Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	divine_a	humane_a	humanity_n	2,395	5	10.2602	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A15431	Tetrastylon papisticum, that is, The foure principal pillers of papistrie the first conteyning their raylings, slanders, forgeries, vntruthes: the second their blasphemies, flat contradictions to scripture, heresies, absurdities: the third their loose arguments, weake solutions, subtill distinctions: the fourth and last the repugnant opinions of new papistes with the old; of the new one with an other; of the same writers with themselues: yea of popish religion with and in it selfe. Compiled as a necessarie supplement or fit appertinance to the authors former worke, intituled Synopsis papismi: to the glorie of God for the dissuading of light-minded men from trusting to the sandie foundation of poperie, and to exhort good Christians stedfastlie to hold the rockie foundation of faith in the Gospell.	Willet, Andrew, 1562-1621.	1593 (1593)	STC 25701; ESTC S119967	179,229	213

same Augustine also holdeth this perilous heresie quaest 127. ex vtroque mixtim or who so was the author of those questions Sanctus Petrus vxorem habuisse cognoscitur vt primatum acciperet inter Apostolos non ei obstitit generatio filiorum Hinc Apostolus eum qui vxorem habeat si in caeteris seruet mandata sacerdotem fieri debere posse ostendit S. Peter is knowen to haue had a wife and the begetting of children was no hinderance to his primacie among the Apostles a primacie of order he meaneth Whereby the Apostle sheweth that lie which hath a wife if in other things he keep Gods commaundements may and ought neuerthelesse to be made a Priest or Minister 4 Vigilantius fourth heresie as it pleaseth Bellarmine to call it was that it profited not a man to leaue all his riches and to betake himselfe to a religious that is a Monasticall life and the same saith he is defended by vs. Ans. Is not this a great heresie As though it were an euil thing to be rich or riches might not be well vsed S. Paul biddeth not rich men cast away their riches but that they do good and be rich in good works 1. Timoth. 6. 18. So saith Augustine Diuitiae seculares si desunt non per opera mala quaerantur in mundo si autem adsunt per opera bona seruentur in coelo Worldly riches if they be wanting do not seeke them by euill doing in the worlde and if thou haue them by good workes lay them vp in store in heauen epistol 1. epistolar 21. And againe speaking of Lazarus he saith Non est in hoc Lazaro meritum paupertatis sedpietatis There was not in Lazarus any merite or worth of pouertie but of godlines in Psal. 51. 14 In the next place the Iesuite laboureth by his cunning to intangle vs with the heresies of the Pelagians but he speedeth no better here than he did in the rest The first Pelagian heresie is they denied that there remained any originall sinne in the faithfull Of this heresie the Iesuite falsely accuseth Bucer Zwinglius Caluin Ans. First the Papistes themselues rather are guiltie of this heresie who affirme that concupiscence in the regenerate is no sinne nor against the commaundement Rhemist annot Rom. 6. 8 What is this els but to take away originall sinne cleane which if it be at all must of necessitie be sin Secondly Bellarmine did not here remember that olde saying Mendacem oportet esse memorem a lyer had neede to haue a good memorie for a little before Haeres 5. he accuseth the Protestants as if they should affirme that sinne euen in the regenerate raigneth and is aliue but here he casteth vpon vs the cleane contrarie opinion that wee should holde no originall sinne at all to remaine in the faithful See so well the Iesuite agreeth with himselfe Thirdly Our opinion then concerning originall sinne is this that it neither ruleth in the regenerate nor yet is cleane extinguished but as Augustine confesseth Concupiscentia Lex peccati cum paruulis nascitur in paruulis baptizatis a reatu soluitur ad agonem relinquitur Concupiscence the law of sinne commeth with children into the worlde the guilt thereof is loosed in baptisme but yet it remaineth still that wee may haue somewhat to striue against The seconde heresie of the Pelagians was that euerie sinne was mortall and worthie of death which the Iesuite also saith is affirmed by vs. Ans. First Augustine in none of his large and learned treatises which hee wrote against the Pelagians with whose heresies hee was as well acquainted as either Hierome or any els doth charge them with this opinion Secondly And no maruell for if this were a point of Pelagianisme hee was a Pelagian himselfe who thus writeth Inexcusabilis est omnis peccator vel reatu originis vel additamento propriae voluntatis siue qui nouit siue qui ignorat Quia ipsa ignorantia in ijs qui intelligere noluerunt sine dubitatione peccatum est in ijs qui non potuerunt paena peccati Euerie sinner is left without excuse either by the guilt of originall sinne or by default of his owne will whether hee that sinneth of knowledge or of ignorance for ignorance it selfe in those which refuse to vnderstande is sinne without doubt in those that can not the punishment of sinne Ergo in vtrisque saith hee non est iusta excusatio sed iusta damnatio Therefore in both there is no iust excuse but iust damnation Epistol 105. Here Augustine is of opinion that euen the least sinnes those which proceede of ignorance are in themselues mortall if God should deale with vs in the rigour of his iustice As the Scripture testifieth The wages of sinne is death Rom. 6. 