Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n apostle_n faith_n word_n 1,525 5 4.2834 3 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A03885 A summary of controuersies Wherein are briefly treated the cheefe questions of diuinity, now a dayes in dispute betweene Catholikes & protestants: especially out of the holy Scripture. Written in Latin by the R. Father, Iames Gordon Huntley of Scotland, Doctour of Diuinity, of the Society of Iesus. And translated into English by I.L. of the same Society. The I. tome, deuided into two controuersies.; Controversiarum epitomes. English Gordon, James, 1541-1620.; Wright, William, 1563-1639. 1618 (1618) STC 13998; ESTC S104309 167,262 458

There are 17 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

the Traditions and doctrine of the Church seing that without them we cannot certainly and without errour know what were those things which the Apostle taught the Galathians 2. Secondly our Aduersaries do erre in that they do not rightly expound that particle in the wordes of S. Paul praeter besides but rather contrary to the Apostles meaning For the Latin word praeter as also the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Hebrew Ghal haue two significations In the former it signifyeth all that which is not the selfe same thing whereof we doe speake in the later sense it signifieth that only which is contrary to that we speake of In which sense praeter signifieth the same that contra doth to wit against the former sense is manifest inough the later is proued by these places of Scripture Act. 18. v 13. where all do translate these Greeke words Calu in act Apo● an 1560. Beza ed. an 1560. 1565. 1598. Hemic Steph. in thes linguae Graecae Tom. 2. dictione 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be against the Law so hath not only the vulgar edition but also Caluin and Beza and all the French Bibles of Geneua Likewise in the first to the Romans the 26. vers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signyfieth against Nature so hath the vulgar edition and all the French Bibles of Geneua yea Cicero as witnesseth Henricus Stephanus doth thus translate this phrase out of Greeke Againe in the 4. to the Romanes the 18. verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth against as the vulgar edition and Beza hath in all editions Moreouer in the 11. to the Romans the 24. vers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth against as the vulgar edition and all the Bibles of Geneua haue finally in the last to the Romans the 17. vers aswell the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Latin word praeter in our interpreter signifieth the same thing that contra doth as manifestly appeareth by the precedent wordes for dissentions and scandals are contrary or against the doctrine of Christ and not only besides his doctrine Wherfore Caluin in his Commentaries set forth in the yeare 1557. vpon the Epistle to the Romanes and Sebastian Castalio and all the French Bibles of Geneua haue contrary or against the doctrine and albeit Beza translateth it besid● the doctrine yet in his last edition set forth in the yeare 1598. he translateth it contrary to the doctrine and in his Annotations he warneth that it is rather so to be translated It is not therfore strange or absurd that the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Latyne praeter should fignify the same that contra doth 3. But now that this word may not only be thus vsed but that also it must necessarily be so vnderstood and taken in this place we haue shewed by the absurdities which would otherwise follow The first is that S. Paul would haue sayd Anathema to S. Iohn Euangelist who many yeares after the preaching of S. Paul to the Galathians yea after his death wrote his Apocalyps wherein there are many new reuelations which S. Paul had not preached to the Galathās because they were not thē reuealed by God 4. The second absurdity that S. Paul had pronounced Anathema vpon all those who in his tyme by a propheticall spirit 1. Cor 14. v. 2. 4. 16. 30. did dayly prophesy new things For in the Apostles tymes there were many such as appeareth by the first epistle to the Corinthians And S. Paul could not preach to the Galathians that which God had not yet reuealed 5. The third absurdity the Apostle for the same reason had pronounced Anathema against S. Luke who in the Acts of the Apostles relateth many thinges which happened long after S. Paul left Galatia 6. The fourth absurdity the Apostle for the same cause also had condemned himselfe with the sayd A●athema For he wrote many Epistles after he had left Galatia wherein he reateth many thinges which hapned afterward vnto him eyther at Rome or in other places 7. Lastly it is an absurd thing to think either God after those wordes of S. Paul to the Galathians could reueale to men nothing more by an Angell sent from heauen or that the said Angell who by the commaundement of God should reueale any new thing but not contrary to faith should incurre that Anathema by S. Paul seing that this were to wrest the Anathema vpon God himselfe who commaunded the Angell to do so This place therefore cannot be vnderstood of diuers and distinct thinges from those which S. Paul taught the Galathians but only of contrary and opposite thinges vnto them But according to this sense of the word praeter all the foresayd Absurdities doe cease For neyther S. Iohn in his Apocalyps nor S. Luke in the Actes of the Apostles nor any other which did prophesy nor S. Paul himself euer wrote or taught any thing contrary to that which S. Paul taught the Galathians But euen God himself cannot Ad Heb. 16. v. ●8 reueale the contrary by an Angell because according to the Apostle It is impossible for God to lye 8. Neyther is it sufficient for me to say that those thinges which were afterward reuealed and written were not necessary pointes of faith to saluation For S. Paul did not say if any shall Euangelize vnto you any point necessary to saluation but absolutely if any shall Euangelize any thing contrary to that which you haue receyued Moreouer all those thinges which were afterward set downe in holy Scripture were true points of faith the which euery Christiā is necessarily boūd to belieue if not expressely yet at the least virtually and generally euery one is boūd to belieue if not expressely yet at the least virtually and generally euery one is boūd to belieue with an assured faith all those things which are in holy Writ to be most certaine and true 9. Finally euen our Aduersaries confession doth conuince this to be most true for now they acknowledge that all those thinges which by a necessary conseqēce are deduced out of the Scriptures do belong vnto the word of God and are points of saith and therefore they may be lawfully preached vnto the people as we haue Suprac 3. said before But al these are distinct things from those which are expresly written in holy Scripture For the antecedent whereby some other thing may be inferred is distinct from that which is inferred For it were a ridiculous illation if one and the same thing should be inferred from it selfe But that which is inferred in a good collection is neuer contrary to the antecedent The Apostle therefore speaketh of doctrine contrary to his and not absolutly of any other distinct doctrine 10. And in this sense the Fathers doe often say that S. Paul affirmed in this place that nothing was to be taught besids that August Tom 7. contra lit Petil. Donat. l. 3. cap. 6. August Tom.
adde also some other naturall reasons and perwasions that they may be conuerted For there are many things in holy Scripture which seeme opposite to naturall reason as the mysteryes of the Blessed Trinity Incarnation Resurrection of the dead c. 9. Ninthly there wanteth last of all the tenth property for there is nothing extant of the Scripture in the Apostles Creed 10. The holy Scripture indeed is the ground and reason why we belieue many points of faith but not the ground why we belieue all Moreouer neyther is it the first ground of all that we belieue by it For the Scripture it self is proued by some other more generall ground to wit by the authority of the Church VVherfore the Scripture is only a particuler ground and not a generall a mediate and not immediate a secondary and not the first and chiefest rule of faith CHAP. IIII. That the priuate or particuler spirit of euery one is not the ground or rule of faith THAT no priuate spirit of any can be the ground of our Faith is farre more euident by the same properties now alledged For none of these ten properties doth agree with the priuate spirit of euery one that belieueth the which we declare by these arguments 1. First there wanteth the foresaid continuance For there is no priuate or particuler person who hath continued from the beginning of the world or shall endure till the end therof as faith hath continued 2. Secondly there wanteth truth because there is no priuate man to be found which cannot erre and be deceiued for as witnesseth the Apostle Euery man is Rom. 3. v. 4. a lyar 3. Thirdly there wanteth certainty in proposing matters of faith vnto vs because none can be certaine that any priuate person can haue such a spirit yea euē in our Aduersaries iudgemēts For the predestinate only in their opinion haue this spirit euen as they only in their iudgments haue the true fayth but the predestinate are knowen to none but only to God according to that of the Apostle God knoweth who are his The which Caluin 2. Tim. 2 v. 19. Cal. l. 4. Inst c. 1. sect 2. expressely teacheth 4. Fourthly the foresaid strength and immutability is wanting for that a priuate man hath not that strength and immutability of his doctrine Our Aduersaries themselues confesse and experience teacheth vs that they often times change their interpretations of Scriptures and at diuers tymes they teach plaine contraries yea they confesse that this their priuate spirit is not permanēt with them but often times leaueth and forsaketh them the which they proue out of that place of the 29. or 30. Psalme the eight verse Thou hast turned thy face from me and I became Vid disp Paris an 1566. in disp 1. di●i sub finem troubled For thus they affirmed in that famous disputation had at Paris Anno 1566. 5. Fiftly there wanteth that fulnesse sufficiency because no priuat man can define all poynts of fayth seeing that many were defined before he was borne against the ancient heretikes and there wil be many things defined in the Church after his death assoone as there shall arise any new heresies 6. Sixtly there wanteth necessity For before there was any priuate man which now liueth there was true fayth and the same fayth will continue after he is dead 7. Seauenthly there wanteth the seauenth property of the rule of faith seing that by this priuate spirit a Christian cannot be distinguished from an Infidell But in truth all heretikes do bragge and boast that they haue this priuate spirit wheras notwithstanding one condemneth or rather damneth another 8. Eightly there wanteth the eight property For no point of faith can be certainly deduced out of this priuate spirit only seeing that it is oftentimes vncertayne and deceitfull 9. Ninthly there wanteth the ninth property For it is a ridiculous thing for one to endeauour to conuert an infidell to the fayth by bragging only that he hath this priuate spirit the which none can eyther see or vnderstand 10. Tenthly there wanteth the tenth and last property because there is no mention made of this priuat and particuler spirit in the Apostles Creed 11. And the true spirit of faith which is in euery faithfull soule wherof the Apostle speaketh when he saith that we haue the spirit of sayth is not the 2. Cor. 4. v. 13. ground or reason of fayth we heere speak of but it is the helpe of God or the supernaturall gift of fayth whereby our vnderstāding is helped to belieue and it is in regard of our vnderstanding as it were the efficiēt cause of the acts of faith But we speake in this place of the formall cause or reason of fayth as it appertaineth to the obiect of Faith which is the word of God and by which we know what is the true reuealed word of God and what is not For albeit the holy Ghost and the gift of faith moue vs to belieue yet they do not rashly moue vs without any reason or ground Eccles 19. v. 4. For he as the wise man sayth who belieueth quickely is light of hart but with a solid and sure ground according to those words of 1. Ioan. 4. v. 1. S. Iohn do not dearely beloued belieue euery spirit but proue the spirits whether they be of God But this proofe and triall necessarily requireth some good reason and sure ground whereof we will speake in the next Chapter 12. Lastly it is to be considered that we do heere dis●ute of the Catholik faith as it is necessary to al to attaine their eternall saluation not of the speciall faith of one or other the which we know very well may arise or proceede from some particuler or extraordinary reuelation of God but this is not the Catholike faith not an ordinary but an extraordinary fayth not to be admitted generally of all till it be approued and receyued by the Church as presently we will declare more at large CHAP. V. That the Catholike Church is the ground or rule of our Faith THAT the Catholike and visible Church is the most solide and true ground of our faith is manifestly proued by the former properties of the Ground of faith For all those ten properties do very well agree to the Church and to nothing els besides The Church hath the first property to wit a continuall and neuer-interrupted Sup● cap. 3. huius Controu duration For the Church hath alwaies continued as we haue already proued euen by the testimony of our Aduersaries 2. The Church also hath the second property that is to say a most certaine Supr cap. 7. huius Controu and vndoubted truth because she can neuer erre in faith as we haue proued before 3. She hath also the third property that is to say the infallible certainty on our partes because in the doctrine of the Church we may haue the greatest certainty perspicuity and euidency that possibly we can
