesse it Concerning God Protestāts teach that he willeth sinne Blasphemie that God willeth sinne as hath beene seene l. 1. c. 2. art 1. Which doctrine to be blasphemous thus confesseth Caluin in Resp ad Nebulon. p. 732. Was it a doubtfull blasphemie to make God the author of of sinne to will sinne to thrust to sinne Beza de Praed cōt Castel vol. 1. Theol. p. 372. Out of these things none of these blasphemies followeth to wit ether that God is the author of sinne or is delighted with sinne or also willeth sinne Et p. 397. It cānot be saied without blasphemie that God willeth iniustice Ib. l. Quest Resp p. 681. What then Shall we say that God willeth iniquitie God forbidde For this is the most horrible blasphemie of all Zanchius l. 3. de Nat. Dei c. 4. We should surely say that God is the cause and author of sinne if we should say that properly speaking he willeth sinne or would haue sinne to be done Hutterus in Analysi Cōf. Aug. p. 625. The blasphemie of Sacramentaries is execrable who are not ashamed to referre the most dolefull fall of our first parents and all that world of euils which thereō insued not in regard of the punishmēt but of the sinne vnto an absolute and eternall decree of God and to his effectuall working and immutable will Et p. seq But let heauē be astonished the elements amazed at such mostrous blasphemies whereof no pious man should suffer to heare the onely outward noise without shaking much lesse should assent vnto them in his heart And Ioannes Andrae in Colloquio Montisb p. 422. This assertion that man fell by Gods will is impious and horrible to heare and so contrarie to the expresse and reuealed word of God They teach also that God willeth sinne euen as it is That God willeth sinne as sinne sinne as hath beene shewed lib. 1. cap. art 2. But that this is blasphemous is acknowledged by Beza l. de Praedest p. 410. in the words If euer we had thought to speake or write that sinnes as sinnes proceed from the will of God we would confesse that we were worthie of all punishment Lobechius also Disp 21. This principle of Diuinitie is firmely to be held and to be beleiued with all our heart that God nether willeth nor commandeth ill deeds as they are such much lesse worketh or helpeth them or by an eternall decree doth destinate or secretly driue men to commit them They teach also that God worketh sinne and is the That God is cause of sinne cause and author of it as is to be seene l. 1. c. 2. art 4. And yet Caluin l. de Prouident p. 742. aliâs 736. confesseth that it is a monstrous blasphemie that wickednesse is done not onely by the will of God but also he being the author thereof And pag. 471. Thou wranglest with me as if I had saied that sinne is the iust worke of God which in all my writings I euer more detest Instruct contr Libertin cap. 14. God must denie himselfe and become a Deuil if he did worke euill which these men doe attribute vnto him The like he hath libr. de Praedestin pag. 711. And in Actor 2. ver 23. saieth I denie that God is the author of euill because in this word an euill affection is insinuated Beza in Absters Calumn Heshus pag. 316. calleth it blasphemie That God worketh the wickednesse of the wicked And de Praedest cont Castel p. 401. God forbidde that anie of ours should haue saied or written as thou auonchest that God ether giue or permit or worke an euill will or anie wicked or filthie desires when as euen our thoughts doe altogether abhorre from these kinde of blasphemies P. Mart. in locis classe 1. c. 14. If God wrought sinne he were a sinner Kemnice in locis part 1. tit de Causa Peccati All mens mynds and eares do so abhorre from that speach God is the cause of sinne that therefore the Maniches did feigne an other God Vrsin in Miscellan p. 72. Thou saiest that these are the speaches of manie of men God doth effectually worke in the reprobate that they sinne With all our heart we accurse this speach and doctrine Whitaker ad Rat. 9. Campia That is horrible Campian and not to be spoaken which thou saiest that anie should make God the Author of sinne He deserueth that God should streigth with a thunder boult cast him into the bottomlesse pit of hell Pareus in Colleg. Theol. 