Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n church_n scripture_n word_n 2,839 5 4.5205 4 true
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
A07868 The Iesuits antepast conteining, a repy against a pretensed aunswere to the Downe-fall of poperie, lately published by a masked Iesuite Robert Parsons by name, though he hide himselfe couertly vnder the letters of S.R. which may fitly be interpreted (a sawcy rebell.) Bell, Thomas, fl. 1593-1610. 1608 (1608) STC 1824; ESTC S101472 156,665 240

There are 9 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Papistes I note First that the Church is the Vnïuersall Congregation of the faithfull throughout the whole VVorlde whereof the head is not the Pope but Christ Iesus our Lord. Secondly that this is that Church which cannot erre Thirdly that when the Pope saith the Church cannot erre then his owne deare and faithfull interpreter telleth him that that priuiledge is not graunted to the Pope but to the whole congregation of the faithfull And the sayd Glosse prooueth the same by many Canons of the popes owne Decrees Fourthly that the church in which the truth alwayes abideth is the congregation of the faithfull and therefore truly said Durandus that the late popish church is not comparable to the primatiue Church which heard Christs Doctrine saw his Miracles and was replenished with the Holy-ghost S. R. But suppose that the present Church could not bee a fit witnes as the Primatiue was What is this to the Argument that proueth necessity of Tradition because without Testimony of the Church wee cannot discerne true Scripture from false T. B. The visible externall church is only an externall mean Instrument or outward help whereby we are induced to giue humaine credite to one Scripture rather then to another But the formall cause why we beleeue any Scripture to be Gods word is God himselfe and the inspiration of his holy spirit Hereof occasion will be offered to speake hereafter more at large S. R. Bels second answere is that as Papistes admit the Iewes Tradition of the old Testament for Gods word and withall refuse many other Traditions of theirs so Protestantes admit this Tradition of the Bible and reiect all other We contend against Protestants that Scripture is not sufficient to proue all points of Christian faith but that Tradition is necessary for some and Bell heere confesseth it Where is now the Downefall of Popery Methinkes it is become the Downefall of protestantry VVhere is now Bels first exposition That Scripture containeth in it euery Doctrine necessary to mans Saluation VVhere is now that wee must not adde to Gods word if this Tradition must needs be added thereunto Where is now that this present church can be no fit witnesse if by her testimony wee come to know the truth VVhere is now the curse which S. Paule pronounceth against him that preacheth any Doctrine not contained in the Scripture Where is now that Scripture is the sole and onely rule of faith T. B. Here our Iesuite in all brauery tryumphing before the victory exclaimeth six seuerall times where is now this and where is now that And when all is done his exclamation is not woorth a dead Rat. Whosoeuer shall duely peruse the Downefall will easily perceiue therein that all which our Iesuite hath brought in all this his great glory was soundly confuted before it came to light Neuerthelesse for the better contentation of the Christian Reader I thus reply vpon our Lordly Fryer First with their owne deare Fryer Alphonsus à Castro in the words Hocn habemus ex ecclesia vt sciamus quae sit scriptura diuina at cum Scripturam ●sse diuinam nobis constiterit iam ex seipsa habet vt ei per omnia credere teneamur It commeth from the Church that we know which is holy Scripture but after we know it to be the holy Scripture henceforth it hath of it selfe that wee are bound to beleeue it in euery point Thus writeth this famous Papist and he doth illustrate his assertion by a similitude drawn from a Creditor and a Debtor As if saith he witnesses should bee brought for the proofe of an Instrument in which Peter standeth bound to pay to Iohn 100. crownes the witnesses do not make Peter to be bound to Iohn For although Peter should deny it and no Witnesses could prooue it Peter for all that should owe the debt But the Witnesses effect so much that hee may be conuicted to owe the debt Much more to this effect hath Alphonsus but I desire to bee briefe This I inferre out of his words that though we grant the Scriptures to be known by the Testimony of the Church yet after that notification it deserueth credite of it selfe for euery iote contained in the same Secondly that seeing the Scripture acknowledged for Gods word of all Christians containeth by the Iesuites confession as is already prooued all thinges necessary for christian beliefe vnto Saluation it followeth of necessity that no vnwritten Tradition is necessary to Saluation For doubtlesse if euery Article and all thinges necessary to salution be written then can nothing at all be necessary that remaineth vnwritten Thirdly I constantly auouch and christianly affirme mark gentle Reader attentiuely that the holy Scripture dow shew it selfe to be Gods word euen as the Sun and the Candle by their light do shew themselues what they are I proue it First because the Prophet cals the Scripture a Lanthorne Thy word O Lord saith holy Dauid is a Lanthorne to my feet and a light vnto my pathes And the Apostle confirmeth the same when hee saith Wee haue a right sure word of prophesie whereunto if ye take heede as vnto a light that shineth in a darke place ye doe well vntill the day dawne and the day-star●e arise in your hearts Secondly because Christ himselfe telleth vs that his Sheepe do heare his voyce My Sheepe saith he heare my voyce and I know them and they follow me Againe thus I am the good Sheepheard I know my Sheepe and they know me But C●rtes if it bee true as it is most true because the truth it selfe hath spoken it that Christes Sheepe heare Christ and know Christs voyce then must it needes be true in like manner that when they eyther read the scriptures or heare them read then they know Christ speaking in the same and heare his voyce Toletus a Iesuite Cardinall of Rome hath these expresse wordes Electi praedestinati dei infallibi●er cognoscunt pastorem Christum quae 〈◊〉 ad tempus errent tamen tandem suum verum agnoscent pastorem Sequitur at Christum necesse est agnoscere Est autem haec nota effectus prioris propterea u. oues cognoscunt me quia ego cogn●sco eas Gods elect and predestinate Children do know Christ their Pastor infallibly because albeit they erre for a time yet in the ende they will know their true Sheepheard for of necessity they must knovv Christ. For therefore do my Sheepe know me because I know them Thus writeth our Iesuite out of wose words I note first that all Gods children are not effectually called at one time but erre and wander as sheepe without a s●epheard but euer in the end they acknowledge Christ their true Shepheard ●●condly that Christs Sheepe know Christ not beecause the Church sheweth Christ to them but because Christ knoweth them This point must bee well marked that Christs sheep therefore know Christ because Christ first knoweth them not because the church make Christ
