of faith in Christ of iustifying faith of faith of remission of sinnes The like hath Ambing apud Hospin in Concord discordi fol. 140. Beza de Praedest cont Caste l. vol. 1. p. 393. There is no mētion in the law of this benefit of free redemption by Christ For the declaratiō of this will belongeth to an other parte of Gods word which is called the Ghospell Apol. Cōf. Augustan c. de Iustific The Ghospell preacheth iustice of faith in Christ which the law doth not teach THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Moises wrote in the law of Christ that Moises wrote things concerning Christ That Moise commanded the people to heare Christ in all things The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the law neuer knew faith in Christ that Moises cōmandeth not faith in Christ that the law knoweth nothing of faith in Christ that in the law there is no mention of free redemption in Christ that the law teacheth nothing of faith in Christ ART IX WHETHER ANY VNWRITTEN word or Traditions be to be kept SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 2. Thessal 2. v. 15. Therefore brethren stand and hould the traditions Traditions not written to be helde which you haue learned whether it be by word or by our epistle CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Coūcell of Trent Sess 4. The holie Coūcell doth with equall pious affection reuerently receaue and honour traditions belonging to faith or manners as ether deliuered by Christs mouth or the holie Ghost and by continuall succession conserued in the Catholik Church PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 3. cap. 10. We care not for vnwritten Not to be helde traditions And Contro 2. q. 5. c. 18. We acknowledge no other word then that which is written And what doctrine soeuer is not written we hould for bastard doctrine Perkins in Cathol ref Contr. 20. c. 2. We acknowledge the onely written word of God Luther Postil in ferias S. Stephani Nothing is to be affirmed Nothing but that which is expressed in Scripture which is not expressed in Scripture Iacobus Andreae l. cont Hosium p. 169. That faith is no faith but an vncertain opinion which is not grounded vpon an expresse testimonie of Scripture Wigand apud Scusselb to 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 681. Onely those doctrines whose very words or equiualent for sense are extant in the Scripture are to be tought and deliuered in the Church Caluin in Gratulat ad Praecentorem pag. 377. Nothing is to be beleiued which is not expressed in Scripture And cont versipellem pagin 353. There is no mention of vnwritten traditions Beza in Rom. 1. v. 17. Christians acknowledge no other object of this faith then the written word of God Etad Reprehens Castell p. 503. Whosoeuer beleiueth in doctrine of religion that which is not written I say he embraceth opinion for faith and an idol for God Vallada in Apol. cont Episc Luzon c. 13. In all the holie No speech of an vnwritten word Scripture there is no speech of an vnwritten word Daneus Controu 7. pag. 1350. The foundation of Christian faith is one onely to wit the word of God and that onely written Hospinian part 2. Histor Sacram. fol. 23. The Magistrates of Zurich commāded that hereafter nothing should be proposed or preached in their Church but the pure fined word of God contained in the bookes of the Prophets and Apostles THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that traditions as well they which are learned by word as they which are learned by writing are to be obserued Catholiks teach the same Protestants expressely teach that onely written doctrin is to be tought nothing to be beleiued but what is written onely the pure fined written word to be tought no obiect of faith but what is written nothing to be beleiued but what is expressed in Scripture and that in verie words or in equiualent sense that there is no mention of vnwritten traditions no speech of vnwritten word that they care not for vnwritten traditions A SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF THE WORD of God or Scripture What we haue rehearsed in this chapter doth clearly shew that Protestants do farre otherwise iudge of Scripture then the Scripture it selfe and Catholiks doe For the holie Scripture together with Catholiks teacheth that in it are some things hard to be vnderstood that it cannot be vnderstood without the light of the holie Ghost that the Ghospell is or containeth a law that it doth preach pennance and good workes reproueth sinne promiseth saluation vnder condition of good workes and is not contrarie vnto the law of God that the law of Moises commandeth faith in Christ and that vnwritten traditions are to be obserued And Protestants defend all the contrarie They shew also that Protestants steale from the Scripture Protestants steale from Scripture her excellencie wherewith she surpasseth the capacitie of mans wit and from the Ghospell that it containeth any law preacheth pennance or good workes reproueth sinne promiseth saluation vpon condition of well doing and agreement with Gods law whereby we see what a libertin Ghospell they bring in to wit such as containeth Libertin Ghospell of Protestants no law preacheth no pennance or good workes reproueth no sinne promiseth saluation without all condition of well doing and is quite contrarie to the law of God And that they steall from the law of Moises that it commandeth faith in Christ and finally they take away all the vnwritten word of God CHAPTER V. OF SAINT PETER AND THE APOSTLES ART I. WHETHER S. PETER WERE first of the Apostles SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. MATHEW 10. v. 2. And the names of the twelue S. Peter first of the Apostles Apostles be these The first Simon who is called Peter CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Pontif. c. 18. Peter was put first by reason his dignitie PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Contr. 3. q. 5. c. 3. Wheresoeuer mention is made Not first of Peter if we looke well into the place we shall find that nothing is giuen to him which agreeth not to the other Apostles And Controu 4. quaest 2. c. Paul maketh himselfe equall to Peter in all points Tindal in Fox his Acts p. 1139. S. Paul is greater then Peter by the testimonie of Christ Articuli Smalcaldici pag. 345. We giue no prerogatiue to Peter Luther in Gal. 2. to 5. This place clearely sheweth that all the Apostles had equall vocation and commission There was altogether equalitie amongst them no Apostle was greater then an other Illyricus in Praefat. lib. de Sectis It appeareth that Christ gaue no primacie at all in his Church to any man Caluinus in Matth. 20. v. 25. Christ shewed that in his kingdome No primacie or firstnesse there was no primacie for which they contended Beza in Matth. 10. v. 2. What if this word First were added of some who would establish Peters primacie Festus Homius disput 12. All the Apostles were equall in dignitie authoritie
Perkins in reform Cathol cap. 8. p. 166. The second is the vow of pouertie and monasticall life in which men bestow all Against Gods will they haue on the pore and giue themselues wholy and onely to praier and fasting This vow is against the will of God The like he hath in Casibus Conscient col 1125. Morton l. 1. Apologiae c 40. Your doctrine of giuing all Sauoureth heresie sauoureth rather heresie then religion Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 5 c. 7. Monks and Iesuits nether marrie Is Anabaptisticall wiues nor haue anie thing proper but haue all things cōmon But this to haue all things common is Anabaptisticall Melancthon in locis tit de Paupertate The Ghospell nether counsaileth nor commandeth to leaue our goods vnlesse they be taken from vs nether counsaileth it nor commandeth to make things common THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that to giue all to the pore is a meane of perfection that the Apostles forsake all and that the first Christians had all things commō The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the Scripture counsaileth not to forsake our goods that it is a mere humane tradition that it agreeth not with true Catholik doctrine that it rather sauoureth heresie then religion that to haue all things common is Anabaptisticall ART XVII WHETHER PENNANCE BE commanded to all SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Act. 17. v. 30. God now denounceth vnto men that all euery Pennance cōmanded to all where doe pennance c. 20. v. 21. Testifying vnto Iews and Gentils pennance towards God and faith in our Lord Iesus Christ And To Iewes and Gentils c. 8. v. 22 it is saied to Simon Magus Do pennance from this thy wickednesse Luc. 24. v. 27. It behoued Christ to suffer and to rise againe To all natiōs from the dead the third day and pennance to be preached in his name and remission of sinnes vnto all nations CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 3. de Paenitent cap. 2. Who haue committed a mortall sinne are bound by Gods law to doe pennance PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Perkins in Apoc. 2. to 2. This precept of repentance is not giuē Pennance not commanded to euerie one seuerally to euerie one but onely to the Church of God or to that people which at last shal be the Church Caluin de Praedest pag. 706. God is saied to will life as he God willeth not pennance to all but by word willeth pennance But this he willeth because by his words he inuiteth all to it And of the same mynd are others who say that God willeth not the saluation of any but of the elect onely otherwise then by his word For if indeed he will not haue the reprobate do pennance but onely in word or shew surely nether doth he command them to do pēnance otherwise then in word and in outward shew THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that God denounceth pennāce to all men euerie where to Iews and Gentils to all Nations to Simon Magus The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that God commandeth not pennance to euerie one but onely to his Church or to these who at last shal be his Church that he doth not will pennance to all but onely in word ART XVIII WHETHER CHASTISMENT of the bodie be a parte of pennance SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Math. 11. v. 21. Woe be to the Corozain woe be to thee Bethsaida For if in Tire and Sidon had beene wrought the miracles that haue beene wrought in you they had done pennance in Bodily chastizment a parte of pennance hairecloth and ashes long agoe Iob. 42. v. 6. I reprehend my selfe and do pennance in imbers and ashes Ionas 3. v. 6. And he rose vp out of his throne and cast away his garment from him and was clothed in sackcloth and sate in ashes And he cried and saied in Niniue from the mouth of the King and his Princes saying Men and beasts and oxen and cattell let them not taste any thing nor feed and let them not drinke water And let men and beasts be couered with sackclothes Ioel. 2. v. 12. Conuert to me in all your harte in fasting and in weeping and in mourning CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Math. 11. erv 21. It is conuinced out of this place that pennance properly consisteth not onely in change of life and repentance but also in penall workes PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Willet Contr. 14. q. 1. p. 711. Ashes sackoth was no parte of No parte of pennance repentance but an outward testification of their inward griefe Whitaker Praefat. ad Demonstrat Sanderi I saied that pennance did not consist in certaine externall punishments but in inward griefe conceaued of the remembrance of sinne and in amendment of life Caluin in Math. 11. ver 21. Pennance is here described by externall Christ regardeth notmuch corporall pennance signes whereof then there was solemne vse in the Church of God not that Christ insisteth much vpon this vpon this point but he accomodateth himselfe to the capacitie of the common people Et Concione 158. in Iob Sackcloth and ashes are onely an externall signe of pennance Beza in Math. 11. v. 21. cit Which custome of casting ashes vpon themselues was after word trāslated to those whome they called Penitents I wish it had beene done with more iudgment and better successe Vorstius in Antibellarm p. 439. Painfull workes are onely outward and oftentimes deceitfull and feigned signes of pennāce Wherefore they are not partes of true pennance THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that pennance in sackcloth and ashes is good that God biddeth vs to conuert to him in fasting weeping and mourning that the Niniuits did pennance in sackcloth and ashes and Iob in embers and ashes The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that Christ did not much insist vpon sackcloth and ashes that they are no partes of pennance but onely an outward signe thereof that pennance consisteth not in outward punishment that the custome of casting ashes vpon penitents was done without good iudgment ART XIX WHETHER THE PENNANCE of the Niniuites were true SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Ionas 3. v. 10. And God saw their Niniuites workes that they were conuerted from their euill way and God had mercie on Pennance of Niniuites was true the euill which he had spoaken that he would do to them and he did it not Et ver 5. And the men of Niniue beleiued in God and they proclaimed a fast c. Math. 12. v. 41. The men of Niniue shall rise in iudgment with this generation and shall condemne it because they did pennance at the preaching of Ionas CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Catechismus ad Parochos cap. de Paenitentia There are most cleare examples of the Niniuits of Dauid of the Penitent woman of the Apostles all which imploring the mercie of God with manie teares obtained pardon of their sinnes PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Beza lib. quaestion vol. 1. Theol. pag. 674. God
