this Controuersy of the visible Church seing that Christ our Lord came into this world that he might make open and knowen the way to eternall sauation not to one Nation or age only but indeed to the whole world and all posterity it is a very absurd thing to thinke that this one only way to eternall saluatioÌ„ which is the true Church of Christ remayned hidden and vnknowen to all Nations for so many ages past CHAP. VII That this visible true Church of Christ cannot erre in matters of fayth NOTHING can be sayd more absurdly theÌ„ that the true Church of Christ can erre in matters of fayth and yet there is nothing which the Sectaries of this tyme do hold and defend with greater pertinacy not without iust cause for they see very well that it cannot be denyed but that the true Church of Christ hath for these many yeares past remayned still among Catholikes only visible as afterward we shall more clearly declare but if they should also graunt that this visible Church cannot erre they should ouerthow themselues by their owne confession Wherefore to the end they may still haue some corner or hole to slip out at they affirme that the true Church of Christ both hath erred still doth erre in points of faith Then the which nothing certainly is more absurd especially seing that they affirme that it hath erred not in things of small moment but in the principall and chiefest poynts of fayth which are playnly necesrary to eternall saluation yea also that it hath fallen into manifest Idolatry Moreouer that it hath not only fayled staggered in fayth hath publikely taught many errors against fayth but hath also compelled and forced by threats and torments all to Idolatry And lastly that it hath donne thus not only for the space of one yeare but for a thousand or at least 900. yeares All which how absurd they are we will now declare 2. But to the end that all which we are to say hereafter of this matter may be the better vnderstood we must note heere that when we affirme that the Church cannot erre in fayth that by this word fayth we vnderstand not only that inuisible fayth which is in our mind but also visible that is to say the publike doctrine of the whole Church which is proposed or set downe to be belieued of all Wherfore when we affirme that the Church cannot erre in matters of fayth we affirme also that the doctrine or points of fayth the which the Church of God setteth downe as the most certayne and vndoubted word of God cannot be false but the very word of God it selfe which I will clearly declare by these arguments 2. The first argument is deduced out Supr hâ— ipsa contro c. 1. of all those properties and offices of the true Church before alledged out of Scripture For the true fayth being once taken away all the foresayd properties of the Church must needes perish and all her offices must cease For the Church caÌ„ neyther be the spouse of Christ nor the bodâ— nor the Kingdome nor the inheritance nor the teÌ„ple of Christ without faith but neyther can the Church without faith the true doctrine therof eyther conceyue bring forth nouriâ—h gouerne or defend Christes flocke And in this manner the Church of Christ for so many ages had lost Supr c. 1. hâ—ius coÌ„tro all her properties had intermitted all her proper offices contrary to so many so cleare promises of holy Writ before alledged 4. The second argument is deduced out of most cleare testimonyes of holy Scripture which teach that the Church caÌ„not erre in faith For first Christ himself V. at 16. v. 18. affirmeth that the gates of hell shall not preuaile against the Church But if the Church could erre in faith the gates of hell for so many ages past had preuailed against her 5. Moreouer God speaketh thus by Isa 59. v. vlâ— his Prophet Isay of the Couenant of the new Testament This is my league with them saith our Lord my spirit which is in thee and my words which I haue put in thy mouth shall not departout of thy mouth out of the mouth of thy seed out of the mouth of thy seeds seed satthour Lord froÌ„ hence forth euen to the worlds end But in our Aduersaries opinioÌ„ the words which God hath put into the mouth of the Church had departed many ages out of her mouth 6. Lastly the Apostle affirmeth that the Church is the Pillar and stability of truth â— Tim. 1. v. 9. But if the Church could erre in faith and teach publikely against the word of God it should be the Pillar rather of falshood then of truth Some of our Aduersaries do aÌ„swere vnto this place that the church is called indeed the Pillar of truth because it doth not erre when it followeth and is agreable vnto the word of God yet neuerthelesse it erreth when it disagreeth from the word of God But this is a very friuolous answere For according vnto this interpretation euery Church of Heretikes of Iewes Turkes yea of the Diuels themselues should be the Pillar of truth For none of these erreth when it is agreable to the word of God But a Pillar is that which necessarily and alwaies vpholdeth that which it strengthneth and whose pillar it is wherfore the Church should not be the Pillar of truth vnlesse it alwaies sticke and be ioyned with the truth and vphould it Caluin therfore Calu. l. 4. Inst c. 2. sect 1. in fine coÌ„uinced by the euidence of the truth writeth that if the true Church be the Pillar of truth it is most certaine that