23. which wordes are generally pronounced of all sinne Can it then be heresie in vs to affirme by the worde of God that all sinne is mortall 15 Bellarmine accuseth Beza of Nestorianisme that hee shoulde affirme two persons or hypostases to be in Christ which was the heresie of the Nestorians Ans. Whatsoeuer Beza hath thought or write in times past as that there are two hypostaticall ●nions in Christ one of his diuine and humane nature the other of his soule and bodie it is not nowe materiall as Saint Paul sayeth what they were in times past it maketh no matter to mee Galath 2. 6. Beza holdeth now no other opinion of the person of Christ than the Church of God euer helde for these are his own words Fatemur inquit personam filij ab ipso momento quo caro ipsius concepta fuit vnitam fuisse humanae naturae inseparabiliter ita vt non sint duo filij Dei sed vnus sit proprie Dei filius Iesus Christus verus Deus verus homo Wee confesse that the person of the sonne from the verie first moment of the conception of his flesh was so inseperablie vnited vnto the humane nature that there are not now two sonnes of God but one onely sonne of God properly Iesus Christ verie God and verie man lib. confession articul de Iesu Christo cap. 22. This is sound and Catholike doctrine and the same is the confession of Augustine Fatemur Christum carnem animam quoque humanam verbo vnigenito coaptasse quod esset vna persona vt Christus est verbum homo sed ipse homo anima caro Wee do confesse that Christ hath so ioyned his humane flesh and soule to the onely begotten worde to make one person that the same Christ should be both the worde and man but man consisting both of soule and bodie de Trinita Unitat. cap 7. This then is our beleefe that there are two natures in Christ the diuine and humane but both these do concurre to make one person 16 The sixteenth heresie which he obiecteth is al one with the twentieth to that place therefore we referre it 17 The Eutychians were condemned for heretikes

because they taught that there was but one nature in Christ his humane nature being absorpt of his Godhead of which opinion saith Bellarmine is Swinckfeldius Brentius who affirmeth that the humanitie of Christ is euerie where Ans. First what haue wee to do with the Swinckfeldians or the vbiquitaries it is nothing to the Protestants what they holde The Papistes come neerer the vbiquitaries than protestants for it is their common opinion that the bodie of Christ in one moment may be in a thousande places at once and more if it happen at one time the Masse to be celebrated in so manie places I praie you how can this be vnlesse you say with the Lutherans and vbiquitaries that Christes bodie is euery where Secondly concerning this matter our opinion is this that it is a blasphemous assertion to say in the abstract Humanitas Christi est vbique The humanitie of Christ is euery where but yet it is true in the concrete in concreto Christus homo est vbique The man Christ is euerie where so that we neither destroy the natures by confounding them nor dissolue Christ by separating and disioyning them 18 Xenaias the Persian first openly taught that the images of Christ the Saints are not to be worshipped so say the Protestants Bellarmine Ans. First it is not true that Xenaias first published this doctrine the Apostles were long before him who warne vs to take heede of idolatrie which is worshipping of images Paul Rom. 1. 23. 1. Iohn 5. 21. Augustine also maintaineth this doctrine Illud inquit quod sedere pater dicitur non flexis poplitibus fieri putandum est t●l● enim simulachrum D●o nefas est Christiano in templo collocare Whereas God the father is said to sitte we must not thinke it is by bowing of his knees for it is a heynous sinne to erect such an image vnto God in the temple of Christians De fid Symbol cap. 7. Yet such images of God the father are euery where to be seene in Popish Churches And againe he saith Nobis vnus colendus dilig●●dus Deus praecipitur qui fecit haec omnia quorum illi simulachra venerantur vel tanquam Deos vel tanquam signa imagines Deorum We are commaunded to worship one onely God which made all these things the pictures or