was not whashed by baptisme See artic 7. Scripture We were by nature the children of wrathe as also the rest As by the offence of one vnto all men to condemnation Protestants Originall sinne is not imputed to them the children of the faithfull are borne Saintes See art 9. Scripture In what then were ye baptized who saied in Ihons Some baptized in Saint Ihons Baptisme Not in that baptisme Some knew not of the Holie Ghost They knew of him baptisme Protestants It is demonstrated that they were neuer baptized in Ihons outward baptisme See more art 11. Scripture But they saied to him Nay nether haue we heard whither there be a Holie Ghost Protestants How could it be that Iewes had heard nothing of the Holie Ghost Se more art 12. CHAPTER XI OF THE EVCHARIST SCripture This is my bodie which is giuen for you This is my The Eucharist is the bodie of Christ It is not his bodie bloud of the new testament that shal be shed for manie Protestants The Sacramentall bread is called Christs bodie although indeed it be not Christs bodie The Eucharist is not truely the bodie of Christ Some do vrge that the lords bread is the verie bodie of Christ but we say the contrarie See more art 1. Scripture Vnles ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and Christs flesh to be eaten drinke his blood ye shall not haue life in you Protestants Christ did not command his bodie to be eaten Not to be eaten but symbolicall bread VVe eate and drinke nothing but bread and wine Christs corporall flesh can be no way eaten See more art 2. His flesh truly meate Scripture My flesh is truely meate Protestants It is farre from the bodie of the lord to be truly Not truly meate eaten See art 2. cit Scripture Drinke ye all of this For this is the blood of the Blood of the new testameÌ„to be drunk Not to be drunk The Chalice is the new testament There is sacrifice new testament Protestants Christ did not giue the blood of the new testament to drink See art 3. Scripture This chalice is the new testament in my blood Protestants That Cuppe was not the new testament This Cuppe was not the new testament it self See more art 4. Scripture In euerie place there is sacrificing and there is offered to my name a cleane oblation Protestants There is no more Sacrifice remayning in the There is none Church See more art 11. Scripture This is the chalice the new testament in my blood The Chalice shed for vs. which chalice as is euident by the Greek text shal be shed for you ProtestaÌ„ts The chalice was not shedde for vs. See more art 6. Not shedde for vs. We haue an altar We haue none Scripture We haue an altar whereof they haue no power to eate who serue the tabernacle Protestants Paule maketh no mention of an altar In the Apostolicall writings there is no mention of an altar Altars haue no place in the time of the Ghospell See more art 24. Scripture And the whole mulâ—â—tude of the children of Israel The Paschall lambe sacrificed Not sacrificed shall sacrifice him the paschall lambe at euen Protestants The holie Bible no where teacheth that the paschall lambe was immolated and sacrificed The paschall lambe was no sacrifice See more art 13. OF THE OTHER SACRAMENTS CHAPTER XII SCripture Whose sinnes you shall forgiue they are forgiuen Men can forgiue sinnes They can not Protestants Men do not forgiue sinnes who attributeth remission of sinnes to a creature robbeth God of his glorie It is proper to God alone to remit sinnes and so proper as he communicateth this glorie to none See more art 1. Scripture Confesse your sinnes one to an other Sinnes to be confessed to men Not to be coÌ„fessed to theÌ„ Grace by imposition of hands Not by it Protestants God requireth not this confession to manne Confession of sinnes is forbidden Nether Christ nor his Apostles would command it See art 2. Scripture Resuscitate the grace of God which is in thee by the imposition of my hands Protestants Grace was not giuen by the externall signe of imposition of hands Imposition of hands of it self hath no efficacie but the effect dependeth of God alone See more art 3. Scripture Euerie one that dismisseth his wife and marrieth an To marie after diuerce is aduantrie Not aduantrie Men dying are to be auoiled other committeth aduoutrie Protestants Who dismisseth his wife for whoredome and marrieth an other doth not commit aduoutrie See more art 6. Scripture Is anie man sick among you let him bring in the preists of the Church and let them pray ouer him anoiling him with oile Protestants The Preists were commanded that they should Not to be not anoile those that died See more art 7. CHAPTER XIII OF FAITHE SCripture This is the worke of God that you beleiue in him Faith is a worke whom he hath sent Protestants Faith is no worke It is false that faith is a Not to worke worke See more art 1. Scripture And now there remaine Faith Hope and Charitie Faith distinct from Hope these three c. Protestants Who wnderstand not that Faith Hope and Not distinct Charitie are the selfe same thinge wil be forced to let passe manie knotâ—es in Scripture vnloosed See more art 7. Scripture And now there remaine Faith Hope and Charitie Faith inferior to Charitie Not inferior these three but the greater of these is Charitie Protestants Faith is greater then Charitie Faith is better more worthie more noble then Charitie See more art 7. Scripture Of the Princes also manie beleiued in him but for Faith without confessioÌ„ the Pharises did not confesse Protestants True faith can no more be separated from confession Not without confession Faith of Christs Godhead helpeth of mouth then fire from heate See more art 9. Scripture These are written that you may beleeue that Iesus is Christ the Sonne of God and that beleiuing you may haue life in his name Protestants To beleiue that Christ is one person which is Helpeth not God and man would helpe none See more art 3. Scripture Of the Princes also manie beleiued in him but Faith without charitie for the Pharises did not confesse For they loued the glorie of man more then the glorie of God Protestants It is impossible to beleiue where charitie wanteth Not without charitie True faith can no more be without workes then fire without heate See more art 8. Scripture Faith without workes is dead Faith some times dead Neuer dead Protestants Who beleiue that true faith can be dead beleiue against the Confession of our Church True faith can neuer be saied to be dead See more art 10. Scripture VVithout faith it is impossible to please God Faith necessarie to saluation Not necessarie Faith without workes saueth not It saueth Beliefe doth iustifie Protestants
1. Bernen f. 532. As if the Apostle should say this is the meaning of those things which we haue tould It is not flesh which is set afore vs albeit now I haue vouchsafed it that name nor likewise blood but bread and drinke OEcalampadius in Hospin lib. cit f. 41. Not without follie Not the selfe same bodie would we binde men to confesse that this selfe same bread is the bodie of Christ. And f. 118. Some do vrge that the Lords bread is the very bodie of Christ But we say the contrarie Not his verie bodie Bucer in Hospin l. cit fol. 191. Nether is bread the very bodie of Christ but a Symboll of it And 192. All acknowledge that bread and wine are symbols and not the very things themselues of this great misterie Peter Martyr cont Gardiner col 147. The Sacrament of Not lawfull to say This is c. the Eucharist being shewne it is not lawfull for them to say of it all This is my bodie Col. 359. Manifest it is that the Eucharisticall bread is not properly the bodie of Christ And in Dialog col 137. This is my bodie is thus to be expoūded This to wit that which was shewed signifieth my bodie Caluin in Math. 3. ver 16. The bread of the holie Supper is Not Christs bodie called the bodie of Christ not that it is it but because it testifieth to vs that it is truely giuen to vs for meate Beza in Catechismo sect 9. This bread and this wine are Not our spirituall food they not our spirituall food No but they signifie to vs that from which life euerlasting proceedeth And lib. quaest quaest 207. pag. 356. So if you properly vnderstand this saying it wil be no lesse false that bread is the bodie of Christ then that a gourd As false that it is his bodie as that a gourd is a man Not Christs true bodie is a man Daneus Cont. de Euchar. c. 10. That Sacramentall bread is not the true and reall bodie of Christ The bread which Christ reached to the Apostles was not the true bodie of Christ And c. 1. Whēce it followeth that the signes remaine signes and seales and neuer become the thing it selfe which is signified to wit the true flesh and true blood of Christ Volanus l. 1. cont Scargam p. 793. Surely bread is not that Not the naturall bodie true and naturall bodie of Christ albeit it be called but sacramētally his bodie Musculus in locis tit de Signis The bread of the lords Not the verie bodie Supper is not the verie bodie of Christ CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that the Eucharist or that which our Sauiour after his last supper gaue with his hands to his Apostles to eate and drinke was his bodie blood and to put vs out of doubt what bodie and blood he added His bodie giuen for vs deliuered for vs His blood of the new testament and shed for remission of sinnes And otherwhere that the bread which he would giue vs was his flesh which he would giue for the life of the world The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the bread the holie bread the bread of the Sacrament the Sacramētall bread the lords bread the bread of the supper the bread of the holie supper the bread of the lords supper the bread which Christ reached to his Apostles the Symbols the Signes the Eucharist the sacrament of the Eucharist the Eucharisticall bread is not the bodie of Christ not his very bodie not his bodie it selfe not his true bodie not his