whomsoeuer you shall finde call to the mariage Mark 16. vers 15. Going into the whole world preach the Ghospell to all creatures CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarmin de Amiss Grat. c. l. 2. 9. The Scripture teacheth that God inuiteth all to him PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Perkins in Casibus conscient cap. 7. It is euident that the promise of saluation is not to be taken as vniuersall without exception or restriction God inuiteth not all Beza de Praedestinat cont Castel p. 417. Christ doth not inuite simply all vnto him Et in quaest Respons p. 655. See with how conuincent reason that vniuersall vocation is refuted Vocation is not vniuersall Wherefore not vocation much lesse that vniuersall election can and must be assigned but onely an indefinite vocation Zanchius in Supplicat ad Senatum Argent to 7. col 57. That God in earnest calleth all is to be vnderstood according to his reuealed will to wit so farre as he calleth all by the outward preaching of the Ghospell not excluding any but not according to his secret will In depuls calum col 260. The promises Promises pertaine not to all do not pertaine indeed vnto all but onely to the elect And col 261. There is an other reason why God doth not giue them reprobates faith nor euer simply promised it to them Bucanus in Institut loco 36. Is not the vocation and remission Not remissiō vniuersall Mathew 11. 28 It is rather indefinite Vrsinus in Miscellan p. 74. If the vniuersall promise belonged to all men what a masse of absurditie and impietie would follow Pareus in Galat. 3. lect 43. The promises are vniuersall to the beleiuers but not vniuersall to the incredulous for they belonge not to them Therefore it sufficeth not to vrge the vniueruersall articles All Of all Stosselius apud Zanchium l. 2. epistolorum The Ghospell Nor the Ghospell belongeth onely to the elect THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ called all that are burdered and commanded to preach to all creatures The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that Gods vocation is not vniuersall that God in earnest calleth not all that the promise of saluation is not vniuersall parteineth onely to the elect that the Ghospell belongeth onely to the elect Which are so opposite to the Scripture as diuers Protestants confesse it See lib. 2. c. 30. ART XXII WHETHER GOD OF HIM selfe will the death and damnation of men SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Ezechielis 33. v. 11. Liue I saieth our Lord God I will not the death of the impious but that the impious be conuerted from God willeth not death his way and liue c. 18. v. 23. Why is the death of a sinner my will saieth our Lord God and not that he conuert from his wayes and liue Et ver 32. Because I vill not the death of him that dieth saieth our Lord. He made not death Wisdome c. 1. v. 13. God made not death nether doth he reioice in the perdition of the liuing Tobie 3. 22. For thou art not delighted in our perditions Ecclesiast 15. vers 11. Impious men are not necessarie for him CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE Gard. Bellarmin l. 2. de Grat. lib. arb c. 16. The sinnes of men and not the onely will of God are the cause of positiue reprobation that is of that act wherewith God will adiudge reprotes to euerlasting punishment PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Conc. vlt. p. 693. God predestinated to eternall God predestinateth to death whome and why he would Sinne not the cause of damnation God worketh and willeth death death whome he would and because he would Pag. 694. The onely cause of reprobation whereof we speake is Gods will mynd and decree Perkins de Praedestinat to 1. col 123. Sinne is not the cause of the decree of damnation See Willet cont 18. q. 1. p. 855. Luther l. de seru arbit to 2. fol. 450. The hidden God worketh life death and all in all Agayne He will not the death of a sinner to wit in word but he willeth it with his vnsearchable will Caluin 3. Institut c. 22. § vlt. If we cannot giue a reason No reason of reprobation but Gods will Some created todamnation and to perish why God vouchsafeth mercie to his elect but because it so pleaseth him nether shall we haue any other thing why he reprobateth others them his will Cap. 21. § 5. To some eternall life is preordinated to others eternall damnation Therefore as euerie one is created to ether end c. In Roman 9. ver 18. Salomon teacheth shat the wicked were of purpose created for to perish Beza in Rom. 9. v. 11. Who gather that God in those whom from all eternitie he destinated to reprobation and perdition was moued thereto by their foreseene incredulitie ill life are greatly deceaued In Explicat Christianismi cap. 5. Reprobates he created to the end that he might be glorified in their iust condemnation In Colloq Montisbel p. 447. He created ordained and destinated the reprobates to eternall damnation for causes knowne to him selfe alone And de Praedestinat vol. 3. p. 438. God of his mere will and therefore not for any respect of foreseene worthines or vnworthines hath destinated to hatred and perdition whome he would ether particular men or whole nations And this doctrin he termeth the foundation of his faith Bucer in Matth. 