Thus by their greater antiquitie of their possession of the Bible and also by the greater antiquitie of the Bible it self did the ancient Christians proue against Heretiks both that their Bibles were the true Bibles and also that they were the true owners of them But manifest it is that Catholiks are ancienter possessors of the holie Scripture then Protestants be in so much as we shall see Protestants confesse that they had the Scripture of Catholiks Therefore Catholiks are the true owners of the Scripture The fourth proof is taken from that there can be no 4. title no beginning of possession named place or time named where or when Catholiks first began to take possession of the holie Scripture besides the very time of Christ and his Apostles who alone could giue true and lawfull possession of the Scripture Whereas See Author of the Prot. religion l. 2. c. 13. we can name the place and time when Protestants first began to Vsurpe possession of the holie Scripture Which is long after the time of Christ and his Apostles And all reason bindeth vs to accounte them the true owners of a thing the beginning of whose possession can not be found but at the very time of the first giuers thereof rather then those whose possession began manie hundreds of years after The fift proof I will ground vpon that the Catholiks 5. title the integritie of Scripture haue conserued the holie Scripture incorrupt For theeues and wrong possessors vse to disfigure the thing they haue stolne as much as they can that it may not be knowne Besides the Scripture must needs be contrarie to the vsurpers and agreable to the true owners therefore necessitie forceth vsurpers to alter the Scripture as false heires are forced to alter the will or testament if they get it into their hands Wherevpon we see that scarce euer there were anie Heretiks who haue not saught to corrupt the Tertul. de prescript c. 17 38. Scripture albeit Catholiks cried out against their sacrilegious impietie How much more then would Papists haue corrupted the Scripture especially whiles for manie ages there were no visible Protestants to reproue them if they had not beene the true owners of the Scripture But Catholiks haue not in all these ages in which Protestants were inuisible corrupted anie parte of the Scripture as is euident by that Protestants confesse that Scripture which they had of Catholiks to be pure and incorrupt Nether do Protestants obiect to Catholiks anie corruption made by them in the Hebrew or Greek text and the vulgar Latin they will haue to be ancienter then Papistrie it self But contrariewise Catholiks haue euer since the beginning of Protestancie charged Protestāts with manie and greiuous corruptions of holie Scripture Wherefore thus I argue All reason teacheth vs to iudge them to be the true owners of a testament who are the freest from corrupting it But Catholiks are farre more free from corruptinge the testament of Christ then Protestants Therefore c. The sixt proof I will take from the Protestants graunt Sixt title graunt of Protestants that they had the Scripture from Catholiks Luther in 16. Ioan. to 4. Germ. witenb fol. 227. There is an argument which can very hardly be wrested from the Papists and which I my self can very hardly answere and refute especially sith we are forced to giue and graunt them so manie thinges which are true to wit that in Poperie is the word the Apostleshippe and that we receaued the holie Scripture baptisme the Sacraments and office of preaching from them otherwise what should we haue knowne of all these things And to 5. in 1. Gal. fol. 293. we had indeed the Scripture and the Sacraments of the Papists Schusselburg to 8. Catal. Haeres p. 439. VVe denie not that Luther saieth that in Poperie is all Christian good and from thence came to vs. D. Daue of Recusancie p. 13. VVe hould the Creed of the Apostles of Athanasius of Nice of Ephesus of Constantinople which the Papists also do hould and the same Bible which we receaued from them Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 5. c. 14. Papists haue the Scripture Baptisme Catechisme the articles of faith the ten commandements the lords praier and these things come from thē to vs. Iames Andreas li. cont Has p. 316. VVe denie not that we receaued the Scriptures from you The like hath Spalatensis lib. cont Suar. c. 1. n. 34. and others A question proposed to Protestants Wherefore I aske the Protestāts how they had the Scripture of vs Did we giue it them Did we sell it them Did we change it with Did we relinquish it as a forlorne thing No one of all these can they proue or affirme with anie apparence How then get they the Scripture from vs but as theeues get the true mens goods and as Turkes and Iews get the same Scripture from vs If anie say as Andrews and Schusselb do intimate that Protestants had the Scripture of Catholiks as Christians had the ould testament of the Iewes I answere that Christians had not the ould testamēt of the Iewes if by Iewes they meane such as remained Iewes For Christians had the ould testament of the Apostles and they of Christ who was lord of the ould and new testament as they had from him the Sacraments and all other goods of the Church Besides euerie Heretik may pretend this as well as Protestants Wherefore thus I argue They whome their aduersaries confesse to haue had the Scripture before them selues and can tell no lawfull means by which they had the Scripture from them are according to all reason to be held the true owners of the Scripture rather then their aduersaries But such are Catholiks in respect of Protestants Therefore c. The seuenth proof I will take from the open and manifould Seuenth title other confessions of Protestant confessions of Protestants For first they confesse that Catholiks are the true Church of Christ as I haue shewed at longe in my foresaied booke of the Author of the Protestant religion lib. 1. c. 2. to which I add these few Spalatensis lib. 5. de repub c. 6. n. 236. The Rom. Church is not gone so farre from the foundation as that she is to be put wholy out of the membres of the Churches of Christ lib. cont Suarem c. 1. n. 20. I think as I haue often saied that the Rom. Church with those that follow here are the true Church of Christ D. Featlie in his Refutation of Fisher p. 82. The Rom. Church we acknowledge to be a member though a sicke and weake one of the Catholik visible Church The like hath D. Hall in his booke of ould religion and his twoe defenders Chalmeley and Batterfeild whereof the latter in his preface saieth he will demonstrate that the Rom. Church is a true Church Now certaine it is that the true Church is the true ower of the Scripture Secondly they confesse that Catholik Pastors are true
Church to the den of theues from the assured path of saluation to the open way of damnation Finally I aduertise the Reader that if at anie time I vse anie sharp words against Protestants I intend them onely against their teachers and leaders yet vse I the common name of Protestants that the rest may know that the crimes which I obiect vnto them proceed of their doctrin and thereby flie and reiect it lest they become partakers of the crimes I shew them the gulfe of impietie into which their guides doe lead them let them not be offended with me that I set before their eyes the impietie of the doctrin which they are tought but let them be angrie with their teachers who vnder the most false pretense of Scripture and Gods word haue thaught them such impious doctrin and so contrarie to Gods words And I hartely pray God and euer shal that he open their eyes that they may see the most imminent and greiuous danger wherein they stand and auoide it lighten with his true light that zeale which they haue to his word Rom. 10. lest they perish for euer with them who had zeale but not according to knowledge Whether Catholiks or Protestants be the true owners of the holie Scripture FIRST CHAPTER BECAVSE this question of the true owners How important this question is of the holie Scripture is of such moment as by it may be decided all controuersies as shall hereafter appeare and withall the decision thereof is so easie and cleare as euerie one may perceaue it and notwithstanding hath not as yet to my knowledge beene particularly handled of anie albeit as we shall see out of Tertullian it should haue beene handled before anie question of Scripture I will begin first with it And because Protestants auouch them selues to be the true owners of the Scripture I need not proue to them that ether Catholiks or they are the true owners thereof which the very question doth suppose but it will suffice against them that I shew that according to all reason Catholiks are to be iudged the true owners of Scripture rather then they The first proofe hereof