1. disput 2. The Fathers iustly condemned that impious doctrine of the Maniches and Libertins ascribing the cause of fall and sinne to God the Creator And Disput 3. God was not nor is not the efficient cause of sinne which heretofore was the blasphemie of the Maniches and now is of some Libertines They teach that God doth predestinate and ordaine That he predestinated men to sinne mē to sinne as is related l. 1. c. 2. art 5. Which to be blasphemous confesseth Vorstius in Amica Collat. sect 89. in the words which doctrine that God doth destinate men to sinne I scarce beleiue that thy selfe wilt thinke to be voide of blasphemie if thou doest well consider it Hutter in Anal. Confes August c. 9. The troupe of Sacramentaries Beza Caluin Renecher doth not feare to write with a most execrable and most wonderfull blasphemie that some are fatally and absolutely destinated not onely to their last end to wit damnation but also to the
proper to the Elect 350 22. VVhether faith come by hearing 352 23. VVhether faith be euer lost 353 24. VVhether faith be rewarded 355 25. VVhether the faith of those who toucht Christs garments were pure 356 Chap. 14. Of good workes in generall Art 1. VVhether anie worke of a Sinner may be good p. 360 2 VVhether euerie good worke be sinne 362 3 VVhether good works be a sweet smell to God 364 4 VVhether good works be fully good 366 5 VVhether they be iust or iustice in the sight of God 369 6 VVhether in good works there be anie worth 371 7 VVhether eternall life be promised to good works 373 8 VVhether good works be meritorious 374 9 VVhether there may be glorie in good works 376 10 VVhether all good works be equall before God 378 11 VVhether good works be commanded of God 379 12 VVhether they be necessarie to iustification 381 13 VVhether they be necessarie to saluation 384 14 VVhether they be profitable to saluation or iustification 387 15 VVhether they be anie cause of saluation 390 16 VVhether they be a testimonie of iustification or predestination 393 17 VVhether they be a cause of Gods loue towards vs 395 18 VVhether we ought to doe good works 396 19 VVhether they may be done for reward 399 20 VVhether they be to be done for the glorie of God 401 Chap. 15. Of workes in particular Art 1. VVhether it be good not to marrie 406 2 VVhether virginitie be a vertue 406. 3. VVhether the state of virginitie be better then marriage 408 4. VVhether God would haue men to liue single 410 5. VVhether Fasting be a vertue 412. 6. VVhether fasting be a preseruatiue against the Diuel 414. 7. VVhether choice of meats be laudable 415. 8 VVhether we may pray for all 416. 9. VVhether we may pray for the dead 417. 10 VVhether we may pray for that which God hath not promised 419 11. VVhether anie obtaine for the worth of their praier 421. 12. VVhether we may pray in an vnknowne tongue 422. 13. VVhether we be commanded to say our lords praier 423 14. VVhether we may make vows 424 15. VVhether almes deliuer from death and sinne 426 16. VVhether we may giue all to the poore 427 17. VVhether pennance be commanded to all 428 18 VVhether affliction of the bodie be a parte of pennance 429. 19 VVhether pennance of the Niniuites was good 431 20. VVhether Eremitical life be lawfull Chap. 16. Of Sinnes Art 1. VVhether sinnes be imputed to the faithfull 435. 2. VVhether anie sinne be mortall to the Elect and faithfull 437. 3. VVhether onely incredulitie be sinne 438. 4. VVhether sinne ought to be ouercomen of vs 440. 5. VVhether anie that serue the flesh can serue God 441. 6 VVhether by greuous sinnes we fall from grace 442. 7 VVhether sinne can staÌ„d with iustice 8. VVhether sinne may be redeemed by good works 447. 9. VVhether to abstaine from great sinnes be necessarie to saluation 448 10. VVhether sinne be the cause of damnation 451. 11. VVhether we must giue account of our sinnes 453. 12. VVhether the iustified commit ill p. 454. 13. VVhether the iustified commit sinne 455. 14 VVhether the iustified euer do sinne wilfully 457. 15 VVhether the widows 1. Tim. 5. did sinne in marrying 458. 16 VVhether vsurie be sinne 459. 17. VVhether all sinned in Adam 460. 18. VVhether there is originall sinne 461. Chap. 17. Of Iustification Art 1. VVhether Iustification be of works 465. 2. VVhether it be of faith onely 467. 