the Kingdome where lyes falshood rargneth cannot be the true Church Thus Caluin 7. The third argument is deduced out of diuers Absurdities which ensue out of the doctrine of our Aduersaries The first absurdity is that the Apostles Creed were false wherin we belieue the holy Catholike Church For that Church cannot be holy which wanteth the true faith which reacheth falsities and wickednes which forceth all men to Idolatry 8. The second absurdity is that Christ himselfe and the holy Ghost should erre and teach thinges both false and wicked For the doctrine of the Church is not so Luc. 10. v. 16. Ioan. 14. v. 26. Act. 15. v. 28. much the doctrine of the Church as it is of Christ of the holy Ghost VVâ—o hear th you saith Christ heareth me and in another place The Paraclete the holy Ghost whom my Father will send you in my name he will teach you all thinges And tâ—e Apostles said It seemeth good to the holy Gâ—ost and to vs. Lastly God himself by his Prophet speaking vnto the Church affirmeth that his holy Spirit is in the Church and that he hath put his words into the mouth of the Church which shall neuer be taken out of her mouth from hence forth till the end of the world Wherefore if
or marrow not in the leauâ—s of the words but in the sappeâ—pâ—th or roote os reason And a little after otherwise Matt. 4. v. 6. euen the Diuell himselfe speaketh Scriptures and all heresies according to Ezechiel make vnto themselues pillowes which they may lay vnder the elbow oâ— euery age Ezec. 13. v. 18. 2. By that which hath byn sayd answere may be made to our Aduersaries when they obiect against vs that we affirme the Scripture to be imperfect obscure like a nose of wax which a man may writh which way he will and lastly the origen and spring in a manner of all heresies for we affirme this of the naked and dead letter alone destitute of the true sense or rather of the letter to which the Heretikes adde their owne peruerse sense and meaning neyther haue our Aduersaries any cause to wonder at this seeing S. Paul himselfe saith of the bare letter alone that it killeth and bringeth eternall death 1. Cor. â— v. 6. 7. 9. and damnation But neuer any Catholike did euer attribute any such thing to the liuing letter which hath conioyned with it the true and natiue sense and which alone is truly and properly the word of God CHAP. IIII. How we are to seeke out the true sense and meaning of the holy Scripture THERE is great contentioÌ„ beweene vs and our Aduersaries about the meanes how to finde out the true and naturall interpretation of the letter a thing so necessary to eternall saluation They teach diuers thinges concerning this matter but deliuer nothing that is certayne One assigneth more rules to this purpose another fewer but when they haue sayd all they confesse at last that there was neuer any which hath not at sometyme erred in seeking out the true interpretation of holy Scripture For they gyue not their assent either to the ancient Fathers or to their owne Maisters in all thinges they teach or write nay they cannot assigne any one whom they acknowledge not to haue erred sometyme nor dare affirme to be free from error seeing as they say Euery man is a lyar and so at last all Rom. 3. v. 4. thinges are left by them doubtfull and vncertayne 2. But the Catholikes do proceed after another manner who teach that the certayne vndoubted sense of the Letter is not to be taken from the iudgment of any particuler man but from the vniforme consâ—nt of the ancient Fathers and especially from the iudgment and interpretation of the Catholike Church to whome it appertayneth to iudge of the sense and meaning of the holy Scriptures as the holy and Oecumenicall Councell of TreÌ„t teacheth very well for there is no doubt Concil Trident. sess 4. but that it is more safe to follow such an interpreter as cannot erre then such a one as erreth somtymes or at leastwise may erre but the Church cannot erre in her iudgment seeing that Christ and the â—oly Ghost remayne with her to teach Matt. 28. c vlt. Ioan. 14 v. 16. â—oan 16. v. 13. â—er all truth wherof more herafter when we shall come to treat of the Church 3. It shall suffice to obserue and â—ote here that according to the doctrine of our Aduersaries nothing either solide or certayne is contayned in the holy Scriâ—ture for wheras all dependeth of the â—rue sense of the Letter and with them â—here is no certayne or sure meanes by which to finde out this sense it followeth â—hat they call all into doubt which is in â—he Scripture wherby who seeth not how much they iniure them But contrariâ—yse according to the Catholike doctrine all thinges are euident and cerâ—ayne which are contayned in the holy Scriptures appertayning eyther to faith or good manners the Catholikes hauing euer a certayne and faithful Interpreter to wit the Catholike Church And surely whosoeuer reiecteth the sense which the Church giueth and in place therof substituteth another altogeather repugnant to it doth all one with him who reiecting the holy Scripture should in place therof bring in a new Scripture of his owne forging the sense of the Scripture being no lesse a part of the word of God then the letter which in these few wordes Tertullian confirmeth out of the tradition of the auncient Church The sense adulterated or falsified is no lesse repugnant