teacheth that Christ praied that S. Peters faith should not faile which vndoubtedly he obtained The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that S. Peter lost his faith erred from faith did not retaine faith did apostotate that his faith failed that infidelitie preuailed against him Which is so open a contradiction of Scripture as diuers Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART V. WHETHER THE APOSTLES were foundations of the Church SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Apocalip 21. v. 14. And the wall of the cittie hauing twelue The Apostles foundations of the Church foundations and in them twelue names of the twelue Apostles of the lambe Ephes 2. v. 20. You are citizens of the Saintes and the domesticals of God built vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Iesus Christ himselfe being the highest corner stone CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Pontif. c. 11. All the Apostles were foundations of the Church PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 4. q. 1. c. 2. It is contrarie to the analogie Not foundations of the Church of faith that any man should be a foundation of the Church Moulin in his Bucler p. 380. The Apostles were not the foundations Peter Martyr in locis clas 4. cap. 3. § 4. If we read in the Fathers as we do in the Apocalips that there are twelue foundations here foundation is not put for the route of the building but for great stones which are next to the foundation Beza in Ephes 2. vers 20. The Apostles and Prophets were builders of this temple that is of the Church of God as also now faithfull Ministers are but not the foundation it selfe Herbrandus in Compend Theol. loco de Eccles The Apostles are not the foundation of the Church but by their doctrine of Christ they laied the foundation THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that there are twelue foundations of the Church and in them written the names of the twelue Apostles that we are built vpon the foundatiō of the Apostles Christ being the cheefe corner stone where there is manifest distinction made betwene the foundation on which we are built and Christ Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that the Apostles were not foundations that they were not foundations of the Church but builders not foundations but great stones next to the foundation that no man can be a foundation of the Church Which are so contrarie to the Scripture as some Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART VI. WHETHER THE APOSTLES were simply to be heard or beleiued without examination of their doctrine SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Luc. 10. v. 16. He that heareth you heareth me The Apostles were simply to be heard 1. Thessalon 1. v. 12. We giue thankes to God without intermission because that when you had receaued of vs the word of God you receaued it not as the word of men but as it is indeed the word of God The same also is proued by the testimonies cited in the next article CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton Defens cont Whitak l. 3. sect 5. It is absurd to iudge of the Apostles doctrine Antidot Act. 17. v. 11. Christ hath ioyned his trueth and the Apostles preaching so narrowly as he saied who heareth you heareth me Why then not also who examineth your doctrine examineth my trueth PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 2. quaest 5. cap. 11. If the Apostles be not simply to be heard but to be examined according to the rule Not simply to be heard of Scripture and to be receaued so farre forth as they agree with it and to be reiected as they differre much lesse c. And l. 2. cont Dureum sect 2. When Paul preached to the Berheans they examined the Scriptures for to know fully whether those things which Paul tought agreed with Scriptures And this their example is allowed with the highest testimonie of the holie Ghost and proposed to all Christians to be imitated Caluin in Actor 17. vers 11. The Thessalonians did not take vpon to examin whether Gods trueth were to be receaued or no onely they examined Pauls doctrine to the line of Scripture For the Scripture is the true touchstone by which all doctrins are to be examined And seing the Spirit of God praiseth the Thessalonians it prescribeth in their example a rule for vs. It was lawfull for the disciples to examine Paules doctrine And 4. Institut c. 8. § 4. The Apostles in their verie name do shew how farre their commission stretcheth Forsooth if they be Apostles let them not prate what they list but faithfullie deliuer his commandments who sent them Luther Praefat. Assert Artic. to 2. If S. Pauls Ghospell or the new testament must haue beene tried by the ould Scripture whether it were so or no what did we who would haue the Fathers sayings examined by the Scripture Daneus Contr. 4. p. 611. It is most false that he writeth that the doctrine and sentence of the Apostles was not examined of the disciples and auditours Yea Christ himselfe commandeth his owne doctrine to be so examined Io. 5. 39. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that who heareth the Apostles heareth Christ that their word is not the word of men but the word of God and as such receaued of such as are faithfull The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the Apostles are not to be heard simply but first to be examined that all Christians ought to imitate the Betheās in examining S. Pauls doctrine that the Apostles must not prate what they list that the Ghospell must be tryed by the ould testament ART VII WHETHER THE APOSTLES were sufficient witnesses of the trueth SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Ihon 15. v. 27. The Spirit of trueth shall giue testimone of me The Apostles were sufficiēt witnesses and you also shall giue testimonie because you are with me from the beginning c. 21. v. 24. This is that disciple which giueth testimonie of these things and hath written these things and we know that his testimonie is true c. 1. v. 7. This man came for testimonie to giue testimonie of the light that all might beleiue through him Actes 1. v. 8. You shall receaue the vertue of the Holie Ghost comming vpon you and you shal be witnesses vnto me in Hierusalem and in all Iewrie and Samaria and euen vnto the vtmost of the earth c. 5. v. 32. And we are witnesses of these words and the Holie Ghost whome God hath giuen to all that obey him c. 10. v. 42. Him God raised vp the third day and gaue him to be made manifest not to all the people but to witnesse preordinated of God to vs who did eate and drinke with him after he rose againe from the dead 3. Ihon. v. 12. And we giue testimonie and thou knowest that our testimonie is true Exode 14. v. 31. And they beleiued our Lord and Moises his seruant CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton Defens Contr. Whitaker l. 1.
sect 8. In all these things the Apostles did alledge their testimonie and themselues also as witnesses of that trueth which they tought And l. 3. sect 3. The Apostles were witnesses of their doctrine and they gaue authoritie to their doctrine See him Cont. 4. l. 8. c. 9. PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 1. q. 3. c. 11. God alone is a sufficient witnesse None but God is a sufficient witnesse of himselfe And l. 3. de Scriptura c. 13. sect 3. The people did not beleiue Moises for himselfe but for that diuine and great miracle Beleife was giuen to Moises and Paul not for themselues but for Gods authoritie which appeared in their ministerie And ib. sect 1. The testimonie of the Church as of the Church is but humane And Contr. 1. q. 3. c. 11. cit The iudgment of the Church is humane The same followeth euidently of that which they saied in the former article For if the Apostles doctrine must be examined it is manifest that they are not sufficient witnesses of their doctrine The same Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 4. c. 3. Yea after Christs Not the Apostles ascension and that descent of the Holie Ghost vpon the Apostles manifest it is that the whole Church erred about the vocation of the Gentils and not the vulgar Christians onely but euen the very Apostles and Doctors These were great errours and yet we see that they were in the Apostles euen after the Holie Ghost had descended vpon them THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely affirmeth that the Apostles had the holie Ghost giuen them to testifie of Christ that they were ioyned with the holie Ghost witnesses of Christ that they were witnesses appointed of God that their testimonie is true that all may beleiue through Saint Ihon that the faithfull beleiued God and Moyses The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that none but God is a sufficient witnesse of the trueth that nether Paul nor Moises were to be beleiued for themselues that the testimonie of the Church is but humane That the Apostles erred and that greatly euen after the holie Ghost had descended vpon them ART VIII WHETHER THE APOSTLES learnt anie point of Christian doctrine after Christs ascension SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Ihon 16. v. 12. Yet manie things I haue to say to you but you The Apostles learnt some thing after Christ cannot beare them now but when he the Spirit of trueth cometh he shall teach you all trueth CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Ioan. 16. v. 12. By this testimonie is clearly proued that Christ tought not all by word of mouth but that both the Apostles and the Church learnt many things of the Holie Ghost PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Contr. 1. q. 6. c. 10. The holie Ghost did suggest no They learnt nothing other things then those which Christ had tought Caluin in Ioan. 14. vers 26. Marke what all these things are which he promiseth that he Spirit shall teach He saieth He shall suggest or bring to mind whatsoeuer I haue saied Whence it followeth that he shall not be a coyner of new reuelations And 4. Institut c. 8. § 8. That limitation is carefully to be noted where he appointeth the holie Ghost his office to suggest whatsoeuer he had tought by worde of mouth Beza in Ioan. 14. v. 26. The Apostles nether learnt nor tought any point of Christian and sauing doctrine after the departure of the Lord. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that manie things were tould to the Apostles which they could not beare in Christs time that the holie Ghost was to be sent to teach them all trueth The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that the Apostles learnt no point of Christian doctrine after Christs departure that the Holie Ghost reuealed no new thing to them that he suggested no other thing then Christ had tought ART IX WHETHER IVDAS WAS TRVELY a disciple or in the true Church of Christ SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Matth. 10. v. 1. seq And hauing called his twelue disciples Iudas was truely a disciple of Christ together he gaue them c. And the names of the twelue Apostles be these The first Simon who is called Peter and Iudas Iscariot who also betrayed him Et c. 20. v. 14. 47. Marc. 14. v. 10. 43. Luc. 22. v. 3. 