6. What he saieth that he will not the death of the impious and of him that dieth but would rather haue him returne and liue is to be vnderstood of them onely whome he hath chosen to be conuerted and liue Peter Martyr in Rom. 9. It lesse despleaseth men if they be God hateth and reprobateth for his mere will saied to be predestinated and chosen then to be saied to be hated and reprobated for Gods mere will without all respect of deserts and yet there must be the same reason of both Et libr. de libro arbit tom 3. locorum It seemeth at first sight absurd that some should be created of God for to perish yet the Scripture Some created to perish Gods will the only cause of reprobation saieth it Musculus in locis tit de reprobis The cause of reprobation is not to be attributed to the future wickednes of the reprobates but to the onely will of God Piscator in Thesibus lib. 2. p. 182. God made man to fall It He made men to fall is false that God hath not need of a sinner Page 235. Nether is this simply true that God is not the beginning or cause of perdition P. 245. Reprobation is absolute that is depending of the mere pleasure of God and not vpon the condition of incredulitie foreseene Marlorat in Rom. 9. v. 22. What inconuenience is it to say Some made to destructiō that these were made to destruction Zanchius de Praedestinat c. 1. to 7. They take from God his Some created to
death to be destroied right who say that it is false that God created some to life others to death onely that he might shew his mercie in them and his power and iustice in these cap. 4. He createth some to this end to be destroied c. 6. That one is saued or damned we must needes confesse that Gods will was and is the cheefest Et apud Schusselburg l. 4. Theol. Caluin art 8. Gods will is the first and vnauoidable Gods will the first cause of perdition cause of the perdition of them that perish And l. 3. de natura Dei c. 4. q. 4. As for that place of wisdome Death entred into the world by the enuie of the Diuel and if there be any such others in which death is attributed to the Diuel as to the Author we answere that it doth not follow that God willeth God author of death not death or is not the author of it For the same effect may proceed from diuers causes Bucanus l. 4. Syntagm c. 10. The cause efficient and mouing for which the decree of affirmatiue or negatiue reprobation was made of God is not sinne The true and onely mouing cause for which the decree of reprobation was made is Gods pleasure or free will See manie more like sayings of Protestants in my Latin booke l. 1. art 22. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that God of him selfe will not the death of the impious or of him that dieth yea God sweareth that he will not his death and the Scripture addeth that God made not death that it entred by the Diuel that impious men are not necessarie for God The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say the contrarie that God will the death of a sinner with his vnsearchable will that he is the Author of death that he created men to perdition death and damnation that he is the beginning the first vnauoidable cause of the perdition of them that perish That he predestinateth to death whome he would and why he would that sinne is not the cause of the decree of damnation That sinne is nether efficient nor mouing cause of negatiue or affirmatiue reprobation but onely the pleasure and free will of God ART XXIII WHETHER GOD DAMNETH men for sinne SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Matth. 25. v. 41. Then he shall saye to them also that be at God damneth for sinne his left hand Get ye away frō me you cursed into fire euerlasting For I was an hungred and you gaue me not to eate c. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarmin l. 2. de Grat. lib. arb c. 16. The Scriptures euerie where teach that by the iust iudgment of God euerlasting punishment is rendred vnto sinne PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther l. de seru arb tom 2. fol. 461. This most of all offendeth God damneth men for his mere will Respecteth not deserts in those that are to be damned Damneth those that deserue not common sense or naturall reason that God for his mere will doth forsake harden and damne men Fol. 465. Let vs I pray you feigne that God must be such a one as respecteth deserts in them who are to be damned Shall we not in like manner auouch and graunt that he respecteth deserts in them who are to be saued And fol. 466. It is now incomprehensible how it is iust that he damneth them that deserue not and yet is beleeued Zanchius apud Schusselburg l. 4. Theol. Caluin art 8. Here we saye that there is no other cause of mens damnation thē Gods mere pleasure