that name to the Morauians at their first Conuersion to the faith of Christ but this was 880. yeares after Christ and this custome was of no long continuance amongst them as appeareth Baron Tom. 10. an 880. n. 19. Tom. 11. an 1080. n. 1. by that which Pope Gregory the s●auenth writeth to the Duke of Bohemia is to be seene in Caesar Baronius 6. The third assertion To translate the Scripture into the vulgar tongue is neyther in it selfe vnlawfull nor forbidden by any Ecclesiasticall law so it be truly translated Nay such a translation serueth Preachers to great vse who are to cite and expound the Scriptures to the people in the vulgar tongue Hereticall translations are indeed forbidden especially of the new Testament because in them many places of holy Scripture are by false translating corrupted 7. The fourth assertion It is not a thing profitable to all to read the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue yea to many it is rather pernicious for we are taught by ● Pet. vlt. v. 26. the Apostle S. Peter that in the Scriptures are many thinges hard to be vnderstood which vnlearned and vnstayed persōs depraue to their owne destruction Many also there are vncapable of meate and solid sustenance who are therefore to be ● Cor. 3. v. 2. Heb. ● v. 12. fed with milke as the Apostle speaketh and for such it is more wholesome to be fed by the sermons and instructions of their Pastors then to feede themselues with reading the Bible It was therefore great prudence of the Church to forbid that the Bible though translated and set forth by Catholikes should be read of Index li. ●roh●● Reg. 4. all indifferently and without the approbation and leaue of the Bishop Pastor or Ghostly Father 8. Our Aduersaries obiect certayne places of S. Chrysostome and S. Hierome in which they exhort to the reading of the Scripture but they should haue obserued that those Fathers speake of reading the Scripture in the Greek tongue then extant or in the Latin according to the old edition which was neuer forbidden to any by the Church whereas our Controuersy is about the translations of the holy Scripture out of the Hebrew Greek and Latin into the vulgar tongue which are all for the most part corrupted 9. And it is worthy the noting that our Aduersaries spend their tyme in vayne in gathering togeather arguments by which to perswade men that it is necessary for them to read the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue to the end they may learne out of them what they must necessarily know if they wil be saued for how truly or plainly soeuer they be translated no man shall euer receyue any fruite by them vnlesse he first belieue aright and be guided by the holy Ghost to whome it appertayneth to guide vs into the right Psal 142. v. 8. 1● land to make knowne vnto vs the way in which we are to walke to teach vs the will of God which we are to fulfill VVhich is manifestly to be seene in the Iewes who vnderstād the Hebrew text much better then Christians in which there is so ample and cleare mention of Christ and yet for all that they do not belieue in Christ Our Aduersaries therefore haue little reason to keep such ado about the wordes of Scripture or the translation of them let them first imbrace the true Faith which is in the Church only let them seeke after the holy Ghost who is not to be found out of the Church let them seeke out the true sense of the Letter which the Church only conserueth vncorrupteed and it will easily be graunted vnto them to haue the Scriptures in what tongue soeuer they will so they be truly and vncorruptedly translated and that they vse them to their owne saluation and not to their destruction as many do wherof we haue for witnesse not only the Scripture but dayly experience And this shall suffice concerning the translatiō of the Scripture into the vulgar tōgue 10. For of the prayers in Latin eyther priuately made by the people or publikely offered by the Priest at masse and in the administratiō of the Sacramōts we wil treat hereafter in their proper places CHAP. XIII That our Aduersaries vse many sleightes in corrupting the Word of God OVR Aduersaries often require vs to proue all that which we say out of the written Word of God but when we cite the same in expresse tearmes they haue many wayes by which they depraue it Wherfore before I make an end of this Controuersy concerning the written Word it shall not be from the purpose briefly to detect such their corruptions partly to the end that no man be deceaued by them and partly that euery man may vnderstand nothing to be so plainely and clearely set downe in the written VVord which by the Commentaries of crafty and subtile wittes may not be weakned and made of little force if no regard be had to the authority and iudgment of the Church And that no man may thinke that I herin calumniate them or deale lesse sincerely with them I will set downe out of their owne writings some one or two exāpls of each manner of corrupting wherof many will occure in ech Controuersy 2. The first manner of shifting of places alleadged out of the written Word is to say that the originall text is corrupted and what is alleadged is crept out of the margent into the text whereof see many examples in the 12. and 18. Chapter of the Latin Edition of this Cōttouersy 3. Their second shift is to reiect the vulgar translation and insteed thereof to cite some new and corrupt translation of their owne It is euident inough that Luther in his first version of the new Testament into the German tongue set forth in the yeare 1522. hath more then a thousād e●rors as many haue obserued amōgst Ioannes Cocl eus de actis Luther an 1522. which neyther the last nor the least is his presuming to add to the text of S. Paul the 3. Chapter and 28. verse the particle alone thereby the stronglier to establish his doctrine that Fayth alone iustifieth for this place of the Apostle VVe thinke a man i● Rom. 3. v. 28. iustifyed by fayth he trāslateth by sayth alone when a certaine friend of his to whome the same was obiected by a Catholike asked the cause why he so translated it he no lesse ridiculously then proudly answereth in a certayne little booke set forth by him in the yeare 1530. vnder this title A certaine information or answere made to two questions proposed by a certayne good friend concerning the translation of Scripture and the inuocation of Saints In which he aduiseth his friend to answere the Catholikes obiection after this manner D. Martin Luther Luth. ●0 4. Germ. excuso VVittemb an 1551. fol. 475. will haue it so and sayth that a Papist and an Asse i● all one thing so I will so I command let my
consequently cōmend vnto vs Traditions and the vnwritten Word of God seing that therein consisteth the principal part of holy Scripture to wit the true sense of the wordes CHAP. XI Wherein is declared how we may know the Apostolicall Traditions AMONG the other argumentes of our Aduersaries this is one that we cannot know certainly which are the Traditions of the Apostles seing that many Heretikes in times past pretended also that their heresyes were agreing to Apostolicall Traditions Moreouer they obiect that Traditions may easily be corrupted and changed for this cause Scripture was ordayned that the doctrine deliuered by word of mouth might continue the longer without any falsification or corruption But we answere to this their reason that the auncient Heretikes also by supposed and false Scriptures which they attributed falsely to the Apostles did confirme and proue their heresies Aug. de ciu Dei l. 15 23. subfinem Many thinges saith S. Augustine were alleadged by heretikes as though they were the sayings of the Prophets and Apostles But yet for all that they were not iudged to be the most certaine and Canonicall Scriptures 2. But the Traditions of the Apostles may so certainly and easily be known from supposed and false Traditions as the Canonical Scriptures may be knowne from the Apocriphall for they are both knowne by the same meanes and authority that is to say by the authority doctrine and testimony of the Catholike Church which neyther can deceiue any nor be decevued her selfe 3. And albeit speaking of humane matters the Scripture is more certaine thē Tradition alone yet it happeneth otherwise in matters concerning God because in these there is the authority of God and the continuall assistance of the Holy Ghost hath place which doth not suffer the Church to erre and hence it is that the Tradition only of the Church which is not so much written in paper as printed 1. ad Cor. 5. v. 3. 4. in the hartes of Christians is a most certayne and faithfull keeper of all the pointes of our diuine faith 4. Moreouer if euen Christ himself had with his owne hand writtē in brasse all the pointes of our faith they should notwithstanding not haue had so great certainty as now Ecclesiasticall Traditions haue vnlesse the same keeper of the diuine doctrine had byn also present For that which is imprinted in brasse may be rased and blotted out and the brasse it selfe may be consumed by fyre But those thinges which are imprinted in the hartes of Christians by the holy Ghost can neuer perish or be any way changed 5. And what we haue said of knowing the Apostolicall Traditions is to be vnderstood whether the Church assembled in a generall Councel declared it so or it became knowne and manifest by the continuall and generall custome of the whole Church Also whether the question be of Tradition belonging to faith or only belonging to rites and Ceremonyes For of the Tradition belonging to faith that is to say of not baptizing againe those which are baptized once before by heretikes are these wordes of S. Augu●tine Albeit indeed of this thing saith he S. Aug. Tom. 7. contra Cres●on Gram. l. 1. cap. penu t. t●ere can no example be alleadged out of Canonicall Scriptures yet notwithstanding we hould the truth of the same holy Scriptures in t●●s matter when we do that which generally the whole Catholik Church holdeth the which euen the authority of the Scriptures themselues commend vnto vs so as because the holy Scripture cannot erre whosoeuer seareth to be deceaued by the difficulty or obscurity of this question let him go to the same Church for counsell the which the holy Scripture v●ry clearely sheweth and S. Aug. Tom. 7de bapt cōt Donat. l. 4. cap. 14. demonstrateth vnto vs. Hitherto S. Augustine And disputing in another place against the Donatists concerning the baptisme of Infants That saith he which the whole Catholike Church holdeth nor was ordayned by generall Councells but yet alwaies kept and obserued by all is most truly to be belieued to haue byn deliuered vnto vs by Apostolicall authority S. Aug. Tom. 2. Epist 118. ad●anuar c. 5. Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 4. sect vlt. sub fi l. 3. c. ● sect 10. in medio 6. But of the Ecclesiasticall rites and Ceremonies the same S. Augustine speaketh in this māner Yf the Catholike Church through the whole world hold and practise any thing it is a signe of great madnesse to dispute whether it is to be done so or noe By which words of S. Augustine it may easily be vnderstood what was the opinion vniforme doctrine of the whole auncient Church concerning this point For our Aduersaries themselues do say that S. Augustine was a most faithfull witnesse of antiquity Vnto whome I referre the Readers if they desire to know certainly any more of the sense of Antiquity The end of the first Controuersy THE SECOND CONTROVERSY OF THE PROPERTIES OF OF THE TRVE CHVRCH The first Part of the second Controuersy CHAP. I. Of the Properties and Offices of the true Church of Christ in generall IN the disputation of the Church that first of all is to ●e obserued that whereas our Aduersaries haue ●rought in and do hold many erroneous opinions they do all proceed out of ignorance of the true definition and Nature of the Church It is a true saying of the Apostle that they which 1. Tim. v. 6. 7. erre and w●nder from the true faith are conuerted into vaine talke desirous to be Doctours of the Law not vnderstanding neyther what things they speake nor of what they affirme For if our Aduersaries did well vnderstand or could conceyue what is imported by the Name Nature of the Church they would neuer affirme so many absurdityes of the Church of Christ We will therfore first of all declare and explicate what is to be vnderstood properly by the name ●of the Church 2. But this best of all is declared by the Properties of the Church of Christ and by her Offices co●mended vnto vs in the holy Scripture it selfe and those we call Properties which do agree with the Church as she hath relation vnto Christ her chiefe head and Pastour But those we call her Offices which the Church exerciseth towards her Children There are indeed many properties of the Church assigned by holy Scripture but it shall suffice vs to alledge and note these fiue only 3. The first is that the Church is the spouse of Christ I will betroth thee vnto me Osee 2. 19. 20. for euer saith the Prophet Osee and againe I will betroth thee vnto me in saith And Isaias The bridegrome will reioyce in his bride and thy Isa 6● v. 5. God she speaketh vnto the Church shall reioyce in thee Christ also by the Prophet Salomon sayth Come o my spouse from Libanus Cant. 4. v. 8. In the new Testament also the Church is called the spouse of Christ He
