v. 5. he was wounded for our transgressions and it followeth he was broken for our iniquities and againe the chasticement of our peace was vpon him and with his stripes are wee healed verse 6. the Lord hath laied vpon him the iniquities of vs all verse 8. For the transgression of my people was he plagued v. 10. he shall make his soule an offering for sinne v. 11. he shall beare their iniquities v. 12. he bare the sinnes of many and praied for the transgressors what could be more euidently expressed or how in more full and effectuall tearmes could the force and efficacie of Christs death redeeming and iustifying vs from our sinnes be described 3. Controv. Against the enemies and adversaries to the Scriptures the Marcionites Libertines with others v. 4. Whatsoeuer is written c. Those heretikes which impugne the Scriptures doe either condemne them as vnnecessarie or of no vse or reiect them as superfluous for such as are perfect or hold them as defectiue and imperfect and such as haue neede of other helps and supplies the first are the Manichees and Marcionites which condemne the bookes of Moses and the old Testament the second the Libertines which doe cleaue vnto their fantasticall dreames which they call revelations and say the Scriptures are onely for such as are weake the third are the Romanists which doe beside the Scriptures receiue many traditions which they call verbum Dei non scriptum the word of God not written which they make of equall authoritie with the Scriptures 1. Against the first Origen in his commentarie here sheweth how the things written aforetime in the old Testament were written for our learning and giueth instance of these places Thou shalt not muzle the mouth of the oxe c. which S. Paul applieth to the Ministers of the Gospel 1. Cor. 9. and that allegorie of Abrahams two sonnes the one by a free woman the other by a bond which S. Paul expoundeth of the two testaments Gal. 4. and that of Manna and the rocke which signified Christ 1. Cor. 10. by this induction Origen confuteth those heretikes which refused the old Testament 2. The Libertines also and Anabaptists are confuted which thinke the Scriptures serue onely for the weake seeing the Apostle who counteth himselfe among the strong v. 1. here saith whatsoeuer is written is written for our learning the Apostle confesseth that he among the rest receiued instruction and learning from the Scriptures Those then are impudent and shamelesse creatures which doe take themselues to be more perfect then S. Paul as needing not the helpe of the Scriptures 3. Our adversaries the Papists are here in an other extreame for as the Libertines allow the Scriptures onely for the vse of the simple so they contrariwise denie them to the simple and vnlearned and challenge a propertie in them onely to themselues that are professed among them of the Clergie and to such other to whome they shall permit the reading of the Scriptures But S. Paul here writing to the whole Church of the beleeuing Romans both learned and vnlearned both Pastors and people saith generally they are written for our learning and so our blessed Sauiour speaking vnto the people of the Iewes saith Search the Scriptures Ioh. 5.39 And as for that other part of Pharisaicall leauen in adding vnwritten traditions beside the Scriptures it is also reiected by warrant of the Apostles words here whatsoeuer things are written are written for our learning things then not written are not for our learning as hauing no certentie nor foundation And S. Paul els where setting forth the manifold vse and profit of the Scriptures addeth That the man of God may be absolute and made perfect c. 1. Tim. 3.17 if perfection of knowledge and to euery good worke may be attained vnto out of the Scriptures all other additions are superfluous See further hereof Synops. Centur. 1. err 12. 4. Controv. Of the authoritie of the Scriptures that it dependeth not vpon the approbation or allowance of the Church Whatsoeuer is written c. From hence also may be confuted an other point of Popish doctrine that the Scriptures receiue their authoritie and allowance from the Church for the word of God in the Scriptures is sufficient of it selfe and we doe beleeue the Scriptures because we are perswaded by the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures that they are the word of God 1. For if the Scriptures should receiue their authoritie from the Church then it would follow that God must submit himselfe to the iudgement and approbation of men and the Prophet Dauid saith Euery man is a lyer can they then which are natura mendaces lyers by nature giue approbation and authoritie to the truth and further seeing faith commeth by hearing of the word of God Rom. 10.17 and the faithfull are begotten by the immortall seede of Gods word as the holy Apostle Saint Peter saith how can they that are begotten beget credite and authoritie vnto that which first begat them 2. We graunt that there are certaine motiues and externall inducements to prepare vs to this perswasion of the Scriptures that they are the word of God as 1. That they were written by Prophets which were stirred vp of God and inspired with his spirit for how otherwise could plaine and simple men as Amos that was a keeper of cattel the Apostles that were fisher men be made able to such great workes 2. they were confirmed by miracles 3. the predictions of the Prophets as of Daniel and the rest were fulfilled in their time and place but God onely can foretell and foreshew things to come 4. Beside the Scriptures haue beene miraculously preserued as the bookes of the Law in the time of the captiuitie and vnder the tyrannie of Antiochus that committed them to the fire so since both the old and new Testament haue beene by impious Tyrants as Iulian the Gothes and Vandales sought for to be vtterly extinguished but yet God hath preserued them whereas many humane writings of Philosophers Historiographers and others haue perished by fire as when Ptolomes librarie was burned at Alexandria and by other casualities 5. adde hereunto the consent of all nations that haue receiued the Christian faith who with one consent haue acknowledged the Scriptures for the word of God All these and such other motiues may be inducements vnto vs at the first to receiue the Scriptures but the full perswasion is wrought in vs by the spirit of God in the reading and learning of the Scriptures themselues that we may say touching these motiues as the Samaritanes did vnto the woman that called them to see Christ that they beleeued him not so much vpon her report as for that they had heard him themselues Ioh. 4. 3. But that saying of Augustine will be obiected Evangelio non crederem nisi Ecclesiae Catholicae me commoverit authoritas I had not beleeued the Gospel if the authoritie of the Catholike Church had not mooued mee I answer
seemed rather to be common brothelhouses Gualter Controv. 2. The Church not alwaies visible and consisting of multitudes v. 5. The Apostle saluteth the Church which was in the house of Aquila and Priscilla so also he maketh mention of the Church in Philemons house Phil. 2. whereby it is euident that the name of a Church agreeth euen vnto a fewe gathered together in Christs name as our Blessed Sauiour promiseth that where two or three are gathered together in Christs name he will be in the middes of them Matth. 28. We must not then looke alwaies to finde out a Church by the outward pompe and glorie of it or by the multitude and great troupes and number of people as the Romanists make these the notes and markes of the Church see further Synops. Cent. 1. err 18.19 Controv. 3. All doctrine is to examined by the Scriptures Whereas the Apostle v. 17. willeth the Romanes to take heede of those which cause divisions contrarie to the doctrine which they had receiued the Rhemists giue this corrupt glosse in their annotations tht he biddeth them not to examine the case by Scriptures but by their first forme of faith and religion deliuered to them before they had or did reade any booke of the newe Testament Contra. 1. The doctrine which had beene preached among the Romanes was agreeable to the old Scriptures though there had beene yet no bookes of the newe Testament extant as S. Paul professeth that he said none other things then Moses and the Prophets did say should come Act. 26.22 and therefore the brethen of Berca are commended Act. 17.11 for searching the Scriptures and examining the Apostles doctrine thereby 2. yet it is verie probable that some of the Gospels were written at this time as Ieraeneus l. 3. c. 1. thinketh that S. Matthewes was and Hierome in catalog S. Markes 3. but it followeth not before the Scriptures were written they receiued their doctrine and faith by tradition when they had immediate direction from the Apostles therefore now when the Sriptures of the old and newe Testament are extant and no Apostles to direct the Church who were priuiledged not to erre we should leaue the written word of God and flee vnto vnwritten traditions Origen hath here an excellent saying vide quam prope periculis fiunt hi qui exerceri in divinis Scripturis negligunt ex quibus solis huinsmodi examinationis agnoscenda discretio est see how neere they are vnto danger which neglect to be exercised in the diuine Scriptures out of the which onely this examination is to be discerned and acknowledged Controv. 4. That Papists not Protestants serue their owne bellie Whereas the Apostle giueth this as a note of false teachers and seducers that they seeke rather to serue their bellie then Iesus Christ v. 18. our vnkind countreymen the Rhemists doe glaunce here at Protestants whom they falsely and blasphemously call heretikes That they seeke onely their owne profit and pleasure what soeuer they pretend But it is as cleare as the Sunne that they here take themselues by the nose and that they are the heretikes if euer any that serue their bellie and are cunning kators for their kitchin They may remember what Erasmus answear was to the Duke of Saxonie when he was asked his opinion of Luther that he medled with two dangerous things the Popes crowne and the Monkes belly witnesse also that pitifull complaint and supâ—â—icatioÌ„ of certaine Monkes to Henry the second that whereas they had before 13. dishes of meate allowed them to a messe their Bishop cut off three of them And are the friers of these dayes thinke you more sparing and pinching of their bellie let that factious crue of those makebates the trayterous Iudasites rather then Iesuites speake who in few yeares at la-flesh in Fraunce beside the sumptuous building of their Colledge which cost an 100. thousand crownes bestowed as much in their revennue a reasonable proportion to keepe a fat table and to fill their bellies Controv. 5. That Protestants are no schismatikes Whereas the Apostle giueth a double caueat v. 17. concerning seducers and false teachers that first they must be examined and obserued how they do bring in strange and nouell doctrine contrarie to the receiued truth and then they must be avoided and declined this doth iustifie the departure of the Protestants from the Church of Rome because it is a false and Antichristian Church and hath fallen away and played the Apostata from the faith of Christ and therefore we are to leaue them according to S. Pauls rule Tit. 3.11 A man that is an heretike after the first and second admonition avoid Controv. 6. Why the Gospel was kept secret so many yeares vnder the kingdome of Antichrist against the obiection of the Papists v. 25. By the revelation of the mysterie which was kept secret from the beginning of the world whereas the Papists obiect against the Protestants where was your Gospel 60. or 70. yeares agoe how commeth it to passe that it was so long kept secret and hid in the world is it like that God would haue his truth so long coÌ„cealed Herevnto we answear that as the Gospel of Christ was a long time folded vp in a mysterie till Christ came but then reuealed at Gods own appointment So it pleased God that the Gospel once preached to the world being by mens vnthankfulnes obscured shold liehid as a punishmeÌ„t of their ingratitude that loued lies rather then the truth yet should againe for the gathering together of the elect be revealed vnto the world at such time as seemed good vnto our gracious God Contr. 7. Against the Popish doxologie ascribing glorie with Christ vnto the virgin Marie v. 27. To God onely wise be glorie thorough Iesus Christ c. This was the holy vse of the Apostles to conclude with giuing praise to God only through Iesus Christ we may then iustly wonder at the superstitious impietie audacious presumption of the Romanists which vse a contrary stile ioyning Christ and the Virgin Marie together in their doxologies as Tolet thus concludeth his commentarie vpon this epistle sit gloria omnipotenti Deo gloriosâ—ssima mâ—tri eius glorie be to the omnipotent God and to his most glorious mother so Pererius concludeth laus Deo Dei genetrici semper virgini Mariae praise be to God and to the mother or bringer forth of God the euer virgin Marie And before him Bellarmine thus shutteth vp his controversiall disputes Praise be to God and to the Virgin his mother Marie But this superstitious doxologie of Papists may thus be refelled 1. the Creator and the creature are not to be coupled or sorted together in any religious act as it is in the Psalme 115. 1. not vnto vs Lord c. but vnto thy name giue the praise and S. Paul thus writing Rom. 1.25 who serued the creature rather then the Creator who is blessed for euer denieth all such praise and blessing to be done vnto
vnsound opinion 1. Bellarmine thus reasoneth that the Apostles did reach the Church at the first without Scriptures therefore they are not simply necessarie but onely for the greater profit of the Church like as an horse is necessarie for ones iourney for his more speedie trauaile but not simply necessarie because he may go a foot Bellar. l. 4. de verb. c. 4. Contra. 1. True it is that the writing of the Scriptures are not simply necessarie in respect of God for he by his absolute power could find a way to teach his Church otherwise but in respect of Gods ordinance which hath appointed the Scriptures for edifying of his Church they are necessarie as bread is necessarie for mans sustentation though God can nourish and maintaine life without bread 2. It is not true that the Apostles did teach without Scriptures for they had the prophetical writings first and afterward their owne and while the Apostles themselues were liuing and present the writing of the Gospel was not so necessarie as afterward 3. The writing then of the Gospel was necessarie 1. both in respect of that age present for the preuenting and stay of heresies which might be more strongely resisted and gainesayed by an euident and extant rule of faith 2. in regard of those Churches to whom the Apostles preached not by liuely voice it was necessarie that they should haue some perfect direction by writing 3. and that the ages also to come might haue a rule of their faith Arg. 2. The Church may as well now be instructed without the Scriptures as it was for the space of 2000. yeares before the lawe was written Bellar. ibid. Contra. 1. In the first age of the world the light of nature was not so much obscured as afterward when the law was written and therefore the argument followeth not the Scriptures were not necessarie then therefore not now 2. because the old world wanted the Scriptures to direct them that was the cause why they were giuen ouer generally to all kind of prophanenesse and therefore to preuent the like mischiefe afterward the Lord thought good to giue his written word to his Church Argum. 3. The Apostles did preach much more then they did write and many things they deliuered to the Church by tradition so that not the Scriptures by themselues are a totall rule and direction of the faith but partiall together with the traditions and ordinances of the Church Contra. 1. The Apostles did indeed speake more then they did or could write but yet they preached the same things and deliuered no other precepts concerning faith and manners but the same which they committed to writing 2. many things concerning orders and especially in particular Churches the Apostles left by tradition but no other precepts and rules of faith then they had written 3. The Scriptures are no partiall but a totall and perfect rule of faith for mensura adaequata esse debet mensurate the measure must be equall vnto that which is measured it must neither be longer nor shorter if then the Scripture should come short of faith it were no perfect rule nay it were no rule at all Pareus Now on the contrarie that the Scriptures are necessarie thus it is made plaine 1. From the author the Prophets and Apostles did write by the instinct of the spirit but the spirit mooueth not to any vnnecessarie or superfluous worke 2. from the office of the Apostles which was to teach all nations Matth 28.19 which seeing they could not doe in their owne persons it was necessarie that they should preach vnto them by their writings 3. from the ende and vse of the Scriptures 1. whether for instruction in doctrine for all Scriptures are written for our learning Rom. 15.4 or direction vnto vertuous liuing or decision of Questions and confuting of errors it was necessarie that the Scriptures should be writen to these vses as the Apostle sheweth 1. Timoth. 3.16 that the man of God may be perfect The Scriptures then were necessarie to be extant for the aforesaid purposes in so much that the Apostle saith if any Angel from heauen doe preach any other Gospel c. let him be accursed whereupon Chrysostome saith Paulus etiam Angelis de coelo descendentibus proponit Scripturas Paul euen propoundeth the Scriptures to the Angels descending from heauen in Galat. c. 1. 6. Morall observations 1. Observ. Of the happinesse of these times vnder the Gospel in comparison of the former times vnder the Lawe In that the Lord hath clearely manifested and opened vnto his Church by Iesus Christ the high mysteries which lay hid before therein appeareth the singular loue of God to his Church and the great preheminence which the faithfull now haue in comparison of the people of God vnder the Law as our Sauiour saith vnto his Apostles Blessed are your eyes for they see and your eares for they heare for verily I say vnto you that many Prophets and righteous men haue desired to see those things which you see and could not see them c. Matth. 13.16 17. the vse hereof is to stirre vs vp vnto thankefulnesse vnto God for this so great mercie shewed vnto his Church 2. Observ. The dangerous estate of those which are found to be contemners of the Gospel and Newe Lawe The greater light is reuealed and the more knowledge that men haue the greater obedience doth God looke for at their hand disobedience then now vnto the Gospel of truth is so much more greiuous then was transgression vnder the law as the times of light and knowledge in brightnesse exceede the dayes of ignorance and blindnesse thus the Apostle reasoneth the night is past and the day is at hand let vs therefore cast away the workes of darkenesse and put on the armour of light Rom. 13.12 So also Hebr. 2.2 the Apostle saith if the word spoken by Angels was stedfast and euerie transgression c. receiued a iust recompence of reward how much more if we neglect so great saluation c. More special obseruations vpon the whole Epistle 1. The Argument and Methode of S. Pauls epistles in generall and specially of this Epistle 1. Nicephorus lib. 2. c. 34. maketh the end and scope of Saint Paules Epistles to consist in these two things 1. that the Apostle what he preached beeing present he committed to writing to put them in memorie when he was absent 2. And that which he did more obscurely deliuer by word of mouth or passed ouer in silence he did in his writings handle and set forth more fully and plainely But the Apostle had diuerse other occasions offred him in his epistles then fell out in his sermons and therefore it is to be thought that although his sermons and writings agreed in the substance of doctrine yet he as occasion did mooue him in his epistles otherwise handleth matters then he did in his preaching 2. His Epistles then may be reduced to these fiue kinds 1. Some belong vnto doctrine wherein he layeth