Rennecber 16. The cause of damnation or reprobation is not to be saught in men but Gods will is the cheefest and supreme cause thereof Also Gryneus 16. Sinnes are Sinne not the cause of damnation not the cause why men are damned And Spindlerus 16. Sinne can no way be the cause why men are damned THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that men are damned and adiudged to hell fire for sinne The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say the contrarie that sinnes are not the cause why men are damned that can no way be the cause why men are damned that there is no other cause of mens damnation then Gods mere pleasure that God damneth those who deserue it not that he respecteth not deserts in those that he damneth that he damneth men for his mere will And thus much of Gods inward and outward acts toward sinne good works and mankinde let vs now see something of his power ART XXIV WHETHER GOD BE ALmightie and can doe all things SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Genes 17. v. 1. Our Lord appeared vnto him and saied vnto God is almightie him I am the God almightie Iob. 42. v. 2. I know thou canst doe all things Mathew 19. v. 26. With God all things are possible The same is repeated Marke 10. and 14. Luke 1. vers 36. There shall not be impossible with God any word CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarmin l. 3. de Euchar. c. 2. All diuines write that Gods power is not absolute God is saied to be almightie because he can do all that implieth not contradiction SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Caluin in Resp ad Nebulon. p. 730. Caluin euerie where earnestly reiecteth that deuise of Gods absolute power which the Sophisters prate of in their scholes Which he repeateth de Praedest 728. de Prouid 755. 1. Inst c. 17. § 2. l. 3. c. 23. § 2. in c. 25. Isaiae Beza cont Heshusium vol. 1. p. 299. That saying of thine All thinges are possible to God hath some exception P. 300. You forsouth shall teach vs that Gods omnipotencie must not Gods omnipotencie limited Some things impossible to God be tied to that order which willingly he hath appointed to him selfe And pag. 302. He saieth that God can no more put Christs bodie in two places at once then he can make new Gods In Colloq Montisbel p. 27. God cannot make that Christs bodie be substantially in many places at one time Lib. quaest vol. 1. p. 658 God cannot make that one and the same bodie be substantially in many places or in any place not coextended to the place Which also he repeateth Respons ad Acta Torgens vol. 3. p. 60. Peter Martyr Respons ad Gardiner obiect 11. We complaine that you alwaies obiect Gods power whereas this Christs To which Gods power doth not extend Gods omnipotencie not without exception Beareth not some things bodie to be at once in manie places is of that kinde of things to which Gods power doth not extend And lib. 1. Epistolarum Zanchij pag. 408. We warne the godlie that Gods omnipotencie which we beleiue is not to be beleiued without all exception Sadeel ad art 14. aburat We haue shewed that Christs bodie cannot be really present in many places at once and that Gods omnipotencie cannot beare this And yet these men say that their faith can make present things that are to come absent and farthest of as
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
WHETHER FAITH BEING alone and without good workes can iustifie SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Iames 2. v. 14. What shall it profit my brethren if a man say he hath faith but hath not workes Shall faith be able to saue him v. 24. Do you see that by workes a man is iustified and Faith alone doth not iustifie nor saue not by faith onely The same proue the places before cited which affirme that faith without workes is dead CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE Councel of Trent Sess 6. c. 7. Faith doth not perfectly vnite to Christ nor maketh a liuelie member of him vnlesse to it be adioyned hope and charitie PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Confessio Belgica art 24. We are iustified by faith in Christ and that also before we haue done any good workes Luther in Gal. 2 to 5. fol. 310. This faith doth iustifie before Iustified before workes and without charitie fol. 312. It is an errour and impietie to say that infused faith doth not iustifie vnlesse it be adorned with Faith without charitie doth iustifie the workes of charitie Et in Disput to 1. f. 371. vnlesse faith be without anie euen the least workes it doth not iustifie nay it is 〈◊〉 â—aâ—th Liber Concordiae Lutheran c. 3 We reiect and condemne That faith doth not iustifie without good workes and so good The presence of workes is not needfull workes to be necessarily required to iustification and that without their presence a man cannot be iustified Illyricus in Claue Scripturae part 2. tractat 6. It is falsely saied That faith is neuer without good workes if it be ment of their actuall and not onely potentiall