Marcionites and Arians that razed out such places of holy writ as were against them Neyther is Bucer (b) dialog contra Melancthon See Lindan dub 84. 96. 98. dumbe in censuring Luthers sayd translation as erroneous Besides both which censures of him you find to touch only one particular that he inserteth words of his owne into the text it selfe as though they were written by the holy Ghost as for example translating that text A man is iustified by fayth without the workes of the law he inserteth in coÌ„trary both to the Greeke and Latin the words only to explicate as himselfe sayth more plainly the Apostles meaning against the Iustification of works done in the tyme of grace 3. The same taske of translation was vndertaken and performed by Caluin but with what dexterity he carryed himselfe therin it appeareth to say nothing of Illyricus coÌ„demning therof by the testimony of Carolus (c) Tract Testamnoui part 11. fol. 110. Molineus a yonger brother of his owne house who wryteth of Caluins translations in this sort He made the text of the ghospell to leape vp and downe at his pleasure and he vsed violence to the same and added of his owne to the very sacred letter for drawing it to his owne purpose 4. Oecolampadius so truly intituled per Antiphrasin as infecting Gods house and church with the darknes of heresy by the helpe of his brethren of Basil would needes busy himselfe with the like labour Yet was their translation so distastfull to Beza (d) In respons ad defens Castalion vide etiam praefat Testam noui anno 155â— as that he chargeth them al with great sacriledge impiety in corrupting of the sacred word it selfe 5. Neither will Beza passe ouer as vncontrolled the translation of Castalio tearming his proceeding with Gods word to be bold pestilent sacrilegious and Ethenicall speaking else where (e) Annot in act 10. of Castalio in this poynt he sayth It commeth to passe that whiles euery man will rather freely follow his owne iudgement then be a religious interpreter of the holy ghost he doth rather peruert many things then translate them Beza himselfe translated the new Testament but with what applause his work was entertained you shall heare for besides Castalio his reciprocall testimony of condemning the same Illyricus much impugneth it and Molineus (f) In tâ—aÌ„slat noui Testament part 64. 65. 66. plainly chargeth Beza Quòd de facto textum mutat that actually he changeth the very text of Gods word it self for the patronizing of his Doctrine 6. Good God would any thinke if their owne writinges were not as yet extant to charge them therwith that such men as these being indeed the Antesignani the most choice and eminent Doctours and as it were so many Oracles or Sunnes of their new Ghospell should no sooner deuide themselues by open Apostasy from the vnity of the Catholike Church but that they begin to inueigh one against another in great acerbity and bitternes of speach concerning their different translations Plainly discouering by their mutuall reproualls and recriminations herein that though they all conspire to make head against the Catholike Fayth yet do they presently therupon broach forth different Doctrines amoÌ„g themselues and ech one glad to fortify their opinions by impugning all other translations which are not made sutable to their new stamped Doctrine 7. Wherfore a company of men falling from the body of the Catholike Church may be well resembled to some mighty fall of earth from the body of a huge mountaine and this mountaine euen by Esay himselfe figureth out Christs Church which great clod is no sooner disparted from the rest but it crimbleth it selfe into innumerable small parcells But herein we are to admire Gods prouideÌ„ce who is able to vse the actioÌ„s of the Churches enemies as handmaids to the Churches preseruation no otherwise then the betraying of (g) Gen. â— 45. 50. Ioseph by his brethren to the safety of the Israelites For seing the diuision of heresy is not mathematicall and infinite but determinate limitable therfore euery heresy though at it first appearance it drawes mens eyes vpon it like blazing starres which seeme high but are low shine no longer then their matter endures yet at the length consumes wasts away by subdiuiding it selfe and striuing to make it own part good against al others so as it falleth out that the Catastrophe and CoÌ„clusion of all such proceeding is this that it may be truly pronounced The war of Heretikes to be the peace of the Church and their diuisions her vnion 8. But to returne for I had almost lost my selfe in our Aduersaries former disagrements touching their translations where we are to obserue that though some of their translations came nearer to the vulgar Latin translation then others yet ech of them as is sayd mainly dissents one from another like two faces which bearing some resemblance to a third face haue notwithstaÌ„ding no likenes betwene themselues That the English Translations are corrupted therfore not sufficient to determine doubts in Religion CHAP. VII THE Hebrew and Greeke Originalls of the holy Scriptures as also the Greeke and Latin traÌ„slations of the same being examined and found defectiue by our Aduersaries assertions we are to descend to our English translations and to shew that they are fraughted with many corruptions and that our Aduersaries cannot iustify the sayd translations to be true and exact only according to the Originalls out of which they are made and consequently that the sayd translatioÌ„s cannot with any shew of iudgment or reason be exposed for the infallible iudge of Controuersies That these translations are most corrupt and erroneous may be proued two wayes first from the translations themselues SecoÌ„dly from the Confession of our English Protestants 2. And concerning the translations themselues three thinges are found in them which may assure all men of their impurity first the adding of diuers wordes vnto the text which words are not to be found neyther in the Hebrew nor in the Greeke Originalls and the wordes added are of such nature as they make only for the better mayntaining of the Protestants religion 3. I could instance this in many textes of their traÌ„slations but one or two shal be sufficient at this tyme as for example in the first Chapter of the Acts our English translations speaking of the election of Matthias the Apostle read thus He was by a common consent counted with the eleuen Apostles to proue out of this place that all Ecclesiasticall functions ought or at least may be made by a popular election which diuers reformed Churches of the Caluinists doe hold at this day Here these former words to wit with a common consent are plainly added by our Aduersaries since the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 heere vsed signifie only He was reckoned numbred or accounted neyther is there any other Greeke wordes in the text which they can or do pretend to
THE PSEVDO-SCRIPTVRIST OR A TREATISE WHEREIN IS PROVED That the Wrytten Word of God though most Sacred Reuerend and Diuine is not the sole Iudge of Controuersies in Fayth and Religion Agaynst the prime Sectaries of these Tymes who contend to maintayne the Contrary Written by N. S. Priest and Doctour of Diuinity DEVIDED INTO TWO PARTS And dedicated to the Right Honorable and Reuerend Iudges of England and the other graue Sages of the Law An Haeretici diuinis Scripturae testimonijs vtantur Vtuntur planè vehementer quidem Sed tantò magis cauendi sunt Vincent Lyrinens lib. aduers Haer. Do Heretiks cite the diuine testimonies of Scripture They do indeed and that most vehemently But therfore are they so much the more to be taken heed of Permissu Superiorum M. DC XXIII THE CONTENTS OF THE seuerall parts of this Treatise IN the first part besides a briefe refutatioÌ„ of the priuate spirit first prefixed therto it is disputed Categoricè and absolutly that the Scripture is not the Iudge of CoÌ„trouersies And this euicted from the difficulty of the Scripture in regard of its Subiect seueral senses and phraze of the stile as also from Reason testimony of the Fathers Doctrine of Traditions c. In the second Part it is disputed Hypotheticè that supposing for the time that the Scripture as it is simply coÌ„sidered in it self were the iudge of Controuersies yet it is proued that of all the different kynds of Sectaries that euer were the Protestants can with the least reason insist in it as Iudge And this is made euident by three seuerall wayes First because the Protestants cannot agree among themselues what Bookes are true Scripture and consequently do not agree in assigning which bookes doe concurre to the making vp of this Iudge some allotting more bookes to it some fewer and so they make it of greater or lesser extent then euen according to their seuerall opinions it should be Secondly because euen of those Bookes which the Protestants ioyntly imbrace for Canonicall Scripture there is not in their iudgments any one entire true Original either Hebrew or Greeke now to be found neither are there any traslatioÌ„s of them now extant but such as are by the PtotestaÌ„ts assertions false corrupt and impure And so by obtruding the Scripture for Iudge they obtrude at least by their owne Doctrine a false corrupt and impure Iudge Thirdly lastly because euen of those particular bookes only or parts of Canonicall Scripture whose Originalls in them yet extant are true and whose translations in those passages are admitted by the Protestants for true and vncorrupted the texts and testimonies do make against the Protestants and in behalfe of the Catholike Roman Religion if we insist either in the perspicuity of the letter and words or in the iudgment of the auncient Fathers interpreting the said texts or finally in the implicit tacit censure acknowledgment of the Protestants theÌ„selues And thus the Protestants by appealing to Scripture do wound themselues TO THE RIGHT HONOVRABLE AND REVEREND IVDGES OF England and to the other graue Professours of the Law THERE is no kind of learning right Honourâ—ble and Learned which more conduceth to mans benefit as instructing him in the way towardes heauen then the sacred knowledge of Diuinity There is no part of Diuinity more expedient in these our contentions and misbelieuing Times which threaten shipwrack of our auncient Christian Faith then the study of Controuersies There is no Controuersy more to be insisted vpon then the question concerning the Iudge of these Controuersies since the proofe of it inuolues within it selfe by force of necessary illations the proofe of all other controuersiall points For wheras most of the doubts betwene the Protestants and vs being conuincingly demonstrated for certaine infallible yet such proofes do but force the iudgment of the Reader only in those particulars But it being heere once coÌ„cluded acknowledged on both sides what or who is this Iudge it then ineuitably followeth that all those articles of faith are most true and Orthodoxall which are found to be decreed and defined by the sayd Iudge Besides daily experience telleth vs that the particular discourse of any dogmaticall point in Religion being fortified and confirmed either by vs or our