3. VVhether the iustified be iust in Gods fight 469. 4. VVhether the iustified be cleane 472 5. VVhether sinne remaine in the iustified 474. 6. VVhether sinnes be simply forgiuen 477. 7. VVhether all the iustified be equally iust 478. 8. VVhether there is anie inherent iustice 478. 9. Whether inherent iustice can be imputed 481. 10. Whether the iustified be infallibly certaine of their iustice 482. 11. Whether pennance goe before iustification 845. 12. Whether iustificatioÌ„ can be lost 487. 13. Whether the iustified may feare to fall 489. 14. Whether iustification be proper to the Elect 492. 15. Whether we cooperate to our iustification 493. 16. Whether after iustification anie punishment remaine 496 Chapt. 18. Of life and death euerlasting ART 1. Whether life euerlasting be a reward p. 499. 2. Whether it be a crowne of iustice 501. 3. Whether it be of faith onely 503. 4. Whether all men be to be iudged 505 5. Whether eternall life be to be rendered to anie 506. 6. Whether the soules of the Reprobates doe now suffer in Hell 507. 7. Whether Hell be anie place 509. 8. Whether Hell fire be true fire 510. Chapt. 19. Of Gods law ART 1. Whether Gods law be possible 513. 2. Whether euer anie kept Gods law 515. 3. Whether anie loued God in all theâ—â— heart 517. 4. Whether Gods law be in thâ— heart of anie 519. 5. Whether we ◠〈◊〉 â— that we may keepe Gods law 520. 6. Whether the keeping of Gods law be necessarie to saluation 521. 7. Whether the law of God be abrogated from the faithfull 522. Chapt. 20. Of mans law and superioritie ART 1. Whether there be anie Superioritie among Christians 526. 2. Whether man can make laws 527. 3. Whether mans law bindeth the conscience 529. Chapt. 21. Of free will ART Whether man be free in indifferent matters 532. 2. Whether man be free in morall matters 534. 3. Whether man cooperate with Gods grace to good 536. Chap. 22. Of mans Soule ART 1. Whether mans Soule be immortall 539. 2. Whether Mans soule be the forme of his bodie 545. 3 Whether there be anie resurrection of the dead 547. THE INDEX OF THE CHAPTERS CONTAINED in the second booke CHAPTER 1. That Protestants contradict the truâ— sense of Scripture because iâ— so manie points they gaynesay the expresse words thereof pag. 549. Chapt. 2. That Protestants confesse they contradict the sense of those words which the Cathol Church long since and manie of themselues now beleiue to be the words of God p. 611. Chapt. 3. That Protestants are forced to vse violence to that parte of Scripture which they receaue p. 615. Chapt. 4. That Protestants ouerthrow all force of the words of Scripture yea contemne and deride them p. 620. Chapt. 5. That Protestants say that words of Scripture which make against them were not spoaken of certaine knowledge p. 630. Chapt. 6. That Protestants saye that manie weightie sayings of the Scripture were not spoaken according to the mynd of the speakers p. 633. Chapt. 7. That Protestants are forced to say that the Scripture speaketh ironically c. p. 640. Chapt. 8. That Protestants are forced to turne the most generall speaches of the Scripture into particulars p. 647. Chapt. 9. That Protestants limitate manie propositions not limitated by the Scripture p. 654. Chapt. 10. That Protestants change manie absolute speaches of Scripture into conditionals p. 665. Chapt. 11. That Protestants change conditionall speaches of Scripture
according to their order and in euerie matter I distinguish manie articles which I propose in forme of question After I set downe the expresse words of Scripture Next I bring the decrees of the Councell of Trent or the Instructions of the Catechisme of that Councell And where I find not their determinations I alledge the doctrin of S. Thomas or of D. Stapleton or Cardinal Bellarmin Against these I produce the assertions of one or manie famous Protestants directly opposite to the doctrin of the Scripture and of the Catholiks Lastly I gather together a summe of the words of the holie Scripture together with a summe of the sayings of Protestants that thereby the opposition betwene the doctrin of them both may the better appeare As for the words of Scripture Plessie of the Church c. 5. p. 145. Let them bring one text that is cleare and euident and we are