Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
doctrine_n	church_n	faith_n	infallible_a	4,769	5	9.6004	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A03880	A treatise of the vnvvritten Word of God, commonly called traditions. Written in Latin, by the R. Father Iames Gordon Huntley of Scotland, Doctour of Diuinity, of the Society of Iesus. And translated into English by I. L. of the same Society. The second part of the first controuersy; Controversiarum epitomes. English. Selections	Gordon, James, 1541-1620.; Wright, William, 1563-1639.	1614 (1614)	STC 13996.A; ESTC S115739	25,730	61

A TREATISE OF THE VNVVRITTEN WORD OF GOD commonly called TRADITIONS Written in Latin by the R. Father Iames Gordon Huntley of Scotland Doctour of Diuinity of the Society of Iesus And translated into English by I. L. of the same Society The second Part of the first Controuersy Permissu Superiorum M. DC XIV THE FIRST CHAPTER Of the true state of the Question HAVING already in the precedent Treatise spoken of the written Word of God and of all other things therunto belonging now it remayneth we speake a litle of the vnwritten word cōmonly called Traditiōs But to the end that the state of this controuersy may more easily be vnderstood I will heere set downe foure things diligently to be considered in this matter we treate of The first is that by the vnwritten Word we only vnderstand that which is not written in the old or new Testament for of the vnwritten word of God in this sense is our whole Controuersy in this place Wherefore that obiection of our Aduersaries is both friuolous and nothing worth to wit that the word of God which we call the vnwriten word may be found extant eyther amonge the holy Fathers or in the books of the Councells or other Canons of the Church But this nothing belongeth vnto this purpose for it is sufficient for vs that this word of God is not written in any booke eyther of the old or new Testament 2. The second is that a thing may be cōteined in the holy Scripture 2. wayes The one way is implicite that is to say in some generall principle from whence this other may be certaynly deduced and in this sense we acknowledge that the whole word of God is conteined in holy writ and not only in Scripture but also in the Apostles Creed yea euen in that one article I belieue the Catholike Church so that it be diligently examined and well vnderstood as S. Augustine very well noteth For so sayth Christ the whole Law and Prophets doe depend vpon two precepts of charity as in the same place S. Augustine noteth For seing that the holy Scripture teacheth that we are bound to belieue the Church in all things that it can neyther deceiue vs nor be deceiued as we will euidently proue in the next Controuersy in the 〈◊〉 Chapter it consequently also teacheth the whole and entire word of God seing that all that which is not expressed in the holy Scripture is conteined expresly in the doctrine of the Church the which the Scripture commendeth vnto vs as infallible as S. Augustine very well sayth and declareth in many places For euen as God the Father comprehended in these few words This is my wellbeloued Sonne heare him the whole word of God so Christ proposed vnto vs the whole word of God when he commaunded vs to heare the Church 3. And in this sense do the holy Fathers oftentymes say that all the points of fayth are conteined in the holy Scriptures to wit in that generall principle in the which they admonish vs to belieue the Church but many of the holy Fathers sayings are falsifyed corrupted by Martinꝰ Kēnitius and some Caluinists as may be seene in Iudocus Ruesten in his first tome defending the Councell of Trent against Kemnitius 4. Secondly a thing may be conteined in expresse words in the holy Scriptures as that Christ is borne suffered and risen againe c. And in this sense we deny that the whole word of God is conteined in the Scriptures That obiection of our Aduersaries by this may easily be answered when they say that we affirme that Traditions are the vnwriten word of God and yet we goe about to proue thē by Scriptures For we do not proue euery particuler Tradition by expresse words of Scripture but we only deduce and gather them out of it and conuince in generall that there are Traditions 5. The third thing which is to be considered is that our Aduersaries being conuinced by truth doe acknowledge that many things were deliuered vnto vs by the Apostles besids those which are written But say they those were only externall rites and ceremonies seruing only for the ornament or discipline of the Church but nothing concerning doctrine of fayth was deliuered by the Apostles which they haue not set downe in writing So Caluin and some others which follow his opinion Wherfore it remayneth for vs to