wresting the holy scriptures that their owne deere brethren and great Doctors cannot for shame deny or conceale the same Polydorus virgilius a famous Papist hath these wordes Non secus isti c. These Popish Legists and Canonists doe now and then so wrest and wrieth the holy Scriptures to that sence which themselues like best euen as Coblers doe gnaw with theyr teeth and stretch out their filthy skinnes This is that which the famous Papist Doctor Fisher the late bishop of Rochester did freely confesse in his answere to the Articles of maist Luther which he could not in truth withstand or gain-say These are his expresse wordes Contendentibus itaque nobiscum haereticis nos alio subsidio nostram oportet tu●re causam quam scriptura sacra Therefore when hereticks contend with vs we must defend our cause by other meanes then by the holy Scripture These are the expresse wordes I neyther adde any thing nor take any thing away of their famous popish Byshop of their holy saint of their glorious martyr a learned man indeed who laboured with might maine for the Popes vsurped soueraignty and defended the same in the best manner he was able and to the vttermost of his skill and yet for all that he hath bolted out vnawares against his will such is the force of truth so much in plain tearmes as is enough to ouerthrow all Poperie for euer and to cause all people that haue any care of their saluation to renounce the Pope and his abhominable Doctrine to their liues end For our learned Popish bishoppe being put to his best Trurmpe telleth vs very plainely and without all dissimulation his mouth being now opaned by him whoe caused Balaams Asse to speake that they must not because forsooth they cannot defend and maintaine their popery by the authority of the Scripture but by some other way and meanes viz by mans forged inuentions and popish vnwritten vanities which they terme the Churches Traditions Now gentle Reader how can any Papist who is not giuen vppe in reprobum sensu for his former sinnes and iust deserts read sueh testimonies against Popery freely confessed and plainly published to the world and that by the pennes of most learned and renowned Papists euen while they bestir themselues busily to defend their Pope and his popish doctrine and for all that continue Papists still and carryed away headlong into perdition beleeuing and obeying that doctrine which as themselues confesse can not be defended by the holy Scripture Methinkes they should be ashamed to hold and beleeue that doctrine in defence whereof they can yeeld no better reason Covorruvius a famous Canonist and reuerend Popishe Byshop hath these wordes Nec me latet c. Neither am I ignorant that Saint Thomas affirmeth after great deliberation that the byshop of Rome cannot with his dispensation take away from Monkes their solemne vow of chastity this notwithstanding we must defend the first opinion least those things which are practised euerie where be vtterly ouerthrowne Behold here gentle Reader that howsoeuer the popes opinion be the same we must defend of necessity and the reason is added because otherwise popery cannot consist Fie vpon that Religion which must haue such poore and beggerly shiftes for the maintenance thereof Much like stuffe I might recount of Popish pardons and Purgatorie c. but for those matters I referre the Reader to my Booke Intituled The wofull cry of Rome CHAP. 2. ¶ Conteining a sound confutation of the Iesuites answere framed to my argumentes against the Popes primacy THe Iesuite S. R. in the first Chapter against my first Article is so troubled to answer my reasons grounds and authorities that one while hee affirmeth otherwhiles denyeth the selfe-same thing so mightily confounding both himselfe and his Reader In the down-fall of Popery I proued euidently that the Pope taketh vpon him to depose Kings and Emperours from their royall thrones and to translate their Empires and regalities at his good will and pleasure To which S. R. answeareth that I belie the Pope but let vs heare his owne wordes S. R. I must needes tell him that he vntruly auoucheth vs to say that the Pope is spiritually aboue all powers and Potentates on earth T. B. I must needes tell you Maist. Iesuite that you vntruly charge me with vntruth yea that you roundly controule your selfe and giue your selfe the lye I proue it first because your selfe confesse the wordes which I alledged out of Bellarmine that Popish and Iesuiticall Cardinall to be truly fathered vpon him viz that when any Prince of a sheepe is made an hereticke or swarueth from the Romish religion which is all one with you Papists then the pope may driue him away by excommunication and withal cōmaund the people not to obey him and therefore depriue him of his dominion ouer his Subiects Secondly because you M. Iesuite confesse freely that Pope Zachary did iustly depose Childrick King of Fraunce Thirdly because ye likewise grant freely that the Pope deposed king Henry the eight and Queene Elizabeth and for better assurance hereof you tell vs the same tale in another place But let all indifferent Readers hearken seriously what the Popes owne deare Fryer telleth vs his wordes are set downe in the Down-fall of Popery but S. R. could not see them because he knewe not what to say to them thus doth he write Vt pace omnium c. To speake by the fauour of all good men this sole nouelty I will not say heresie was not yet knowne in the worlde that his priests who maketh an hypocrit to raigne for the sinnes of the people should teach the people that they owe no subiection to wicked Kinges and that although they haue taken the Oath of fealty yet do they owe them no allegiance neyther are periured that thinke ill against the king yea he that obeyeth the king is this day reputed an excommunicate person and he that taketh part against the king is absolued from the crime of Iniustice and periury Thus writeth Sigebertus a Learned popish Fryer so liuely painting out our very case this day in England as if hee were liuing euen now amongst vs. Where we see that the popes own Monks friers haue thought as il of the popes dealings in former times as we think of his proceedings in these latter daies as also that to absolue Subiectes from their allegeance is not onely a Nouelty but euen a flat Heresie Let all popish Recusants marke this point well and defie the Pope and all his absolutions from their allegeance for as the secular popish Priests haue truely written Popery is this day inseparably linked with Treason But what saith S. R. Let vs heare him againe S. R. And much lesse did we euer tell you that the pope hath temporall superiority ouer all Princes on earth but teach the quite contrary Againe if Bell reply that some Cannonists