visible and inuisible and they say that the inuisible Church cannot erre but Supr hac ipsa cont cap. 4. the visible may erre But we haue now already declared that the true Church of Christ must needes be visible Wherfore this distinction is now sufficiently refuted And truly it importeth but a little whether that their inuisible Church can erre or not erre seing that it cannot be seene or knowne of any and consequently cannot be profitable vnto any 16. There are also some of the later Sectaries who distinguish and deuide the Church into the Church of the Saints which Iunius in Bellarm. Contr. 1. l. 4. c. 10. nota 8. are in Heauen and into that which remayneth fighting heere vpon earth And they say that the Church triumphāt of Saints cannot erre in faith or in the doctrine of faith but the Church militant may erre But this is a ridiculous distinction First Hebr. 21. v. 1. because the Saints hauen ot fayth but a cleare vision of God for as the Apostle witnesseth Fayth concerneth things which doe not appeare wherefore if at any tyme faith perished vpon earth without al doubt it could not be found in heauen neyther must we exprect the doctrine of fayth from heauen as the Anabaptists doe who seeke for reuelations from heauen but we must looke to receiue it from the Supr c. 1. huius controuersiae Church militant vpon earth Moreouer the properties and offices of the Church of Christ before alledged out of holy Scripture do not agree as is manifest to the Church triumphant of Saints but to the Church militāt vpon earth For neither is that Church of the Saints betrothed vnto Christ by fayth neyther are the Saynts those who preach vnto vs the word of God who administer the Sacramēts vnto vs who execute the other offices of the Church but men liuing vpō earth wherfore they runne in vaine to this heauenly Church wherof we do not here dispute 17. Moreouer that is also a very weake reason wherby they thinke that Iunius ibid. nota 8. they conuince that the Church militant vpon earth may erre This Church sayth he militant vpon earth is imperfect and therfore she may erre euen in explicating the doctrine of sayth for otherwise a perfect effect might proceed 1. Cor. 13● per totū caput from an imperfect cause So ●e As though forsooth there could be no other imperfection in the Church besids infidelity or error in explicating the doctrine of fayth or as though the whole perfection of the Church consisted in fayth only and in the doctrine thereof and not also in charity and other gifte● of God as the Apostle declareth at large Or lastly as though this perfection of the Church which consisteth in a right fayth and a good explication of the doctrine thereof could proceede from the militant Church only and not rather from a most perfect cause to wit from the holy Ghost who continually ad Rom. 8. v. 26. gouerneth the Church and as the Apostle sayth helpeth her infirmity and imperfection 18. Lastly when our Aduersaries Ita Philip Mor. Tract de Eccles cap. 9. Genes 3. v. 6. can by no places of Scripture nor other reasons proue that the Church hath erred they g●e about to persuade i● by many examples And heere they be●in a discourse frō our first Father Adam till these our da●es For first they say that Adam lost his fayth and so lykewise his wy●e Eue when they both eate of the for●idd●n fruit consequently the wholy Church then erred in fayth Then they runne through all the old Testament till Christs tyme and heap togeather many places which say that those who liued in the tyme of the Naturall Moysaicall Laws forsooke God Lastly out of some Historiographers who haue writtē since Christs tyme they scrape togeather all such testimonies as s●eme to serue to this purpose in any sort 19. But they labour in vayne For if these kinds of argumēts were good they would also proue that the Church it selfe also wholy perished and was not to be found in any place as in tymes past the Donatists contended the which euen our Aduersaries themselues acknowledge to by very absurd and against the holy Scriptures as hath beene declared before For if all haue lost their fayth then indeed the true Church could no longer be which without fayth cannot consist and thus the whole Church had perished 20. But that which they affirme of Adā and ●ue to wit that they lost their fayth by sinning is of no moment at all For to omit that they do not so much proue by that argumēt that they lost their fayth then that after their sinne there remayned neyther any fayth nor Church in the world it is truly manifest inough that this belongeth nothing to this disputation we now handle For neyther do we heere dispute of the Church of Angells nor of that which was in Paradise before the fall of our first parēts but of that only Gen. 3 v. 15. which ensued that promise made vnto all mankind after the sinne of Adam wherein God foretould that there should be perpetuall enmity betwixt the woman and the serpent that is to say betwixt the Church of Christ and Satan And wherein also God foretould that the Church should alwayes haue the victory Supra cōtrou 1. cap 16. 17. 18. ouer Satan as we haue declared more at large before Wherfore our Aduersaries must needes shew this promise to be frustrate if they desire to conclude any thing against vs. 21. But those examples which they Supra cap. 5. in solut 2. argumenti alledge our of the old Testament are the very arguments of the Donatists and other auncient Heretikes who by them went about to proue that the true Church was wholy decayed and perished wherunto we haue also sufficiently answered out of S. Augustine 22. And lastly those thinges which they haue takē out of those Authors who wrote after Christs tyme are eyther corrupted by our Aduersaries or taken out of Apocriphall Authors and such as are Baron in 12. Tom. Annal. not worthy of credit as the worthy Cardinall Baronius declareth manifestly in euery age in his Ecclesiasticall histories and the same hath Bellarmine done before Bellarm. l. 3. de Eccles militante him more briefly vnto whome we refer the Reader because they do not appertaine to this present question but rather vnto that which is of the continuall duration of the Church the which now almost euery one doth acknowledge and Supr c. 3. 4. buius Controu which we haue sufficiently declared before wherefore these arguments are of so small worth that they need no longer a confutation CHAP. VIII That there is no lawfull Calling of Preachers or Pastours of the Church but by the visible Church ONE of the Offices of the true Church is to appoint lawfull preachers of the Ghospell and true administers of
diuers mysteries which lye hidden in the Hebrew text and cannot sufficiently be explicated in Latin wordes may be the better vnderstood And lastly that we may the more fully attayne vnto the force and Emphasis of that holy tongue 3. But as for the Hebrew text now extant we do not acknowledge it to be of so great either authority or perspicuity as our Aduersaries pretend and we further deny that the vulgar Editiō wherinsoeuer it differeth from it is to be corrected by it and that for two reasons The first is for that the Hebrew text though neuer so incorrupt further then it is approued by the authority of the Church is much more doubtfull and vncertayne then the Latin The other reason is for that the Hebrew text which is now in vse is in ma●y places corrupted and depraued in which the vulgar Edition is entire and vncorrupted Both these reasons sh●lbe confirmed in the ensuing Chapters which the learned Reader may see in the Latin edition from the seauenth Chapter to the 14. all which I haue omitted to put into English because I intend to help the lesse learned who are not so capable of that so profoūd and learned a discourse CHAP. VII Of our Aduersaries new Translation of the Bible THE Catholike Church of Christ not without good cause doth reiect and condemne our Aduersaries new Translations of the Bible and that for many reasons The first and most iust reason is because such their translations are replenished with errors which haue byn inuented eyther by Ie●●es or Heretikes wherof see many examples in the precdent Chapters of the Latin edition but we in this Chapter will set downe three other causes or origens from whence these errors spring wherby it shall further appeare that our Aduersaries can set out no Translation which shall not be sound full of many great errors 2. The first cause is for that our Aduersaries eyther contemne or make little account of the translations and interpretations of the Fathers and imploy all their labour in finding out all the versions and interpretations and expositions of the Iewes which they highly extoll commend so as in their Commentaries vpon the old Testament you shall see them cite Thargus Rabins and such other Thalmudicall fictions but especially Rabbi Dauid Kimhi whom sometimes they call learned sometymes the most learned among the Hebrewes But of the auncient Fathers no mention at all for if there be it is for the most part eyther to taxe or manifestly to oppugne or euen to corrupt their writings 3. Now what can be more vnreasonable or absurd then to begge the true sense of the Scripture of the Iewes who 2. Cor. 3. v. 14. 1. Thess c. 2. v. 15. 16. lacke faith and who haue a veyle ou●r their hartes when they read the old Testament with whome God is not pleased and who are Aduersaries to all men vpon whom the Anger of God is come to the end who peruert all the oracles of the Prophets that appertayne to Christ and lastly who are the most malicious enemies of Christians And on the other side to despise the excellent Doctors of Christs Church who euen in the iudgment of our Aduersaries were indued with the Rom. 8. v. 9 Eph 4. v. 14. true faith full of the holy Ghost ra●s●d by God and placed in the Church to the end we should not be carried about with euery wind of doctrine who haue d●fended the faith against all he●esies who haue sincerely instructed the faithfull people in the mysteries of the Christian faith who haue faithfully set downe to Posterity the sense and interpretation of the Scriptures which they rece●ued frō the Apostles 4. Moreouer wheras no man can 2. Cor. 12. v. ●● ●8 ● Pet. 1. v. 20. 21. rightly interprete the Scriptures who hath not rec●aued from God the gift of the interpretation which is not giuen but to the members of Christ and his Church only it is apparent ●nough how much more salfe it is to follow such holy Doctors then the impious Iewes who are wrapt in the snares of the Diuell and h●ld 2. Tim. ● v. v●t Mat. 15. v. 14. captiue at his will And seeing that saying o● Christ is most true if the blind lead the blind they hoth fall into the ditch it cannot be but our Aduersaries blind and destitute of the light of faith and led by the bli●d Iewes must needes fall downe headlong and breake their neckes 5. Heerehence it is that our Aduersaries do insert into the new Translations almost all the places of Scripture corrupted by the Iewes and that they deny togeather with the Iewes many oracles of the prophets to be vnderstood of Christ and many wayes wrest euen those oracles which they cānot deny to be vnderstood of Christ from that true sense in which they are cited in the new Testament by the Apostles Euangelists and Christ himselfe to prophane impious senses lately inuented by the Iewes out of their hatred to Christ 6. The second cause is that they desire nothing more then in their translations to depart from the vulgar edition the which seeing it is most sincere and correct they which almost in all thinges leane it must needes fall into many errors 7. The third cause is the malicious intention of our Aduersaries who set forth new Translations of the Scripture for no other end then by them to oppugne the Catholike doctrine and to establish and confirme their owne errors and heresies and therefore when any plain text occurreth which maketh manifestly against their erroneous doctrine they seeke to make obscure the true and proper sense by their peruerse translation but if they light vpon any place somewhat obscure which may seeme to sauour their doctrine they so depraue it by their new translation that the Scripture it selfe may seeme to confirme what they falsely teach and so by this meanes they must needes stuffe their translations with infinite corruptions For these three reasons therfore not without great reason Gretser tract de noua transtat in defen Bel. arm do we reiect our Aduersaries translations which so swarme with corruptions Many other reasons are both learnedly and largely set downe by Iames Gretser which we for breuity sake omit CHAP. VIII Of the Latin vulgar Edition OVR Aduersaries conuinced by the truth it selfe confesse sometymes that the vulgar Edition not only is to be preferred before all other latin Editions but euen before the Greeke text of the new Testament and the Hebrew text of the old for in many places reiecting them they follow our vulgar translation as may be seene in the Latin edition in the Chapters 8. 9. 10. 13. notwithstanding that in many other places they exceedingly inueigh against it and with great hostility oppugne it partily for that they see the same to contradict in many places their errors and partly also for that they labour by all meanes to peruert the text of the Scripture by their new