beleefe in vs and on Gods behalfe his efficacious power Gryneus In the amplyfying and tractation of this definition all the rest of the epistle is bestowed as this proposition that we are iustified by the Gospel that is by faith and beleefe in Christ is further amplified by the contrarie that we cannot be iustified either by the workes of nature c. 11.2 or of the Lawe c. 3. but by grace and faith c. 4. by the effects of iustifying faith inward the peace of conscience c. 5. outward the fruites of holinesse c. 6. by the contrarie operation of the lawe which reuealeth sinne c. 7. but the Gospel freeth from condemnation c. 8. by the cause the free election of God c. 9. by the subiect the Gentiles called the Iewes reiected c. 11. See more hereof concerning the Methode in the generall argument of the epistle before 3. For the kind of epistle It is principally definitiue and demonstratiue for he defineth and determineth that we are iustified neither by the workes of nature nor of the law but by faith in Christ and prooueth the same by most euident demonstration Beside this epistle hath somewhat of all other kinds of epistles which are called accessaria accessarie and secundarie as it is both gratulatorie reioycing for their faith c. 1. and it is reprehensorie rebuking the Gentiles for their licentiousnes it is also exhortatorie exhorting to holinesse of life c. 6.12 and it is deprecatorie he praieth and maketh request praying for encrease of grace in them and for himselfe that he might haue some good occasion to come vnto them Aretius 4. Places of doctrine 1. Doct. Of the godly custome and vse of the Church in laying the foundation of religion which is Catechising This commendable vse was taken vp by the Apostles themselues as the Apostle sheweth Hebr. 6.1 he calleth it the doctrine of beginnings and the laying of the foundation as of repentance faith baptisme the resurrection of eternall iudgement And so in this epistle the Apostle deliuereth a perfect forme of catechisme which consisteth of three parts of the miserie of man by nature his reparation and restitution by grace and then of his thankfulnes afterward in his obedience of life for the benefits receiued which three parts the Apostle doth at large handle in this epistle what man is by nature he sheweth c. 1.2.3 what by grace c. 4.5.8 and of the fruits of regeneration he entreateth c. 6. c. 12. So that it is false which Bellarmine affirmeth that the Apostle deliuered no forme of catechising to the Church l. 4. de verb. Dei c. 4. for he doth it most plainly euidently in this epistle Pareus 5. Places of controversie 1. Contr. That it is knowne that this Epistle was written by S. Paul and is of diuine authoritie by the Epistle it selfe Bellarmine affirmeth that to know that any Scripture is diuine or Canonicall it can not be concluded out of the Scripture it selfe neither which were the writings of S. Paul or that the Gospel of S. Matthew was written by Matthew without the tradition of the Church Bellar. lib. 4. de verb. c. 4. Contra. 1. That the Epistles of Saint Paul are of diuine and Canonicall authoritie it appeareth euidently out of the writings themselues for they beeing written by Saint Paul who had the spirit of God 1. Corinth 7.40 and had Christ speaking in him 2. Cor. 13.13 and was taught of God from whome he receiued his doctrine by reuelation Gal. 1.12 it is not to be doubted but that his holy writings proceeded from the spirit of God and so are of diuine authoritie and he himselfe doubteth not to make them canonicall as he saith Gal. 6.16 Whosoeuer walketh according to this canon or rule c. And he denounceth anathema if any yea an Angel should teach any other Gospel then he had preached Gal. 1. 2. Likewise that S. Paul was the author and writer of them it is euident both by the inscription and title and by the salutation in the ende of euery epistle and the benediction which he vseth The grace of our Lord Iesus Christ be with you all which he saith is the token or marke to know his epistles by 2. Thess. 3.17 3. The tradition of the Church is an vncerten thing that which is vncerten can not be a rule and measure of that which is most certen the testimonie of men can not assure vs of the testimonie of God Christ saith Ioh. 5.33 Ye sent vnto Iohn and he bare witnesse vnto the truth but I receiue not the record of men c. 36. I haue a greater witnes then the witnes of Iohn c. 2. Contr. That S. Pauls epistles are not so obscure that any should be terrified from the reading thereof In the Preface to Toletus commentarie the epistles of S. Paul are affirmed to be hard out of Hierome and Origen contr Whitakerum hareticum against Whitaker that heretike as it pleaseth that rayling taxer to call that learned godly man Contr. 1. True it is that as S. Peter saith some things are hard in S. Pauls epistles 1. Pet. 3.16 he saith not that many things are hard or that the Epistles are hard but onely some few things in them this letteth not but that his Epistles may safely be read of all that read them with an humble minde desirous to profit thereby the danger is onely to the vnlearned and vnstable which peruert them as they doe the rest of the Scriptures as S. Peter in the same place saith 2. And euen those hard places may be made easie by diligent reading as Chrysostome giueth this instance like as we know their minde whome we loue and obserue and are familiar with them vtique si lectioni cum animi alacritate volueritis attendere c. so you if you will with cheerfull attention giue your selues to reading ye shall neede no other helpe c. hinc vt innumera mala nata sunt quod scripturae ignorantur hence so many euills haue sprung vp because the Scriptures are not knowne hence so many heresies c. the ignorance then not the reading of Scripture breedeth heresies and thus he concludeth oculos ad splendorem Apostolicorum verborum aperiamtu let vs open our eyes to receiue the brightnes of the Apostolicall words c. they doe not then cast darknes vpon our eyes but bring brightnes and clearnes Chrysost. argum in epist. ad Rom. 3. Controv. Against the Ebionites which reteined the rites and ceremonies of Moses Whereas the Ebionites thought the rites of the Law necessarie and ioyned them together with the Gospel which heresie did much trouble the Church in the Apostles time and is at large confuted in the epistles of S. Paul to the Galatians and Colossians the same also in this epistle is conuinced and confounded for the Apostle renounceth the workes of the Law whether the ceremoniall and morall as hauing no part in the matter of iustification which he concludeth to be by faith without
adoration and humble prostrating of himselfe 3. All idololatricall worship is forbidden but all religious adoration giuen vnto the creatures is such as tendeth to idolatrie because it ascribeth vnto the creature that which is peculiar to the Creator as to knowe the heart to be present euerie where to haue power to helpe and such like for they which pray vnto Angels and Saints and prostrate them before their images haue this opinion of them that they are present to heare and helpe them which onely God can doe Ergo such religious adoration is idolatrous See further of this question Synops. Controv. 4. Of the comparison betweene virginitie and mariage The Rhemists in their annotation 1. Cor. 7.31 doe extoll virginitie in such sort that they doe much disgrace marriage for these are their words virginitie hath a gratefull puritie and sanctitie of bodie and soule which mariage hath not c. and for this cause they say that Priests are forbidden marriage That they may be cleane and pure from all fleshly acts of copulation c. But this were to make mariage vncleane whereas it is not the matrimoniall act but the lasciuious and wanton minde which abuseth mariage that bringeth vncleanenesse with it Origen is more equall who vpon these words v. 1. giue vp your bodies a liuing sacrifice â—â—â—â—ly c. thus writeth quoniam videmus nonnullos sanctorum aliquas etiam Apostolâ—◠〈◊〉 buisse coniugium c. because we see that certaine of the Saints and some of the Apostles were married we cannot vnderstand the Apostle here to meane virgintie onely c. but that they which are in coniugijs positi c. placed in mariage and by consent for a time doe giue themselues to prayer corpora sua exhibere posse hostiam viuentem c. may exhibite their bodies a liuing sacrifice if in other things sanctè agant iustè c. they deale holily and iustly c. and concerning virgins he further saith that if they be polluted with pride or couetousnesse or such like they are not to be thought ex sola virginitate corporis c. by the onely virginitie of their bodies to offer vp a liuing sacrifice vnto God c. Thus then there may be both puritie and sanctitie in mariage and as the Apostle saith an vndefiled bed Heb. 13.4 which the Rhemists denie and there may be pollution and vncleanesse in virginitie See further Synops. Papis Centur. 3. er 97. Controv. 5. The minde it selfe and not the sensuall part onely hath neede of renovation v. 2. Be changed by the renewing of your mind this is against the position of the Philosophers as Aristotle affirmeth Ethic. 1.13 that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reason alway perswadeth and mooueth vnto the best things the Romanists doe iumpe with them herein who thinke the sensuall part of the minde onely to be corrupted But 1. the Apostle here sheweth that the verie minde and spirituall part of the soule hath neede of renouation 2. indeede in ciuill things and morall duties the reason may be a guide but in diuine and supernaturall it is blind and erroneous 3. and if it be here obiected that the Philosophers as Socrates Plato did many excellent things by the light of reason I answear that yet in those things they failed of the true ende for they respected not the honour and glorie of God but sought perfection by their owne endeauour and herein they shewed the error and corruption of their mind 4. yea the reason is so farre off from beeing a perfect guide that euen in the regenerate it hath neede still to be renewed as in the Romanes here to whom S. Paul writeth how much more in the vnregenerate Controv. 6. Of the perfection of the Scriptures against traditions v. 2. To prooue what the will of God is acceptable and perfect this perfect will of God is no where els reuealed but in the scriptures if they containe a perfect reuelation of the will of God then there neede no other additaments what vse then of humane traditions such as many the Church of Rome is pestered with which haue no warrant out of the Scripture which beeing able to make the man of God perfect to euerie good worke 2. Tim. 3.17 all other helpes and supplyes are superstitious and superfluous See further hereof Synops. Centur 1. err 11.13 Controv. 7. Against freewill v. 2. And be not fashioned c. Tolet hence collecteth because the vulgar Latine thus readeth nolite configurari c. haue you no will to be conformed c. that it is positum in arbitrio hominis placed in the will of man whether thus to be fashioned or not whereas there is no such word in the originall for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth be not fashioned not be ye not willing to be fashioned and beside the verie next words be ye changed by the renewing of your mind doe confute this opinion and euidently shewe that a man hath no free-will of himselfe vnto that which is good Indeede the Scriptures doe vse exhortations to the regenerate to shewe that it must be the worke of the spirit to stirre them vp to doe those things whereunto they are exhorted See further Synops. Papis Centur. 4. err 46. Controv. 8. Against the arrogancie of the Pope v. 3. According as God hath dealt to euerie man c. Then euerie man hath his certime measure and stint of gifts one hath not receiued all as the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 7.7 Euerie man hath his proper gift of God c. Then that man of pride here sheweth himselfe in his colors who arrogateth to himselfe authoritie ouer the whole Church and boasteth to haue all knowledge locked vp in his breast wherein he sheweth not himselfe to be a seruant of Christs for all his seruants haue receiued a portion and measure of gifts one alone hath not all Pareus Controv. 9. Against the superstitious orders of the Popish Clergie v. 7. Or he that teacheth on teaching c. Pet. Martyr and Gualter vpon this place do shew what was the oeconomie ecclesiasticall policie and discipline of the Primitiue Church how first they had praesides doctrinae the presidents of doctrine then they had assistants the Seniors and Elders qui disciplinam publicam conservabant which did preserue the publike discipline the next were the deacons which dispensed the treasure of the Church vnto whom were ioyned such as attended the sicke as in this place the Apostle setteth downe fiue offices of the Church pastors and teachers that attended the spirituall edifying of the Church then distributors rulers shewers of mercie whose care was for the externall discipline but now ne nominaÌ„ quidem extant c. not so much as the names remaine of these functions Martyr or as Gualter praeter inauia nomina c. beside vaine names and titles nothing is left in the Popish Church but they substituted other orders as Acoluthists exorcistes doorekeepers candlebearers and such like See more hereof
reprobation in this place as of Election 10. contr Whether as well the decree of reprobation as of election be without the foresight of workes 11. contr Of the difference betweene the decree of election and reprobation and of the agreement betweene them 12. contr Whether mercie be a naturall propertie in God or an effect onely of his will against Socinus 13. contr Whether the mercie of God in the forgiuenesse of sinne be an effect of Gods free and absolute will onely and be not grounded vpon Christ against the heresie of Socinus and Ostorodius 15. contr Of the sufficiencie of Scripture 16. contr Of the certaintie of saluation 17. contr Against the works of preparation Controversies vpon the 10. Chapter 1. contr Against inherent iustice 2. contr Against the workes of preparation which are done without faith 3. contr That it is impossible for any in this life to keepe the lawe 4. contr Against the doubting of salvation 5. contr Against vnwritten traditions 6. contr Against freewill 7. contr Against Limbu Patrum that Christ went not downe thither to deliuer the Patriarkes 8. contr Whether the righteousnesse of faith and the righteousnes of the law be one and the same or contrarie the one to the other 9. contr Whether the righteousnesse of the lawe and that which is by the law doe differ 10. contr That Baptisme doth not giue or conferre grace 11. contr Against the dissembling of our faith and profession 12. contr That faith is not onely in the vnderstanding 13. contr The Scriptures the onely sufficient rule of faith 14. contr How the Apostle saith there is no difference between the Iew and the Grecian v. 12. 15. contr Against the maintainers of vniversall grace 16. contr That faith iustifieth not by the act thereof but onely as it apprehendeth Christ. 17. contr That faith onely iustifieth not invocation 18. contr Against the invocation of Saints 19. contr That we must pray with confidence and assurance 20. contr Against the vaine pompe of the Pope of Rome in offering his feete to be kissed 21. contr Against humane traditions 22. contr That the Ministers and Preachers of the Gospel haue a lawfull calling against Stapleton 23. contr That the Hebrew text is more authenticall then the vulgar Latin translation 24. contr Against the works of preparation 25. contr Against the Iewes that will not haue the Prophet to speake of them in these words I haue stretched out my hands c. Controversies out of the 11. Chapter 1. contr That none which are elected can finally fall away 2. contr Whether the complaint of Elias of the paucitie of true worshippers be well applied to the decay of religion vnder the Pope at the time of the first reformation 3. contr That works are excluded both from election and iustification 4. contr Against free-will 5. contr That vniversalitie and multitude is not alwaies a note of the true Church 6. contr Of the sufficiencie of Scripture and of the right way to interpret the same 7. contr Against the Iewes 8. contr Whether any of the true branches may be broken off 9. contr Against the heresie of Valentinus and Basilides that held some things to be euill some good by nature 10. contr That there was the same spirit of faith and the same spirituall substance of the Sacraments vnder the old Testament and in the New 11. contr That the Scriptures are the iudge of euery one in particular 12. contr Against the Popish vncertentie and doubtfulnes of saluation 13. contr Against the Manichees and Marcionites 14. contr Against the works of preparation 15. contr Against the erroneous opinion of Origen concerning the purgatorie of hell Controversies vpon the 12. Chapter 1. contr Concerning the power of free-will 2. contr Whether the Masse be a sacrifice properly so called 3. contr Of the difference betweene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worship and seruice whether they signifie two kinds of religious worships the one peculiar to God the other to the creatures 4. contr Of the comparison betweene virginitie and mariage 5. contr The minde it selfe and not the sensuall part onely hath neede of renovation 6. contr Of the perfections of the Scripture against traditions 7. contr Against free-will 8. contr Against the arrogancie of the Pope 9. contr Against the superstitious orders of the Popish Clergie 10. controv The Pope not the head of the Church 11. contr That to loue our enemie is a precept and commanded not counselled as indifferent Controversies vpon the 13. Chapter 1. contr Whether the Pope and other Ecclesiasticall persons ought to be subiect to the Ciuill power 2. contr Whether the Pope haue a spirituall power ouer Kings and Princes 3. contr That the tyrannie and idolatrie of the Pope may be gain said and resisted 4. contr Whether the Ciuill magistrate haue any power or authoritie in matters of religion 5. contr Whether Ecclesiasticall persons as Bishops and others may haue the temporall sword committed vnto them 6. contr Whether it be lawfull for a Christian to be a Magistrate and to vse the sword in the time of peace and warre 7. contr Whether lawes Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall doe bind simply in conscience 8. contr Whether Ecclesiasticall persons are exempted from tribute 9. contr Whether the fulfilling of the law be possible in this life 10. contr Against the Marcionites which denied the morall precepts to be now in force but to be ceased 11. contr Against iustification by the works of the law Controversies vpon the 14. Chapter 1. contr Whether to abstaine from certaine meates be an act of religion and a part of Gods worship or a thing in it selfe indifferent 2. contr That faith is not onely an assenting of the wil but an act also of the vnderstanding and it is ioyned with knowledge 3. contr That it is necessarie that festivall daies should be obserued among Christians 4. contr That festiuall daies ought not to be consecrated to the honour of Saints 6. contr Whether all the festivalls of Christians are alike arbitrarie to be altered and chaunged as shall seeme good to the Church 7. contr Against Purgatorie 8. contr Whether Christ by his obedience and suffering merited for himselfe eternall glorie and dominion 9. contr Of bowing the knee to the name of Iesus whether it be necessarily inferred out of this place v. 11. and Phil. 2.10 10. contr That Christ is prooued to be God by this saying of the Prophet cited v. 11. as I liue euery knee shall bow vnto me against the blasphemie of Georg. Eniedinus 11. contr That morall works which are done without faith are sin howsoeuer outwardly they appeare good Controversies out of the 15. Chapter 1. contr Whether S. Peter were iustly reprehended of S. Paul for refusing to eate with the Gentiles 2. contr That Christ is not set forth onely as an example for vs to imitate but as our Sauiour to redeeme vs. 3. contr Against the enemies and adversaries to the Scriptures the