portraitures whereof they worship either as Gods or as the images or resemblances of God De doctrin Christian. lib. 3. cap. 7. Images then are not to be worshipped no not in the remembrance of God What is become now I pray you of Xenaias heresie 19 The Iesuite here hath found out a newe heresie of the Lampetiani who should say that Monasteries ought to be free from perpetual vowes that the parties might at their choice goe backe from their vowes So saith he doth Luther hold and the rest Ans. Is not this now a damnable heresie As though it were not lawfull for those which haue rashly vowed and aboue their strength euen by the rules of the Gospel to be sorie for their rashnes and feeling their owne weaknesse to desire to be loosed from their vow and to take heed that they do no more presume beyond their strength As if a man hath foolishly vowed to liue a single life and afterward is inflamed with lust and seeth he cannot containe the Apostle giueth him leaue to marrie To auoide fornication let euery man haue his wife 1. Corin. 7. 2. He speaketh of all that cannot otherwise auoide fornication haue they vowed or not vowed Augustine giueth his sentence of the vowes of fasting saying thus ●eiunia legitima in necessitate soluta non faciunt reos si stomachi fuerit causa ●ut infirmitatis febrium Lawfull fastes being broken for necessitie as if the stomacke be weake or the partie sicke do not make men guiltie of offence ex veteri Testament quest 61. If the vow of fasting may be broken because of the weaknes of the stomacke why not the vow of continencie also for the frailtie of the flesh Yea Augustine disswaded Bonifacius a secular lord who had vowed and purposed with himselfe to become a Monke Cupiebas te in ocium sanctum conferre in ea vita viuere in qua serui Dei Monachi viuunt vt autem non faceres quid te reuocauit nisi quia considerasti ostendentibus nobis quantum prodesset Christi Ecclesiis quod agebas you were desirous to haue giuen your selfe to that holy vacant life of Monks from so doing what els withdrewe you but that you considered as I shewed you how much your seruice did profite the Churches of Christ epist. 70. This Boniface did fight in defence of the faith against the barbarous infidels See then S. Augustine taketh it to be no fault to dissuade a man frō perfourming that which he had vowed with him selfe Heare also what a later writer saith whome the Papistes challenge wholly to be theirs Non arbitror Deum saith he exigere quodcunque sibi promissum bonum si pro eo aliquid melius fuerit persolutum I do not thinke that God wil exact euerie thing vowed or promised vnto him if in steede thereof we perfourme somewhat that is better epist. 57. But the married estate is better than the single life to him that cannot containe wherefore such an one doth not euill if after his vow he marrie Againe Id promittere nos in nostra professione non credimus quod certum est non posse tener● lib. de dispens We do not take vpō our selues to promise that when we enter into our profession which it is certaine cannot be kept Wherefore men ought not to make absolute vowes of single life but so farre as they shall bee able to contayne Necessitas also saith hee non habet legem ob hoc exeusat dispensationem Necessitie hath no law and therefore excuseth a dispensation or loosing of the vow ibid. Let these men go for heretikes togither with vs if it be heresie to say that rash vowes vpon necessitie may bee broken or dispensed withall 20 Two other heresies remaine the first which is the sixteenth in number of certaine that are namelesse who affirmed that the bodie of Christ remained not in the Eucharist if it were kept till the next daye The other of those who should say that the Eucharist was a figure onely of the bodie of Christ and both these heresies as he calleth them are saith he maintained by vs. Ans. First wee do not say that the Eucharist is a bare signe of the bodie of Christ but that Christ is verily present with all the benefites of his death to the faithfull and worthie receiuer Secondly yet wee vtterly denie that the same flesh which Christ tooke of his mother which hanged vpon the crosse and where withall hee ascended vp into heauen is now really substantially and carnally present in the sacrament at all much lesse that it remaineth there afterward Neither for so holding ought wee to be