47. he is called one of the twelue Ihon 12. v. 14. One therefore of his disciples Iudas Iscariot Actes 1. v. 17. Iudas who was the captaine of them that apprehended Iesus who was numbred among vs and obtained the lot of this ministerie v. 25. Shew of these twoe one whome thou hast chosen to take the place of this ministerie and Apostleship from the which Iudas hath preuaricated And the lot fell vpon Mathias and he was numbred with the eleuen Apostles CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarm. l. 3. de Eccles c. 7. Iudas was once of the true Church for he was an Apostle one of the twelue and called a Bishop of the Prophet Dauid psal 108. Which could not be true vnlesse he had beene of the Church PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 2. q. 1. cap. 7. I answere that the reprobate Iudas neuer of the Catholik Church Iudas was neuer of the true Catholik Church He held for a time a principall place in the outward societie of the Church because he was an Apostle but this made him not of the true Catholik Church But how he was one of the Apostles Austin telleth Tract 61. in Ioan. That how he was one in number not in merit Neuer an Apostle indeed Neuer true member of the Church are in shew not in vertue But what is in shew seemeth to be but is not indeed Daneus Controu 4. c. 2. Iudas Iscariot and Simon Magus were neuer true members of the true Church of God Of the same opinion are Protestants commonly who denie that anie reprobate can be in the true Church as we shall see hereafter c. 8. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Iudas was one of Christs disciples one of the twelue Apostles was numbred amongst them obtained the lot of their ministerie had the place of Apostleship which S. Mathias afterwards had The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that Iudas was neuer of the true Catholik Church seemed to be one of the Apostles but was not indeed ART X. WHETHER IVDAS WAS a Bishop SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Actes 1. v. 20. For it is written in the booke of psalmes Be Iudas was a Bishop their habitation made desert and be there none that dwell in it and his Iudas Bishoprick let an other take CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE C. Bellarm. cited in the former article Iudas is called a Bishop of the Prophet Dauid PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 1. c. 7. Iudas was an Apostle therefore no He was no Bishop Bishop because the Apostles were no Bishops The same say other Protestants who denie that the Apostles were
properly Bishops THE CONFERENCE The Scripture expressely saieth that Iudas had the office of a Bishop which an other Apostle tooke The same say Catholiks The Protestants say that Iudas was no Bishop THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF SAINT Peter and the Apostles Out of that which hath beene rehearsed in this chapter it clearly appeareth that the Protestāts in an other māner describe S. Peter and the Apostles thē the holie Scripture and Catholiks doe For the Scripture and Catholiks teach that S. Peter was first of the Apostles that he was the rock on which Christ built his Church that he had the keyes of the kingdome of heauen that his faith did not faile All which Protestants denie Besides the Scripture and Catholiks say that the Apostles were foundations of the Church were simply to heard without examining their doctrine were sufficient witnesses of trueth learnt diuers things of the holie Ghost All which are denied by Prorestants Moreouer the Scripture and Catholiks say that Iudas was truely a disciple and Apostle of Christ and also a Bishop which Protestants in like manner denie Wherefore Protestants steale from S. Peter his honour that he is the first of the Apostles his authoritie that he is the rock of the Church and his power of the keyes and stedfastnesse of faith And frō the rest of the Apostles they steale that they were foundations of the Church simply to be hearde sufficient witnesses of truth and that they learnt any thing of the holie Ghost CHAPTER VI. OF PASTORS OF THE CHVRCH ART I. WHETHER THERE BE ALwaies pastors of the Church SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. HIEREMIE 33. v. 21. Thus saieth the Lord If my Pastours alwaies couenant with the day can be made voide and my couenant with the night that there be no day and night in their time also my couenant may be made voide with Dauid my seruant that there be not of him a sonne to reigne in his throne and leuites and preists my ministers Ephes 4. v. 12. And he gaue Pastours and Doctours to the consummation of the saintes vnto the worke of the ministeric vnto the edifying of the bodie of Christ vntill we meete all into the vnitie of faith and knowledge of the Sonne of God CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in 1. Cor. 15. v. 15. Impious Caluin doth bouldly and often times say that Pastours Doctours Prelats Bishops Maisters of Churches all vniuersally for manie ages haue wholy straied from the Christian trueth and beene seducers PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther in psal 129. to 3. The Church vnder Antichrist had no true ministerie Caluin de vera reform p. 322. Not without cause we auouch Not alwaies that for some ages the Church was so torne and scattered that it was destitute of true Pastours And p. 322. I graunt indeed that it can neuer come to passe that the Church perish but when they referre that to Pastours which is promised of the perpetuall continuance of the Church therein they are much deceaued Beza de notis Eccles vol. 3. Forsooth it fell out that the lawfull order was then wholy abolished in the Church as it is manifest that it hath beene now for some ages not so much being left as the smalleste shadow of the cheifest partes of ecclesiasticall vocation Sadeel ad Art abiurat pag. 533. It is false that the externall ministerie must be perpetuall Daneus Controu 3. p. 426. The Church eftsones hath no man Postour And Controu 4. p. 757. The true Church hath ofte wanted Prelats Lukbertus l. 5 de Eccles cap. 5. We say that for some short time the Church may be depriued of Pastours CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that there shal be Pastours as long as there shal be day and night that Pastours are giuen vntill we meete all in one faith The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the Church may be depriued of Pastours that Pastours may perish that the ministerie must not be perpetuall that the Church sometime had no true ministerie was for some ages destitute of true Pastors that lawfull order was for some ages quite abolished in the Church not so much as the slēderest shadow of the chiefest partes of ecclesiasticall vocation being left Which are so plaine against Scripture as sometimes Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART II. WHETHER AVTHORITIE of gouerning the Church be in the Pastours them selues SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Matth. 16. v. 18. seq Thou art Peter c. And to thee I will giue Pastours haue authoritie to gouerne the keyes of the kingdome of heauen Actes 20. v. 28. The Holie Ghost hath placed you Bishops to rule the Church of God 1. Cor. 4. v. 21. What will you In a rodde that I come to you or in charitie and the spirit of mildnesse 2. Cor. 13. v. 10. These things I write absente that being present I may not deale hardly according to the power which the Lord hath giuen me And c. 10. v. 6. Hauing in readinesse to reuenge all disobedience 2. Tim. 1. v. 11. I am appointed a preacher and Apostle and Maister of the Gentils Hebrews 13. vers 17. Obey your Prelats and be subiect to them CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Triplicat cont Whitaker c. 13. We see that Paul putteth the authoritie in the Prelats PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker l. 1. de Script c. 13. sect 12. The authoritie is not Authoritie is not in the Pastours in the Prelats but in the worde for whose administration the Prelats do serue Againe I acknowledge no ruling which the Church hath All the authoritie is in God and in his word the Church hath nothing but mere ministerie Spalatensis l. 5. de Repub c. 2. n. 40. Church gouernours are most like to Phisitiās The Phisitian appointeth holesome things and forbiddeth vnholesome prescribeth diete c. but hath no They haue no iurisdiction iurisdiction or cōmand ouer the sick As it is the Phisitians office to gouerne the sick that is without iurisdiction So it is the office of the ecclesiasticall rectors to gouerne the Church that is the faithfull Caluin 4. Instit c. 8. § 2. We must remember that what authoritie or dignitie the Holie Ghost in the Scripture doth giue to Preists or Prophets or Apostles or Successours of Apostles all that is giuen not properly to the men themselues but to the ministerie whereof they are officers or to speake brefly to the word whose ministerie is committed to them The same he hath in Ioan. 16. v. 8. in Math. 20. v. 25. and in Iacob 4. v. 12. Beza in Math. 20. v. 25. What then will you say Haue the No power at all ouer consciences Ministers of the word of God no power at all None truely they no not ouer cōsciences for instructiō whereof they are appointed But they are legats of Christ to say and doe in his name sacred not ciuill matters who alone hath all right of commanding and
mouth Math. 3. v. 4. And his S. Ihons meate was locusts and wild And S. Ihon Baptiste honie Luc. 1. v. 15. And wine and sicer he shall not drinke c. 7. ver 33. For Ihon baptist came nether eating bread nor drinking wine The like is saied of the mother of Sampson Iudic 13 v. 4. and of the Rechabits Hieremie 35. Rom. 14. v. 21. It is good not to eate flesh and not to drinke Good not to eate flesh or drinke wine wine nor that wherein thy brother is offended or scandalized or weakened CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm de bonis operibus in part l. 2. c. 7. If Ionadab could for euer forbidde his children and nephews wine and both his commandment and their obedience pleased God why cannot our mother the Church forbidde her children some meates for a time so that both the Churches precept and our obedience please God PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker ad Ration 9. Campiani It is madnesse to haue Madnesse to vse choice of meates for religion Foolish and wicked No seruice of God anie choice of meates for religion sake Perkins in Cathol Contr. 12. cap. 2. We hould this distinction of meates both to be foolish and wicked Confessio Argentinensis c. 9. We haue omitted that choice of meate which was commanded vpon certaine dayes which Saint Paul attributeth to the doctrine of Diuels Caluin in Luc. 1. v. 15. We must not imagin a seruice of God No seruice of God Fond superstition in oâ—stayning from wine Beza in Confess cap. 5. sect 41. This choice of meats which some make a seruice of God we doubt not with the Apostle to call a diuelish and most fond superstition THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressâ—ly saieth that Daniel many days abstained froÌ„ fleâ—h wine and desiderable bread that S. Ihon Baptiste nether eate bread nor drunke wine or sicer that it is good not to eate flesh nor to drink wine Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that the choice of meats is superstitious foolish madnesse wicked and diuelish doctrine that there is no seruice of God in abstinence from wine And thus much of Fasting ART VIII WHETHER IT BE LAWFVLL to pray for all SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 1. Timoth. 