I will take from the actuall The first title for Cathol actual possession possession of the Scripture in which Catholiks peacably were when Luther and the Protestants first began to chalenge the Scripture for theirs For reason teacheth vs to iudge the Possessor of anie thing to be the true owner of the same and possession to be a sufficient title of houlding it vnles the contrarie be manifestly proued and conuinced as we see dayly in lands and temporall goods and otherewise the dominion of things would be vncertaine amongst men Wherevpon the law teacheth the Possessor to plead possession as a sufficient title and to say possideo quia possideo I possesse because I possesse But Protestants can not manifestly disproue no nor yet colourably impugne the right of the Catholiks possession of the holie Scripture as shall hereafter appeare Therefore according to all reason Catholiks vpon this title of their possession are to be iudged true owners of the Scripture The second proof I will take from the Catholiks vndoubted Second title peacable possession possession thereof and vnquestioned by Protestants for manie ages That Protestants did not for manie ages call the Catholiks possessions of the Scripture into question is manifest by the manie and plaine confessions of Protestants that their Church was inuisible before Luther for manie ages which I haue related in my second booke of the Author of the Protestant Church c. 4. And reason teacheth vs to accounte him the true owner of a thing who without all question or clame of anie hath hould it peacably for manie ages together Wherevpon the law alloweth prescription of certaine yeares after which time expired it permitteth not the possession to be called in question Besides it is no way likelie that the true Church of God would suffer her self to be bereaued of so heauenlie a treasure as is the holie Scripture and yet not once in anie corner of the world for manie ages crie after the theefe or chalenge her treasure which she did see was held of others Will men euerie day venture their liues for sauing or recouering a little land or goods and would not the Church of God the onely true owner of the Scripture for manie ages once open her mouth to chalenge so heauenlie a treasure especially the Scripture being as Protestants teach the onely Martyr in disput oxon p. 143. Pareus Coll. Theol. 3. disp 2. externall infallible meane to attayne faith and as necessarie to the saluation of the Church as meate is to the life of man what care had the Church offo great a treasure left vnto here by Christ what account made she of faith and saluation if for manie ages she would not so much as chalenge the onely externall infallible and necessarie means to obtayne them Would the primitiue Church suffer so manie torments and cruell death as we read in the Ecclesiastical Historie rather then loose the holie Scriptures which the Heathens would haue taken from her and would she afterward suffer Papists to take it from her without muttering one word or laying clame to it for manie ages together Moreouer how had she faith how obtained she saluation if for maine ages she lost the onely externall infallible and necessarie meanes to obtayne them The third proof is that the Catholiks possession of the Scripture is farre more ancient then the Protestāts possession Third title ancientest possession thereof For euident it is that that Christian Church which is the first and ancientest possessor of the holie Scripture is the onely true owner of the same because the Apostles and Euangelists left their writings first and Qui prior est tempore potior est iure Reg. iuris onely to the true Church and gaue her the testament and last will of Christ her sponse so that the true Christrian Church had the Scripture before anie false Christian Church had it and likewise certaine it is that she neuer lost it since it was deliuered vnto her but as she is the pillar of truth so she hath faithfully kept this heauenly truth deliuered vnto her in writing and consequently is ancienter possessor of the Scripture then anie false Christian Church can be And this reason the ancient Christians vsed against Heretiks as appeareth by these words of Tertullian lib. de Praescript c. 37. It is my possession I possesse it of ould I possesse it first I am the herie of the Apostles And lib. 4. cont Mart. c. 4. I say my Bible is true Marcion saieth His. I say Marcions Bible is corrupted Marcion saieth Mine is corrupted what shall end our controuersie but order of time giuing authoritie to that which is found to be ancienter and reiecting that which is later For in that falsitie is a corruption of trueth trueth must needs be before falsitie
power did open the shut dores The dores were not shut in the very instant of his passing See more art 23. Scripture Hauing a great high preist that hath penetrated Christ penetrated the heauen Not penetrated them Christ praieth for vs. He praieth not for vs. the heauenes Iesus the Sonne of God Protestants Christ ascended without penetration of quantities VVe admit no penetration See art 14. Scripture I will aske the Father VVho also maketh intercession for vs. Protestants VVe may not imagin that Christ as a Suppliant praieth for vs. His death and resurrection are in steed of an eternall intercession See more art 25. CHAPTER IV. OF ANGELS AND SAINTES SCripture And the Angell of our Lord answered and saied O Angels pray for vs. Lord of Hostes how long will thou not haue mercie on Hierusalem Protestants The Scripture teacheth not that Angels pray They pray not We denie that the holie Angels do pray in particular for our necessities See art 4. Scripture And he preuailed against the Angel and was Angels to be praied vnto Not to be praied vnto strenghtned and he wept and besought him Protestants The inuocation of Saints and Angels is impious See art 8. Scripture Our lord opened the eyes of Balaam and he saw the Angels to be bowed vnto Angel standing in the way with a drawne sword and he adored him flat to the ground Protestants We must beware that we nether adore nor worship Not to be bowed vnto Angels He could not fall downe to the Angel without diminishing Gods honour See art 11. Scripture Nether take thou away thy mercie from vs for God to be praied by the names of Saintes Not so to be praied Abraham thy beloued and Isaac thy seruant and Israel the holie one Protestants In the Prophets there is not found anie such inuocation Heare me o God for Abraham God is not to be besought by the names of Saintes See more art 9. Scripture For your selues know how you ought to imitate vs. Saintes to be imitated Not to be imitated God protecteth vs for the Saintes sake Not for their sakes Some Saintes bad power to worke miracles None had such power Santes receaue men into eternall tabernacles They do not receaue Be ye followers of me Protestants These trifles ought not to be sung to the people that they should imitate the Saintes God requireth that we follow his scripture only and not the examples of Saintes See art 12. Scripture I will protect this cittie and saue it for my self and for Dauid my seruant Protestants It is not to be borne that they say through Gods liberalitie and Christs grace the merits of Saints do profit vs to protection See art 10. Scripture And he gaue them power to cure infirmities and to cast out Diuels Protestants God neuer gaue anie man power of working miracles ether mediatly or immediatly See art 16. Scripture Make vnto you freinds of the mammon of iniquitie that when you faile they may receaue you into the eternall tabernacles Protestants VVe must not vnderstand that men shall receaue vs into eternall tabernacles See art 13. Scripture They shal be priests of God and Christ and shall Saints reigne with him reigne with him Protestants The Saints do not reigne with Christ. See art They reigne not with him 16. Scripture And he that shall ouercome and keepe my workes Saintes rule nations vnto the end I will giue him power ouer the nations and he shall rule them with a rodde of yron Protestants It is an errour that Angels or the soules of the They rule them not blessed men are appointed of God to rule and gouerne vs. See art 16. cit CHAPTER V. OF THE SCRIPTVRE OR WORD OF GOD. SCripture Paule according to the wisdome giuen him hath Some things in Scripture are hard written as also in all Epistles speaking in them of these things in which are certaine hard to be vnderstood Protestants Peter saieth not that Paules Epistles are obscure No thing hard no nor that there are some obscure things in Paules Epistles No parte of the Scripture is obscure How can the Scripture be called obscure in anie parte See more art 1. Scripture Iesus began to preach and say Doe pennance for The Ghospel preacheth pennance It