substantiall bodie not flesh not Christs true flesh an other thing and much different from Christs flesh not the thing it selfe of this misterie not our spirituall food that Christs words can no way be vnderstood of Christs substantiall flesh that his meaning is not This my naturall bodie That the Eucharist being shewed we may not say if it This is my bodie that though it be called Christs bodie yet it is not his bodie Which are so directly contrarie to the Scripture as many of these men sometimes confesse it as shal be seene cap 30. of the 2. booke But because they do not onely contradict the Scripture in denying the Eucharist to be the bodie of Christ which the Scripture so often and clearly affirmeth but diuers other waies also I will likewise set them downe Secondly therefore they contradict the Scripture in saying that the Eucharist is nothing but a simple ceremonie onely bread onely a type or figure onely a seale or signe of the bodie and blood of Christ which the Scripture so oftentimes saieth is his true bodie and blood Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 5. c. 19. Sacraments are onely seales of Onely aseale those goods which are proposed to vs in the word Cartwright in disput Oxonien apud Martyrem p. 134. Onely a signe The Eucharist is onely a signe Spalatensis l. 5. de Rep. c. 6. n. 113. The bread is not the bodie of Christ indeed but onely a signe of it Perkins de Caena to 1. col 858. The bread is called the bodie Onely a signe and seale whereas it is onely a signe and seale of the bodie Melancthon as Luther reporteth in Hospin part 2. Histor A simple ceremonie fol. 194. Accounted the Eucharist no better then a simple ceremonie Confessio Czinge in Syntagmate pag. 196. The Eucharisticall Hath onely the name signes haue not the substance of the things signified but onely their names Helueti in Hospin libr. cit fol. 153. The bread is not the Onely a signe verie bodie of Christ but onely a signe and Sacrament of it Iuel art 10. sect 1. p. 313. The bread in it selfe is very naturall Very naturall bread bread art 21. sect 1. p. 443. The misticall bread is not Christ himselfe but onely a sacrament of Christ Zuinglius de Caena to 2. f. 286. The bread is onely a figure Onely a figure wherewith is signified that bodie which we ought to remember f. 291. This drinke was nothing else indeed but wine 293. Nothing Nothing els but a signe Nothing but bread and wine else but a signe and figure And. 296. The Apostles themselues neuer called this bread the bodie of Christ but onely bread And in Respons ad Lutherum fol. 431. It is nought els but bread OEcolampadius apud Zuinglium to 2. fol. 503. These particles This that we denie not to be certaine infallible tokens No hing but commō bread but such they are as teach that here is nothing els but common bread And ibid. 510. The drinke is a pure and bare creature and nought els beside Caluin de administr Caenae p. 41. Let vs account it enough Nothing but a note and signe if bread and wine be giuen vs for a note and signe In admonit vlt. ad Wesphal p. 826. What other is the bread As the Doue was the Holie
Ghost and wine of the Supper then a visible word Cont. Heshus pag. 861. The bread of the Eucharist in the same maner is called the bodie of Christ as the doue is called the holie Ghost And 4. Instit c. 17. § 14. The Supper is nothing els but a visible testificatiō of that promise which is Ioan. 6. to wit that Christ is the bread of life which came from heauen Beza in Colloq Montisbel p. 42. The disciples saw that Mere bread and wine Christ held bread and that it was mere bread and wine which he gaue with his hands Cont. Illy ric col 2. Theol. p. 149. I say No better then water of baptisme that the water of baptisme is as well the blood of the Lord as that bread is his bodie Cont. Heshus vol. 1. p. 308. The bread is no otherwise the bodie and wine no otherwise the blood then the water of baptisme is blood And in 1. Corint 5. vers 7. The No otherwise then the pascall lambe Pascall lambe is called Christ in the selfe same manner that that bread is saied to be the bodie of Christ which was giuen for vs. Daneus Cont. de Euchar. cap. 13. The Fathers will haue the Onely symbol and signe bread and wine to be onely symbols and signes of the true and essentiall bodie and blood of Christ Peter Martyr apud Coccium to 2 l. 6. art 1. The bread and Onely type and signe wine are onely types and signes of the bodie and blood of Christ And hereupon albeit as Zanchius confesseth in Resp ad Arian col 876. the Roman Church doth keepe baptisme and the Supper or as Caluin speaketh the halfe parte of the Supper is remaining in Poperie yet neuerthelesse they sometime terme our Eucharist a Crust of bread as doth Whitaker Contr. 1. q. 2. c. 16. and Perkins de Sermon Dom. col 554. Sometimes a small crust of bread as Caluin Admonit vlt. p. 800. cont Versipel p. 358. in Math. 19. v. 13. Sometimes a Crust as Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 6. c. 3. Beza in Confess c. 7. sect 11. Sometimes a gobbet of bread as Whitaker in place last cited Sometime a most profane crust as Beza li. quaest vol. 3 p. 355. Sometime a cake and crust as Peter Martyr orat 1. Tigurin Sometime a wafer of pastie as the same Martyr cont Gardiner col 422. Thus reproachfully they terme that which in their owne opinion is the lords Supper or at least the halfe parte thereof but no meruaile if they so speake so of our Eucharist who say that theirs is nothing els but bread nothing but common bread nothing but a bare creature nothing but a bare signe or figure nothing but mere bread and wine But farre otherwise saied Christ that his Eucharist was his bodie giuen for vs his blood shedde for remission of sinnes and not as Protestāts say onely a signe onely a seale onely a figure onely a tokē onely a testificatiō onely a symbol onely a type of Christs bodie which onely hath the name of Christs bodie onely a simple ceremonie and no otherwise the bodie of Christ Then the Pascal lambe was Christ the doue the Holie Ghost or the water of baptisme the blood of Christ Thirdly they contradict the Sripture in saying that the Eucharist is onely figuratiuely and in some sorte the bodie and blood of Christ which the Scripture in the places cited simply and absolutely saieth to be his bodie and blood and addeth Ihon 6. v. 55. My flesh is truely meate and my blood truely drinke Which is most clearly opposite to mere figuratiuely Spalatensis l. 5. de Repub. c. 6. n. 45. The wine in the Chalice is the blood of the lord onely ostensiuely or in shew that is figuratiuely Onely figuratiuely and typically And num 115. The Eucharist is not Christ substantially but onely significantly and figuratiuely And 118. It is but figuratiuely and typically called the bodie of Christ Perkins in Cathol ref Cont. 11. c. 2. We take the bread to By resemblance and no otherwise be the bodie of Christ sacramentally by resemblance and no otherwise And Cont. 10. cap. 4. These words must not be vnderstood properly but by a figure Rogers on the 28. Article of Protest Confess pag. 174. Abhominable be the Popish errours that substātially and really the bodie and blood of Christ is contained in the Sacrament Eucharisticall Iuel art 5. sect 10. p. 255. As Christ is herbes or milke euen so As he is herbs or milke As manna and none otherwise he is bread or flesh Art 8. sect 25. p. 303. As the bread is Christs bodie euen so was manna Christs bodie Vsher in his Answere to a Chalenge p. 58. Nothing in this Not substantially world is more plaine then when our Sauiour saied It was his blood he could not meane it to be substantially And ib. pag. 60. Not really The things which he honoured with those names cannot be really his bodie and blood but figuratiuely Whitaker l. 2. cont Du. sect 10. The bread is the true bodie Metonimycally of Christ and the wine the true blood of Christ but mistically metonymicall Sacramentally Melancthon apud Hospin lib. cit fol. 69. This is my blood is a metonimie as if you should say The ensigne or Maze is the Roman Empire Caluin cont Heshus p. 844. Bread may truely be saied to Symbolically be symbolically the true bodie of Christ Which also he hath Admonit vlt. ad Westphal pag. 836. Where also pag. 821. he saieth It appeareth that to them bread was symbolically the bodie and p. 830. In some sorte it is the bodie And 4. Instit c. In some sorte 17. § 23. The bread is figuratiuely the bodie And cont Heshus Improperly l. cit p. 847. Could he more clearly testifie that bread is improperly called the bodie of Christ in respect of likenes Beza respons ad Selneccer vol. 2. pag. 270. The names But metonymically of the bodie and blood are but metonymically giuen to the bread and wine Daneus Cont. de Euchar. c. 10. The bread is tropically called Tropically the bodie of Christ Peter Martyr l. cont Gardin col 293. We say that speach Not properly This is my bodie is not proper but metaphoricall and tropicall And in Hospin l. cit f. 259. The words This is c. cannot be taken simply and without a figure Peucer apud Hospin in Concordia discordi fol. 206. The Not simply consecratea bread and chalice are the bodie and blood of Christ Relatiuely relatiuely as figures and signes Wolfius in Schusselburg l. 1. Theol. Caluin art 22. The Significantly bread is the bodie and the wine the blood of Christ significātly no other waies then a keye deliuered is a house More of their mere figuratiue expositiōs of these words may be seene in my Latin booke l. 2. c. 20. But by that which here we haue rehearsed it clearly appeareth