presence especially in the first iustification Againe God iustifieth the impious euen not working Therefore in iustification good workes do not onely not cooperate but nether are they present Schlusselbug to 7. Catal. Haeret. pag. 837. Our proposition Faith without workes iustifieth remaineth straÌ„ge That faith in the first iustification of a wicked sinner is without all good workes actually present Wigandus in Schlusselburg lib. cit p. 792. Faith must needs be first and then workes follow albeit we cannot discerne the time For Luthers sentence is certaine Faith iustifieth before it doth good workes Et p. 764. The absence of our good workes doth Absence of workes hindreth not iustification not hinder God to impute iustice by Christ Authour de Iustif to 5. doctrinae Iesuit p. 241. The holie Scripture describeth manie iustified in whome is no good worke seene but onely faith Againe These and the like examples do clearly shew that in the beginning faith is truely without good workes and that it so voide of good works is imputed to iustice and receaueth remission of sinnes See more of their like sayings hereafter cap. 14. art 12. For the same beleiue as well the Lutherans who hould that the presence of good workes is not necessarie to iustification as Caluinists who teach that iustification of faith remaineth in the faithfull euen in most grieuous sinnes THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely sayeth that faith without workes profiteth not saueth not is dead that a man is not saued with faith onely The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that faith iustifieth before we doe any good worke without and before charitie without euen the least good workes without good workes actually present without the presence of good workes that in iustification good workes are not so much as present that manie are iustified in whome no good workes are seene that faith void of good workes is imputed to iustice and receaueth remission of sinnes ART XVIII WHETHER FAITH DO iustifie as it is Beleife or as it beleiueth or knoweth SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Ioan. 17. v. 3. This is life euerlasting that they know thee the Faith iustifieth as it is a knowledge onely true God and whome thou hast sent Iesus Christ 1. Ioan. c. 5. ver 1. Whosoeuer beleiueth that Iesus is Christ is borne of God v. 5. Who is he that ouercometh the world but he that beleiueth that Iesus is the Sonne of God Rom. 4. v. 3. Abraham beleiued God and it was reputed him to iustice c. 10. vers 9. If thou confesse with thy mouth our Lord Iesus and in thy hart beleiue that God hath raised him vp from the dead thou shalt be saued CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 6. cap. 6. They are disposed to iustice whilst stirred vp and holpen by Gods grace conceauing faith by hearing they are freely moued to God beleiuing these things to be true which are reuealed and promised PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Willet Controu 19. pag. 983. Faith doth not iustifie vs by Faith iustifieth not as it is a Beleife As it is a Beleife But as it is a Petition the worke of beleiuing As it is an act of beleiuing onely it iustifieth not Feild l. 3. de Eccles c. 44. Speciall faith hath sundrie actes but to this purpose specially two The one by way of petition huÌ„bly intreating for acceptation and fauour the other in the nature of confortable assurance consisting in a persuasion that that is graunted which was desired Faith by her first act obtaineth and worketh our iustification by her second act she doth not actiuely iustifie but finding the thing done certifieth and assureth vs of it Zuinglius l. de ver falsa relig cap. de Merito Faith in As it is a Trust a Confidence Scripture is taken manie waies First for beleife then for stedfastnes next for trust in God and of this onely it must be vnderdoost That faith saueth Respons ad Confess Lutheri f. 507. To say that this kind of faith and assent bringeth any comfort securitie peace tranquillitie or saluation to our soules were false and most foolish Hemingius in Enchirid. classe 1. pag. 109. It is manifest that none is saued by onely knowledge Whereupon euerie one seeth that iustifying faith is not onely the knowledge of the historie of Christ. Lobechius Disput 22. Sauing faith is saied to iustifie not by the foundation as it is a knowledge and assent in the mynd and trust in the will but by reason of the end or obiect which is Christ And of the same opinion are other Protestants as appeareth both by their words related before art 2. 3. and also because they teach that iustifying faith is not the Catholik faith wherewith we beleiue the misteries of faith but a speciall trust or confidence wherewith euerie elect faithfull man assureth himselfe of the remission of his sinnes or at least that it includeth this trust Herevpon Confessio Saxon. c. 4. saieth By faith is signified a trust resting Protâ—stants faith is Trust on the Sonne of God Which is repeated c. 7. 16. Luther Praef. in Epist ad Rom. to 5. Faith is a trust of the mercie of God towards vs. Ministri Saxonici in Colloq Aldeburg fol. 30. Faith in this matter we vnderstand to be trust relying vpon Christ. Zuinglius Respons