preacheth it not the kingdom of heaune is at hand Protestants The Ghospell properly is not a preaching of pennance The Ghospell preacheth not to vs that this or that is to be done or exacteth any thing of vs. See more art 4. Scripture If thou will enter into life keepe the commandments Promiseth life conditionally Protestants The Ghospell promiseth saluation euen to those Not conditionally that haue no good workes at all The Ghospel requireth not workes to saluation See more art 6. Ghospell not contrarie to the law Scripture Doe we then destroie the law by faith God forbid But we establish the law Protestants The Ghospell is truly opposite to the law The law It is contrarie to it aad the Ghospell of themselues wholy fight one with the other See more art 7. Scripture All things must needs be fulfilled which are written Moises law commandeth faith in Christ It commandeth it not Traditions to be kept Not to be kept in the law of Moises and the Prophets and the Psalmes of me Protestants Faith in Christ the law neuer knew The law of Moises commandeth not faith in Christ See more art 8. Scripture Hould the traditions which you haue learnt whether it be by word or by our epistle Protestants VVe care not for vnwritten traditions we acknowledge no word but that which is written See more art 9. CHAPTER VI. OF S. PETER AND THE APOSTLES SCripture Thou art Peter and vpon this rock will I build Church built vpon Peter my Church Protestants Peter is not rock because Christ did not build Not vpon Peter his Church vpon Peter See more art 2. Scripture And I say to thee Thou art Peter And to thee Keyos giuen to Peter I will giue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen Protestants Christ called faith the rock to which rock not to Not giuen to him Peter be gaue these keyâ—s See art 3. Scripture I haue praied for thee Peter that thy faith faile Peters faith failed not It failed not Protestants For a time surely Peters saith failed whiles he denied Christ It is a blasphemous speech that Peter denying Christ did not lese his faith See more art 4. Scripture And the wall of the cittie hauing twelue foundations The Apostles foundations and in them twelue names of the twelue Apostles of the lambe Protestants The Apostles were not the foundations See Not foundations more art 5. Scripture He that heareth you heareth me The Apostles simply to be heard Not simply to be heard Protestants The Apostles be not simply to be heard but to be examined according to the rule of Scripture S. Paules
Ghospell or the new testament must haue beene tried by the ould See more art 6. CHAPTER VII OF THE PASTOVRS OF THE CHVRCH SCripture If my couuenant with the day can be made voide Pastours alwaies c. also my couuenant may be made voide with Dauid my seruant that there be not of him a sonne to reigne in his throne and Leuits and Preists my ministers Not alwaies Protestants It is false that the externall ministerie must be perpetuall The Church hath osten no man Pastour Some short time the Church may be depriued of Pastours See more art 7. Scripture Thou art Peter c. And to thee I will giue the Authoritie in the Pastours keyes of the kingdome of heauen Protestants The authoritie is not in the Prelats but in the Not in them worde the Church hath nothing but mere ministerie See more art 2. Scripture Thou art Peter c. and whatsoeuer thou shalt One pastor cā excōmunicate bind on earth it shal be bound also in heauen Protestants VVe must remember that this power of excommunicating One cannot is giuen to no one man but to the whole companie of the Presbiterie See more art 3. Scripture And he Paul walked through Syria and Silicia Pastours can make lawes confirming the Churches and commanding them to keepe the precepts of the Apostles and the Auncients Protestants The Church hath no power to make lawes See They can not more art 4. Scripture The Holie Ghost hath placed you Bishops to rule Pastors rulers of the Church Not rulers the Church of God Protestants The true nature of a ruler of the Church is in no pure man one or manie See art 5. Scripture You shal be called the preistes of the lord Pasters to be called preists Not to be so called Protestants Who administer the word and Sacraments amongst the people nether may nor ought to be called preists See more art 7. Scripture But how shall they preach vnles they be sent No preaching without mission Without mission Protestants Euen they who are not lawfully called may preach the word fruitfully Euerie Christian man hath authoritie to preach Christ in what place soeuer where they are desirous to heare See more art 8. Scripture Moises and Aaron in his preists Moises a preist No preist Protestants Moises did not exercise at all the preisthood but was onely a Prophet See more art 10. CHAPTER VIII OF THE CHVRCHE SCripture There shal be made one fould and one pastor Church but one onely Not one onely Protestants We say that there are twoe societies of men that is twoe Churches to the one belong the predestinate to the other the reprobate Christ and the things themselues teach vs that there are twoe Churches See more art 1. Scripture VVe are one bodie all that participate of one All those one bodie who participate one Sacramēt bread Protestants The godlie are no more ioyned in one bodie with Not all those the wicked then light with darkenes Christ with Belial See more art 2. Scripture The gates of hell shall not preuaile against her of Church can not faile It can faile his kingdome there shal be no end Protestants It is no meruaile though the Church be cleane fallen downe long agoe Antichrist had rooted out the Church euen from the ground Christes kingdome was cast flat downe See more art 4. Scripture You are the light of the world A cittie can not be Church can not be hidde hidde situated vpon a mountaine Protestants Often times God will haue no visible Church It can be hidde on earth The whole visible Church may faile See more art 5. Scripture Which is the Church of the liuing God the pillar Church is infallible and strenght of trueth Protestants The vniuersall Church may erre The Church Not infallible may erre The Catholik Church may erre and that most greeuously See more art 6. Scripture If he will not heare the Church let him be to thee Church simply to be heard Not simply to be heard as the Heathen and the Publican Protestants VVe must not simply receaue whatsoeuer the Church teacheth See more art 7. CHAPTER IX OF TEMPLES OR MATERIAL CHVRCHES SCripture Who Anna departed not from the temple by Churches for priuate praier fasting and praiers seruing day and right Protestants Churches are for preaching onely It is no lawfull Not for priuat praier end of Churches that the faithfull may priuatly pray in them See more art 1. Scripture Twoe Cherubins also thou shalt make of beaten Images to be set in Churches Not to be set in Churches gold on both sides of the oracle Protestants The Iewes had no manner Image nether painted not grauen in their temple God abhorreth images We must not suffer that Images be in Churches See more art 3. Scripture reporteth these words of a Heathen This Heathens thought idols to be Gods They thought not so Paule saieth that they are no Gods which be made by hands Protestants It is a lie that the Heathens did beleiue the Images of their Gods to haue beene their Gods them selues See more art 4. CHAPTER X. OF BAPTISME SCripture Vnlesse a man be borne againe of water and the Water necessarie to baptisme Not necessarie Spirit he can not enter into the kingdome of God Protestants Though water be wanting yet if the baptisme of one cannot be differred with edification I would baptize as well with anie other liquour as with water See more art 1. Scripture Going teach ye all nations baptizing them Baptisme cōmanded of Christ Not cōmanded of him c. Protestants Baptisme is of lesse importance then that the lord should haue greatly cammanded anie thing about it See more art 3. Scripture Vnlesse one be borne of water and the Holie Baptisme necessarie to saluation Not necessarie Simon Magus was baptized He was not baptized Baptisme profiteth all Not all Ghost he cannot inter into the kingdome of God Protestants Children who die before they be christened are not shut out of the kingdome of God See art 4. Scripture Then Simon Magus also himself belieued and being baptized he cleaned to Philippe Protestants That Simon Peter and Simon Magus receaued the same whole baptisme is most false See more art 5. Scripture As manie of you as haue beene baptized in Christ haue put on Christ Protestants Baptisme bringeth no commoditie to those that are not elect See more art 6. Scripture Christ loued the Church cleansing it by the lauer Baptisme purgeth sinne It purgeth not sinne of water in the worde Protestants VVho will say that we are cleansed by this water Doest thou thinke that water is the lauer of the soule No. Baptisme cannot wash away the filth of sinnes See more art 7. Scripture Be baptized and wash away thy sinnes Sinnes washed away by baptisme Not by baptisme All borne in in state of dānation Not all Protestants Paule