proue that not only external ceremonies but also those which belong vnto the doctrine of fayth were deliuered vnto vs by the Apostles and that they were neuer expressely set downe in writing 6. The fourth thing is that seing our Aduersaries cannot deny that which was obiected vnto them by Catholikes to wit that the Scripture in many places maketh expresse mentiō of the word of God preached deliuered and diuulged ouer the whole world as we haue already declared euen out of the holy Scriptures they are wont to answere that long since in the Apostles tyme this word of God was deliuered preached and not written but the Apostles afterwards set downe in writing all the preached word of God or at the least as much therof as was necessary vnto saluation The which solutiō albeit it be very weake and friuolous seing that it relyeth vpō no sure ground yet notwithstanding that it may more fully be confuted we will declare hereafter that many of the chiefest points of faith were not expressely set downe in writing by the Apostles And thus much of the state of this Question CHAP. II. Out of the first and chiefest principles of faith it is clearly conuinced that there are Traditions THE first argument wherby we proue Traditions is taken out of some of the chiefest principles of faith For there are three chiefe and most necessary points of faith yea the thiefe grounds of our whole faith which are not to he found expressely in Scriptures 2. The first that there must needes be some Catalogue or Canon of the sacred Bookes aswell of the old as of the new Testament the which all Christians with an assured faith should imbrace as a most certaine and an vndoubted truth and this is a very necessary point of faith yea of it dependeth the authority of all the bookes of holy Scripture because by this Canon the sacred and true books of Scriptures are discerned and made knowne from all those which be Apochriphall especially because aswell in times past as in these our daies there hath byn so many and so great Controuersyes about the Canonicall and Apochriphall bookes of Scripture and such a Canon was altogeather necessary aswell in the auncient Church before Christ as in our present Church after Christes tyme the which also our Aduersaries themselues haue learned by experience For they haue also placed their new Canon of the bookes of holy Scripture in their Confession made at Rochell and in the later end of some of their Bibles and yet neyther in the tyme of the old Testament nor in the tyme of the

Diuell himself against Christ vsed this reason It is written God hath giuen his Angells charge of thee therfore cast thy selfe downe headlong Lastly all the arguments indeed which our Aduersaries at this tyme alleadge against vs out of Scriptures and all the errours which they haue inuēted do take their beginning and strength from their new illations and reasons and not out of the bare and playne words of Scripture as will manifestly appeare in euery one of the Controuersies 10. The reason also is manifest why these their collections and reasons are vncertaine and doubtfull For in nothing can one more easily or more often erre then in these illations The which may proceed of many causes eyther because the illation it selfe is bad and Sophisticall or because the place of Scripture from whence it is gathered is falsified by some false exposition therof or because the proposition which is assumed and adioyned to the wordes of Scripture is false and ambiguous or because one or more wordes in that collection are vsed doubtfully that is to say in one sense in the premises and in another in the conclusion or lastly because there hapneth some errour to be in the collection which maketh it weake Sophisticall and erroneous 11. Besides that there are so many and so contrary illations of diuers men that the authority of the Church is altogeather necessary in matters of faith that there may arise a certaine and an vndoubted faith of these matters of which sort Traditions are that is to say the doctrine of the whole Church 12. But when one belieueth such an illation with a diuine or Catholike faith he must needes know two thinges the one is that the expresse place of Scripture from whence this conclusion is deduced must certainly be well vnderstood by him which disputeth the other is that he who maketh such a deduction and collection can neyther deceiue others not be deceyued himselfe But none can know eyther of these without the Traditions of the Church seeing that otherwise there is none which may not be deceiued sometymes All collections therefore which produce or breed fayth in vs do most clearly conuince and shew the authority and necessity of Traditions CHAP. VII Wherein it is proued that there are Traditions by the absurdities which