Aduersaries according to the state therof differently maintained with seuerall authorities of Gods word doth finally resolue into this point to wit who is to iudge of the sense and true meaning of the foresaid alledged testimonies In so much as that we may iustly pronounce the question of this Iudge to be both the Center Circumference of all other questions since no lesse the lynes and deductioÌ„s of all controuersies do for their last resolution meet and concurre in this one common poynt then that it selfe being cleared and made euident doth include containe by demonstrable inferences the proofe of al the rest within the capacity and largnes of its owne Orbe The difference betwene vs and our Aduersaries herein is this That we do ioyntly (a) Câ—ncil Trident. sess 4. teach that the whole Church of God by the mouth of the chiefe pastour alone or otherwise seconded with a lawfull generall Councell is ordayned in appealably to define either from Scripture or from the ancient practice of Gods Church what is the vndoubted and Orthodoxall faith of Christians what is Schisme and Heresy But our Aduersaries (b) Luth praefat assertionis suae Melancthlocis de Ecclesia Caluin l. 4. Instit c. 9. Chemnitius in exam CoÌ„cil TrideÌ„t sess 4. do with one consent maintaine that all Controuersies of faith are to be tryed by the touchstone of the holy Scripture so as the Scripture it self is to become the sole iudge since nothing they say is to be receaued as an article of fayth but what hath it expresse warrant from the wrytten Word of God The sentence of the Catholiks in his Controuersy I forbeare to handle in this Treatise since it is already discussed very painfully by diuers Catholike writers and particularly in seuerall (c) Tract 1. sect 4. subd 14. tract 3. sect 7. passages of that most learned worke of the Protestantes Apology of the Roman Church the very store-house of reading or the Armory wherin are layed vp the weapons vsed by vs and taken from our Aduersaries owne sides Therefore I will spend these ensuing leaues in refutation of our Aduersaries Doctrine which consisteth in making the Scripture the sole iudge of Controuersies a subiect not so frequently written off in particuler though otherwise the reprouall therof be potentially and implicitly included in the confirmation of the Catholike contrary Doctrine Now Graue learned Sages the reason emboldning me to dedicate this Treatise otherwise vnworthy your iudiciall view to your selues though of a different religion from me is the consideration of the subiect here discussed which is indeed of that nature as that you may iustly seeme to challenge a particuler interest therin for
of all Controuersyes in fayth whatsoeuer without any restraint or exception Sometymes therefore the Fathers meaning is to shew that the Scripture is sufficient to proue expresly the chiefest Articles of our beliefe and of which euery man is bound to haue an explicite and cleare knowledge such are the articles contained in the Creed and those Sacraments which are more necessary which kind of sufficiency we also admit In this sense Augustine writeth as the contexture of the passages there do shew that what points concerne our fayth are clearely to be found in the Scripture another like saying of the sayd Father and to be thus expounded is found in Tract 49. in Ioannem 7. The Fathers at other tymes do teach that the Scripture is of that perfection that the certainty of the truth of it in regard of it selfe alone though not in respect of vs is sufficiently proued from it selfe without the help of any other probation as being penned by them who were immediatly assisted by the holy Ghost In this sense Athanasius (n) Contra Gentiâ—es in exordio calleth the Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Scripturas sufficientes Irenâ—us (o) Lib. 2. c. 47. in like sort sayth that Scripturae perfectae sunt The Scriptures are perfect and then immediatly followeth this reason Quippe à verbo Dei spiritu eius dictae Because they are indicted by the word of God and the holy Ghost The Fathers also are in their writinges accustomed to ascribe a great perfection to the Scripture for recording such miracles of Christ by the which he is sufficiently proued to be the sonne of God which is the generall doctrine also of the Catholikes which testimonyes our Sectaryes are not ashamed to alleage in proofe of the Scriptures fulnes for warrant of any article of Religion whatsoeuer Thus we find that (p) In Ioan l 12. c. 68. Cyrill wryting of the miracles of our Lord sayth with reference to the wordes of S. Iohn The number of our Lords miracles were great yet those which are related Sufficiunt ad plenissimam fidem attente legentibus faâ—iendaÌ„ meaning that they were sufficient to proue that Christ was the sonne of God and Sauiour of mankind 9. Lastly the Fathers acknowledg in their writings mostfully that the perfection of Scripture is such as that it is sufficient to disswade man from vice and perswade him to vertue a point which we al willingly grant both in regard of the ten Commaundments expresly set down which euery one is obliged to obserue as also by reason of many most eminent and remarkable examples of vertue and vice recorded in the Scripture and the inestimable rewardes promised to the vertuous the most dreadfull comminations and threats thundred against the wicked Now of this sufficiency Theophilact speaketh in c. 2. ad Tim. 3. where he sayth that the Scripture is of force to make Vt nihil bonorum desit homini Dei That no vertue be wanting in the man of God the same interpretatioÌ„ a place Authoris (q) In Mat. 22. hom 41. imperfecti admitteth And heere now by these short explications it appeareth that none of these former passages of the Fathers whether they concerne the perfection or sufficiency of the written word either in regard of exhortation to vertue or of demonstrating Christ to be the Sonne of God or of prouing the Scriptures certainty from it owne worth and dignity alone or finally of expresly containing the chiefest Articles of our beliefe can in any sort preiudice our Catholike doctrine handled in this discourse and therefore the wrong of our Aduersaryes towardes their followers is the greater in seeking to abuse their ignorance and credulity by such idle and trifling allegations 9. The third and last head of those misapplyed sentences of the Fathers in this question doth concerne the perspicuity of the Scripture which word is not heere to be taken in that sense as if the Fathers taught that the Scripture were in it selfe absolutely so easy perspicuous and cleare as that without the helpe of the Churches authority in the exposition thereof euery illiterate and mechanicall fellow were able to iudge of the true sense thereof and consequently by the only meanes of it to determine end all Controuersies for they fully acknowledged it to be as Ezechiel (r) Ezech. 2. styled it The enrolled volume written within and without as also to be that hidden booke described by the Euangelist (s) Apoc. 5. to be clapsed with seauen seales But their meaning herein is that the Scripture is perspicuous in two constructions 10. First that the histories similitudes other matters of fact recorded in the Scripture as also some principle Articles of our beliefe are there clearly and perspicuously set downe But what is this to conuince that the Scripture is in generall easy for the truth of any abstruse speculatiue and dogmaticall point or article of Fayth whatsoeuer 11. Of this first manner S. Austin (t) lib. de operibus monac c. 9. speaketh when he sayth that the Scripture is most perspicuous and cleare to proue which no man denyeth that Christ ordayned that those who did preach the Ghospell should be maintained by the Ghospell and therupon shewing that this is clearly and euidently set downe in the Scripture he thus wryteth Quid hoc apertiùs quid clariùs That the Fathers do in like sort sometymes restraine this euidency clearnes of the Scripture to some chiefe articles of Christian Religion appeareth as afore I haue shewed that they in like sort attribute a perfection and sufficiency of the written word of God to the same end Thus doth Irenaeus (u) lib. â— cap. 46. wryting against certaine Infidels denying that there was one only God affirme that for the proofe of this verity Vniuersae Scripturae propheticae Apostolicae c. The whole Scriptures both Prophetical Apostolical are euident without any ambiguity Which wordes being spoken only of that particular point hurteth vs nothing at all Yet our Sectaries sleight in deprauing the Fathers wrytinges is such as what words are spoken for the perspicuity of the Scripture for one only article they shame not to stretch them as spoken in proofe of all 12. The second sense or construction of the Fathers wordes touching the perspicuity of the written word is that the Scripture is cleare and euident in that it doth illuminate and enlighten the mynd of the reader vnderstanding the Scripture a verity which we acknowledge as elsewhere is shewed as it is explained by the spirit of God which spirit speaketh in the voyce of his Church And in this sense to omit the like sentences of diuers other Fathers Epiphanius (x) Contra Aetium l. 3. tom 2. wryteth that in the Scripture omnia lucida sunt all things are cleare in conceauing this clearnes as I sayd before only in respect of the mynd which by truly vnderstaÌ„ding the Scripture is enlightned cleared and much freed
thence runneth headlong into certaine deuiations by-wayes of most foulâ— errours 8. This answere salueth not the doubt for once graÌ„ting a true Iudge it followeth that this Iudge though depending of God is to haue authority in compounding of Controuersies absolutely infallible And the reason hereof is this for if his authority were not infallible then might it be inferred an absurditity little sorting to the sweet prouidence of God that the whole Church by force of such a delegated authority to it by God himselfe might be led into a generall errour since euen moral Philosophy and the light of reason assure vs that granting a Magistrate who may erre to haue publike authority in his censures and decrees then are the subiectes or inferiour persons who are interressed in the sayd definitions bound to imbrace those errours Which if they were not obliged to doe then should it follow that the Magistrates state were no better in defining then the subiects since they were not bound to stand to the ceÌ„sure of their Iudge but only when they did know his sentence to be euidently most true and consequently it might be likewise inferred that the Magistrate hath no power at all in defining and yet all Philosophy instructeth vs that euen in a point doubtfull where it is not euident the opinion of the Iudge to be clearly false the persons acknowledging obedience to the Iudge are in regard of the former reasoÌ„s obliged to follow his doubtfull definition though perhaps erroneous 9. To the former reason may be adioyned this following as is also afore touched That euen the light of reason teacheth vs that euery Iudge in any Court of CoÌ„trouersies ought to be such as all conteÌ„ding parties without exception