not lost by fraction of the signacle but by corruption of the minde and purpose of the will Saint Augustine hath a learned and large discourse concerning this onely point of Doctrine wherein he sheweth grauely that the apertion of the matrice may bee done sundry waies viz either by Arte in the way of medicine or by violence of the corrupter or by other accidentall means and that Virginity this notwithstanding may be free from all corruption Much more might Christes most holy mothers wombe bee opened by his diuine power and neuerthelesse her most sacred wombe still remaine inviolable S. R. God can by his omnipotency bring a Cammell through a Needles eye as well as a rich man into heauen but he can bring a rich man to heauen keeping his riches Ergo a Cammell keeping his greatnes through a Needles eye T. B. I answere first that this sillogisme is vnfitly couched hangeth together as Yorke and fowle Sutton Secondly that the consequence is so against all rules of Logicke as the framer thereof is worthy to be hissed out of all schoooles Thirdly the Gospell saith indeed it is easier for a Cammell to passe through the eye of a Needle then for a rich man to enter into the kingdome of heauen But no Prophet no Apostle no Epistle no Gospell sayth as our Iesuite doth For as these wordes keeping his riches are the Scripture of our sawcie Popeling but not the holy scripture so also are these words keeping his greatnes the inuention of his own brain And therfore I must salute him with these words of the holy Apostle though we or an Angell from heauen preach any other Gospell to you then that which we haue preached to you let him be accursed Fourthly that by the word Camell may be vnderstood a cable rope and not a beast For the Greeke word is indifferent to them both Cauinius obseruerh out of the Thalmudists that it is a prouerbial phrase by which Christ doth insinuate vnto vs that rich men do not without great difficulty enter into heauen Fiftly that a Camell keeping his greatnes still cannot possibly by any power passe through a Needles eye the Needle still keeping the former quantity The reason is euident because it implyeth flat contradiction as is already proued Not for that there is any defect in the omnipotency of God who is able to do more then mans wit can comprehend but because there is repugnance in the thing that should be done Sixtly that God can dilate the eie of a Needle so as a Camell may passe through the same and that without any preiudice to the naturall quantity of his body S. R. GOD made the furnace of Babylon though neuer so hot not to heat yea to refresh the three children Why then can hee not make a great body to occupy but a smal roome For to occupy place is an effect and accident of quantity as to heat is of heate T. B. I thus reply first Scripture is to our Iesuite as a nose of wax He addeth to it and taketh away from it as seemeth good in his owne conceit For that fire did refresh the 3. Haebrewes no Scripture doth affirme Secondly whether to occupy place be an effect and accident of quantity or no because it is diuersly holden of diuers learned men and nothing pertinent to our controuersie transeat for the present For whether occupying of place be intrinsecall or extrinsecall to quantity it skilleth not for this matter and this question nowe in hand The reason is euident because to haue partem extrapartem one part without another is by vniforme assent of al learned Writers as well of Phylosophers as of Diuines so intrinsecall and essentiall vnto quantity as it can by no power neither create nor vncreate be taken away from it And this is the cause not occupation of place why christs body beeing greater cannot bee contained in the Popish round cake This was my former reason and it stands stil vntouched neither can all the Iesuites in the worlde euer yeelde a sound answere to the same For if they could it shoulde now haue beene performed Because our Iesuite hath had the best aduice and helpe that any of them could possibly make him Heere by the way I m●st tell our Iesuite of another monster in the Popish host or Cake viz of their accidents without subiects Which their position is against all Phylosophy all reason all learning It is a constant axiome generally receiued in all Schooles Accidentis esse est inesse The essence and being of an accident is the inherence and being in the subiect No Text in the lawe of Moses no sentence in the Prophet no word in the Psalmes no affirmation out of the Gospell no Testimony out of the Epistles of the Apostles no verdict out of the holy Fathers no note out of the Auncient Counsels can euer be found which once maketh mention of accidents without subiects This may suffice for answere to sundry other impertinent bibble babbles which our Iesuite powreth out by ladle fuls in this Chapter CHAP. 2. ¶ Containing a confutation of the Iesuites aunswere to my reasons against the reall presence S. R. CAietane affirmed as Iosephus Angles saith Bell reporteth that there is no Texte that conuinceth the Reader to vnderstand these wordes this is my body properly But Bell greatly wrongeth both Caietan and Angles in changing the word Hereticke into Reader T. B. Let vs heare Iosephus Angles speake for himselfe then shall we know Bels dealing in that behalfe Thus doth he write Exconclusione posita probationibus quae à prē à Castro affermiter coligiter cantè legendum esse Caietanum dicente non apparere ex euangelio aliquod coactinum quo possimus conuincere haereticos ad intelligenda verba haec hoc est corpus meum propriē sed tenendū hoc esse solum authoritate Ecclesiae quae ita verba consecrationis declarat We gather out of the conclusion and proofes which father à Castro bringeth that Caietane must be read warily who saith that there appeareth not any coactiue thing in the Gospell by which we may conuince Heretiques to vnderstande these wordes This is my body properly But wee must hold this to be onely of the authority of the Church which so declareth the words of consecration Thus writeth Iosephus Angles out of whose words I note first that Caietane who was a learned man a Domincan Fryer and sometime Cardinal of Rome must be read warily Secondly the cause for which he must be warily read and that consisteth of these two heads First that no Text in the whole Gospel can be produced which conuinceth these words This is my Body to be vnderstood properly Marry sir it is high time indeed to read this Cardinal warily for if his words were wel knowne and marked of all Papists I weene they would forsake the Pope thicke and threefold If these words this is my body be not
Octauianus to the Popedome Was not the oth accomplished and bee named Iohn Was he not a great hunter and a man of licencious life Did he not keepe women openly to the notorious scandall of the Church Did not some of the Cardinals write to Otto King of the Saxons to come besiedge Rome so to afflict him for his sins Did not the Pope perceiuing it cause the Cardinals nose to be cut off that gaue the counsel his hand that wrote the letter Martinus Polonus a Popish Arch-Bishop sometime the Popes owne Penitentiary affirmeth this to bee a constant truth Did not Pope Siluester the second a French-man borne Gilbertus by name promise homage to the Deuill so long as he should accomplish his desire Did he not so often expresse his de●ire to the Deuill as he made homage vnto him And was he not first made Archbishop of Rhemes then of Rauennas at the last Pope of Rome Did not the Deuill knowing his ambitious mind bring him to honor by degrees When he was made Pope was hee not desirous to know of the Deuill how long he should liue in his pontificall glory Did not the Deuill answere him so long as he said no Masse in Hierusalem The story is long he that can read and desireth to know it at large may find it in Martino Polono aboue named Did not Pope Benedict the eyght appear corporally after his death as it were riding on a blacke Horse the Deuill Did he not desire the Bishop that saw him to cause some Mony to be giuen to the poore because all that he gaue afore time was gotten by robbe●y and extortion Petrus Damascenus affirmeth it Was not Pope Formosus a periured person Did not Pope Iohn degrade him after he had been Bishop of Portua Did he not take him sworn that he neither should be Bishop nor euer returne to the city of Rome Did not Pope Martine absolue him of his oath Came hee not to Rome and shortly after was made Pope Did not Pope Stephanus the sixt persecute