thus farre we haue proceeded in such questions as concerne the person of this Apostle now follow such matters as are to be obserued touching his writings and specially this Epistle to the Romanes 16. Quest. Of the Epistles of S. Paul the number of them 1. The Epistles which S. Paul writ are in all 14. in number he writ nine of them to the 7. Churches 1. to the Romanes 2. to the Corinthians 1. to the Galatians 1. to the Ephesians 1. to the Philippians 1. to the Colossians 2. to the Thessalonians and one to the Hebrewes and 4. beside to priuate persons 2. to Timothie 1. to Titus 1. to Philemon The reason of this number Gregorie whom Anselmus followeth yeeldeth to be this this number of 14. consisting of 10. which signifieth the morall Lawe and of fowre which noteth the 4. Euangelists sheweth the harmonie and consent of Law and Gospel and that S. Paul Iegis Euangelij secreta rimatus esset had searched out the secrets both of the Law and Gospell But this reason is too curious Cyrillus de Hierosâ—lym Catech. 10. better sheweth the reason why S. Paul did write more epistles then the rest of the Apostles non quod minor esset Petrus ant Ioannes not because Peter or Iohn were lesse or inferior sed quia antea fuit mimicus but because he had beene an enemie before it pleased God he should write most that we might be the better perswaded that he taught the truth 2. These epistles of S. Paul are extant some other he did write which are not extant as 1. Cor. 5.9 he maketh mention of an epistle which he had written to the Corinthians before that for thus he saith I wrote vnto you in an epistle that you should not companie together with fornicators which words Chrysostome thinketh to haue relation to the 2. and 7. verses of the chapter but the 11. verse following But now I haue written vnto you doth shewe that it was at another time that he so had written Indeede those words of the Apostle Ephes. 3.3 as I haue written before or aboue in fewe words may haue relation to the beginning of the same epistle c. 1. v. 9. yet in this place it may be gathered that S. Paul had written a former Epistle to the Corinthians Pareus which may be his meaning where he saith this is the third time that I come vnto you 2. Cor. 13.1 which he may vnderstand of his three epistles which he had written vnto the Corinthians for that some of the Apostles writings may be missing in the Newe Testament as some of the Prophets in the old Testament as Salomon is said to haue spoken three thousand Prouerbs and a thousand and fiue songs 1. king 4.32 whereof the greater part is lost may be granted without any inconuenience seeing that part of the Scripture which the Lord hath thought good to preserue for the edifying of his Church is found to be sufficient 3. Yet diuerse bookes were forged and foisted in vnder S. Pauls name as Augustine citeth the Apocalypse or Reuelation of S. Paul in 16. c. Ioan. whereof Nicephâ—rus also maketh mention lib. 12. c. 34. which they said was found in Pauls fathers house at Tarfus in a marble coffet in the time of Theodosius the Emperour which was prooued to be false by the confession of an old man such was the booke of the Acts of Paul mentioned by the same Nicepherus lib. 12. c. 46. 4. Of the same sort was the Epistle to the Laodiceans imagined to be of S. Pauls writing 1. which neither was S. Pauls writing but the Church reiected it that there might be but 14. epistles in all to shewe that the Apostle had attained to the secrets of the Law and Gospel for renne signifieth the Lawe and foure the Euangelists thus Anselmus in 4. epist. ad Colossens following Gregor lib. 35. moral c. 25. for the Church hath no authoritie to reiect any part of the Apostolical writings 2. neither was it of S. Pauls writing but now perished as Bellarmine thinketh lib. 4. de verbo Dei c. 4.3 nor yet was that epistle sometime extant of S. Pauls writing as Epiphanius maketh mention thereof in the heresie of the Marcionites for S. Hierome well saith legunt quidam ad Laodiceuses sed ab omnibus exploditur some doe read also the Epistle to the Laodiceans but it is reiected of all catalog scrâ—ptor for the words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from Laodicea Coloss. 4.16 which the vulgar Latine corruptly translateth quae Laodicensium est which is of the Laodiceans 4. neither was it the same epistle which the Apostle had written from Laodicea which some thinke to haue beene the first epistle vnto Timothie for it is euident Coloss. c. 2.1 that S. Paul when he wrote this Epistle had not seene the Laodiceans 5. So Philastrius har 59 maketh mention of such an Epistle which was taken to be S. Pauls but it was not publikely receiued because of some doubtfull sentences thrust in by some but it was not S. Pauls Epistle neither in part nor whole for the reason before alleadged as Theodoret thinketh that it is a seyned and forged epistle 6. Sixtus Senens writeth that there is an epistle of S. Pauls to the Laodiceans to be found in Paris in an old booke in the librarie of Sorbon and at Padway in the librarie of S. Iohn But that is not S. Pauls epistle for it containeth nothing worthie of him and whatsoeuer that epistle hath is more distinctly handled in the epistle to the Colossians so that there was no reason why S. Paul should will the Colossians to read that epistle 7. this epistle then from Laodicea was some epistle which either the Laodiceans writ to S. Paul whereunto he partly maketh answer in that epistle to the Colossians as Chrysostome Theodoret Oecumeneus or which they had written to the Colossians Beza Quest. 17. Of the order of time wherein S. Pauls seuerall epistles were written This Epistle to the Romanes though it be placed first yet is thought to haue beene written last of all those which S. Paul did write before he was imprisoned at Rome His epistles then are thought to haue beene written in this order 1. the former epistle to the Thessalonians seemeth to haue beene first written which he sent vnto them from Athens by Tychicus for from Thessalonica he remooued to Berea from thence to Athens Act. 17.2 And the same yeare while he was at Athens he did write the second epistle also to the Thessalonians explaining in the latter that which he had written in the first concerning the comming of Christ and the ende of the world this was about the 17. yeare of his Apostleship and the 9. yeare of the raigne of Claudius the Emperour Pareus Chrysostome giueth this coniecture why the epistles to the Thessalonians should be written before those to the Corinthians because he saith 2. Cor. 9.2 that Achaia was prepared a yeare agoe whereby he signifieth that he
quicken glorifie to raigne to be adored which things were performed in both his natures 2. some things are communicated really to his whole person which yet properly belong onely to one of his natures as Christ the Sonne of God in whole person is said to be made of the seede of Dauid but yet in respect onely of his humanitie according to the flesh these two communions there is no question made of 3. a third communion there is deuised by the Vbiquitaries whereby they really communicate the properties of one nature to an other as the flesh of Christ by reason of the vnion of the Godhead they call omnipotent knowing all things euery where present Pareus v. 8. I thanke my God c. 1. Here two kinds of prayer are expressed inuocation which is a requesting of some grace or benefit from God and giuing thanks for some benefit receiued 2. the requisite things in prayer are here shewed 1. that our praiers must be made to God not to any creature I thanke my God 2. we must pray with confidence my God 3. by Christ our Mediatour 4. not for our selues onely but our brethren Pareus v. 9. God is my witnes Hence the lawfulnes of a lawfull oath among Christians is warranted by the Apostles example against the Anabaptists Piscator v. 10. That by some meanes c. The Apostle then though he praied for a prosperous iourney yet neglected not the meanes against the Messalian heretikes who ascribed all vnto praier and in the meane time would doe nothing themselues Here also the doctrine of Gods prouidence is to be considered who many times worketh euen by contrarie meanes for S. Paul his bonds and imprisonment which might haue seemed like to hinder his iourney to Rome yet were meanes to bring him thither by his appeale Olevian v. 17. As it is written The Apostles alleadged Scripture not to confirme their doctrine for they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of themselues worthie to be credited but to shew the consent of the Prophets for the confirmation of others But the Pastors of the Church doe now alleadge Scripture for warrant of their doctrine Pareus v. 19. That which may be knowne of God The knowledge of God is generall either internall by the light of nature or externall by the view of the creatures or speciall which is peculiar to the Church which is either externall common to the whole visible Church as by the preaching of his word or internall by the inward operation of the spirit which is proper onely to the Elect. v. 23. They turned the glorie of the incorruptible God to the similitude c. An idol is whatsoeuer beeing not God is worshipped for God either inwardly or outwardly Idolatrie is of two sorts direct or indirect the first when the creature is worshipped the Creator beeing omitted and it is of two sorts internall when men set vp such an idole in their hearts or externall when diuine worship is giuen outwardly to a false god as the heathen worshipped the Sunne Moone and starres or to the image of a false god indirect idolatrie when the true God is worshipped but not after a due manner such as he hath prescribed Pareus 5. Places of controversie 1. Controv. Against the Manichees which refuse Moses and the Prophets v. 2. Which he had promised before by the Prophets Out of this place August lib. 5. cont haeres as he is cited by Beda conuinceth the Manichees I saith the Maniche neither receiue Moses not the Prophets quid ais de Apostolo Paulo c. what saiest thou then to the Apostle Paul who in the beginning of his epistle to the Romanes thus writeth Paul a seruant c. put a part for the Gospel of God which he had promised before by his Prophets c. then he inferreth thus audis quia evangelium per Apostolos non exhiberetur â—i ante per Prophet as promitteretur you heare that the Gospel should not haue beene exhited by the Apostles vnlesse it had beene promised before by the Prophets 2. Controv. Against election by the foresight of workes v. 1. Set apart for the Gospel of Christ. Origen and Sedulius following him thinke that Paul was separated in the counsell of God and ordained to be the Apostle of the Gentiles because God did foresee his merits and labour which he should take in the Gospel the same is the opinion of the Rhemists who affirme that Christ doth not appoint any by his absolute election without respect vnto their workes annotat Hebr. 5. sect 9. But Tolet. a champion of their owne confuteth this position by that place of S. Paul Gal. 1.15 But when it pleased God which had seperated me from my mothers wombe and called me by his grace to reueale his Sonne vnto me he ascribeth this his separation to the good pleasure and grace of God not to any merit foreseene in himselfe P. Martyr addeth further that if election were grounded vpon such foresight of workes it had not beene so hard a matter to find out the reason why the Lord electeth some and not others and the Apostle needed not thus to haue stopped the mouthes of those which complaine of Gods righteousnes O man who art thou which pleadest against God c. And the Apostle in the same place euidently saith It is not in him that willeth or in him that runneth but in God that sheweth mercie This doctrine of the free grace of God in electing his seruants hath a double vse 1. to make them confident and bold that seeing they are elected of God nothing can hinder or ouerturne their election whatsouer befalleth them in this life 2. as also to humble them that they should not ascribe their election to any workes of their owne but to the meere grace of God 3. Controv. Against the Nestorians and Vbiquitaries v. 3. Made of the seede of Dauid according to the flesh The Sonne of God not the Sonne of man is said to be made of the seede of Dauid and yet with this limitation according to his flesh that is his humane nature where first the heresie of the Nestorians is confuted who denied that Marie was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the mother of God seeing the Apostle doth euidently affirme that the Sonne of God was made of the seede of Dauid so that because of the vnion of the two natures the humane and diuine in one person that is ascribed to the whole person which is proper but vnto one of his natures as the Sonne of God is saide to be borne and become man and to haue died for vs and so the Sonne of man is said to haue descended from heauen the Sonne of man which is in heauen Ioh. 3.13 which was onely true of his diuine nature yet is spoken of his whole person which there receiueth denomination of his humane nature 2. Beside as the Nestorians admit no communication at all of the properties which belong to each
law written Contra. 1. The Apostle inferreth not that euery mouth is stopped by the written testimonies but that generall word is vsed least the Iewes should thinke themselues excluded so then not that writing but the thing written that all men are sinners serueth to stoppe all mens mouthes and especially the Iewes it conuinceth both Iewes and Gentiles the Iewes both for the manner because the written law was giuen vnto them and for the matter also they were sinners the Gentiles it conuinceth for the matter they were guiltie of all these sinnes 2. Though law be there taken generally both for the naturall and written law by the which came the knowledge of sinne and yet both Cain and Iosephs brethren had beside the naturall law instructions receiued from their fathers yet in this place it is euident that the Apostle meaneth the written and speaking law whatsoeuer the law saith 2. Origen beside hath here an other strange conceit he thinketh that not onely men but Angels and spirits are here saide to be vnder the law because they also haue a law and rule giuen them to be ordered by but seeing the Angels are not saued by faith in Christ which the Apostle treateth of here he saith directly that by the works of the law no flesh shal be iustified in his sight the angels can not be said to be vnder the law for they are not in the flesh 3. Theodoret here hath this distinction that the law saith thus to them which are vnder the law seà non de ijs but not onely of them for the Prophets haue many comminations concerning the Egyptians Babylonians and other nations Pererius also hath this obseruation that wheÌ„ as any prophesie is directed against other nations they are touched by name but those things which are set downe in generall and absolutely without any such particular direction doe properly appertaine vnto those who are vnder the law c. And although the Scripture make mention of other nations yet the speciall intent thereof is to profit the Church of God Faius 4. Now the occasion of these words of the Apostle is this the Iewes hearing these generall sentences setting forth the iniquitie of the world might thinke that the Gentiles were specially meant and so shift them off from themselues Therefore the Apostle sheweth that these things were specially directed to the Iewes and that by these three arguments 1. from the relation which the law hath to them to whome it is giuen it seemeth specially to concerne them therefore because the Scriptures wherein these things were found written were giuen vnto the Iewes to them they were specially directed 2. from the end that euery mouth should be stopped if the Gentiles should be vnderstood and not the Iewes also then they might haue somewhat to glorie in and to exalt themselues against God therefore that all occasion of boasting should be taken away euen the Iewes are conuinced by these testimonies to be sinners 3. an other ende is that not onely all occasion of boasting should be taken away but that the whole world should be found 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 guiltie and culpable before God Chrysostome by this word vnderstandeth him qui sibi ipsi aâ— defensionem non sufficit who is not sufficient or able to defend himselfe but it signifieth more one that is guiltie and subiect to condemnation Pareus 5. Tolet thinketh not this to be the occasion to meete with such a secret obiection of the Iewes for they could not be ignorant saith he but that whatsoeuer was written in the Scriptures was spoken to them but rather to shew the reason why they could not be iustified by the law because the law which was giuen vnto them condemned them annot 11. Contra. The Iewes did know that the Scriptures did speake vnto them but not of them they might flatter themselues as though such things were vttered against the Gentiles and therefore as Augustine saith in Iudaeis confringenda erat superbia c. the Iewes pride was to be taken downe exposit epist. ad Galat. and both these may very well stand together that an obiection of the Iewes is met withall and a reason also shewed that the law which condemned them could not iustifie them 6. But the Psalme whence the Apostle alleadgeth his first words toucheth those which said there is no god Psal. 14.1 but so did not the Iewes Hierome answereth they did confesse God with their mouth sed factis negabant but denied him in their works 23. Quest. How no flesh is iustified by the workes of the law v. 20. 1. By the works of the law in that he decreeth iustification to the very workes not to the persons or workers onely it is euident that the places before alleadged as v. 10. there is none righteous no not one are to be vnderstood generally of all and not of the most although some should be excluded that did some good workes either among the Iewes or Gentiles for euen the workes of the law which they did were not able to iustifie them Melancthon 2. By the workes are not here vnderstood those quae praecipiuntur which are commanded and required by the law for if a man could performe those works he should finde life thereby but such quae praestantur which are performed of men Beza either before grace which can not iustifie because they can not be good or acceptable to God without faith or in the state of grace which can not iustifie neither because they are imperfect Pareus 3. By the law here he vnderstandeth both the natural whereby the Gentiles were conuinced and the written law giuen to the Hebrewes for the Apostle disputeth generally against both the Gentiles and Hebrewes proouing them both to be transgressors of the law and so not able to be iustified thereby Pareus and by the works of the law are vnderstood not onely the ceremonials and iudicials as the ordinarie gloss but the morall works which the Gentiles did by the light of nature for otherwise the Iewes onely should be excluded whereas the disputation of the Apostle is generall both against Iewes and Gentiles Pareusâ— Tolet. 4. The word flesh is diuersly taken in Scripture it signifieth the humane nature of man as Ioh. 1.6 the word was made flesh or the corruptible and mortall state of man as wheâ— the Apostle saith flesh and blood can not inherit the kingdome of God or the sinfull state and condition of man in which sense it is saide they that are in the flesh can not please God in which sense Origen would haue it taken here that they which are carnall not spirituall aâ—â— denied iustification by works but in this sense the meaning of the Apostle should be much peruerted who generally affirmeth that there is no iustification for any by the works of the law but by faith but yet the Apostle vseth this word flesh to put man in minde of his fresh condition and state beeing not apt of it selfe to bring forth