may for the appeasing of their debates haue easy accesse vnto him Which accesse is found to be in the Church but not in the Scripture from which it vnauoydably followeth that the Scripture cannot be this iudge whereunto ech maÌ„ is to repaire but that the church may be and is the sayd Iudge That euery man at his pleasure may come to the Church for resolutioÌ„ of doubts we see it is euident by the practise of all ages 10. But on the contrary part euery man that maintaineth different points of fayth hath not this freedome of comming to the Scripture for decision of his doubts for first there are diuers Christians who cannot as much as read the Scripture much lesse vnderstand it how can such men then expect to haue their Controuersies touching religion to be deâ—ermined by the wrytten word alone And as touching those others who can read yet is their cause little bettred therby seing many by their reading of the Scripture do strangely detort the true sense therof Yea we may obserue that diuers Nouellistes of different religions who are dayly coÌ„uersant in the Scriptures endeauour euen from the self same passages of it by their false constructions to fortify their repugnant Doctrines And thus though the voyce of the holy Ghost in the wrytten word and the leter there read be but one yet through ech mans selfelike expositions it seemeth to speake as euery man would haue it by this meanes making the Scripture to be like vnto the tongue of S. Peter other the Apostles which being but one was notwithstanding heard in euery mans seuerall language 11. Another argument for the conuincing of this supposed Iudge may be drawne from the Doctrine of Traditions which haue euer bene maintayned by the auncient Fathers and the primitiue Church Which Doctrine if it be true then may we most consequently deduce from thence that the Scripture is not to iudge all questions of Fayth since the Doctrine of vnwrytten Traditions teacheth vs that all the articles and points of Christian Religion haue not their expresse proofe out of the Scriptures but that some of them are belieued only by force of Tradition and of the continued and vn-interrupted practise of Gods Church To enter into any exact proofe of this point of Traditions is improper to this place and would require a reasonable large Treatise alone and therfore I remit the Reader to such Catholike wryters (g) Hofiâ—e in 4. l. aduers Prolegomena Brentij Peresius initio operis sui do Traditionib Roffensis Canisius Bellarmin besides many others as haue most learnedly handled this subiect Only I wil here set downe and consequently proue the sayd Doctrine à posteriori certayne pointes of Christian Fayth which haue no cleare and conuincing proofes out of Scriptures and yet are belieued no lesse by the ProtestaÌ„ts themselues then by vs Catholikes 12. And first against the Anabaptistes both the Catholikes Lutheranes and Caluinistes do belieue that the baptisme of Infantes is lawfull and that they are not to be rebaptized after they come to ripenes of age which point as D. Field acknowledgeth terming it a TraditioÌ„ caÌ„ neuer be sufficiently and clearly proued by the Scriptures alone without the testimony of the practise of the church and force of Tradition as appeareth by the testimonies of the auncient Fathers for we find that Origen thus speaketh hereof in c. 6. epist ad Rom. Ecclesia ab Apostolis traditionem accepit etiam paruulis baptismum dare In like sort Austin l. 10. de Genesi ad literam c. 23. Consuetudo matris Ecclesiae in baptizandis paruulis nequaquam spernenda nec omnino credenda est nisi Apostolica esset Traditio 13. D. Bancroft teacheth that Confirmation is an Apostolicall Tradition as appeareth in his conference before the King All we do belieue that our blessed Lady dyed a Virgin do account Heluidius an Heretike for houlding the contrary and yet no text of Scripture doth coÌ„firme it to vs but rather through misconstruction may seeme to insinuate the contrary in regard of those words Non cognouit virum donec peperit filium suum 14. D. Whitguift (h) In his defense pag. 539. acknowledgeth that now during the tyme of the new Testament we are to celebrate Easter vpon Sunday contrary to the custome of the Iewes a point of such moment euen in the primitiue Church that the maintainers of the coÌ„trary were then reputed for Heretikes and styled (i) Epiph. haeres 50. Aug. haeres 29. Tertul. de praescript Quartadecimani And yet for this change of obseruing Easterday we haue no warrant from the holy Scriptures but may say with Tertullian (k) De corona militis quod non prohibetur vltrò permissum est D. Couel in his booke of examination teacheth the word Archbishop to be a Tradition M. Hooker in his Eccles polic sect 7. p. 118. in generall defendeth the Doctrine of Traditions and answereth diuers testimonies out of the Fathers alledged by Carthwright and others 15. Againe both Catholikes and Protestantes doe belieue that there are certaine diuine wrytinges which are the true and vndoubted word of God and first penned by the holy Prophets Apostles and Euangelistes Yet we cannot conuincingly and demonstratiuely proue so
much out of the Scriptures themselues which point since it includeth within it selfe by necessary illation this question of the Scriptures being Iudge it shal be more fully discussed in the Chapter following Now of this poynt as also of the former belieued without the wrytten word warranting them we may say Harum (*) Tertull. de corona â—ilitis disciplâ—narum Traditio tibi praetenditur auctrix Consuetudo confirmatrix Fides obseruatrix 16. The last argument heere vrged for the refelling of our aduersaries Doctrine herein may be taken from the practise of both the auncient moderne heretickes who euer for the warranting of their heresies heresies I meane euen in the iudgment of our aduersaries haue euer fled to the Scriptures and haue most seriously taught therby to auoyde the authority of the Church that the Scriptures alone ought to Iudge defyne al doubtes of Fayth whatsoeuer And therfore to the end that the reader may see what wicked heresies haue bene proseminated and haue sprung from this so false and hereticall a principle I will exemplify this one point somewhat at large in a Chapter following there shewing how many diuelish heresies haue bene countenanced by their Patrones with the misapplyed testimonies and authorities of the holy Scriptures which abuse of the Scriptures well sheweth that the Doctrine hereof neuer proceeded from God (l) Tertull. de fuga in persecut Quid diuinum non bonum quid bonum non diuinum That it cannot be determined to vs by Scripture that there is any Scripture or Gods word at all CAAP. XI FOR the more particuler handling of this poynt I am to demaund of our aduersaries these three things following which are as it were the three steps wherby we ryse to the graduall difficulties of this question heere intreated of First how they can proue out of Scripture the particuler Ghospell of S. Marke or of any Euangelist to be the same without all corruption which the sayd Marke or the other did wryte considering that it is granted euen by our aduersaries that diuers parcels of the Scriptures haue bene fouly corrupted and mangled by the Additions Translations and other such like deprauations of the auncient heretikes Secondly if it be granted them that any one Ghospell or other part of Scripture is the very same vntoucht and vndefiled as the authour therof did first wryte it yet if we should demand of them how the Scripture can assure and determine this poynt to wit that such a Ghospell as for example that of S. Marke is true and Canonicall Scripture and yet that the obtruded Ghospell of S. Thomas is a false prophane wryting since both these Ghospells haue indifferently in the beginning their seuerall prefixed titles the one but of an EuaÌ„gelist yet accepted the other euen of an Apostle but reiected what could they say Thirdly if it were agreed vpoÌ„ which were the particular books which maks vp the CanoÌ„ of Scripture yet if any prophan Atheist should arriue to that height of impiety as to deny flatly that ther were any such diuine wrytinges at all as to be counted Gods sacred word or Scripture how could our Aduersaries conuince him herein by the Scripture it selfe It were idle for them to reply that the Scripture telleth him that the bookes of the Prophets and the Apostles are diuine wrytinges since the Atheist would not belieue the Scripture so saying vntill it were proued to him which cannot be out of the Scripture that this Scripture affirming so much is Scripture that is a diuine supernaturall and sacred wryting no more then at this present we Christians belieue that the Iewes Thalmud is diuine Scripture though it be countenaÌ„ced with the title of Gods vndoubted word 2. This poynt so presseth our Aduersaries that diuers of them such as are of no meane ranke haue bene forced to confesse that it cannot be proued out of Scripture that there is any Scripture at all neyther that this Ghospell is true that forged nor lastly that we now enioy any one or other parcell of Scripture free from all manner of corruption and as the Prophet Euangelist or Apostle guided by the holy Ghost did first pen it Hence it is that Chemnitius (a) ExameÌ„ Concil Trident. intreating of Tradition Brentius (b) In prolegomenis do teach that this one sole vnwrytten Tradition remayneth in the Church of God to wit that there are certaine diuine wrytings or Scriptures But Hooker (c) In his treatise of Ecclesiasticall policy in treating of this poynt passeth on further and iumpeth with vs in the reason thereof for thus he sayth Of thinges necessary the very chiefest is to know what bookes we are bound to esteeme holy which poynt is confessed impossible for the Scripture it selfe to teach And then afterwardes he warranteth his Doctrine with this reason For if any bookes of Scripture did giue testimony vnto all yet still that Scripture which giueth credit vnto the rest would require another Scripture to giue credit vnto it neyther could we euer come to any pause wheron to rest our assurance this way so that vnles besides Scripture there were something which might assure vs that we do well we could not thinke we do well no not in being assured that Scripture is a sacred and holy rule of weldoing So farre we see this learned Protestant whose calamity is the more to be deplored in that retayning diuers Catholike grounds he forbare to build a fayth answere able therto was from making the Scripture to be the sole iudge and vmpier of all articles of Fayth since by his Doctrine the Scripture could not determine out of itselfe that there is any Scripture at all which is the Basis or foundation of the rest by our aduersaryes owne assertions 3. Others of our aduersaries who will not acknowledge the truth in this point labour to salue the matter with diuers weake and insufficient answeres And first we find that Caluin (d) l. 1. Instit c. 7. §. 1. 2. sayth That the true and holy Scriptures are discerned from the false and prophane with the same facility that light is discerned from darknes and sweetnes from bitternes Which answere if it were true how came it to passe then that Luther reiecteth the Epistle of S. Iames which Caluin himselfe reuerenceth as Apostolicall both of them being able to discerne the materiall light from darknes the sweet from sower 4. The same Caluin whom our more moderne Sectaries in most points do follow as beasts follow the first of their heard affirmeth also That the maiesty voice of God doth so present it self to vs in the sacred Scriptures as that it secureth vs of the infallible truth therof Against which first I vrge that the Maiesty voyce of God speaking in the Scripture is not distinguished froÌ„ the Scripture it self but is the same eueÌ„ as the CoÌ„mandemeÌ„t of a Prince expressed in his law is the same which his law