otherwise would follow THE fift argument wherby we proue that many things are to be belieued which are not expressed in holy Scriptures is taken out of the absurdities which do ensue of the contrary doctrine For hauing once admitted that nothing is to be belieued which is not expressed in Scripture all old heresies are renewed and a great vncertaynty and confusion of all things is brought into the Church of God yea euen the way to Atheisme is layd open because hauing once reiected despised the Tradition of the Church all the poynts of fayth from the Apostles tyme till now explicated and proued by the auncient Fathers against heretiks all those things also which were decreed and determined by all the generall Councells in times past against the said heretiks leese their chiefest strength and authority the which notwithstanding our Aduersaries do acknowledge themselues to receiue and belieue 2. Neyther do we know by an assured Catholike fayth whether there were euer any Fathers or Councells but by the Traditions of the Church But neyther do we know any other way but by fayth whether since the Apostles tyme till now there were any Catholikes or not because of those things which were done since the tyme and death of the Apostles there is nothing extant in holy Scripture seeing that all the bookes therof were written before the death of the Apostles But such things as haue byn donne since till now cannot otherwyse be knowne but by the Tradition of the Church 3. Neyther is it sufficient to say that we know these things by the Ecclesiasticall histories For that fayth which proceedeth of histories without the authority or Traditions of the Catholike Church is but an humaine fayth which oftentymes deceaueth others and may be deceiued it selfe and therfore these kind of histories cannot produce a diuine fayth in vs this experience it selfe doth clearly teach vs. For our Aduersaries do somtymes doubt whether S. Peter was euer at Rome or no because forsooth this is not to be found expresly in holy Scriptures wheras notwithstanding it is most assuredly proued and testified in many bookes both of the auncient Historiographers and holy Fathers Why may they not as lawfully call other matters in question which are notwithstanding expressely set downe in other auncient writers Our Aduersaries therfore do make all things very doubtfull and vncertayne whyles they will only belieue and admit the Scripture but now let vs answere their arguments CHAP. VIII Wherein the arguments of our Aduersaries taken out of the old Testament are confuted THE first argument wherby our Aduersaries oppugne Traditions and which they vse very often the which also as inuincible they haue added to the confession of their fayth they take out of those words of Deuteronomy Thou shalt not add any thing to the word which I speake vnto you nor shall you take any thing from it And againe that which I commaund thee do that only neyther add or diminish any thing from it By these places of Scriptures our Aduersaries do inferre that nothing is to be receiued as a poynt of fayth which is not expressely set downe in Scriptures 2. But this argument is erroneous and the weaknes thereof is very great for many causes First because in those words there is no mention made of the Scripture nor of the written word of God but only of the word preached and deliuered viua voce Thou shalt not add sayth the Scripture to the word that I speake vnto you he doth not say that I write vnto you Againe Do only sayth he that which I commaund thee he doth not say that which I write vnto thee 3. Moreouer in these words the holy Scripture doth not only speake of matters of sayth to be belieued but also of ceremonies and customes to be done and obserued but our Aduersaries themselues confesse that these customes may be added by the authority of the Church yea they haue ordeined themselues very many the which they chang euen yet when they please Caluin also acknowledgeth that many vnwritten customes were deliuered vnto vs by the Apostles 4. That also according to the phrase of Scripture is said to be added to the word of God which is contrary opposite vnit For Iosue did not transgresse this commaundement of Deuteronomy when he added his booke to the bookes of Moyses Nor did others transgresse it who added the bookes of the Iudges Ruth and of the Kinges which were not written by Moyses which are also to be belieued as contayning pointes of faith But in these bookes there is nothing contrary to that which Moyses wrote And the Hebrew text agreeth very well to this answere for in both