Pope Formosus Did hee not cause his dead body to be brought forth into his consistory the papall ornamentes to bee taken away a laical habit to be put on the dead corps two fingers of his right hand to be cut off and so his body to bee put into the graue Did not Sergius the third cause Pope Formosus who now had beene dead almost ten yeares to be taken out of his Tombe and to bee set in a Chaire with pontificall attire vpon his backe and then his head to bee cut off and cast into Tyber Platina Carranza and Polonus affirme it for a constant and knowne truth Did not Pope Vrbanus the second absolue subiects from their fidelity and alleageance which was dew vnto their Soueraigne so that whosoeuer obeyed the King was reputed excommunicated and they that took part against the King were resolued from the ●●ime of periury and Iniustice Did not Pope Boniface the eight challenge the right of both Swordes Did hee not depriue Phillip the French King and giue his Kingdome to him that could get it Sigebertus and Nauclerus proclaime it to the World If I should enter into the full discourse of these Mysteries time would sooner faile me then matter whereof to speake Let it suffice for the present to call to mind the ladder of eight steppes by whch the late Bishop of Rome did climbe vp to their tyrannicall primacy the killing of Christ in the Popish Masse the pluralities of bodies ascribed vnto him the sensible touching breaking and chewing of Christs Reall and naturall bodie without teeth the absurdities impossiblities and contradictions which necessarily insue vpon their falsely and fondly imagined reall presence their intollerable and blasphemous dispensations the Brother licenced to marry his owne naturall Sister persons ioyned in wedlocke by God himselfe and dissolued by the Pope Saint Pauls flat doctrin of Concupiscence to bereiected Condigne merits of Mans workes established damnable sinnes to be made Veniall Bishops not to haue voyces in Counsels vntill they first sweare to de●end the Pope and his damnable decrees that Papistes can keepe the Commandements and adde thereunto works of supererogation These and many like execrable assertions the Gentle Reader shall finde in this small Volume to be truely iustified against the Pope and his Iesuited Popelings Many years are expired since I first wrote against the Papists They haue desperately a●firmed that my Bookes were answered many yeares agoe yet this is the first answere indeede that euer was published against any of my Books which was pretended to be such a worthy thing that it must needs haue a fore-runner to come before it to exhort Men to prepare themselues worthily to receiue it as if forsooth this saucy Rebell S. R. were Christ himselfe and his fore-ru●ner Saint Iohn the Baptist. VVhat hee hath performed in his supposed aunswere and my selfe in this my Reply I refer it to the iudgement and censure of the indifferent Reader The worke such as it is I haue Dedicated vnto your Honour as an externall signe of thankefulnesse for the Honourable fauours receiued at your Lordships hand The Almighty increase your Christian zeale towardes his Gospell and so blesse your faithfull seruice to your Prince and Countrey as your most Honorable place and calling doth require Your Honors Seruant in Christ Iesus Thomas Bell. The first Article Of the Popes falsly supposed SOVERAIGNTY Chapter first Of certaine Aphorismes for the better instruction of the Reader Aphorisme 1. MAny reasons might be alledged why so many at this day doe so greedily though foolishly and vndiscreetly embrace the late Romish religion but these few to giue a tast shall suffice for the present The first reason is because they expect a day as prophane Esau did when they may kill their true and naturall Soueraigne Gods sacred and annointed Lieutenant as I haue proued elsewhere at large and so aspire and be aduaunced to great wealth dignitie But let them remember proud Hammons end least they be hanged on the gallowes which they intend and prepare for others The second because our gratious Soueraigne as did his noble predecessors K. Edward and Queene Elizabeth of famous memory laboureth to win Papists with lenity and long sufferance and by reading preaching to bring them to the light of Christes Gospell whereas the Pope neuer ceaseth to burne burne with fire and fagot whosoeuer holdeth and defendeth any one article contrary to his late hatched Religion yea if one passe by an Image or their house of Inquisition which they terme the Holy-house and do not reuerence thereunto it is enough to cast that man into the sayde disholy prison Which kind of punishment if it were vpon iust cause executed within his Maiesties Dominions shortly few or no disloyall subiects would be found within his kingdomes Which is not my bare opinion onely but euen Saint Austens in the like subiect
in defence of late start-vp Popery His Doctrine smelleth of nothing but of winde vanity and leasinges His first lye is this That the glosse saith not de nihilo but de nullo The second lie is this that I affirme the glosse to say in all cases and at all times The third lye is this that the words by me alledged are taken out of Iustinian The 4. lie is this that the glosse speaketh of Ciuill contracts Lies abundant for one short sentēce And why doth our Iesuit thus shamefully heap lyes vpon lyes Doubtles because he now seeth the halter about the Popes necke the Pope ready for his trechery to be hanged on the Gallowes as one that is conuicted by the flat Testimony of his owne sworne Vassals of most notorious blasphemy against the sonne of God For first to make of nothing something is vndoubtedly propper to the blessed Trinity the Father the sonne and the Holy-ghost three in distinction of persons and one in Vnity of substance And consequently if the Pope can make something of nothing he must perforce be another God This consequence our Iesuit and his Pope dare not admit in verball phrase although they practise it in reall act and that the truth may euidently appeare beecause it is a matter of great consequence I will examine euery parcell of the Iesuites aunswere seuerally by it selfe S. R. The glosse saith not the Pope can make de nihilo aliquid but de nullo aliquid T. B. This is a most notorious lye I referre my selfe for the truth hereof to al indifferent Readers that haue the popes decretals and can read and vnderstand the same And if the glosse say not de nihilo as I affirme but de nullo as our Iesuite saith let me be discredited for euer Oh sweet Iesus Who could euer thinke that the Papists would bee so impudent as to deny the expresse words of the text Nay I will proue it by the circumstances to the Iesuites euerlasting shame and confusion For first if the assertion were borrowed from the ciuill law and meant of ciuill contracts pacts or stipulations as our Iesuite impudently auoucheth but against his owne conscience if he haue any left then shuld it not be aliquid but aliquod as euery meane Gramarian can and will testifie with me Againe the glosse saith the Pope can change the Nature of thinges by applying the substance of one thing to another But doubtlesse when the Emperor maketh that to be a ciuill contract which afore was none hee doeth not apply the substance of one thing to another but onely commandeth his subiects to accept that for a law which before was none Thirdly no mortall man can apply the substance of one thing to another and so change the nature thereof Although the Pope take vppon him