commeth the knowledge of sinne and the law is a schoolemaster to bring vs vnto Christ it sheweth vs our disease and sendeth vs to the Physitian Faius Sasbout but because this is not the proper effect of the law otherwise then by reason of our infirmitie the Apostle is to be vnderstood to speake of the practise and obedience of the law which Christ requireth of the faithfull who though they doe not looke thereby to be iustified yet by the spirit of sanctification are enabled to walk according to the same as the law commandeth that we should loue the Lord with all our heart and our neighbour as our selfe these precepts euery Christian is bound to keepe And in this sense our Sauiour specially saith Matth. 5. I came not in dissolue the Law but to fulfill it so Origen omnis qui credens Christo bene agit c. viâ—enâ—â— legem confirmat c. euery one which beleeueth in Christ and doth well doth confirme the law by his life to the same purpose Augustine fides impetrat gratiam qua lex impletâ—â— c. faith obtaineth grace whereby the law is fulfilled c. the Gospel giueth grace whereby men are directed to liue and walke according to the law Adde hereunto that without faith it is impossible to keepe the law or any part thereof as the law commandeth vs to loue God with all our heart but no man can loue God vnlesâ— he first know him and beleeue in him Againe the law commandeth the worship of God whereof inuocation is a part but none can call vpon him vpon whome they haue not beleeued Rom. 10. Mart. 6. Other expositions there be of this place Caietane saith that faith doth establish the law because by faith we beleeue that God is the author of the law without which faith iâ— would be of no greater authoritie with men then the laws of Lycurgus and Solon 7. Catharinus a Popish writer herein would haue the lawe holpen by the Gospell because those things which were handled obscurely in the lawe are manifested openly in the Gospell the lawe was kept then thorough a seruile feare but now vnder the Gospell for the loue of iustice But leauing those and other like expositions I insist vpon the fift before alleadged as most agreeable vnto S. Paul 8. Now then whereas the Apostle in some places speaketh of the abrogating of the law as Heb. 7.12 If the Priesthood be changed there must of necessitie be a change of the lawe and v. 18. the commandement that was afore is disanulled because of the weakenesse thereof and vnprofitablenes c. he is not herein contrarie to himselfe for either the Apostle speaketh of the ceremoniall lawe as in the first place but it is the morall law which is established by faith or be meaneth that the vnprofitable ende of the morall lawe which was to iustifie men is abrogated but here he speaketh of an other ende and vse of the lawe which is to be a direction vnto good life in which sense the lawe is established 9. Thus the Apostle hath answeared this obiection least he might haue seemed to abrogate the lawe because he denieth vnto it power to iustifie vnto this obiection he maketh a double answear first in denying that he doth not take away the effect of the lawe for where one ende of a thing is denied all are not taken away secondly he answeareth by the contrarie he is so farre from abrogating or disanulling the lawe that contrariwise he doth establish and confirme it as is shewed before 4. Places of doctrine Doct. 1. Of the preheminence or prerogatiue of the Church v. 1. What is the preferment of the Iewe c. here occasion is offred to consider of the preheminence and excellencie of the Church which consisteth in the consideration of the dignitie state and blessings wherein it excelleth other humane conditions and states This excellencie and preheminence of the Church is either of nature or grace but by nature all men are the children of wrath one as well as an other Ephes. 2.3 therefore all the prerogatiue of the Church is of grace This prerogatiue is either common to the old Church of the Iewes and the newe of the Christians or proper and peculiar the common is either internall in their vocation iustification sanctification by the spirit or externall in their publike profession of religion and adoption to be the people of God with their externall directions by the word and sacraments vnto saluation The peculiar and proper prerogatiue of the old Church is considered 1. in their state that they were a people seuered from the rest of the world and ioyned vnto God by a solemne couenant 2. in the blessings wherewith they were endued which were partly spirituall as the Scriptures of the Prophets were committed vnto them they had the legall sacraments of circumcision and the Paschal lambe the Priesthood of Leui partly temporal as the inheritance of Canaan which was tied vnto Abrahams posteritie The prerogatiue peculiar vnto the Church of the newe Testament consisteth 1. in their state in beeing an holy people taken out from the rest of the world and consecrated to the worship of God 2. in their blessings partly perpetuall as the doctrine of the newe Testament the sacraments baptisme and the supper of the Lord partly temporall as the gift of tongues and miracles which the Church had for a time for the necessarie propagation of the faith but are now ceased ex Pareo Doct. 2. Of the vtilitie and profit of the diuine oracles v. 2. Vnto them were coÌ„mitted the oracles of God The Scriptures called here the diuine oracles are profitable to diuerse ends 1. illuminant intellectum they doe lighten the vnderstanding Psal. 19.8 It giueth light vnto the eyes 2. inflammant affectum they inflame the affection as Luke 24.32 the two disciples said betweene themselues did not our hearts burne within vs while he talked with vs by the way 3. mundant culpam they doe cleanse the fault as Ioh. 15.3 now are ye cleane thorough the word which I haue spoken vnto you 4. conseruant contra tristitiam they doe comfort against heauinesse 5. roborant ad pâ—tientiam they do strengthen vnto patience both these the Apostle sheweth saying Rom. 15.4 that we through patience and consolation of the Scriptures might have hope 6. franâ—â—â—t cordis duritiam they breake the hardnesse of heart Ierem. 23.29 is not my word like an hammer that breaketh the stone 7. protegunt contra tentationes they defend and protect against the tentations of the deuill Prou. 30.5 Euerie word of God is pure it is a sheild c. Ephes. 6.17 the sword of the spirit is the word of God Gorrhan Doct. 3. Of the combination betweene God and his Church v. 3. Shall their vnbeleefe make the faith of God without effect Here are to be considered tria ingorum paria three paire of yokes and bands as it were betweene God and vs. 1. the couenant and
1. Ioh. 2.2 He is the reconciliation for our sinnes 2. to be our Redeemer v. 24. Through the redemption that is in Christ. 3. to be our Mediator 1. Tim. 2.6 Our Mediator betweene God and man c. 4. to be our doctor and teacher Matth. 23.8 One is your Doctor to wit Christ. 5. to be our aduocate and intercessor 1. Ioh. 2.1 We haue an advocate with the Father Christ Iesus the Iust. 6. to be our defender and deliuerer Isay. 19.20 He shall send them a Sauiour and a great man that shall deliuer them 7. to be our Lawgiuer Iam. 4.12 There is one Lawgiuer which is able to saue and destroy 8. to be a faithfull and true witnesse Apocal. 3.14 These things saith Amen the faithfull and true witnesse 9. to be our iudge Act. 10.42 It is he that is ordained of God iudge of the quicke and dead 10. to be our Sauiour Philip. 3.20 From whence we looke for our Sauiour euen the Lord Iesus so Christ is all things vnto his seruants reis propitiatore â—aptiuis redemptor c. a reconciliation to the guiltie a redeemer to the captiues a Mediator vnto them at variance with God a teacher to the ignorant a lawgiuer to the dissolute an intercessor to them accused a defender to the assaulted a witnesse to the defamed a iudge to the oppressed and to the elect a Sauiour Gorrhan Doct. 12. The same faith both vnder the lawe and Gospel v. 25. Thomas well obserueth vpon this place that seeing the sinnes which were passed and committed vnder the lawe were forgiuen by no other way then in Christ that the righteousnesse of faith was at all times necessarie as S. Peter saith Act. 4.12 Among men there is giuen no other name vnder heauen whereby we must be saued and S. Paul saith 2. Cor. 14.13 That we haue the same spirit of faith 13. Doct. Of our redemption by Christ and the manner thereof v. 24. Thorough the redemption that is in Christ c. 1. This our redemption consisteth in our deliuerance from the power of Sathan sinne and death and in reconciling of vs vnto God 2. there is a double redemption the first in the forgiuenes of our sinnes nowe present the second when we shall be redeemed from corruption and mortalitie in the resurrection 3. This our redemption is not metaphorically so called but it is a verie true redemption there beeing all things concurring in redemption the captiues which are men the redeemer Christ the price his blood and from whom we are redemed from Sathan hell and damnation see contr 22. following 4. They which detaine the captiues are first God as a iust Iudge whom they had offended then Sathan as Gods minister sinne is as the bands death as the tormentor hell as the prison Pareus loc 5. 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. That the Sacraments of the old Testament did not iustifie ex opere operato by the worke wrought and so consequently neither the newe There are diuerse opinions among the Romanists concerning this point in question 1. Some of them think that the Sacraments of the old Testament did not iustifie at all though they were receiued in faith because they were not giuen to that ende to iustifie sed vt oneri essent but to be a burthen so Magister sentent 4. distinct 1. 2. Some are of the contrarie opinion that circumcision did iustifie ex opere operato by the work wrought though there were no faith in the receiuer as Alexander Bonaventure Scotus Gabriel as Bellarmine citeth them 3. But the common opinion on that side is that the sacraments of the old Testament did onely iustifie and conferre grace ex opere operantis by the worke or disposition of the receiuer and this they hold to be the difference betweene the old sacraments and the newe nostra conferunt gratiam illa sola significabant ours doe conferre grace theirs onely signified grace Bellar. and that those Sacraments did not conferre grace Bellarmine would prooue it out of this place v. 1. What is the profit of circumcision c. to the which question the Apostle maketh answear Much euerie way for chiefely because vnto them were committed the oracles of God herein was the preheminence of the Iewe before the Gentiles not that he was iustified by his circumcision but because the Lord gaue his oracles to the circumcised Bellar. lib. 2. de sacram c. 14. Now vpon this conclusion of Bellarmine thus it may be further inferred the sacraments of the old Testament did not iustifie by the worke wrought or conferre grace this Bellarmine graunteth but there was the same substance and efficacie of the old and newe sacraments for the Apostle saith that circumcision was the seale of the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 4.11 and so is baptisme Col. 2.12 And Christ was the substance both of their sacraments and ours for the rocke was Christ 1. Cor. 10.4 the conclusion then followeth that seeing their sacraments did not conferre grace no more doe the sacraments of the Gospel the difference then betweene the old sacraments and the newe is not the substance which is Christ and the proper effect thereof which is to be seales of faith but in respect of the more cleare signification and so in the more liuely illustration and confirmation of our faith for the more full discussing of this matter I referre the reader to the treatise of controuersies Synops. Centur. 2. err 97. Controv. 2. Of the Apochryphal Scriptures v. 2. Vnto them were committed the oracles of God Faius well obserueth hereupon thaâ— seeing all the old Scriptures which were Canonicall were committed vnto the Hebrewes then those books which were called Apochryphal that is of hidden and obscure authoritie are not to be accounted any part of the diuine Canonical Scripture such are the books oâ— the Macchabees of Tobi Iudith with the rest that goe vnder the name of Apochyphaâ— for they were not commended to the Church of the Hebrews because they are not writteâ— in the Hebrewe tongue neither did the Iewes place them in the canon of the Scriptures as Iosephus setteth it downe lib. 1. contra Appion see further Synops. Centur. â—â— error 1. Controv. 3. That the wicked and vnbeleeuers doe not eate the bodie of Christ in the Eucharist v. 3. The Apostle saith Shall their vnbeleefe make the faith of God without effect hence then it will be inferred by the Romanists that the promise of Christs presence in the Sacrament is not evacuated notwithstanding the vnbeleefe of the communicants Answ. True it is that the vnbeleefe of some doth not make Gods promises voide and of none effect in respect of God himselfe who for his part is readie to performe his promise or couenant where the condition is performed and on the behalfe of the elect to whom Gods promises are effectuall they receiuing them by faith but it followeth not that the promises of God should be effectuall vnto vnbeleeuers for Gods promises are made vnto
those which beleeue vnto vnbeleeuers therefore they doe not appertaine Pareus But it will be further obiected that the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 11.27 that he which eateth and drinketh vnworthily shall be guilty of the bodie and blood of Christ but they could not be guilty vnlesse they were partakers Answ. It doth not followe one may be guiltie of a thing which he is not partaker of as many may be guilty of violating the princely maiestie which had no interest therein neither were partakers thereof so then the wicked and vnbeleeuers are guilty non manducati sed non dâ—â—dicati corporis c. not of the eating but of not discerning the Lords bodie Gryneus Controv. 4. That the Romane Church hath not the promise of the perpetuall presence of Gods spirit The Romanists alleadge this place for themselues that the vnbeleefe of some make not the promises of God of no effect and therefore seeing the Lord hath promised to be present with and to giue his spirit to his Church they cannot faile thereof notwithstanding their sinnes and corruptions Answ. Christ promised the presence of his spirit to his disciples they must then first prooue themselues to be the disciples of Christ in following his doctrine and keeping his word in adding nothing thereto nor decreeing any thing against it before they can haue any interest in this promise God indeede hath promised to be present with his Church but a companie of mitred Bishops following humane traditions and leauing the word of God doe not make the true Church of Christ Martyr Controv. 5. The Virgin Marie not exempted from sinne v. 10. There is none that is righteous no not one Chrysostome handling these words in his commentarie vpon the 13. Psalme giueth instance how that when Christ was crucified this saying was then most of all verified that there was not one that did good discipuli omnes fugerunt c. all the disciples fledde Iohn went away Peter denied Mariae animam gladius dubitationis incredulitatis pervasit and a sword of doubtfulnesse and vnbeleefe did pierce the soule of Marie c. the like is affirmed by Chrysostome hom 49. in Genes and by Origen hom 17. in Luc. and by Augustine lib. question veter nov Testam qu. 73. But Pererius refusing the iudgement of these fathers confidently affirmeth that the Virgin Marie fuisse expertem omnis peccati etiam minimi levissimi per omnem vitam was free from the least and lightest sinne all her life and of Chrysostome he is bold to say veritatis pietatis terminos excessisse that he exceeded the bounds of veritie and pietie Perer. 〈◊〉 6. numer 33. Contra. But Pererius in thus affirming will make not Chrysostome onely and other ancient writers liers but Christ himselfe and his blessed mother for if Mary were without the least sinne why did our Blessed Saviour reprooue her for taking so much vpon her saying Iohn 2.4 Woman what haue I to doe with thee would he checke her without any fault and againe Marie her selfe saith in her song Luk. 2.47 My spirit reioyceth in God my Sauiour what needed she a Sauiour if she were free from sinne see further hereof Synops. Centur. 2 â—â—â— 79. Controv. 6. The reading of Scripture is not to be denied vnto any v. 10. As it is written c. in that the Apostle alleadgeth testimonies of Scripture to prooue all men to be sinners thereupon appeareth the necessitie of the reading of Scripture 〈◊〉 of the generall vse for all both laymen and others for by the Scriptures commeth the knowledge of sinne which concerneth all Chrysostome in his homilie of Lazarus and the rich man exhorteth all men to reade the Scriptures euen such as did trade in the world and kept families further shewing that they could not attaine vnto saluation vnlesse both day and night they were conuersant in the Scriptures yea he affirmeth that such of the common sort had more neede to reade the Scriptures then men of more holy life quod perpetus versantur in maiori discrimine because they are conversant in greater danger Here then that corrupt vsage of the Romane Church is to be taxed who denie the generall vse of the Scriptures vnto the people neither doe permit them to reade them shutting the Scriptures vp in an vnknowne language Martyr Controv. 7. Against the adversaries of the Lawe the Marcionites and other heretikes v. 20. By the lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne hereupon those wicked heretikes tooke occasion to speake against the lawe malaradix lex c. the law then is an euill root and an euill tree by the which commeth the knowledge of sinne to this Origen vpon this place answeareth well non dexit ex lege agnitio peccati sed per legem vt scias non ex ipsa â—tum sed per ipsam cognitum he saith not of the lawe is the knowlede of sinne but by the lawe to knowe that sinne did not spring of it but is onely knowne by it As physicke by the which we come to haue the knowledge of our diseases is not therefore euill thus Origen Controv. 8. Against the Counsels of perfection v. 19. That euerie mouth may be stopped c. here the opinion of the Romanists is euidently conuinced that beside the precepts which are commanded there are Euangelicall counsels which are more then one is bound to doe notwithstanding he that doth them is worthie of a greater reward such are these counsels of perfection as they call them â—â— vowe single life to giue all to the poore and to take vpon them voluntarie pouertie and such like and Origen hath the like conceit who in his commentarie vpon this third chapter giueth this corrupt glosse vpon these words of our Sauiour Luk. 17.10 When ye haue done all these things which are commanded you say we are vnprofitable seruants as long as a man saith he doth that which he is bound to doe he is an vnprofitable seruant si aâ—â—m addas aliquid praeceptis iam non eris invtilis servus but if you adde any thing to the precepts then are you no longer an vnprofitable seruant Contra. 1. Concerning Origens glosse we haue as great libertie to refuse it as Pererius had before to reiect Chrysostomes opinion concerning the Virgin Marie and to accuse him of falshood and impietie especially seeing that his glosse corrupteth the text for if we cannot doe those things which are commanded much lesse beside the commandement can any doe more then is required 2. the Apostle here in saying That euerie mouth may be â—â—ped ouerthroweth this arrogant and presumptuous opinion of such counsels of perfection for then a man should haue wherein to reioyce if he could doe more then is commanded and his mouth would not be stopped Controv. 9. Against the Pelagians which established freewill Augustine c. 9. lib. de spirit liter handling these words confuseth that presumptuous error of the Pelagians who affirme that the lawe onely sheweth what should be