no where written in holy Scripture and so whyles they goe about to perswade vs that all points of fayth are writtē they coyne inuent a new point which is no where extant in Scripture that is to say that all such things as S. Paul viua voce taught the Galathians are written But we following herein S. Augustine do gather much better by these words and infer thus against them If there must be nothing belieued but that which S. Paul preached to the Galathians and that none knoweth certainly what are those things which he preached but by the Traditions and doctrine of the Church it followeth manifestly that besids the Scripture we must also belieue the Traditions and doctrine of the Church seing that without them we cannot certainly and without errour know what were those things which the Apostle taught the Galathians 2. Secondly our Aduersaries do erre in that they doe not rightly expound that particle in the wordes of S. Paul praeter besides but rather contrary to the Apostles meaning For the Latine word praeter as also the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Hebrew Ghal haue two significations In the former it signifyeth all that which is not the selfe same thing whereof we doe speake in the later sense it signifieth that only which is contrary to that we speake of In which sense praeter signifieth the same that contra doth to wit against the former sense is manifest inough the later is proued by these places of Scripture Act. 18. v. 13. where all do translate these Greeke words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be against the Law so hath not only the vulgar edition but also Caluin and Beza and all the French Bibles of Geneua Likewise in the first to the Romans the 26. vers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth against Nature so hath the vu●…gar edition and all the french Bibles of Genena yea Cicero as witnesseth Henricus Stephanus doth thus translate this phrase out of Greeke Againe in the 4. to the Romanes the 18. verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth against as the vulgar edition and Beza hath in all editions Moreouer in the 11. to the Romans the 24. vers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth against as the vulgar edition and all the Bibles of Geneua haue finally in the last to the Romans the 17. vers aswell the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Latin word praeter in our interpretor signifieth the same thing that contra doth as manifestly appeareth by the precedent wordes for dissensions and scandals are contrary or against the doctrine of Christ and not only besides his doctrine Wherfore Caluin in his Commentaries set forth in the yeare 1557. vpon the Epistle to the Romanes and Sebasti●…n Castalio and all the French Bibles of Geneua haue cōtrary or against the doctrine and albeit Beza translateth it besids the doctrine yet in his last edition set forth in the yeare 159●… he translateth it contrary to the doctrine and in his Annotations he warneth that it is rather so to be translated It is not therfore strange or absurd that the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Latyne praeter should signify the same that contra doth 3. But now that this word may not only be thus vsed but that also it must necessarily be so vnderstood and taken in this place we haue shewed by the absurdities which would otherwise follow The first is that S. Paul would haue sayd Anathema to S. Iohn Euangelist who many yeares after the preaching of S. Paul to the Galathians yea after his death wrote his Apocalyps wherein there are many new reuelations which S. Paul had not preached to the Galathiās because they were not thē reuealed by God 4. The second absurdity that S. Paul had pronoūced an Anathema vpon all those who in his tyme by a propheticall spirit did dayly prophesy new things For in the Apostles tyme there were many such as appeareth by the first epistle to the Corinthians And S. Paul could not preach to the Galathians which God had not yet reuealed 5. The third absurdity the Apostle for the same reason had pronounced Anathema against S. Luke who in the Actes of the Apostles relateth many thinges which happened long after S. Paul left Galatia 6. The fourth absurdity the Apostle for the same cause also had condemned himselfe with the said Anathema For he wrote many Epistles after he had left Galatia wherein he relateth many thinges which hapned afterward vnto him eyther at Rome or in other places 7. Lastly it is an absurd thing to think either God after those wordes of S. Paul to the Galathians could reueale to men nothing more by an Angell sent from heauen or that the said Angell who by the commaundement of God should reueale any new thing but not contrary to faith should incurre that Anathema by S. Paul seing that this were to wrest the Anathema vpon God himselfe who commaunded the Angell to do so This place therfore cannot be vnderstood of diuers and distinct thinges from those which