Tertul. de prâ—sc c. 17. to the truth then the letter or stile corrupted 4. And to conclude it may be inferred that saluation is to be found in the Roman Church only and none at all out Marc. vlt. vers 16. â—om 3. v. 1â— Heb. â—â— v. 9. of it which I proue thus Both the Scripture testifyeth all meÌ„ confesse that diuine fayth is necessary to saluation but such as forsake the RomaÌ„ Church cannot haue diuine faith which wholy relieth vpon the word of God only but meerly humane seing their fayth is founded not in the word of God interpreted by the Church which cannot errâ— but in the word and interpretation of Luther Caluin or some other priuate man who as they themselues graunt may erre and be deceiued such an humane fayth then so doubtfull and vncertayne and only warranted by mans authority cannot iustify or bring a man to eternall saluation CHAP. V. How we may know which is the true letter of the holy Scripture ALL such as forsake the Roman Church and make little account of her authority are not only doubtfull vncertayne which is the true sense of the Scripture but they can haue no assurance at all eyther of the whole or of any part of the letter therof For whilst they goe about to call in question and make doubtfull certayne bookes only of the old Testament before they are aware they take away all authority from all other bookes both of the old and new Testament For whereas there is but one certaine and vndoubted Canon of these bookes to wit that which is receaued and approued by the iudgment of the Catholike Church which cannot erre our Aduersaries reiecting this Canon make all the books doubtfull conteined therin for no certayne testimony can be had of these bookes but eyther by this Canon only or by the auncieÌ„t tradition of the Church but they neyther admit this Canon nor wil stand to this vnwritten TraditioÌ„ or acknowledge it for the true word of God 2. Now as for the Canons lately set out by themselues no man can safely belieue them seeing they neyther agree one with another nor with the auncient Canons of the Church nor are any where found in the writteÌ„ word of God which as they teach is only to be belieued neyther can they bring any thing eyther concerning the Canon of the Hebrewes or any other auncient Canon which they haue not taken from the writings of the auncient Fathers whose authority without the expresse written word of God they will haue to be in no wise sufficient to engender fayth so as euen by the iudgment of our Aduersaries none of all these
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 EditioÌ„ 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 maâ—y places corrupted and depraued in which the vulgar Edition is entire and vncorrupted Both these reasons shâ—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 profouÌ„d 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 Ieâ—â—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 ouâ—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 raâ—sâ—d by God and placed in the Church to the end we should not be carried about with euery wind of doctrine who haue dâ—fended the faith against all heâ—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 receâ—ued froÌ„ the Apostles 4. Moreouer wheras no man can 2. Cor. 12. v. â—â— â—8 â— Pet. 1. v. 20. 21. rightly interprete the Scriptures who hath not recâ—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 â—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 hâ—ld 2. Tim. â— v. vâ—t Mat. 15. v. 14. captiue at his will And seeing that saying oâ— 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 bliâ—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 caÌ„not 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
tyme can intimate vnto vs diuers things 6. The which thing is excellently declared by S. Augustin for hauing said that Aug. â— 12. â—onf c. vlt. he thought Moyses intended diuers senses in his words he correcteth himselfe saâ—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 amoâ—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 Deuteronâ—my Thou shalt Deut. 25. v. 4. not tâ—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 inteÌ„ded 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 beâ—ne shewed in the seaueÌ„th 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 womaÌ„ 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 attrâ—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 thâ— for reprehending our version seeing they stoutly maintayne that by the seed â—â— the woman Chrill only is meant 4. But as for Caluin he sheweth the greedy appetite he hath to calumniate wheÌ„ he calleth our version a sacrilegious exposition for he conuinced by the truth coÌ„fesseth that by the seed of the woman not only Christ is meant but al his members yeâ— euen all maÌ„kind It is therefore woÌ„derfull that he saith it is a sacrilegious expesition to apply to the Blessed Virgin Mary that which was spoken of the seed vnlesse â—e will not that the Blessed Virgin be any meÌ„ber of Christ or to appertayne any thing to mankind For seeing that the promise of bruzing SathaÌ„s head appertayneth to Christ and euery member of his aâ— Caluin writeth in expresse wordes Calu. l. 1. Inst c. 14. sect 13â— it must doubtlesse principally apperthyne to the Blessed Virgin as who next after Christ hath most strongly crushed Sathans head VVherfore euen the Lutheranâ— Hun. in Caln IudaizaÌ„te in Anti. paraeo themselues obserue that Caluin hath no reason to obiâ—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 ipsâ— 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 heâ—re iâ—stâ—â—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