and more by Bullinger in Hospin part 2. fol. 344. Where he saieth Who knoweth not that we are of their number who do not admit this word Substance nor euer would admit it THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ gaue to his Apostles his bodie to be eaten and his blood to be drunke that vnlesse we eate his flesh we shall not haue life that his flesh is truely meate The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that Christs flesh eaten profiteth nothing nothing at all that Christs true flesh cannot be eaten spiritually can be no way eaten that it is farre from Christs bodie to be truely eaten that Christs bodie is not exhibited in the Supper according to the substance thereof that those words Take eate are not spoaken of Christs bodie that Christs neuer gaue his bodie to be receaued the Euangelists neuer commanded vs to receaue and eate it that what is giuen to be eaten is Christs symbolicall bodie is but symbolicall bread is nothing but bread and wine onely a signe of Christs bodie that Christ gaue bread to the Apostles and not his bodie Which are so coÌ„trarie to the holie Scripture as themselues sometimes confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART III. WHETHER CHRIST GAVE the blood of the new testament to be drunke SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Mathew 26. v. 28. Drinke ye all of this For this is my blood The blood of the new testament to be drunâ—k of the new testament CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Mathew 26. vers 28. Christ professeth that what we drinke in the chalice is the blood of the new testament PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Zuinglius in Subsidio to 2. fol. 245. Christ did not giue the Not the blood of the new testament blood of the testament to drinke Which he repeateth againe And of the same opinion all the rest are who ether denie that Christ gaue his true blood to drinke as we haue seene in the former chapter for Christs true blood is the blood of the new testament or denie that the Eucharist is the testament as we shall heare art seq THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ gaue the blood of the new testament to be drunke The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely denie it ART IV. WHETHER THE EVCHARISticall Chalice be the testament of Christ SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. The Chalice was the new testament Luc. 22. v. 20. Christ saieth This is the chalice the new testament in my blood 1. Corinth 11. vers 25. This chalice is the new testament in my blood CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarm. l. 1. de Euchar. c. 11. As for the figure which they put in the word Testament I say there is none there and he auoucheth that the Eucharist is properly the testament of Christ PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Iuel art 10. sect 1. Nether was that cuppe in deed and really the It was not ths new testament new testament So also art 12. sect 16. Willet Cont. 13. q. 1. p. 595. The wine in the cuppe was not the new testament 596. The blood is not the testament Peter Martyr in Hospin part 2. Histor fol. 257. Nether the cuppe it selfe nor the liquor contained in it is indeed the testament Zuinglius in Subsidio to 2. fol. 245. This cuppe was not the blood of the testament nor the testament itselfe De Caena fol. 291. The blood of Christ is not the new testament and much lesse can we say that this drinke is the new testament howbeit it be called by this name And the reason why against the expresse word of God he denieth the chalice to be the testament of Christ he giueth l. de Relig. c. de Eucharist in these words If the cuppe be the testament it followeth that it is the true and sensible blood of Christ Oecolampadius apud Zuinglium to 2. fol. 499. It must needs be that this chalice or cuppe be the signe of the couenant or new testament not the new testament itselfe indeed Beza in Lucae 22. v. 20. edit An. 1565. Wine is called the couenant it selfe whereas it is onely a symbol or badge of the couenant or rather of that wherewith the couenant is made to wit of the blood of the Lord. In Colloq Montisbel pag. 38. I maruail that you call the Supper of the Lord a testament which seemes very strange to me The Supper of the Lord is not the testament itselfe but onely a parte of the testament that is the seale thereof The Cuppe cannot be the testament THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the chalice of the Eucharist is the new testament Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that nether the chalice nor the liquor therein contained is the new testament that nether the wine nor the blood of Christ is the new testament that the Cuppe cannot be the new testament but is onely a symbol or badge thereof or rather of the blood wherewith the testament was made That the Lords Supper is not the testament and that it were strange to call it so Which contradictioÌ„ of Scripture is so euident as diuers Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART V. WHETHER AT THE VERIE time of Christs celebration of the Eucharist his bodie was giuen and deliuered and his blood shedde for vs SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Luc. 22. v. 19. And taking bread he gaue thanks and brake Christs bodie was giueÌ„ and his blood shed at Supper and gaue to them saying This is my bodie which is giuen for you And S. Paul 1. Corinth 11. vers 24. in Greek hath which is broken as also S. Mathew 26. vers 28. S. Mark 14. v. 24. S. Luke c. 22. v. 20. speake of the blood or of the Chalice in the present tense Which is shedde CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Math. 26. v. 28. Those words Which shal be shedde for you are to be redde in the present tense according to all the Euangelists in the Greek text and the sense is which is now distributed for you and is by reall participatioÌ„ sprinkled and inwardely powred into euerie one of you PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Iuel art 17. sect 4. Christ gaue his bodie to be broken and his blood to be shedde not at his last supper but onely vpon his crosse and not where else Spalatensis l. 5. cap. 6. sect 229. saieth that the forecited words can be no way true of the present time Peter Martyr cont Gardiner col 354. But I pray you tell vs once what that is which remaineth and is broken If you say Not giuen or shedde at the Supper Accidents you wil be laughed at by children If you say The bodie of Christ you wil be blasphemous Col. 812. But who will say that Christ himselfe or his bodie is broken in the Supper Moulins in his Bucler part 2. pag. 91. Christ did not say that his blood was shedde in the Eucharist Pag. 87. He speaketh of a shedding which was not yet made but to
your sinnes Translate ill one to an other proue that we ought to confesse our sinnes to men the French Bibles An. 1605. 1610. translate them thus Confesse your faults one against an other as if the Apostle had bidden onely to confesse offences done against men The same insinuateth the Kings Bibles whiles for Sinnes it hath Faultes Because those words Actor 23. v. 11. And the night following Translate ill our Lord standing by him saied c. do proue that Christ was present with S. Paul in prison the French Bibles An. 1560 1562. 1568. 1605. in steed of Standing by translate He presented himselfe Tremellius hath He was seene Because those words Hebr 4. ver 14. Hauing therefore a Translate ill great high Preist that hath penetrated the heauens Caluin for Penetrated the heauenes translated He entred Beza He passed through Tromellius He ascended Because that Pronoune demonstratiue Hic This in those words of Christ This is my blood doth proue that it Translate ill is not referred to the word Cuppe or wine but to the word Blood Beza in Math. 26. v. 28. would not translate it Hic in the masculine gender but Hoc in the neuter gender For saieth he homilia 2. de ver present vol. 3. pag. 316. Surely who saieth Hic This is my blood pointeth at nothing but his owne blood The like he saieth in Cyclope pag. 268. Piscator l. 2. Thes p. 450. And yet as Illyricus saieth All both ancient and new and Caluin himselfe translate Hic This is my blood And Beza himselfe Hebr 9. ver 20. translateth the very selfe same Greek words thus Hic est sanguis This is my blood because there they proue not that the Euchariste is the bloud of Christ as they do Mathew 26. v. 28. cit Musculus also in locis tit de Caena pag. 360. affirmeth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vsed by S. Mathew and S. Mark is not well translated in the Masculin gender Hic Vnlesse we vnderstand Calix and neuerthelesse in the same place saieth that Mathew and Mark write that our Lord saied Hic This is my my blood of the new testament So that though twoe Euangelists teach that our Lord saied Hic This in the Masculine gender yet it is not well translated so Because those Greek words Luc. 22. vers 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is This is the new cuppe which the new testament in my blood that Cuppe which is shed for you do euidently shew that the word Shed is referred to the word Cuppe and consequently doe proue that it was a Cuppe of the true blood of Christ Beza vpon that place and Respons ad Illyr p. 198. and other Protestants after him saieth that ether there is a manifest Solloecophanes wherein the They call in do oâ— the words Nominatiue case is put for the Datiue or els these words are foisted into the text And yet confesseth that all our ancient Copies haue the nominatiue case or as Fulk saieth Praef. in nou testam not 49. All the Copies extant haue it in the nominatiue case And Beza herein is followed of Whitaker l. 1. cont Dur. sect 35. Daneus Contr. de Euchar. p. 544. Bucanus loco 48. Piscator in Refutat Sophismatum Hunnij p. 468. and of others Zuinglius resp ad Matthaeum Rulling tom 2. fol. 156. somewhat bolder translated these Greek words so as the word Shed cannot be referred to the word Cup to which alone S. Luke referreth it for thus he hath Hoc poculum in sanguine meo qui pro vobis funditur and Respons ad Confess Lutheri tom 2. fol. 511. saieth that it is an Enallage or Change of