S. Paul taught the Galathians but only of contrary and opposite thinges vnto them But according to this sense of the word praeter all the foresayd Absurdities doe cease For neyther S. Iohn in his Apocalyps nor S. Luke in the Actes of the Apostles nor any other which did prophecy nor S. Paul himself euer wrote or taught any thing contrary to that which S. Paul taught the Galathians But euen God himself cannot reueale the contrary by an Angell because according to the Apostle It is impossible for God to lye 8. Neyther is it sufficient for me to say that those thinges which were afterward reuealed and written were not necessary pointes of faith to saluation For S. Paul did not say if any shall Euangelize vnto you any point necessary to saluation but absolutely if any shall Euangelize any thing contrary to that which you haue recevued Moreouer all these thinges which were afterward set downe in holy Scripture were true pointes of faith the which euery Christiā is necessarily boūd to belieue if not expressely yet at the least virtually and generally euery one is boūd to belieue with an assured faith all those things which are in holy Writ to be most certaine and true 9. Finally euen our Aduersaries confession doth conuince this to be most true for now they acknowledge that all those thinges which by a necessary consequēce are deduced out of the Scriptures do belong vnto the word of God and are points of fayth and therfore they may be lawfully preached vnto the people as we haue said before But al these are distinct things from those which are expresly written in holy Scriptures For the antecedent wherby some other thing may be inferred is distinct from that which is inferred For it were a ridiculous illation if one and the same thing should be inferred from it selfe But that which is inferred in a good collection

holy Scripture to wit the true sense of the wordes CHAP. XI Wherein is declared how we may know the Apostolicall Traditions AMONG the other arguments of our Aduersaries this is one that we cannot know certainly which are the Traditions of the Apostles seing that many Heretikes in times past pretented also that their heresyes were agreing to Apostolicall Traditions Moreouer they obiect that Traditions may easily be corrupted and changed and for this cause Scripture was ordayned that the doctrine deliuered by word of mouth might continue the longer without any falsification or corruption But we answere to this their reason that the auncient Heretikes also by supposed and false Scriptures which they attributed falsely to the Apostles did confirme and proue their heresies Many thinges saith S. Augustine were alleadged by heretikes as though they were the sayings of the Prophets and Apostles But yet for all that they were not iudged to be the most certaine and Canonicall Scriptures 2. But the Traditions of the Apostles may so certainly and easily be known from supposed and false Traditions as the Canonical Scriptures may be knowne from the Apocriphall for they are both knowne by the same meanes and authority that is to say by the authority doctrine and testimony of the Catholike Church which neyther can deceiue any nor be deceyued her selfe 3. And albeit speaking of humane matters the Scripture is more certaine thē Tradition alone yet it hapneth otherwise in matters concerning God because in these there is the authority of God and the continuall assistance of the holy Ghost hath place which doth not suffer the Church to erre and hence it is that the Tradition only of the Church which is not so much written in paper as is printed in the hartes of Christians is a most certayne and faithfull keeper of all the pointes of our diuine ●…aith 4. Moreouer if euen Christ himself had with his owne hand writtē in brasse all the pointes of our faith they should notwithstanding not haue had so great certainty as now Ecclesiasticall Traditions haue vnlesse the same keeper of the diuine doctrine had byn also present For that which is imprinted in brasse may be rased and blotted out and the brasse it selfe may be consumed by fyre But those thinges which are imprinted in the hartes of Christians by the holy Ghost can neuer perish or be any way changed 5. And what we haue said of knowing the Apostolicall Traditions is to be vnderstood whether the Church assembled in a generall Councel declared it so or it became knowne and manifest by the continuall and generall custome of the whole Church Also whether the question be of Tradition belonging to faith or only belonging to rites and Ceremon●…es For of the Tradition belonging to faith that is to say of not baptizing againe those which are baptized once before by heretikes are these wordes of St. Augustine Albeit indeed of this thing saith he there can no example