Prophet Esay saying Behold I will lay in Sion a stone a sure foundation which is a playne and manifest Prophecie of Christ and not of Peter as the Apostle Peter himselfe expoundeth it where by the way we may note the feareful outrage of these Romish Rabbies against the truth of God and the God of truth whilst to the end they may aduance their Popes dignity by Peter they wrest and peruert the Scriptures and apply the Prophecies belonging to the Sonne of God to his seruant Peter and so make Peter himselfe nay the holy Ghost a Lyar. It were not credible that such blasphemous thoughts and words should nestle in the heart and issue out of the mouth of any but that the Apostle Saint Paul hath fore-told vs that in the time of Antichrist because men would not receiue the loue of the truth that they might be saued therefore God would send them strong delusions that they should beleeue lyes c. But to the point If Christs person be the onely true foundation of the Church in whom all the building being coupled together groweth vnto an holy Temple in the Lord and that not the persons but the doctrine and faith of the Apostles are those secundary foundations which the Scripture speaketh of as hath beene proued out of the Fathers then the opposition is vndefeasible namely that there is but one person the foundation of our Church which is our Lord and Sauiour the Sonne of God Christ Iesus and yet that Peters person should be the foundation of the Church also together with Christ 45. Thirdly I answere that both in truth and also in proprietie of speech there can bee but one foundation of one building those stones that are layd next to the foundation are not properly a secundary foundation but the beginning of the building vpon the foundation and for that cause when Peter and the rest of the Apostles are called twelue foundations it cannot bee vnderstood that they were any wayes properly foundations of the Church either first or second but that our Sauiour who is the substance and subiect of their doctrine is the onely true and singular foundation of the Church and that there is none other besides him for if when it is said that we are built vpō the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles is meant the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles as must needes bee because the Prophets are coupled together with the Apostles which liued not in the Christian Church and therefore could not be personall foundations of it and Christ crucified is the substance of their doctrine then it must needes follow that the Apostles meaning is nothing else but that we are built vpon Christ whom the Prophets and the Apostles preached and beleeued in And thus S. Hilary vnderstood it and Saint Ambrose and Anselmus who giuing the foundation of the Church to Peter expoundeth it sometimes of his faith in Christ and sometimes of Christ himselfe in whom he beleeued And thus doe also Salmeron the Iesuite and Cardinall Caietane in their commentaries vpon that place and Peter Lumbard together with the glosse vpon the place interpret And so this distinction of a primary and secundary foundation hath no foundation in the word of God 46. The Gospell teacheth that no Apostle or Bishop or other Minister of the Gospell is superiour to another of the same ranke or hath greater power and authority then another in respect of their ministerie but that all Ministers in their seuerall degrees haue equall power of preaching the Gospell administring the Sacraments binding and loosing But the Bishop of Rome challengeth to himselfe a supreme power ouer all other Bishops and ouer the whole Church and braggeth that he hath by right a title to both the swords both spirituall and temporall and that both iurisdictions doe originally pertaine to him and from him are conueyed to others c. 47. Bellarmine heere first confesseth and secondly distinguisheth hee confesseth that the Bishop of Rome hath a supreme power ouer all other Bishops and the whole Church and denyeth that eyther those places here quoted or any other doe prooue the contrary 48. To which I answere first that whereas out of Luke 22. 26. and 1. Cor. 3. 