the Nominatiue case for the Datiue Moreouer Beza Luc. 22. vers 17. calleth in doubt those words Which is giuen for you Whereby the real presence is confirmed Because those words Math. 10. vers 2. The names of the They call in doubt twelue Apostles be these These first Simon who is called Peter proue the primacie of S. Peter Beza vpon that place saieth What if this word First be added by some who would stablish the the primacie of Peter And neuerthelesse addeth We find it so written in all Copies And so by his owne confession contrarie to the testimonie of all Copies calleth in question a word which fauoureth the Primacie of S. Peter Because the Pronoune Hoc or Hic in the words of They â—â—ll in doubt the Eucharist being taken adiectiuely helpeth to proue the Eucharist to be the bodie blood of Christ Daneus l. 1. de Euchar. c. 1. pag. 543. saieth What if I except that the proper words of Christ were onely these twoe Is my stesh I shall with one word frustrate all this proofe by the Pronoune Hoc But if thou canst nether proue thy exceptioÌ„ of Christs words nor canst denie but that the Euangelists haue the pronoune Hoc This is not thy exception both vaine and impious Because those words 1. Corinth 13. v. 2. If I should haue Translate ill all faith so that I could remoue mountaines and haue not charitie I am nothing do proue that no faith at all worketh iustification without charitie Beza therefore All translateth whole and saieth he doth it lest this text should deceaue anie Because those words Daniel 4. v. 24. Redeeme thou thy Translate ill sinnes with almes proue that good workes do redeeme sinnes The Kings Bible translateth it thus Breake of thy sinnes by righteousnesse And others say that our translatioÌ„ is naught And neuerthelesse P. Martyr on this place auoucheth That the Chaldee in which tongue this was written hath word for word Redeeme thy sinnes by iustices and so it is cited by Caluin 3. Instit c. 4. § 36. Apolog. Confess August c. de respons ad argumenta and also by others reported in the Protestants Apologie Tract 1. sect 4. subdiuis 7. Because those words Hebr. 2. ver 9. But him that was a They change the order of the words litle lessened vnder the Angels we see Iesus because of the passion of death crowned with glorie and honor proue that Christ was crowned with glorie because he suffered death Beza turneth the words thus But we see that Iesus crowned with glorie and honor who for a time was made inferior to Angels for suffering of death And King Iames Bible followeth him As if the Apostle had not saied why Christ was crowned with glorie but why he whas made inferiour to Angels And yet Beza is not ashamed to adde Let no man meruaile that I haue changed the placing of the words Because the words 2. Pet. 2. v. 8. For in sight and hearing They 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 he was iust dwelling with theÌ„ who from day to day vexed the iust soule with vniust workes proue that meÌ„ may be iuste in some deeds The King and Queens Bible turne the words thus For being righteous and dwelling amoÌ„g theÌ„ in seing and hearing vexed his soule Where they do not refer
in manie places refuteth In like sorte Grauer in Absurdis Caluin c. 14. ser 10. Touching the Eucharist they denie that it is the bodie Of the Eucharist and blood of Christ l. 1. c. 11. art 1. Which is against Scripture For thus Muscul in loc tit de Caena I may not say the bread of the Supper is not the bodie of the Lord. For in so saying I should contradict the Lord saying This is my bodie Againe Otherwise bread should not be the bodie of the Lord against his expresse word Beza in Hosp part 2. f. 300. being asked whether he disliked that one should say The bread of the Supper is the bodie of Christ answered No for they are the words of Christ Et Hosp ib. f. 136. We denie not that bread and wine are the bodie and blood of Christ For Christ himselfe saied This is my bodie They say that those words This is my bodie must be thus expounded This signifieth my bodie Of which exposition Musculus in Schlusselb l. 1. Theol. Caluin art 22. giueth this iudgement We must beware of that exposition wherewith Christs words are thought to be the same as if he had saied This signifieth my bodie For this is not Christs meaning to shew that this bread signifieth his bodie They denie that Christ gaue vs his bodie to eate or his blood to drinke l. 1. c. 11. art 2. Which doctrine thus censureth Caluin l. de Neces ref Christ saied in plaine termes that he gaue them his bodie Beza epist 5. But I answere that is all one as to make Christ a lyer as who in cleare and plaine words saieth he gaue them that bodie which was deliuered for vs. Et Apol. 1. contr Saintem p. 292. To denie all eating of flesh were plainely to denie the very words of Christ They denie that the Cuppe is the new testament l. 1. c. 11. art 4. And yet Simlerus in Hosp part 2. f. 348. saieth The proper sense of these words is The Cuppe is the new testament or the blood of the new testament Iames Andreae in Colloq Montisbel p. 38. To me it seemeth altogether new and vnheard of that the Supper is denied to be the testameÌ„t of Christ against the plaine words alledged out of Luke Et Musculus in locis titul de Caena In Luke and Paul it is saied of this Cuppe that it is the new testament They denie that the Cuppe of the Eucharist was shed for vs. l. 1. c. 11. art 6. And yet Illyricus in Luc. 22. v. 20. writeth Which is powred out for you in the Greek text must needs be referred to the Cuppe Touching Matrimonie they denie that it is a SacrameÌ„t Of Matrimonie c. 12. art 5. And yet thus professeth the Confession of Wittemberg c. de Coniugio We confesse that Mariage is a kind of life instituted and approued by God and a mysterie as commonly it is expounded a great Sacrament in Christ and the Church as Paul saieth Touching faith they denie that it can be without good Of Faith works l. 1. cap. 13. art 8. which doctrine thus condemneth Schlusselburg l. 1. Theol. art 15. Aretius saieth that faith and good works are conioyned as the species and her proprietie as a man and reason But we out of the word of God teach and learne that this doctrine is false They denie that faith it selfe is imputed to vs for iustice l. 1. c. 13. art 19. And yet thus iudgeth Vrbanus Regius in loc fol. 46. Sincere faith on the mercie of God and Iesus Christ is our verie iustice Faith is imputed for iustice to the beleiuer Abraham beleiued and it was imputed to him for iustice They denie that the faith of the Hemorroïssa was pure libr. 1. capit 13. articul 25. And yet thus Bullinger in Marci 5. The power of true faith is singularly expressed Touching good works they denie that they are necessarie Of good workes to saluation l. 1. c. 14. art 13. And yet Piscator saieth in Thes loc 10. The Scripture teacheth that good works are necessarie to saluation The same say the Electorals in Colloq Aldeburgico They denie also that good works are cause of saluation lib. 1. cap. 14. art 15. And yet thus writeth Illyricus in Claue tractat 6. titul de Var. bonum operum praed We heare that to manie effects and praises and euen saluation it selfe is attributed in Scripture to good works It is plaine that oftentimes somewhat to much praise is ascribed to good works which doth not agree to them nor is to be ascribed to them if we will speake exactly truely and properly They denie that they are meritorious lib. 1. cap. 14. art 8. And yet thus professeth Apollog Confession in Melancthon tom 3. Seing works are some fulfilling of the law they are truely saied to be meritorious reward is rightly saied to be due to them Agayne The text of Scripture saieth that life euerlasting is rendered to them Which Protestants denie lib. 1. cap. 14. articul 7. They denie also that they are to be done for God lib. 1. cap. 14. art 20. Of which point thus iudgeth Kemnice in locis tit de bonis oper The testimonies of Scripture most clearely teach that good works are to be done for Gods sake Touching virginitie they denie that it is counsailed in Scripture l 1. c. 15. art 4. And neuerthelesse Vrbanus Regius in locis fol. 372. saieth Virginitie is counsailed in the Ghâ—spell not commanded And in Interp. loc 49. Virginitie is onely a counsaile not a precept Concerning sinne they teach that it can remayne with Of sinne iustice l. 1. c. 16. art 17. Yet thus pronuonceth Luther in Gal. 3. These are directly opposit That a Christian is iust and loued of God and yet with all is a sinner Againe How are these twoe coÌ„tradictories true at once I hâ—ue sinnes am most worthie of the wrath of God and the Father loueth me They denie that sinne putteth a man out of grace l. 1 c. 16. art 6. And yet thus writeth Hemingius in Enchir class 2. If a penitent sinne against his conscience as Dauid did with murder and adulterie he casteth of the holie Ghost and becometh guiltie of Gods wrath and vnlesse he doe pennance falleth into eternall punishment It is a horrible madnesse to say that such retaine the holie Ghost wheÌ„ as Paul saieth plainely Gal. 5. The works of the flesh are manifest and they that doe such shall not possesse the kingdome of God They denie that the widdows whereof S. Paul speaketh 1. Timoth. did sinne in marrying l. 1. c. 16. art 15. And yet thus Bullinger in Tim. 5. Surely to marrie of it selfe is no sinne But because they haue once giuen their promise to Christ the spouse and to the Church and of their owne accord haue left marriage hereupon their marriage turneth to the disgrace of Christ which is that which Paul termeth to become wanton against Christ Bucer lib. 2. de Regno