of faith in Christ of iustifying faith of faith of remission of sinnes The like hath Ambing apud Hospin in Concord discordi fol. 140. Beza de Praedest cont Caste l. vol. 1. p. 393. There is no mētion in the law of this benefit of free redemption by Christ For the declaratiō of this will belongeth to an other parte of Gods word which is called the Ghospell Apol. Cōf. Augustan c. de Iustific The Ghospell preacheth iustice of faith in Christ which the law doth not teach THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Moises wrote in the law of Christ that Moises wrote things concerning Christ That Moise commanded the people to heare Christ in all things The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the law neuer knew faith in Christ that Moises cōmandeth not faith in Christ that the law knoweth nothing of faith in Christ that in the law there is no mention of free redemption in Christ that the law teacheth nothing of faith in Christ ART IX WHETHER ANY VNWRITTEN word or Traditions be to be kept SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 2. Thessal 2. v. 15. Therefore brethren stand and hould the traditions Traditions not written to be helde which you haue learned whether it be by word or by our epistle CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Coūcell of Trent Sess 4. The holie Coūcell doth with equall pious affection reuerently receaue and honour traditions belonging to faith or manners as ether deliuered by Christs mouth or the holie Ghost and by continuall succession conserued in the Catholik Church PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 3. cap. 10. We care not for vnwritten Not to be helde traditions And Contro 2. q. 5. c. 18. We acknowledge no other word then that which is written And what doctrine soeuer is not written we hould for bastard doctrine Perkins in Cathol ref Contr. 20. c. 2. We acknowledge the onely written word of God Luther Postil in ferias S. Stephani Nothing is to be affirmed Nothing but that which is expressed in Scripture which is not expressed in Scripture Iacobus Andreae l. cont Hosium p. 169. That faith is no faith but an vncertain opinion which is not grounded vpon an expresse testimonie of Scripture Wigand apud Scusselb to 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 681. Onely those doctrines whose very words or equiualent for sense are extant in the Scripture are to be tought and deliuered in the Church Caluin in Gratulat ad Praecentorem pag. 377. Nothing is to be beleiued which is not expressed in Scripture And cont versipellem pagin 353. There is no mention of vnwritten traditions Beza in Rom. 1. v. 17. Christians acknowledge no other object of this faith then the written word of God Etad Reprehens Castell p. 503. Whosoeuer beleiueth in doctrine of religion that which is not written I say he embraceth opinion for faith and an idol for God Vallada in Apol. cont Episc Luzon c. 13. In all the holie No speech of an vnwritten word Scripture there is no speech of an vnwritten word Daneus Controu 7. pag. 1350. The foundation of Christian faith is one onely to wit the word of God and that onely written Hospinian part 2. Histor Sacram. fol. 23. The Magistrates of Zurich commāded that hereafter nothing should be proposed or preached in their Church but the pure fined word of God contained in the bookes of the Prophets and Apostles THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that traditions as well they which are learned by word as they which are learned by writing are to be obserued Catholiks teach the same Protestants expressely teach that onely written doctrin is to be tought nothing to be beleiued but what is written onely the pure fined written word to be tought no obiect of faith but what is written nothing to be beleiued but what is expressed in Scripture and that in verie words or in equiualent sense that there is no mention of vnwritten traditions no speech of vnwritten word that they care not for vnwritten traditions A SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF THE WORD of God or Scripture What we haue rehearsed in this chapter doth clearly shew that Protestants do farre otherwise iudge of Scripture then the Scripture it selfe and Catholiks doe For the holie Scripture together with Catholiks teacheth that in it are some things hard to be vnderstood that it cannot be vnderstood without the light of the holie Ghost that the Ghospell is or containeth a law that it doth preach pennance and good workes reproueth sinne promiseth saluation vnder condition of good workes and is not contrarie vnto the law of God that the law of Moises commandeth faith in Christ and that vnwritten traditions are to be obserued And Protestants defend all the contrarie They shew also that Protestants steale from the Scripture Protestants steale from Scripture her excellencie wherewith she surpasseth the capacitie of mans wit and from the Ghospell that it containeth any law preacheth pennance or good workes reproueth sinne promiseth saluation vpon condition of well doing and agreement with Gods law whereby we see what a libertin Ghospell they bring in to wit such as containeth Libertin Ghospell of Protestants no law preacheth no pennance or good workes reproueth no sinne promiseth saluation without all condition of well doing and is quite contrarie to the law of God And that they steall from the law of Moises that it commandeth faith in Christ and finally they take away all the vnwritten word of God CHAPTER V. OF SAINT PETER AND THE APOSTLES ART I. WHETHER S. PETER WERE first of the Apostles SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. MATHEW 10. v. 2. And the names of the twelue S. Peter first of the Apostles Apostles be these The first Simon who is called Peter CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Pontif. c. 18. Peter was put first by reason his dignitie PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Contr. 3. q. 5. c. 3. Wheresoeuer mention is made Not first of Peter if we looke well into the place we shall find that nothing is giuen to him which agreeth not to the other Apostles And Controu 4. quaest 2. c. Paul maketh himselfe equall to Peter in all points Tindal in Fox his Acts p. 1139. S. Paul is greater then Peter by the testimonie of Christ Articuli Smalcaldici pag. 345. We giue no prerogatiue to Peter Luther in Gal. 2. to 5. This place clearely sheweth that all the Apostles had equall vocation and commission There was altogether equalitie amongst them no Apostle was greater then an other Illyricus in Praefat. lib. de Sectis It appeareth that Christ gaue no primacie at all in his Church to any man Caluinus in Matth. 20. v. 25. Christ shewed that in his kingdome No primacie or firstnesse there was no primacie for which they contended Beza in Matth. 10. v. 2. What if this word First were added of some who would establish Peters primacie Festus Homius disput 12. All the Apostles were equall in dignitie authoritie
teacheth that Christ praied that S. Peters faith should not faile which vndoubtedly he obtained The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that S. Peter lost his faith erred from faith did not retaine faith did apostotate that his faith failed that infidelitie preuailed against him Which is so open a contradiction of Scripture as diuers Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART V. WHETHER THE APOSTLES were foundations of the Church SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Apocalip 21. v. 14. And the wall of the cittie hauing twelue The Apostles foundations of the Church foundations and in them twelue names of the twelue Apostles of the lambe Ephes 2. v. 20. You are citizens of the Saintes and the domesticals of God built vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Iesus Christ himselfe being the highest corner stone CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Pontif. c. 11. All the Apostles were foundations of the Church PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 4. q. 1. c. 2. It is contrarie to the analogie Not foundations of the Church of faith that any man should be a foundation of the Church Moulin in his Bucler p. 380. The Apostles were not the foundations Peter Martyr in locis clas 4. cap. 3. § 4. If we read in the Fathers as we do in the Apocalips that there are twelue foundations here foundation is not put for the route of the building but for great stones which are next to the foundation Beza in Ephes 