4. he extracteth a disparity and an inequality I answere that no man denyeth it and therefore he fighteth with his owne shadow hee should prooue not a bare superiority which wee confesse but a superiority in the same degree as of one Bishop to another and that in power not in execution wherein standeth the point of opposition 49. Secondly whereas he saith that though the power of remitting and retayning finnes and binding and loosing was communicated to all the Apostles yet Peter was ordayned chiefe Pastor ouer them all because our Sauiour Christ sayd vnto him alone Feede my sheepe and To thee will I giue the Keyes of the Kingdome of heauen I answere that in this hee crosseth both himselfe the Fathers and the truth himselfe for elsewhere hee confesseth that the keyes both of Order and Iurisdiction were giuen to all the Apostles indifferently and therefore it must needes follow that Tibi dabo claues was not spoken singularly to Peter but generally to them all for if Christ gaue the keyes to them all as he confesseth then without doubt he promised them to them all or else his word and his deede should not accord together And againe hee acknowledgeth that all the Apostles had both power and commission to feede the sheepe of Christ when Mat. 28. he bade them all Goe teach and baptize and they all did put that commission in execution therefore it must needes follow that no singular power was giuen to Peter when as Christ said vnto him Feede my sheepe vnlesse we will say that the rest had not the same commission 50. The Fathers for Saint Cyprian saith plainely that all the Apostles were the same with Peter indued with equall fellowship both of honour and power and that a primary was giuen vnto Peter that the Church might appeare to be one Saint Hilary is of the same minde You O holy and blessed men saith he for the merit of your faith haue receiued the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and obtained a right to binde and loose in Heauen and earth Saint Augustine saith that if when Christ said To thee will I giue the keyes of the kingdome of Heauen he spake onely to Peter then the Church hath not the power of the keyes but if the Church hath it then Peter receiuing the keyes represented the Church And lastly Leo one of their owne Popes confesseth asmuch when hee affirmeth that the strength of this power of the keyes passed vnto all the Apostles and the constitution of this decree vnto all the Princes of the Church 51. Lastly the truth for when the Apostles stroue for superiority Christ who is truth it selfe and would not haue concealed so necessary a trueth if
absolution to wit if he will be absolued from adultery or incest it must cost him foure Turons if from both together it must stand him in sixe Turons if from wilfull murther being in holy orders hee must pay twelue Turons being a Bishop or an Abbot fiftie Turons twelue Ducats c. Thus there is no sinne so haynous for which pardon may not be purchased for a small summe of money as one of their owne Canonists could sing Si dederis marcas ijs impleueris arcas Culpa soluêris quaque ligatus eris If thou with markes wilt fill their arkes what ere thou doest commit By word or deed thou shalt be freed the Pope hath pardon'd it 15. If this be not a doctrine of liberty let all the world iudge Who need care what sinne hee commit when a pardon is but a money matter Is it any maruaile now if whores and theeues and notorious offenders turne Papists seeing they may haue so easily a full and plenary remission of all their offences And that which is yet a greater emboldening of men to sinne then all the rest they oftentimes for money pardon a sinne before it be committed as it is constantly reported of Parry that he brought with him his pardon in his pocket for murdering the late Queene intended by him But I haue heard of some that haue beene hanged with their pardons about their necks and so it may be was that bloudy-minded Traytor And this was it that emboldened the Germans to robbe the Popes pardoner because they had purchased of him before a pardon for the next sinne they should commit though it were a great one now this was the next and therfore iustly he could not find fault with them 16 By this it is euident to what loosenesse and lewdnesse of life this doctrine doth tend Isti enim indulgentiarum buccinatores omnimodam promitâ—unt securitatem quaeparit negligentiam negligentia offensam Dei saith the Author of that Booke called Onus Ecclesiae that is these publishers of pardons do promise all manner of security which breedeth negligence and negligence the offence of God for Culpam qui praeterit inuitat nouam conniuence at one fault is the hatching of a new Who so will plainly see in one view the monstrous licentiousnesse of life that issueth from this puddle of Popish pardons let him read the third grieuance of the German Nation in the Booke of their Centum grauamina exhibited to the Popes Legate at Noremberge Anno 1522. in the latter end whereof are these wordes of iust complaint By the sale and marchandize of this ware not onely Germany is spoyled of money but Christian godlinesse is extinguished where when euery one according to the quantity of his payment taketh vnto himselfe liberty to sinne hence whoredome incest adultery periury murther theft robbery vsury and a whole heape of mischiefes haue proceeded for what mischiefe will men be afraid to commit