with the baptisme of S. Ihon and after with the baptisme of Christ Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that they were not baptized againe were not baptized with Ihons baptisme and that it is madnesse to say it that in the foresaied place of the Acts there is no speech of baptisme or baptizing Which are so contrarie to Scripture as Protestants sometime confesse it See lib. 2. cap. 30. ART XII WHETHER THE FORESAIED Ephesians had heard of the Holie Ghost SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Act. 19. v. 2. And he S. Paul saied to them Haue ye receaued The Ephesiās had not heard of the holie Ghost the Holie Ghost beleiuing But they saied to him Nay nether haue we heard whether there be a Holie Ghost CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE D. Stapleton in Actor 19. v. 5. S. Paul saied to these Ephesians because they had answered that they had heard nothing of the Holie Ghost In what then were you baptized PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Caluin in Actor 19. v. 2. How could it be that Iewes had heard They had heard of the holie Ghost nothing the Holie Ghost Surely hence we gather that Paul spoake not so much as in generall of the Holie Ghost and therefore there is a figure in the word Ghost Beza in Actor 19. v. 2. It were most absurd to beleiue that they who had beene baptized of Ihon and professed themselues disciples of Christ were ignorant that there was anie holie Ghost Bucanus in Instit loco 47. What those twelue men denie that they had heard that there was a Holie Ghost is not to be vnderstood of the being or person of the Holie Ghost but figuratiuely of the visible manner of powring downe his guifts Reineccius to 4. Armaturae c. 18. If demaund and answere had beene simply made of the Holie Ghost in respect of his person and grace it would follow that they had had no knowledge of the person of the Holie Ghost But the consequent is absurd THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that the saied Ephesians had not so much as heard that there was a Holie Ghost Catholiks say the same Protestants plainely say that it could not be that they had not heard of the Holie Ghost that it is absurd most absurd to thinke that they were ignorant of the Holie Ghost THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF BAPTISME The things which we haue in this Chapter rehearsed do clearly shew how differently Protestants beleiue of baptisme from the Scripture For the Scripture together withe Catholiks teacheth that water and the inuocatiō of the holie Trinitie be necessarie to baptisme that baptisme is necessarie by necessitie both of precept and of meane to saluation that Simon Magus and reprobats receaue whole baptisme that baptisme is effectuall in the reprobates that baptisme cleanseth sinnes but pardoneth not sinnes that are to be done that children of the faithfull are in state of damnatiō before they be baptized that Christs baptisme is different from S. Ihons baptisme All which Protestats denie They shew also that Protestants play the theiues with baptisme and steale from it the necessitie of water and of the inuocation of the holie Trinitie the necessitie of precept and meane to saluation the integritie and efficacie thereof in the reprobates the vertue of cleansing sinnes in anie whomsoeuer the difference and excellencie aboue the baptisme of S. Ihon which being taken away Christs baptisme remaineth onely in name and they likewise Christians in name onely Thus much of Baptisme Now of the Eucharist CHAPTER X. OF THE EVCHARISTE ART I. WHETHER THE EVCHARIST or that which Christ after his last supper gaue with his hands vnto his Apostles was his bodie and blood SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. MATHEW 26. v. 26. Christ saied of that which with his hands he gaue to his Apostles to eate This is my bodie The same is Marc. 14. v. The Eucharist is the bodie of Christ 14. And Luc. 22. ver 19. This is my bodie which is giuen for you And 1. Cor. 11. v. 24. This is my bodie which shal be deliuered for you Moreouer Ihon. 6. ver 15. he saieth The bread which I will giue is my flesh for the life of the world Mathew 26. v. 28. Christ saieth of that which he gaue The blood of Christ his Apostles to drinke This is my blood of the new testament which shal be shed for manie vnto remission of sinnes Marc. 14. v. 24. This is my blood of the new testament that shal be shed for manie Luc. 22. v. 20. This is the Chalice the new testament in my blood which shal be shed for you 1. Cor. 11. v. 25. This chalice is the new testament in my blood CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent sess 13. c. 3. The Apostles had not yet receaued the Eucharist of the hands of our Lord and yet he truely affirmed that to be his bodie which he gaue And cap. 4. Because Christ truely saied that that was his bodie which he offered vnder forme of bread therefore c. PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Iuel in Denfense of the Apologie part 2. c. 10. diuis 1. p. Not the flesh of Christ 209. The bread of the Sacrament is one thing and the flesh of Christ is an other There is great difference betweene the bread of the Sacramēt and the flesh of Christ Art 8. sect 5. The sacramentall bread is called Christs bodie although indeed it be not Not indeed his bodie Christs bodie So also art 21. sect 1. Bel in his Iesuits Antepast p. 44. The meaning of Christ is Not his reall blood not This is my naturall bodie and my reall blood Spalatensis l. 5. de Repub. c. 6. n. 108. The holie bread is not Not the bodie of Christ the bodie of Christ n. 112. The bread is called the bodie of Christ not that it is the bodie of Christ The Eucharist though it be Not truely called the bodie of Christ Yet it is not truely and really the bodie of Christ ibid. pag. 165. It is false to say The bread is the bodie of Christ Melancthon epist ad Com Palatin apud Hospin part 2. Not the true bodie of Christ Histor f. 260. Paul doth not say as they of Breme do Bread is the substantiall bodie of Christ nor as Hes husius doth Bread is the true bodie of Christ Hospinian himselfe lib. cit f. 261. The bread of the Supper Not his substantiall bodie is not the substantiall bodie of Christ Which he repeateth fol. 254. The verie like words of the Heluetians her rehearseth f. 161. 153. of the Tigurins 161. of the Strasburgians f. 100. of the Witenbergians fol. 292. of Hardenberg 297. and of Engelhard fol. 25. Zuinglius l. de Caena to 2. f. 283. These words of Christ This Not corporall flesh is my bodie can no way be vnderstood of substātiall and corporall flesh Which he hath againe l. de relig c. de Euchar. and in Subsidio to 2. fol. 247. And Sermon
cleare that they say that Christs bodie is not in the sacrament is not present in the Sacrament is not in substance present is absent in bodie is not in the Sacrament nor can be in it is not in the Supper according to substāce is not present in the bread is remoued from the Eucharist that there is no word in the scripture of the presence of Christs bodie in the Supper that his blood is in the chalice as the people are there that he is no otherwise in the Eucharist then in baptisme that he is not there otherwise then a thing is present to our cogitation or a thing to the name thereof or our bodies are now present in heauen finally onely present by speculation and mere imagination Fiftly they contradict the Scripture by saying that no other thing is receaued in the Eucharist or Supper then in baptisme or in the simple word Caluin cont Heshus p. 860. There is no cause why Christ No more present in the Supper then in baptisme Then in the word should be saied to be more present in the Supper then in baptisme p. 847. Surely there is a plaine solution That God giueth not more to the visible symbols then to the word Therefore communication is no lesse truely giuen vs by the Ghospell then by the Supper 4. Instit c. 14. § 14. He is deceaued who thinketh that any thing more is giuen him by the Sacraments then which offered by the word of God he receaueth by true faith § 17 There is no other function of the Sacraments then of the word of God And c. 16. § 5. he saieth that the Sacrament is inferiour to the word Beza in Colloq Montisbel p. 136. There is the same receauing of Christ in the Sacrament which is in the simple word In 2. part respons ad Acta Colloq p. 109. Nothing more is to be sought in the Sacraments then in simple word l. cont Heshus p. 287. Nothing more is giuen in the Supper then in baptisme or in the preaching of the word Bucer in Hospin l. cit p. 161. The memorie of this bodie may More in the word then in the Sacramēt be refreshed by the bread but more fully by the word Peter Martyr in 1. Cor. 11. This is the summe that we vnderstand the bodie and blood of Christ to be offered to vs no lesse by the words of God then by Sacraments In Disput Oxonien pag. 225. We receaue no lesse the bodie and blood of Christ in the word of God then in this Sacrament And cont Gardiner col 1041. I denie not that that is our speach Christs bodie is receaued no lesse in words then in the Sacraments Nether am I afraied to say that we come much better to them by words then by Sacraments Willet Cont. 11. q. 3. c. 557. There is the same substance of both Sacraments Iuel art 5. diuis 5. The word of God is the bodie and blood of Christ and that more truely then is the Sacrament Art 21. diu 1. As Christ entreth into vs by a minister by his word euen so he entreth into vs by the Sacrament of his bodie and no otherwise Defense of the Apol. p. 221. As Christ is present in the one Sacramēt euen so and no otherwise is he present in the other Hereupon Apologia Confess Augustanae cap. de vsu Sacrament saieth that the Sacrament is as it were a picture of the word Melancthon in Disputat tom 4. pag. 513. The Sacrament is like a picture of the promise And lib. contr Anabaptistas As the will of God is shewed in the worde or promise so also it is shewed in the Sacrament as in a picture And oftentimes they say that there is no other presence of Christs bodie in the Eucharist then there is in the simple word as you may see in Beza Apol. 1. cont Sanctem p. 297. in Hospin l. cit fol. 36. 