2. vers 1. I desire therefore first of all things that We must pray for all men obsecrations praiers postulations thanks giuings be made for all men Exod. 32. v. 32. Moises thus praieth for the idolatrous people Moyses praied for all Ether forgiue this trâ—spasse or if thou do not strike me out of the booke that thou hast written CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. lib. 1. de Septem verbis Dom. c. 1. saieth that Christ vpon the crosse praied for Pilat and the chiefe Preists Scribes and people of the Iews PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Rainolds in Apologia thesium p. 245. Nether must we pray We must not pray for euerie one for euerie one For we are forbidden to pray for them that sinne to death Wherefore where we are bidden to pray for all the world All designeth all kinds not all of euerie kinde Beza in Ioan. 5. ver 16. Hereof it followeth that no sinnes Not for reprobates are veniall to the reprobates and therefore we must not make praiers for the sinnes of the reprobates Daneus in orat Dom. p. 593. saieth that Thy will be done belongeth not properly to reprobates as if we praied God that they quietly and willingly submitt themselues to God and doe and execute his will out of their harte faithfully and obediently Piscator in Thesibus lib. 3. loco 11. We ought to pray for all Nor for those that sinne to death that are aliue they onely excepted whome we see do sinne to death The same also saieth Bucanus in Instir loco 17. to which he addeth loco 37. that a man must not pray for the obdurated or those that sinne against the Holie Ghost THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that we must pray for all and that Moises praied for the idolatrous people amongst whome manie were reprobates The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that we must not pray for all not for reprobates not for those that sinne to death not for the indurated not for those that sinne gainst the Holie Ghost ART IX WHETHER IT BE LAWFVLL to pray for the dead SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 2. Mach. 12. vers 43. And Iudas making a gathering sent twelue thousand drachmes of siluer to Hierusalem for sacrifice to be offered the for sinnes of the dead Et ver 16. It is therefore a A holie thing to pray for the dead holie and healthfull cogitation to pray for the dead that they may be loosed from sinnes CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 25. c. 1. The Catholik Church teacheth that the soules detained in Purgatorie are holpen by the suffrages of the faithfull PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Iewel art 18. sect 3. p. 433. This kinde of praier for the dead It is superstitions is mere superstitious and vtterly without warrant of Gods word Confessio Seotica generalis We detest his Popes praiers Detestable for the dead Caluin Epistola 366. That forme of praier God giue the One may wish well to the dead but not pray dead a good and happie resurrection because it is not fitting to the rule of good praier is to be reiected yet I do not denie but that one may make such a wish Brentius in Dom. 12. post Trinit Albeit we may wish all happines to the dead yet praier for them is vaine Confessio Witten bergen c. de Memoria de functorum Charitie requireth that we wish all rest and happines in Christ vnto the dead But there is no testimonie of Propheticall and Apostolike doctrine that they be holpen by our praiers THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the people of God vnder the law offered sacrifices for the dead which Caluin also confesseth 3. Instit c. 5. § 8. and that it is a holie and healthfull thing to pray for them that they be loosed from their sinnes The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that it is lawfull to wish good to the dead but that to pray for them is vaine superstitious and detestable And yet Luther Serm. de de Diuite Lazaro to 7. f. 268. de Captiuit Babylon f 72. and cont Catharin f. 151. Et in Hospin Concordia discor f. 225. Apologia Confess Augustan c. de vocabulis Missae Agenda Anglica apud Bucerum p. 427. 449. Zuinglius art 60. Vrbanus Regius and others allow praying for the dead ART X. WHETHER IT BE LAWFVLL to pray for that which God hath not promised SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Math. 26. ver 39. Christ thus praieth My Father if it be Christ praied for that which was not promised to him And S. Paul And Abraham and Dauid possible let this chalice passe from me 2. Cor. 12. vers 8. For the which thing thrice I besought our Lord that
Protestants expressely say that such kinde of praier is to be condeÌ„ned and expressely forbidden of the Apostle ART XIII WHETHER WE BE COMmanded to say our Lords praier SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Luc. 11. ver 1. 2. One of his disciples saied to him Lord teach We are commanded to say our Lords praier vs to pray as Ihon also taught his disciples And he saied to them when you pray say Father c. Math. 6. vers 9. Thus therefore you shall pray Our Father c. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 1. de bonis operibus cap. 4. Our Lords praier excelleth all other formes of praier in authouitie breuitie perfection order efficacie necessitie In necessitie because there is no other forme of praier which all Christians in the very words are commanded to keepe and vse but this PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Bucer in Mat 6. Note pray in this manner not these words Not commanded as the common people hitherto was foolishly perswaded thinking that they had praied well when they had mumbled vp these words Nether are we here taught in what words we should pray but what we ought to aske with hartie desire Caluin in Math. 6. v 9. Christ biddeth not his disciples pray in these words but onely sheweth them whither they ought to referre all their desires and praiers THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ commanded that wheÌ„ we pray we say Our father The same say Catholiks ProtestaÌ„ts expressely say that Christ taught vs not to say these words that he taught not what words we should pray withall that it is a foolish persuasion to thinke that the recitall of our our Lords praier were a good praier Which is so contrarie to Scripture as some Protestants coÌ„fesse it See lib. 2. c. 30. ART XIV WHETHER IT BE LAWFVLL to vow any thing to God SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Psal 75. v. 12. Vow ye and render to our Lord your God Lawfull to vow Isaie 19. v. 21. it is saied of the time of Ghospell And they shall vow vowes to our Lord and pay them Eccles 5. vers 3. If thou hast vowed anie thing to God differre not to pay it But whatsoeuer thou hast vowed pay it CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 2. de Monachis c. 17. Vowes haue neuer ceased in Christs Church since the promulgation of the Ghospell PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Tindal in Fox his Actes p. 1138. Vowes are against the ordinance Vnlawfull of God Which Fox there mantaineth Luther de Ratione Confitendi to 2. fo 28. I for my parte could wish that there were no vowes at all among Christians besides these which which we made in baptisme De Captiuit Babylon fol. 77. One thing here I adde which I would that I could perswade all men that is that all vowes whatsoeuer were taken away and auoided fol. 78. It is not a litle contrarie to Christian Contrarie to Christian life life that a vow is a certaine ceremoniall law a humane tradition or presumptioÌ„ from which the Church is freed by baptisme Vrbanus Regius de Noua vet doctrina tom 2. fol. 26. Iudaical That rite of vowing was Iudaical and is now abolished as sacrifices are Zuinglius in Explanat art 30. I speake of vowes in generall Contempte of God that by Christ they are abolished To vow is a curiositie contempte and abasing of God and exaltation of men Wherefore Sinfull seing vowes proceed of perfidiousnesse and fight against God they are sinnes Peter Martyr l. de votis col 1337. Vowes do no more continue the Ghospell being now reuealed and brought in And 1383. Become not Christians I saied indeed and recall not but make good that vowes do not become Christians Daneus Contr. 5. p. 1020. God no where hath commanded or prescribed that any thing should be vowed vnto him THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that Christians shall vow to God and exhorteth them to vow and to pay their vowes The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that vowes are against Gods ordinance that they fight against God proceed of perfidiousnesse are sinnes nnes humane presumption curiositie contempt of God and that God neuer appointed them that they are abolished continew no longer become not Christians and that it were to be wished that they were all taken away ART XV. WHETHER ALMES DELIVER from death and sinne SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Tob. 4. v. 11. Almes deliuereth from all sinne and from death Almes deliuer from sinnes and death c. 12. v. 9. Almes deliuereth from death and that is it which purgeth sinnes and maketh to find mercie and life euerlasting Luke 11. v. 41. Giue almes and behould all things are cleane vnto you CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Promptuar Morali Dom. 1. post Pentecost By the liberalitie of almes we oftentimes auoid the iust punishments of sinnes and manie assaults of the Diuel PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Aretius in locis part 1. f. 90. Almes deliuereth not from teÌ„porall Nether from temporall nor eternall death Not from sinne death nor also deliuereth from eternall death Confessio Wittenbergens c. de Eleemosyna What need had there beene of the passion of Christ to blot out sinnes if they be blotted out by the merit of almes Apologia Confess Augustanae c. de Resp ad argumenta We will not say that speech of Tobie is an hyperboll although it must be so vnderstood lest it detract from the praises of Christ Vallada in suo Apologia cap. 22. This manner of speech of Tobie is hyperbolicall THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that almes deliuereth from death and sinne The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that it deliuereth not ether from temporall or eternall death that if it did deliuer from sinne Christs death had not beene needfull ART XVI WHETHER IT BE LAWFVLL to sell all and giue it to the pore SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Math. 19. v. 21. If thou wilt be perfect goe sell all that thou Perfect men must giue all to the pore hast and giue to the pore and thou shalt haue treasure in heaueÌ„ v. 27. Then Peter answering saied to him Behould we haue left al things and haue followed thee Act. 4. v. 32. Nether did anie one say that ought was his owne of those things which he possessed but all things were common vnto them CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Mathei 19. v. 21. It was the errour of Vigilantius and it is now of Caluin and of all Heretiks to denie that voluntarie pouertie is a meane and instrument of greater perfection PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Apologia Confessio Augustanae cap. penult The forsaking Forsaking of goods not counsailed A humane tradition Not Catholike doctrine of goods hath no commandment nor counsaill in the Scripture Againe It is a mere humane tradition and vnprofitable worshippe Confessio Wittenbergens c. de votis The kinde of vowing single lâ—fe pouertie and obedience agreeth not with the true Catholik doctrine
be in it selfe cleare So Pareus in Gal. 2. lect 25. The Ghospell teacheth good works not of it selfe but borroweth the doctrine of workes from the law So the some Pareus Colleg. Theol. 9. disput 39. The Thessalonians tooke not vpon them to iudge or to debate whether Gods trueth were to be admitted but onely examined Pauls doctrine according to the touchestone of Scripture So Caluin act 17. vers 13. As if Paules doctrine and Gods trueth were not all one The Ghospell in a most large sense is taken for the whole doctrine of Christ and the Apostles Largely for the doctrine both of grace and faith and of repentance and new obedience but straitely and properly for the doctrine of grace by faith So Pareus l. 4. de Iustif c. 3. Finally the Scripture speaketh as the law not as the Ghospell by which distinction they delude manie places of Scripture as is to be seene in Luther de seru arbit to 2. f. 449. Caluin in Math. 19. vers 17. Pareus l. 4. de Iustif cap. 2. Schlusselb to 8. Catal. p. 441. to 2. p. 270. Of S. Peter and the Apostles they haue inuented these Of the Apostles new distinctions S. Peter is first of the Apostles in order not in iurisdiction The Apostles are foundations of the Church as those that found the Church not as those on which it is founded or as Iunius spaketh Cont. 3. l. 1. c. 10. The Church is founded vpon Peter as vpon a pillar not as on a foundation Of Pastors they distinguish That authoritie is in the Of Pastors word which they preach not in themselues That they gouerne the visible Church but not the Catholike That in case of necessitie they are made without mission but not otherwise See l. 1. c. 7. Of the Church they haue brought in these new distinctions Of the Church That for professiō of faith there is one Church visible an other inuisible That she is infallible in fundamentall points but not in others That she is to be heard when she preacheth Scripture but not otherwise That she is the pillar to which trueth is fastened not on which it relieth So saieth Riuet Tractat. 1. sec 39. Or as Andrews writeth in Resp ad Apol. Bellar. c. 14. She is so the pillar of trueth as that she relieth vpon trueth not trueth vpon her That the Church is necessarie to beleiue the Scriptures not to know them So whitaker lib. 3. de Script 396. That the Church is the staye and pillar of trueth not the foundation of trueth Heilbruner in Colloq Ratisb sess 7. Of the Sacraments they distinguish in this sorte They iustifie as signes or seales not as causes They are receiued Of Sacramēts whole and intire of the good but not of the badde that baptisme is the lauer of regeneration passiuely not actiuely So Daneus Contr. 