rest First Harding chargeth him to haue written against the power of lawfull Magistrates Luthers wordes saith he be these Inter Christianos nullus neque potest neque debet esse magistratus Among Christian men none can nor ought to be a magistrate Defens Apol. P. 446. Luther speaketh not these words of the outwarde Ciuill gouernmēt but onelie of our inward band obediēce toward God And in this respect there is no king nor prince indeed nor may be anie In this sense S. Paul saith There is no Iewe there is no Gentile there is no Lorde there is no seruant there is no man there is no woman for all you are one in Christ Iesus Galath 3. They might therefore as well haue charged S. Paul to haue written against ciuil gouernors as Luther But what his opinion was of the authoritie of the ciuil Magistrate may appeare where he writeth thus vnto the rebels in Garmanie being in the field against their Lords Yee take the sword withstand the magistrate whom God hath apointed is not this rashly to abuse the name of God Iohn Sleidan lib. 5. Our Rhemistes charge Luther that vpon these wordes of our Sauiour Resist not euill Math. 5. 39. He should hold that Christians might not resist the Turke annot Math. 5. sect 9. This is a slaunder of Luther hee did write onely that Christians should not hope to haue victorie against the Turkes before the Church were reformed That Luther teacheth that onely infidelity is sin Annot. Mat. 7. sect 5. Luther doth not teach that infidelity only is sin but that it is the root of al sin That Luther and Caluine do teach that God was the author of the traiterous sinne of Iudas Act. 2. sect 9. They neuer so taught but speake onely as the scripture doth That Christ was deliuered vp according to the determinate Counsell and foreknowledge of God That Luther and Caluine attempted to cast out diuels sped much like as the 7. sons of Scena did Act. 19. sect 9. This is a great slaunder inuented of them by a lying spirit yet it is most credibly reported of Luther that God by his hand wrought a miraculous worke vpon a yong man that had giuen himselfe bodie and soule to the diuell see the storie Foxpag 864. Against Melancthon they obiect that he auouched 3. sacraments Baptisme the Eucharist and Orders Harding defens apolog 162. Melancthon onely sayth thus That he can well call Orders a sacrament so that it be knowen from baptisme and the supper which in proper speech and verily be called sacraments In apolog confes August So another Sorbonist disputing with Friderike Danuile Martyr belyed Melancthon that in his booke of common places he should call auricular confession Euangelicum secretum A secrete of the gospell Fox pag. 921. Whereas Melancthon saith cleane contrary in that booke calling it a snare of the conscience and against the Gospell But aboue all other they haue a great spite at Caluine Harding accuseth him that hee should teach that where the death of Christ may bee remembred otherwise there all Sacraments bee superfluous Defens apolog pag. 185. But Caluine teacheth cleane contrarie Sic est exigua nostra fides saith he c. So smal is our faith that vnles it be borne vp of euery side by all meanes be held vp it wauereth and is like to fall By which words hee sheweth that wee haue great neede of such remedies because of the weakenes of our faith much lesse are they superfluous thus M. Harding by his leaue is proued a lyer The Rhemistes charge Caluine with this heresie that God is the author of sin Mat. 13. sect 2. Neither Caluine nor any of vs say so but we say hold as Augustine doth that God hardeneth the wicked not as an euill author but as a righteous iudge not by a bare permission or suffering as the papists teach but by withdrawing and withholding his grace deliuering thē to the deceit of sathan as a iust punishment of their sinnes thus Augustine at large Cont. Iulian. lib. 5. cap. 3. Thus also S. Paul affirmeth of the Idolatrous Gentils That God gaue thē ouer to their hart● lust Ro. 1. 24. Fulk ibid. That Caluine holdeth the second person to be God not as of God the father but as of him selfe Iohn 1. sect 3. Caluin teacheth that Christ is God of God the father in respect of his person as the sonne yet very God of himselfe in respect of his diuine nature and essence and of one and the same Godhead with his father which is not multiplied by cōmunication of generation but is one and most singular in al the three persons And this is sound and Catholik doctrine That Caluine teacheth that Christian mens children be so holie that they neede no baptisme 1. Corinth 7. sect 11. Rhemist A false slaunder for Caluine contrariwise doth reason against the Anabaptistes out of S. Paules wordes that because they are holie they are to be baptized That Caluine and Luther and their followers refuse to put their preaching to the triall of holy Councels Rhemist 2. Galath sect 3. It is false they neuer refused neither doe wee to put our doctrine to the conference of lawfull Councels but haue often desired that such a generall councel by consent of Christian princes might be gathered we onely refuse to be tried by popish councels such as the late Chapter of Trent was where the pope is both the partie accused and the Iudge That Caluine exhorteth all men to haue respect to S. Pauls Apostleship rather then vnto S. Peters as though the preaching authoritie and Apostleship of both were not alike true all of one holie spirit whether they preached to Iewes or Gentiles Galath 2. sect 6. See what sophistical cauilling here is Caluine maketh no difference of the truth of doctrine or Apostolike authoritie which was the same whether in Paule or in Peter but biddeth vs to keepe the difference of primacie distinction of prouinces made betweene them by the holie ghost that Paule should be the chiefe Apostle of the Gentils Peter of the circumcision Calu. lib. 4. Instit. 