39. and in Concordia discordi f. 205. So that they plainly say that Christ is no more present in the Supper then in baptisme no more cōmunicated in the Supper thē in the Ghospell no more receaued in the Sacramēt them in the word that there is the same receauing of Christ in the Sacrament and in the simple word nothing more giuē in the Supper them in preaching no more offered by the sacrament then by the word yea that the Sacrament is inferiour to the word the memorie of Christs bodie more fully refreshed by the word then by this Sacrament that we may better come to Christs bodie by words then by this Sacrament Which are so contrarie to Scripture as sometimes themselues confesse it See lib. 2. cap. 30. Sixtly they contradict the holie Scripture whiles they say that they Iewes receaued Christs bodie before it was borne as truely as we receaue it in the Eucharist Willet Cont. 11. q. 2. p. 544. We do hould and constantly affirme The Fathers no lesse receaued the bodie of Christ thou we and teach that the Fathers in the law receaued no lesse the substance of Christ by faith in their Sacraments then we do in ours Christ was as well exhibited to them in their Sacraments as he is in ours Beza in Colloq Montisbel p. 96. He was as present in their Sacraments as he is to vs in ours p. 69. The Fathers were no lesse partakers of the bodie and blood of Christ then we are in the Lords Supper Respons ad Acta Colloq p. 119. The Fathers as truely receaued Christs true bodie and true blood in the word and in their Sacraments as we by the instrument of the same faith now receaue them Peter Martyr cont Gardiner col 150. The Fathers in the ould testament did no lesse then we eate and drinke the bodie and blood of Christ for so much as pertaineth to the thing it selfe Seuenthly they contradict the holie Scripture in saying that the Eucharist is a symbolicall mysticall and Sacramentall bodie of Christ which the Scripture plainely saieth to be his true bodie Zuinglius de ver falsa relig c. de Euchar. to 2. f. 208. We are here compelled plainely to confesse that this selfe same which Christ gaue with so great diligence and maiestie is his symbolicall Christs symbolicall bodie Sacramentall bodie bodie Respons ad Luther ib. fol. 514. It is easie to vnderstand that this bread which Christ giueth vs is Christs sacramentall bodie that is the signe of his bodie in that manner and forme of speach wherewith shewing the statue of Cocles we say Behould Cocles that stout champion of his countrie Epistola ad Principes fol. 548. The bread is made the sacramentall bodie of Christ Againe Our aduersaries say that Christs naturall and substantiall bodie is giuen we say his sacramentall Hereupon the contention And in Hospin l. cit fol. 143. We are forced will we nill we to confesse that these words This is Misticall bodie my bodie are thus to be vnderstood that is A sacrament of my bodie
there is a Christ The Epistle to the Hebrews in he whole eleuenth chapter putteth the obiect of it diuers and manifould but faith cannot nor must not be saied to iustifie in regard of them all Zuinglius in Ioan. 2. to 4. Manie beleiue Christ to be the Sonne of God that he was borne suffered and raised from death but this faith iustifieth not Sadeel in Resp ad Artic. abiurat 33. It is not sufficient if I beleiue that Iesus Christ came into the world suffered death rose againe and ascended into heauen For this historicall faith will not saue me Of the same opinion are other Protestants as appeareth by their words cited in the former article as also because they denie that the Catholik or as they speake historicall faith wherewith we beleiue what God hath reuealed generally to all is iustifying faith and likewise because they will haue iustifying faith to be onely a speciall trust which euerie elect man hath of Gods fauour towards himselfe THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the faith of the diuinitie of Christ maketh God to abide in vs and vs in God that it maketh men blessed is that which sufficieth to baptisme and which giueth life Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that faith wherewith Christ is beleiued to be God and man helpeth none that that faith wherewith all the misteries of our redemption are beleiued is a feigned faith that it is no iustifying faith wherewith we beleiue Christ or that he was borne suffered and rose againe ART IV. WHETHER IVSTIFYING faith be one SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Ephes 4. v. 5. One Lord one faith one baptisme Faith is bu◠one CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Iustif c. 5. There are not manie faithes For there is but one faith by reason of one and the same formall obiect whereby all things are beleiued PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Scharpe de Iustif Contr. 1. Iustifying faith according to Faith is twoefould the diuersitie of the subiect is twoe fould one of Infants an other of men The faith of Infants can nether haue knowledge nor application of the promises of grace as in men it hath yet Infants haue their notions stirred vp by the Holie Ghost Polanus 2. part Thes tit de Fide p. 611. Infants albeit Infants haue a different faith from men they haue not the same faith in all points that men haue by reason of the weaknesse of their organs yet they haue some thing correspondent to it which the Holie Ghost worketh immediatly in them according to their capacitie and strenght for their iustification Caluin 4. Institut cap. 16. § 19. I will not rashly say that Infants are indued with the same faith which we feell in our selues Et § 21. If hauing receaued baptisme they departe this life before they come to years of discretion God reneweth them by the vertue of his spirit in a manner vnknowne to vs which himselfe alone knoweth Beza in Explicat Christianismi vol. 1. p. 186. Faith is in a manner twoefould One wherewith Christ is knowne in common and as it were generally to wit wherewith we assent to the historie of Christ and the propheties written of him which faith is sometimes giuen euen to the reprobates An other which is proper and peculier to the elect In Colloq Montisbel pag. 402. The learnedest Diuines of our age do not say that faith it selfe is actually infused into the mynd of Infants but onely some beginning thereof and as it were some seed or roote Wherefore Iacobus Andreae ib. fol. 403. saieth Your worshippe if I haue well vnderstood you discourseth of a double kinde of faith whereof A double kinde of faith the one is ioyned with vnderstanding the other is esteemed of you like to seede Kemnice in 2. part Exam. Concil Trid. p. 92. denieth that Infants haue the same faith which men haue but some other thing which saieth he we nether well vnderstād nor can expresse by words what it is yet we call it faith because Scripture calleth that instrument wherewith the kingdome of heauen is gotten faith THE CONFERENCE Scripture as plainely saieth that there is but one faith as it saieth that there is but one God one baptisme The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that faith is twoefould that Infants haue some things correspondent to faith that they haue not altogether the same faith that men haue that they are renewed in a manner vnknowne to vs that they haue onely a beginning root or seed of faith that we know not what it is which they haue in steed of of our faith that there is a twoefould faith one with vnderstanding an othet without that there is one faith of Infants an other of men one of the elect an other of reprobats ART V. WHETHER ALL THE ARTIcles of faith may be beleiued without the Holie Ghost SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Math. 16. v. 17. Flesh and blood hath not reuealed it to thee Faith not without the holie Ghost but my Father which is in heauen 1. Corint 12. v. 3. No man can say our Lord Iesus but in the Holie Ghost 2. Cor. 3. v. 5. Not that we be sufficient to thinke any thing of our selues as of our selues but our sufficiencie is of God CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE D. Stapleton lib. 8. Princip cap. 2. It is an errour that anie can beleiue all the articles of faith by onely humane faith PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Whitaker Contr. 1. q. 4. c. 1. We may in some sorte know all the doctrine of Scripture and haue historicall faith by the All articles may be beleiued without the holy Ghost ministerie of the word so that we know all the articles of faith and iudge them to be true and that without internall light of the Holie Ghost as manie wicked men and the Diuels doe Perkins in Gal. 2. to 2. fol. 89. The Papists define iustifying faith that is a guift of God wherewith we beleiue the articles of faith and all the word of God to be true But this faith the diuels haue The same say Melancthon and Beza cited in the former article and others who teach that diuels may haue the same Catholik or as they speake historicall faith wherewith the misteries of faith are beleiued which Christians haue Wherevpon thus writeth Pareus in Gal. 3. lection 32. Without trust it would be onely historicall faith which euen hypocrites haue yea the Diuels themselues who know and beleiue the Ghospell to be true THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that flesh and blood reueale not the diuinitie of Christ but the heauenlie Father that none cā call Iesus Lord but in the Holie Ghost that of our selues we are not able so much as to thinke any good The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that without the light of the Holie Ghost we can iudge all the articles of faith to be true that it is not a guift of God te beleiue all the articles of faith and all