when they be once perswaded that they haue obtained licence and impunitie to sinne not onely in this life but also after their death Hitherto is the complaint of Germany which also may bee the iust complaint of the whole world 17 A third doctrine of the Papists opening the gap to licentiousnes is their auricular confession and popish penance I ioyne them together because they goe together in their practice and are both together members of one of their new deuised Sacraments True it is that in outward showe these carry a semblance of seuere discipline but if we search into their bowels we shall find them to be the greatest baytes that can be vnto dissolutenesse For when they teach that the enumeration and reckoning vp of all a mans finnes in the yeare of a Priest once a yeare obtaineth present absolution and pardon at the Priests hands who is both Iudge in this cause and Phisicion and hath power to loofe and binde and to open and shut to wound and heale by the key of power committed to him What is this but to open a gappe to all wickednes for when men are perswaded that there is so ready and easie a meanes to be rid of their sinne what need they be so chary of committing it Hence it is as by lamentable experience it is found true among those that are deuoted to this Religion they sinne freely that they may confesse and be absolued and when they haue confessed they sinne againe that they may confesse againe making no conscience how they liue all the yeare and what horrible sinnes they commit being perswaded that at Easter by the shriuing of a Priest they are cleane absolued Iust like a drunkard that drinkes so long till hee vomite and when his stomacke is disgorged drinkes afresh that he may vomite afresh or like a glutton that surfets all the yere long in all maner of intemperancy then in the spring takes phisick to purge out the naughty humors froÌ„ his stomake as soone as he is purged fals again to his surfeting ryot in hope to be purged again in the spring 18. This is the fruite of Popish shrift commended so highly by them to be so soueraigne a medicine against sin which if it be so why did not Christ and his Apostles vse it were they not as carefull to preserue men from sinne as the Pope and his shauelings are or is the Pope and his Apostles wiser then Christ Iesus and his Disciples why was it not vsed in the Primitiue and purer times of the Church Rhenanus and Erasmus two learned Papists affirme plainely that it was neither ordained by Christ nor vsed by the ancient Church and Chrysostome telleth vs that God doth not enforce vs to come forth and disclose our sinnes to any man He requireth no more saith he but that we speake to him alone and to him alone confesse our faults I but the Popes iudgement is more diuine and the times of Popery are more free from corruption beleeue it who list and therefore howsoeuer then yet now it is found to be a soueraigne preseruatiue against sinne as if they that feare not to offend in the presence of God will blush to confesse their offences in the eare of a sinnefull Priest or as if the law of God were of lesse force to keep men in awe which they cannot escape than the feare of a mortall man whome they may deceiue 19. But let them say what they will and cloake their licentiousnesse with neuer so holie pretences all that haue any iudgement to discerne colours which the blinde Romanists cannot do or any wisedome to trye the spirits and doctrines whether they be of God or no know that Romish shrift is nothing but a shift to diue into mens purses and a tricke of policie to search into their purposes that by that meanes they may enrich their owne coffers and vphold their Antichristian Hierarchie for by this deuice they vnderstand the secrets of state and ciscouer mens
practice Their principles are these As long as the Prince continueth excommunicate the Subiect is freed from the oath of subiection this is the Position of a Cardinall whose authority was so great in the Church of Rome that whatsoeuer he wrote was allowed as sound and authenticall without examination or supervizing To him I adde a Bishop whose writings after supervision and examination were approued as Catholique doctrine and to containe in them nothing contrary to the receiued faith of the Romane Church his Position is this Assoone as a Christian King becomes hereticall forthwith people are freed from their subiection The condition in the first Position is if the King be excommunicate in the second if he be hereticall which though different in termes yet in substance are all one for euery heretique is excommunicate quatenus apertè haereticus in that he is an open heretique if not by name yet in deed and by right and so Subiects may lawfully deny him obedience saith another Iesuite and what