of the Church let vs not therefore sayth S. Ambrose walke by loue and affection vpon the earth and the Serpent cannot hurt vs. In the first combat is that the Church ouercometh by open warre and therefore it is expressed by crushing of the head In the later combat in which a part of the Church is ouercome the enemy proceedeth by guiles and deceites and therefore that combat is signifyed by crushing the heele for the Hebrew word signifying calcaneum doth signify also properly insidiari Oleast i● c. 3. Gen. ex insidij● aggredi as appeareth by many places of Scripture And out of ignorance heerof Caluin without cause reprehendeth the vulgar Interpreter for otherwise explicating this combat in the later part of the sētence then he had in the forme● for the Emphasis or force of the Hebrew word required that he should interprete the later part as he did by these wordes tu insidiab●ris calcan●●●ius which is as much to say as thou shalt crush her heele not by open warre but by taking her at vnawares See further of this matter in this Chapter in the Latin Edition the 8. ● And you shall see that our Aduersaries make a great adoe about a matter of small moment if the wordes be rightly vnderstood For whether we reade ipsa and so referre it to the Church or ipsum that it may be referred to the children of the Church the sēse is all one for it is all on to say the seed of the woman shall crush the he●● of the Serpent or the Children of the Church shall doe it And heerehence it is that the auncient Fathers whether they read ipse as S. Hierome and S. Chrysostome do or ipse Hier in tradit Hebr. Hom. 17. in Gen. Amb. de fug ● saec e. 7. Greg. in Iob. c. 38. as read S. Ambrose S. Augustine S. Gregory and other Latin Fathers all of them expound this place of the Church 9. Howsoeuer it be the reading of the vulgar Edition is to be preferred before the other for this victory is rather to be attributed to the Church as to the Mother of all the faithfull and to her who continueth for euer according to that promise of Christ the gates of hell shall not preuail against her then to her children or mēbers which are euery day changed for this promise is an explication of the promise made by God in Genesis for the head of the Serpent and the gates of hell signify Mat. 16. v. 18. one and the same thing And if the victory be attributed to the woman that is to the Church all thinges are better explicated for God first did foretell the emnity that was to be betweene the woman the Serpent and afterward he maketh mention of the seede of the woman and the Serpents seed so as the woman is opposed to the Serpent and the seede of the one to the seede of the other but the victory promsed is sayd to be gotten against the Serpent himselfe and not against the seed wherefore the same appertaineth rather to the woman her selfe then to her seede for the words following betweene thy seed and her seed do not properly signify any new combat but a continuance of that combat which was betweene the woman and the serpent and are put in by way of parēthesis for the combat of the Church and of her childrē is all one combat 10. But the chiefe cause that moued the Church to retayne at this tyme rather the word ipsa then ipsum or ipse was to controle the error of the Lutherans for if the reading had byn ipsum or ipse one might haue thought this promise to haue appertayned only to Christ as they though erroneously would haue it but by reading ipsa this promise must needes be vnderstood to haue byn made to the whole Church For such is the custome of the holy Church whether she interprete the Scripture or administer the Sacraments to do all as is most profitable and most for the edification of the faithfull Neyther is Christ hereby excluded but he is rather included in the name of the Church a● is also the holy Ghost for the true Church of Christ cannot consist or do any thing that is good without the help of her supreme head Christ and the assistance of his holy spirit That the reading according to the Hebrew text is ipsa or ipsissima and not ipsum or ipse is learnedly proued in the next Chapter of the Latin Edition of this Controuersy to which I referre the Reader and to the Chapters following in which other places of the vulgar Edition are defended CHAP. XI That the written Word is no fit Iudge of Controuersies concerning matters of Fayth OVR Aduersaries in the beginning did stifly mayntaine that the holy Scripture was to be the only iudge of all Controuersies which arise in matters of fayth but when they were told that to make the Scripture a iudge was as much as to say the Scripture did heare speake liue for all these appertayne to a iudge that nothing is more vnreasonable thē to assigne such a iudge of Controuersies as can neyther heare nor speak but is vtterly voyd of life changing their opinion they begin Iun. cōtra Bell. Cont. 1. l. 3. c. 3. nota 9. c. 9. nota E. 10. now to say that the Scripture is improperly called a iudge and that to speake properly the holy Ghost only is the iudge And thus hauing for many yeares togeather spoken vnproperly now at last they fly to the holy Ghost of whome there is no doubt but that he is the supreme Robert Ro●oc de vocat effic c. ●5● iudge of all 2. But they should haue added further that the holy Ghost at this tyme doth not immediatly propose any new reuelations to any particuler man concerning points of fayth but only proposeth verities already reuealed and that by the mouth of the Church as shal be shewed heereafter in the next Controuersy where we shall haue occasion to say more of this matter Whosoeuer therefore contemneth the iudgment of the Church in so doing he despiseth the iudgment of Christ and of the holy Ghost for Christ himselfe saith Luc. 10. v. 16. he that despyseth you despyseth me Neyther doth the holy Ghost speake by the Scripture but when it is rightly vnderstood which is neuer but when we imbrace the interpretation of the Catholike Church as we haue already shewed in the fourth Chapter CHAP. XII Whether the Scriptures be obscure or hard to be vnderstood THE Word of God is eyther writen or vnwritten and preached Now certaine it is that the Word preached is not obscure for it is not hidden from such as perish the question therefore is of the written Word ● Cor. 4. v. 3. Our Aduersaries in the beginning did teach that the whole Scripture was easy and no part therof hard to be vnderstod but after that not only many obscure places but euen
will stand for a reason for we will not be the papists schollers but their Iudges Luther will haue it so he saith that he is a Doctor aboue all the popes D●ctors So Luther concluding at last that the word alone shal remayne in his new Testament though it should make all his Aduersaries mad and he addeth further that he is only sory that he had not added two wordes more to the text and translated it after this manner we are iustifyed by only faith without any workes of any law 4. Zwinglius also who first in our age endeauored to perswade many that the body of Christ is not really contayned in the Sacrament of the Eucharist the better to establish this his error goeth about to Zuing. l. de vera falsa relig c. de Euchar. §. 202. in lib. excuso Tiguri 1555. proue that those words of Christ this is my b●dy are very well translated thus this signifieth my body with this his new translation he is so rauished as if he had receaued the same from heauen for these are his words So therefore hath Luke with whome we content our selues without citing any other Euangelist And hauing taken bread he gaue thankes brake it and gaue it them saying This signifyeth my body which is giuen for you do this in remembrance of me Thou seest O faithfull soule but yet wrapped in absurd opinions how all thinges heere agree and nothing is violently eyther taken away or added so as thou hast cause to wonder that thou hast not byn alwayes of this opinion and much more that any dare so boldly teare and rent the body of this speach so well ioyned together So Zwinglius in the praise of his new translation wherein he arrogates more authority to himselfe thē is due so as that of Cicero in his booke de diuinatione may well be applyed to him I neuer saw any man arrogate greater authority to himselfe and in the end say iust nothing 5. Moreouer concerning Caluins and Bezas errors in translating or rather peruerting the holy Scriptures whole books Calu l. 2. instit c. 16. in c. 26. Matt. v. 39. inc 27. ●●a●th v. 46. Item in Catech. Dom. 10. Bez. in c. 5. ad Heb. v. 7. trāct Theol. pag. 657. iuxta edit Geneu 1582. are extant as also of the corruptions of the Geneua Bibles which are euery yeare increased but this shall much more commodiously be declared heerafter in the particuler Cōtrouersies We will only heere set downe one example of a corruption to be found in Caluins Bezas and all the Geneua Bibles And this coruption is forged of purpose by them to confirme a new and notable blasphemy against Christ and himselfe by some apparent testimony of Scripture for they teach in many places that Christ when he praied in the Garden was seized with an extreme feare least God being angry with him for our sinnes for which he had taken vpon him to satisfy should inflict vpon him eternall damnation neither did Christ feare without cause for they say he suffered vpon the Crosse the paynes of a damned person the torments of hell for these are the impio●s words of Caluin Christ suffered in his soule the torments of a forlorne and damned man and Beza saith at what tyme Christ hange vpon the Crosse he was in the middest euen of the torments of hell which is as much as to say that God himselfe was not only afraid of the torments of hell but that he suffered and endured them for it is euident that Christ was true God But against these absurd Paradoxes we are to dispute heerafter It shall suffice heere to shew that they haue depraued the holy Scripture to fortify this theyr impious assertion for wheras it is written in the fifth to the Hebrewes Heb. 5. v. 7. and 7. v. that Christ was heard of God for his reuerence Caluin first and after Beza and all the Geneua Bybles make the text to say Christ was heard by reason of his feare or because he was afraid but that in Bez. annot anni 1598. the last Edition Beza hath added more words to the text making it sound thus His prayer being heard he was deliuered fr●̄ this feare Moreouer Caluin in his commentaries and Beza in his annotations seeke to proue out of this text that Christ feared eternall damnation that he was deliuered out of this feare by his prayers which he offered with teares true it is that in the French Bibles lately printed at Geneua in the yeare 1605. they haue put in the margent vel pro sua reuerentia where inforced by truth they manifestly contradict Caluin and Beza who plainly deny that this place is so to be trāslated yet least their inconstancy should be noted they leaue the former words in the text ayant estè exaucé de ce qu' il craignoit that is in latin exauditus est ex ●o vel in eo quod timuit 6. But all others as well Catholikes as their Aduersaires who haue written before Caluin translate pro sua reuerentia vel pro pietate sua as Erasmus Bucer the Tigurines in their Bibles of the yeare 1542. Nay Sebastian Castalio for this cause sharply reprehendeth Castal in defen suae translat Bibl. in fine Castalio for this cause sharply reprehendeth Beza who glorieth that Caluin was the first that found out this new explication in a note of his vpon this 7. v. See his editions the yeare 1560. 1565. 7. The third shift is their false exposition of the text though neuer so truly translated for by diuers commentaries and little notes in the margent they goe about to perswade their Readers the clean contrary to that which is expressely in the text See examples hereof in this Chapter in the latin edition CHAP. XV. The fourth fifth and sixt shift that our Aduersaries vse in deprauing the Word of God THE fourth shift of our Aduersaries is to fly to figuratiue and metaphoricall speaches for it is most true that was Aug. l. 3 dedoct Christ cap. 10. wittily obserued by S. Augustine If sayth he the mind be preoccupated with any erroneous opinion whatsoeuer the Scripture saith to the contrary men take to be a figuratiue speach And surely there is no kind of figuratiue speaking to which our aduersaries at one tyme or another haue not recourse but there are three figures of which our Aduersaries doe oftenest serue themselues in deprauing the holy Scriptures which Matt. ●● v. 26. Cal● l. 4. Instit c. 17. sect 21. are these Metonymia Hyperbole and Ironia Metonymia is a figure very familiar with Caluin for by it he peruerteth many places of Scripture yea euen those plaine words of Christ this is my body for hauing disputed long about the sense of those words at last he concludeth thus I omit sayth he Allegories and Parables least any man should thinke that I seeke euasions and to go from the matter in
wrong and damnify the chiefe parts of the Ghospel yea they euen as it were cōtract or bring the whole preaching of the Ghospell to the bare name thereof 6. Many of our Aduersaries who deale more sincerely with vs conuinced by these arguments do acknowledge that these grounds or principles of our faith are only to be had by Traditions without any written word of God as Ioannes Brentius and Martin Kemnitius who adde also that those Traditions which doe not repugne to the written word of God are to be admitted and receiued and that those only are to be reiected which are opposit vnto the holy Scriptures 7. But whatsoeuer our Aduersaries do answere it is altogeather necessary that they confesse these three principles of our fayth do belong indeed to the very word of God it selfe They must also needs confesse these are not extant in plaine and expresse tearmes in any booke either of the old or new Testament out of which necessarily followeth that the whole intire word of God is not conteyned expresly in the holy Scripture CHAP. III. Wherein it is proued out of other particuler poynts of fayth that there are Traditions THE second argument whereby we proue Apostolicall Traditions is taken out of other particuler poynts of fayth the which almost all our Aduersaries belieue with vs albeit they be no where expressely conteyned in the Scriptures There are many poyntes o● sayth of this sort wherof for example sake we will alledge some few But to the end we may vse our accustomed breuity we will rehearse only those which do also manifestly shew out of this opinion of our Aduersaries that nothing appertayneth to the doctrine of fayth which is not expresly conteyned in holy Scripture there are many greeuous errours and heresies in this our age arisen 2. The first point is that in God there are three Persons really distinct among themselues and one only substance for this is now here extant in holy Scripture yea in it nothing is to be found expresly written eyther of the substance or of the person in that signification wherein these words are vsed when we speake of the Blessed Trinity 3. This indeed the Caluinists to their great losse and domage haue sufficiently learned by experience fourty yeares agoe in Transiluania For when one Iohn Huniades whom they called Iohn the secōd King of Hūg●ry was then Gouernour in Trā●luania a Coūtry or Prouince of Hungary had ordained a publike disputatiō betwixt the Cal●inists and the Anti-trinitarians that is to say those who oppugned the mystery of the Blessed Trinity and that according to the cōmon doctrine on both syds they should dispute only out of the holy Scriptures the Caluinists could neuer proue out of the Scriptures alone that there is eyther a substance or person in God neyther could they by the Scriptures