to chaunge bread into Christs body And therefore when the glosse addeth immediately and of nothing he can make something hee meaneth of that diuine power which is propper to GOD alone Like as Antoninus affirmed as is already proued that the Pope doth challenge power super omne quodcunque est ouer euery thing whatsoeuer is and hath any being and consequently ouer God himselfe And so whether he be Antichrist or no I referre it to the iudgement of the Reader for if the Pope be aboue God I dare not take vpon my selfe to bee his iudge Neither will it serue to say that Saint Antoninus doth not affirm the Pope to be aboue God For though he say not so expressely yet doth hee affirme so much virtually when he telleth vs that hee is aboue euery thing that hath being For God hath not only a being but such a supereminent being as surpasseth all intelligence and is the cause of the being of all creatures S. R. Neither yet in all cases and at all times as Bell addeth T. B. If our Iesuite were not intrinsecally as it were made of lying he would neuer for shame delight so much therein These are my wordes in my Booke and yet the truth is that as man can in some cases at some time make one thing of another so in all cases at all times to make something of nothing is proper to God alone Yet the lying and impudent Iesuite not able to encounter me nor to gainesay my proofes and reasons laboreth with might maine to disgrace me with the Reader to get the victory with flat lying Our slanderous and rayling Iesuite reporteth my wordes in this manner for saith Bell it is a thinge proper to God to make something of nothing in al cases and at al times So then all that I said was this viz That though man can at sometime in some cases make one thing of another yet to make of nothing something is proper to GOD alone neither is man able to performe the same S. R. The foresaide words are taken out of Iustinian where the Emperor saith that because he can make to be accounted a stipulation where none is much more hee can an insufficient stipulation to be sufficient T. B. The foresaid words cannot bee found in Iustinian it is a lye with a witnes The Popish Religion cannot be defended but with falshood deceit and leasings The residue is confuted already S. R. Which Bell would apply to creation and the making of Creatures of nothing as God made the world T. B. I both would and haue applyed it so in very deed and I haue proued it so sufficiently as the Iesuit cannot tel what to say to the same and therefore did he bethink him to betake himselfe to his accustomed art of Lyeng The second Article Touching the Masse Chapter first ¶ Of the reall presence of Christs body in the popish Masse S. R. THough saint Thomas teach that Christes quantity is also in the Sacrament yet affirmeth hee it not as a point of faith In like manner Bellarmine in the place which Bell citeth teacheth and truly that Christes quantity is in the Sacrament but not with Bels addition As a point of Fayth T. B. Here I perceiue I haue an Eele by the tayle Anguis est elabitur Doe our Papists teach that which they beleeue not to be true And doe they that in the Sacrifice of their most holy so supposed Masse Who would haue beleeued it if our Iesuite Parsons had not said it But good Sir tell me this Doe you teach that of your reall presence in your holy Masse which ye beleeue not to be true Then doubtlesse your silly subiects your Iesuited Papists haue neede to looke to your fingers Then must they remēber Christs rule Beware of false prophets which come to you in sheepes cloathing but inwardly are rauening Wolues And if you teach vs as ye beleeue then must your doctrin be an article of your faith Againe two Popes Vrbanus the fourth and Innocentius the fifth haue confirmed Aquinas his Doctrine for Authenticall and strictly commaunded to admit and receiue all that he hath written
wee eyther had done or could doe but for his owne good pleasure to the glory of his grace For as to doe any workes at all before we are borne is altogether impossible so to doe Goodworkes when we are borne seeing we are conceiued in sin born in sinne and by nature the Children of wrath is impossible in like manner Fiftly that all our Goodworkes are the effects and fruits of our predestination For if it be true as it is most true else the Apostle should be a lyer that wee were elected to be holy and to do Goodworkes it is also true it cannot be denyed that holy life and Goodworkes are the effectes and fruites of our election and predestination in in Christ Iesus For this cause saith the Apostle that predestination proceeds freely of Gods eternall purpose Iustification of predestination and glorification of iustification For first hee chooseth vs in Christ then he iustifieth vs in Christ. Thirdly and lastly he glorifieth vs for his owne names sake For this cause saith that famous Papist Nicholaus de Lyra in this manner Dicendum quod predestinatio diuina est preparatio gratiae in presenti gloriae in future ides cūsit aeterna sicut ab aeterno predestinauit al●quē ad beatitudinē ita preordinaui● modū quē daret sibiillā beatitudinem I answere saith this Popish Doctor that Gods predestination is the preparation of grace in this world and of glory in the World to come And therefore seeing it is eternall as hee hath predestinated any one from eternity to endlesse blisse or beatitude so hath he also fore-ordayned the meane by which hee would bring him to the same For this cause saith the Popish Angelicall Doctor Aquinas that predestination includeth Gods will of bestowing both Grace and Glory And hee addeth these words Nam praedestinatio ect causa eius quod expectatur in futura vita à praedestinatis selt gloriae eius quod percipitur in presenti selt gratiae For predestination is the cause both of that which is expected in the life to come that is to say of Glory and also of that which the predestinate receiue in this life that is to say of Grace For this cause saith our Iesuite Bellarmine that Goodworkes follow predestination as effects follow their causes These are his expresse wordes Itaque sunt opera bona effectus praedestinationis Therefore Goodworkes are the effect of predestination Againe in another place thus Itaque illa propositio deus ab aetet no praedestiaaut hominibus dare regnum per opera bona praeuisa potest vera esse falsa Nam si illud per opera praeuisa referaetur ad verbū praedestinauit falsa erit significabit n. Deum praedestinasse homines operaillorum bona praeuiderat si referatur adverbum dare vera erit quia significabit executionem futuram esse per opera bona siue quod est idem glorificationem effectum esse iustificationis operum bonorum sicut ipsa iustificatio effectus est vocationis vocatio praedestinationis Againe in another place thus Non ideo pendet praedestinatio ab operibus sed opera à praedestinatione Therefore predestination doth not depend of workes but workes depend of predestination Againe in another place thus Alia ratio est praedestinationis alia exequutionis constituit n. in praedestinatione regnum caeloruū dare certis hominibus quos absque vlla oper ūpraeuisione dilexit tamen simul constituit vt quo ad exequ●●tionem via perueniends ad regnū essent opera bona There is one reason of predestination another of execution for in predestination God decreed to giue the Kingdome of Heauen to certaine men whom hee loued without any fore-sight of workes Howbeit hee decreed withall that in respect of the execution Goodworks should be the way to come to the