6. 14. Bellarmine seemeth to charge Caluine yet further that hee shoulde affirme Christum in cruce desperasse et esse damnatum That Christ did despaire vppon the crosse and was damned lib. 4. De Christi anima cap. 8. This is a grieuous slaunder Caluine only saith that it was necessarie that Christ should not onelie suffer in body but euen abide the wrath of God in his soule for the sinnes of the world which inforced him and not his bodilie paine to crie out vppon the crosse that hee was forsaken of his father This is neither heresie nor blasphemie but sound doctrine and agreable to scripture Our Rhemistes also in diuerse places haue a ●●ing at that reuerend and learned pastor M. Beza and finding no iust matter to vpbraid him withal they thus fondly picke quarrels against him Heare say

itaque regis Dauid legimus peccata sed legimus etiam rectè facta cont Faust. lib. 22. cap. 66. As we read of Dauids sinnes so wee also reade of his wel doing and againe Nos scripturas sanctas non hominum peccata defendimus We maintaine and defend the holy scriptures and not the sinnes of men cont Faust. lib. 22. cap. 45. We aunswere them further as Augustine doth the Manichees Be it saith he that the patriarkes prophets were such euil men as the Manichees slaunder them to be Etiam sic non dico electis eorū sed ipso etiam deo illorum demonstrarentur meliores Yet in that case being we can easely shew that they are much better not onely thē their chiefe doctors ringleaders whom they cal elect but then their God whom they imagine to be polluted defiled with mixing him selfe with the kingdome of darkenes c. Ibid. cap. 98. So we say to our aduersaries that if we should yeelde that the patriarkes had greater infirmities then in deede they had yet confessing that their soules after death were presently receiued vp to heauen we should more honor them then the papistes who howsoeuer they magnifie their holy and vertuous liues yet allow them no place in heauen till the comming of Christ but thrust them downe into a place of darkenes which they affirme to bee a part and member of hell Wherein they doe offer the vilest disgrace to those holy men that can bee Ninthly Bellarmine accuseth vs of Donatisme The Donatists denied that the Church consisteth of good and bad and so saith hee doe wee Answ. Wee confesse that the visible Church vppon earth hath not onely good but bad therein and therefore is compared to a house wherein are vessels of al sorts to a barne floore which hath both chaffe corne to a nette that conteyneth both good and bad fishe But the holy inuisible Catholike Church consisteth only of the elect such as shal be saued for which Church Christ gaue himself to sanctifie it make it vnto himselfe a glorious Church That it should be holy without blame as Saint Paul saith Ephes. 5. 25. 27. And Augustine being taught by the Apostle saith Illa Columba vnica pudica casta sine macula ruga non intelligitur nisi in bonis iustis sanctis That Doue which is but one chast vndefiled vnspotted without wrinkle is not vnderstood but of the good righteous holie De baptism lib. 6. cap. 3. Bernard also saith Sponsa est ecclesia electorum congregatio iustorum The spouse is the Church of the elect and the congregation of the iust Cantic 68. Yet neither Augustine nor Bernard were for so saying counted Donatistes 10 Bellarmine layeth Arrianisme to our charge because they in no wise receiued vnwritten traditions Answ. If this be a point of Arrianisme then Augustine was an Arrian who writteth thus of a certaine booke that treated of saint Thomas Cui scripturae licet non credere non est enim in catholico canone Which booke it is lawfull for vs not to beleeue because it is not in the catholike Canon of the scripture Therfore we are not bound to beleeue more then is contained in scripture and so consequently no vnwritten and vncertaine traditions Our kinde countrimen of Rhemes doe charge vs with a deeper point of Arrianisme because wee affirme that Christ was our priest and mediator both as God and man for this were say they to make Christ his fathers priest and not his sonne and so inferior vnto him Heb. 5. sect 4. Answ. In the office of the priesthood of Christ. 2. thinges must bee considered a ministerie and authoritie the ministeriall part of his priesthood as his obedience his sufferinges and sacrifice Christ executed as he was man but the authoritie of reconciling vs to God he wrought both as God and man So saint Paut sayth that Christ through his eternall spirit offered himselfe Heb. 9. 