away our selues for our sinnes then Christ came and by the price of his blood redeemed vs againe and restored vs to our former libertie so the Prophet Isai saith 50.1 For your iniquities are ye sold. Now whereas in Scripture redemption is taken sometime for a franke deliuerance where no price is paid yet here the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken properly for such redemption where the price is paid which was Christs blood as 1. Cor. 6.20 You are bought for a price c. 13. Controv. Against the Novatian heretikes Whereas the Apostle saith v. 25. to declare his righteousnes by the forgiuenes of sinnes that are past the Novatians hereupon denied remission of sinnes to those which fell away after they were called who beeing pressed and vrged by arguments out of the Scripture in the contrarie confessed and graunted that God indeede by his absolute power might giue remission of sinnes vnto such as fell away but the Church had no authoritie to graunt reconciliation vnto such But 1. they remembred not the answer of our blessed Sauiour made to Peter how often one should forgiue his brother not onely seuen times but seuentie times seuen times 2. Dauid sinned grieuously after he was called yet was restored to the Church so was the incestuous young man after due repentance for his incest 3. for how els should the blood of Christ clense vs from all sinne 1. Ioh. 1.7 if that there were not remission of sinnes and reconciliation euen for offences committed after our calling 14. Controv. Against inherent iustice v. 28. We conclude that a man is iustified by faith c. This word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be iustified or made iust the Romanists contend to signifie ex impio iustum effici of a wicked man to be made iust and righteous Staplet in Antâ—dot and so their opinion is that there is in iustification an habituall righteousnes infused into the soule whereby a man is iustified 1. This they would prooue by the grammaticall sense of the word because words compounded with facio to doe as magnifico purifico certifico to magnifie purifie certifie signifie to make one great pure certaine and so to iustifie should be taken to make one iust 2. The Apostle expresseth it by an other phrase Rom. 5.19 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be made or constituted righteous before God 3. It is not agreeable to the nature and puritie of God to absolue and hold for innocent those who are wicked and vngodly Contra. 1. This word to iustifie though sometime it signifie to teach one iustice and righteousnes as Dan. 12.3 they which iustifie others c. that is teach them or turne them to righteousnes and sometime to perseuere or continue in iustice as Apoc. 22.11 he that is iust iustificetur adhuc let him be more iust yet vsually in Scripture it is taken to absolue to pronounce and hold iust and that in a double sense as either to acknowledge and declare him to be iust that is iust as wisdome is said to be iustified of her children Matth. 11.19 so is it taken before in this chapter v. 4. that thou mightest be iustified in thy words c. or 〈◊〉 to count him iust who is vniust in himselfe that is absolue free and discharge him as c. 8.33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods chosen it is God that iustifieth that is acquiteth dischargeth who shall condemne so is it vsed in the same sense Act. 13.39 From all things from the which ye could not be iustified by the law of Moses by him euery one that beleeueth is iustified Neither doth that grammaticall construction alwaies hold for Marie saith My soule doth magnifie the Lord that is declareth or setteth forth Gods greatnes here it can not signifie to make great Lombards obseruation then is not found that to iustifie in Scripture signifieth foure things 1. to be absolued and freed from sinne by the death of Christ. 2. beeing freed from sinne to be made iust by charitie 3. to be cleansed from sinne by faith in the death of Christ. 4. by faith and imitation of Christs death to bring forth the works of righteousnes Lobmard lib. 3. distinct 19. for of these foure significations the 1. and 3. are all one which may be acknowledged but the 2. and 4. are not found in Scripture 2. We are also made and constituted righteous before God not by any inherent righteousnes in our selues but by the righteousnes of faith as the Apostle saith that I may be found in him not hauing mine owne righteousnes which is of the law but that which is thorough the faith of Christ. 3. Yet it is most agreeable to the puritie of the diuine nature to accept vs as iust in Christ who is most absolutely righteous before God and so to impute his righteousnes vnto vs by faith so sanctifying also our hearts by his holy spirit that we should delight in the works of righteousnes 4. If we should be iustified by any inherent and inhabiting iustice and not by righteousnes imputed by faith these inconueniences would follow 1. that iustification and sanctification should be confounded for that sanctitie which is wrought in the faithfull is a fruit of iustification by faith 2. this holines and charitie which is in the faithfull is a worke of the law which requireth that we should loue God and our neighbour but faith and the worke of the law can not stand together 3. this habite of pietie and charitie is imperfect in vs for no man loueth God and his neighbour as he ought now that which is imperfect can not iustifie See further of inherent iustice Synops. Centur. 4. err 56. 15. Controv. Against the Popish distinction of the first and second iustification The Romanists generally doe hold that there are two kind of iustifications the first which is an infused habite of iustice formed by charitie to the which we are prepared by faith other dispositions of the mind and this they say is without works the other is the encrease of this iustification by the works of charitie the grace of God concurring with mans free-will and this they say is by works and truly meritorious sic Stapl. in Antidot Perer. disput in 2. c. ad Rom. disput 16 17. Contra. 1. The Scripture acknowledgeth but one kind of iustification in all which is both begunne continued and ended by faith as c. 1.17 The righteousnes of God is reuealed from faith to faith and c. 3.30 For it is one God who shall iustifie circumcision of faith and vncircumcision through faith here the whole worke of iustification is ascribed to faith and Rom. 8.20 whome he iustified he glorified there is nothing that commeth betweene this one iustification and glorification 2. They confound iustification and sanctification for that which they call the second iustification is nothing els but sanctification which is the bringing forth of the fruits of holines after that we are iustified by faith these
promised but that he had also a particular confidence of his acceptance with God and remission of his sinnes in the Messiah promised doth euidently appeare by these two arguments 1. The Apostle saith that Abraham was partaker by faith of that blessednesse which the Prophet Dauid speaketh of v. 7. Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen then it followeth ver 9. Came the blessednesse vpon the circumcision or vpon the vncircumcision 2. the like faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnesse which is imputed to vs v. 23. but our faith is to beleeue that Christ was put to death for our sinnes and rose for our iustification v. 25. therefore Abrahams faith was an assurance of remission of his sinnes in Christ. Controv. 15. That faith doth not iustifie by the merit or act thereof but onely instrumentally as it applyeth and apprehendeth the righteousnesse of Christ. Bellarmine hath an other sophisticall collection vpon these words v. 22. therefore it was imputed to him for righteousnesse here saith at the Apostle rendreth the reason why faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnesse because he in beleeuing gaue glorie vnto god therefore he was iustified merito fidei by the merit or worthinesse of faith which notwithstanding was his grace and gift Bellar. lib. 1. de iustif c. 17. Contra. 1. Abraham was not iustified because he in beleeuing gaue glorie vnto God that indeede was an act and fruit of his faith but it was his faith onely for the which he was iustified as the Apostle saith afterward v. 24. it shall be likewise imputed to vs for righteousnes which beleeue c. 2. the Apostle saith to him that worketh not but beleeueth c. faith is counted for righteousnesse then it will followe that where faith is counted or imputed for righteousnesse there is no worke faith then iustifieth not as a worke by the act of beleeuing for then faith should not iustifie without works which is the scope of all the Apostles discourse that by faith righteousnes is imputed without workes v. 6. faith then doth not iustifie actiuely as it is a worke but passiuely as it apprehendeth the righteousnesse of Christ. 3. If faith be the gift of God as Bellarmine confesseth then can it not merit for he that meriteth must merit of his owne where there is grace and fauour as in the bestowing of gifts freely there is no merit v. 4. 4. I will here oppose against Bellarmine the iudgement of Tolet and so set one Iesuite against an other and a Cardinall against his fellowe he thus ingeniously writeth vpon these words non existimes Paulum merito fiderascribere iustitium c. thinke not that Paul ascribeth righteousnesse to the merit of faith as though because he beleeued he was worthie of the righteousnesse of God but he signifieth Deum ex gratia acceptare fidem nostram in iustitiam that God of grace and fauour accepteth our faith for righteousnesse Controv. 16. The people are not to be denied the reading of the Scriptures v. 23. Now it is not written for him onely but for vs c. Hence it is euident that the Romanists offer great wrong vnto the people of God in barring them from the reading of the Scriptures for they are to be admitted to the reading of the Scriptures for whom they are written but they are written for all that beleeue in Christ the reading then of the Scripture serueth to coÌ„firme our faith therfore they belong generally vnto the faithfull Par. But it will be obiected that the vnlearned doe not vnderstand the Scriptures and therefore they are to depend vpon the fathers of the Church for the vnderstanding of them and not to venture vpon them themselues Answ. 1. Nay the sense of the Scripture is most safely taken from the Scripture which is the best interpreter of it selfe 2. the Fathers and expossitors are to be heard and consulted with so farre forth as they agree with the Scriptures but the sense of the Scripture 〈◊〉 not depend vpon their fancies which haue no warrant by Scripture as Hierome vpon theâ— 23. chap. of Mathew giueth instance of a certaine interpretation of one of the Fatherâ— that Zacharias the sonne of Barachias mentioned there v. 35. to haue beene slaine betweene the Temple and the Altar was Zacharie the father of Iohn Baptist And Hierome searching out which of the Fathers had made this interpretation found that it was Basil and then he concludeth this seeing it hath no warrant out of the Scriptures eadem facilitate contemnitur qua probatur is as easily reiected as it is affirmed See further of the vulgar reading of Scripture and of the manner of interpreting the same Synops. Centur. 1. err 3. and err 9. Controv. 17. Against the heretikes which condemned the old Testament and God the author thereof v. 24. Which beleeued in him that raised vp Iesus c. Origen very well inferreth vpon these wordes that seeing the God whom Abraham beleeued was able to quicken the dead was the same that raised Iesus from the dead non erat alius Deus legis alius Domini nostri Iesu Christ. c. there was not then one God of the law and another of our Lord Iesus Christ c. But there was the same God of the old and new Testament which is obserued by Origen against the wicked Marcionites and Manichies who condemned the old Testament and the author thereof So also whereas the same heretickes vrged these wordes of the Apostle v. 15. where no law is there is no transgression and thereupon inferring the contrarie where there is a law there is transgression would thereby conclude that the law is the cause of transgression and so condemne the law Origen doth thus returne this their collection vpon themselues that as where the law is there is transgression of the law so where faith is there is transgression against faith but as faith is not the cause vt quis praeuaricetur à fide that one transgresse against faith neither shall the law be the cause of transgression against the law Controv. 18. Whether iustification consist onely in the remission of sinnes v. 25. Who was deliuered to death for our sinnes and is risen againe for our iustification Pererius taketh occasion here to inuergh against Protestants thus affirming of vs qui â—â—â—â—em vim iustificationis ponunt in sola remissione peccatorum donationem vero iustitiae c. which doe place all the force of iustification onely in the remission of sinnes but the donation of iustice whereby the minde is rectified and newenesse of life wrought in vs they do reiect and abandon Perer. disput 10. err 49. and to the same purpose Bellar. lib. 2. de iustif c. 6. and the Rhemists take vpon them to confute the Protestants because they hold iustification to be onely remission of sinnes and no grace inherent in vs annot in 4. ad Rom. Sect. 6. Contra. 1. It is a false imputation that we place iustification onely in the remission of
sinnes for we hold also with S. Paul the imputation of Christs righteousnesse by faith as S. Paul saith Philip. 3.9 That I may be found in him not hauing mine owne righteousnesse which is by the lawe but that which is of the faith of Christ c. 2. But though we graunt as well an imputation of righteousnes as a not imputation of sinne concurring vnto iustification yet we denie that any inherent iustice or renouation of life is any part of this iustification neither doth the Apostle meane any such iustification here Christ rose for our iustification not thereby onely to giue vs an example of newenesse of life as Bellarmine and Pererius expound it wherein Tolet his owne fellowe Iesuite and Cardinall is against him as is before shewed qu. 42. but Christs resurrection is the cause and ground of our iustification which is imputed by faith as Ambrose expoundeth resurrexit c. vt nos gratia iustificationis donaret he rose againe to endue vs with the grace of iustification vt iustitiam credentium confirmaret to confirme the iustice of those which beleeue saith Hierome ista resurrectio credita nos iustificat this resurrection beeing beleeued doth iustifie vs saith Augustine 3. an inherent iustice we confesse which is our sanctification the fruit and effect of our iustification by faith but because it is imperfect in vs and not able to satisfie the iustice of God we denie that we are thereby iustified in his sight Controv. 19. Against Socinus corrupt interpretation of these words v. 25. Was deliuered vp for our sinnes Socinus will not haue this phrase to signifie any satisfactioÌ„ made by Christ for our sinnes but onely to betoken the cause or occasion of Christs death as the Lord is said to giue Israâ—l vp for the sinnes of Ieroboam who sinned and caused Israel to sinne 1. king 14.16 thus â—icked Socinus de Seruat part 2. p. 108. Contra. 1. Though sometime this phrase signifie the cause yet it is false that it so onely signifieth for the Scripture speaketh euidently that Christ was our reconciliation and that we haue redemption in him Rom. 3.24 25. our sinnes then onely were not the cause or occasion of his death but he so died for our sinnes as that he by his blood satisfied for them 2. It was the Pelagian blasphemie that Christ died for our sinnes to be an example onely vnto vs to die vnto sinne for thus the power and force of Christs death is extenuated which indeede causeth vs to die vnto sinne it doth not teach vs onely and shew vs the way this were to extoll the power of mans corrupt will against the grace of God 3. The instance of Ieroboam is altogether impertinent Israel was deliuered vp for Ieroboams sinnes which they imitated and followed if Christ were so deliuered vp for our sinnes then they must make him also to be a sinner with vs and to be polluted with our sinnes ex Perer dub 8. 20. Controv. Piscators opinion examined that our sinnes are remitted onely by Christs death not for the obedience and merit of his life These are Piscators words in his annotation vpon the 25. v. Omnia nostra pectata expiatâ— sunt per solam mortem Christi all our sinnes are expiated onely by the death of Christ and therefore neither originall sinne is purged by his holy conception nor the sinnes of omission by his holy life but by Christs death onely to this purpose many places of Scripture are cited and alleadged by him as Matth. 20.28 The Sonne of man came to giue his life a ransome for many Matth. 26.28 Which namely blood is shed for many for the remission of sinnes Act. 20.28 Christ hath purchased his Church by his blood Likewise he affirmeth that by Christs obedience in his death and vpon the crosse partâ—â— esse nobis vitam aeâ—ernam euerlasting life is obtained for vs as Hebr. 10.19 By the blood of Iesus we may be hold to enter into the holy place and other places are cited to the same effect Contra. 1. It is true that Christ onely by his death and other his holy sufferings paied the ransome and bare the punishment due vnto our sinne but seeing Christs blood had beene of no value if he had not beene most perfectly righteous his obedience and righteousnes must as well concurre vnto the remission of sinnes as his death and this is that which S. Peter saith 1. Pet. 1.19 We are redeemed with the pretious blood of Christ as of a Lâ—â—â—e vndefiled and without spot and c. 3.18 Christ hath once suffered for sinnes the iust for the vniust the innocencie then and integritie of Christ must be ioyned with Christs blood to make it an acceptable sacrifice 2. Whereas there are two parts of our iustification the remission and not imputing of sinnes and the imputation of Christs righteousness which two are not separated neither can the one stand without the other neither can there be any remission of sinnes vnlesse Christs righteousnes be imputed as S. Paul saith 1. Cor. 5.21 He hath made him to be sinne 〈◊〉 that knew no sinne that we should be made the righteousnes of God in him the merit of Christs obedience and righteousnes must needes concurre in the remission of sinnes yea Piscator in his annotation vpon the 4. v. confesseth that these words blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen idem valere to be as much in effect as to say blessed are they to whom iustice is imputed 3. But that seemeth to be a more straunge assertion to denie that possessio vitae eternat tanquam effectum adscribitur obedientiae Christi the possession of eternall life is ascribed as an effect to Christs obedience which is directly affirmed by the Apostle Hebr. 7.26 Such an high Priest it became vs to haue which is holy harmelesse vndefiled separate from sinners and made higher then the heauens what hath made Christ higher then the heauens but his holines perfection integritie and therefore he is able perfectly to saue them that come vnto God v. 25. 4. And further that we are iustified by Christs obedience the Apostle sheweth Rom. 5.13 As by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous here the Apostle saith directly that we are made righteous by the obedience of Christ. Piscator here answereth that by Christs obedience here is vnderstood his obedience in submitting himselfe willingly vnto death in which it was his fathers will he should suffer for vs. Contra. Our iustification consisteth of two parts of the remission of our sinnes and the making of vs iust before God the one is procured by Christs death the other is purchased by his obedience and righteousnes and that the Apostle speaketh not onely of Christs obedience vnto death but generally of his whole course of righteousnes both in life and death is euident because he calleth it the gift of righteousnes v. 17. and the raigning of grace