controu 2. quaest 4. pag. 223. thus wryteth It is manifest that euen after Christ his Ascension and the holy Ghosts descending vpon the Apostles not only the common sort but euen the Apostles themselues erred in the vocation of the gentils c. Yea Peter also erred concerning the abrogation of the Ceremoniall law c. and this was a matter of fayth c. he furthermore erred in manners and these were great errours 19. Answerably hereto Brentius (e) In Apolog CoÌ„fess c. de Concilijs p. 900. an eminent Protestant wryteth that S. Peter chiefe of the Apostles and Barnabas after the holy Ghost receaued together with the Church of Hierusalem erred D. Fulke (f) Against the Rhemish Testam in Galat. 2. speaking vpon the said point sayth Peter erred in ignorance against the Gospell Iewill (g) In his defence of the Apology pag. 361. affirmeth that S. Marke did erroneously alledge Abiather for abimelech and S. Mathew with the like ouersight did write Ieremy for Zachary Conradus (h) In Theolog. Calumist l. 2. fol. 40. Schlusselburg a famous Protestant chargeth Caluin to maintaine that the Apostles alledged the Prophetes in other sense then was meant Zuinglius (i) Tom. 2. Elench coÌ„tra Anabap f. 10. most wonderfully abaseth the wrytings of the Apostles and the Euangelists in these words This is your ignorance that you thinke the Commentaries of the Euangelists and the Epistles of the Apostles to haue bene then in authority when Paul did write these thinges as though Paul did attribute then so much to his Epistles that whatsoeuer was contained in them was sacred c. which thing he sayth were to impute immoderate arrogancy to the Apostle 20. D. Bancroft (k) In his suruey of the pretended discipline pag. 373. alledgeth out of Zanchius his Epistles that one of Caluins Schollars sayd If Paul should come to Geneua and preach the same houre that Caluin did I would leaue Paul and heare Caluin Caluin (l) In his CoÌ„mentar in omnes Pauli Epistol p. 510. himselfe chargeth S. Peter with errour to the Schisme as he sayth of the Church to the endangering of Christian liberty and the ouerthrow of the grace of Christ The Century wryters (m) Cent. 2. l. 2. c. 10. â—ol 580. thus reprehend S. Paul Paul doth turne to Iames the Apostle and a Synod of the Presbiters being called together he is persuaded by Iames and the rest that for the offended Iewes he should purify himselfe in the TeÌ„ple wherunto Paul yieldeth which certainly is no small sliding of so great a doctour In which one testimony we see that not only Paul but the rest of the Apostles are charged by the Centurists with errour in fayth And to close this poynt with that incestuous and reuolted monke I meane Luther we read that besides the seuerall bookes of the new Testament as it aboue shewed denyed by him as also besides the reprehending of Peter of whome he thus sayth Peter (n) In epist ad Galat. c. 1. after the English transl fol. 33. 34. Tom. 5. VVittemberg of anno 1554. fol. 290. the chiefe of the Apostles did liue and teach extra verbum Dei besides the word of God he thus inueigheth most scurrilously against Moyses himselfe Moyses (o) Luther tom 3. VVittenberg in psal 45. f. 423. tom 3. german f. 40. 41. in colloq mensalib german f. 152. 153. had his lips vnpleasant stopped angry c. do you collect all the wisedome of Moyses and of the heathen Philosophers and you shall find them to be before God eyther Idolatry or Hypocryticall wisedome or if it be Politicke the wisedome of wrath c. Moyses had his lippes full of gaul and anger c. away therfore with Moyses 21. And thus farre of this poynt from whence we conclude that the Protestants in charging the Euangelistes and the Apostles with errours of fayth in their words and actions do withall labour to take away the infallible authority due to their wrytings and books for grant they erred in the first way how can we be secured they erred not in the second seing their pens had no greater priuiledge from God of not erring then their tongues and other their actions had and consequently they cannot alledge their wrytings as being subiect to errour by necessary inferences drawne from their owne grounds for the finall decyding and determining of all doubts arysing in matters of fayth and religion That the Protestantes allow not the Originall Hebrew of the old Testament now extant for authenticall and vncorrupted CHAP. II. ALTHOVGTH our Aduersaries do giue it out in their wrytings and sermons that the Hebrew Originall which now they haue and as it is at this present poynted with pricks is pure and free from all corruption and therfore that we ought in any text of the old Testament to recurre to the Hebrew as to the touch stone of truth and to a cleare and vntroubled fountaine Yet that this is but a meere glosse and false vaunt of them inuented only to quit themselues from that reading of the text altogether fauouring the Catholike Doctrine wherunto both the Greeke and Latin Fathers and the whole Church of God for so many ages haue bene accustomed it is most euideÌ„t For it is most certaine that in diuers places themselues do forsake the present Hebrew and do read as the Septuagint or as the Latin Interpretour doth read both who differ much from the present Hebrew Some few texts for example I will heere set downe 2. First then that prophesy of Dauid (a) Psal 8. concerning the Apostles the Septuagint S. Paul (b) Rom. 10. and the Protestants themselues do read thus In omnem terram exiuit sonus eorum Their sound went out through all the earth and yet the present Hebrew hath insteed of these words sonus eorum linea or perpendiculum eorum so insutable with the other words as that it is hard to collect any good and perfect sense therof 3. The Psalme 22. affoards a most notorious prophesy of the particular manner of our Sauiours death in these words They haue peirced my handes and feet for so the Septuagint the Catholikes and the Protestantes in their Translations doe read and yet the present Hebrew so much magnified by theÌ„ hath insteed therof these words as a Lyon my handes and my feet frustrating thereby so remarkable a prophesy of our Sauiours particular suffring death 4. The Hebrew sayth in one (c) Reg. 24. place Zedechias his brother meaning thereby the brother of Ioachim and yet the English Bible translated anno 1579. readeth thus Zedechias his fathers brother according to the Greeke and Latin translation therin 5. Likewise in another place (d) Parâ—lip 2. the present Hebrew sayth Achaz King of Israel and yet our Aduersaries reiect this reading and translate Achaz King of Iuda following therein the Septuagingts translation and the Latin interpretour 6. I let passe the
by the works of the law In both which places the very answere is expressed which the Catholikes are accustomed to make to such arguments since in the sayd testimonies it is set down so we Catholikes do teach that the works of the law of Moyses and consequently all others done meerely by nature and freewill without the fayth spirit and grace of Christ can in no sort iustify a man vpon which expresse distinction of works in the Scripture it selfe it followeth that all other places which through a naked resemblance of words may seeme to make more literally for the Protestants in this poynt then these alledged are to be expounded by these former texts since the holy Ghost caÌ„not set downe contrary and repugnant Doctrines 11. For defence of Traditions we vsually alledge that place of the Thessalonians (a) 2. c. 2. Brethren hold the traditions which you haue receaued whether it be by word or by Epistle Wher we see that the Apostles words do immediatly and necessarily without any helpe of strained consequences imply a diuision or partition of his Doctrine which no doubt was Gods word And that part therof was deliuered to the Thessalonians by his Epistle the rest by word of mouth only Which Text containes the very conclusion of the Catholikes Doctrine to wit that the Euangelists and Apostles did not wryte all things touching Christian fayth but deliuered part therof only by preaching or by some other such like instruction Now our Aduersaries to confront this text and the Doctrine deriued thence are acccustomed to obiect the words of S. Paul (b) Galat. 1. Sed licet nos c. But if we or an Angell from heauen euangelize to you besides that we haue euangelized be he anathema In which words they suppose two things and both false before they can square this text to their purpose 12. First that the word Euangelizare doth include only the wrytten word and not verbum traditum the word left by Tradition which is implicitly the matter in question and as the Sophisters call it Petitio principij Secondly that the Latin word praeter being in this text hath reference to euery thing which is not expresly set down in Scripture since indeed it here signifieth as much as contra meaning therby all Doctrine contrary to the Doctrine already deliuered by the Apostles for otherwise S. Iohn should haue had the Anathema pronounced against him for wryting of the Apocalips after this Epistle of S. Paul was wrytten So farre distant is this text from falling directly and plainly vpon the impugning of Traditions since from such false supposalls as granted they draw their Illation against the Catholike Doctrine therof 13. In like sort they alledge that saying of the Apostle to Timothy All Scripture (c) 2. c. 3. inspired of God is profitable to teach to argue to correct to instructe in iustice thaâ— the man of God may be perfect instructed to euery good worke Where we see that this text as well as the former is so farre froÌ„ pressing the Doctrine of Traditions immediatly and without any helpe of a secondary inference as that it doth not so much as once make mention of Traditions at all either in word or sense neyther can any thing be racked against vs from thence vntill it be first proued which neuer shal be that the word vtilis signifyeth sufficient and because a thing is profitable and conduceth to another thing or end it therfore is sufficient alone of it selfe for the obtayning therof 14. Lastly they bring forth certaine places (d) Math. 15. Galat. 