Consciences are bound with Gods law onely Zuinglius in Explanat artic 28. It is no sinne which God forbiddeth not Mans additions cannot make anie thing to be good or euill Art 24. No Christian is bound to those workes which Christ hath not commaunded Caluin in Iacobi 4. vers 12. It is God alone who hath the conscience subiect to his laws In Refutat Cathalon p. 384. No mortall man can make lawes which binde the conscience and make men guiltie of Gods iudgment De necessitate reform pag. 58. We teach that consciences are free and quite from mens lawes In Confess fidei p. 109. Men haue no power to binde the consciēce vnder mortall sinne The like he hath 3. Instit c. 19. 4. c. 10. Beza in Confess c. 5. sect 33. God hath reserued to himselfe alone all this power of binding the conscience with lawes cap. 7. sect 9. It is lawfull to God alone to impose lawes vpon the conscience Peter Martyr in locis classe 4. cap. 4. § 5. The Apostles No sinne to breake the Apostles laws without scandall did decree that Gentils conuerted to Christ should abstaine from strangled meate and immolated to idols and from blood If anie had eaten of them without offense of others he had sinned nothing in conscience Daneus Controu 3. p. 509. Mens commandment can not bind our consciences Contr. 5 pa. g1125 No law but Gods can binde vs in consciencience THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that who resisteth the Magistrate resisteth Gods ordinance and purchaseth damnation and that we must be subiect to him for conscience sake Catholiks say the same Protestāts expressely say that Magistrates cannot binde the conscience that God alone can binde the conscience that breakers of the Apostles precept without contempt or scandall did not sinne THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER of mans law What hath beene rehearsed in this chapter plainely proueth that Protestants teach contrarie to the Scripture concerning mans law For the holie Scripture and Catholiks withall teacheth that there is superioritie among Christians that men haue power to make lawes and that their lawes may binde the conscience all which are denied of Protestants It proueth also that Protestants euen in this matter keepe their ould custome of stealing For they take from Christians all superioritie all power of makinge lawes and from their lawes all power of binding the conscience CHAPTER XX. OF FREE VVILL ART I. WHETHER MANS WILL BE free in indifferent matters SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. NVMBERS 30. v. 14. It shal be in the arbitrement Man free in things indifferent of her husband whether she shall do it or not do it Iosue 24. ver 15. Choice is giuen you chuse this day that which pleaseth you 2. Reg. 24. vers 12. Choice is giuen thee of three We haue choice things chuse one of them which thou wilt 1. Corint 7. vers 37. For he that hath determined in his hart being setled not hauing necessitie but hauing power of his owne will c. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Concil of Trent Sess 6. Con. 5. If anie shall say that mans free will is after Adams sinne lost and extinct or a thing onely in Title or a title without the thing finally a deuise of Sathan brought into the Church be he accursed PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Luther art 36. tom 2. Free will after sinne is a thing onely in No free will after sinne Title And in assert eiusdem articuli Free will is a deuise amongst things and a title without the thing because no man hath in his power to thinke any good or ill but all things fall out of absolute necessitie There is no doubt but that by Sathans teaching this name Free will came into the Church The same Luther de seruo arbit to 2. f. 434. Mans will is Mans will is like a beast set in the middest as a beast if God sitte vpon it it willeth and goeth whither God will if Sathan sitte vpon it it willeth and goeth whither Sathan will Nether is it in his power to runne to ether rider or to seeke him but the riders themselues striue about We do all things of necessitie him whether shall haue him fol. 435. It is certaine that we do all things of necessitie and nothing by free will The like he hath p. 461. 