against him such were the Angelâ— but it is not true of those whom God was offended with for their transgression and yet he loued them not onely as his creatures but as his children whom he purposed to redeeme in Christ 2. So then in a diuerse respect God both was angrie with them as sinners and yet he loued them vnder this condition that they should be saued by the redemption of Christ in him they were elected and beloued before the foundation of the world the argument then followeth not God loued them in sending his sonne to die for them and so reconcile them therefore it was needelesse that Christ should die for them which were beloued of God alreadie for God loued them in Christ whom he had ordained before to be their Mediator and Redeemer 2. Obiect As herein God shewed his loue toward vs so it would seeme a cruell part in God so to be delighted in the death of his sonne Answ. 2. God had no delight in his sonnes death in respect of his suffering and torments but as it was a satisfaction for the sinne of the world and the price of our redemption 2. and Christ the sonne of God was not forced hereunto but offred himselfe willingly of his infinite loue to die for man 3. Obiect It had beene a greater loue if the father himselfe had died for vs then in sending his Sonne thus Pareus reporteth how a Iewe obiected vnto him as he tooke his Iourney toward Silesia ann 78. Answ. First we must not curiously search into Gods secrets to knowe the reason of his will why the sonne of God rather then the father tooke our flesh and died for vs Secondly yet these reasons may be alleadged hereof 1. the father and sonne beeing but one God the father as God did worke with his sonne in finishing our redemption 2. because God was offended and it was God that must satisfie for none else could doe it therefore there must be one person in the Godhead that must satisfie namely the Sonne and one that must be satisfied namely the father 3. what greater loue could God the father shewe then in giuing his owne Sonne the most deare thing vnto him 4. It was the Redeemers and Sauiours part to restore vs vnto the dignitie of the sonnes of God vnto whom did this more properly belong then vnto the Sonne of God Controv. 8. That Christs death was a full satisfaction for our sinnes against Socinus his cauills Obiect If Christs death were a satisfaction vnto the iustice of God for the sinnes of the worldâ— then 1. it must haue beene performed by the same person that had offended 2. the iustice of God required a punishment equivalent to the offence namely euerlasting destruction and malediction which Christ sustained not 3. the Scripture no where speaketh of any such satisfaction for vs by the death of Christ. Answ. 1. As in humane Courts there is a double kind of iustice either strict or rigorous iustice or iustice moderated and tempered with equitie and clemencie as if a king inflict vpon a traytor either the punishment of death or the muâ—ct of ten thousand talents in the rigor of iustice he may exact either but if he shall in his clemencie accept an 100. talents of an other that shall vndertake for the offender here now is iustice tempered with mercie So is it with God he dealeth with some in strict iustice as with the reprobate Angels and reprobate men that doe despise Christ and his redemption but with his elect by dealeth in the other kind of tempered iustice accepting the satisfaction of Christ for them not a stranger from them but made man like vnto them 2. Though Christ suffred not eternall paines yet in respect both of the excellencie of his person that suffered and the bitternesse of that agonie which he endured did beare that punishment which in Gods gracious acceptance was equiualent vnto euerlasting paine 3. And though the Scripture vse not the verie tearme of satisfaction yet there are words of like fâ—â—ree and efficacie applyed to the death of Christ as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ransome redemption and such like as Matth. 20.28 to giue his life for the ransome of many Rom. 2.14 are iustified c. by the redemption that is in Christ Iesus and in many such places thâ—â— like phrases are found Controv. 9. That Christs death was not onely satisfactorie but meditarious against Socinus Obiect 1. No satisfaction of a due debt hath merit in it for no more is paid then is due Christ then by his death merited not because he payed our due debt neither doth the Scripture ascribe any merit to Christs death Answ. 1. It is true that he which satisfieth for his owne debt therein doth not merit for he paieth but that he oweth but he that satisfieth for an others debt meriteth two waies first in respect of the debter in paying that he oweth not then in respect of the Creditor who by an agreement couenanteth to accept the satisfaction of the vndertaker not as a recompence onely for the debt but as a merit to deserue further grace and fauour for the debter So Christ hath truely merited in respect of vs in paying our debt for vs and in respect of God who accepteth the death of his sonne as truely meritorious of his grace and fauour for vs. 2. And further herein appeareth the merit of Christs death 1. in respect of the excellencie of the person that died 2. of the perfect obedience and fulfilling of the law 3. his great loue and willingnesse in suffring 4. and beside his satisfaction he was a faithfull martyr and witnesse of the truth Reuel 3.14 3. The Scripture though in direct tearmes it ascribeth not merit vnto the death of Christ yet it vseth words equivalent as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acquisitio purchasing includeth merit as Act. 20.28 Christ is said to haue purchased his Church by his blood and Ephes 1.14 It is called the redemption of the possession purchased c. which is all one as if he had said merited See more in Pareus dub 7. Here followe certaine questions and controversies of waight touching originall sinne Controv. 10. That there is originall sinne in men by the corruption of nature against the opinion of the Hebrewes The Hebrewes doe reiect this saying of the Apostle that sinne entred into the world and death by sinne and they vrge vs to shewe some authorities out of the old Testament to prooue the propagation of Adams sinne to his posteritie Paulus Burgensis addit 2. thus consureth their opinion 1. That death which was inflicted vpon Adam for his transgression remaineth quoad 〈◊〉 as it is a punishment is euident by that place Genes 3.3 Dust thou art and to dust 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 returne which sentence of mortalitie is executed as we see by experience vpon all Adâ—â—s posteritie 2. Then he prooueth quod illud peccatum transijt ad posteras quoad culpam that 〈◊〉 sinne did
from this vniuersalitie he that attempteth to except you goeth about to deceiue you Gregor lib. 4. epist. 31. acknowledgeth Mauritius the Emperour his Lord c. 5. To conclude reason it selfe perswadeth thus much that all the citizens as parts and members of the Commonwealth should be subiect to the head and gouernor thereof Ecclesiasticall persons then if they be citizens and members of the Commonwealth must be in subiection to the Ciuill head not onely decretiva sed coactiva obligatione not onely to receiue direction but by a coactiue bond and obligation for otherwise they are not parts and members of the Ciuill bodie See further hereof Synops. Cent. 1. err 98.100 2. Controv. Whether the Pope haue a spirituall power aboue Kings and Princes The Pope is not contented to exempt himselfe and his Clergie from the command of the Ciuill Magistrate but he arrogateth vnto himselfe a superior power to be aboue Emperors and Kings Innocentius 3. decret 1. titul 33. de maiorit C. solitae thus decreeth Imperium non praeest Sacerdotio sed subest the Empire is not superior to the Priesthood but vnder it and Bonifacius 8. extrav de maiorit C. vnam sanctam decreeth thus that omnes Christi fideles de necessitate salutis c. all the faithfull of Christ vpon necessitie of saluation are subiect to the Romane Bishop qui vtrumque gladium habet c. who hath both swords and iudgeth all and himselfe is iudged of none And in the same place he compareth the Ecclesiasticall and Ciuil power to the two great lights which God made and there is as great difference betweene them as betweene the Sunne and Moone Bellarmine though in words he denie the Pope to haue vllam temporalem iurisdictionem directe any temporall iurisdiction directly yet he hath power indirecte indirectly to dispose of temporall things yea of Princes kingdomes and dominions in ordine ad bonum spirituale as it serueth for the promoting of the spirituall good and so in effect the Pope shall haue absolute power of temporall things to dispose at his will and pleasure as he seeth to make for the maintenance of his iurisdiction which they vnderstand to be this spirituall good Some and the chiefe of their arguments for this vnreasonable opinion are these 1. The Pope hath both the swords the spirituall and the materiall sword as the Apostles said Luk. 22. behold two swords and Christ answered it is enough he is therefore aboue the Ciuill power which hath but one sword Ans. 1. Bellarm. lib. 5. de Rom. Pont. c. 7. disclaimeth this argument and sheweth that there is no such meaning in that place by the two swords to vnderstand a double power of the Pope but they were two materiall swords in deede which were shewed vnto Christ. 2. and this beeing but a deuised allegorie not expressed in Scripture is of no force to proue any doctrine 2. Bonifacius further vrgeth in the saide place that the Church is superior to the Ciuill state because they receiue tithes of them Ans. 1. We graunt that the Church which giueth spirituall things and receiueth temporall is superior and more worthie in respect of the spirituall things which it giueth but it is not therefore superior in temporall dominion 2. neither were they in the law alwaies superior which receiued tithes for beside the tithes which were giuen to the Levites the rich also reserued a tith for the poore and strangers Deut. 14.28 3. and though this be admitted that the paiment of the ceremoniall tith was a signe of subiection as the Apostle reasoneth for the preheminence of Melchisedeck Heb. 7.5 because that tith was giuen vnto the Levites in the Lords right who were then a type and figure of Christ yet now all ceremonies beeing ceased tithes are giuen vnto the Church not in the name of the Leviticall tenths but as the salarie and stipend of the ministers for their maintenance so that now they are no signe of such superioritie for the hire is giuen to the labourer as well by those that are superiors as inferiors 3. Argum. The Bishops doe annoint kings at their inauguration and doe blesse them but the lesse is blessed of the greater Heb. 7. therefore the Ecclesiasticall state is greater Ans. 1. By this meanes not the Pope onely but euery Bishop which doth annoint the Prince at his coronation should be greater then the Prince 2. he that blesseth by a Propheticall benediction as did the Prophets and Priests which was by the special appointment of God was greater but euery one that ordinarily blesseth is not greater for the subiects vse to blesse their Prince in their vsuall acclamations and this is but benedictio ritualis a kind of rituall no reall blessing which is vsed in such inauguration as an externall complement and matter of solemnitie as so is the annointing which argueth no more a superioritie then the receiuing of the sword from the high Marshall and of the great seale from the Chancelor as the vse was in Princes coronations 4. Argum. The Lord said to Ieremie chap. 1.10 I haue set thee ouer nations and kingdomes to pull vp and destroy which Ieremie was not of the princely race but of the stocke of the Priests therefore the Ecclesiasticall power is aboue kings Ans. 1. The particular and extraordinarie example of one Prophet can be no rule to the Pope 2. and his power was spirituall not in the actuall deposing of kings but in prophecying of their ruine 5. Argum. The Apostle saith 1. Cor. 2. that the spirituall man iudgeth all things but he is iudged of none this spirituall man is the Pope c. Ans. 1. The Apostle speaketh not there of a spirituall man by calling or profession but of one illuminate by the spirit and he is set against the carnall and naturall man such a spirituall man beeing guided by the spirit is able to iudge and discerne all things and he himselfe can not be iudged of those which are carnall 2. such a spirituall man the Pope is not but the man of sinne who sauoureth not the things of the spirit of God but of the flesh 6. Argum. The power of binding and loosing is the greatest power in earth but this power was giuen vnto Peter and his successors therefore the Pope hath the greatest power in earth Ans. 1. The power of binding and loosing by the word of God is the greatest power in spirituall things but not in temporall 2. the Pope hath not this power he bindeth not by the word but by his bulls booke bell and candle 3. if he had this power he should not haue it alone for it was not giuen onely to Peter but to all the Apostles and their successors the Pastors of the Church to whome it is said Matth. 18. Whatsoeuer yee loose in earth c. 7. Argum. Bellarmine thus reasoneth 1. the superior power may command the inferior therefore the Ecclesiasticall beeing superior may command the Politike state 2. and
prescribed was brought in And whence hath sprung the great innovation of religion in Poperie from the puritie of the ancient faith but from this that the Bishops of Rome excluding the authoritie of the Emperor first in the East and afterward in the West haue arrogated to themselues the sole authoritie in matters Ecclesiasticall 4. Argum. Princes can not doe the lesse as preach the word minister the Sacraments therefore not the greater to make Ecclesiasticall lawes Ans. 1. It followeth not for though duties meerely Ecclesiasticall can not be executed by the Prince because he is not thereunto called yet externall iurisdiction he may exercise in the Church neither are these duties as the lesse and greater one to the other in the same kind they are in diuers respects both lesse and greater the preaching of the word is greater in respect of the spirituall power and the Ciuill in regard of the externall iurisdiction 2. neither is it alwaies true he that can not doe the lesse can not doe the greater where he is barred from the lesse by some defect either of right in beeing called thereunto or otherwise the thing not beseeming as in the ciuill functions it is not fit for the Prince to digge and dolve and yet he can doe the greater to make and ordaine laws so in the Church affaires he is not to preach because he wanteth a calling thereunto 5. Argum. They which can not iudge infallibly of the sense of Gods word can haue no Ecclesiasticall power Princes can not iudge Ergo. Ans. 1. The proposition is not true for neither can any Bishop iudge infallibly of the sense of Scripture nor any els since the time of the Apostles 2. but as the Pastors by prayer conference meditating vpon the Scriptures attaine to a competent measure of vnderstanding of the Scriptures sufficient to direct them so by the same meanes and by helpe of the learned the Prince also may be prepared to applie his iudiciarie power to the present necessitie of the Church 3. And I pray you what infallibilitie of iudgement hath beene in the Popes when as Iohn the 23. was condemned in the Councell of Constance for his monstrous opinions as that he should hold vitam aeternam non esse that there is no eternall life after this animam hominis cum corpore mori that the soule of man dieth with the bodie and that the bodie beeing dead shall not rise againe And seeing it hath beene often seene among them that the Pope hath made boyes and children Bishops as Bernard complained in his time scholares pueri impuberes adolescentes promoventur ad ecclesiasticas dignitates scholler boyes and beardlesse youthes are promoted to the dignities of the Church epist. 41. what infallibilitie of iudgement then can they boast of in their Clergie 6. Argum. Not the Princes and Ciuill magistrates shall giue account for the soules of the subiects but the Pastors onely Hebr. 13.17 therefore they haue no Ecclesiasticall power Ans. The argument followeth not Pastors must giue account for mens soules if they be lost by their default therefore Magistrates shall not for both shall giue account though not in the same manner the Pastors for seducing them by false doctrine the Magistrate in tolerating a corrupt worship or in making impious lawes for the maintenance of idolatrie as it is often obiected concerning Ieroboam that he made Israel to sinne And these and such like are the Aduersaries arguments against the Ecclesiasticall power of the Magistrate Now on the contrarie some arguments shall be propounded for the proofe and confirmation of the question 1. Argum. The Magistrate is the minister of God for the good of the subiect Rom. 13.5 but this good is not onely ciuill but spirituall therefore euen in spirituall things he must minister for their good the Papists will haue the Prince to be their minister and seruant indeede that he should put in execution the decrees of the Church but decree nothing himselfe but this were to giue no power at all vnto magistrats but as seruants which are commanded to doe their masters will the Prince hath a ministring power in spirituall things not a ministring seruice 2. Argum. Euery soule must be subiect to the higher power therefore euen the Ecclesiasticall state and euery person therein of what condition soeuer he be the Papists answer that they must be subiect as they are citizens and as they enioy possessions but not as they are Ecclesiasticall persons But the Apostles rule is generall euery soule must be subiect in what things soeuer so that the power which is of God be not abused against God true it is that in things meerely spirituall touching faith and doctrine they must not depend vpon the Ciuill power but as he enioyneth precepts according to the word yet in respect of the externall policie of the Church in giuing order and direction in censuring and punishing offenders and such like euen spirituall persons are subiect to the Ciuill power 3. That the Prince hath power euen in Ecclesiasticall matters shall be prooued by these particulars 1. that the cognizance and knowledge of religion is required in the Prince 2. that it belongeth vnto him by law to maintaine the truth and to inhibit all false religion 3. that he is to take order for the Ministers and Pastors that they do applie themselues faithfully to their calling and to censure them which are disorderly and exorbitant 4. that it is the Princes office to appoint Synods Councells nationall generall Prouinciall concerning Ecclesiasticall busines 1. The first is euident Deut. 17.19 where the king is commanded to read in the booke of the law all the daies of his life so also Ioshu 1.18 2. Moses prescribed vnto Israel a forme of worship Ioshua caused the people to be circumcised Iosh. 5. Dauid disposed the ministeriall offices of the Tabernacle and appointed the Leuites and Priests their orders and courses 1. Chron. 23. Hezekiah pulled downe the brasen serpent Iosias tooke away idols so did other Christian Emperors make Ecclesiasticall lawes as the first law Cunctus populus in the Code is concerning the beleefe of the Trinitie Martianus made a law against the Nestorians and Eutychians Iustinian inserteth diuers Ecclesiasticall lawes as that the Letanie should not be said by lay-men none of the Clergie beeing present Novell 123. c. 31. and that Bishops and Presbyters should rehearse the prayers in an audible voice to the vnderstanding of the people Novell 137. c. 6. and diuers such like 3. Salomon deposed Abiathar Iehosaphat appointed the Leuites to teach in the cities 2. Chron. 19. Constantinus the great heard the controversie betweene Donatus and Cecilianus and iudged it Euseb. lib. 10. c. 5. Theodosius commanded the Nestorian Bishops to be deposed leg 2. C. de sum Trinitat he appointed Nectorius to be Bishop of Constantinople Socrat. lib. 5. c. 19. Iustinian deposeth a Bishop that had a suspected woman in his house Novel 6. c. 5. yea the Bishop of