only declare what is a person or what is a substance 4. Wherefore at the last this was the end of the disputatiō that almost all those which were present iudged that the Antitrinitarians got the victory and that the Caluinists were shamefully ouercome wherupon it came to passe that the sayd Prince of Transiluania of a Caluinist became an Anti-trinitarian yea one of their chief friends in so much that he tooke some publike Churches from the Caluinists and gaue them to the Anti-trinitarians and he continued miserably in that wicked heresy euen till death which happened in the yeare 1571. the 14. of March 5. All which things are aboundātly declared by one Ioannes Sommerus Pirnensis in the funerall Oration which he made at his death where in among other things he affirmeth that the chiefe cause why this Prince left the Caluinists and became an Antitrinitariā was this because forsooth in the Scriptures he could fynd nothing of the Blessed Trinity and for that the Caluinists were forced to confesse that the words wherby the mystery of the Blessed Trinity is explicated are not extāt in the holy Scripture but because this funerall Oration is scarce any where to be found least some should thinke that I falsely coyned these things my selfe I will heare set downe his owne words For after he had most blaspemously spoken as the Anti-trinitarians are wont to doe against the Blessed Trinity the which he calleth heere and there the Roman Idolatry these things he addeth of his Prince 6. This funeral Orat of Ioan Sommer was printedat Claudiopolian Domini 1571. But this our Prince sayth he being instructed by God easily vnderstood what was the truth and with earnest desire imbraced it and with no lesse pleasure of mind defended it for being accustomed euen from his childhood to read the holy Scriptures he made them very familiar vnto him presently he found that such things which were contrary to the phrase of Christ and his Apostles were in the ensuing ages by a wicked curiosity brought into the Church and that they are not at all to be numbred amongst those things which adde any firmity or strength to the Author of our saluation especially seing that the Aduersaries themselues acknowledge that the words wherby these subtilties of this new opinion are explicated if not rather as I may well say more obscured are not to be found in the writings of the Apostles 7. And a little after Wherfore little regarding eyther the multitude of wranglers He meaneth Seruetus who was bu●ned at Geneua an 1553 as Beza writeth in vita Caluini or the torments and paines which others had endured who first endeauoured to breake this yce he manifestly condemned the falsity of the Trinity freely professing his owne opinion therein And after a few words For what hath he not done what assemblies and disputations hath he not ordayned caused to be had about this matter both in Hungary and in Transiluania that the sense or meaning of the Scripture might the better be explicated by conferring those thinges togeather which were then said or spoken of where he would not only be present himselfe but also taking the place or office of the Iudge and vmpyre in the said disputations he very wisely and grauely confuted the great absurdities of that superstition warning often the Aduersaries that reiecting the fancies or fond expositions of men they should lesse impudently and more sincerly carry themselues in the explication of the heauenly doctrine Thus farre S●●●merus of the great care diligence of the Prince of Transiluania in defending the heresy of the Anti trinitarians 8. Moreouer it is also manifest that out of this opinion of our Aduersaries to Seruetus l. 1. de erroribus Trinitat fol. 32. pag. 1. Edit an 1531. wit that we must not belieue any thing which is not expressed in Scriptures this wicked heresy of the Anti trinitariās in these our dayes had her beginning For that Michael Seruetus who in our age was the first of them that by printed bookes presumed to oppugne the mystery of the Blessed Trinity doth plainely testify writing in
VI. Wherin euen by the doctrine of our Aduersaries it is proued that there are Traditions THE fourth argument wherby we proue Traditions is taken out of the doctrine of our Aduersaries For all those things which our Aduersaries do affirme to be points of fayth against the Catholike doctrine they teach and belieue them without any expresse Scripture For it cannot be found expressely in Scripture that fayth only iustifyeth that there are only two Sacraments of the new law that none should pray for the de●d c. for all these things and many others which they teach against vs they gather only out of Scriptures and that by some false and very weake consequence but it is no where expressely written that fayth only iustifieth that there are only two Sacraments that we must not pray to Saynts or for the dead c. 2. Moreouer there can no Catholike be found who doth not receaue and assuredly belieue the whole authenticall text of the holy Scripture why do they therfore condemne vs when they affirme that nothing is to be belieued besi●● the text of Scripture wheras the whole Controuersy betwixt them and vs is of the vnwritten points of fayth which we affirme they deny 3. Our Aduersaries being conuinced by this argument do now at the last confesse that not only that is to be admitted and belieued as the pure word of God Beza de n●●i● Ec. pag. 137. volū 2. Theol. Tract ●dit an 1581. which is expresly written in holy Scripture but all that also which by a necessary consequence may be gathered out of it 4. But when they answere thus they are forced to depart and forsake that their first principle whe● by they affirm●d that all the poynts of fayth are expresly conteyned in Scriptures and that they were set downe in writing by the Apostles 5. Furthermore not per●auing so much they ioyne in opinion with vs so that they must needes indeed confesse that the Traditions of the Church are altogeather necessary For such things as are gathered out of Scriptures do rather belong to Traditions then to expresse Scripture For that which only consequently by reasoning discoursing is gathered out of Scripture albeit it very well and necessarily may be deduced from thence is not expressely in Scripture but only obs●urly secretly or vertually is conteined therin For no man can truly say that the conclusion which is only inferred out of the premisses is expresly conteined in the same premisses for otherwise our discourse and arguing were vayne and to no purpose But therfore do we reason and discourse to the end that that which lieth hidden vertually in the premisses may be expresly manifested in the conclusion 6. And that we may alleadge an example out of the Scriptures themselues when God the Father sayd this is my welbeloued Matt. 17. v. 5. Sonne heare him Out of these wordes we may very well gather and by a necessary consequence that the whole doctrine of Christ our Lord is to be heard and receiued of all yet none will say that al the doctrine of Christ is conteyned expresly in these few wordes And truely the holy Scripture is so fertill plentifull that many points of faith do as yet lye hidden and vnknowne therin which hitherto haue neuer byn gathered togeather by any but these thinges are conteyned vertually and not expressely in it 7. Moreouer after so many debates and contentions after so many bookes set forth against vs after so many slaunders wherby our Aduersaries charge vs as though we taught that the Scriptures are imperfect they at the last returne to our opinion For we do not deny yea we willingly acknowledge that all those things which rightly and without errour are deduced or gathered out of the expresse wordes of the holy Scriptures do belong vnto the written word of God and are contayned in holy writ obscurely not expressely vertually and not plainly For in that God doth reueale any thing in expresse wordes consequently and vertually he reuealeth all things which necessarily and without any errour may be deduced from thence 8. We graunt also that the Scripture consequently mediatly vertually as in a generall principle conteyneth all things necessary to saluatiō yea in that one only article of the Creed I belieue the holy Catholike Church in those few words also of Christ Luc. 19. v. 16. he who heareth you heareth me if the collection be rightly framed as we haue also said before in the 25 Chapter But when these thinges are gathered togeather which are not expressely in Scripture there is scarse any of them which is not vncertayne doubtful without the authority and Traditions of the Church Wherefore these collections do manifestly conuince the necessity and authority of Traditions 9. But that these collections may be vncert●yne and deceytfull both experiēce reasō teacheth vs experiēce because almost all Heresies haue had their beg●nning not from the Scripture alone in it selfe but from these collections badly framed and made For there is not almost any one heresy which is only grounded on the expresse wordes of Scripture without some other collection seing that almost all Heretikes both in tymes past as now al●o go about to proue and gather their heresies from the Scripture by certayne deceytfull sophistical arguments Arius for example out of those wordes of Christ the Father is greater then I did gather Ioan. 14. v. 28. but badly that Christ euen according to his diuine Nature was inferiour to his Father The new Arians out of those words of the ten cōmaūdemēts thou shalt not haue strāge Gods before me do gather but foolishly that Exod. 20. v. 3. the Sōne is not God the holy Ghost is not God So the Diuell himself against Christ Matt. 4. v. 6. vsed this reason It is written God hath giuen his Angells charg● of thee therfore cast thy selfe downe headlong Lastly all the arguments indeed which our Aduersaries at this tyme alledge against vs out of Scriptures and all the errours which they haue inuēted do take their beginning and strength from their new illations and reasons and not out of the bare and playne words of Scripture as will manifestly appeare in euery one of these Controuersies 10. The reason also is manifest why these their collections and reasons are vncertaine and doubtfull For in nothing can one more easily or more often erre then in these illations The which may proceed of many causes eyther because the illation it selfe is bad and Sophisticall or because the place of Scripture from whence it is gathered is falsified by some false exposition therof or because the proposition which is assumed and adioyned to the wordes of Scripture is false and ambiguous or because one or more wordes in that collection are vsed doubtfully that is to say in one sense in the premises and in another in the conclusion or lastly because there hapneth some errour to be in the collection which maketh
it weake Sophisticall and erroneous 11. Besides that there are so many and so contrary illations of diuers men that the authority of the Church is altogeather necessary in maters of faith that there may arise a certayne and an vndoubted faith of these matters of which sort Traditions are that is to say the doctrine of the whole Church 12. But when one belieueth such an illation with a diuine or Catholike faith he must needes know two thinges the one is that the expresse place of Scripture from whence this conclusion is deduced must certainly be well vnderstood by him which disputeth the other is that he who maketh such a deduction and collection can neyther deceiue others nor be deceyued himselfe But none can know eyther of these without the Traditions of the Church seeing that otherwise there is none which may not be deceiued sometimes All collections therefore which produce or breed fayth in vs do most clearly conuince and shew the authority and necessity of Traditions CHAP. VII Wherein it is proued that there are Traditions by the absurdities which otherwise would follow THE fifth argument wherby we proue that many things are to be belieued which are not expressed in holy Scriptures is taken out of the absurdities which do ensue of the contrary doctrine For hauing once admitted that nothing is to be belieued which is not expressed in Scripture all old heresies are renewed and a great vncertainty and confusion of all things is brought into the Church of God yea euen the way to Atheisme is layd open because hauing once reiected despised the Traditions of the Church all the poynts of fayth from the Apostles tyme till now explicated and proued by the auncient Fathers against heretiks all those things also which were decreed and determined by all the generall Counc●lls in times past against the said heretiks loose their chief●st strength and authority the which notwithstanding our Aduersaries do acknowledge themselues to receiue and belieue 2. Neyther do we know by an assured Catholike faith whether there were euer any Fathers or Councells but by the Traditions of the Church But neyther do we know any other way but by fayth whether since the Apostles tyme till now there were any Catholikes or no● because of those things which were done since the tyme and death of the Apostles there is nothing extant in holy Scripture seeing that all the bookes thereof were written before the death of the Apostles But such things as haue b●n done since till now cannot otherwyse be knowne but by the Tradition of the Church 3. Neyther is it sufficient to say that we know these things by the Ecclesiasticall histories For that fayth which proceedeth of histories without the authority or Traditions of the Catholike Church is but an humane fayth which oftentimes deceaueth others and may be deceiued it selfe and therefore these kind of histories cannot produce a diuine fayth in vs this experience it selfe doth clearly teach vs. For our Aduersaries do somtymes doubt whether S. Peter was euer at Rome or no because forsooth this is not to be found expresly in holy Scripture wheras notwithstanding it is most assuredly proued and testified in many bookes both of the auncient Historiographers and holy Fathers Why may they not as lawfully call other matters