486. and otherwhere often Melancthon in locis editis An. 1521. apud Bellarm. l. 4. Men haue nether free will nor reason de Grat. lib. arbit c. 5. Men vse the name of free will which is most different from the holie scripture from the sense and iudgment of the Spirit And out of Plato his schole is added the word Reason as pernitious as that Againe Seing all things that fall out fall out necessarily according to Gods predestination there is no libertie of will What then will you say is there no chance in things no happe no fortune The Scripture say that all things fall out necessarily And if there seeme to thee to be some chance in humane matters thou must here command the iudgment of reason Which words of his also are repeated by Zanchius de Praedestinat c. 5. to 7. col 435. Zuinglius l. de Religione c. de Merito to 2. Gods prouidence taketh away both free will and merit The verie name of free will disliked Caluin l. 2. lib. arb p. 153. The name of free will displeaseth me and I would it were taken away Et p. 154. Who mantaineth free will vseth an other lāguage then the Holie Ghost doth 2. Instit c. 2. § 8. Because I thinke it name of free will cannot be kept without great danger and that it would be great good to Church if it were abolished nether will I vse it and I should wish others if they will heare me to forebeare it Et l. 1. cap. 15. § 8. Who do yet seeke will in mā lost and drowned in spirituall perditiō do plainely doate Et in confess p. 108. We nether grant merit nor free will No free will in indifferent things Polanus in Disput priuatis disput 34. A sinfull man hath no free will in indifferent and ciuill matters CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that man hath freedome in choice to doe that he hath choice to chuse what he will that he hath not necessitie but power of his will The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that free will is a deuise a thing onely in title or title without the thing that there is no libertie no chance in things that all things fall out of absolute necessitie that mans will is like a beast that a sinfull man hath no free will in indifferēt and ciuill things Which some Protestants confesse to be contrarie to Scripture See lib. 2. c. 30. ART II. WHETHER MANS WILL BE free in morall matters that are good or badde SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Gen. 4. v 6. Why art thou angrie and why is thy contenance Free will in
and that we should rightly vnderstaÌ„d his meaning Finally Christs hearers do contest the same For they were his Apostles to whome he had made knowne the mysteries of God and therefore of their parte there was no cause to speake otherwise then men vse to do by such kind of words The seuenth head shal be taken from the nature or qualitie 7. From the matter of the matter of the foresaied articles in which Protestants contradict the expresse words of Scripture together with Protestants want of the like opposite words of Scripture which may seeme expressely and without any inference or exposition of Protestants to teach as Protestants doe For the matter of the foresaied articles partely is such as the very light of reason doth see that it is so as the expresse words of Scripture doth teach it to be to wit That God willeth not doth not commandeth not sinne That he tempteth not nor prodestinateth men to sinne that he iustifieth not the impious remaining impious that good workes are necessarie to saluation and the like Partely is knowne to be such by verie experience as That a man hath free will in good and badde that he cooperateth to his conuersion that faith is an act of man and such others Partely it is new neuer heard of before and farre beyond the reach of all reason as is the Eucharist and manie more Now Protestants in all kinds of matter What kind of words Protest want which is in controuersie and almost in all the foresaied articles want expresse words of Scripture which were of purpose spoaken to declare what a thing was and which of themselues plainly and directly without any inference or exposition of men may so much as seeme to say that it is so as Protestants teach Seing therefore that What kind of words Catholiks doe bring in all kind of matter in controuersie and in all the foresaied articles Catholiks do bring both expresse words of Scripture and spoaken of purpose to declare what we ought to beleiue touching that article and which plainely and directly according to their natiue and vsuall sense amongst men without any inference or exposition added to them pronounce that it is so as Catholiks teach and that the light of reason and experience also contest the same sense in such matters as they can reach vnto And that Protestants in none or very few articles can bring anie such expresse words of Scripture which may so much as seeme to be so plaine What Protest oppose against the expresse words of Scripture for them as those are for Catholiks but in all or all most all the saied articles onely bring their inferences or arguments and those composed at least of one humane principle and that in matters which humane reason no way can reach vnto it is mere madnesse to forsake the doctrine the doctrine of the Catholik Church holie Fathers and Councels and the most expresse words of Scripture in all the saied articles and the very light of reason and experience it selfe in manie of them and to harken to the inferences consequences and humane arguments of a few new and disagreing Heretiks For example Seing the Eucharist as it is a matter of faith to wit a Sacrament instituted