Rome was a long time together nominated and his election confirmed by the Emperor as Constantinus saith to Liberius Nos quod Christianus esses te dignum iudicanimus Episcopatu vrbis nostrae We because thou art a Christian haue iudged thee worthie to be Bishop of our citie Theodor. lib. 2. c. 16. 4. Dauid called together the Priests to bring home the Arke 1. Chr. 13.7 so did Ezekiah call an assembly of the Priests 2. Chr. 29. and Iosias 2. king 23. the first Nicene Councell was summoned by Constantine the great the 1. Constantinopol by Theodosius the elder the 1. Ephesine by Theodosius the younger the Chalcedon Councell by Martianus Iustinian decreeth Archiepiscopum singulis annis synodos celebrare c. that the Archbishop should euery yeare celebrate Synods and assemble the Bishops together Novell 123. c. 10. and Novell 137. c. 7. he commandeth the Presidents of the Provinces to see that the Metropolitans doe assemble Synods If then Princes haue made lawes for the maintenance of true religion and against heresies and haue taken vpon them to giue order and direction for Ecclesiasticall offices haue deposed such as were vnmeete and vnworthie and called Councells and Synods concerning Ecclesiasticall matters then can there not be denied vnto them a kind of Ecclesiasticall power But Stapleton thus obiecteth against those forenamed Presidents of the Emperors and kings authoritie in Ecclesiasticall matters 1. Obiect These instances doe onely shew that de facto in fact and in deede Princes medled with Ecclesiasticall affaires not that de iure of right they ought to haue so done Ans. If onely such presidents were brought out of Ecclesiasticall stories and not out of the Scriptures he should seeme to say somewhat but seeing the Scriptures set forth examples of godly kings who are commended in Gods booke dealing in Ecclesiasticall affaires there is no question to be made of their right in so doing 2. Obiect These Princes by such acts did onely provide for the peace of the Church ex zelo of their zeale and pietie not imperio by their imperiall power and authoritie Ans. That can not be said to be done of a pious zeale which any vsurpeth vpon them without an authoritie and calling if these Princes did these things of zeale then also by a lawfull calling and power for otherwise it had not beene pleasing vnto God they intruding and vsurping vpon an others place and office 3. Obiect They did not make new Ecclesiasticall lawes but onely confirmed and ratified such things as were decreed in former Canons Ans. 1. True it is that new articles concerning faith neither Emperors nor Bishops haue authoritie to bring in but such as are prescribed by the word 2. but yet new lawes concerning faith requiring obedience vnder certaine penalties haue beene made by Emperors not prouided for afore by Canons and concerning orders to be obserued in Synods and in the gouernment Ecclesiasticall diuers things haue beene enacted by the Imperiall power neuer mentioned before in the ecclesiasticall Canons 3. and what if the Imperiall constitutions enioyne the same things concerning faith and doctrine decreed before by the Canons this prooueth not that they executed onely what the other prescribed but both the powers the Ecclesiasticall by Canons the Imperiall by lawes enforced the same rules of faith which the word of God prescribed More who please to see of this controversie I send him to learned Pareus treatise dub 5. and to Synops. Papism Cent. 1. err 98. and err 100. 5. Controv. Whether Ecclesiasticall persons as Bishops and others may haue the temporall sword committed vnto them The Romanists are herein very confident who maintaine that the Pope is both a temporall and a spirituall Prince and so are some other of their chiefe Prelates in Germanie which they thinke not onely to be lawfull but very expedient and in these times necessarie for the more peaceable gouernment of the Church By this meanes they say that Cities and Prouinces are the better gouerned when the chiefe authoritie is committed to Ecclesiasticall persons and in these daies it is necessarie that men which will not be wonne by the sword should be compelled by the sword Contra. But the contrarie is euident that no place is worse gouerned but where the Prelate is also a temporall Prince and the reason is because they commit all vnto officers not beeing able nor fit themselues to manage the affaires of the state and by this meanes much corruption groweth And as it is necessarie that the obstinate that can not be perswaded by the word should be bridled by authoritie so God hath appointed to that ende Magistrats to whome the sword is committed and not to Ministers and this is also seene by daily experience that no where more disorders are committed then where Bishops haue the guiding of the Ciuill state which sheweth that God giueth no blessing vnto such preposterous proceedings against his ordinance And that Ecclesiasticall persons ought not to meddle with the sword though from exercising of other parts of Ciuill iustice which are compatible with their calling all and altogether are not to be excluded appeareth by our blessed Sauiours lesson vnto his Apostles vos autem non sic c. it shall not be so with you as with the Princes and Lords among the Gentiles Matth. 20.25 and the Apostle in this place v. 5. saith that he beareth not the sword in vaine that is the temporall power Here it will be answered that Christs example and the Apostles are not to be imitated in all things for then neither should there be any magistrate among Christians because he tooke not that office vpon him neither should it be lawfull to haue siluer and gold because Peter saith Act. 3. Gold and siluer haue I none Ans. 1. Our Sauiour Christ forbiddeth not all to take Lordly authoritie vpon them but onely his Apostles he forbiddeth not all to be Ciuill magistrates but such as had the preaching of the word committed vnto them 2. neither doe we vrge the Apostles examples onely but their precepts that of Saint Peters not hauing gold or siluer was a matter of fact not a precept but that is a precept which Saint Peter giueth vnto Pastors not to be Lords ouer Gods heritage 1. Pet. 5. 3. thus was it in Origens time who writeth thus homil 13. vpon this chapter omnia crimina quae vindicari vult Deus non per antistites principes ecclesiarum sed per mundi iudices voluit vindicari all the faults which God would haue punished he would haue so punished not by the rulers and cheife gouernors of the Church but by the Iudges of the world c. Now though the vse of the sword which properly is seene in the power of life and death be denied vnto Ministers yet the tractation of all Ciuill causes is not forbidden as in the compounding of controversies ending of strifes among neighbours and if vnto some discreete men be committed a commanding power
shew that he is God because euerie knee shall bowe vnto him and euery tongue shall confesse him to be God adoration and praise which doe belong onely vnto God are giuen vnto Christ and in that place the Prophet yet speaketh more euidently am not I the Lord and there is no God beside me And here where the Apostle said v. 10. we must all stand before the iudgement seat of Christ v. 12. he saith We must giue account vnto God the tribunall seate then of Christ is the tribunall of God Doct. 7. Of the authoritie of the Scriptures v. 11. For it is written c. The Apostle speaking of our appearing before the iudgement seat of Christ doth not affirme it onely but prooueth it by the Scriptures teaching vs thereby that the Scriptures and written word of God are the only rule and line of our faith and that nothing ought to be imposed vpon the Church as a matter of beleefe but that which is warranted from thence the Scriptures are able to make the man of God perfect 2. Tim. 3.17 he then that seeketh any doctrine beside that which is taught in the Scriptures as not content with that which is perfect would adde further that which is superfluous idle and vnnecessarie Doct. 8. That no kind of meate is vncleane in it selfe v. 14. I knowe c. that there is nothing vncleane in it selfe c. All kind of meats then which are appointed for the food and nourishment of mans bodie are in themselues lawfull and cleane beeing receiued with giuing of thankes And if they be lawfull and cleane the restraint of them by any prohibition for religion and holines sake is superstitions and inclining to Iudaisme It is the mind onely and opinion that polluteth and defileth meats so the superstition of Papists in making conscience of some kind of meates is so farre from making them more holy and acceptable vnto God that they thereby defile and pollute the good creatures of God they should therfore remember that charge which was giuen vnto Peter from heauen Act. 10.15 What God hath cleansed pollute thou not 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. Whether to abstaine from certaine meates be an act of religion and a part of Gods worship or a thing in it selfe indifferent The latter is affirmed and maintained by Protestants the other is stifly defended by the Romanists but that the state of the question may better appeare first the diuerse kinds of fasting and abstinence are to be considered 1. There is a naturall abstinence which is onely from such meates as agree not with the stomack and are enemies to the helth of the bodie 2. A morall abstinence is from such meates and drinkes as a man findeth to distemper him and to disturbe his memorie and other faculties of his minde as the drinking of wine and strong drinke 3. A ciuill and politike abstinence is to refraine eating of flesh some certaine daies for the maintenance of navigation and the vtterance of fish and for sparing the breed of cattell as the Lenton fast is now kept in England 4. There was beside these a Iudaicall fast which was of two sorts either a totall and generall abstinence as from swines flesh and other meates counted vncleane by the law or an abstinence for a time which was either generall of the whole nation as to abstaine from eating of vnleavened bread for seauen daies in the feast of the Passeouer or particular of some professed persons as of them which had taken vpon them the vow of the Nazarites which was neither to take wine nor any strange drinke See the law of the Nazarites Numb 6. 5. Beside these there was an hereticall fast and abstinence of such as abstained from certaine meates counting them euill and vncleane in themselues which was the opinion of the Manichees and Tatiane heretikes which kind of impious abstinence the Apostle speaketh against 1. Tim. 4. 6. Adde vnto this the superstitious abstinence of the Papists which make the fasting and refraining from fleshmeates vpon the fift and sixt day of the weeke and in the time of Lâ—uâ— to be a necessarie part of Gods worship and a thing meritorious and satisfactorie This is the abstinence that now is in question 7. Yet a religious fast we acknowledge which is when vpon some daies appointed by the Church publikely or when any are disposed priuately to fast the more feruently to giue themselues vnto praier which the Apostle speaketh of 1. Cor. 7.5 But this is done without any opinion of merite or holines in the act it selfe but as it helpeth and confeâ—â—eth to a spirituall end the more earnest invocation of God and humble supplication before him 8. There was also a scrupulous kind of abstinence in the primitiue Church when some Christians did abstaine of conscience from eating things which were consecrate to Idols of the which S. Paul entreateth 1. Cor 8.10 Now the fast and abstinence which is controverted betweene vs and the Papists is the superstitious fast before the 6. whose opinion is this that to abstaine from flesh and other kinds of meates in the time of lent and vpon other daies of restraint is a necessarie part of the diuine worship meritorious and satisfactorie habet meritum satisfactionem apud Deum it meriteth and satisfieth before God c. Tolet in his annotations here and the precept of fasting obligat sub peccato mortali bindeth vnder the daunger of mortall sinne we will examine some of their reasons Argum. 1. The Apostles by their synodicall decree prouided that they should abstaine from certaine meates as strangled and blood Ans. 1. The Pastors of the Church haue not now the same power and authoritie to make Canons to bind the conscience which the Apostle had who were guided by the immediate direction of the spirit 2. they did not enioyne abstinence from flesh-meate egges milke and such like as the Romanists doe but onely from such meates as were forbidden by the law 3. neither did they enioyne this abstinence as a part of the divine worship for then it should bind still but onely for a time to avoid offence in respect of the Iewes newly conuerted Argum. 2. Those things which the Church commandeth are necessarily to be kept and observed for our Sauiour saith he that heareth you heareth mee c. But such is the Ecclesiasticall law and precept of fasting Ergo c. Ans. 1. Not euery thing the Church commandeth is to be obserued as a part of Gods worship but those things onely which the Church propoundeth by the warrant and authoritie of Gods word and so is our Blessed Sauiour to be vnderstood otherwise whosoeuer preacheth any other Gospel or any thing contrarie thereunto is to be held accursed 2. neither are we to regard what the false and Antichristian Church now commandeth no more then our B. Sauiour and his Apostles did hold themselues bound to the superstitious decrees of the Pharisies Argum. 3. The law of fasting is
avouched by this Egesippus as how Peter and Simon Magus did striue which of them should raise Neros cousin that was dead and he that could not doe it should die and how Peter fleeing out of Rome met Christ at the gates and asked him Domine quo vadis Master whether goest thou and he answeared I come againe to be crucified whereupon Peter returned and was crucified for this is contrarie to S. Peters owne doctrine that the heauens should containe Christ vntill his second comming Act. 3.21 To Ireneus testimonie we answear 1. whereas he saith that Matthew wrote his Gospell at what time Peter and Paul preached at Rome this cannot agree with the historie of times for Matthew is held to haue written his Gospel in the 3. yeere of Caligula from which yeare vnto the 2. of Nero when S. Paul is held to haue first come vnto Rome are verie neere 20. yeares 2. and as Ireneus is vncertaine in this so an other opinion he hath of the like credit that Christ should be 40. or 50. yeare old when he preached and this he saith he receiued of all the Elders of Asia who testified id ipsum tradidisse eis Iohannem that Iohn deliuered the same vnto them and yet the other opinion of Epiphanius that Christ died in the 33. yeare of his age and beganne to preach at 30. is held of all to come neerer vnto the truth Hierome is as vncertaine 1. he saith that Paul came to Rome in the 2. yeare of Claudius and yet he granteth that before he had been at Antioch and from thence went and preached to the dispersed brethren in Pontus Galatia Bithinia Cappadocia Asia which might hold him not much lesse then 14. yeares as shall be shewed afterward so that he could not in this account come to Rome til the 2. of Nero. 2. Hierome is as vncertaine in other things in his epistle to Marcella he thinketh Adam was buried in mount Calvarie in his epitath of Eustach he will haue him buried in Chebron in his epistle to Evagr. he thinketh Iob came of Esau and in his cōmentarie vpon Genesis that he discended of Nahor Abrahams brother To Eusebius these exceptions may be taken 1. that he was an Arrian and beeing an Arrian wrote his historie which maketh it of the lesse credit 2. he is contrarie to himselfe for l. 3. c. 2. he affirmeth that Peter came not to Rome till the last yeare of Claudius See Christ. Carlil in his booke of the life and peregrination of Peter 1. dis This shall suffice concerning the contrarie arguments and obiections made by the Papists now ours follow for the demonstration of the contrarie part of Peters not beeing at Rome where first I will set downe the opinion of the Protestants and then produce their reasons Though the Protestants in generall and by the most full and sufficient warrant of Scripture do hold that Peter was not at Rome as Bishop there or founder of that Church and so in effect doe agree in the substance yet I finde some difference among them in certaine points coincident to this question 1. Some directly affirme and prooue it by euident places of Scripture that Peter was not at Rome at all as Vl. Vellanus whose obiections Bellarmine rather maketh an offer to confute then indeed confuteth them l. 2. de Rom. Pont. c. 5.6 2. Some goe yet further and affirme that Peter neither liued at Rome nor yet died there nor S. Paul neither but assigneth Ierusalem to be the place where S. Peter was crucified by warrant of that place Matth. 23.34 where our Sauiour saith that Ierusalem shall kill and crucifie some of the wise men and Prophets whom he should send thither Christopher Carlil who alleadgeth Lyranus and the interlinear gloss vpon that place that Peter was crucified at Hierusalem for none els of the Apostles were crucified there Linus also affirmeth that Peter was slaine at Ierusalem by Agrippa the last king of the Iews when also Iames the lesse was killed with Ioses Simon and Iude. 3. Some of our writers denie not Peter to haue beene at Rome but they affirme he could not come thither so soone nor continue there so long 25. yeares from the 2. of Claudius as Beza saith non invitus concedam c. I will not vnwillingly graunt that Peter was at Rome and there put to death but not the other annot in 1. Pet. 5.14 so also Gualter id ego non facile negaverim c. I will not easily denie that Peter in the last yeare of Nero receiued the crowne of Martyrdome because of the consent of auncient writers c. to the same purpose also D. Fulke annot 4. in 16. c. ad Roman 4. To this we adde further that howsoeuer we absolutely denie not but that Peter might be at Rome yet it is more probable he was not certainely out of the Scripture it can not be prooued that he was there at all and it is not de fide a thing concerning faith neither to be held as an article of faith as the Church of Rome doth defend it because the Scripture only must be a rule of our faith and further it is euident out of the Scripture that Peter was not at Rome till Pauls first beeing there in bonds where the historie of the acts of the Apostle endeth whatsoeuer he was afterward which Pareus thinketh to haue beene the 11. yeare of Nero but it was rather the second yeare when S. Paul came thither first and his second arrivall was in the 11. yeare for this Epistle was not written in the 8. yeare of Nero as Pareus thinketh but rather in the ende of Claudius raigne while Narcissus was yet in authoritie see before in the ende of the 5. and 10. quest Our reasons against Peters beeing at Rome in manner and forme aforesaid are these Our first argument shall be out of the Scripture 1. it is evident that Peter was at Ierusalem the third yeare after Pauls conversion for there he staied with him 15. dayes which was the 37. yeare of Christ he was not then yet at Rome 2. 8. yeare after this he was imprisoned by Herod which was the 43. yeare of Christ and the 3. yeare of Claudius Euseb. l. 2. c. 11. Ioseph l. 19. c. 7. Peter thē was not yet at Rome 3. Sixe yeare after this was Peter at Ierusalem for there S. Paul found him 14. yeare after his first comming thither Galat. 2.1 then was celebrated the Apostolicall counsel mentioned Act 15. when each gaue to other the right hand of fellowship this was the 9. yeare of Claudius as witnesseth Hierome hitherto Peter had not visited Rome neither will it suffice to say that he came from Rome thither to the councell for then what time will they leaue vnto Peter to visit Antioch and the Churches of Asia Bythinia Cappadocia Galatia and Egypt where Nicephorus saith he preached lib. 2. c. 35. in all these places he preached as it appeareth by his 1.