in question which are notwithstanding expressely set downe in other auncient writers Our Aduersaries therfore do make all things very doubtfull and vncertayne whiles they will only belieue and admit the Scripture but now l●t vs answere their arguments CHAP. VIII Wherein the arguments of our Aduersaries taken out of the old Testament are confuted THE first argument wherby our Aduersaries oppugne Traditions and which they vse very often the which also as inuincible they haue added to the confession of their Rupell Confess Art 5. Deut. 4. v. 2. Deut 12. v. vlt. fayth they take out of these words of Deuteronomy Thou shalt not add any thing to the word which I speake vnto you nor shall you take any thing from it And againe that which I commaund thee do that only neyther add or diminish any thing from it By these places of Scriptures our Aduersaries do inferre that nothing is to be receiued as a point of fayth which is not expressely set downe in Scripture 2. But this argument is erroneous and the weaknes thereof is very great for many causes First because in those words there is no mention made of the Scripture nor of the written word of God but only of the word preached and deliuered viua voce Thou shalt not add sayth the Scripture to the word that I speake vnto you he doth not say that I write vnto you Againe Do only sayth he that which I commaund thee he doth not say that which I write vnto thee 3. Moreouer in these words the holy Scripture doth not only speake of matters of fayth to be belieued but also of ceremonies and customes to be done and obserued but our Aduersaries themselues confesse that these customes may be added by the authority of the Church yea they haue ordeined themselues very many the which they chang euen yet when they please Caluin also acknowledgeth that Calu. cōtra 4 sess Concil Trident. many vnwritten customes were deliuered vnto vs by the Apostles 4. That also according to the phrase of Scripture is said to be added to the word of God which is contrary opposite vnit For Iosue did not transgresse this commaundement of Deuteronomy when he added his booke to the bookes of Moyses Nor did others transgresse it who added the bookes of the Iudges Ruth and of the Kinges which were not written by Moyses which are also to be belieued as contayning pointes of faith But in these bookes there is nothing contrary to that which Moyses wrote And the Hebrew text agreeth very well to this answere for in both places of Deuter●nomy this word Ghal is vsed which sig●●tieth o●tentines contrary or against so that the sense is Do not add any thing contrary to the word which I commaund and againe yee shall not add any thing contrary to the word which I say vnto you For so is that particie G●●l taken in the 40. Psalme or according to the Hebrewes 41. in the 2. Psalme also the second verse And in the 14. of Numbers the 2. verse els where very often Euen as also in the new Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which answereth to the Hebrew Ghal signifieth also contrary or ag●i●st when the Apostle writeth to the 1. ad Cor. 4. v. 6. Corinthians that in vs you may learne one not to be puffed vp against another aboue that is writtē that is to say against the Scripture the which saith we must not be puffed vp in pryde ●s S. Chrysostome and after him Theophilactus others do note vpon that place The which place some bouldly alledge against Traditions wheras the Apostle in that place doth not speake of the whole Calu in
32. Christ hath but one spouse and acknowledgeth no other They shal be two in one flesh but I sayth the Apostle speake in Christ in the Church So also Christ speaketh of the Church my doue and my persect is one Cant. 6. v. 8. Christ is not an adulterer neyther doth he beget any children of an adulteresse For this cause saith S. Cyprian the spouse of Christ cannot be an adulte●esse ●he is not corrupted S. Cyp● in tra●● de vnit E●cles and she is chast And a little after VVhosoeuer be●ng separated from the Church is ioyned to an adul●er●sse he is separated from the promises of the Chu●ch Neyther shall he euer attaine to the rewards S. Aug. Tom. 9. de ●ymh ad Ca●h lib. 4. c vlt. of Christ who teares the Church of Christ He is an al●ene he is prophane he is an enemy he cannot haue God for his Father who hath not the Church for his Mother Thus he which last words S. Augustin repeateth out of him 2. Secondly he that is without the body of Christ cannot receyue the spirit of Christ nor be partaker of the lyfe and Rom. 8. v. 9. S. Aug. Tom. 29. tract 2. in oan merits of Christ But he who hath not the spirit of Christ is not his as witnesseth the Apostle S. Augustine d●clareth this very well by the example of a mans body whose members cannot liue vnlesse they be ioyned to the body Another reasō also S. Augustine alledgeth taken from the forsaid property of the Church None sayth he obtayneth saluatiō euerlasting lyse but he who S. Aug Tom. 7. de vnit Ecc. c. 19. hat● Christ to be his head But none can haue Christ to be his head but he who is in ●is body which is the Church So sayth S. Augustine 4. Thirdly the Name only of a Mother doth proue this sufficiently For none can be conceyued nor borne without a mother and the child which is borne if it leaue to sucke the mothers breasts will perish for hunger By which argument euen our wisest Aduersaries are conuinced For both Caluin ●nd Beza doe confesse Calu. l. 4. nstit c 1. Beza cap. 5. Confess Art 1. this that euen the name only of a mother doth conuince that which we haue sayd to be true yea also the Scripture doth oftē testify that out of the bosome of the Church we cannot hope for the rem●ssion of our sinnes nor euerlasting saluation and that the going out of the true Church was alwaies hatefull And hence it commeth to passe that in the Creed of the Apostles first we belieue the holy Catholike Church and then the remission of sinnes and lyfe euerlasting because indeed without this Church none can obtaine eyther remissiō of their sinnes or life euerlasting CHAP. III. That the Church of Christ is to continue for euer THE second errour of our Aduersaries is that many of them affirme that the Church of Christ hath not continually endured but that it sometymes fayled This error may also be easily refuted by the forsayd propertyes offices of the Church For first the Church is the spouse of Christ of which he speaketh by the Prophet I will betroth thee vnto me for euer Christ therfore did not b●troth his Church vnto him Ose 2. v. 19. for a few yeares only 2. Secondly the Church is the Body of Christ but Christ cannot be without his Rom. 12. v. 5. body And truly it were a monstrous thing to see a liuing head without a body 3. Thirdly the Church is the Kingdome of Christ but the Scriptures doe teach in many places that this Kingdome Psa● 83. ve 89. v. 36. of Christ shall continue for euer as Micheae 4. v. 7. Daniel 2. v. 44. Ierem. 33. v. 20. 21. Luc. 1. 32. 33. Lastly Christ sweareth in his Holy One that is to say by his Holines that the Kingdome of Christ shall last for euer Wherefore they endeauour to make Christ himself periured who affirme that the Kingdome of Christ sometymes perished 4. Fourthly the Church is the House Matt. 17. v. 18. of Christ the which he built vpon a rocke and against which the gates of hell shall neuer preuaile 5. Fifthly the same is proued be the 1. Cor. 11. v. 26. offices of the Church The Church shall shew the death of our Lord vntil he come God also gaue some as Apostles and Doctors who should Ephes 4. v. 11. teach and rule the Church vntill we meet all in Christ in the end of the world When Christ also sent his Disciples to teach all Nations and to administer the Sacramēts he added this promise Behould I am with Matt. vlt. v. vlt. you all dayes euen to the consūmation of the world By which words as S. Hierome wel noteth he sheweth that they are to liue alwayes and that he is neuer departed from the faithfull belieuers 6. Lastly our Aduersaries themselues being cōuiuced with the truth of this matter do acknowledge that the holy Calu. lib. 4. Instit c. 1. sect 17. in fine Scriptures do testify this in many places For Caluin and Beza to omit many others do acknowledge and proue this out of the Scriptures Seeing that sayth Beza the Kingdome of Iesus Christ is continuall it Beza c. 5. Confess art 1. necessarily followeth that there haue alwaies byn some to be found who did acknowledge him for their King CHAP. IIII. That this Church which hath alwaies continued hath alwaies byn visible THE third errour of our Aduersaries is that they deny the Church of Christ to haue byn alwayes visible For seing that they cannot deny but that the Church of Christ hath alwayes continued as we haue declared in in the precedent Chapter and whē we demaund of them where their Church was for the space of a thousand yeares and more they fly vnto a certaine inuisible Church which they say lay hidden for many yeares But this errour also is easily refuted by the for said properties and offices of the true Church 2. For first the Church is the body of Christ but this body of Christ was visible 1. Cor. 1● vers 27. for the Apostle spake vnto visible men when he sayd you are the body of Christ Moreouer we are made the body of Christ by baptisme and the receiuing of the Eucharist 1. Cor. 10. v. 17. 1. Cor. 12. v. 13. Ephes 4. v. 11. 12. as witnesseth the Apostle But these Sacraments are visible Also in this body of Christ there are Doctors and Pastors vntill the consūmatiō of Saynts vntil we meet with Christ but such persons are also visible The building also of the Church is visible this consūmation of Saynts is visible that worke of ministery is visible which the Apostle sayth shall continue vntill the comming of Christ 2. Secondly the Church is the Kingdome of Christ but euery Kingdome cōprehendeth in it a visible company of mē who all acknowledge one
is to say to vphould the house to strengthen it The Apostle heere attributeth thē both to the Church the one when he calleth h●r the pillar of truth the oth●r when ●● calleth her the ground of the same truth For the pillar also of the earth according to the Hebrew Iob. ● v. 6. Psal 74. vel inxta Hebr●os 79. v. 4. phrase doth signify the lowest foūdations of the earth So God is sayd to shake the pillars of the earth elswhere to strengthen the pillars of the earth that is to say the very foundations thereof 17. These so manifest and perspicuous Calu. in● ad Tim. 3. v. 15. words of the Apostle do compell Caluin at the last to be of our opinion albeit after his accustomed māner at the first he wrongfully slaundereth vs affirming that Catholiks hold or to vse his owne words do blab out this horrible blasphemy that is to say that the truth of God is not strong inough vnlesse it be vphoulden by the shoulders of men and that the word of God is vncertayne till by humble prayers as it were it borroweth some certaymy from men And afterward he affirmeth that the Apostle in this place would nothing els but that the truth of God is supported by the pure preaching of the Ghospell But that which he sayd first is a meere slaunder for we do not say that the truth or the word of God absolutly and considered precisely in it selfe receiueth it certainty and strength from the Church for in this sense it receyueth a most perfect strength and large authority from God himselfe but in regard of men and in consideration of our knowledge it receiueth it certainty frō the Church Infra hac Controu cap. 16. in fine as afterward we will declare more at large the which also Caluin in the words immediatly following acknowledgeth to be most true when he writeth in this Calu. loco citato Rom. 10. v 17. sorte S. Paul simply vnderstandeth sayth Caluin that which in other words he sayth in the tenth Chapter to the Romans because fayth is by hearing there wil be no fayth vnlesse there he some that preach Therfore in regard of men the Church supporteth the truth because it maketh it famous by her prayse and commendation because the retayneth it in sincerity and purity and because the deliuereth and sendoth it to her posterity Thus Caluin 18. But that which secondly he addeth that the truth of God is supported and vpholden by the pure preaching of the Church is indeed most true but he should haue considered that this pure preaching of the Ghospell cannot be foūd but only in the Church and that no others but men can preach the pure Ghospell Wherefore if the truth of God be sustayned by the pure preaching of the Ghospell it necessarily followeth also that the Church must be sustained by men and consequently that the Church of Christ is the gound of truth albeit not absolutly yet in regard of vs and our Beza in 1. ad Tim. 3. v. 15. knowledge So as Beza also is forced to cōfesse the same ex●licating those words of the Apostle the pillar and ground of truth Vnderstand this sayth Beza not simply in it selfe but in regard of vs. Thus he 19. It is therfore manifest as well out of Caluin as Beza that the Church in regard of vs is the ground of truth or of the word of God and consequently of our fayth which relyeth thereon But that which in regard of men is the ground of our fayth that is the true ground therof because our fayth cannot well nor must not be considered but in regard of men seeing that our fayth cannot be found but in men only if therfore in regard of men the Church be the ground of truth it is also most truly and necessarily the ground of our fayth 20. Furthermore that the ancient Church of the holy Fathers did cōstantly hold the preaching and authority of the Catholike Church to be the ground of our fayth those excellent words of S. Augustine do manifestly declare when he S. Aug. Tom. 6. contra Epist Manich. cap. 5. Calu. l. 1. Instit sect 3. writeth thus disputing against the Maniches I sayth he would not belieue the Ghospell but that the authority of the Catholike Church moued me therunto this sētēce of S. Augustine vexeth our Aduersaries very much Caluin goeth about to perswade the ignorāt people that S. Augustin speaketh of himselfe yet remayning a Manichean Heretike and not of himselfe as being conuerted