2. c. 12. That baptisme is but one taken wholy but is twoe taken by partes So Beza part Resp ad Acta p. 44. That the Church is cleansed significatiuely by the baptisme of water but really by the baptisme of the spirit So Beza ib. p. 115. or as Polanus saieth in Disp priu p. 37. Sinnes are saied to be blotted out by baptisme not properly but in a figuratiue sense The same Beza in Hutter in Analysi p. 54. saieth I neuer simply saied that baptisme was the obsignation of regeneration in children but of adoption Perkins in Galat. 3. By baptisme actuall guilt is taken away but not potentiall Pareus in Gal. 2. lect 23. Absolutely we are all borne sinners but in regard of the couenant we are borne Christians or Gods confederats Of the Eucharist they haue these distinctions That it Of the Eucharist is the symbolicall bodie of Christ but not his true bodie That Christ his flesh killed doth profit vs but not eaten That it is exhibited in the Supper according to the vertue thereof not according to the substance That when S. Paul saieth 1. Cor. 11. He eateth iudgement to himselfe he meaneth not of damnation but of correction So wolfius in Schusselb l. 1. Theol. art 25. In like sorte they say that Preists forgiue sinne indirectly not directly directly as it is an offense of the Church indirectly as it an offense of God So Spalata l. 5. de Repub. c. 12. Of faith they make these distinctions That one is Catholike Of Faith or vniuersall or historicall an other speciall Againe that one is abstract naked simple an other concrete compounded incarnate So Luther in Gal. 3. to 5. That there is one habituall and actuall of men an other potentiall and inclinatiue of infants So Pareus l. 3. de Iustif c. 14. or as Polanus saieth part 2. thes p. 651. Infants haue not altogether the same faith that men haue yet they haue some thing proportionable Piscator in Thesibus l. 2. pag. 252. Adam before his fall had not iustifying faith or as Pareus writeth l. 1. de Amiss Grat. c. 7. Adam lost faith of the commandement but not faith of the promise Bullinger dec 5. serm 7. Infants are faithfull by the imputation of God Agayne They are baptized in their owne faith to wit which God imputeth to them Zanchius in Supplicat to 7. Manie reprobates are endued with a certaine faith much like to the faith of the elect but not with the same Perkins in Cathol 4. c. 5. There is one generall and Catholike faith wherewith a man beleiueth the articles of faith to be true and an other iustifying or particular faith Thus they distinguish of faith And in like sorte they distinguish of the iustification of faith to wit that it iustifieth relatiuely or correlatiuely not absolutely and as an instrument not as it is a worke Bucanus in Institit loc 3. Faith is saied to be imputed to iustice not properly but relatiuely Polan part 2. thes pag. 197. We are iustefied by faith not properly but relatiuely Reineccius tom 4. Armat cap. 21. Faith iustifieth as well absolutely as considered relatiuely Pareus in Galat. 3. lection 32. Faith is imputed to iustice relatiuely Agayne Faith iustifieth organically And in Colleg. Theol. 2. disp 10. We are saied to be iustified by faith but not formerly nor meritoriously but organically Touching the losse of faith they thus distinguish Zanchius in Supplication citat The elect loose faith in parte but not wholy Beza in Prefat 2. part respons ad Acta Faith sometimes sleepeth sometimes seemeth to be quite lost but yet is not lost Agayne There is a lethargie of faith but no losse The feeling or vse of faith is lost for a time but not faith it selfe Some reprobates do beleiue with a generall and historicall faith common to the Diuels themselues Tilenus in Syntagm capit 43. The faithfull become sometimes outliers but not runawaies or forsakers In like sorte they say that faith without works at the time of iustification is not dead but at other times if it be without workes it is dead Likewise Reineccius
almost extinguished in the Church Liber Concordiae Luther in Declar. art c. 4. Those propositions of necessitie of good workes to saluation take away comfort Not necessarie to saluation from troubled and afflicted consciences giue occasion of doubting of the grace of God and are manie wayes dangerous Againe Those propositions of the necessitie of good workes to saluation are not to be taught defended painted but rather to be hissed out cast out of our Churches as false and not sincere Luther in Gal. 1. to 5. f. 286. The false Apostles did teach that Doctrine of false Apostles beside faith in Christ the workes of Gods law are necessarie to saluatioÌ„ l. de votis to 2. f. 281. Thou now vnderstaÌ„dest why I saied so oftentimes that nether vowes nor our workes are necessarie to iustice and saluation And as Schlusselburg to 7. Catal. Haer. pag. 312. reporteth This forme of speech God workes are necessarie Cast out of Luthers Churches to saluation he caused to be blotted and taken out of same mens writings and made a publike disputation of the same and therein cast it out of his Churches and sent it back againe to the Popes market or as Illyricus and Gallus ibid. pag. 567. write In publick disputation held at Wittemberg 1536. he more then fiue times iterated this speech That proposition good workes be Condemned necessarie to saluation we will haue to be condemned abrogated and quite shut out of our Churches and scholes The like saieth Scheptius cited in Colloq Aldeburg p. 153. 349. The Ministers of Saxonie in Colloq Aldeburg p. 6. and 7. condemne this proposition Good workes are necessarie to Popish and impious doctrine saluation and p. 129. say that it is Popish scandalous dangerous and impious contrarie to the word of God the Confâ—ssion of Auspurg and writings of Luther to which purpose they cite manie of Luthers sayings p. 134. they say it breedeth desperation Popish paradox p. 151. is the onely foundation of the Popes kingdome p. 349. a Popish paradox Schlusselburg tom 7. Catal. Haeret. pag. 69. Good workes Popish speech are necessarie to saluation is especially the speech and phrase of Papists and the foundation of all Popish and Antichrists workes This foundation standing all Poperie standeth If therefore we Foundation of Poperie shal be so madde as to admit this proposition we shall take away all distinction betwene vs and Poperie all our religion wil be condemned we iustly accounted Schismatiks accursed and ether compelled to recant our doctrine or to be damned for euer And to the same purpose he citeth manie famous Lutherans Morlinus in Schlusselburg to 4. Catal. Haeret. pag. 229. I am assured that it is the doctrine of SathaÌ„ if any say or thinke Doctrine of Sathan that to a sinner as he is now after his fall workes are any way necessarie to saluation To which Poach addeth p. 266. that it is doctrine of Sathan to say that good workes are necessarie to saluation ether in the law or in the Ghospell or in anie parte whatsoeuer of Christian doctrine Illyricus Praefat. in Epistol ad Rom. Workes are not any Not any way necessarie way necessarie to saluation Hunnius de Iustif p. 187. This proposition wherewith it is saied that workes are necessarie to saluation I iudge to be cast out of the Church howsoeuer it be painted or coloured Herbrandus in Compendio Theol. loco de bonis operibus Let this proposition God workes be necessarie to saluation be cast away The same say manie other Lutherans whome I name in my Latin booke c. 13. art 13. Confessio Heluet. cap. 16. We do not thinke that good God workes not necessarie workes are so necessarie to saluation that without them no man is euer saued And to this Confession subscribed the Protestant Churches of England Scotland France and Flanders as is reported in Syntagmate Confessionum Caluin in Antidoto Concilij Sess 6. Can. 20. In that the Ghospell differeth from the law that it promiseth life not vpon condition of workes as that doth but for faith Preus l. 3. de Iustif c. 12. Whence we vnderstand that workes Not absolutely necessarie are not absolutely necessarie to saluation l. 4. c. 1. We thinke euen the thiefe who in all his life hadde done no good when in his agonie he fled to Christ being preuented by death to haue beene saued with out workes Et. c. 2. Without new obedieÌ„ce the promise of life may be sure to the beleiuers And in Gal. 6. lect 73. They Contrarie to the Ghospell Interimists did hould no few points of doctrine contrarie to the Ghospell of seuen Sacraments of workes necessarie to saluation c. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that patience is necessarie to attaine the promises that without holines none shall see God that vnlesse our iustice be greater then that of the Pharises we shall not enter into the kingdome of heauen that if we will haue life we must keepe the commandments The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that workes are not necssarie to saluation not absolutely necessarie that the thiefe was saued without workes that the Ghospell promiseth saluation without condition of workes that doctrine of necessitie of workes to saluation is Popish is the foundation of all Poperie the doctrine of Antichrist and Sathan Which are so opposite to Scripture as sometimes Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART XIV WHETHER GOOD WORKES be profitable or auaile any thing to iustification and saluation SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 1. Tim. 4. v. 8. Pietie is profitable to all things hauing promise Good workes profitable of the life that now is and of that to come The same teach other places cited in the former article and others to be cited in the next article CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Catechismus ad Parochos cap. de Oratione By deuout praiers we appease God by almes we redeeme the offenses of men by fasting we wash away the filth of our owne life And albeit euerie one be profitable against all kinde of sinnes yet c. PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Apologie of the English Church We say we haue no meed No meed in workes in Latin praesidium at all by our owne workes and deeds but appoint all the means of our saluation to be in Christ alone Confessio Argentinensis c. 3. It is cleare that our workes Workes helpe nothing to iustice Of no momeÌ„t helpe nothing to this that of iniust we become iust Confessio Belgica art 24. Workes proceding from the true roote of faith are of no moment of all for to iustifie vs. Whitaker ad Ration 8. Campiani God in iustifying vs Of no reckoning makes no reckoning at all of our workes Tindal in Fox his actes p. 1143. All that thinke that good Profit nothing workes helpe or profit any thing to get the guift of saluatioÌ„ they blaspheme against God and robbe God of honour Which Fox also