that the lawe coÌ„mandeth onely the wicked that that being iustified all lawes cease that the lawe compelleth no more that we are not buÌ„od with the lawe that Christ hath abrogated all lawes that that the lawe is not giuen to the iust in anie vse that no lawe bindeth anie more Which is so contrarie to Scripture as some Protestants confesse it See lib. 2. c. 30. THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER of Gods lawe By what hath beene reported in this Chapter clearely appeareth that Protestants teach quite contrarie to the holie Scripture concerning Gods lawe For the Scripture together with Catholiks teacheth that Gods lawe is possible that some kept it that some haue loued God in all their harte that Gods lawe is in the harte of some that we pray to fulfill it that the keeping of it is necessarie to saluation and that the morall lawe of the ten coÌ„mandments is not taken away from the faithfull all which Protestants denie By the same also appeareth that the Protestants also in this matter play the theeues For they take from Gods lawe that it is possible that it hath beene kept of anie that it is in the hartes of anie that it is necessarie to saluation and that it obligeth the faithfull CHAPTER XIX OF MANS LAVV AND SVPERIORITIE ART I. WHETHER THERE BE ANIE Superioritie among Christians SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. PROVERB 8. vers s 15. By me Kings do reigne Math. 24. v. 45. Who thinkest thou is a faithfull Christ appointed some ouer his familie All power is of God wise seruant whome his Lord hath appointed ouer his familie Rom. 13. v. 1. Let euerie soule be subiect to higher powers for there is no power but of God Tite 3. v. 1. Admonish them to be subiect to Princes and Potestates Hebr. 13. v. 17. Obey your Prelats and be subiect to them Subiect to Prelats and Princes Act. 2. v. 28. The Holie Ghost hath placed you Bishops to rule the Church of God CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 3. de Laicis c. 3. The Prophets foretould that all the Kings of the earth should serue Christ and the Church which cannot be vnlesse there be Kings in the Church PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther l. de saeculari potestate apud Coccium tom 1. l. 7. No Superioritie among Christians A Christian subiect to none art 1. Among Christians there can be no superioritie De libertate Christiana to 2. f. 3. A Christian man is the most freest Lord of all subiect to none De votis ibib fol. 270. Christ hath giueÌ„ me so much libertie that I man subiect to none but to himselfe onely Christ is my immediate Lord I know no other anie more In 1. Petri c. 2. to 5. f. 462. Christ hath coÌ„mitted the badde to profane power for to gouerne theÌ„ as they ought to be gouerned the good that is those who beleiue he hath reserued to himselfe whome he gouerneth by his word onely CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that Kings reigne by God that we must obey the higher powers that we must be subiest to Princes and Prelats and to rulers of the Church The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that there is no superioritie among Christians that a Christian is subiect to none vnder none but Christ that Christ is his immediate Lord and that he knoweth no other ART II. WHETHER MAN HAVE AVthoritie to make lawes SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Act. 15. v. 29. It hath seemed good to the Holie Ghost and to The Apostles made lawes vs to lay no further burde vpon you then these necessarie things That you abstaine from things immolated to idols and blood and that which is strangled Ibid. v. 41. Paul walked through Syria and Cilicia confirming the Churches commanding them to keepe the precepts of the Apostles and the Ancients 1. Cor. 7. vers 12. For to the rest I say not our Lord If anie Also S. Paul brother haue a wife an infidel and she consent to dwel with him let him not put her away CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Act. 15. v. 28. The Church can impose temporall lawes as precepts for some good end to wit to keepe peace in the Church which binde the faithfull in conscience and before God to obey them PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Confession of Basle art 10. None can forbidde that which None can forbidde that which Christ forbade not God alone caÌ„ make lawes Christ hath not forbidde Lutherl cont R. Angliae to 2. f. 346. The power of making lawes belonges to God alone De Captiu Babyl fol. 77. Nether men nor Angels can by anie right impose anie lawe vpon Christians but as they will themselues Caluin 4. Instit c. 10. § 7. We heare that God chalengeth God onely a lawgiuer this as proper to himselfe alone to gouerne vs by the command of his word and by lawes Ibid. § 8. If God be the onely lawgiuer men must not take this authoritie vpon them In Iacobi 4. v. 12. They draw to themselues all the maiestie of God who chalenge authoritie to make lawes THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the Apostles had authoritie to impose necessarie burdens and to command that which Christ had not commanded to command their precepâ—s to be kept and to make lawes for married persons The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that none can forbidde that which Christ hath not forbidde that the power of making lawes is proper to God alone that no lawe can be imposed vpon Christians but as they will themselues ART III. WHETHER MANS LAW CAN binde the conscience SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Rom. 13. v. 2. Who resisteth the power resisteth the ordinaÌ„ce Mans lawe can binde conscience of God and they that resist purchase to themselues damnation v. 5. Therefore be subiect of necessitie not onely for wrath but also for conscience sake CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Rom. 13. v. 1. The breach of humane lawes offendeth also God The verie consciences of the faithfull are bound with ciuill lawes PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Contr. 4. quaest 7. c. 1. We say that the lawes of Princes lawes bind not conscience Princes binde not the conscience for this is proper to God lib. 8. cont Dur. sect 103 Who impose lawes vpon the conscience chalenge power of sauing and destroying and robbe God of his right The lawes of Magistrates haue no power ouer the conscience Perkins in Anatomia Conscientiae tom 1. col 1215. We Conscience subiect to no mans lawe acknowledge no subiection at all of the conscience to mens lawes In Galat. 5. tom 2. col 258. The Magistrates lawe maketh a thing necessarie externally Neuerthelesse the thing in it selfe is not made necessarie but remaineth indifferent and you may vse it or not if you auoide contempt or scandall Luther in 1. Petri c. 2. tom 5. f. 464. The Magistrate cannot binde the conscience De seruo arbit to 2. fol. 431.
If we proue that God doth now cleanse vs from all iniquitie because it is saied 1. Ioan. 1. v. 19. He is faithfull and iust to forgiue vs our sinnes and cleanse vs from all iniquitie Caluin ib. answereth If anie obiect that whilest we liue in this life we are neuer cleansed from all iniustice for so much as belongeth to reformation that is true indeed but Ihon teacheth not what God doth now perfect in vs. If we proue that in this life some are made iust by the merits of Christ as by Adams demerit they were made iniust by these words Rom. 5. v. 19. As by the disobedience of one man manie were made sinners so also by the obedience of one manie shal be made iust Pareus l. 2. de Iustificat cap. 3. answereth In this life we are made iust imperfectly in the next we shal be made perfectly iust Hereupon perchaunce Luther saied Disput 3. tom 1. We thinke that a man to be iustified is not to be yet iust but to be in the way and course to iustice If we proue that faith without workes is alwaies dead because it is saied Iames 2. vers vlt. Faith without workes is dead Schlusselburg to 8. Catal. p. 526. answereth The saying of Iames touching faith dead without workes is to be vnderstood of ehe time after iustification So that he will not haue faith to be dead without good workes whilest it iustifieth If we proue that God alwaies will all men to be saued by those words 1. Tim. 2. Who will all men to be saued Perkins in Cases of Conscience cap. 7. sect 3. answereth God will all men to be saued vnderstand now in this last age of the world If we proue that Saintes in heauen aske mercie for the faithfull because they aske reuenge vpon their persecutors by those words Apocal. 6. vers 9 I saw vnder the aultar the soules of them that were slanie for the word of God c. and they cried with a loud voice saying How long Lord holie and true iudgâ—st thou not and reuengest not our blood on them that dwell on the earth Confessio Wittember c. de Inuocat Sanctorum vnderstandeth this onely of praiers made whiles the Saints were on earth In the Apocalypse the soules of the Saints that were slaine do crie that their blood be reuenged not that now resting in the Lord they are desirous of reuenge after a humane manner but because the Lord euen after their death is myndfull of the praiers which whiles they yet liued on earth the made for the deliuerie of themselues and the Church If we proue that in this life we fulfill the law doe the will of God and obey Christ by those words Rom. 8. v. 4 God sent his Sonne c. that the iustification of the law might be fullfilled in vs. Et Math. 6. Thy will be done on earth And Hebr. 5. vers 9. Christ is made the cause of saluation to all that obey him Scharpius de Iustif Contr. 