2. vers 20. The Apostles and Prophets were builders of this temple that is of the Church of God as also now faithfull Ministers are but not the foundation it selfe Herbrandus in Compend Theol. loco de Eccles The Apostles are not the foundation of the Church but by their doctrine of Christ they laied the foundation THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that there are twelue foundations of the Church and in them written the names of the twelue Apostles that we are built vpon the foundatiō of the Apostles Christ being the cheefe corner stone where there is manifest distinction made betwene the foundation on which we are built and Christ Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that the Apostles were not foundations that they were not foundations of the Church but builders not foundations but great stones next to the foundation that no man can be a foundation of the Church Which are so contrarie to the Scripture as some Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART VI. WHETHER THE APOSTLES were simply to be heard or beleiued without examination of their doctrine SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Luc. 10. v. 16. He that heareth you heareth me The Apostles were simply to be heard 1. Thessalon 1. v. 12. We giue thankes to God without intermission because that when you had receaued of vs the word of God you receaued it not as the word of men but as it is indeed the word of God The same also is proued by the testimonies cited in the next article CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton Defens cont Whitak l. 3. sect 5. It is absurd to iudge of the Apostles doctrine Antidot Act. 17. v. 11. Christ hath ioyned his trueth and the Apostles preaching so narrowly as he saied who heareth you heareth me Why then not also who examineth your doctrine examineth my trueth PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 2. quaest 5. cap. 11. If the Apostles be not simply to be heard but to be examined according to the rule Not simply to be heard of Scripture and to be receaued so farre forth as they agree with it and to be reiected as they differre much lesse c. And l. 2. cont Dureum sect 2. When Paul preached to the Berheans they examined the Scriptures for to know fully whether those things which Paul tought agreed with Scriptures And this their example is allowed with the highest testimonie of the holie Ghost and proposed to all Christians to be imitated Caluin in Actor 17. vers 11. The Thessalonians did not take vpon to examin whether Gods trueth were to be receaued or no onely they examined Pauls doctrine to the line of Scripture For the Scripture is the true touchstone by which all doctrins are to be examined And seing the Spirit of God praiseth the Thessalonians it prescribeth in their example a rule for vs. It was lawfull for the disciples to examine Paules doctrine And 4. Institut c. 8. § 4. The Apostles in their verie name do shew how farre their commission stretcheth Forsooth if they be Apostles let them not prate what they list but faithfullie deliuer his commandments who sent them Luther Praefat. Assert Artic. to 2. If S. Pauls Ghospell or the new testament must haue beene tried by the ould Scripture whether it were so or no what did we who would haue the Fathers sayings examined by the Scripture Daneus Contr. 4. p. 611. It is most false that he writeth that the doctrine and sentence of the Apostles was not examined of the disciples and auditours Yea Christ himselfe commandeth his owne doctrine to be so examined Io. 5. 39. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that who heareth the Apostles heareth Christ that their word is not the word of men but the word of God and as such receaued of such as are faithfull The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the Apostles are not to be heard simply but first to be examined that all Christians ought to imitate the Betheās in examining S. Pauls doctrine that the Apostles must not prate what they list that the Ghospell must be tryed by the ould testament ART VII WHETHER THE APOSTLES were sufficient witnesses of the trueth SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Ihon 15. v. 27. The Spirit of trueth shall giue testimone of me The Apostles were sufficiēt witnesses and you also shall giue testimonie because you are with me from the beginning c. 21. v. 24. This is that disciple which giueth testimonie of these things and hath written these things and we know that his testimonie is true c. 1. v. 7. This man came for testimonie to giue testimonie of the light that all might beleiue through him Actes 1. v. 8. You shall receaue the vertue of the Holie Ghost comming vpon you and you shal be witnesses vnto me in Hierusalem and in all Iewrie and Samaria and euen vnto the vtmost of the earth c. 5. v. 32. And we are witnesses of these words and the Holie Ghost whome God hath giuen to all that obey him c. 10. v. 42. Him God raised vp the third day and gaue him to be made manifest not to all the people but to witnesse preordinated of God to vs who did eate and drinke with him after he rose againe from the dead 3. Ihon. v. 12. And we giue testimonie and thou knowest that our testimonie is true Exode 14. v. 31. And they beleiued our Lord and Moises his seruant CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton Defens Contr. Whitaker l. 1.
sect 8. In all these things the Apostles did alledge their testimonie and themselues also as witnesses of that trueth which they tought And l. 3. sect 3. The Apostles were witnesses of their doctrine and they gaue authoritie to their doctrine See him Cont. 4. l. 8. c. 9. PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 1. q. 3. c. 11. God alone is a sufficient witnesse None but God is a sufficient witnesse of himselfe And l. 3. de Scriptura c. 13. sect 3. The people did not beleiue Moises for himselfe but for that diuine and great miracle Beleife was giuen to Moises and Paul not for themselues but for Gods authoritie which appeared in their ministerie And ib. sect 1. The testimonie of the Church as of the Church is but humane And Contr. 1. q. 3. c. 11. cit The iudgment of the Church is humane The same followeth euidently of that which they saied in the former article For if the Apostles doctrine must be examined it is manifest that they are not sufficient witnesses of their doctrine The same Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 4. c. 3. Yea after Christs Not the Apostles ascension and that descent of the Holie Ghost vpon the Apostles manifest it is that the whole Church erred about the vocation of the Gentils and not the vulgar Christians onely but euen the very Apostles and Doctors These were great errours and yet we see that they were in the Apostles euen after the Holie Ghost had descended vpon them THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely affirmeth that the Apostles had the holie Ghost giuen them to testifie of Christ that they were ioyned with the holie Ghost witnesses of Christ that they were witnesses appointed of God that their testimonie is true that all may beleiue through Saint Ihon that the faithfull beleiued God and Moyses The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that none but God is a sufficient witnesse of the trueth that nether Paul nor Moises were to be beleiued for themselues that the testimonie of the Church is but humane That the Apostles erred and that greatly euen after the holie Ghost had descended vpon them ART VIII WHETHER THE APOSTLES learnt anie point of Christian doctrine after Christs ascension SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Ihon 16. v. 12. Yet manie things I haue to say to you but you The Apostles learnt some thing after Christ cannot beare them now but when he the Spirit of trueth cometh he shall teach you all trueth CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Ioan. 16. v. 12. By this testimonie is clearly proued that Christ tought not all by word of mouth but that both the Apostles and the Church learnt many things of the Holie Ghost PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Contr. 1. q. 6. c. 10. The holie Ghost did suggest no They learnt nothing other things then those which Christ had tought Caluin in Ioan. 14. vers 26. Marke what all these things are which he promiseth that he Spirit shall teach He saieth He shall suggest or bring to mind whatsoeuer I haue saied Whence it followeth that he shall not be a coyner of new reuelations And 4. Institut c. 8. § 8. That limitation is carefully to be noted where he appointeth the holie Ghost his office to suggest whatsoeuer he had tought by worde of mouth Beza in Ioan. 14. v. 26. The Apostles nether learnt nor tought any point of Christian and sauing doctrine after the departure of the Lord. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that manie things were tould to the Apostles which they could not beare in Christs time that the holie Ghost was to be sent to teach them all trueth The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that the Apostles learnt no point of Christian doctrine after Christs departure that the Holie Ghost reuealed no new thing to them that he suggested no other thing then Christ had tought ART IX WHETHER IVDAS WAS TRVELY a disciple or in the true Church of Christ SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Matth. 10. v. 1. seq And hauing called his twelue disciples Iudas was truely a disciple of Christ together he gaue them c. And the names of the twelue Apostles be these The first Simon who is called Peter and Iudas Iscariot who also betrayed him Et c. 20. v. 14. 47. Marc. 14. v. 10. 43. Luc. 22. v. 3. 47. he is called one of the twelue Ihon 12. v. 14. One therefore of his disciples Iudas Iscariot Actes 1. v. 17. Iudas who was the captaine of them that apprehended Iesus who was numbred among vs and obtained the lot of this ministerie v. 25. Shew of these twoe one whome thou hast chosen to take the place of this ministerie and Apostleship from the which Iudas hath preuaricated And the lot fell vpon Mathias and he was numbred with the eleuen Apostles CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarm. l. 3. de Eccles c. 7. Iudas was once of the true Church for he was an Apostle one of the twelue and called a Bishop of the Prophet Dauid psal 108. Which could not be true vnlesse he had beene of the Church PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 2. q. 1. cap. 7. I answere that the reprobate Iudas neuer of the Catholik Church Iudas was neuer of the true Catholik Church He held for a time a principall place in the outward societie of the Church because he was an Apostle but this made him not of the true Catholik Church But how he was one of the Apostles Austin telleth Tract 61. in Ioan. That how he was one in number not in merit Neuer an Apostle indeed Neuer true member of the Church are in shew not in vertue But what is in shew seemeth to be but is not indeed Daneus Controu 4. c. 2. Iudas Iscariot and Simon Magus were neuer true members of the true Church of God Of the same opinion are Protestants commonly who denie that anie reprobate can be in the true Church as we shall see hereafter c. 8. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Iudas was one of Christs disciples one of the twelue Apostles was numbred amongst them obtained the lot of their ministerie had the place of Apostleship which S. Mathias afterwards had The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that Iudas was neuer of the true Catholik Church seemed to be one of the Apostles but was not indeed ART X. WHETHER IVDAS WAS a Bishop SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Actes 1. v. 20. For it is written in the booke of psalmes Be Iudas was a Bishop their habitation made desert and be there none that dwell in it and his Iudas Bishoprick let an other take CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE C. Bellarm. cited in the former article Iudas is called a Bishop of the Prophet Dauid PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 1. c. 7. Iudas was an Apostle therefore no He was no Bishop Bishop because the Apostles were no Bishops The same say other Protestants who denie that the Apostles were
properly Bishops THE CONFERENCE The Scripture expressely saieth that Iudas had the office of a Bishop which an other Apostle tooke The same say Catholiks The Protestants say that Iudas was no Bishop THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF SAINT Peter and the Apostles Out of that which hath beene rehearsed in this chapter it clearly appeareth that the Protestāts in an other māner describe S. Peter and the Apostles thē the holie Scripture and Catholiks doe For the Scripture and Catholiks teach that S. Peter was first of the Apostles that he was the rock on which Christ built his Church that he had the keyes of the kingdome of heauen that his faith did not faile All which Protestants denie Besides the Scripture and Catholiks say that the Apostles were foundations of the Church were simply to heard without examining their doctrine were sufficient witnesses of trueth learnt diuers things of the holie Ghost All which are denied by Prorestants Moreouer the Scripture and Catholiks say that Iudas was truely a disciple and Apostle of Christ and also a Bishop which Protestants in like manner denie Wherefore Protestants steale from S. Peter his honour that he is the first of the Apostles his authoritie that he is the rock of the Church and his power of the keyes and stedfastnesse of faith And frō the rest of the Apostles they steale that they were foundations of the Church simply to be hearde sufficient witnesses of truth and that they learnt any thing of the holie Ghost CHAPTER VI. OF PASTORS OF THE CHVRCH ART I. WHETHER THERE BE ALwaies pastors of the Church SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. HIEREMIE 33. v. 21. Thus saieth the Lord If my Pastours alwaies couenant with the day can be made voide and my couenant with the night that there be no day and night in their time also my couenant may be made voide with Dauid my seruant that there be not of him a sonne to reigne in his throne and leuites and preists my ministers Ephes 4. v. 12. And he gaue Pastours and Doctours to the consummation of the saintes vnto the worke of the ministeric vnto the edifying of the bodie of Christ vntill we meete all into the vnitie of faith and knowledge of the Sonne of God CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in 1. Cor. 15. v. 15. Impious Caluin doth bouldly and often times say that Pastours Doctours Prelats Bishops Maisters of Churches all vniuersally for manie ages haue wholy straied from the Christian trueth and beene seducers PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther in psal 129. to 3. The Church vnder Antichrist had no true ministerie Caluin de vera reform p. 322. Not without cause we auouch Not alwaies that for some ages the Church was so torne and scattered that it was destitute of true Pastours And p. 322. I graunt indeed that it can neuer come to passe that the Church perish but when they referre that to Pastours which is promised of the perpetuall continuance of the Church therein they are much deceaued Beza de notis Eccles vol. 3. Forsooth it fell out that the lawfull order was then wholy abolished in the Church as it is manifest that it hath beene now for some ages not so much being left as the smalleste shadow of the cheifest partes of ecclesiasticall vocation Sadeel ad Art abiurat pag. 533. It is false that the externall ministerie must be perpetuall Daneus Controu 3. p. 426. The Church eftsones hath no man Postour And Controu 4. p. 757. The true Church hath ofte wanted Prelats Lukbertus l. 5 de Eccles cap. 5. We say that for some short time the Church may be depriued of Pastours CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that there shal be Pastours as long as there shal be day and night that Pastours are giuen vntill we meete all in one faith The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the Church may be depriued of Pastours that Pastours may perish that the ministerie must not be perpetuall that the Church sometime had no true ministerie was for some ages destitute of true Pastors that lawfull order was for some ages quite abolished in the Church not so much as the slēderest shadow of the chiefest partes of ecclesiasticall vocation being left Which are so plaine against Scripture as sometimes Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART II. WHETHER AVTHORITIE of gouerning the Church be in the Pastours them selues SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Matth. 