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 Dâ—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 bâ—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 theÌ„ 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. â—â—aâ—th v. 46. Item in Catech. Dom. 10. Bez. in c. 5. ad Heb. v. 7. traÌ„ct 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 CoÌ„trouersies 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 impioâ—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 frâ—Ì„ 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 traÌ„slated 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 â—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. â—â— v. 26. Calâ— 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
consequently coÌ„mend 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 theÌ„ 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 writteÌ„ 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. Auguâ—tine Albeit indeed of this thing saith he S. Aug. Tom. 7. contra Cresâ—on Gram. l. 1. cap. penu t. tâ—ere can no example be alleadged out of Canonicall Scriptures yet notwithstanding we hould the truth of the same holy Scriptures in tâ—â—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 vâ—ry clearely sheweth and S. Aug. Tom. 7de bapt coÌ„t 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. adâ—anuar c. 5. Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 4. sect vlt. sub fi l. 3. c. â— sect 10. in medio 6. But of the Ecclesiasticall rites and Ceremonies the same S. Augustine speaketh in this maÌ„ner 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 â—e obserued that whereas our Aduersaries haue â—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 wâ—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 â—of the Church 2. But this best of all is declared by the Properties of the Church of Christ and by her Offices coâ—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 6â— 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
perspicuously resolued Their first argument is if the authority of the Church were the ground of fayth then it would follow that our faith relied vpon men and not vpon God for the Church consisteth of men Our Aduersaries do often repeate and inculcate this argument vnto vs. I answeere that the same argument if it were any thing worth would also proue that we should not belieue Scriptures because althose who wrot the books of the Bibles were also men buâ—â—â— we do belieue their writinges not because they were men but because they had a certaine peculiar assistaÌ„ce of the holy Ghost who did so gouerne and direct them that they could not erre so in like manner we belieue the Church and make it the ground of our fayth not as it consisteth of men but as it hath a speciall and continuall assistance of the holy Ghost by whome she is continually gouerned and directed wherby it commeth to passe that she can neuer erre as we haue proued Cap. 7. praeced a little before 2. Wherefore to make the Church the ground of our fayth is nothing els then to make the holy Ghost and Christ himselfe the ground therof For it is he who speaketh vnto vs by the mouth of the Church according to that saying of S. Paul Seeke you an experiment of him that speaketh in me Christ And in another place speaking of his own 2. Cor. 13. v. 3. 1. Thess v. 8. doctrine he sayth therfore he that despiseth these things despiseth not man but God who also hath giueÌ„ his holy spirit in vs. But our Aduersaries do thinke speak too basely of the Church as though it consisted of men only as the Churches of Infidells and Heretikes seeing that the chiefe part of the true Church of Christ is the holy Ghost who is as it were the soule and spirit of the Church 3. But neither is this to make the Scripture or the holy Ghost subiect inferito our men as our Aduersaries are woÌ„t to cauil but oÌ„ly to shew that the holy Ghost is euery where conformable to himself that in all things he neuer differeth or disagreeth froÌ„ himselfe Whether he speak vnto vs by the holy Scripture or by the mouth of the Church as Caluin acknowledgeth Calu. l. 1. Instit c. 9. sect 2. disputing against the Anabaptists and Libertines who by such an argument went about to reiect the holy Scriptures to wit least the holy Ghost might be made subiect and inferiour vnto them 4. The second argument is that Christians may and ought to iudge and examine all things as the Apostle sayth therefore the spirit of euery Christian ought to be the grouÌ„d of al things I answere that by the same argumeÌ„t the Anabaptists Libertines 1. Cor. v. 15. reiectâ—d all the Scriptures that they might only retaine the spirit as witnesseth Caluin but badly for euen as Christians must discerne and iudge all things so must Calâ—â— c. 9. citat sect 1. they also obserue the rule and methode in iudging which the Scripture doth prescribe vnto them and which himselfe appointed but this rule is not euery ones priuate spirit but the