he loueth he dishonoureth Christ c. de votis It is an impious opinion that we obtaine remission of sinnes for our workes Confessio Bohemica art 7. Good workes are to be done not Iustification not by workes that we thinke that we obtaine remission of sinnes for them Gallica artic 22. We are not iustified by workes Belgica artic 24. Good workes are of no moment at all for to iustifie vs. Argentinensis Workes helpe not to iustification cap. 3. Good workes helpe nothing for to make vs iust of vniust Heluetica cap. 15. We receaue this iustification not by any workes Whitaker ad Ration 8. Campiani In iustifying vs God maketh no reckoning of our workes For the iust liueth not of workes Perkins in Serie Causarum cap. 51. To be iustified by good Abraham not iustified by workes workes is both false and ridiculous In Gal. 3. Abraham was not iustified by his good workes In c. 4. That doctrine which dreameth of Iustification by workes bringeth in idolatrie Et in c. 5. it ouerturneth the foundation of religion Luther de libertate tom 2. fol. 4. A soule is iustified by no workes In Gal. 1. to 5. Sinne is taken away by no workes In c. 3. Abraham was iustified by no other thing at all but faith Epist Abrahā not iustified by workes ad Liuones to 7. All doctrine of iustifying and sauing vs by workes is impious diuelish and high blasphemie against God Et to 1. fol. 393. We must firmely beleiue against the Diuel that the woman was saued by onely faith before she loued Caluin 3. Instit c. 11. § 6. In iustification there is no place for workes c. 14. § 5. Workes helpe nothing to iustifie vs. cap. 16. § 1. Men are not iustified by workes We say they are not iustified by workes In Gal. 2. v. 15. We cannot be iustified by workes Beza in Confess cap. 4. sect 17. How can we be iustified by Workes do not iustifie workes l. Quaest p. 689. Good workes do not iustifie Peter Martyr in locis classe 3. c. 4. § 8. Iustification is not had of workes Bullinger de Iustif fidei Serm. 6. Abraham was not iustified by his workes Aretius in locis part 2. f. 78. We are not iustified of workes Zanchius in Confess c. 21. art 4. We constantly confesse that a man is not iustified of workes Man is not iustified by workes Polanus in Disp priuat perio do 1. disput 36. Not because the woman loued much therefore her sinnes were remitted her Pareus in Gal. 2. lect 24. The Apostle denieth that workes ether alone or with faith do iustifie Rogers artic 11. Workes haue no place or portion in the Workes with faith do not iustifie matter of our iustification CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that Abraham was iustified by workes that Rahab was iustified by workes that the womans sinnes were forgiuen because she loued that men must repent for to haue their sinnes forgiuen The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that Abrahā was iustified by workes by nothing els at all but by faith that the womās sinnes were not forgiuen because she loued that sinne is not taken away by any workes that we are not iustified by any workes that workes haue no place are of no moment or reckoning in iustification that it is impious diuelish ridiculous and most blasphemous against God to dreame of Iustification by workes ART II. WHETHER IVSTIFICATION be by faith onely SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Iames 2. v. 24. Do you see that by workes a man is iustified Iustification not by faith alone and not by faith onely CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE Councel of Trent Session 6. can 9. If anie shall say that the impious is iustified by faith alone so as he vnderstandeth that nothing els is required to cooperate to the grace of iustification and that it is no way necessarie that he be prepared and disposed by motion of his owne will be he accursed PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Confessio Saxonica c. de Remiss Peccat Wittenbergica c. de Iustif Articuli Smalcaldici part 2. c. 1. liber Concordiae c. 3. Confessio Anglica art 11. Heluetica cap. 15. Belgica art By onely faith 22. Bohemica art 6. teach in expresse termes that we are iustified by onelie faith And the same in other words teach Confessio Augustana c. de fide Argentinensis c. 3. Gallica art 20. Apologia Confess Augustanae c. de Iustif We are iustified By faith alone by faith alone if by iustification we meane to be iust of vniust or to be regenerated Againe Faith alone doth iustifie alone maketh iust of vniust By faith onely we receaue remission for Christ Et c. de Resp ad Argumenta Remission of sinnes and Onely by faith iustification is receaued onely by faith These things we obtaine onely by faith Luther de libertate to 2. fol. 4. A soule is iustified by faith By nothing els alone In Gal. 2. to 5. Faith iustifieth and nothing els Vrbanus Regius in Catachesi fol. 136. We are Iustified by faith onely Schusselburg l. 1. Theol. Caluin art 15. Paul teacheth that By faith alone a man is iustified by faith onely by faith alone Zuinglius ad Matthaeum Rutling to 2. f. 151. We are iustified by faith alone Caluin in Galat. 2. v. 16. We are iustified by faith alone Beza in Rom. 3 vers 20. What was the Apostles intent To teach that no man is iustified by anie other means then by faith We are iustified by onely faith Peter Martyr in 1. Cor. 1. It belongeth to faith onely that we be iustified by it Whitaker ad Ration 1. Campiani That is our doctrine most true and most holie That a man is iustified by faith alone Perkins in Catechesi tom 1. col 487. How canst thou be Onely by faith made partaker of Christ and of all his benefits and fruitfully enioye them Onely by faith Rogers artic 11. Onely by faith we are accounted righteous before God THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that a man is not iustified by faith onely The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that a man is iustified by faith onely by faith alone and no other way then by faith that nothing iustifieth but faith ART III. WHETHER THE IVSTIFIED be indeed and in the sight of God iust SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Gen. 7. ver 1. God thus speaketh to Noë I haue seene thee Noē iust in Gods sight iust in my sight c. 6. v. 9. Noë was a iust and perfect man Iob 32. v. 2. And Eliu was angrie and tooke indignation and he was angrie against Iob for that he saied himselfe to be iust before God Luc. 1. v. 6. And they were both iust before God Iust before God 1. Cor. 5. v. 21. Him that knew no sinne for vs he made sinne that we might be made the iustice of God in him Ephes 1. ver 4. He chose vs in him before
de Subsidio tom 2. fol. 253. of which corruption of Scripture thus writeth Illyricus vpon this place Some corrupt this text by translating The Cuppe of thanks giuing by which we giue thanks and the text so corrupted they vse in their liturgies in steed of the words of the Institution or holie supper making a duble sacriledge Caluin also in Math. 26. ver 26. not onely expoundeth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by He gaue thāks but also in the very text translateth it when he had giuen thanks And yet as himselfe confesseth there Mathew and Marke vse the word of Blessing Why therefore would not he vse the same word in S. Mathews text Because those words Acts 2. v. 27. Because thou wilt not They change leaue my soule in hell proue that Christs soule descended into hel Beza in his translation An. 1557. thus changeth the text Because thou wilt not leaue my carcasse in the graue Et ad Defens Castell p. 460. he saieth My soule in the text I did translate My carcasse but in my Notes My life but we may also take My soule in steed of the Pronoune Me. Which exposition saieth he is most plaine And he addeth Where as I noted that by the ancient translation my soule the error rose I did it not without cause sith we see that Papists wrest this place especially for to setle their Limbus and the Fathers from thence deuised that descent of Christ soule into hell As if he had saied I was forced to alter the tongue of the holie Ghost because he spoake against me In like sorte because we proue the same out of that passage Act. 2. v. 3◠Foreseing he spoake of the resurrection of Christ for nether was he left in hell c. the French Bibles An. 1562. 1567. 1568. 1605. of Hell haue made Graue as also hath Tremellius done in his Latin translation of the Bible neuewed by Iunius printed at Hannow 1603. Because those words Psalm 5. verss 5. Thou art not a God They change that wilt iniquitie proue that God no way willeth iniquitie or sinne the Kings Bible translateth the place thus That hath pleasure in wickednesse The French Bibles An. 1568. That loueth iniquitie And those of 1588. and 1610. That art not delighted with iniquitie And the like hath Piscator apud Vorstium in Parasceue cap. 3. and Tremellius in this place That so they may defēd their blasphemous doctrine that God willeth iniquitie though he do not loue it Because these words Ezechiel 33. vers 11. Liue I sayeth They change our Lord I will not the death of the wicked but that he be conuerted from his way and liue do proue that God of himselfe willeth no mans death the Kings Bible translateth them thus I haue no pleasure in the death c. and so also doth Musculus in locis tit de veritate Tremellius in this place Piscator in Thesibus l. 2. p. 187. and others That God may seeme of himselfe to will mens death though he take not pleasure in it as say they a sicke man willeth a bitter potion though he take no delighte in it Because the words 2. Thessalon 2. v. 15. Hould the traditions They change which yee haue learnt whether it be by word or by our Epistle do proue that traditions not written are as well to be held as those that are written Beza in his translation An. 1598. changeth the disiunctiue particle whether into the coniunctiue Also in this manner Hould the traditions which yee haue learnt by speach and also by our Epistle Whome follow Author Respons ad Theses Vadimontanas pag. 647. and others An other translation of Beza in Tremellius hath thus Hould the deliuered doctrine which you haue beene taught both by speach and by Epistle Where for whether he hath And and for Traditions Deliuered doctrine as Tremellius for Traditions hath Commandments The French An. 1568. and 1605. haue Institutions and the Queens Bible hath Ordinances Because those words 1. Timoth. 2. v. 4. Who will all men They change to be saued shew that God hath a will to saue all men Beza in that place changeth All into whomsoeuer that God may seeme to haue onely a will to saue whatsoeuer kinde of men In like sorte ib. v. 6. Where the Scripture saieth Who gaue himselfe a redemption for all Beza translateth For whomsoeuer Because that speach 1. Timoth. 4. v. 10. Who is the Saniour They change of all men especially of the faithfull declare that Christ redeemed all men Beza in that place in steed of Sauiour putteth Preseruer And saieth Because the name of Sauiour troubleth manie in that commonly it signifieth eternall life purchased by Christ therefore to auoid ambiguitie I chose rather to say Preseruer As if he had saied Because the word which the Scripture vseth doth shew that Christ purchased eternall life for all therefore I haue changed it for an other Because those words Coloss 1. v. 10. That yee may walke They change worthie of God and 1. Thessalon 2. v. 11. We haue adiured euerie one of you that you walke worthie of God and 3. Epistle of 5. Ihon. v. 6. Whome thou shalt doe well bringing on their way in manner worthie of God do shew that good workes may be worthie of God Beza in all these places for worthie of God hath Agreable to God Tremellius 1. Coloss v. 10. for worthie of God hath It is iust and 1. Thessal 2. It is agreable to God The Kings Bible 3. Ioan. 6. cit hath After a godlie sorte Because Christs words Lucae 7. ver 47. Manie sinnes are They change forgiuen her because she hath loued much insinuate iustification by workes Beza in place of Because in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translateth For. And addeth that he did so that it might be more easily perceaued that in these words is not shewed the cause of remission of sinnes The Kings Bible Illyricus and others follow Beza herein Because those words of S. Luke c. 1. v. 6. They were both They translate ill iust before God walking in all the commandements and iustifications of our Lord without blame helpe to proue that good workes are iustifications and do iustifie Beza though he confesse that the Greek word which S. Luke vseth be to be literally translated Iustifications Yet saieth that he would not so interprete it that saieth he I might take away this occasion of impugning iustification by onely faith and so in steed of Iustifications hath Rites Tremellius hath Righteousnesse Queen Elizabeths and King Iames Bible ordinances Because those words Philip. 2. v. 12. Worke your saluation Translate ill with feare and trembling proue that we may worke our saluation The French Bibles An. 1562. 1568. 1605. 1610. in steed of worke haue Endeauour you that the Scripture may seeme onely to say that we may endeauour to worke but not worke our saluation Because those words Iames 5. v. 16. Confesse