is an hereticke in their diuinity I pray you Marry Whosoeuer maintaineth any doctrine expresly condemned by the Church of Rome hee is to be accounted say they an obstinate hereticke To these adde the sentence of another Cardinall euen our owne Countriman Al in his Apology for Stanlies treason who ioyneth both these two conditions together as two twinnes By reason saith he of Queene Elizabeths excommunication and heresie it was not onely lawfull for any of her Subiects but euen they were bound in conscience to depriue her of any strength which lay in their power to doe and to deliuer her Armies Townes or fortresses into her enemies hands she no more being the right owner of them But all this while we haue not the pillar of Popery Bellarmine it may be he is of another mind heare therefore his resolution Non licet Christianis tolerare c. It is not lawfull for Christians to tolerate a King that is an infidell or an heretike if he endeuour to draw his Subiects to his heresie or infidelity This is braue Bellarmines resolution of this case Neither doth he barely set it downe but laboureth to proue it by many arguments throughout that whole Chapter indeed he pinneth it all vpon the Popes sleeue he must pronounce the King to be an heretike and they like sheepe must auoyde him as a wolfe he must forbid them to obey and they must forthwith fall to rebellion that whole seuenth Chapter is worth the reading if any desire to know the full and compleat doctrine of the Romish Church concerning the poynt of rebellion and treason against Princes And that this was the doctrine not of some few among them but of all in generall Let a Fryer of their owne testifie about three hundred yeares since Sigebert mencioning the Popes proceeding against Henry the Emperor thus writeth Be it spoken with the leaue of all good men this nouelty that I say not heresie had not as yet sprung vp in the world that Gods Priests should teach the people that they owe no subiection to euill Princes and though they haue sworne allegeance to them yet they owe them no fidelity neither shall hee be accounted periur'd which thinketh against the King yea hee that obeyeth him shall be counted for excommunicate and he that doth against him shall be absolued from the guilt of iniustice and periurie Here we may behold the doctrine of that age and withall that by this Fryers iudgement concurring with vs it is not onely nouelty but a point of heresie to dissolue the bond of allegeāce which Subiects owe vnto their Princes vpon any pretence whatsoeuer 3. But all these are but the opinions of priuate men and not the decrees of the Church heare therefore what the Church speaketh by the pretended head thereof the Pope who as they affirme cannot erre whilest he sits in the chaire of Peter to determine matters of faith Gregory the seuenth alias Hildobrand thus determineth We by Apostolicall authority doe absolue all from their oaths which they haue giuen to persons excommunicate And another Pope of later time in his Bull against Queene Elizabeth thus We absolue all Subiects from their faith they haue plight with Elizabeth their Queen A third Pope Paulus Tertius did excommunicate Henry the Eight King of England and commanded his nobles to beare armes against him and to make vp the full squadron of Popes when as the Vniuersite of Salamanca determined that all Catholiques which did not forsake the defence of the English and follow the traytor One all in Ireland did sinne mortally and could not obtaine euerlasting life except they should desist Pope Xistus giueth this censure of their determination Those Diuines saith he haue done the parts of good Lawyers Confessours and Doctours Many more testimonies to this effect might be accumulated but these are sufficient because wee shall haue occasion to speake hereof more at large hereafter to all that are not either bewitched with the enchantments of the whore of Babylon or blinded with preiudice to shew how both in their principles and their practice they maintaine treason and rebellion against Princes contrary to the lawes of God of nature and of man 4. A doctrine Cousin german vnto this of the same kind though not of the same degree is that their Position touching the dissoluing of all bonds of naturall and ciuill society wherby they resolue that no communion or fellowship is to bee held with heretiques that is with Protestants by whatsoeuer bond of nature or ciuility they be obliged therevnto and therefore the Father is bound to dis-inherite and cast off his Sonne the Sonne to deny and disobey his Father the wife is forbidden to render due beneuolence to her husband the seruant is commanded to disobey his Master the debter to deny payment to his Creditor the Countriman to deny his owne Country the kinsman to