readie to yeeld vnto them I bring not all which might be brought of euerie article because nether is that necessarie to my purpose sith God is as much to be beleeued in one word as in manie nether as the Councell of Arausica saieth truly will manie testimonies of Scripture auaile any thing with him to whome few are not sufficient but I bring those onely testimonies which to me seemed most opposite to the words of Protestants Nether do I proue that the words of Scripture which I cite be cleare and vttered of purpose to declare vnto vs Gods mynd of that matter wherof they treate or do of themselues and according to their accustomed acception amongst men manifestly afford that sense in which Protestants gayne saye them because al thefe points are manifest by them selues and the shifts which Protestants vse to delude them do manifestly proue them Nether also do I proue that Protestants can not at least touching the most of these Articles produce any such testimonies of Scripture which in expresse words may seeme directly and without any inference conference or exposition of theirs to speake for them as in these 260. points the testimonies which I bring do speake for vs. First because this being a denial it is of it self sufficiently proued vnles the Protestants can demonstrate their contrarie affirmation Secondly because this is euident to euerie one who See Tertul. l. de Resur c. 3. Luther de verb. Caenae fol. 389. considereth the testimonies brought by ProtestaÌ„ts which in verie few and almost no matters at all in controuersie betwixt vs and them are such as of them selues without the addition of some humane principle or illation they may so much as seeme to be directly opposite vnto vs. Which if ProtestaÌ„ts would consider they should easily see almost in all controuersies as much difference betwene our proofes out of Scripture and theirs as there is betwixt the expresse word of God and humane discourse Nether may they saye that they are not bound to proue Why Protest are bound to prooue their negatiue points of doctrin those points wherin they contradict vs because their denial needeth no proof Both because in some controuersies they are the affirmers and we the deniers as when they say that God will and worketh sin tempteth and predestinateth to sin That Christ was truly a sinner feared his daÌ„nation suffered the paines of hel the like In which questions seing Catholiks proue their denial by expresse words of Scripture much more ought Protestants by the like expresse words to proue their affirmation As also because it is one thing simply to deny or not to beleeue the Catholik affirmation as euerie Iew Turk or infidel doth an other thing not onely to denie it or not beleue it but also to condemne it as an vntruth contrarie to See Tertul. de Corona c. 2. Scripture and to auouche the denial as a truth taught by Scripture For albeit a simple denial or not beleefe need no proofe yet such a mixt denial as denying the opposite affirmation affirmeth it self to be auouched by Scripture and the affirmation to be condemned thereby hath as great need of proofe out of Scripture as any other affirmation whatsoeuer Moreouer these denials are articles of faith with Protestants and as such are put in their Confessions of faith and therfore ether ought to be proued by Scripture as other articles are or they must confesse that they can not proue out of Scripture the greatest parte of their faith which principally consisteth of these negatiue articles or denials of our faith 9. As for Catholiks for the most parte I produce the Why one Cath. saying is alledged words of one onely of the foresaied Authors because the agreement of Catholiks in matters of faith is wel enough knowne I might if I would haue my self set downe the Catholik doctrin in euerie article in the same words in which the Scripture deliuereth her doctrin of the same or perhappes haue found the Catholike doctrine proposed by some Catholikâ— Author in the verie same words which the Scripture vseth But that Protestants should not saye that it was no maruel if the Catholik doctrin be deliuered in the Scriptures words by any Author whatsoeuer or when it is done of purpose I would not set it downe but in the words of some