16. v. 18. seq Thou art Peter c. And to thee I will giue Pastours haue authoritie to gouerne the keyes of the kingdome of heauen Actes 20. v. 28. The Holie Ghost hath placed you Bishops to rule the Church of God 1. Cor. 4. v. 21. What will you In a rodde that I come to you or in charitie and the spirit of mildnesse 2. Cor. 13. v. 10. These things I write absente that being present I may not deale hardly according to the power which the Lord hath giuen me And c. 10. v. 6. Hauing in readinesse to reuenge all disobedience 2. Tim. 1. v. 11. I am appointed a preacher and Apostle and Maister of the Gentils Hebrews 13. vers 17. Obey your Prelats and be subiect to them CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Triplicat cont Whitaker c. 13. We see that Paul putteth the authoritie in the Prelats PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker l. 1. de Script c. 13. sect 12. The authoritie is not Authoritie is not in the Pastours in the Prelats but in the worde for whose administration the Prelats do serue Againe I acknowledge no ruling which the Church hath All the authoritie is in God and in his word the Church hath nothing but mere ministerie Spalatensis l. 5. de Repub c. 2. n. 40. Church gouernours are most like to Phisitiās The Phisitian appointeth holesome things and forbiddeth vnholesome prescribeth diete c. but hath no They haue no iurisdiction iurisdiction or cōmand ouer the sick As it is the Phisitians office to gouerne the sick that is without iurisdiction So it is the office of the ecclesiasticall rectors to gouerne the Church that is the faithfull Caluin 4. Instit c. 8. § 2. We must remember that what authoritie or dignitie the Holie Ghost in the Scripture doth giue to Preists or Prophets or Apostles or Successours of Apostles all that is giuen not properly to the men themselues but to the ministerie whereof they are officers or to speake brefly to the word whose ministerie is committed to them The same he hath in Ioan. 16. v. 8. in Math. 20. v. 25. and in Iacob 4. v. 12. Beza in Math. 20. v. 25. What then will you say Haue the No power at all ouer consciences Ministers of the word of God no power at all None truely they no not ouer cōsciences for instructiō whereof they are appointed But they are legats of Christ to say and doe in his name sacred not ciuill matters who alone hath all right of commanding and
he commandeth them to be heard as legats not as maisters THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the power of keyes was giuen to S. Peter that the Holie Ghost placed Bishops to gouerne the Church that S. Paul had a rodde and power ouer the faithfull could deale hardly and punish all disobedience was Maister of the Gentils and that we ought to be subiect to our Prelats The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that there is no authoritie in the Prelats themselues that the Church hath no rule but mere ministerie that Pastours haue no more iurisdiction ouer the faithfull then Phisicians ouer the sick that they haue no power ouer the consciences but that all authoritie or right of commanding is in God onely and in his worde ART III. WHETHER ANIE ONE PAStour haue authoritie to excommunicate SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Math. 16. v. 19. Thou arte Peter And whatsoeuer thou shalt S. Peter had authoritie to excommunicate And S. Paul binde vpon earth it shal be bound also in heauen 1. Timoth. 16. v. vlt. Of whome is Hymenaeus and Alexander whome I haue deliuered to Sathan that they may learne not to blaspheme CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton Cont. 2. q. 1. art vn The Ecclesiasticall power first principally of it selfe and immediatly is in particular persons PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Beza in Conf. c. 5. sect 43. We must remēber that this power No one man can excommunicate of excommunicating is giuen to no one man but to the whole companie of the Presbyterie Caluin 4. Instit c. 11. § 5. The spirituall power of excommunicating must not be exercised at the pleasure of one man but by the lawfull assemblie § 6. This kinde of power was not in one but in the assemble of the Elders Peter Martyr in 1. Cor. 5. v. 4. So great an Apostle doth not not take vpon him to excōmunicate of himselfe and alone which yet the Pope and manie Bishops dare Bucanus in Institut loco 44. In whome must the power of excommunicating be not in anie one ether Bishop or ordained of the Bishop THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that power of binding was giuen to S. Peter that S. Paul excommunicated or deliuered some to Sathan Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that power of excommunicating is in no one mā Bishop or other that S. Paul tooke not vpon to excommunicate of himselfe ART IV. WHETHER PASTOVRS OF the Church haue power to command or make lawes SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Actes 15. v. 28. It hath seemed good to the Holie Ghost and Pastours can command to vs to lay no further burden vpon you then these necessarie things That you abstaine from the things imolated to idols and blood and that which is strangled And ver 41. And he Paul walked through Syria and Cilicia confirming the Churches and commanding them to keepe the precepts of the Apostles and the Ancients 1. Thessalon 4. v. 11. We desire you brethren that you worke with your owne hands as we haue commanded you And Epistol 2. cap. 3. vers 4. And we haue confidence of you in our Lord that the things which we command you both doe and will doe 1. Cor. 7. v. 12. For to the rest I say not our Lord If any brother haue a wife an infidell and she consent to Diuel with him let him not put her away CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 4. de Pontif. c. 17. The Pope and other Bishops can iudge and make lawes PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Caluin in Antidoto Concilij Sess 6. con 20. As for laws of They cannot command the Church let them looke to them we acknowledge one lawmaker who can giue rules of life as we haue our life from him In actor 15. v. 28. The sottish Papists who out of these words would The Church hath no authoritie No power to make lawes proue that the Church hath some authoritie Musculus in locis c. de Magistrat The Church hath no power to make lawes but she is commanded to heare and obey Luther de Captiuit to 2. fol. 76. Nether Pope nor Bishop nor any man hath any right to put a tittle vpon a Christian man vnlesse it be done by his owne consent THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely affirmeth that the Apostles put precepts and burdens vpon the faithfull that S. Paul commanded Christians to keepe them and that himselfe commanded diuers things The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the Church hath no authoritie of lawmaking hath no power to make laws that no Bishop or other can command a Christian man any thing but what he will himselfe ART VIII WHETHER BISHOPS BE rulers of the Church SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Act. 28. v. 28. The Holie Ghost hath placed you Bishops to Bishops rulers of the Church rule the Church of God 2. Tim. 1. ver 11. I am appointed a preacher and Apostle and Maister of the Gentils 7. c. 5. v. 19. Against a Preists receaue not accusation but vnder twoe or three witnesses CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent sess 23. c. 4. Bishops are put of the Holie Ghost for to rule the Church of God PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Spalatensis or Lohetus Respons ad Marium cap. 1. The true nature of a head and the true nature of a ruler is in no pure No mā ruler of the Church man one or manie nether Monarchically nor Aristocratically Of the same opinion are others as appeareth by what hath beene saied before art 2. and 4. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Bishops are rulers of the Church that S. Paul was maister of the Gentils that S. Timothe was iudge of Preists The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that no pure man one or manie can be head or true ruler of the Church ART VI. WHETHER DO RVLE THE true Church of God SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Act. 20. v. 28. The holie Ghost hath placed you Bishops to Bishops rule the true Church rule the Church of God which he hath purchased with his owne blood Ephes 4. v. 11. And he gaue other some Pastors and Doctors to the consummation of the Saints vnto the worke of the ministerie vnto the edifying of the bodie of Christ Isaie 62. v. 6. Vpon thy walls Hierusalem I haue appointed watch men CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Ttent Sess 6. c. 1. The Holie Ghost hath put all Bishops of Patriarchall Primatiall Metropolitan and Cathedrall Churches to rule the Church of God which he hath purchased with his blood PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 2. quaest 2. c. 2. The rule of the Catholik Not the true Church Church could yet neuer be seene Againe The Catholik Curch which containeth onely good men can nether be seene nor comen vnto nor saluted And q. 1. c. 10. There are some Prelats who say and do not but these are not of the Catholik Church Bellarmin should remember that Bishops are Pastors of particular Churches not of the Catholik