disclaime his kindred if any of these be heretiques that is be Protestants What a religion is this that not only choaketh the breath of humane society but euen stifleth the life of nature it selfe Hee that desireth to see these things proued let them reade Doctor Mortons first Booke of Romish positions and practices of rebellion and also his reply vnto the moderate answere where he shall find them largely and foundly discouered and confirmed 5. Againe by their doctrine of equiuocation they teach and maintaine open and notorious lying and periury such as the very heathen of stricter life and simpler iudgement abhor'd their doctrine is this A man saith Tollet is not alwaies bound to answere according to the meaning of the asker but may sometimes vse equiuocation and deceiue the hearer this is lawfull saith he whē the Iudge requireth an oth against iustice or when he is not a competent Iudge as another speaketh as for example if the Iudge demand Hast thou done this he may answere I haue not though he
c. Which words they interpret as spoken to Peter onely and consequently to the Pope his successour we to the rest of the Apostles as well as to him Where now doth the Scripture decide this doubt and speake plainely which is the truest sense Mary first in the very place it selfe by the due examination of the circumstances thereof they euidently shew that our sense is the truest for whereas the question is propounded to all the Apostles verse 15. and all the Apostles held the same faith that Iesus is the Sonne of God verse 20. it must needes be that Peter was but as the fore-man of the Quest and answered not for himselfe only but for them all thereby shewing forth not any preeminence of authority aboue the rest but a greater zeale and forwardnesse then the rest And herevpon it followeth that seeing this promise of the keyes is made because of that faith and confession therefore they all beleeuing and confessing the same haue an interest to the promise as well as Peter And this Anselmus in plaine tearmes affirmeth It is to be noted saith he that this power was not giuen alone to Peter but as Peter answered one for all so in Peter hee gaue this power to all 14. Secondly by the conference of another place which is more plaine to wit Ioh. 20. 23. where is a gift and an endowment of that power of the keyes which before was promised for to binde and to loose and to remit and retayne sinnes is all one in effect as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth and containâ— the whole vertue of the keyes now here they are all inuested with equall iurisdiction the Holy Ghost is equally breathed vpon them all and equall authority be queathed vnto them all by these words of the Commission As my Father sent me so I send you which exposition is confirmed by the authority of most of the Fathers as Augustine Cyprian Hierome Theophilact Anselme c. and thus the Scripture by a most liuely voyce determineth this doubt and as of this so of all other questions and interpretations the Scripture onely must bee the Iudge which by searching the originals examination of circumstances conference of other places and consulting with the learned Fathers and Expoâ—itors together with feruent prayer to God for inward illumination will giue a most exact and precise satisfaction to all controuersies touching matters of â—aith necessarie to bee beleeued 15. To the third reason that the Scripture is the law and therefore cannot be the Iudge I answere that though the Law and the Iudge be diuers distinct things yet they are subordinate one vnto the other and so may both ioyne in the concurrence of one cause as when our Sauiour saith Call no man Father vpon earth for there is but one your Father which is in heauen his meaning is not to exclude earthly Fathers from their title but to shew that God is the primer and principall Father both in respect of time order and cause and that the other are but subordinate vnto him so in a Common-wealth the Iudge is subordinate vnto the law and the law is the Iudges Iudge and for that cause as the Law is said to be a dumbe Magistrate so the Magistrate is said to be a speaking Law and so in truth the Law is the Iudge primarily and principally and the Magistrate is but the Minister of the law and the Iudge subordinate Now if this be so in a Common-wealth gouerned by humane Lawes which are failing and imperfect in many things being the ordinances of erring men how much more may we deeme it to be so in the Church of God whose Law-giuer is God himselfe and the law the word of God and therefore though the Pastors and Ministers of the Church may interpret the Scriptures yet they must be tyed to this rule to doe it by the Scriptures and to expound the law by the law for shall not a temporall Iudge giue