1. Coloss 2. which do particularly condemne certayne pernicious and friuolous Traditions of the Iewes and the Traditions which the Catholikes do teach to haue bene deriued from our Sauiour and his Apostles be all one So impertinently do our Aduersaries alledge these and such like places against our Doctrine of Traditions 15. Concerning prayer for the dead what can be more cleare perspicuous for proofe therof then those words alledged out of the Machabees (e) 2. c. 1. a testimony so euident as that I cannot forbeare it though it impugne my former method Sancta ergo salubris est cogitatio c. It is therfore a holy and heathfull cogitation to pray for the dead that they may be loosed from their sinnes Which place we see doth literally expresly contayne the very conclusion of the Catholike Doctrine therin and which words proceeded vpon the practise of Iudas Machabeus who sent a summe of money vnto Ierusalem to procure sacrifices to be performed for the spirituall reliefe and ease of his dead souldiers I know that our Sectaries do expunge out of the Canon of Scripture this booke as Apocryphall yet they are to remember that it is reckoned among other diuine and vndoubted bookes of Scripture by the third Councell of Carthage (f) Can. 47. by Innocentius (g) Epist ad Exuperium the first and by S. Austin himselfe who thus (h) l 18. de Ciuit. Dei c. 36. sayth Libros Machabeorum c. The bookes of the Machabees are acknowledged by the Christians for Canonicall not by the Iewes 16. Now the chiefest places which our Aduersaries do obiect herein are among others such as being intended of the generall resurrection of the Iust are calumniously wrested by them to the particular tyme of ech vertuous mans death Thus they alledge that sayng of the Psalmist (i) Psalm 126. Cùm dederit dilectis suis somnum ecce haereditas Domini as also that place of the Apocalips (k) 14. Beatiqui in Domino moriuntur c. Blessed are they which dye in the Lord from henceforth now sayth the spirit that they rest from their labours for their workes follow them And as concerning this later place Saint Iohn throughout his whole Chapter speaketh of the later iudgment and therfore except the Protestants do first coÌ„found the particular tymes of mens deaths with the tyme of the general iudgment they can draw nothing from hence in denyall of purgatory adde to this that some of the Fathers as shal be shewed hereafter do interpret this text of martyrs only who neuer suffer any paynes in Purgatorie 17. They also produce to the same end the place in Ecclesiastes (l) â—1 Si occiderit lignum ad Austrum c. If the tree shall fall towardes the Souht or towardes the North it shal be in that place where it did fall The meaning of which passage being deliuered in Metaphors or Allegories doth the more hardly conuince any thing since the sense in regard therof appeares the more doubtfull Notwithstanding the common exposition of this place is that euery man eyther dyes in state of grace vnder which state are also vnderstood those which come to Purgatory and so falleth towards the South wherby is meant Heauen or in the state of mortall sinne and then falleth towards the North to wit into hell And whosoeuer dyeth in eyther of
these states shal for euer remaine in the same And thus we see how farre of the texts obiected by our Aduersaries are from conuincing plainly literally and without any strained deductions the Doctrine of Purgatory or Prayer for the dead 18. Lastly to omit the like examples of diuers other Controuersies the Catholikes do produce for proofe of Euangelicall Counsells that plaine saying of our Sauiour (m) Math. 19. Sunt Eunuchi c. There are Eunuchs who haue gelded themselues for the kingdome of heauen Which words contayning no precept are so cleare and direct in proofe of those Counsells as that our Aduersaries (n) Peter Martyr l. de caelib votis therby to auoyd the force of them are constrained to say that by the words For the kingdome of heauen is figuratiuely meant for the more speady preaching of the Ghospell So ridiculous far fetcht is this their answere 19. As cleare also are those other wordes of Christ spoken to the yong man for confirmation of the said Doctrine being taken literally plainly vz. Si (o) Math. 19. vis perfectus esse c. If thou wilt be perfect Go and sell all and follow me and thou shalt haue a treasure in heauen Which text as also the former doth immediatly and primatiuely without any secondary deductions touch and proue the Doctrine it selfe of Euangelicall Counsells 20. Now against the sayd Doctrine they vsually obiect diuers passages (p) Math 22. Marc. 12. Luc. 10. of Scripture where we are cōmanded to loue God with all our soule and withal our strength where we fynd that what is collected is by this supposition to wit that the phrases Toto corde tota anima do signify all our endeauour possibly in the highest degree which being false they heerupon infer that there is nothing which is good left vncommanded to be done then they conclude there is no place for Euāgelical Coūsells which are distinguished against precepts Now what toto corde tota anima or totis viribus do signify shall appeare in the Chapter following 21. To the same purpose they detort those words of our Sauiour (g) Luc. 17. Cùm feceritis haec omina c. When you haue done all these thinges which are commanded you say we are vnprofitable seruants we haue done that which we ought to doe Which place as it is manifest in it immediate sense doth not touch the Doctrine of Euangelicall Counsells besydes the very words themselues do expresly shew that it cannot be applyed to our Aduersaries sense and meaning since our Sauiour speaketh precisely of those things which are commanded to be done where the Catholikes doe teach that nothing which is particularly commanded in Gods word is an Euangelicall Counsell 22. Now by these few example set down of the places alledged out of Gods holy word both by the Catholikes and Protestants we may make a coniecture of the rest wherin as I sayd before we see the great disparity betwene the seuerall kinds of those texts Seing that if we grant the literall ordinary facill and most naturall sense of the testimonies vrged by Catholikes we necessarily grant the conclusion it selfe of that Doctrine for which they are vrged since they do touch immediatly without any ambages or borrowed supposalls the primary and radicall poynt or question controuerted betwene vs and the Protestants wheras our Aduersaries testimonies out of the sayd Scriptures though they were granted them in their own sense cōstructiō yet they presently force not the proofes of their assertions and the reason her of is because they fall not directly vpon the question it selfe but only by meanes of their supposed inferences and deductions and then sometimes they but concerne the māner or some other circumstance therof which being only accessory and subsequēt euen among Catholike Deuines is holden indifferent and disputable 23. Thus we see that these men though they be much verbally conuersant with the Scripture yet for any conuincing proofes deduced by them from thence they are most needy therin not much vnlike vnto those who haue the stamping or coyning of siluer and gold who though great store therof come through their handes yet commonly are poore as hauing no true interest in any part of the same That the textes of Scripture are expounded by the Fathers in the same sense in the which they are alledged by Catholikes for proofe of their Doctrine and fayth CHAP. IX IT being made cleare in the precedent chapter that the texts of holy Scripture alledged by the Catholiks for proofe of their faith are more literall perspicuous as also do touch more directly and punctually the doubts for which they are vrged then any cōtrary passages or places therof obiected by our Aduersaries It now remaineth that we shew two things first that the ancient Fathers haue in their wrytings and commētaries euer interpreted the sayd former texts and others of like nature vrged by vs euen in the same sense and meaning which we do for the iustifying of our Catholike Doctrine Secondly that they haue deliuered a different construction from our Aduersaries of those principall texts which they now produce against vs so as according to the Fathers expositions of the sayd places which agree with the Catholikes construction therof they do nothing at all impugne our Religion Both which poynts being once made good do mightily preiudice our Sectaries For what probability I might say possibility can there be conceaued to the contrary but that the Fathers did interprete both the sayd sorts of texts I meane of such as are produced eyther by vs or our Aduersaries according to the intendment of the holy Ghost or at least were much aduantaged aboue the Nouellistes of these dayes for the true construction therof When we consider that they were men of admirable vertue and piety of great and extraordinary learning such as were not interessed our in Cōtrouersies as neither hauing then enemies to crosse their present Doctrine except it were some one or other confessed Heretike nor yet knowing what doubts in fayth might aryse in after ages but especially when we call to mynd the tymes wherin they liued to with euen then when by our Aduersaries confessions the Church of God of which they were the graue and reuerend Pastours and Doctours had in no one poynt departed from the Doctrine deliuered by our Sauiour and his Apostles So litle reason we find hath our Nouellist to make his sole refuge to Gods sacred word were it not therby to auoyde the ordinary and vsuall tryall drawne from all other proofes or testimonies whatsoeuer and finally to make himselfe sole iudge of the sayd word 2. But to begin with some chiefest of those testimonies of Scripture which the Catholikes are accustomed to alledge reseruing the textes obiected by our Aduersaries to the next Chapter where I intend to restraine my selfe only to some few texts of euery maine Controuersy both because to examine al the places of euery