all men because it is saied 1. Tim. 2. v. 6. One Mediator of God and men the man Iesus Christ they limite this to the elect faithfull Beza Epist 28. It is false that Christ is mediator also of the infidels In like sorte Hunnius de Iustif pag. 179. restraineth that saying Hebr. 5. ver 9. He was made to all that obey him cause of eternall saluation to obedience in faith If we proue that vnwritten traditions of faith are to be Touching Traditions beleiued because S. Paul saieth without limitation 2. Thessal 2. ver 15. Stand and hould the traditions which you haue learned whether it be by word or by our epistle they limite this to onely traditions of rites or ceremonies Whitaker Contr. 1. q. 6. cap. 10. Other Protestantes thinke that Paul speaketh of certaine externall matters and rites of no great moment Academia Nemaus Resp ad Tournon pag. 554. By the word Tradition in the Apostles writings is meant ether the application and right handling of doctrine or the appointing of rites and discipline If we proue that Christ committed all his sheepe to S. Touching S. Peter Peter because without anie limitation he saieth to him Ioan. 21. v. 17. Feed my sheepe Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 5. cap. 5. answereth Christ doth not say to Peter Feed all my sheepe but speaketh indefinitely And Beza ib. in vers 15. Must Gods word be thus profaned Surely Christ did not adde All and the difference betwixt vniuersall and indefinite propositions is well knowne As if Protestants did not as well limitate vniuersall propositions as indefinite as appeared in the former chapter Besides Daneus Contr. 3. p. 127. faithfull An indefinite What Protest say of an indefinite proposition proposition is equiualent to an vniuersall And Caluin in 1. Ioan. 3. v. 3. An indefinite speach is as much as an vniuâ—â—sall And 4. Instit c. 17. § 29. It is our parte whatsoeuer is absolutely spoake of Christ so to embrace as without exception that take place with vs which he would say If we proue that the Church is alwaies famous and visible Touching the Church because Isaie c. 2. v. 2. saieth without limitation of time And in the latter dayes the mountaine of the house of our Lord shall be prepared in the top of mountaines and shal be eleuated aboue the litle hilles and all nations shall flow vnto it Et c. 61. ver 9. And they shall know their seed in the Gentils and their budde in the middest of peoples And Miche 4. v. 8. And the remanent of Iacob shall be in the Gentils in the middest of manie peoples as a Lion amoÌ„g the beasts of the forest Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 2. c. 2. answereth The Prophets foretell that no kingdome shal be so glorious no cittie so ample no Empire so large as the Church shal be in the times of the Messias But we neuer read that the Lord hath promised that this maiestie and glorie of the Church shal be constant and perpetuall Et Morton in Apolog. part 1. l. 1. c. 13. The league is indeed perpetuall but this so admirable successe is not alwaies so vniuersall but in a manner peculiar to the age of the Apostles If we proue that the Pastors of the Church be alwaies visible because Christ saieth of them Math. 5. v. 15. A cittie cannot be hid situated vpon a mountaine Whitaker loc cit answereth Albeit Christ say that godlie Doctors and Pastors shall not be obscure nor escape the sight of men yet he saieth not that there shal be alwaies such Doctors which may be as visible as mountaines If we proue that the Church is the pillar of all trueth of faith because S. Paul 1. Timoth. 3. ver 15. without anie limitation calleth her the pillar and strength of trueth Whitake Contr. 2. q. 4. c. 2. answereth In this place is meant not simply all trueth but onely necessarie trueth And Vorstius in Antibel p. 143. The Apostle speaketh not of euerie trueth that howsoeuer pertaineth to religion but onely of holesome trueth or which is necessarie to saluation and that conditionally also to wit so long as she shall remayne the true Church of Christ If we proue that the Church is alwaies infallible in faith because without limitation to anie time she is called loc cit The pillar and strength of trueth P. Martyr in locis clas 4. c. 4. § 21. saieth I graunt She is indeed the pillar of trueth but not alwaies but when she relieth vpon the word of God Confessio Heluet. c. 17. She erreth not as long as she relieth vpon the rock Christ and the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Daneus Contr. 4. p. 717. The place of Paul speaketh of the visible Church which on earth is the keeper of heauenlie doctrine so long as she is true Bullinger Dec 4. Serm. 5. The Church erreth not so long as she heareth the voice of her Spouse and Pastor Herbrandus in Compend loc de Eccles She erreth not so long as she houldeth and followeth the word of God Of we proue that the Church is to be heard simply in all things because our Sauiour without anielimitation saieth Math. 18. v. 19. If he will not heare the Church let him be to thee as an Ethnik and Publican Whitaker lib. 1. de Scriptura c. 13. sect 1. answereth The Sonne of God himselfe commanded to heare the voice of the Church but not preaching anie thing but Scripture Herbrand loc cit saieth the Church is to be heard as long as she preacheth heauenlie and incorrupt doctrine Moulins in his Buckler p. 84. limitateth this speach of Christ to quarrels betwixt particular men and not to questions of religion The like saied Feild l. 4. de Eccles c. 4. and others If we proue that the Church in teaching cannot erre because Isaias saieth c. 59. v. 21. This is my couenant with them saieth our Lord My spirit is in thee and my words which I haue put in thy mouth shall not departe out of thy mouth and out of the mouth of thy seed and out of the mouth of thy seeds seed saieth our Lord from this present for euer Whitaker libr. 1. de Scriptura cap. 11. sect vlt. answereth This promise is not made to the teaching Church but to the whole Church that is to the elect If we proue that the militant Church is perpetuall because the Scripture saieth that Christs kingdome shal be perpetuall Daneus Contr. 4. p. 718. answereth All these places and the like properly pertaine to that Church which God shall gather in heauen not on earth If we proue that the visible Church is alwaies the true Church because she is called 1. Timoth 3. the pillar of trueth Daneus loc cit pag. 721. answereth Let him know that the visible Church then and so long is saied to be the true Church as long as the voice of heauenlie and Euangelicall trueth soundeth in her If we proue that the visible Church cannot
them and neglect and condemne it THE 23. argument wherewith we will proue the opposition of Protestants with the Scripture shal be because sometimes they be forced to acknowledge that they contradict the vniforme consent of the Fathers Councels and Church yea neglect and contemne it That sometimes they confesse the vniforme consent Protest confesse that â—hey are against Fathers How manie soeuer of the Fathers Councels and Church is against them is manifest For thus writeth Luther in 2. Petri to 5. fol. 490. Here stumbled how manie soeuer ether Fathers are Doctors haue heretofore expounded the Scripture as when that Math. 16. Thou art Peter c. they interpreted of the Pope Tom. 2. l. de lib. arbit fol 480. What auaileth it if one shall relie vpon the ancient Fathers approued by the course of so manie ages Were All of them they not all of them together blind Et to 6. in Gen. c. 42. Here surely all the Fathers Austin Ambrose c. were deceaued nor vnderstood any thing Kemnice in loc part 1. p. 166. All antiquitie with one mouth reiect those propositions That all things that are done are done necessarilie That men sinne of necessitie And yet Protestants teach so as appeareth l. 1. c. 2. art 8. c. 21. art 1. 2. Schlusselburg to 8. Catal. p. 379. We deny that The ancient Doctors the ancient Doctors of the Church were Catholiks euery where for they were deceaued sometimes and peruerted some articles of faith Zuingle in Respons ad Epist Constant to 1. speaking of the exposition of Malachias touching sacrifice in the Church saieth The exposition of the Ancient is reiected And l. de Baptism to 2. We must say that almost all whosoeuer haue Almost all from the Apostles Ould and new All Diuines written vpon baptisme euen from the very Apostles time haue erred from the marke and that not in few points Wherefore we will see what thing baptisme is after a farre other manner then ether the ancient or the new writers yea then those of our dayes haue done Ib. fol. 74. Nether they onely say that Saint Ihons baptisme is different from Christs but also all Diuines whome I remember euer to haue read doe follow this their sentence most constantly Ib. in Paraen fol. 603. They were Fathers begot the Popedome the most wicked brood of Antichrist Bullinger dec 4. serm 10. It is true which they say that the ancieÌ„ts prated for the dead Gualter in Actor 19. hom 125. It is euident that the Fathers abused this place It deceaued them that they thought Ihons baptisme of water and Christs to be differeÌ„t P. Martyr l. de votis Surely that I may confesse that which is true we haue them Fathers harder against vs in this cause In 1. Cor. 15. All the Fathers make for this opinion Againe We All the Fathers confesse freely that the Fathers make differences of rewards Zanchius de Eccles cap. 9. tom 8. The Fathers exposition is not admitted in this place Agayne The Fathers exposition is The Fathers not admitted in this place Vpon this rock that is vpon Peter Musculus in locis tit de signis The Fathers doe attribute more efficacie to our Sacraments then to those of the ould testament in so much as they say they be effectuall signes of grace This error is to be beaten out of the heads of all the faithfull Ib. tit de bapt The Fathers did denie saluation to the children of ChristiaÌ„s takeÌ„ away by death before they were baptized Caluin in 1. Cor. 7. v. 5. The Fathers Let no man meruaile that in this matter we freely dissent froÌ„ the Fathers Againe Fathers erred in approuing inconsiderately the vow of chastitie Ib. v. 7. The Fathers will haue virginitie to be a worshippe of God Now therein is a pernitious error In Act 19. v. 9. With the Fathers that opinioÌ„ had force that Ihons and Christs baptismes were different And for breuities sake to omit his In how manie points Caluin is against the Fathers words 2. Inst c. 2. § 4. he confesseth that the Fathers be against him touching free will c. 4. § 3. touching permissioÌ„ of sinne c. 14. § 3. touching Christ mediator as he is God c. 16. § 9. touching the desceÌ„t of Christ to hell Et l. 3. c. 4. § 38 39. touching satisfactioÌ„ c. 5. § 10. touching praier for the dead Et l. 4. c. 15. § 7. touching the differeÌ„ce betwixt S. Ihons and Christs Baptisme § 20. touchings laicks baptizing in case of necessitie c. 17. § 39. touching the carying of the Eucharist to the sick c. 18. § 10. touching Sacrifice Et § 43. touching exufflation and chrisme in baptisme The like he acknowledgeth Luc. 7. v. 13. Math. 19. v. 9. 17. 1. Cor. 15. v. 10. Hebr. 7. v. 9. other where ofteÌ„ Beza in resp ad Cast vo 1. Theol. We see that this place especially was wrested by the Fathers for to proue their limbus And the Fathers from hence also deuised that descent of Christs soule into hell Besides in Marc. 1. v. 4. In act 2. v. 27. In c. 19. v. 2. In Rom. 4. v. 11. and otherwhere ofteÌ„times he professeth to disagree froÌ„ the Fathers Dan. CoÌ„tr. 3. p. 277. saieth that the Fathers haue most naughtily expouÌ„ded that saying of Christ Math. 16. Thou art Peter of the person of Peter Et. p. 281. They haue most naughtily expounded the place Sadeel ad art abiur 26. We hould this article of Christs desceÌ„t but we vnderstaÌ„d it otherwise theÌ„ the Fathers did Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 5. c. 7. We confesse indeed that some Popish errors are ancient and held and defended of the Fathers which truely we doe freely and openly professe Lib. 6. cont Dur. sect 7. Your Poperie is errors of the Fathers mingle mangle of Popish religion is pached vp of the errors of the Fathers lib. 8. sect 7. Both of them iustly exclude that fictitious limbus of the Fathers l. 2. de Script p. 280. Luther durst dissent from the Fathers whome he perceaued plainely to dissent from the Scriptures Perkins in Gal. 1. vers 8 Manie doctrines From the time of the Apoles haue beene receaued and beleiued euen from the time of the Apostles of the intercession of Saints of the praier to the dead and for the dead in purgatorie and the the like and these doctrines haue beene confirmed by diuers reuelations Spalata l. 5. de Repub c. 11. n. 41. That Preists doe truely and properly forgiue sinnes Common consent of Fathers Vniuersally receaued by the keyes is the most common consent of the Fathers cap. 8. numero 37. It was a most ancient custome and most vniuersally receaued in the Church that praiers and oblatioÌ„s should be made for the dead Sutclif l. 1. de Eccles Bellarmin meaneth any consent whatsoeuer with the Fathers in doctrine of free will of mens satisfactions for sinnes of limbus of purgatorie of praier for the