famous Catholik writer those spoaken not of purpose to accomodate their speech to the phrase of Scripture but spoaken to declare and expresse the Catholik doctrin And here by we may see that when the Catholik doctrin is to be sett downe most plainly and distinctly by theÌ„ who best know it of it nature it requireth to be deliuered with the very same or the likewords which the Scripture vseth Whence we may also gather as I shal herafter that the Catholik doctrin is in very deed one and the self same with the doctrin of the Scripture 10. For the like cause I haue alledged the words onely Why manie Protâ—stants sayingâ— alledged of famous Protestants such as almost all were not onely writers but also Professors of Protestant diuinitie lest any should attribute their words to ignorance And some times I haue cited diuers sayinges of the same Author partly lest any should think that such words fell from him vnawares partely also because some times they contradict the Scripture in so different manners of speech as if they would that none should be ignorant therof partely also to the end that the Catholik Reader may make choice amongst manie sayings of Protestants which he iudgeth most opposite to the Scriptures words Nether yet do I feare that the multitude of Protestants sayings opposed against the Scripture may scandalize any weake Catholik for seing the Scripture most directly contrarie to them and armed with this sheild he wil no more regarde the Protestants words then so many barkings of of doggs against heauen so many cries of Ieves against Christ so many blasphemies of damned men against God And if it be wearisome or irkesom to the Catholik Reader to read all the blasphemous
For from whence might they better draw their dreggs So plainelie he confesseth that his doctrine in the foresaied points contradicted the bookes of Machabes Tobie and Ecclesiasticus And notwithstanding S. Austin whome †Caluin 4. Instit c. 14. §. 26. Protestants account the best witnesse of antiquitie clearelie testifieth that manie ages agoe the holie Church held the bookes of Machabes for Canonicall Scripture For thus he writeth of them lib. 18. de Ciuitat c. 36. Which not Iewes but the Church holdeth for Canonicall And the like he saieth lib. 1. cont Gaudent cap. 23. Lib. de doctrin Christ c. 8. l. 2. Retract c. 4. and otherwhere Besides manie Protestantt as Caluin in Antidot cit p. 266. Whitaker Contr. 3. q. 6. c. 3. Perkins de Symbol p. 787. and also Hyperius Zanchius Lubbertus Hospinian Rainolds Feild and others alledged in the Protestants Apologie Tract 1. Sect. 3. confesse that the Councel of Carthage where S. Austin was present and subscribed thereto did reckon the bookes of Machabes in the nūber of Canonicall Scripture And to omit all other arguments drawne out of the Scripture and Fathers for the infallibilitie of the Church the Protestants themselues eftsoones confesse that the Church can discerne true Scriptures from false and that we are bound to yeeld to her iudgment For thus saieth Luther l. de Captiuit to 2. fol. 84. This indeed hath the Church that she can discerne The Church can discerne the word of God Hath authoritie to iudge the word of God from the word of men as Austin confesseth that he beleiued the Ghospell being moued by the authoritie of the Church The Confession of Wittenberg cap. de Eccles The Church hath authoritie to iudge of all doctrines And cap. de Concilijs She hath an assured promisse of the perpetuall presence of Christ and she is gouerned of the holie Ghost Melancthon Respons ad Acta Ratisbon tom 3. pag. 732. We acknowledge this authoritie of testifying the Apostolicall Scriptures or discerning the writings of the Apostles from counterfait doth agree to the true Church Caluin de vera ref p. 232. I denie not but that it is the proper office of Church to discerne true The proper office of the Church Scriptures from counterfeit Peter Martyr Praefat. 