Kingdome For this cause say our Rhemists that our first iustification is of Gods Grace and not of our deseruinges because none of all our actions that were before our iustification could merite or iustly procure the Grace of iustification Out of this discourse of the famous Popish Doctours I obserue these memorable Lessons for the great good of the Reader First that all the Grace Faith and Goodworkes which we haue in this world and the glory which we expect in the World to come doe wholy proceed from Gods predestination without all deserts of man Secondly that as God prepared the kingdome of heauen for his elect before they were borne or had done any Goodworkes so did he also prepare the way and means by which he intended to bring them thither Thirdly that no works either done or foreseene to be doone did mooue God to predestinate any man to the ioyes of heauen Fourthly that Goodworkes are not the cause but the effect of predestination Fiftly that Goodworkes are the way and meanes which God ordained for the execution of predestination and for the accomplishment of glorification Sixtly that not onely predestination but also iustification proceed of Gods meere fauour grace and good pleasure without all deserts of man Seuenthly that our vocation our iustification and our glorification are the effects of predestination I therefore conclude that Good workes are not the cause vvhy Gods Children possesse Heauen as their inheritance seeing it is the effect of Gods predestination yet that they are the ordinary way and meanes by which God decreed in his eternall purpose to bring his elect to Heauen For as hee ordained the end that is to say the kingdome of heauen or eternall life so also ordained he the way and meanes to attaine the same that is to say vocation iustification faith and Goodworkes Secondly that there is great disparity betweene saluation and damnation and therefore that Goodworkes cannot merite Saluation though euill workes bee enough for damnation The reason is euident both in Phylosophy and Diuinity because as Saint Dionysius Areopagita saith and the Popish Angelicall Doctor Aquinas approoueth the same Bonum ex integra causa existit malum ex quolibet defectu Good is of an intire and whole cause but euill comes of euery defect yea that more is required to good then to euill daily experience teacheth vs for one may soone do that hurt to his Neghbour which cannot without great cost and long time be cured againe This S. Austen well obserued when hee left in writing to be read of all posteritie that it is a greater thing to iustifie the wicked man then to make heauen and earth S. R. I proue the conclusion because Christ saith My yoke is sweete and my burthen light And Saint Iohn saith his commaundementes are not heauy Ergo they are possible Bell aunswereth that these words are not meant in respect of vs but of Christ whose keeping the Commaundements is imputed to vs. Which Saint Austen saith hee meant when he writ thus Then are all the Commandements reputed as done when whatsoeuer
demerite eternall torment in hell fire Secondly that their Sacrament of Pennance doeth not conferre Grace Ex opere operato neyther are their most great faults therein forgiuen seeing after their auricular confession and absolution receiued of their ghostly Fathers they still stande in such feare of remission of their most great faults that they must needs confesse the same daily in time of Popish Masse To which two Corollaries I cānot but adde this delicate Post-past for his holines viz That the supposed certainty of the operation of Popish sacraments is as vncertaine as the wind For though all Papists of all sorts be bound to beleeue that Popish absolution ministred by a Popish priest after Popish auricular confession doth vndoubtedly purge them from all their sins though neuer so many neuer so great yet after such confession and such absolution receiued from the Priestes mouth they are bound by Popish lawe and Doctrine immediately to confesse their most greeuous ●aults in time of Popish Masse Whereupon followeth of necessity that Popish late start-vp Religion is able to bring all Papists headlong into desperation S. R. If you loue mee saith Christ keepe my Commaundements but how can we keepe them if they damnably deadly breake them Can true keeping thinkes Bell and true breaking stand together T. B. True keeping and true breaking in diuers respects both may and do well stand together For as the faithful in respect of their sinnes inherent in them doe breake Gods Commaundements and are in state of damnation so in respect of Christs merits imputed to them of mercy they are iust and keepe Gods commaundements perfectly For as the disobedience of Adam made all men sinners so the obedience of Christ made all the faithfull holy and iust This is it that S. Iohn saith He that is borne of God sinneth not which is not meant that he sinne not indeed but as wee liaue heard out of S. Austen and Abbot Bernard That his sinnes be pardoned and not imputed to him Hitherto we haue seene and viewed our Iesuites Diuinity now a word or two of his great charity and there an end S. R. What sir are these speeches S. Chrisostoms cited by your selse What neede a Sermon What neede a Preacher Surely then your preaching is needlesse and consequently the fifty pound pension giuen to you for it may bee well spared T. B. Behold heere our Iesuites charity He tooke in hand to aunswere the Downefall of Popery but hauing broken his back with the fal therof taking to hart that he was put at a Non-plus as not able to defend the Pope Popery he deuised with himselfe how hee might bee auenged of me and so took occasion to quarrell at my pensiō A rare Metamorphosis doubtles a digression of meer foolery to what end it were wisedome to diuine The question in hande was of the Popes souer aignety Of Religion Of Faith Of Saluation All which things though of great consequence being set apart our Iesuite as one forgetfull of the text beginneth sodainly to preach against my pension telling his Reader with all grauity that it may be well spared It may seeme our Iesuite would haue a begging Fryer and so to spend my time in seeking my dinner But as it pleased most Noble Queene Elizabeth of famous memory of her Royall bounty to bestow the fifty pound pension on me and as it hath hitherto well pleased his most excellent Maiesty to continue the same for mine honest maintainance so I hope that notwithstanding all the Iesuites pratling I would say preaching I shall still enioy the same Soli Deo vni trino honor Glorìa FINIS GEntle Reader by reason of the Authors absence and mis-vnderstanding the Copy in the 49. page these two lines are thus rightly to be corrected Ex conclusione posita probationibus quae à patre à Castro affirmantur colligitur cautè legendum esse Caietanum dicentem c. Ephe. 4. 5 The Chu●● of England defendeth old Rom● religion The late R●●mish faith the new re●●●●●on 〈◊〉 this point w●ll 〈◊〉 Par. 19. Reg. 18. Par. 29. 30 1. 34. Reg. 2. 4. 8. ●ee defend 〈◊〉 old Romā●●ligion ●n Dom 1498. 〈…〉 〈…〉 annot in 〈…〉 de potest 〈…〉 ●onc 〈◊〉 4. p. 139 〈◊〉 Iohns esie con●nned with sound of ●●●●pets Adrianus Lyr. in 16. 〈◊〉 Mat. The Pope with child 1. Tim. 2. 