of Christ and a guift giuen of him to the Church whether it be onely a seale of grace as ProtestaÌ„ts would or the true bodie of Christ as Catholiks beleiue is a new thing instituted first of Christ and neuer heard of before nor falleth vnder the reach of sense or reason but onely of faith and is such as Christ would haue it to be is it not Madnesse to follow mens consequences rather then Gods words madnesse to gather what it is rather by the humane inferences or arguments composed of some few new and disagreing men of one humane principle at least then by Christs owne words and those most expresse and spoakeÌ„ of him purposely for to tell vs most clearely what he would haue the Eucharist to be For who well in his witts will perswade himselfe ether that these men by their humane arguments perceaue better what a thing which falleth not vnder reason is then Christ who instituted it or that they know better what Christ would haue it to be then Christ himselfe or that they expresse Christs meaning more clearely by their arguments and consequences quite opposite to Christs words then he hath done by his owne expresse words speaking by himselfe of purpose for to declare his meaning or finally that Christ expresseth his meaning concerning the Eucharist by a humane principle no where deliuered of him and a humane argument neuer made of him and that also directly opposite to his owne expresse words better then by his owne most expresse and cleare words and those of purpose spoaken for to expresse clearely what he would haue the Eucharist to be Can any maÌ„ beleiue that a few new and disagreing men do vnderstand the supernaturall matters of faith better then God himselfe or that they declare better what they are by their humane inferences and arguments composed of humane principles theÌ„ God himselfe doth by his owne expresse words spoaken by him of purpose for to declare what they are what it is to preferre mans word before Gods word and man before God if this be not Or doth any wise man teach new Notethis things necessarie to be knowne of vs and which cannot be knowne but by his teaching and that but once in his life and a litle before his death onely by contraries to wit by saying that they are that which they are not indeed and neuer saying that they are that which truely they are And shall we thinke that Christ the wisdome of his Father did once onely in his life and neare vnto his death teach vs what the Eucharist is which was then a new thing neuer heard of before and necessarie to be knowne of vs and yet could not be knowne but by his teaching onely by the contrarie to wit by saying most expressely that it was his bodie giuen and broken for vs neuer saying that it was not his bodie but onely a figure thereof if indeed it onely were a figure as Protestants beleiue would God or Gods Scripture as S. Austin writeth â— 33. cont Faâ—stum c. 7. speake in an other manner to vs then ours is No surely vnlesse it would not be vnderstood of vs. And who will say that Is it mens custome to be taught by coÌ„traries it is our manner to be taught new things and that but once and which caÌ„not be knowne but by some Maisters teaching not by our Maisters expresse words spoaken by him of purpose for to tell vs what those things are but by a quite opposite discourse not made of him but of some other and consisting at least of one principle which he neuer allowed By these Reader thou seest clearly as I hope that if Ether Protest contradict the true sense of Scripture or
the elect And againe It is certaine that the places which promise saluation vniuersally belong onely to the elect And Beza in Ioan. 6. v. 40. It must not be taken for an vniuersall but for an indefinit proposition Caluin vpon the place cited saieth It speaketh of kinds of men not of all persons And Perkins in Serie causarum c. 52. We must know that this proposition is not generall but indefinit If we proue the same out of these words 2. Pet. 3. v. 10. Not some but all that is Some Not willing that anie perish but all to returne to pennance Beza in Colloq Montisbel p. 422. in respons p. 231. and De Praedestinat cont Castel p. 355. answereth It is plaine that Peter speaketh onely to the faithfull Zanchius l. 5. de Nat. Dei cap 2. It is vnderstood onely of the elect And Bucer in Math. 6. It is ment of them onely whome he hath chosen for to be conuerted and liue If we proue that God calleth all because Christ Math. 11. ver 28. crieth Come to me all that labour and are burdened All that is Some and I will refresh you Beza l. quaest resp vol. 1. p. 699. answereth But yee will say the calling and promise is vniuersall But vnderstand it indefinite and that in regard of certaine circustances of which we spoake and thou shall thinke more rightly For otherwise behould with how necessarie reasons that vniuersall calling is refuted wherefore not an vniuersall calling but onely an indefinite can and must be defended If we proue that God hateth euen the faithfull when they worke iniquitie