and made a Catholike But this is a ridiculous euasion for the words which follow a litle after do shew that this is a false interpretation of Caluin If thou doest hold thy selfe to the Ghospell S. Augustine speaketh vnto a Manichean heretike I would hold my selfe to those by whose commandment I beliued the Ghospell He speaketh therfore of himselfe as now being a Catholike and after a few words VVhose authority sayth he being infringed weakned I could not now euen belieue the Ghospel it selfe Where he sheweth plainly that our faith doth so depend of the authority of the Church that it being weakned or taken a way it could not remayne or continue by any fayth of the Ghospell Wherby it is manifest that it is false which Iunius writeth that S. Augustine did only speake of the accidentary and not of the necessary cause 21. Others say that S. Augustine did speake of this or that booke of the Gospell and not of the whole Gospell in generall but the very words of S. Augustine doe teach the contrary because he speaketh euery where of the Gospell it selfe in generall Moreouer one and the same reason is of one booke of the Ghospell and of all the rest as concerning fayth 22. Others lastly do answere that S. Augustine did not speake of the Church of his time but of the primitiue Church wherin were the Apostles who approued the Ghospell But this solution is also easily refuted out of the words next following to whom saith S. Augustin I haue obeied saying Belieue the Gospell why should I not obey them then saying vnto me Doe not belieue Manicheus But it is manifest that the primitiue Church spake nothing of Manicheus but that Church only which was in S. Augustines time sayd vnto him doe not belieue Manicheus For Manicheus liued many yeares 8. Aug. Tom. 6. contra Faustū l. 13. c. 4. after the primitiue Church yea euen after S. Cyprian that is to say almost three hundred yeares after Christ as the same S. Augustine testifyeth and it is otherwise sufficiently well knowen that the Manichean heresy was vnknowne in the world before the yeare 277. See Baronius in his 2. Tome in the yeare 277. in the 2. number and others following CHAP. VI. The Arguments of our Aduersaries are confuted NOVV it remayneth we answere to the arguments of our Aduersaries for by our answers the difficulty of this whose controuersy wil be more
the Apostles is there resident and gouerneth the same as the supreme head thereof 2. The first place is taken out of S. Mat. 15. v. 18. 19. Mathew For he relateth the words which Christ spake to S. Peter which are these And I say vnto thee that thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke will I build my Church and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it and I will giue to thee the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen And whatsoeuer thou shalt bind vpō earth it shal be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose on earth it shal be loosed in heauen 3. First that Christ spake to S. Peter and not to the other Apostles appeareth euidently by the very words of the text For Io. 1. v. 24. Ioan 22. v. 15. first of all Christ setteth downe S. Peters old name Simon sayth he thou art blessed and then afterward he setteth downe the name of his father Ba●-iona that is to say the sonne of Ionas or of Iohn as also the Euāgelist S. Iohn testifyeth He sheweth afterward that the reuelation was only made to S. Peter My father sayth he hath reuealed vnto thee he doth not say vnto you as he is wō● to say when he speaketh vnto them all He addeth moreouer because thou art Peter which certainly agreeth only to S. Peter for vpon him only was this Name imposed Ioan. 1. v. 42. 4. Moreouer Christ addeth And vpon this rocke I will build my Church in which words that particle and is a coniunction causall and not a copulatiue and it signifieth because and in this sense it is vsed oftentymes in holy Scripture as our Aduersaries cannot deny as for example in that place of Genesis Lo thou shalt dye for the woman Gen. 20. v. 3. Psal 59. ve● 60. v. 13. 107. Psa vel 08 v. 13. Isaiae 46. v. vlt. Luc. 1. v. 42. that thou hast taken and hath a husband that is because she hath a husband So also Dauid in his Psalmes Giue vs thy helpe from our tribulation and vayne is the saluation of men that is to say because the saluation of men is but vayne In like manner the Prophet Isay saith Behould thou art angry and we haue sinned that is to say because we haue sinned In the same sense it is vsed in the new Testament Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruite of thy wombe that is to say because it is blessed as Caluin and Beza doe acknowledge all which places Caluin confesseth to be so vnderstood after Theophilact Also and none gaue him any thing that is to say because none gaue him See more examples of this in the latin edition 5. This therfore is the true sense of that place As thou hast sayd vnto me thou Ioan. 1. v. 42. art Christ the Sonne of the liuing God so I say vnto thee that I haue worthily called thee Peter because vpon this rocke which thou art I will build my Church For to what end should Christ haue said vnto him thou art Peter seeing that all knew well inough before that Peter was Peter but that he would therby declare that he was not called Peter without great cause that is to say because vpon him as vpon a sure and strong foundation and rocke Christ intended to build his Church Christ therfore Ioan. 1. v. 42. would haue S. Peter to remember the name which of late was giuen him and afterward he assigneth the reason and S. Hier. in c. 16. Matt. sup eaverba Quiatu es Petrus cause why he called him so to wit because vpon him as vpon a most strong rocke he would build his Church According to the metaphore os a rocke saith S. Hierome it was rightly said vnto him I will build my Church vpon thee 6. For the holy Scripture is accustomed when it speaketh of a name giuen vnto any by the interpretation of the word to adioyne also the reason and Gen. 17. v. 5 Gen. 22. v. 27. Gen. 4. v. 25. cause of the name so said our Lord vnto Abram Neyther shall thy name be called any more Abram but thou shalt be called Abraham and then he presently giueth a reason takē from the etimology of the word because a Father of many Nations I haue made thee So also he did when Iacob was called Israel See more of this in the Latin edition pag. 280. 7. Lastly not without great reason Christ gaue vnto S. Peter this new name but no other cause is assigned in the holy Scripture but this Because vpon this rocke I will build my Church This therfore and no other was the cause of giuing him this new name Hereupon saith S. Hilary very well O happy foundation of Christes Church saith he in the imposition of a new name and o In c. 16. Matt. worthy rocke of that building the which should dissolue and breake the infernall Lawes the gates of hell and all the stronge barres of death So S. Hilary 8. Moreouer Christ said to S. Peter I will giue the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen vnto thee he doth not say vnto you In like manner he said in the singular number Mat. 16. v. 19. whatsoeuer thou hast bound vpon earth c. that thou shalt loose c. He spake therfore to S. Mat. 18. v. 18. Peter only and not to many 9. And albeit he promised this last authority of bynding or loosing men from their sinnes to the other Apostles also yet first of all in this place he promised this to S. Peter alone and then afterwardes to the rest to the end we might therby know that he made S. Peter the head of all the rest and that all their power and authority was subordinate to that of his For at this day all Catholike Bishops haue authority to bynd loose but subordinate to the Popes authority 10. All which thinges that holy martyr S. Cyprian declareth very well in Cypr. de vnit Ecc. circa principium Mat. 16. v. 18. 19. these wordes wherby it may easily be vnderstood what was the opinion and iudgment of the primitiue Church concerning this matter God speak●th vnto S. Peter saith S. Cyprian I say vnto thee because thou art Peter and vpon this rocke I will build my Church c. And againe after his resurrection Ioan. 20. v. 20. 21. 22. 23. he sayd feed my shepe vpon him alone he buyldeth his Church and he committeth vnto him to feede his sheepe and albeit he gaue the like authority to all the other Apostles saying As my Father sent me so c. whose sinnes yee forgiue c. yet to the end he might shew and declare an vnity he ordayned but one chayre he confirmed by his authority the beginning of that vnity proceeding from one The same indeed or equall in all other thinges were the other Apostles with S. Peter indued with the same power and authority to wit before those wordes of
Tertul. de paenitent c. 9. Priests and to kneele to the dearely beloued of God which is nothing ●l● but kneeling downe to adore And the same Tertullian els where saith that they were Tertul. de pudicit c. 13. wont to licke vp the footesteps of euery one that past where he seemeth to allude to those wordes of the Prophet Isay cited Isa 49. v. 23. Isa 60. v. 4. a little aboue they shall licke vp the dust of thy seete and adore the steppes of thy feete Now if it be so that they licked the footestepe● of all Christians much more doubtlesse the footesteps of the supreme Bishop who receaued them into the Church and who at that tyme was called the blessed Pope as the same Tertullian witnesseth 11. Neyther doth this adoration derogate any thing from the honour of God or Christ but rather much more illustrate and set it forth for this honour is exhibited to the Bishop of Rome not for his owne holines or any other quality with which he is adorned as a priuate person but only for that authority and spirituall power which he receaued from Christ and which indeed properly appertayneth to God and to Christ and therefore in him and by him Christ whose person he representeth is honored and adored according to those words of Tertullian VVhen Tertul. de p●nitēt ce●o therefore saith he thou stretchest thy selfe sorth to the knees of thy brethrē thou layest hold on Christ and makest thy supplication to Christ And this Caluin himselfe by the force of truth confesseth when he speaketh of the Adoratiō of the Church For expounding those wordes of the Prophet Isay they shall adore the steppes of thy feete or as he translateth they shall bow themselues downe to the plantes of thy feete thus he writeth Heere some man Calu in c. 60. Matth. v. 14. will aske whether this honour of which the Prophet speaketh be not too much and greater then is to be exhibited to the Church for to how our selues down and prostrate our selues are signes of that honour which no man ought to admit I answere this honour is not exhibited to the mēbers but to the head to wit Christ who is adored in the Church so Caluin which also those words of God in the Apocalyps manifestly declare to be true I will make them adore thee before thy feete and they shall know that I haue loued thee for therefore is this honour exhibited to the supreme Bishop because God hath so exalted the Roman Sea and b●ene so liberall towards it which is a signe of exceeding great loue And heere hence it is that the same veneration is exhibited to all Bishops of Rome as well to the bad as to the good for they are not honored for their owne goodnes but for the office which Christ bestoweth vpon them As also they are called holy and most holy not for their Act. 28. v. 15. owne personall holynes but for the holines of Christ whose person and place they susteine vpon earth and for the holynes of the office which they receaue from God euen as S. Paul called Festus President of Iury very good not for any goodnes of his Baron Tō 1. anno 58. num 13. owne for he was an Infidel and a wicked man but in regard of his office for so the Presidents of Proninces were wont to be stiled as well noteth Baronius 12. Moreouer whereas in the Scripture feet signify diuine mission and vocation which is most ample in the Bishop of Rome no meruaile Rom. 10. v. 15. if greater veneration be exhibited to his feet it is to be obserued that there is a Crosse vpon his shoe which all kisse to giue vs to vnderstand that the honor is not exhibited to him but to Christ crucified whom he representeth 13. To conclude heere hence is easily solued that which our obiect of S. Peters refusing to be adored by Corneleus Act. 10. v. 25. 26. the Centu●ion for Cornelius adored not S. Peter in respect of Christ whose Vicar he was but in respect of himselfe whom he took to be some God as did the Licaonians Act. 10. v. 10. Hieron aduers Vigil ep 53. n. 12. iuxta edit Marian victorij thinke of Paul Barnabas so S. Hierome or surely they thought Peter to be more thē a mā as manifestly appareth by S. Peters answere Arise for I also am a man therfore Cornelius was to be admonished corrected for adoration is eyther good or bad according to the cause or reason for which it is exhibited Now the cause for which Catholikes exhibite the same to the Bishop of Rome is very good to wit the excellent power of Christ or rather Christ himselfe gouerning ruling his Church in his Vicar Act. 16. v. 26. and therfore this adoration is good and gratefull to God but the cause of Cornelius adoration was fond and false and therfore his adoration was naught and worthily reprehended 14. I know our Aduersaries often obiect that Pope Alexander the third did insolently trample vnder his feete Frederike the Emperour but this foolish fable is soundly and copiously refuted by Baronius citing the testimonies of such as were present and haue commited to writing all that passed in which there was nothing vnusuall but the Pope admited from Frederike the accustomed adoration He that desireth more concerning the kissing of the Popes feet may read Ioseph Steph●nus who hath written a whole booke therof it is sufficient for vs to haue briefly proued the same by many euident testimonies of holy Scripture CHAP. X. Of Generall Councells GENERAL Councells doe represent the whole body of the Catholike Church wherefore we will now speake a little of them for seeing that we haue already spoken of the head of the Church it remayneth we treat of the body therof But this we will do briefly For our Aduersaries now adaies graunt many thinges concerning this matter which in tymes past they denyed To the end therfore that the true state of this Controuersy may the better be vnderstood three thinges are to be considered which our Aduersaries hauing now learned by experience to be true do willingly graunt vnto vs. 2. The first is that these Councells are very profitable that the authority therof is not to be despised For seing that Hebr. vl● vers 17. the Apostle warneth vs to obey euery true Pastor much more are we bound to obey many assembled togeather For which cause our Aduersaries would also that we should all obey their synodicall assemblies Hereupon sayth Caluin Truly Calu. l. 4. Inst c. 9. sect 13. we do willingly graunt that if there happen debate about any doctrine there is no better nor surer remedy then if a Synod of true Bishops assemble togeather where the doctrine in controuersy may be discussed Thus he And euen naturall reason it selfe conuinceth this to be true as Caluin also confesseth For it is an easie● matter for many