14. Therefore not as man onely And Augustine Diuina humanitas humana diuinitas mediatrix The diuine humanitie and humane diuinitie is our me diatrix Homil. de ouib cap. 12. Bernard also though a writer in a corrupt time might easily haue resolued them in this point Sicut mediator noster duas naturas humanitatem scilicet diuinitatem coniunxit in vnapersona ita singula eius opera ad hanc siue illam necesse est pertinere naturam quicquid ergo miseriae passus est ex homine contraxit quicquid potenter operatus est a patre habuit As our mediatour hath ioyned two natures the humanitie and diuinitie in one person so all his workes must necessarily be referred to either one of them whatsoeuer he suffered in weaknesse he tooke of his manhood what soeuer he wrought in power hee receiued of his father Serm. de verb. sapient 11 Bellarmine thrusteth vpon vs as an heresie that opinion of Aerius that no prayer or oblation is to bee made for the dead which was saith hee in time past in the auncient Church condemned for an heresie Ans. Wee denie not but that diuerse of the auncient writers did incline too much this waye to maintaine and commende prayer for the dead yea and Augustine seemeth somewhat to bee infected with this errour though sometime his speech soundeth to the contrarie as where he saith Pompa funeris agmina exequiarum viuorum sunt qualiacunque solatia non adiutoria mortuorum impleant ergò homines ista erga suos postremi muneris officia The pompe of funerals the rites and solemnities of buriall are comfortes of the liuing no helpe to the dead let men therefore perfourme this last duetie to their friends De verb. Apost serm 34. But prayer and supplication pertaineth to the rite of buriall ergo it auaileth not the dead And if the honest buriall of our friendes be the last duetie wee owe vnto them the duetie of praying for them afterward is cut off But whatsoeuer some auncient writers thought of this point wee do rather credite the Apostles wordes who saith That euerie man shall receiue according to the things done in his bodie 2. Corinth 5. 10. Therefore it is in vaine to praye for the dead seeing they cannot vndoe that which was done in their flesh or do what was left vndone If Aerius then held no woorse opinion than this wee see no cause why they shoulde condemne him for an heretike 12 Now followe the heresies of Iouinian which the Iesuite with open mouth casteth vpon vs. The first of Iouinians heresies was this Hee affirmed that a man once endued with faith can no more sinne And so Caluin saith hee affirmeth that faith once had cannot be lost Ans. First who seeth not the Iesuites bad dealing as though it were all one to saie The faithfull cannot sinne which Iouiuian affirmed but wee instantly denie and to holde that the faithfull cannot loose their faith Secondly that true faith whereby wee are iustified once graft in a faithfull mans heart

the scripture alloweth that speech Wee are messengers for Christ and for Christ or in Christes steede we beseech you 2. Corinth 5. 20. 21. He saith not as Christ but for Christ and the highest dignitie that the pastors of the Church haue is to be ministers only of reconciliation 2. Corinth 5. 18. and to be dispensers or disposers of the mysteries of God 1. Corinth 4. 1. See then what is become of this distinction Distinct. 37. There is an action in the Church which is both a sacrifice and a representation of a sacrifice beside there is also an otherthat is no sacrifice but a representation onelie the first is the Masse the second the Eucharist Bellarm. lib. 1 de missa cap 1. Contr. 1. The Eucharist also is a sacrifice of praise and thankesgiuing as the word signifieth for other sacrifice externall in the Church we acknowledge none but these spirituall ones Hebr. 13. 15. 16. 2. Such distinction of a sacrifice representing and a representing without a sacrifice they learne not out of the word nay it is cōtrary to it for al that Christ commaundeth vsis to doe this in his remēbrance and this doing is nothing else but eating drinking according to his institution in the sacrament 1. Corinth 11. 26. vers 2● This do as often as ye drinke it This doing is cōmunicating by drinking not sacrificing as they fondly imagine Distinct. 38. There is Duplex diuortium a double kinde of diuorce in matrimonie quoad thorum cohabitationem quoad vinculum A diuorce from bed and bourd onely the mariage knot or bond remayning still as in case of adulterie and an other kinde when the knotte or bond it selfe is dissolued and loosed Bellar. de matrim lib. 1. cap. 14. Contr. This distinction is contrarie to the Apostle as wee shall shew marriage cannot bee dissolued in respect of bedding and bourding together but the bond Vinculum must needes be vntied What the Vinculum or bond of mariage is Saint Paul sheweth The wife hath not power ouer her owne bodie but her husband and so likewise the husbande c. 1. Corinth 7. 