12. Seauen Pop witnesses 〈◊〉 pope Iohn was a wo●● Behold Po● Iohn the vi gin 〈◊〉 Dom ●07 〈◊〉 is now 〈◊〉 indeleble Character most bru●● cruelty ●●uclerus Bishops must sweare to be true to the Pope Our holy Iesuite must needs haue a fore-runner The truth 〈◊〉 preuaile in time and Po●●pery wholly ouerthrowne Gen● 27 41 See my Anathomy of Popish tyranny Hest 7 10. August epist 48 Tom 2 3 Cap quicunque de haeret lib 6 Relect 4 de potest papae conc propos 16 caus 17 q 4 cap ne●ini Rom 10 2 Marke well this word Late Victor de potest papae conc rel 4. pag. 151 Polid. Virg. lib. 4. cap. 9 pag. 39 Roffensis art 37. adu Luth. pag. 11 Couar Tom. 1 part 2. cap. 7 par 4. ● 14. in medio In the first Article Page 4 Page 7 Page 55 Page 75 Page 26 Page 17 Sigebert An. 1088. Sigebert i● Chron. An. 1088. See my Anathomy Page 5 Page 6 dist 22. can omner Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 In my Anathomy in the Caueat to the Reader and libr. 2. cap. 4. cap. 9. ●●pist to the King Page 27 Page 28 Page 30 dist 40. cap. si papa Gers. de pot eccle cons. 12. part 3. Hugo Cardin. ps 50. See my profes in the downe-fall of popery G●rs de potest eccles consid 12. part 3 Page 33 3. Reg 2 vers 35 27 3 Reg. 4 4 Cap. 2 35 Num. 27 17 2 Reg. 2 27 vbi supra verse 35. 3 Reg. 2 v. 27. v. 35. Page 38 Rom 14 23 1 cor 10 31 Page 37 See the secōd chapt for this point Page 37 2 Sam. 15 5. 6 Page 42 In my Motiues Page 44 Page 47 Page 49 The first step Page 49 The 2. step Page 51 Marke 3 24 Pag 52 In the downfall pag 3. Page 54 The 3. step Page 52 Platina in vita Bened. secund I● vita Pelagii 2 Platini in vita Siluerii Pag 53 The 4. step The 5. step Page 57 Page 57. An. 756. Nautle gen 27. pag. 678 The 6. step Page 64 Sigebert in Chron. An. 801. Bellarm. tom 1. col 831 The 7 step Phil. Berg. pag. 277 Auton 3. partit 22. cap. 5 §. 13 Page 70 Prou. 8 15 16. Rom. 13 1 The 8. step Note this point well Bonifac. 8 In extr dist 22 can omnes lib 7. epist ● Sigebert An. 1088. fol. 117. K Chron. An 1088 Anton 3 partit 22 cap 5 §. 8. In summam pag. 152 Page 78. Page 78 The first lye The 2. lye The 3. lye The 4. lye
the iudge thereof No more thē hee who conferring Scripture with Scripture expoundeth one place by another Which kind of exposition S. Austen preferreth before all other S. R. Bell saith canonicall Scripture may bee discerned of it selfe as light from darke He prooueth it because Gods word is called a light and a Lanthorne which shineth to Men. Because spirituall men iudge all things because the vnction teacheth Gods children all things And Christes Sheepe both heare and know his voyce But this is easily refelled First because though Samuell were a faithfull and holy man and God spake thrice to him yet he tooke his word for mans word vntill Hely the high Priest tolde him it was Gods word Gedeon was faithfull and yet knew not at first that it was God that spake vnto him by an Angell and therefore demanded a Miracle in confirmation of it Likewise Saint Peter was faithfull and yet at first he knew not that it was an Angell that spake and deliuered him Secondly Gods word consisteth in the sence and meaning which the faithfull oftentimes doe not vnderstand Thirdly the distinction of Scriptures from not Scriptures is not so euident as the distinction of light from darknesse is for then no man could erre therein T. B. This aunswere of our Fryer is friuolous and childish That which hee obiecteth of Samuell Gedeon and Peter is not to the purpose For as I haue prooued out of Melchior Canus and others euery one of the faithfull knoweth not euery thing but onely so much as is necessary for his saluation to know neyther is such their knowledge at euery houre moment but then onely and in such measure when and in what degree it pleaseth God to giue it Some of Gods children are effectually called at the first hour some at the third some at the sixt some at the last For though al Gods children be elected and predestinate before all time yet are they al called both generally and effectually in time some sooner some later according to the good pleasure of the caller who calleth freely without respect of persons Now where our Fryer denyeth the distinction of Gods word from mans word to be so euident as the distinction of light from darkenes because then none as he saith could erre therein I answere that as he that is blinde corporally cannot discerne colours nor behold the bright beams of the sinne so neither can he that is blind spiritually discerne Gods word frō mans word nor behold the brightnes of eternall truth For as the Apostle teacheth vs. If Christs Gospell be hid it is hidde in them that perish in whom the God of this world hath blinded the minds of them which beleeue not least the light of the gospell of the glory of Christ should shine vnto them And the same Apostle telleth vs else-where That the spirituall man iudgeth all things but the naturall man perceiueth not the things which are of God S. R. Saint Iohn sayth Bell affirmeth that the Vnction teacheth vs all thinges which wee deny not but no where saith he that it alone teacheth vs without the testimony of the Church which is it that wee deny and Bell should proue T. B. I haue proued at large euen out of your owne reuerend Byshop Melchior Canus that as the well affected tast can easily discerne the differences of sauours so can the good affection of the minde discerne the Doctrine of saluation And therfore as the testimony of the church is not necessary to the one no more is it to the other Yea if that sence of our Fryer had beene the truth of the text all the graue expositors of S. Iohn woulde neuer haue omitted the same But our Fryer coulde bring no expositor for himselfe and therefore no reason that we should admitte this bare denyall against the plaine wordes of the Text. S. R. That of the Spiritual man is not to the purpose both because all the faithfull are not spirituall but some carnall and therefore may we better inferre that the Gospell is not euident to all the faithfull as also because Saint Paul explicateth not by what meanes the spirituall man iudgeth all things whether by the euidency of the thinges as Bell woulde haue him to Iudge scripture or by some outward Testimony T. B. I answere first that all the faithfull rightly so tearmed are spirituall and not carnall neyther do the places quoted by our Iesuite proue any thing for his purpose For if he will haue none to bee spirituall that are sinners then must he deny the Apostles of our Lord to haue beene spirituall For as S. Iames granteth freely They all sinned in many thinges Secondly that if the Apostle had not explicated by what meanes the Spirituall man iudgeth all things as he did indeed yet would it not follow thereupon that our Iesuite may expound it to his best liking Thirdly that the Apostle sayth plainly in the words afore going That the spirituall man iudgeth by the spirit of God that is in him Fourthly that our Iesuite belyeth Bell heere as he doth many times else-where For Bell would not haue the spirituall man to Iudge the scripture by the euidency of the things but by the spirit of God which is euer at hand euen within him to teach him all necessary truth S. R. Bell alledgeth the Scripture That Christes Sheepe heare and know his voice which no man doubteth of But the question is whether they heare it of himselfe alone or of his church T. B. This is but irkesome Tautologie it is answered againe and againe First the late Romish Church is not the church that cannot erre this is already proued Secondly I haue proued euen out of their owne Cardinall Tolet That Christes sheepe know him because hee first knoweth them Yea the Text doth plainly yeeld that sence I knowe my sheepe saith Christ and they know mee As if he had said My Sheepe therefore know mee because I first know them Christ therefore not the church maketh his sheep to know and discern his voyce Thirdly the church is an outward help as is the preaching of the word To beget a kind of morral certitude or humane faith in the hearers but neither of them eyther doth or can beget faith Diuine in any man Paule may plant and Apol'o may water but only God can giue the increase Experience may confirme this to be so For no testification of the Romish church can make the Turke or Iew bebeleeue or acknowledge Christs Gospel If it were otherwise 10000. Iews this day in Rome would becom christians I wil say more and it is S. Austens Doctrin Many come to the Church and heare the word of God read and preached vnto thē but beleeue it not as their liues declare for euery good tree bringeth forth good fruits as our master christ telleth