spirit of the whole Church For it is altogeather necessary that the rule of fayth be most certayne free from all errors as the spirit of the whole Church is and not that of euery priuate man Hereupon sayth S. Iohn He 1. Ioan. 4. v. 6. which knoweth God heareth vs he who is not of God doth not heare vs in this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error We must tâ—erfore iudge of euery man by that they eyther heare or do not heare the Church c because they either agree or disagree from the spirit of the Catholike Church 5. The third argument is that Catholikes proue the Church and the authority thereof by the Scripture therfore Scripture is rather the ground of fayth then the Church I answere first that the proofe of the Church which is taken out of Scriptures when we dispute against heretikes is an argument called by Philosophers ad hominem and it is deduced out of the premises already graunted in which manner also the first principles or grounds of euery science may be proued and out of those thinges also which of themselues are not very strong and certayne So out of the old Testament agaynst the Iewes we proue the new Testament albeit this also is the ground of our fayth because the Iewes do admit and receiue the old Testament but not the new yea also euen out of the Iewish Talmud we proue many things against the Iewes because they admit and approue it as the word of God but yet their Talmud is not the ground of our fayth because this only is as I sayd an argument deduced out of such thinges as they graâ—â—t vnto vs. So in like maÌ„â—er because almost al heretikes admit the Scripture and reject the authority of the Church therefore when we dispute against them we proue the authority of the Church by the Scriptures as premisses already graunted by them But if we were to deale with Infidells or others who doe not admit the Scriptures then the sayd Scriptures were to be proued by the authority of the Church and not contrarywise For it is a thing farre better and more commonly knowne that there Infra 18. buius coÌ„ â—r §. 10. is a Church then that there are the holy Scriptures as afterward we will shew more clearly 6. Secondly I answere that there is so great connexion betwixt the Scripture and the Church that the Scripture may very well be proued by the authority of the Church and againe the church by the authority of the Scripture Neyther should this seeme strange to our Aduersaries For Logicians also know very well that that which by it owne nature is more certaine better knowne may be proued by that which is more certaine and beter knowne vnto vs by a demonstration called by them à posteriori And coÌ„trary wise that which is better knowne vnto vs may be proued by that which is better knowne and more certaine in his owne nature by a demonstration called à priori So the cause is proued by the effect the effect by the cause as fyre is proued by heate à posteriori and heate by the nature of fyre à priori So in like manner by the authority of the Church the which in regard of vs is more certayne and better knowne we proue the Scripture as it were à posteriori and by the authority of the Scripture which in it owne nature is more certaine we proue the true Church of Christ as it were à priori 7. The fourth argument S. Paul testifyeth that the Church is supported by the ground and foundation of the Prophets and Apostles that is to say by their Propheticall and Apostolicall doctrine but if the foresaid doctrine be the ground of the Church it necessarily followeth that this doctriue appeareth to
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 vpoÌ„ 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 Baâ—-iona that is to say the sonne of Ionas or of Iohn as also the EuaÌ„gelist 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 woÌ„â— 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. veâ— 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 takeÌ„ 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 speakâ—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
belieue by faith are inuisible but by faith we belieue there is a Catholike Church as appeareth by the Apostles Creed therefore the Catholike Church is inuisible and not visible I answere that this is a weake argument albeit Calu. l. 4. â—nstit c. â— sect 1. in prinâ— Caluin also vseth it For if it were not it would proue that the holy Scripture were also inuisible because we belieue also the holy Scripture by faith yea it would also proue euen our Aduersaries Church to be as yet inuisible for they as yet belieue their Church by faith and yet they coÌ„fesse that their Church is now visible And truly if their Church had remayned stil inuisible they had neuer caused so many tumults in the Christian Common-wealth But certainly euen as in the holy Scriptures we see one thinge and belieue another we see the letters characters the which the Infidels also see but we belieue that the Scripture is most true in all thinges the which they do not belieue so we sâ— that the Church of Christ is extant the which also the Infidels do see for Turkes Iewes do very well know that there is a Pope and that there are Bishops Princes and Christian Nations but we belieue that this Church which we see is an holy Church is gouerned directed by the holy Ghost and that she cannot