that this Epistle was written by Paul and is of diuine authoritie by the epistle it selfe 2. contr That S. Pauls epistles are not so obscure that any should be terrified from the reading thereof 3. contr Against the Ebionites which retained the rites and ceremonies of Moses 4. contr Against the Marcionites that reiected the lawe of Moses 5. contr Against the Romanists which depraue the doctrine taught by S. Paul in his Epistle 6. contr Against Socinus that blasphemously subverteth the doctrine of our redemption by Christ and iustification by faith 7. contr Whether Paul may be thought to haue beene married Controversies vpon the 1. Chapter 1. contr Against the Manichees which refuse Moses and the Prophets 2. contr Against Election by the foresight of workes 3. contr Against the Nestorians and Vbiquitaries 4. contr Against the heresie of one Georgius Eniedinus a Samosatenian heretike in Transilvania 5. cont Against the Marcionites that Christ had a true bodie 6. contr Against the Apollinaâ—â—sts that Christ had no humane soule 7. contr That the Romane faith is not the same now which was commended by the Apostle 8. contr That the Pope is not vniversall Bishop 9. contr Against the Popish distinction betweene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to worship and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to serue v. 9. whom I serue in my spirit 10. contr That God onely spiritually is to be serued and worshipped 11. contr Of the vaine vse of Popish pilgrimages 12. contr None to be barred from the knowledge of Gods word 13. contr Against diuerse hereticall assertions of Socinus touching the iustice of God 14. contr Against inherent iustice 15. contr That the Sacraments did not conferre grace 16. contr That faith onely iustifieth 17. contr How the Gospel is the power of God to salvation to euerie one that beleeueth 18. contr Of the difference between the law and the Gospel 19. contr Whether by naturall meanes the Gentiles might haue attained to the knowledge of the onely true God without the speciall assistance of Gods grace 20. contr Against some Philosophers that the world is not eternall 21. contr Against the adoration and setting vp of images in Churches and places of prayer v. 23. they turned the glorie of the incorruptible God to the similitude of an image 22. contr Of the corrupt reading of the vulgar Latine translation v. 32. 23. contr Against the Popish distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes Controversies out of the 2. Chapter 1. contr Against the power of freewill in good things 2. contr Of iustification by the imputatiue iustice of faith 3. contr Against the merit of workes 4. contr Which are to be counted good works 5. con Whether any good works of the faithfull be perfect 6. contr Whether men ought to doe well for hope of recompence or reward 7. contr Against iustification by workes vpon these words v. 13. Not the heares of the lawe but the doers shall be iustified 8. contr That it is not possible in this life to keepe the lawe 9. contr Whether by the light of nature onely a man may doe any thing morally good 10. contr Of the imperfection of the vulgar Latine translation 11. contr That the Sacraments do not conferre grace 12. contr That the Sacraments depend not vpon the worthines of the Minister or receiuer 13. contr Against the Marcionites and other which condemned the old Testament and the ceremonies thereof 14. contr Against the Anabaptists which reiect the Sacraments of the newe Testament 15. contr That the want of Baptisme condemneth not 16. contr That the wicked and vnbeleeuers eate not the bodie of Christ in the Sacrament Controversies vpon the 3. Chapter 1. contr That the Sacraments of the old Testament did not iustifie ex opere operato by the work wrought and so consequenly neither the newe 2. contr Of the Apochryphall Scriptures 3. contr That the wicked and vnbeleeuers doe not eate the bodie of Christ in the Eucharist 4. contr That the Romane Church hath not the promise of the perpetuall presence of Gods spirit 5. contr The Virgin Marie not exempted from sinne 6. contr The reading of the Scripture is not to be denied to any 7. contr Against the adversaries of the law the Marcionites and other heretikes 8. contr Against the counsels of perfection 9. contr Against the Pelagians which established free-will 10. contr That the vertue of Christs death is indifferently extended both to sinnes before baptisme and after 11. contr That the beleeuing fathers before Christ were not kept in Limbo 12. contr Against the Marcionite heretikes 13. contr Against the Novatian heretikes 14. contr Against inherent iustice 15. contr Against the Popish distinction of the first and second iustification 16. contr Against the works of preparation going before iustification 17. contr What iustifying faith is 18. contr What manner of faith it is that iustifieth 19. contr Of the manner how faith iustifieth 20. contr Whether faith alone iustifieth 21. contr How S. Paul and S. Iames are reconciled together 23. contr Against Socinus that Christ properly redeemed vs by paying the ransome for vs and not metaphorically 23. contr That Christ truely reconciled vs by his blood against an other blasphemous assertion of Socinus Controversies out of the 4. Chapter 1. contr That the Apostle excludeth all kind of workes from iustification 2. contr Whether blessednes consist onely in the conversion of sinners v. 7. 3. contr Whether sinne is wholly purged and taken away in the iustification of the faithfull 4. contr Against workes of satisfaction 5. contr Of imputatiue iustice against inherent righteousnes 6. contr That the Sacraments doe not conferre grace by the externall participation onely 7. contr That there is the same substance and efficacie of the Sacraments of the old and newe Testament 8. contr That circumcision was not onely a signe signifying or distinguishing but a seale confirming the promise of God 9. contr Whether circumcision were availeable for the remission of sinne 10. contr Of the presumptuous titles of the Pope calling himselfe the father and head of the faithfull 11. contr Against the Chiliasts or Millenaries that hold that Christ should raigne a 1000. yeares in the earth 12. contr Of the certaintie of faith v. 16. that the promise might be sure 13. contr Whether faith be an act of the vnderstanding onely 14. contr That iustifying faith is not a generall apprehension or beleeuing of the articles of the faith but an assurance of the remission and forgiuenesse of sinnes in Christ. 15. contr That faith doth not iustifie by the merit or act thereof but onely instrumentally as it applyeth and apprehendeth the righteousnesse of Christ. 16. contr The people are no to be denied the reading of the Scriptures 17. contr Against the heretikes which condemned the old Testament and the author thereof 18. contr Whether iustification consist onely in the remission of sinnes 19. contr Against Socinus corrupt interpretation of these words v. 25. was deliuered vp for our sinnes 20. contr Piscators
Marcionites Libertines and others 4. contr Of the authoritie of the Scripture that it dependeth not vpon the approbation or allowance of the Church 5. contr Against the invocation of Saints 6. contr Of the certentie of saluation against the Popish diffidence and doubtfulnes 7. contr Against the power of freewill in spirituall things 8. contr Whether the Apostles excusing of himselfe doe derogate from the authoritie of this epistle 9. contr That the Scriptures are perfect and absolute containing whatsoeuer is necessarie to saluation both touching doctrine and manners 10. contr Against the Popish sacrifice of the Masse which the Papists make the peculiar act of their Priesthood 11. contr Against the superstitious order of Monks and Friers 12. contr That miracles are not necessarie in the Church 13. contr Against the vaine pompe of the Popish pontificall ornaments 14. contr Of the idle boastings and vaine-glorious excursions of the Iesuits 15. contr Against the pompous processions and Persian-like traine of the Popes Legats and Cardinals 16. contr Against the Anabaptisticall communitie 17. contr Against the invocation of Saints 18. contr Against the merit of praiers Controversies out of the 16. Chapter 1. contr Against cloistered Nunnes 2. contr The Church not alwaies visible and consisting of multitudes 3. contr All doctrine is to be examined by the Scriptures 4. contr That Papists not Protestants serue their owne bellie 5. contr That Protestants are no schismatikes 6. contr Why the Gospel was kept secret so many yeares vnder the kingdome of Antichrist against the obiection of the Papists 7. contr Against the Popish doxologie ascribing glorie with Christ vnto the virgin Marie 8. contr Whether S. Peter were euer at Rome and continued there Bishop 25. yeares The summe of the Controversies handled in this Commentarie beside Doctrines and Morall observations maketh in all about 290. The Questions and Controversies summed together make toward a thousand beeing in all 950. This COMMENTARIE by Gods gratious assistance was finished April 10. Ann. Dom. 1611. anno aetatis Authoris currente 48. To God onely wise be praise through Iesus Christ for euer Rom. 16.27 The Printer to the Reader Whereas the copie was in many places darke and obscure as beeing but once written as it was first framed by the Author neither could he be present himselfe to ouersee the worke I pray thee Courteous Reader with patience to amend the faults which fell out to be more then either we had thought or could by our diligence which was not wanting preuent The first figure sheweth the page the other the line exp signifieth to put out r. read f. for Pag. 2. lin 30. for S. Matthew read S. Marke p. 5 25. r. letter 6 29 r praeponit and f. propoundeth preferreth p. 12 3.r which in f and 〈◊〉 3 29 f. Ianuarie r. December 14.56 r. how often 15 20 of the 16 f. officer r ofineâ— 18. r Hortiensiâ— l. 28. exp and. p. 20. r. Phrygia paccaltana 24 r. ipsius Corinthi 26 parte s. puto 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 29 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 34 3. r. of his 37. r opponit 39.12 r. finite f. infinite 41. r. advers Praxeam 42.17 significatur 45.30 collato 44.61 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 9. r. illo 45.20 f. he saith â— he saith not 16 25. r incontaminatam 47.40 r quidam 52.56 r it that is the Gospel 56.3 〈◊〉 601.7 r 〈◊〉 eat f immiserat 62.54 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the best thing liuing and eternall and the heauen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 64.3 r consecutive 67 21. it exp 70.36 r. and is not 71.1 r de placit 43 Midata 72.35 incorruptible 36. r. pro f pio 75.14 r. actiones f. notimâ—â— 50 and f. end 76.57 r depriving 77.9 r. ea parte 21. r. as with 81.24 pâ—â—naâ— exp 37. impr be 82.29 impugnatio 83.33 Venerecu 8â— 27 implacable 36 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—0 45 Mahometane 91.2 r. in elatione 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 21 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—3 21 r. conversation 38. satisfaction 96 34. Tharasius 107 56. furnished 110 19. proposition 111.9 strange 117.17 maintained f. mentioned 120 46. r not now 121. â—9 r. esse 122.32 in doing 127 43. r. circumcision f. remission 131.4 carnall f. morall 141 â—7 Apostolici 40. Christians f. heathen 1â—4 4. then f. that 156.51 their f. then 56. meriteth not 57 accepertâ—nt 162.30 denieth f. decreeth 166 6 treated of 169.25 satisfied f. â—o testified 170.31 framing f. straining 172.40 ipsam 174.9 of f if 180 49 qua f quia 52. vertue f. veritie 181.5 Catharinus 15 antididagma 184.20 whereas f wherein 188.23 and yet f. nor yet 189 53. execration f. operation 56. r. is not 194.6 application 13. amplified 196.42.16 f. 6.201.18 iustificandi 23. oppositions 204 30. exp of 206.12 exp not 208.15 foreshewer f. foreshewen 55. quae f quia 209 26 it is euident f it was euideÌ„tly 213.51 retracteth f returneth 216.1 we not haue 47. should not 229.36 is ioyned 230.24 Gods grace f. his 233.50 we f. he 51. vnto him 234.33 positiuely f. passiuely 35. rendreth f. readeth 49 sinned not 237.7 the one f. the other 241.29 forth f. faith 244.55 might f must 247. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 39 exp place 250.11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 17. Phoâ—â—s 256 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 257.1 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 54. one f our 263.29 obfuscationem 34. depravation 266.23 m f an 270 51. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 53.1.3.24 f. 2.14.272.20 if men were f. of men 277.4 forme f. former 278.20 and to come f the come 28. out of a vessell not originally c. 279 23. is for 47. a weake consequent 286.13 and f. on 290.12 exp if 50. birth f both 29â— Flacius f. Florius 293 8 omittendo 45. severall f. severe 295.55 observeth f. ascribeth 298.14 forme of f. former 301.17 vnto f. vpon 302.12 cura 303.41 was in those f. or those 307.28 life f death 309.34 â—â—der f order 45. maketh f. worketh 313.30 propounded f. provided 52. minde f. word 315.42 defect f. desert 49. the woman is free 319.28 exp of 320.12 dum f. nondum 321.12 depraved 19. cum hominibus 24. repeated 322.17 the things which 18. some f. foure 29. prisons f persons 324 2◠〈◊〉 328.11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 44. the present 333.27 expositum exposed 38. potuit non mort 334 vet f. not 24. prioribus f principibus 335.27 regulâ—breâ—â—er 336 21. warre f. marrie 337.29 accepted 338.17 as of one 340.11 ad Eustâ—ch 341.56 preparatorie 344.51 in f. to 351.25 some f. sinne 352.21 ioyne f. coine 355.38 contumacie f continuance 365.37 creature f. nature 368.11 restored 27. Hexemer f. Hypertum 373.50 waite f. waile 375.57 in f. not 376.20 interpellare 45. impatient 377.11 expositions 49. neither f. either 380.11 arithmeticall 15 not in 492.23 perfited f. excepted 57. whatsoeuer 395 37. ouerthroweth 397.11 wall f. will 398 51 ad gloriam 400.51 as long 401.8 are mentioned 404.4 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
other Apostles which were iudged to be Apochryphall bookes and of no authoritie 1. because in the writings of those which succeeded the Apostles no mention is made of them 2. the stile is diuerse from the stile of the Apostles 3. and the doctrine contained in those bookes dissenting from the doctrine of the Apostles 3. Beside these two latter sorts of bookes all the rest are vndoubtedly held to be Canonicall and of equall authoritie and therefore that distinction of Sixtus Senensis is to be taken heede of who calleth some bookes of the New Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 canonicall of the first sort some 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 canonicall of the second sort which were sometime doubted of for by this meanes should they not be of equall and the like authoritie And beside he saith that these latter were held by some of the fathers to be Apochryphall bookes vnderstanding Apochryphal bookes for such as had an hid and vnknowne author But indeede the Apochrypha are so called not for that their author was vnknowne for then diuerse of the Canonicall bookes should be Apochrypha but because they were of an hid and obscure authoritie in which sense none of the fathers euer held any of the Canonical bookes of the New Testament to be Apochrypha 4. As the Heretikes brought in counterfeit bookes of their owne into the New Testament so they reiected diuerse parts of the Canonical bookes 1. Faustus the Manichie held diuerse things to be false in the New Testament Augustin lib. 33. cont Faust. c. 3. 2. The Ebionites receiued none but the Gospel according to Saint Matthew Iren. l. 1. c. 26. 3. the Marcionites onely allowed S. Lukes Gospel Epiphan haeres 42.4 the Acts of the Apostles and S. Pauls epistles the Tatiane and Seueriane heretikes reiected Euseb. l. 4. c. 29. 5. Marcion and Basilides the epistles to Timothie Titus and to the Hebrewes Hierom. praefat ad Titum 4. Places of doctrine in generall 1. Doct. Of the excellencie of the Newe Testament aboue and beyond the Old 1. It excelleth in the the matter and doctrine the law promiseth life onely to those that keep it the Gospel vnto those which beleeue in Christ Rom. 10.5 6. 2. In the subiect the lawe was written in tables of stone but the Gospel is written by the spirit of God in the fleshie tables of our hearts 2. Cor. 3.2 3. In the end the old Testament was the ministration of death and the killing letter the other is the ministration of the spirit which giueth life 2. Cor 3.6 7. 4. In the condition and qualitie the law imposed the hard yoke and seruitude of ceremonies which was impossible to be borne Act. 15.10 but Christs yoke is easie Math. 11. which of seruants adopteth vs to be the sonnes of God Rom. 8.15 5. In the minister Moses was the typical Mediator of the Olde Testament but Christ the Lord and builder of the house is the Mediator of the New Heb. 3.3 6. In the fruites and effects the Old Testament could not purge the conscience from sinne but the sprinkling of the blood of Christ purgeth the conscience from dead workes Heb. 9.13 14. 7. In the manner the old Testament was folded vp in types and figures as Moses vailed the glorie of his face but now we see the glorie of the Lord in the Gospell with open face 2. Cor. 3.18 8. In the ratification the old Testament was confirmed with the blood of beasts the New by the death of Christ quest 17.18 9. In the seales the old was attended vpon by bloodie sacrifices and other such like hard Sacraments as circumcision which was painefull to the flesh the New hath easie and vnbloodie sacraments as the seales neither so many in number namely Baptisme and the Eucharist 10. Another excellencie is in persons whom this New Testament concerneth which is not giuen onely to one people and nation as the old was but vnto the Catholike Church of God dispersed ouer the face of the earth as the Apostles are commanded to goe and teach all nations Matth. 28.19 In these respects the Apostle thus giueth preheminence to the New Testament before the old Heb. 8.6 he hath obtained a more excellent office in as much as he is the Mediator of a better Testament which is established vpon better promises Not that Christ was not Mediator also of the old Testament for without him neither can there be any Church nor couenant made with the Church but because Christ but shadowed forth in the old Testament is more fully reuealed and manifested in the New 5. Places of confutation 1. Controv. Against those which thinke it is against the nature of the New Testament to be committed to writing Of this opinion are certaine of a fantasticall spirit which to this purpose abuse that place of Ieremie 32.33 I will write my lawe in their hearts and that of S. Paul 2. Cor 3.3 You are our epistle written not with inke but with the spirit whence they would inferre that the Newe Testament is not to be written but that it consisteth in reuelation and the instinct of the Spirit Contra. 1. If the Newe Testament were not to be extant in writing then the Apostles had done a superfluous and vnnecessarie worke in writing the bookes of the Newe Testament whereunto they were directed by the spirit of God and S. Iohn is directly commanded to write Apocal. 14.13 and S. Paul saith that all Scripture is giuen by inspiration 2. Tim. 3.16 The spirit of God then mooued them to put in writing these holy bookes of the Newe Testament which are part of the Scripture 2. It followeth not because the Lord writeth the Gospel in our hearts by his spirit that therefore it is not to be written for by the writing thereof which is preached and read saith is wrought in the heart by the operation of the spirit as the Apostle saith Rom. 10.17 that faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the word And againe the Prophet there sheweth a difference betweene the lawe and the Gospell the law gaue Precepts but could not incline the heart to obedience but the Gospel doth not onely command faith but by the operation of the spirit worketh the same thing which it requireth 3. In the other place of the Apostle 1. they would make the Apostle contrarie to himselfe as though he should speak against the writing of Euangelical precepts whereas the Apostle did write that very epistle with inke 2. he speaketh not of the Gospel but of the Corinthians whom he calleth his Epistle 3. and by the latter in that place he vnderstandeth not the writing with inke or such like but the externall doctrine without the grace and life of the spirit such as the doctrine of the Law was 2. Controv. Against the Romanists which hold that the writing of the Gospel and other Scriptures is not simply necessarie to saluation First we will examine the arguments which are brought by them to confirme this their