4. and that this is the bond it is gathered out of the 15. verse where speaking of the departure of infidels hee sayth that a brother or sister is not in subiection that is is no longer bound to performe these duties and debtes of mariage verse 27. Art thou bound to a wife secke not to be loosed Ergo the bond may bee loosed the word here vsed is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the which worde commeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vinculum ● bond Therefore by not being in subiection or vnder power one of an other is to be freed and to be no longer bound If the marriage knot or bond could not be vntied among christians the apostle needed not to haue saide Seeke not to bee loosed for who will seeke for an impossible thing Distinct. 39. Some vertues are Morales moral some Theologica theologicall repentance which they call penance is a vertue Morall saith the Iesuit faith a vertue Theologicall Bellarm. lib. 1. de poenitent cap. 29. Contr. First this distinction is not currant for if you vnderstande by Theologicall that which is diuine for so wee englishe Theologia Diuinitie then are all the vertues of christians Theologicall that is Diuine both in respect of the author for they are all the giftes of God Iam. 1. 17. as also in respect of their operation and effect Yee are partakers sayth S. Peter of the diuine nature if ye flie the corruption of worldly lusts 2. Epist. 1. 4. Lo the flying of worldly lustes which is with them a Morall vertue is now become a theologicall or diuine vertue because thereby wee are made diuine or like to the diuine nature Secondly if they bee morall vertues which consist in manners and practise they theologicall that consist in knowledg and speculation Faith in that sense is not theologicall but morall Faith working by loue Gallath 6. 5. Thirdly what needeth such distinction and separation of vertues seeing the apostle ioyneth them all together Ioyne vnto your faith vertue to vertue knowledge to knowledge temperance 2. Peter 1. ver 6. 7. Therefore it is no good argument which the Iesuite maketh ●ayth belongeth not to repentance because one is of this kind another of that seeing the apostle both in nature practise ioyneth thē together Distinct. 40. In contrition Propositum non peccandi duplex there is a double purpose not to sinne any more Virtuale siue implicitum formale seu explicitum an inward and vertuall purpose and a formall and explicate purpose the first is not sufficient but it is necessary that he which is iustified from his sinne should make a formall expresse purpose not to sin any more beside the detestation which he hath of sinne Bellarm. lib. 2. de poenitent cap. 6. Contr. First the Lord saith by his prophet If the wicked will returne from all his sinnes and keepe my statutes hee shall surely liue Ezech. 18. 21. Here is nothing required but a forsaking of sinne and doing of righteousnes which may be done without any such formall or expresse purpose yet a purpose of heart is necessary Act. 11. 23. which must needs accompanie the detestation of sinne and amendement of life Secondly I pray you where was this formall expresse vowe or purpose in the theese vpon the crosse vnto whō Christ notwithstanding promised paradise Luk. 23. verse 42. 43. Distinct. 41. They distinguish thus of merites There is Meritum de congruo merite of congruitie as the workes which goe before instification though they be not simplie meritorious Ex debito iustitiae by the due debt of iustice yet they deserue of congruitie Meritum de condigno merite of condignitie followeth iustification whereby a man by his meritorious works is worthy by iustice of the kingdome of heauen Rhemist annot Ro. 2. sect 3. Bellarm. lib. 2. de poenitent cap. 12. Contr. First that there is no merite at all of condignitie S. Paul sheweth saying The afflictions of this life are not worthie or as they reade Condigne of the glory to come Rom. 8. ver 1. 8. The Rhemistes distinction vpon that place of condigne to and condigne of is but a Iesuiticall toye and not worth the answere Secondly that there is no merite of congruitie before iustification it is thus prooued Without faith there is no merit for without faith it is impossible to please God Hebr. 11. 6. and saith is not before iustification Rom. 5. 1. Ergo. Distinct. 42. Workes of the lawe or of nature done without or before sayth merite not but workes done by Gods grace are truely meritorious Thus they answere vs when we obiect that place Rom. 3. 28. Wee holde that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe Rhemist in hunc locum Contr. The Apostle himselfe taketh away this distinction Ephes. 2. By grace are