tyme can intimate vnto vs diuers things 6. The which thing is excellently declared by S. Augustin for hauing said that Aug. ● 12. ●onf c. vlt. he thought Moyses intended diuers senses in his words he correcteth himselfe sa●ing that without all doubt God who is the principall author of the Scriptures did so O Lord sayth he seeing thou art God and not flesh and bloud if man he short sighted can it be hidden from thy spirit which will lead me into the right land whatsoeuer thou wast in those words to reueale to posterity howsoeuer he by whome they were spoken thought peraduenture but of one sense only amo●st many other no lesse true so S. Augustin Seeing therfore there are diuers litterall senses of one and the same place one Interpreter may follow one sense and another interpreter another so long as neyther of them do say any thing not agreeable to the word of God but both the one sense and the other is godly and conformable to other places of Scripture And this maketh much for the dignity of the Scriptures and profit of the Church according to that which S. Augustin writeth Lib. 3. de Doctrin Christ c. 27. else where How could God sayth he better commend vnto vs the plentifull fruite of his Deuine VVordes then by so disposing as the same words may be vnderstood diuers wayes 7. Nay we see moreouer the holy Scripture it selfe to shew very manifestly that there are diuers senses of the same wordes For there is no doubt but that commaundment of Deuteron●my Thou shalt Deut. 25. v. 4. not t●e the mouth of the Oxe that thresheth according to the litter all sense doth signify that the mouth of an oxe is not to be tyed whilst 〈◊〉 treadeth forth the corne in the floare for so according to the Letter the Iewes obserued it as indeed they were bound to do Neuertheles S. Paul manifestly teacheth that God the proper Author 2. Cor. 9. v. 9. 10. of the holy Scripture intēded chiefly another sense Is God sayth he so carefull of Oxen or doth he not so say in regard of vs for indeed those things are written for vs hitherto it also appertayneth that in the Hebrew tongue one word hath many significations as hath be●ne shewed in the seauēth Chapter of the Latin Edition 8. Out of this ground we affirme that there is no repugnance betweene the Septuagint Interpreters and the Hebrew text and betweene the Hebrew text and the vulgar Edition or lastly betweene the interpretation of the vulgar Edition of the old Testament and that of the new how much soeuer the same wordes are diuersly translated to wit otherwise of the Septuagint and otherwise of the vulgar Latin interpreter or otherwise of the vulgar Edition of the old Testament and otherwise of the vulgar Edition of the new where in both places the same wordes are cited for the same places of Scripture are oftentimes otherwise cited by the Apostles in the new Testament then hath the Hebrew text of of the old But here is diuersity without any repugnance or contrariety And this hath place especially in the Hebrew text because in the Hebrew tongue there is so different reading of one and the same word See examples heereof in the Latin Edition of this Controuersy in this Chapter 9. It wil be easy out of that which hath byn said to answere that which our Aduersaries obiect against diuers places of the vulgar edition For albeit there be diuersity betweene it and the Hebrew text yet there is no repugnance or contrariety and if our Aduersaries think otherwise it procedeth from their ignorance of the Hebrew tongue which hath many wordes subiect to ambiguity and very many phrases much different from the Latin and Greeke phrase as in the Chapters that follow may be seene in the Latin Edition from the 16. to the 20. CHAP. IX The place of Genesis she shall breake thy head is shewed to be well translated IT wil be too long and little to my purpose to examine all the places of the vulgar Edition to which our Aduersaries take exceptions for many of them differ little or nothing from the Hebrew text of the old Testament or from the Greeke of new we will handle some few of greatest difficulty and which our Aduersaries do most often and with great bitternes vrge against vs that by them iudgment may be giuen of the rest which are of lesse importance 2. The first place which they say is depraued and of which they often and eagerly complaine is that of the third of Luther in Genes ib. Genesis v. 15. Ipsa centeret caput tuum for it is not ipsa in the Hebrew but ipsum as if it were spoken of the seed of the womā and not of the woman her selfe The Lutherans crie out of great iniury done therby to Christ as to whome alone it appertayneth to bruze the head of the Diuell which we attr●bute to another to wit to the Blessed Virgin 3. Caluin also affirmeth that we Calu. in c. 3. Gen. v. 15. haue found out a sacrilegious Exposition whilst we accommodate that to the holy Mother of Christ which was spoken of the seed Christ himselfe And as for the Lutherans we haue lesse cause to blame th● for reprehending our version seeing they stoutly maintayne that by the seed ●● the woman Chrill only is meant 4. But as for Caluin he sheweth the greedy appetite he hath to calumniate whē he calleth our version a sacrilegious exposition for he conuinced by the truth cōfesseth that by the seed of the woman not only Christ is meant but al his members ye● euen all mākind It is therefore wōderfull that he saith it is a sacrilegious expesition to apply to the Blessed Virgin Mary that which was spoken of the seed vnlesse ●e will not that the Blessed Virgin be any mēber of Christ or to appertayne any thing to mankind For seeing that the promise of bruzing Sathās head appertayneth to Christ and euery member of his a● Caluin writeth in expresse wordes Calu. l. 1. Inst c. 14. sect 13● it must doubtlesse principally apperthyne to the Blessed Virgin as who next after Christ hath most strongly crushed Sathans head VVherfore euen the Lutheran● Hun. in Caln Iudaizāte in Anti. paraeo themselues obserue that Caluin hath no reason to obi●ct this vnto the Catholikes 5. But to the end we may the better vnderstand whether it be any fault at all that we retayne in the vulgar version the particle ips● we are first to declare the litteral sense of this place and to examine after whether it be any error that we retayne the particle ipsa in our version For it was not out of any ignorance or drowsy carelesnes that the feminine gender crept in he●re i●st●●d of the masculine or neuter as Caluin calumniateth but it was In Gen. loc cit done of purpose and for iust cause as shal be shewed CHAP. X. Of the
true sense of these wordes Ipsa conteret c. THAT we may find out the true sense of these wordes we must first resute the false expositions of our Aduersaries The Lutherās by the seed of the womā will needes haue Christ only to be meant we confesse in deed that he is principally meant therby and that therefore the place may be well vnderstood of Christ as many auncient Fathers haue expounded it but that Christ alone is meant hereby and not his members we deny to be the literall sense for the reason following 2. First it is euident that the seed of the Serpent which is opposed against the seed of the woman doth not signify any one Serpent but a multitude it is therefore very probable that by the seed of the woman a multitude also is signified vnlesse we will haue the Scripture in so few wordes speake ambiguously Moreouer semen is a Nowne collectiue properly signifying a multitude neyther is there any thing in this sentence that forceth vs to depart from the proper signification of the Word This reason is of so great a force that Caluin was moued therby to forsake the exposition of the Lutherans which he would otherwise willingly haue imbraced the more strongly to assault vs for thus he writeth Some make no doubt but Christ alone is Calu. in Gen. loco ●it meant by the seed of the woman whose exposition I could willingly approue but that I see they offer too great violence to the word seed for who will graunt that a Nowne collectiue is to be taken for one man only Thus Caluin So strong is the truth that it extorteth a true confession from her greatest enemy 3 Secondly it is sayd of the seed of the woman that it shall crush and bruze the head of the Serpent but this crushing and bruzing the Scripture doth not attribute to Christ alone but to all that lead a godly life in him for to euery iust man the holy Ghost speaketh saying Thou thalt walke ouer the Addar and Basiliske and thou Psal 90. v 13. shalt tread vnder thy feete the Lyon and the Dragon And Christ saith vnto his Disciples Behold I haue giuen you power to tread vpon the Serpents and Scorpions and vpon all the power of Luc. 10. v. 19. the enemy And the Apostle to the Romans prayeth saying The God of peace cru●h Satan vnder your seete quickly And lastly in very many places of Scripture the faithfull Rom. 16. v. 20. are said to ouercome the Diuell and to get victories against him which is all one as to crush him Seing therefore the proper worke of this seed agreeth also 1. Ioan. 2. v. 13. Apoc. 12. v. 11. 1. Cor. 15. v. 57. to the members of Christ the Word seed is not to be limited to Christ alone Ad hereunto that God in these wordes intended to comfort not only Eue deceaued by the craft of the Diuell but all her posterity Now the comfort is more generall if all the faithfull should be able by Christ to ouercome the Diuell th●n if that Christ alone should ouercome him euen as our comfort is greater that we togeather with Christ shall rise againe then if Christ only should rise and be alon● attayne to eternall life 4 Thirdly Albeit we should graunt our Aduersaries that Christ alone doth crush the head of the D●uell which is the former part of the sentence yet the latter part can by no meanes b● applyed to Christ alone where it sayd that the Diuell shall crush this seed for Christ in his owne person cannot be crushed by the Diuell we must therefore needes by this seed vnderstand also the members of Christ for in the Hebrew text it is thus word for word ipsa vel ipsum cōteret t● in capite ●●●●teres ●um v●lea● in calc●●● for the Hebrew word is the same in both places both in the first and in the later part of the sentence and signifyeth cont●●●re 5. As for Caluins exposition interpreting In Gen. loc cit lib. 1. Instit c. 13. sect 2. by the seed of the woman al mankind it is not to be receaued for God in this place denounceth emnity betweene the seed of the Serpent and the seed of the woman but infidells and vngoodly persons haue no emnity with the Diuell and his seed but are rather the seed and sonnes of the Diuell according to those words of Christ Y●● are of your father the Diuell they therefore cannot appertayne to this seed Ioan. 8. v. 44. of the woman 6. But wh●r●as Caluin in another place sayth that Christ and his members are signifyed by the seed of the woman wee Calu. l. 1. Instit c. 14 sect 18. like well of that his saying for it is the exposition of the Catholike and auncient Fathers and indeed the true litterall sense 7. For in that sentence God sayth first that he will put emnity wherefore he speaketh not of any naturall emnity ●● Caluin insinuateth but of a super naturall proceeding from God Moreouer God signifyeth betweene whome this emnity shal be to wi● betweene the Serpent and woma● Now as by the Serpent the Diuell is meant whome that naturall Serpent represented and in whome God layed his curse vpon the Diuell so by the woman E●e is meant the spouse of Christ or his true Church represented by E●e whose force and victory against the Diuell was therefore foretold by God for that Eue represented the Eph. 5. v. 32. 2. Cor. 11. v. 2. 3. Church as Adam did Christ the Apostle plainely teacheth in his Epistle to the Ephes and the same Apostle doth therfore elsewhere expound this place of Satan and the Church as doth S. Iohn in his Apocalyp● Apoc. 1● v. 13. 17. where he declareth this emnity betwene the VVoman and the Serpent to be indeed the emnity betweene the Church of Christ and the Diuell wherfore here by the Serpent is signifyed the Diuell by the woman the Church by the seed of the Serpent the Children of the Diuell and all the wicked who are aliens from Christ and his Church but especially such as seduce others and Mat. 1● v ●8 Apoc. ●● v. 17. oppugne the Church The seede of the woman are the Children of the Church especially such as keep Gods commaundments and haue the testimony of Iesus Christ as S. Iohn speaketh 8. Furthermore this woman to wit the Church shall crush the head of the Serpent as we haue proued by many places of Psal 90. v. 1● Luc. 10. v. 19. Rom. 16. v. 20. Scripture But on the other side the womans heel● shal be crushed by Satan for the Church ouercōmeth the Diuell by her chiefe and more excellent members but she is ouercome in such her members as are base and worldly giuen which set vp their rest heere vpon earth and tast no other things but such as are terrene earthly worthily therefore signified by Defuga saec c. 7. the heele