be alleadged out of Canonicall Scriptures yet notwithstanding we hold the truth of the same holy Scriptures in this matter when we do that which generally the whole Catholike Church holdeth the which euen the authority of the Scriptures themselues commend vnto vs so as because the holy Scripture cannot erre whosoeuer feareth to be deceaued by the difficultie or obscurity of this question let him go to the same Church for counsell the which the holy Scripture very clearely sheweth and demonstrateth vnto vs. Hitherto S. Augustine And disputing in another place against the Donatists concerning the baptisme of Infants That saith he which the whole Catholike Church holdeth nor was ordayned by generall Councells but yet alwaies kept and obserued by all is most truly to be belieued to haue byn deliuered vnto vs by Apostolicall authority 6. But of the Ecclesiasticall rites and Ceremonies the same S. Augustine speaketh in this manner Is the Catholike Church through the whole world hold and practise any thing it is a signe of great madnesse to dispute whether it is to be done so or noe By which wordes of S. Augustine it may easily be vnderstood what was the opinion and vniforme doctrine of the whole auncient Church concerning this point For our Aduersaries themselues do say that S. Augustine was a most faithfull witnesse of antiquity vnto whome I referre the Readers if they desire to know certainly any more of the sense of Antiquity The end of the second Part of the first Controuersy FINIS S. Aug. in the 140. quest vpon Exodus Tom 4. Matt. 22. v. 40. S. August Tom. 7. contra Crescon Grammat c. 33. de vnie Eccles c. 22. in fine Matt. 17. v. 5. Matt. 18. v. 17. Luc. 10. v. 16. Caluin cōt 4. sess Con. Tridēt in suo ●…ntid Be●…a de notis Eccles. tom 3. Tract Theol. p. 137. edit An. 158●… Confess Rupellana Act. 3. Supra c. 5. Supra c. 9. 10. 12. 13 Suprae 3. S. Basil. l. de Spiritū sanct c. 27. Brent contra Petrū à Soto in suis prol●…gomenis Kemnitius contra 4. sess Concil Trid. cùm agit de 2. genere Tradi●… This funeral Orat of Iohn Sommer was printed at Claudiopoli an Domini 1571. He meaneth Seruetus who was burnt at Geneua an 1553. as Beza writ●…th in vi●…a Caluini Seruetus l. 1. de erroribus Trinitatis fol. 32. pag. 1. Edit an 1531. L. Item apud §. Ai●… Praetor f●… de iniurijs Ioan. 3. v. 1. Calu. in c. ●… Ioan. v. 5. Genes 17. v. 10. S. Aug. Tom. ●… de haeres cap. 84. S. Hieron cōtra Heluidium Author de Eccles. dogmatib cap. 69. S. Ambr. in Epist. 7. ad Siriciū Papam Epiphan haeres 78. ●…nnius cōtra Bellar. Controu 1. lib. 4. cap. 9. not●… 5. Concil Trident. sess 24. c. 2. Beza Epist. 1. ad Andream Duditium Beza in lib. de Poligamia extat in initio voluminis ●… suarum Tract Theol. §. ●… cap. praeced Beza Epist. ●… ad Tom. Tilium Fratrem Symmistam suam Beza ●…adē Epist. 2. Concil Trid. sess 7. can 2. de baptism Luc. 22. v. 18. Calu. ibid. insua harmonia Beza Epist. 2. citata Exod. 34. v. 1. Exod. 20. v. 8 9 10 11. Vide Prateolum V. Sabatharij Coccius Tom. 1. l. ●… Antic vltimo Bellarm. Tom. 1. l. 41. de verbo Dei c. 7. 2. ad Thes. c. 1. v. 14. S. Chrisost. Hom. 4. in 2. ad Thessal Caluin l. 4. Instit c. 14. sect vlt. S. August Tom. 7. de baptismo contra Donatist l. 2. cap. 7. Beza de notis Eccl. pag. 137. volum 2. Theol. Tract edit an●… 1581. Matt. 17. v. 5. Luc. 10. v. 16. Ioan. 14. v. ●… 28. Exod. 20. v. 3. Matth. 4. v. 6. Rupellana confessio Artic. 5. Deut. 4. v. 2. Deut. 12. v. vltimo Caluin cōtra 4. sess Concil ●…rident ●… ad Cor. 4. v. 6. Caluin in illa verba 1. ad Corin. 4. v. 6. Deuteron 27. v. vlt. Ad Galat. 3. v. 10. 13. Prouerb 30. v. 5. ●… Supra c. 2. Hier. 23. v. 16. 21. Confess Rupell Art 3. Gal. 1. v. 8. 9. S. August Tom. 7. de vnit Eccles c. 24. S. Aug. Tom. 9. Tract 96. in loan Tom. 7. de v●…itat Eccles. c. 21. in fine Calu super acta A post ann 1560. Beza edit an 1560. 1565. 1598. Henric. Steph. in thesauro linguae Graecae Tom. 〈◊〉 in dictione 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈…〉 1. ad Cor. 14. v. 2. 4. 26. 30. Ad Hebr. 16. v. 18. Suprac 3●… S. August Tom. 7 ōtra literas Petil Donatist lib 3 cap. 6. S August Tom 9. Tract 98. in Euang. Ioan. sub finem Ad Gal. 1. v. 9. 1. ad Thess. 3. v. 10. Ioan. 1●… v. ●… Apoc. vlt v. 18. confess Rupell Artic 5. S. Hier. de script Eccles in Ioā Apost Supra c. 25. Supra c. 25. Ad Tim. 3. v. penul●… Iunius cōtra Bell. controu 1. lib. 4. c. 10. nota 44. S. Hier. de Script Eccles in Ioan Apost 2. ad Tim. ●… v. penult Supra c. 3. Supra c. 4 8 Aug. de Ciuit. Dei l. c. 〈◊〉 sub finem 2. ad Cor. 3. V. 3. 4. S. Aug. Tom. 7. contra Crescon Grammat l. 1. cap. penult S. Aug. Tom. 7. de baptismo contra Donatist l. 4. cap. 24. S. Aug. Tom. 2. Epist 118. ad Ianuar. c. 5. Calu. l. 4. Instit. c. 4. sect vltima sub finem l. 3. c. 3. sect 10. in medio