erre in matters of faith all which the Infidels do not belieue 3. The fifth argument None is in the Church but by faith but faith is inuisible therfore the Church also is inuisible I answere that this is a very weake consequence for otherwise we might reason thus None is man but by a reasonable soule but the soule of man indued with the vse of reason is inuisible therfore the whole man also is inuisible Also no Scripture is to be accounetd holy but by the authority of God but this authority is invisible therefore the Scripture also is inuâ—sible For it is not necessarie that a thing may be called visible that the chiefe part or reason thereof be visible but it sufficieth if any part therof be visible as manifestly appeareth in all visible substances for their chiefe partes to wit their substantiall matter and forme are thinges inuisible 4. Secondly I answere that the faith wherby a man is made a member of the visible Church is not only an interiour faith which is not to be seene but that which is euidently seene and declared by exteriour signes as for example by confessing publikely the said faith by receauing the Sacraments and such other exteriour acts The which is so true that this exteriour profession of our faith only without the interiour faith sufficeth that a man become a member of the visible Church as Bellarmine well proueth Bell. l. 3. de milit Eccl. c. â—0 seing that otherwise none could be certaine of his Prelate or Pastour because none can see the faith or mind oâ— another 5. Hence also it is that not only the predestinate and iust men are members of the visible Church but also such as be hypocrites and wicked men who professe their faith according to those wordes of Ioan. â—â— v. 2. Ibid. v. 6. Christ Euery branch in me not bearing fruit he will take it away And if any abide not in me he shal be cast forth by whcih wordes Christ sheweth that they also who doe not remayne in him that is to say those which are not predestinate and those which do not bring forth any fruit that is to say bad Christians are in him that is to say in his visible body which is the Church the which also almost all our Aduersaries confesse as we haue said before and Bellarmine proueth more at large 6. The sixt argument our Aduersaries Apoc. 12 v. â— 14. deduce out of the Apocalyps wherein it is said That a woman â—â—uested with the sunne which signifieth the true Church fled into the desert and remayned there for the space of 1260. dayes that is to say as our Aduersaries interprete it a thousand two hundred and sixty yeares Out of which they infer that the Church remayned inuisible as it were in the desert these thousand two hundred and sixty yeares last past I answere that this is a vicious argument for many reasons For first it is very absurd to thinke that the Church of Christ did ly hidden and invisible these thousand two hundred sixty yeares past For therupon it would ensue that the Church of Christ was inuisible then when it most florished was spread abroad ouer the whole world as for example in the tymes of S. Augustine Ambrose Hilary Athanasius Hierome Chrysostome Cyril c. Yea in the tyme also of all the auncient Councels the which our Aduersaries Confess Rupell Art 6. themselues do admit in their confession of faith For all these Fathers and ancient Councels haue byn within the space of the forsaid thousand two hundred and sixty yeares the which our Aduersaries do account from Pope Siluester till Luthers tyme wherefore this place of the Apoâ—â—lyps is not to be vnderstood of yeares but literally of daies only 7. Moreouer it is not certain that by this word desert is vnderstood any solitary place or such as is depriued of all the society or comfor of men For Primasius S. Prima in cap. 12. Apoc. Augustines scholler saith that by the foresayd word is signified the whole world the which also that desert signified through the which the Children of Israel Numer 14. v. 34. passed before they came to the land of Promise euen as by the sayd land of Promise was also signified the euerlasting lyfe Some others will haue the foresayd word desert to signfy a departure or forsaking of all sinnes and vices and all other pleasures of this world according to that saâ—ng of the Prophet Osee I will carry and lead her into the desert and I will speake vnto Osee v. 14. Psal 54. v. 8. her hart And that of Dauid Behould flying away I went farre off and I remayned in the desert 8. Lastly albeit we should graunt that this desert were some wyld or forsaken place yet neuâ—rthelesse it could not be gathered thereby that the Church of Christ eyther was or euer shal be inuisible For neyther this womaÌ„ which fled into the wildernesse signifieth the whole Church of Christ but some one famous Church the which Antichrist shall persecure most of all because it will strongly oppose it selfe against his impiety and wickednesse And in the end of the forsaid vision S. Iohn playnly affirmeth that the Dragon Apoc. â—2 v. 17. after the deliuery of that woman shall make warre against the rest of her seed who keep the commandmeÌ„ts of God and haue the testimony of Iesus Christ therfore besides that woman there wil be some out of the desert who will publikely professe the true faith of Christ against whom for that cause the Dragon will fight 9. But that we may now conclude