sentence out of his owne braine but secundum leges statuta according to the lawes and statutes of the Realme And shall any Pastour of the Church be it the Pope himselfe giue iudgement in any question out of his owne brest without the direction of Gods word This is to preferre humane lawes before Gods law and to make the state of the Church farre inferiour to the state politike and to haue a more certaine rule for the deciding of ciuill controuersies then for the determining of questions of â—aith so that in a word the Scripture is both the law and the interpreter of the Law the Iudge and the Iudgement 16. Secondly Bellarmine affirmeth and laboureth to proue that the proper and chiefe end of the Scripture was not to be the rule of faith but that it might be commonitorium quoddam vtile A certaine profitable commonitory whereby the doctrine deliuered by word of mouth might be conserued and nourished And to this end and purpose he vseth diuers reasons as first because it containes in it many things which are not necessary to faith as all the Histories of the Olde Testament and many of the New and the salutations in the Epistles of the Apostles all which were not therefore committed to writing because they were necessary to be beleeued but are therefore necessarily beleeued because they are written Secondly because all things necessary to be beleeued are not contained in the Scripture as by what meanes women vnder the law were clensed from originall sinne wanting circumcision and children that dyed before the eight day and many Gentiles that were saued againe which are the books of Canonicall Scripture and that these are Canonicall and those are not that the Virgin Marie was a perpetuall virgin that the Passeouer is to be kept vpon the Sunday being the Lords day and that children of beleeuing Parents are to bee baptized and such like Thirdly because the Scripture is not one continued body as a rule should bee but containeth diuers workes Histories Sermons Prophecies Verses and Epistles These be his three reasons by which the Iesuite would euince that the Scripture is not giuen to this end to be the rule of faith 17. To all which I will answere briefly and distinctly and first in generall secondly in particular In generall if the Scripture be not giuen to be the rule of faith why is it called Canonicall It is therefore called Canonicall because it containes the Canon that is the rule of faith and life this very inscription approued by all doth refute Bellarmines fond cauillation Againe if the Scripture was not giuen to bee the rule but onely a monitorie why were there so many Bookes written seeing fewer would haue serued for monition The multiplicity of Bookes proueth that they serue not onely to put vs in mind of our duty but also as an exact rule to square our faith and frame our life by And lastly if the Scripture was not giuen to be a rule why doth he himselfe
teach his proceeding in age is his proceeding in wisdome And therefore Saint Luke sets his growth in age First that thou mightest know that it is spoken of him as he is man And Chrysostome thus The wisemen gaue honour not to his childhood vnderstanding nothing but to his diuinitie knowing all things and Maldonate doth confesse that Athanasius Gregory Nazianzene Theodoret Cyril and the authour of the imperfect worke on Mathew did al teach that Christ as man was ignorant of the day of Iudgement Neyther do these fathers alleadged by Bellar. for the contrarie opinion in truth deliuer any thing else if they bee rightly vnderstood for most of them when they say that our Sauiour was full of grace knowledge and wisedome from his verie conception and that hee did not increase and grow therein as other men they speake eyther of his person in the concret or of his diuine nature apart as their owne words alleadged by him doe clearely shew And to this opinion Thomas Aquinas their grand Schooleman and angellical Doctor setteth his hand and seale For thus hee writeth Though I haue elsewhere written otherwise yet it is to be said sayth bee that in Christ there was scientia acquisita knowledge acquired or gotten which is properly knowledge according to the measure of man and that not onely in respect of the subiect receiuing but also of the cause agent c. 90. Secondly al ignorance is not sin by the doctrine of their own schoole For that ignoraÌ„ce which is called purae negationis of pure negation doth not oppugne the state of innocencie seeing that it was in AdaÌ„ before his fal and is now in the Angels in their perfection may be in any without the spot of sin as witnesse Lumbard Aquinas Pererius al their learned Doctors for the most part yea their Iesuite Suarez telleth vs it is not to be called ignorance at al. Because ignorance sayth he doth not signifie