alledge those words of the Apostle (p) 1. Cor. c. 11. Qui manducat bibit indignè c. He that eateth and drinketh vnworthily eateth and drinketh iudgment to himselfe not discerning the body of our Lord Out of which words we gather that some are here reprehended in that they receiue the body of Christ vnworthily but these do not receaue it in spirit and fayth for in so doing they should receaue it with profit and worthily therfore they receaue his body only in body and not in spirit and consequently his body is there really and truly present And in this sort is this text expounded by the fathers vz. Ambrose (q) In c. 11. prioris ad ad Corinth Theodor Ierome (r) In c. 1. Malach. Chrysostome (s) Hom. 24. in prior ad Corinth hom 83 in Matth. Origen (t) Hom. 2. in psal 37. Basil (u) l. 2. de baptisae 3. others which exposition of the fathers being true depriueth our Aduersaries of all sufficient answere to the said text 10. That those three places which the Catholiks do commonly vrge for proofe of Priests authority in remitting sinnes vz. Math. 16. To thee I will giue the keyes of heaueÌ„ and whatsoeuer thou shalt bynd vpon earth shal be bound in heauen c. Math. 18. What things you shall bynd vpon earth shal be bouÌ„d in heauen and what things you shall loose c. Lastly Iohn 20. Whose sins you shall remit are remitted vnto theÌ„ and whose sinnes you shall retaine are retained That these places I say doe proue that Priests haue authority giuen them truly and really to remit sins in the Sacrament of Pennance not only by declaring and pronouncing their sinnes to be remitted as our Sectaries do teach it appeareth out of the fathers expositions of the foresaid places who expounding them literally with the Catbolikes do proue therby the true authority of the Priests therin S. Gregory (x) Hom. 26. in Euang expounding the words Whose sinnes you shall remit thus sayth Principatum superni iudicij c. The Apostles do obtaine a principality of supreme iudgment that in the place of God they may retayne the sinnes of some and loose the sinnes of others S. Chrysostome (y) l. 3. de sacerd the scope of which booke is to proue this point expounding the former texts and comparing the authority of the Priests of the old law ouer the leprous persoÌ„s with the Priests of the new law thus concludeth At nostris Sacerdotibus non corporis lepram c. It is granted to our Priests I say not to try them which are purged but absolutely to purge and cure not the leper of the body but the filth and foulnes of the soule See also S. Austin (z) l. 20. de Ciuit. Dei expouÌ„ding those words of the Apoc. Et vidi sedes sedentes c. Ierome (a) Ep. ad HeliodoruÌ„ de vita solitaria Ambrose (b) l. 1. de poenit c. 2 sequent Gregory (c) Oratione ad ciues timore perculsos Naziazene all which do interpret the former texts literally and ackknowledge from thence the sayd authority in Priests for remitting of sinnes which the Catholikes at this day do teach 11. That place of S. Iohn (d) c. 3. vz. Except a man be borne againe of water and the spirit he cannot enter into the kingdome of God doth proue that the Sacrament of Baptisme doth ex opere operato conferre grace and iustify a man which perspicuous and cleare testimony to peruert our Aduersaries are forced to say that the wordes are not spoken of the Sacrament of Baptisme but only of regeneration caused by the holy Ghost whose property is to wash the soule as the water doth wash the body And yet against this phantasticall exposition we are able to produce the fathers who do literally vnderstand the former words as spoken of the Sacrament of Baptisme which exposition of theirs granted as true doth necessarily force the Catholike Doctrine therin See Cyrill Austin Chrysostome and Origen all interpreting this place as also Ambrose (l) l. 3. de spirit saÌ„ct c. 11. Cyprian (m) l. 3. ad Quirinum Ierome (n) In c. 16. Ezech. and the rest 12. In proofe of Freewill mong other places we alledge those words of God spoken to Cain Nonne (o) Genes 4. si bene egeris recipies c. If thou dost well shalt thou not be accepted and if thou dost not well sinne lyeth at thy doore Sub te erit appetitus eius tu dominaberis illius that is And vnto thee it desire vz. of sinne shal be subiect and thou shalt rule ouer it vz. ouer sinne 13. Now our Aduersaries in answere hereto do say that the words Sub te erit appetitus eius tu dominaberis illius ought to haue reference to Abel meaning hereby that Abel should be subiect to Cain and that as being the elder he should rule ouer Abel Which construction being most forced indirect is generally impugned by the Fathers who in the exposition of the former words do in both places vnderstand sinne and not Abel Thus we find that S. Austin (p) l. 15. de Ciuit. Dei c. 7. saith of this place as interpreting it Quiesce ad te enim conuersio eius tu dominaberis illius numquid fratris absit cuius igitur nisi peccati that this Content thy selfe Cain for it shall turne it selfe to thee and thou shalt rule ouer it ouer what ouer thy brother God forbid ouer what then but ouer sinne S. Ierome in like sort wryteth thus (q) Inquaestion Hebraicis Quia liberi arbitrij es moneâ— vt non tibi peccatum sed tu peccato domineris alluding to the words in Genes Because thou art of freewill I do counsell thee that sinne may not rule ouer thee but thou ouer sin See also Ambrose (r) lib. 2. de Cain c. 7. Gregory (s) lib. 4. moral cap. 22. and Prosper (t) l. 2. de vocat geÌ„â—ium c. 13. expounding those former words of sinne and not of Abel all which fathers do euen deriue the Doctrine of frewil from their foresaid exposition therof 14. For maintenance of Iustification by workes for we allow that saying of the Historiographer Fayth that is seene is better then faith that is heard we do vrge that place of Iames (u) cap. 2. aboue touched Do you see because of workes a man is iustified and not of faythonly which text is so plaine direct for Iustification by workes as that S. Austin (x) lib. de side operibus c. 14. is not afraid to say that the very scope and drift of this Epistle of S. Iames as also that of Peter Iohn and Iude was chiefly to represse the heresy then begun about Iustification by fayth only so great an impugner was this auncient Father of our Aduersaries sole and melancholy fayth for so I
We account a man to be iustifyed by fayth without the workes of the law Where besides that the very text it selfe doth expresly speake of the workes of the law which kind of workes no Catholike doth teach to iustify S. Austin (r) l. de gratia liber arbit c. 17. doth euen in the same sense expound this place saying thus Homines non intelligenâ—es c. Men not vnderstanding what the Apostle heere sayth did thinke that he sayd fayth would suffice a man though he liued euilly and had no workes which God forbid that a Vessell of Election should so thinke who in a certaine place after he had sayd In Christ Iesus neyther Circumcision nor prepuce auaileth any whit straight added but Faith which worketh by loue Thus S. Austin In like sort they vrge another saying of the sayd Apostle vz. Si Abraham (s) Rom. 4. ex operibus c. If Abraham be iustifyed by workes he hath glory but not with God As also that other Gratia estis saluati c. By (t) Ephes â— grace you are saued through faith c. and not of works In both which places are vnderstood workes done by the force of nature before our vocation and calling in Christ as appeareth out of S. Austin (u) Supra praefat in psal â—1 and S. Ierome (x) Eâ—ist ad â—thesiphontem expounding the sayd places See also Austin expounding the former and other such like places in l. de praedest Sanct. c. 7. epist. 105. ad Sixtum l. de hono perseuerenâ—iae c. 2. 10. Against the merit of good workes they alledge diuers places which may seeme to intimate that God doth crowne men only in mercy and consequently not by force of their owne workes as where it is sayd Beati misericordes quia c. Blessed are they which be mercifull for they shall obtaine mercy which place both S. Austin (z) Epist 105. l. de correp gratia cap. 13. and S. Gregory (a) In psal 7. paenitential expound thus to wit that blessednes and eternall felicity is attributed to mercy not because there is not a true reward of merit but because the merit it selfe is giuen to man by the mercy of God For a man cannot do any meritorious worke before he be iustified but he is iustified by the grace mercy of God 11. They also vrge that place aboue mentioned of S. Luke Cùm feceritis haec omnia c. When you haue done all these thinges which are commanded you say we are vnprofitable seruants for we haue but done what we ought to haue done which text may seeme to make against the merit of workes and against workes of supererogation yet in the Fathers iudgments it nothing impugneth the same who though they do giue seuerall expositions thereof yet not any one of theÌ„ maketh against the Catholike Doctrine in this point S. Chrysostome (c) Hom. in illud Illatum est cor Oziae sayth that our Sauiour did not meane that we were vnprofitable seruants but that we should so say and thinke of our selues therby to humble our selues least a selfeliking pride might corrupt our good works S. Austin (d) Serm. â— de verbis Domini sayth that we may be called vnprofitable seruants because when we haue kept all Gods commandements we haue done nothing but what we ought to haue done and therfore in rigour and iustice we can expect no reward but only from the liberall promise and bargaine of God with vs. 12. S. Ambrose (e) l. 8. in Lucam expoundeth the former wordes in this sense to wit that we should acknowledge how weake and imperfect we are of our selues to do any good worke and that we are made profitable seruants therto only by the assistance and grace of God Now no one of these expositions as I sayd before doth agree with our Aduersaries exposition of the sayd place or preiudice the Doctrine of merit 13. Against actuall and inherent Iustice they vsually prostitute that saying of Isay (f) cap. 64. Facti sumus immundi omnes nos tanquam pannus menstruatae omnes iustitiae nostrae that is We are all made vncleane and all our iustice is like vnto the cloath of a menstruous woman Out of which words they endeauour to proue all our actions to be bad and sinfull wheras it is certaine that the Prophet did speake these wordes not in the person of himselfe or of the iust but only of the wicked Iewes by reason of whose sinnes both their Citty and the people were to be deliuered into the hands of the King of Babylon And this appeareth out of the word which a little before he had spoken vz. Ecce iratus es peccauimus behould thou art angry because we haue sinned And thus we fynd this place expounded by Cyril (g) In huÌ„c locum The truth of which expositioÌ„ appeareth more clearly out of the words following the former textes vz. Non est qui inuocet nomen tuum There is not any which calleth vpon thy name which saying must haue reference only to the wicked and not to the iust 14. To the sayd end they obiect Dauid saying Non intres (h) c. 142. in iudicium cum seruo tuo c. do not enter into iudgment with thy seruant because no liuing creature shal be iustifyed in thy sight Of which place the Fathers do deliuer seueral expositions but all different from our Aduersaries meaning intention S. Ierome (i) In hunc psalm Hilary (k) Ibidem Arnobius (l) Ibidem do say that the meaning of Dauid was that man cannot besayd to be iustifyed if he be compared with the purity and sublimity of the iustice of God in respect wherof the iustice not only of men but euen of Angells may be accounted to be but Iniustice and impurity Lastly S. Gregory (m) In coÌ„ment huius psalm as also S. Austin (n) l de perfect iustitiae do referre the sayd wordes of Dauid to veniall sinnes without committing of which our life cannot be passed ouer 15. Concerning Euangelicall Counsels of which our Aduersaries are professed enemies they therfore doe alledge those sayings (o) Math. 22. Marc. 12. Luc. 10. where we are commanded to loue God with all our forcâ— strength and will as is aboue rehearsed wheras indeed those words are put downe only for greater efficacy vnderstanding therby that we are to loue God sincerly truly and aboue all other thinges thus doth S. Ierome (p) In coÌ„ment ad c. 22. Math. Chrysostome (q) Chrysostom ibid. and Ambrose (r) ad c. 10. Luc. expound this place They also obiect that saying of Christ where he (s) Luc. 14. teacheth That except a man renounceth all the things he possesseth he cannot be Christ his disciple concluding froÌ„ thence that there are no Euangelicall Counsells which place notwithstanding S. Austin (t) Epist 5.