vs. And what is the cause Forsooth saith S. Austen because they onely heare a sound in their outward eares but not the heauenly Preacher sounding in their harts S. R. Well saide S. Austen I would not beleeue the Gospell vnlesse the Authority of the Church did moue me thereto This place so stingeth Bell as he windeth euery way to auoyd it T. B. Howsoeuer in your opinion it stingeth me yet haue I so sufficiently aunswered it in the Downfall as there is no need heere to adde any thing in defence thereof Neuerthelesse some few Annotations I will adde for explication sake First when S. Austen saith I wold not beleeue the Gospel vnlesse the Authority of the Church did moue me thereto He meaneth of himselfe as being a Manichee not as being a christian As if he had said If I this day were not a Christian but a Manichee as I once was I woulde not beleeue this Gospell which I wish thee to embrace vnlesse the Churches Authority did moue me to the same For these are S. Austens own words Si ergo invenirem aliquem qui Euangelio nondum crèdit quid faceres dicenti tibi non credo Ego vero Euangelio nō crederem nisi me Catholicae Ecclesiae comm●veret authoritas If therefore I shoulde finde one that yet beleeueth not the Gospel what wouldst thou do to him saying to thee I beleeue it not I doubtlesse would not beleeue the gospell vnlesse the authority of the Catholicke church did mooue mee ther●unto Loe he speaketh of him that beleeueth not the gospell and of himselfe not being a christian not of himselfe or any other that professeth the gospell Where I am to admonish the Reader that here as in many other places of my Bookes this period last recited is vnperfect in the Downefall For my selfe being absent from the Presse as dwelling farre off many faultes escape the Printer That this is the true meaning of S. Austen I proue it first because in the very same Chapter hee confesseth that the Authority of the Gospell is aboue the authority of the Church Secondly because in the Chapter aforegoing after he hath discoursed of many notable things in the church Consent Miracles Antiquitie and Succession he addeth that the truth of the Scriptures must be preferred before them all These pointes and reasons I cited before out of Saint Austen which because they confound our Iesuite hee impudently denieth them affirming that Saint Austen saith not so These therefore are S. Austens owne words in the first Chapter Quòd si forte in euangelio aliquid apertissimum de Manichaei Apostolatu 〈◊〉 p●tueris infirmabis mihi catholicorum anthoritatem qui iubent non credam If happily thou canst finde in the Gospell any manifest thing of the Apostle-ship of Manichaeus thou shalt discredite the authority of Catholiques to mee who commaund mee not to beleeue thee Againe in the fourth Chapter he hath these wordes Apud vos sola persona● veritatis pollicitatio quae quidem si tam manifesta monstratur vt in dubium venire non possit praeponenda est omnibus illis rebus quibus in Catholica teneor With you onely soundeth the promise of truth which if it bee prooued so manifest that it cannot be doubted of it is to be preferred before al those thinges that hold me in the catholique church Loe in the former place Saint Austen graunteth freely that the authority of the Scripture is aboue the authority of the church And in the latter that the truth of the Scripture must be preferred before all other things whatsoeuer Away therefore with our lying Fryer and giue hearing to his fables no longer Secondly the faith that proceedeth from the Church for Testificatiō is but humaine and not diuine For none saue God onely can beget faith diuine in vs. It pleaseth GOD to vse externall meanes and Ceremonies for the confirmation of our Faith but the grace power vertue is from himselfe alone The Law was giuen by Moyses but grace and truth came by Iesus Christ. I prooue it First because a supernaturall effect must needes bee produced of a supernaturall cause and consequently diuine faith beeing a supernaturall effect cannot proceede from the Romish Church Secondly a corporall agent cannot ascend and penetrate a spirituall obiect as a materiall Sword cannot penetrate an immateriall Spirit and consequently neither produce an immateriall effect as is faith diuine Thirdly no immateriall and spirituall accident can bee receyued into any corporall subiect and consequently no corporall subiect is apt to produce a spirituall effect Fourthly Saint Austen saith plainly that it is a greater woorke to iustifie a man then to create the VVorlde but no power saith the Popish Angelicall Doctor Aquinas which is vpon earth can concurre to creation Ergo neither to iustification and consequently neither to the producing of Faith diuine Thirdly when saith is wrought and begotten in vs we may not diuide the worke giuing part to God and part to the Church but we must ascribe the whole to GOD the true Author of the whole Therfore after S. Paule had tolde the Corinthians that he had laboured more aboundantly then all the Apostles hee forthwith added these wordes Yet not I but the grace of God which is with me For though mā be not in his actions as a brute beast or block but free from all coaction and constraint yet hath he no power but from aboue neither hath he any part more or lesse in producing Grace Faith or the supernatuall effects For though it be Gods pleasure to vse mans externall acts and operations for the exercise of his faith whē he meaneth to produce supernaturall effectes yet dooth hee himselfe solely and wholy of himselfe produce the same effectes And heere I must tell the Reader of a great defect in the Latine Vulgata editio which the late Councell of Trent extolleth to the Heauens and withall Papists are bound to vse and beleeue It saith thus Yet not I but the grace of God with mee as if forsooth part were imputed to grace and part to the act and woorke of Saint Paule Whereas indeed the Apostle ascribeth the whole to God and vtterly refuseth to take any part to himselfe Which the Article ● in the Greeke left out in the Latine Vulgata editio maketh plaine and euident For after Saint Paule had saide That hee had laboured more then all the Aopostles he by and by addeth this correction Yet not I but the grace of God which is with me And heere because sensible things worke most in sensile persons let vs take an example of the Napkins and Partlets which were brought from Saint Paules body vnto the sicke for the Napkins by touching Saint Paules body receiued no inherent vertue to worke Miracles The Text saith plainely that God wrought the Miracles by the hand of Paule The Napkins and Handkerchiefes were but outward tokens to confirme the faith of