euery want of knowledge but the priuatioÌ„ of that knowledge which ought to be in a subiect according to the state of the nature thereof as man is not to bee called ignorant because he wanteth angellicall knowledge so Christ was ignorant of none of these things which was behoofefull for him to know in respect of the dignitie of his person so that of two kindes of ignorance one of pure negation that is when a man knoweth not some thing which hee is not bound to know and the other of wicked disposition when a man is 〈…〉 of something which he ought to know This last is a sinne but not the first and therefore to say that Christ was ignorant of some things in his humane nature and that hee increased in knowledge as in age is not to impute vnto him any blot either of originall or actuall sinne 91. For the other part of the obiection wherewith Caluine is touched concerning our Sauiours correcting of his owne speech it is no other then that which Ierome before him many hundred yeeres vttered and Origen also two famous fathers of the Primitiue Church the one affirming that Christ returning to himselfe auouched that as he was the Sonne of God which hee had staggeringly spoken as hee was a man the other that he recalled his desire and as it were thinking better vpon it said Not as I will yea they themselues acknowledge asmuch for Bellarmine sayth that when our Sauiour prayed Let this cup passe from me but not as I will but as thou wilt it was asmuch as if he should haue said Volo vt non fiat voluntate naturali quod voluntate deliberata volo vt fiat I will that it may not come to passe to wit by my naturall will which by my deliberate will I desire may come to passe Here is a plaine correction as Caluine calleth it or a returning to himselfe as Hierome or a reuocation of his natural desire by a more aduised desire as Origen the like interpretation is giuen by Iansenius Pererius and Maldonate all agreeing in tâ—is that they admit of a correction and reuocation of his naturall inferiour humane wil by his spirituall superior diuine will and yet without all blemish and suspition of sin this correction presuposing no corruption So that either Caluine must be excused or themselues must bee inwrapped within the folds of the same fault But this is their rancour against that good man and all other of our side that which is orthodox in the Fathers and themselues is notwithstanding heresie in vs because they looke vpon vs thorow the spectacle of malice but vpon themselues with the eyes of selfe-loue 92. And to cleere him altogether and ridde him out of their hands the most receiued doctrine both by Caluine and all our whole Church concerning this point is that this was not in our Sauiour Christ either a rebellion of the sensuall part of the soule against the rationall as Perâ—rius maketh it which is in the vnregenerate nor of the flesh against the spirit as Iansenius would haue it which is in the regenerate nor a repugnance of Christs will as he was a man to his will as he was God which Maldonate sâ—emeth to affirme but onely the strife of two contrarie desires in the humane soule of Christ for dominion both which notwithstanding were good and holy though the one not so good as the other and in that respect this desire to auoid death which was the lesse might without any great offence bee said to bee corrected when it yeelded vnto that other which was more excellent 92. Lastly to omit a number more of their sslanders in this kind they charge our Religion it selfe to lead to loosenesse and sensualitie by diuers doctrines thereof especially these foure to wit freewill iustification by faith alone perseuerance in grace and impossibilitie to keepe the Commandements but with what spirit of malice let the indifferent Reader consult and iudge 93. First for our doctrine touching the inabilitie of free-will doth it lead a man to loosenesse nay rather doth it not teach him to deny himselfe and to seeke for all grace and goodnesse from God humilitie and prayer are the fruits of this doctrine and not loosnesse and libertie and to make it cleare to any single eye We teach that a man is onely voyde of freewill to grace before his regeneration and that hee is passiue onely in the very act of regeneration but after his will being quickned and stirred vp by Gods spirit he willeth and worketh forth together with the spirit of God his owne saluation Now few or none there are that are Christians but presume though falsely that they are regenerate and therefore this doctrine cannot giue libertie to any to sinne but rather bindeth them fast to obedience nay doth not their doctrine rather open a gappe to libertie For when they teach that it is in a mans power either to accept or reiect the grace of God offered vnto him What doth this