because Psalm 5. v. 7. it is saied Thou hatest all who worke iniquitie they will except the All that is Some faithfull as appeareth by what we rehearsed l. 1. c. 2. art 9. If we proue that all things are possible to God because so it is saied Math. 19. v. 26. Beza Dial. cont Heshus vol. 1. answereth That saying of thine All things are possible to God hath some exception Of Christ if we proue that he died for all because it is Touching Christ saied 2. Cor. 5. ver 15. If one died for all then all were dead and Christ died for all Beza ib. answereth Sith it is here spoaken All that is Some of the Church or of the elect onely considered vniuersally we must needs restraine All to that whereof the speach is Et Contraremonstrantes in Collat. Hagae p. 131. That All wherewith it is saied Christ died for all is expounded not to be extēded vniuersally to all and euerie and none excepted but is to be restrained onely to the faithfull If we proue that Christ is the propitiation for the sinnes of all the world because 1. Ioan. 2. v. 2. it is saied He is the All the world that is Some propitiation for our sinnes and not for ours onely but also for the whole worlds Zanchius in Summa Praelect tom 7. col 264. answereth When he saieth Christ is the propitiation for the sinnes of the whole world we are not compelled by name of the world He amitteth whole to vnderstand all men vniuersally Agayne Christ is the propitiation onely for the sinnes of the elect of the whole world Caluin vpon this place Nether had Ihon anie other meaning then to make this good common to the whole Church Beza ib. By the name of the world He also omitteth whole are vnderstood all the elect of all ages degrees and places If we proue that Christ is the Sauiour of all men because it is saied 1. Timoth. 4. v. 10. Which is the Sauiour of All that is Some all men especially of the faithfull Author Resp ad Theses Vademont p. 482. answereth This pertaineth to the elect onely Of the Church if we proue that she erreth not in anie Touching the Church point of faith because Christ saieth Ioan. 16. v. 13. When he the spirit of trueth cometh he shall teach you all trueth Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 4. c. 2. expoundeth it thus That is All trueth that is Some all necessarie trueth Agayne I answere that Christ and the holie Ghost teacheth the Church all trueth simply necessarie but yet oftentimes leaueth some error The like hath Rainalds thesi 2. and Bucanus loco 41. But Daneus Contr. 4. p. 632. saieth Properly and truely this promise of Christ pertaineth to those twelue whome he then spoake vnto Wherefore it is a personall blessing which must not be extended to anie other then to those twelue Apostles The like hath Moulins in his Buckler pag. 51. If we proue that wicked men may be in the Church which is the bodie of Christ because S. Paul saieth 1 Cor. 10. v. 17. For being manie we are one bread one bodie all that All that is Some participate of one bread Beza dial cont Heshus p. 280. answereth That All that participate cannot be extended to the wicked Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 1. c. 11. saieth The Apostle speaketh onely of the good and godlie the wicked do not participate that bread whereof the Apostle speaketh If we proue that all the Corinthians and Galathians baptized were in the Church and had put on Christ because 1. Cor. 12. v. 13. it is saied For in one Spirit we were all All that is Some baptized into one bodie And Galat. 3. ver 27. For as manie of you as are baptized in Christ haue put on Christ Whitaker Contr. 24. 1. cap. 8. answereth The Apostle in these places speaketh not of all the Corinthians and Galathians but of those onely who were endued with the spirit of Christ and true faith Touching Sacraments If we proue that Baptisme is Touching Sacraments necessarie to all because Christ saieth Ioan. 3. v. 5. Vnlesse one be borne againe of water c. Pareus l. 6. de Amiss Grat. c. 1. answereth The proposition is to be limitated And commonly One that is Some they except infants If we proue that baptisme is effectuall also in the reprobate because Galat. 3. ver 27. For as manie of you as are baptized As manie that is Some in Christ haue put on Christ Beza ib. answereth It is added As manie for to take away the difference of nations states and sexes And 2. part resp ad Acta Montisb p. 62. By no colour of reason it can be vnderstood vniuersally of euerie baptized person Zuinglius in Elencho tom 2. fol 13. saieth It is spoaken synechdochically All did eate the same spirituall bread when as they onely eate it who were spirituall If we proue that the bound of marriage dureth all the life of the married parties because it is saied 1. Cor. 7. v. 39. A woman is bound to the law so long time as here husband So long that is for a time liueth Peter Martyr ib. answereth When he writeth that a woman is bound to hir husband so long as he liueth the exception which Christ hath must be added to wit vnlesse adulterie be committed