out of the Fathers writings against vs I plainely say that I will not binde my selfe to their authoritie In like sorte they make litle reckoning of the Church Authoritie of the Churche auaileth nothing Councels For thus writeth Whitaker ad Rat. 3. Camp Can the Church afford vs no confirmation of doctrine no arguments of faith None Et Cōt 1. q. 5. c. 10. The practise of the Church is the opinion of men The sentences of the Fathers is an opinion of Merely humane men The definition of Councels is the iudgement of mē Vorstius in Antib pag. 1. saieth that the testimonie of the Church is merely humane Et p. 382. An Argument from the practise of the ancient Church concludeth nothing Protest contemne Fathers Church and Councels Not to be regarded Contemned Finally they professe to cōtemne both Fathers Church and Coūcells For thus writeth Luther de ser arb to 2. fol. 433. The Fathers authoritie is not to be regarded Et l. de Concil Twentie years agoe I was forced to contemne the Fathers commentaries Melancthon in loc edit An. 1523. I am of opinion that in matters of religion mens commentaries are to be fled like the plague Reineccius to 4. Armat cap. 15. There are Fathers who hould the same error with the Papists whose testimonies we reiect as false and fond Bullinger dec 5. Serm. 4. We answere in one word to the ancient writers of the Church whome they obiect vnto vs testifying I know not what of Peters primacie we doe not so much care what the Fathers thought Litle moued as what Christ hath instituted Caluin 3. Institut cap. 14. § 38. I am litle moued with those things which euerie where are to be found in the writings of the Fathers touching satisfaction Et de ver reform Nether care I for the sentences of the Fathers which these Moderators bring for to tread downe the trueth What to doe with Father◠Humfrey in Proregom What haue we to doe with Fathers with flesh and blood or what pertaineth it to vs what the false synods of Bishops doe decree Whitaker lib. 8. cont Dur. sect 62. I care litle for the Fathers Sect. 69. I care not what We care not What to doe with Coūcels the Fathers thought of Ihons baptisme Cont. 1. q. 5. c. 10. What haue we to doe with Churches or Councells vnlesse they shew that those things which they define be aggreable to Scripture Et l. de Script c. 1. sect 7. An argument which is taken from the bare testimonie of the Church to confirme the Scriptures or anie parte of them or anie point of our faith I say is inualide vneffectuall and vnfit to perswade Iuel in Apol part 4. saieth that Way of the Church fanaticall the way to find the trueth by God speaking in the Church and Councels is very vncertaine very dangerous and in a manner fanaticall Thus thou seest Reader that Protestants confesse that in manie and great matters the Fathers the ancient all Fathers all from the Apostles time the ancient Fathers with mutuall consent all antiquitie likewise the ancient Church the Church of the first 500. or 600. yeares the Church in the very beginning Finally generall Councells all generall Councells are opposite to them and that the Catholik doctrine doth consist of the sentences of the Fathers hath beene beleiued and receaued since the Apostles time and all deliuered by the Fathers with mutuall consent Moreouer thou seest how litle they esteeme the vniforme consent of Fathers Church and Councells yea in plaine termes professe to contemne it I dispute not now how the vniforme cōsent of Fathers of the Church and Councells is infallible in matters of faith which hath beene manifestly proued by many Catholiks writers onely I propose to the Readers consideration how much Note Protestants doe preiudice their cause in the iudgement of all reasonable men by reiecting and contemning the vniforme consent of Fathers of the Church and Councells touching the exposition of Scripture Forsooth yong mē contemne most ancient few very manie disagreing those that most agree men of meane wit or learning those that were most wittie and learned men of small diligēce those that haue beene most diligent vulgar yea profane men those that were most holie nether will admit such and so manie men now happily reigning with Christ who nether knew vs nor them so that could not be partiall ether for iudges or arbiters or witnesses sufficient of the sense of Scripture but quite reiect them as insufficient to decide this controuersie Surely hereby it is euident that the sense which Protestants attribute to the Scripture is not euidēt and cōsequently no point of faith seing so manie so learned so wittie so holie so diligent searchers of Scripture in so manie ages could not finde it For as Andrews saieth in Tortura Torti It is monstrous if among so manie eyes eagles eyes eyes dayly conuersant in Scriptures I adde eyes lightened by the holie Ghost none perceaued this sense grounded as they say must plainely If it had beene most plainely grounded I thinke some Father would haue seene through a lattise at least he would not haue denied it and taught the contrarie Yea it followeth that the sense in which Catholiks expound the Scripture is manifest seing so manie and so great Fathers haue vniformely deliuered it nor deliuered it onely but also condemned those who followed that sense which the Protestants embrace as Heretiks as shall appeare in the Chapter following I adde also that Casaubō in his epistle to Card Perron thus writeth The King will willingly graunt that now it is not lawfull No end of controuersies without the Fathers for anie to condemne those things which are euident to haue beene approued by the Fathers of the first ages by an vniforme consent for good and lawfull Agayne If the testimonie and weight of the primitiue Church be taken away the King willingly graunteth that amongst men the controuersies of these times will neuer haue an end Luther also in Defens verb. Caenae to 7. If this frame of the world shall continew some ages humane means wil be agayne set downe after the manner of the Fathers for to take away distinctions and laws and decrees wil be made for to reconcile and to keepe agreement in religion In forme therefore thus I make my 23. argument Who not onely gainesay the expresse words of holie Scripture in such sorte as hath beene set downe in the former booke but also confesse that in manie and gerat matters they contrarie to the vniforme consent of holie Fathers of the Church and Councels yea reiect and contemne it they are also contrarie to the true sense of holie Scripture Protestants doe so Therefore c. CHAPTER XXIV THAT PROTESTANTS CONFESSE that their doctrine was in ould time condemned for Heresie THE 24. argument for to proue that Protestants cōtradict the right sense of holie Scripture shal be because it is
conceaue how God in different manner willeth and willeth the same thing Againe Where we conceiue not how God will haue that to be done which he forbiddeth to doe let vs remember our weaknesse Et 3. Instit c. 24. § 17. When he had saied that God willeth that which he professeth that he will not he addeth Albeit according to our vnderstanding Gods will be manifould yet in himselfe he willeth not this and that but by his manifould wisdome maketh our vnderstanding astonished till it shal be graunted to vs to know that wonderfully he willeth that which now seemeth contrarie to his will And cap. 11. § 11. This is a meruailous manner of iustifying that they that are couered with Christ iustice feare not the iudgement which they deserue and whilest iustly they condemne themselues they are iudged iust out of themselues De Praedest pag. 704. Let our faith adore a farre of with decent sobrietie the hidden counsail of God wherewith the fall of man was preordained And pag. 711. How it was appointed by the foresight and decree of God what was to become of man and yet God is not to be madde partaker of the sinne as if he were ether author or allower thereof seing it is clearely a secret farre beyond the reach of mans wit let vs not be ashamed to confesse our ignorance In Ioan. 12. ver 27. But it seemeth that this doth not become the Sonne of God that an inconsiderate desire escapeth him which he must streight renounce for to obey his Father I confesse saieth he that truely this is the follie of the crosse which is a scandall to proud men Nay it is not the follie of the crosse but the impietie of Caluin to attribute an in cōsiderate desire to Christ And in Math. 26. vers 39. If anie obiect that the first motion which should haue beene bridled before it went further was not temperate as it beseemed I answere saieth he that in this corruption of our nature there cannot be seene the feruor of passions with that temper which was in Christ but we must yeeld this honor to the Sonne of God that we iudge not of him by our selues Forsooth the impostures of Caluin not onelie wāting all word of God but also quite cōtrarie thereto must be beleiued though they cannot be vnderstood and the Catholik doctrine of the Eucharist and the like must not be beleiued because it cannot be vnderstood Beza in Explicat Christianismi c. 3. After a wonderfull and incomprehēsible manner it pleaseth God that euen that which as it is sinne he alloweth not yet is not done without his will De Praedest cont Cast p. 340. When he had saied that God decreeth the causes of damnation and that none can resist his decree he asketh Is not then all the falut in God and answereth This difficultie is vnexplicable for men Agayne How God is not in fault if he ordayne the causes of dānation we thinke with the Apostle that it is a question vnexplicable for mans wit Et in Colloq Montisb p. 427. There is no parte of Christian doctrine from which sense and humane reason doth more abhorre Pareus l. 2. de Amiss Grat. c. 13. after he had saied p. 358. that God doth enforce mē to sinnes as they are his secret iudgements addeth p. 363. that this manner is vnexplicable Indeed this their excuse of the inexplicabilitie of the thing were tolerable if the Scripture did clearely teach what they say but seing it doth not clearelie teach so as appeareth by the answers of Catholiks yea so clearely teach the contrarie as Protestants are forced to confesse that they know not how to reconcile so manie of their positions with the Scripture it is a verie great proofe that in verie deed their doctrine is repugnant to Scripture An other manner whereby implicitlie they cōfesse that Protest confesse that the words of Scripture seeme against them their doctrine is repugnāt to Scripture is because in manie and great matters they acknowledge that the words of Scripture and such as are of purpose spoakē for to declare vnto vs what we ought to beleiue of such matters seeme to fauour vs more then them are hard to them and torment them shrewdly Luther in Postill Dom. 9. post Trin. This dayes Ghospell if it be nakedly looked into without the Protestant spirit is plainely Papisticall Zuinglius l. de Rel. c. de Merito None denieth but that in Scripture there are almost more places which attribute merit to our works then denie it And in Explanat art 20. The places of Scripture at first sight seeme to attribute some what to Merit Bullinger Dec. 3. Serm. 9. We acknowledge that the Scripture euerie were doth seeme to attribut life and iustice to good works Rainolds in Confer c. sect 1. What if in that other place the Scripture in shew do fauour you more then vs. And he addeth that he easilie graunteth that the shew of the words of Scripture maketh more for vs then for them Agayne I will graunt 〈◊〉 the words of Christ This is my bodie in shew do fauour more your reall presence then that sacramentall which we mantaine And in an other place In shew of words our Sauiour seemeth to haue promised the keys to Peter onely Herbrand in Compendio Theol. pag. 340. saieth If the letter be vrged in those The letter against Protestants words of Daniel Redeeme thy sinnes by almes they be contrarie to their doctrine The same confesseth Hunnius l. de Iustif of those words of Tobie Almes deliuereth from all sinne and from death And the same is euident by infinit places of Scripture which Protestants are forced to expound figuratiuelie because the proprietie of the word is for vs. Zuinglius Epist ad Matthaeum Rutling to 2. thus speaketh Now remaineth that which in this matter is the hardest A hard matter for Protest to wrest the words of all to wit how we may wrest the words of Christ which they terme words of consecration Here verily we must stretch all the veyns of faith Et in Resp ad Billican he saieth that he vseth pulleis and presses to wring out the sense of the words of consecration and addeth We denie that anie one They need pullies and presses litle droppe at least sincere and pure will come from them vn-vnlesse they be prest with the weight of other places And againe How manie had we some years agoe who could acquit themselues handsomely of those words of Christ Thou art Peter c. and shew the figure of the speach And yet it was no hindrance that we could not handsomely dispatch our selues of the word Caluin 3. Instit c. 2. § 11. I know it seemeth hard to some where faith is attributed to the reprobates In Luc. 3. vers 9. As for Merit that knot is to be loosed which hindreth manie For the Scripture so often promising reward to works seemeth to attribute some merit to them Peter Martyr in Dom. 4. Hom.