wheras they do alledge to proue that there is now no sacrifice in the Church the words of our Sauiour (a) Ioan. 29. CoÌ„summatum est It is consummated or finished As if our Sauiour testifyed hereby that whatsoeuer was requisite for our health and saluation was accomplished and consummated by his only sacrifice vpon the Crosse wheras his meaning only was that all his afflictions and punishments which he suffred in flesh were consummated and ended by his death vpon the Crosse thus do Austin Cyril Theophilact Chrysostome teach in their expositions of this place 29. This now among many other like passages of Scripture obiected by our Aduersaries may serue to discouer the Fathers iudgments in the explicating of al such texts and how far distant at least in those learned Doctours censures they are from coÌ„tradicting any one point of our Catholike Fayth consequently how preiudiciall it were to the Protestants in the Fathers iudgments to make the holy Scripture the sole and last resort and Tribunall of Controuersies And here we are to aduertise the Reader that he is not to expect that the Fathers should preuent in their bookes Commentaries by way of explication the obiections and arguments drawne from all such places of Scripture as are vrged by our Aduersaries both because they could not foresee the Heresies of our tymes as also if they had yet could they not be induced to belieue that any one of learning professing Christian Fayth and Religion would so pertinaciously and impertinently rack and force Gods sacred word for the vphoulding of their Heresies as the Sectaries of our age haue done 30. Neither is the Reader to looke that our Catholike Expositions of euery text which our Aduersaries doe vrge against vs should be warranted with the authorities of many Fathers though most of them haue bene so fortified in that some such passages of Scripture there are of which few Fathers did vndertake to make any peculiar Comment or exposition at all Only it suffiseth that we can haue our expositioÌ„s of euery such senteÌ„ce of Scripture strengthned with the authorities of some few of theÌ„ And that the Protestants are not able to alledge so much as one Father interpreting in the Protestants construction against our Catholike Doctrine any one of the former alledged places of Scripture or any one other text which our Aduersaries alledge though heere it be not set downe And now hauing thus dislodged our Aduersaries of their best couerts and places of Retyre for patronage of their strange and exorbitant Positions and Doctrine as also hauing in the precedent Chapter fortified and strengthned with the Fathers explications the sense and meaning of such texs as we produce against theÌ„ I will herein proceed no further referring one point to their owne considerations and iudgments to wit whether themselues receaue greater hurt and domage by the Fathers erecting their impregnable Forts of Gods word from whence they make their issues sallyes out in pursuite and profligation of these mens Heresies then by the sayd Fathers raising and battering downe the weake houlds and fortresses of such misapplyed texts of holy Scripture wherin our Sectaries are wont to place theyr greatest strength and confidence since by the first theyr Heresies receaue most deadly and incurable wounds by the second the Catholike Faith is secured freed from al dangerous assaults and encounters 31. But to end this point to wit that the Fathes interpreted the Scripture in generall in one the same sense with vs Catholikes the euidency of it is such as that therefore the Fathers are charged by our Aduersaries through their supposed misconstruction of Scripture as maintainers of Popish Religion The consideration of which assertion of theirs being for seueral respects not to be neglected and as particularly conducing to our preseÌ„t purpose induceth me a litle to insist in setting downe the seuerall reproualls and criminations of the Protestantes bouldly deliuered against the Fathers for their defending of our Catholike Articles and Doctrine Which point being made manifest it then ineuitably followeth that eueÌ„ in our Aduersaries iudgments the Fathers did deliuer the sayd constructions of Scripture which we Catholikâ— do seing the Fathers maintained no Doctrines but such as were in their owne opinions warranted with the authority of Gods sacred wrytten word or at least not any way impugned by the same 32. And first we find D. Whitaker (a) Contra Duraeum l. 6. p. 423. scornefully traducing the Fathers in a generall to write thus the Popish Religion to vse his own words is a patched Couerlet of the Fathers errours sowed together 33. D. Whitguift (b) In his defence of the answer to the admonition pag. 472. 473. the once pretended Archbishop of Canterbury in like manner thus chargeth the Fathers How greatly were almost all the Bishops and learned wryters of the Greeke Church and Latin also for the most part spotted with Doctrines of freewill of merits of Inuocation of Saintes and such like meaning such like points of our Religion 34. Peter (c) De votis p. 476. Martyr speaking of the supposed Popish Errours thus insimulates the Fathers within the said errours saying As long as we insist in Councels and Fathers so long we shal be conuersant in the said errours Malancthon (d) Iu 1. Cor. c. 3. in like sort inueighing against the Fathers thus auerreth Presently from the beginning of the Church the anncient Fathers obscured the Doctrine concerning the iustice of faith increased Ceremonies and deuised peculiar worships 35. M. Iewel (e) l. de vita Iewelli printed at London pag. 212. most Hypocritically appealing to the Fathers at Paules Crosse as challenging them for Protestants is sharply reprehended for such his idle vaunting by D. Humfrey himselfe in these words He gaue the Papists too large a scope was iniurious to himselfe and after a maÌ„ner spoiled himselfe and his Church 36. Beza thus (f) In his preface vpoÌ„ the new Testâ—ment dedicated do the Prince of Condy anno 2587. confidently wryteth vpon the said poynt Euen in the best tymes meaning the tymes of the Fathers of the Primitiue Church the ambition ignorance and lewdnes of the Bishops was such that the very blynd may easily perceaue that Sathan was president in their assemblies or Councels 37. But I will conclude this point with the testimony of Luther who as he was the first in our age that broached a religion vnknowne to the Fathers of the Primitiue Church So he shewed himselfe most insolent in controlling them for their maintaining of our Catholike Religion he thus speaking of them (g) Luther Tom. 2. VVittenberg anno 1551. deseruo arbitrio pag. 434. The Fathers for so many ages haue bene plainly blind and most ignorant in the Scriptures they haue erred all their life tyme and vnles they were ameÌ„ded before their deathes they were neuer Saintes nor pertayning to the Church 38. Now from all these assertions of our Sectaries it is
necessarily gathered that their disclaiming from the auncient Fathers as patrones of our religion doth implicitly inuolue in it selfe as aboue I haue touched that euen in our aduersaries acknowledgmeÌ„ts the Fathers interpreted the Scriptures in one and the same sense with vs Catholikes for if they had made one and the same construction of the Scripture with the ProtestaÌ„ts they had then taught the same Doctrine which the Protestants now teach and consequently it appeareth how dangerous it is to our Aduersaries to appeale to the Scripture alone as Iudge of all Controuersies if for the true construction and sense therof they would rest in the iudgments of the anncient Fathers That the Scripture doth make for the Catholikes euen by the tacite acknowledgment of our Aduersaries rising from their maintayning of our Catholike articles CHAP. XI IN this last place we are to vndertake to shew that euen by our Aduersaries Confessions the holy Scripture is most cleare for iustifying our Catholike Faith which point might be proued at large by producing their owne words and expositions of many of the chiefe passages of Scripture wherby we are able to demonstrate out of their owne books and writings that they are interpreted by them in the same sense and meaning wherein we Catholikes do vsually expound them But this course I will purposely forbeare partly to auoyde the distastfull iteration of the former texts so often already repeated but chiefly in regard of the tedious prolixity which would necessarily attend the deliuering in their owne wordes of our Aduersaries expositions of all such places and in supply therof I will take a more briefe and yet no lesse conuincing method That is I will set downe ten of our mayne Controuersies for example of al the rest acknowledged taught and iustified by our Aduersaries and such who for wit and learning may seeme to equall any others of their owne side Which thing being once performed it then ineuitably followeth euen from their owne Principles that they acknowledge the Scriptureto make for the Catholikes in the sayd Doctrines confessed by theÌ„ since their owne generall and constant axiome (*) Luther iâ— CoÌ„ment c. 1. ad Galat Caluin l. 4. Instit c. 8. §. 