12. answereth Out of these places nothing followeth but that the faithfull fulfill the law but it followeth not that they fulfill it in this life Wherefore I thus make my fourtenth argument Who besides the foresaied opposition to the expresse words of Scripture will not expound the words of Scripture on that time whereof it speaketh do contradict the true sense thereof Protestants doe so Therefore c. CHAPTER XV. THAT PROTESTANTS OF MANIE sayings of Scripture make one MY fiftenth argument shal be because Protestants are forced to confound manie sayings of Scripture in one and so make one of manie For if we proue that God will not the death of a sinner but willeth his conuersion by those words Ezechiel 18. I will not the death of a sinner but that he be conuerted and liue Caluin l. de Praedest pag. 706. answereth If as we ought to doe those twoe be read ioyntly I will that a sinner which is conuerted liue the cauill is easily refuted The some hath Beza 2 part resp ad Acta Montisbel p. 196. If we proue that God would haue al to be saued and come to the knowledge of the trueth because it is so saied 1. Tim. 2. v. 4. Beza lib. quaest respons vol. 1. Theol. p. 684. saieth Those twoe To saue and to come to the knowledge of trueth are to be ioyned that so God may be vnderstood to will that they be saued whome he will haue to come to the knowledge of the trueth So also he answereth in Respons ad Acta Montisb p. 194. And there p. 196. in the same sorte expoundeth that Ezech. 18. I will not the death of a sinner but that be conuerted If we proue that Christs baptisme was different from S. Ihons because Actor 19. S. Luke telleth that some who haue beene baptized with S. Ihons baptisme were baptized againe of S. Paul Beza ib. ver 5. saieth that these are not the words of S. Luke telling who were baptized of S. Paul but of S. Paul telling what was the baptisme of Saint Ihon. Caluin l cont Anabap. p. 415. saieth There is saied that Paul baptized them in the name of Christ then to explicate what this meaneth is added that he laied hands vpon them and the holie Ghost descended Wherefore the same thing is diuersely expressed by twoe wayes as the Scripture vseth Et 4. Inst c. 15. § 18. Luke doth not tell twoe different things but keepeth the forme of relating vsed of the Hebrews who first set downe the summe of the matter and after explane it more at large If we proue that we must be borne againe both of water and of the holie Ghost by these words Ioan. 3. v. 5. Vnlesse one be borne againe of water and the holie Ghost c. Caluin ib. answereth It is one simple sentence that we must be borne a new for to be Gods children and that of this second birth the holie Ghost is author Therefore he put water and Spirit for the same thing And in this manner they confound manie things which the Scripture distinguisheth and say that ether they be Synonimies or that one exegetically expoundeth the other Wherefore this is my 15. argument Who besides the foresaied opposition to the expresse words of Scripture are compelled to confound manie different sayings of the Scripture in one those are also opposite to the true meaning of the holie Scripture Protestants doe so Therefore c. And hitherto we haue seene how manie and what kind of Propositions of Scripture almost in all kinds of controuersies Protestants doe change and depraue and that no kind of speach can be so plaine strong and forcible as it can recall them from their errours but that they break through delude depraue all Now let vs see how they deale will the wordes of Scripture For as Tertullian saieth cont Hermogenen It is the Heretiks custome to wreste all simple words CHAPTER XVI THAT WORDS OF SCRIPTVRE WHICH signifie the working or doing of a thing
Protest tormented with the words of Scripture 21. The Protestant interpreters do torment themselues in that Daniel seemeth to attribute redemption or remission of sinnes to mans iustice and works of mercie For they well admonish that it is repugnant to the chiefe point of our religion Daneus in c. 67. Enchir. Aug. saieth that saying of S. Iames We are not iustified by faith onelie doth this day tormeÌ„t manie so that some haue reiected the epistle others haue called it strawish Kemnice in loc to 2. tit de Argum. That saying of Daniel c. 4. seemeth very hard against free iustification The third way by which they tacitelie confesse that Protest forced to denie their doctrine their doctrine is contrarie to Scripture is because when it maketh for their purpose they denie that they teach manie of those points which in the former booke we haue clearelie shewed that they plainelie teach And because they do this so frequentlie as I need not bring manie examples thereof I will here cite onelie some few Touching God Pareus thus writeth Colleg. Theol. 9. disp 32. It is a slaunder that we simply say that God would and decreed that our first parents should fall See l. 1. cap. 2. art 5. Of Scripture thus Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 4. cap. 1. Our aduersaries attribute vnto vs this doctrine as if we saied that the Catholik Church could faile which is most false See lib. 1. cap. 8. art The same man q 3. cit c. 2. Our aduersaries slander vs when they say that we make such a Church which sometime is no where and can be seene of none See l. 1. c. 8. art 5. Touching the Eucharist Eliensis Resp ad Apol. Bellar. c. 1. We agree with you of the matter all the contention is about the manner A presence I say we beleiue nor lesse reall then you Perkins in Cath. refor Contr. 10. cap. 1. We beleiue and teach a reall presence of the bodie and blood of Christ in the Sacrament of the Supper and that not feigned but true and reall Argentinenses in Hospin part 2. Histor Be they accursed who will haue nothing to be exhibited here but a signe and figure And Hospinian himselfe Our men neuer denied that the bodie of Christ was truely in their Supper Beza l. qq saieth that it is a slander that they exclude Christ from their Supper Gratianus Antiiesuita p. 140. There is no controuersie whether the true bodie and blood of the Lord be contained in the Sacrament of the Eucharist Et Riuet tract 3. sec 12. The question betwene vs is not simply whether the bodie and blood of Christ be truely and really in this Sacrament Et Spalatensis libr. contr Suar. cap. 1. num 39. Who denieth that the Eucharist is the onely flesh and onely blood of our Lord Iesus Christ See the contrarie of all these lib. 1. c. 11. art 1. Touching faith thus writeth Peter Martyr in loc Class 3. § 24. We make faith hope and charitie three different things nether doe we confound them as our aduersaries accuse vs. See the contrarie lib. 1. c. 13. art 6. Of good works thus Tilenus in Syntag. cap. 46. It is a cruell slander of our aduersaries where they feigne that we teach that all the works of the iust be properly and simply sinnes Et Riuet tract 3. sect 31. None of ours saieth absolutely that all works are sinne nether say we that they are mingled with sinne absolutely See the contrarie lib. 1. c. 14. art 2. Touching good works in particular thus Riuet tract 1. sect 73. We reiect this position That it is one of the conditions necessarie to a Bishop that he be married See the contrarie lib. 1. cap. 15. art 4. Of reward thus the some Riuet 3. sect 39. We denie not the reward of good works See the contrarie lib. 1. c. 14. art 7. c. 18. arr 1. Of free will thus Serranus l. 3. cont Hayum Doth anie of ours denie or euer denied that those that are not regenerate doe fall to sinne of their prone and free will See the contrarie lib. 1. c. 16. art 14. But finally they doe plainely and expressely graunt that Protest confesse much of their doctrine to be against Scripture Of God manie points of Protestants doctrine are coÌ„trarie to Scripture For touching God thus writeth Confessio Saxon. c. God nether willeth sinne nor approueth nor helpeth it as it is written when the Diuel speaketh a lie he speaketh of his owne and 1. Ioan. 3. Who committeth sinne is of the Diuel Gerlachius tom 2. disput 15. It is impossible that God should will sinne of whome it is saied psalm 5. Thou art not a God that willeth ini-inquitie Et Polanus in Disput priuat p. 235. God nether willeth nor can will the ill of offence or sinne properly taken psal 5. vers 5. Melancthon in disput to 4. p. 623. The conference of the continuall doctrine in the writings of the Prophets and Apostles doth shew that God nether willeâ—â— nor worketh sinne as it is expressely saied Thou art not a Gad that willeth iniquitie And out of this same place Pareus in Colleg. Theol. 1. disp 2. proueth that Gods will is no efficient cause of sinne And yet Protestants teach both that God willeth sinne and worketh sinne See lib. 1. c. 2. art 1. 4. They teach also that God hath ordained and predestinated men to sinne l. 1. c. 2. art 5. of which doctrine Melancthon in disp to 4. p. 572. giueth this censure There are certaine frantike fellows much worse then the Stoicks who teach that God of himselfe doth ordaine and predestinate haynous sinnes and that he willeth them and not onely suffereth them And in locis tit de Causa Peccat Sinne is nether done of God nor ordained of him They teach that God commandeth vrgeth and tempteth to sinne lib. 1. cap. 2. art 7. Which is contrarie to Scripture by iudgment of Riuet tract 3. sect 33. The Scripture expressely saieth that God will not iniquitie that he commandeth none to doe ill that he cannot tempt to ill Moulins in his Bucler p. 97. God doth not stirre vp meÌ„ to doe ill as it is saied ps 45. Thou hast loued iustice and hated iniquitie Et Calu. in Math. 4. v. 1. Wherevpon we gather that tentations which incite vs to ill come not froÌ„ God They teach that God is not angrie with the faithfull when they worke iniquitie lib. 1. c. 2. art 11. Which to be contrarie to Scripture Protestants in Zanchius in Supplicat confesse in these words God doth threaten his anger to all the transgressors of his law and they cite thereto that Ps 5. Thou hast hated all that worke iniquitie They teach that God hath no will that all should be saued li. c. 2. art 19. Which is against Scripture as coÌ„fesseth Hemingius in these words in Enchir. clas 3. They accuse God of a lye whosoeuer thinke that he will not the saluation of some as farre as perteineth to