1. Epist ad Corinth We will easily graunt that the ancient Church was indued so much with the holie Ghost that by his leading and directiō they easily discerned betwene those which were proposed to them which were the true and sincere words of God and by this spirituall power they distinguished the Canon of Scriptures from apocryphall bookes And in locis Class 1. c. 6. § 6. We acknowledge the office of the Church to be that being indued with Gods Spirit she may distinguish the true and sincere bookes of holie writ from counterfeit and apocryphall Iuel in Defens of the Apologie pag. 204. The Church of God had the spirit of wisdome She hath the spirit of wisdome Can discerne true Scriptures whereby she might discerne true Scriptures from false Fulke in his Answere to a false Cathol p. 5. The Church of Christ indeed can discerne true Scriptures from false Perkins de Serm. Dom. tom 2. col 252. The Church hath the guift of iudging of greatest matters She can iudge of the booke of Scripture Hath the guift of iudging which are Canonicall which are not of the spirits of men and of their doctrines and therefore surely can iudge which companie of men is the true Church which is not Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 3. c. 1. pag. 315. We denie not that it belongeth to the Church to approue to acknowledge to receaue to promulgate to commend the Scriptures to all her children and we say that this testimonie is true and ought to be admitted of all Cap. 2. pag. 316. It is the office of the Church to iudge and discerne true sincere and right Scriptures from false counterfait and bastard And for to discharge Hath the spirit of Christ to distinguish this office she hath the Spirit of Christ by which she may distinguish trueth from lyes she knoweth the voice of her Spouse she is most iuditious and can discerne spirits Cap. 5. p. Her tradition conuinceth 322. I denie not that the Tradition of the Church is an argumēt by which it may be cōuinced which kookes are Canonicall which not Canonicall cap. 6. pag. 323. The Church hath the Spirit of God by which being taught she heareth the voice of he Spouse and acknowledgeth his doctrine cap. 7. pag. 324. Indeed we may Her authoritie cōpelleth be compelled by the authoritie of the Church to acknowledge the Canonicall Scripture I say as I often saied before that we are compelled by the authoritie of the Church to beleiue these bookes to be Canonicall And cap. 9. pag. 326. We graunt with Ireney A sound demonstration that the authoritie of the Church is a sound and breife demūstration a posteriori of Canonicall doctrine And l. 1. de Scriptura c. 1. sect 9. he affirmeth that the testimonie of the Church ought to be receaued and who receaueth it not is guiltie of sacriledge And lib. 2. cap. 4. sect 4. p. 227. I say the testimonie of the Church is sufficient to refute and conuince those who thinke amisse of the Scriptures The like he hath ib. p. 218. 228. and and other where often Out of which confessions of Protestants of the authorite and power of the Church to discerne and distinguish true Scripture from false we may thus argue It belongeth to the Church yea it is her function and proper office to discerne true Scriptures from false she hath that she can distinguish the word of God from the word of man she is taught of the holie Ghost indued with Gods Spirit hath the guift of iudging the spirit of wisdome for to discerne by her tradition it may be conuinced which bookes are Canonicall which not by her authoritie we may be compelled to acknowledge the Canonicall Scripture her authoritie is a sound demonstration of Canonicall doctrine her testimonie ought to be receaued of all and who receaueth it not is guiltie of sacriledge But this holie Church manie ages agoe hath iudged the bookes of Machabes to be Canonicall Therefore they are such The Maior or first Proposition is the confession of Protestants now rehearsed and the Minor is confirmed by the foresaied testimonie of S. Austin and the confessions of the forenamed Protestants And howsoeuer Protestants The Cath. aduantage ouer Protest will delude this argument they must needs confesse that Catholiks haue the aduantage of them in that Protestāts produce no testimonie which forceth Catholiks to reiect anie booke which anie Father testifieth to haue beene anciently held of the Church for Canonicall as Catholiks produce the testimonie of S. Iames which maketh the Lutherans to reiect his epistle which other Protestants confesse to be Canonicall and an other testimonie out of the bookes