8. Chemnit in Exam. Conc. Trident sess 4. in libro quem inseripsit Theologiae Iesuit praecip capit Brentius in suis Prologeminis c. de Traditionibus HaÌ„melmanus in suo volumine coÌ„tra Traditiones alij permulti is that they are not to beleeue any thing as matter of fayth but what hath it warrant in Gods written word And to proceed yet more particularly seing that for iustifying of such Catholike articles no passages of Scripture can be alledged more forcibly and pressingly by our Aduersaries own censure then the texts alledged in the former Chapters it therfore may be concluded that those very particular texts euen by the acknowledgment of the Protestants do receaue that sense and construction which the Fathers and we Catholikes haue deliuered of them for proofe and warranting of our fayth Agayne wheras our Aduersaries which maintaine any such Catholike Positions will no doubt confidently auouch that they teach nothing which may be contradicted by the Scripture It in like sort followeth that all such texts of Scripture meÌ„tioned aboue and others of like nature which are vrged by other protestaÌ„ts to impugne the said Catholike points are at least in these mens iudgments to be taken in a construction far different from ouerthrowing the sayd articles So as the conclusion of all is this that in these mens censures we implicity do shew that such authorities of Scripture vrged by vs do confirme our Catholike Fayth and obiected by them do preiudice it nothing at all But to beginne 1. And first concerning the Primacy of one in the Church of God we fynd that Caluin (a) Alledged by VVhitg p. 137. thus sayth The twelue Apostles had one among them to gouerne the rest D. Whitguift (b) vbi suprap 375. sayth Among the Apostles themselues there was one chiefe c. In like sort Musculus (c) Alledged by VVhitguift vbi supra p. 66. sayth Peter is found in many places to haue bene chiefe among the rest Melancthon (d) In his booke intituled Centur epist theolog epist 74. thus writeth as certaine Bishops are President ouer many Churches so the Bishop of Rome is President ouer all Bishops and this Canonical policy no wyse man I hope will or ought to disalow To maintaine this sayd Doctrine Iacobus Andraeas is alledged by Hospinianus (e) Historia sacramentaria part 2. fol. 589. 2. That the Pope is not Antichrist appeareth froÌ„ the testimonies of diuers Protestants which teach that Antichrist is not yet come So doth Zanchius (f) In epist Pauli ad Philippens teach the like doth Franciscus (g) In his booke intituled Antichristus siue progno stiâ—â— mundi Lambertus affirme And Done in one of his sermons (h) Of the sâ—â—ond coÌ„ming of Christ confesseth That some Protestantes do make a doubt whether Antichrist be yet reuealed or no. And heere we are to obserue that some other Protestants who do teach him to be come do make the Turk to be him thus doth MelaÌ„cthon so vrged by Haruey in his Theological discourse pag. 102. Bucer and Fox teach vz. Act. Mon. of anno 1577. pag. 539. 3. Touching the Reall Presence who knoweth not that Luther and the Lutheranes defend it And therfore it is needles to set down the particular names of any of them since the maintainers of this Doctrine which are not Catholikes are tearmed Lutherans especially because they chiefly dissent from the Caluinistes in this poynt 4. That Priests do truly remit sinnes by Absolution and not only pronounce them to be remitted appeareth from the testimony of the English Communion booke where the Priest sayth And by his authority committed to me I absolue thee from all thy sinnes Which booke is therfore reprehended by the booke called the Suruey (i) p. 145. of the booke of common prayer As also the same is proued by Lobechius (k) Disput Theologic pag. 301. who sayth That God remits sinne immediatly by himselfe but mediatly by his ministers And that the Caluinistes do therfore erre in withdrawing this efficacy from the absolution giuen by the minister of the word Thus farre Lobechius And answerably hereto we find that Melancthon (l) In Apolog confess Aug. art 13. did teach that Absolution is properly a Sacrament The like did Spandeburge (m) In margarit Theologic pag. 116. Andraeas (n) In concilat locorum seript pugnant loc 191. Althamerus and Sarcerius (o) Loc. com hom 1. de potest Eccles fol. 305. affirme 5. That the Sacraments of the new Testament conferre grace ex opere operato appeareth from the iudgment of D. Bilson in his true difference part 4. pag. 539 D. Whitaker contra Duraeum l. 8. p. 662. M. Hooker in his Ecclesiasticall policy lib. 5.
sect 57. Melancthon in cap. 4. epist. ad Roman Iacobus Andraeas in Epitom colloq Montisbelgar pag. 58. Luc. Osiander in Enchirid. controuers c. p. 272. 6. The Doctrine of Freewill in like sort is maintayned by Osiander Cent. 16. p. 814. by Siccanus Hemingius as Willet doth witnesse in his Sinopsis printed 1600. p. 808. By Perkins in his reuelat p. 326. 7. The Doctrine of merit of workes to wit that in regard of Christ his Passion and promise and as proceeding from faith all which poynts the Catholiks do acknowledge as necessary they are meritorious is warranted by the testimonies of Melancthon (p) loc com de bonis operib of the Confessions q in the Harmony of Hooker (r) l. 5. Ecclesiast polic sect 72. pag. 208. and of the disputation holden at Ratisbone (s) p. 509. 8. The forbearance of certaine meates at set tymes and this not for a politick respect but in regard of spirituall ends is iustified by Hooker (t) In his Ecclesiast polic l. 5. sect 72. p. 204. who not only condemneth Aerius and Montanus for teaching the contrary but doth also answere the place vrged out of S. Paul by our Aduersaries in disproofe of our Catholike fastings The sayd Doctrine is also approued by a booke wrytten by a Protestant authour intituled Querimonia (u) p. 31. 94. Ecclesiae printed in London anno 1592. 9. The Doctrine of Euangelicall Counsels is maintained by Luther (x) assertionib art 30. by Hooker in his Ecclesiasticall policy lib. 3. sect 8. pag. 140. and by D. Couel in his defence of Hooker art 8. p. 49. 50. c. 10. Lastly that the true Church is euer to be Visible is proued from the testimonies of Melancthon who alledging sundry texts out of Scripture in proofe therof thus (y) loc com de Eccles p. 354. concludeth Hi similes loci non de Idea Platonica sed de Ecclesiae visibili loquuntur D. Field (z) l. 1. of the Church p. 19. 21. doth affirme the same and therupon reprehendeth Bellarmine for prouing needlesly the Visibility of the Church as if the same were denyed by the Protestants D. Humfrey in like sort iustifieth the Churches Visibility and intreating at large and prouing this poynt in the end directeth his wordes to the Catholikes in this manner Cur (a) In Iesuitismo part 2. rat 3. p. 240. ergo anxiè curiosè probant quod à nobis nunquam est negatum that is why do our Aduersaries so painfully proue that to wit the Churches Visibility which we neuer denied Thus teacheth the said Doctour 11. The same Doctrine of the Churches Visibility is in like sort maintained by Henoch Clappam (b) In his soueraigne remedy against schisme p. 18. who thus saith Not only all Auncients did hould the Churches Visibility but also al learned men of our age 12. These now ten articles among many other such like Catholike poynts acknowledged by our Aduersaries as the Reader may fully see in that most elaborate learned conuincing and vnanswerable booke stiled The Protestants Apology of the Roman Church may be sufficient to proue that the Scripture maketh most cleare and euidēt for the iustifying of our Catholike Fayth in the former poynts at least in the iudgments of these as I may tearme them Agrippian and halfe Christians I meane in the iudgments of the aforealledged Protestants teaching and acknowledging these Catholike Positions And the reason hereof is in that those who maintaine and defend the sayd former articles do neuertheles as I touched before confidently teach auouch that that only and nothing els is to be beleeued in matters of faith which is manifestly and expresly warranted or necessarily deduced out of the written word Now this being thus I see not how our former Protestants can auoyde and diuert the danger of this their present Doctrine which broacheth that the written word alone is solely definitiuely to determine all Ecclesiastical doubts Controuersies of Religion The Conclusion CHAP. XII IT is recorded of a certaine Heathen Poet who endeauouring to discounsell his Prince and Mecaenas from waging of warre to the which he had bene ouermuch inclined composed a Tragedy representing therin all those aggreuances and terrours commonly attending vpon warrs as sacking of townes depopulation of countries slaughter of souldiers murthering of the innocent and other such lamentable effects But insteed of his Catastrophe or last Act therof he caused the Chorus without any speach at all to bring forth in a vessell certaine dead bones of his Princes predecessours with a paper therin bearing this or the like inscription 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is Behould heere mighty Prince the bonesof such thy auncestours which were slaine and dyed in the warres Which deadliuely spectacle being set in the sight of his Lord spake no doubt more feelingly and persuadingly as forcing or inuading his Vnderstanding by the irresistable assault of the Eye then the deliuerance of words or any other external representation could import 2. The like in the closure of this treatise I thinke good to obserue for hauing laboured to withdraw our Sectaries from erecting the Scripture as sole Iudge of Cōtrouersies in the patronizing wherof they warr fight against Gods sacred word against the practise of the church in her first purity against the vniforme iudgment of the auncient Fathers and finally against Reason it self And hauing refuted this their Doctrine first by discouering the difficulty of the Scriptures in regard wherof euery priuate spirit though of such as are predestinated and elected cannot assure himself indubiously of their true sense meaning Secōdly by laying down the incōpetency insufficiency of the Scriptures in this poynt proceeding both from the Protestants disagrements which is Scripture from the corruptions of all Originalls and Translations therof now extant at least by the iudgment of our new Ghospellers and lastly by shewing that supposing the Scripture to be this iudge yet it maketh in behalfe of vs Catholiks and not for our Aduersaries if we insist either in the perspicuity of the letter therof or in the iudgment of the Fathers and Protestants passed theron The proofe of which passages necessarily forcing that the Scripture cannot be this determining Iudge Which being accomplished it now remaineth by allusion to the former Poet that in place of an exact ceremonious Conclusion I only present to the view of the Protestants the yet extant and as it were the vn-entombed sentences Iudgments of their own ancestours I meane of Luther Caluin Zuinglius and their followers wherin with great bitternes of speach they do anathematize and damne one another for their different opinions rysing out of their supposed reuealing spirit out of their priuate interpreting the Scriptures as ech one doth truly charge another though they all indifferently maintained with the like feruour this Doctrine promising infallibly to thēselues in particular the certainty of this spirit and iustifying