authoritie of the Church THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the Church is the pillar and ground of trueth The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the Church doth not sustaine or conserue the trueth that faith relieth not vpon her authoritie that trueth doth not relie vpon her authoritie as a foundation no not in regard or respect of vs. THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF the Church What hath beene repeated in this Chapter doth make manifest that Protestants describe vnto vs a Church quite different from that which the holie Scripture and Catholikes propose For the Scripture and Catholiks teach that the Church is but one Protestants say there are twoe Churches They say she containeth both badde and reprobates that she endureth for euer is alwaies visible infallible in faith is simply in all things to be heard and is the pillar of faith touching vs All which points Protestants denie They also make manifest that Protestants steale from the Church a great parte of her to wit the badde and reprobate faithfull and manie of her chiefe properties namely vnitie perpetuitie continuall visibilitie infallibilitie and our dependencie vpon her in beleife And thus much of the Church Now of Temples or materiall Churches CHAPTER VIII OF TEMPLES OR MATERIALL CHVRCHES ART I. WHETHER THE CHVRCHES be also for priuat praier SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. KINGS 3. cap. 8. ver 41. Moreouer also the stranger Place of praier for a straÌ„ger which is not of thy people Israel when he shall come from a farre countrie for thy name and shall pray in this place thou shalt heare in heauen in the firmament of thy habitation and shalt do all things for which the stranger shall inuocate thee 2. Paralipomen 6. vers 21. Whosoeuer shall pray in this For whomsoeuer place heare out of thy habitation that is from the heauens and be propitious Mathew 21. vers 13. It is written my house shal be called a house of praier Luc. 2. v 37. Who departed not from the temple by fastings For S. Anne and praiers seruing night and day c. 24. v. 53. And they were alwaies in the Temple praising and blessing God CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Cardin. Bellarm. lib. 3. de Santis cap. 4. The Churches of Christians are rightly instituted for to pray also priuate praiers PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Tindal in Fox Actes 1610. pag. 1138. Churches are for preaching For preaching onely onely And Fox addeth This article containeth nether errour nor honestie Vorstius in Antibellarm p. 327. Nether is this a lawfull end Not for priuat praier of Churches that the faithfull pray priuaty in them Luther in Festo Dedicat. Templi fol. 447. The people which beleiue in Christ are all iust and subiect to no law especially Not dedicated to praier that pertaineth to ceremonies of temples And therefore now amongst them there is no temple dedicated to praier And hereupon Protestants in Confes Heluet. c. 23. bidde them beware that they wearie not the people with to long praier And in Confess Argentinen cap. 21. They detest our long paier as also doth Caluin in Matth. 6. ver 7. and finally in their Synod at Dordrach art 46. they define that publik euening praiers are not to be brought in where they are not in vse and to be taken away where they are So well these men loue praiers in Churches THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Gods Church is the house of praier for all people a place of praier where the stranger may make his praier and be heard that Anna night and day praied in the temple that the Apostles were alwaies in the temple praising God The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that Churches are onely for preaching that is no lawfull end of Churches to pray priuatly in them that Christians haue no temple dedicated to praier and forbidde long and euening praier in Churches ART II. WHETHER CHVRCHES BE to be adorned SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Exod. 35. is described the wonderfull adorning of the tabernacle Churches are to be adorned made by Gods commandment and 3. Reg. 6. the most rich ornaments of the temple made by Salomon Psalme 25. v. 8. I haue loued the beautie of thy house Marc. 14. v. 15. Say to the maister of the house that the Maister saieth where is my refectorie where I may eate my Paske with my disciples And he will shew you a great chamber adorned and there prepare for vs. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Ioan. 12. v. 3. Sumptuous dâ—cking and honorable adorning when they are done in the honour of God and for his worshippe ether in the adorning or magnifencie of Churches or in solemne administration of Sacraments doe please God PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Perkins in Problemate c. de ornatu temploruÌ„ The errour Not to be adorned of adorning temples began to be strange in Constantins time and the Fathers theÌ„ being caried away with the custome do exact the adorning of temples Caluin in Math. 26. v. 11 Let vs not deuise sumptuous worshippes of God with the Papists In Ioan. 12. v. 6. Surely God careth not for externall pompe wherefore they are preposterous interpreters who out of Christs answere do infer that costly and magnificall worshipps do please God Tigurini apud Hospin part 2. Hist fol. 24. The ornaments of Churches belonge not to the true worshippe of God Vorstius in Antibellarm p. 327. It is not onely superfluous but also vaine and superstitious and in parte ethnicall also and Iewish to make great and vnprofitable expenses in adorning Churches as euerie where vseth to be done in Poperie For that theatricall brauerie is contrarie to the simplicitie of Christian religion THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that God himselfe comcommanded the tabernacle to be adorned that Salomon by his instinct adorned the temple that Dauid loued the beautie of Gods house that Christ made choice of a great and adorned chamber wherein he should celebrate the Eucharist The same say Catholiks ProtestaÌ„ts expressely say that the adorning of Churches is an errour superfluous vaine superstitious ethnicall and Iudaicall and contrarie to Christian religion that magnificall and costlie worships please not God ART III. WHETHER IT BE LAWEFVLL to put the Images of Angels or Saintes in Churches SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Exod. 25. v. 18. God thus commandeth Two Cherubins Images in the Temple also thou shalt make of beaten gould on both sides of the Oracle And vers 22. And I will speake to thee ouer the Propitiatorie and from the middest of the two Cherubins which shal be vpon the arke of testimonie all things which I will coÌ„mand the children of Israel by thee 3. Reg. 6. vers 23. And he Salomon made in the Oracle two Cherubs of oliue trees of ten cubits in height And v. 27. And he put the Cherubs in the middest of the inner temple CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Session 25. c. de Inuocat The Images of Christ and other Saintes
it might departe from me and he saied to me My grace sufficeth the. In like sorte Abraham praied for Sodom Gen. 18. Dauid for the life of his child 2. Kings 12. Hieremie for the sauing of Hierusalem Hier. 32. and yet had no promise of that for which they praied CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. de bonis operibus c. 9. Sometime the praier is meritorious and not impetratorious as when a iust man of charitie asketh that which perhaps is not expedient for him as when S. Paul praied thrice that the prick of the flesh might be taken from him In praier is not required faith wherewith we certainly beleiue that absolutely God will do that which we aske PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Perkins reform Cathol Contr. 4. pag. 79. That which we are to aske God in praier we must beleiue it shall be giuen vs as we aske it It is a rule of Gods word requiring that in euerie petition we bring a particular faith whereby we beleiue that the thing lawfully asked shal be giuen accordingly Tindal in Fox his Acts pag. 1139. To aske of God more then he hath promised cometh of a false faith and is plaine idolatrie Idolatrie to pray for more then God hath promised Melancthon in Disput to 4. p. 487. As often as thou callest vpon God in any busines first of all thinke certainly that thy praiers are heard for the Sonne of God Vnlesse this faith goe before thy praier is vaine ib. p. 555. Let faith assure vs that our Praier for corporall goods euer heard Euerie good man assured to be heard No praier to be made with out Gods promise praier for corporall goods is heard and neuer frustrate Illyricus in Marci 5. v. 28. Euerie godlie man in praying perswadeth himselfe by the word and promise of God that in his petition he is heard no lesse then if he heard God answering with a cleare voice that he had heard him Luther Postilla in Dom. 5. post Phasca fol. 261. Who pray without a promise of God they imagin that God is angrie with them whome by praiers they endeauour to appease There God heareth not and our praeier and labour is lost Daneus in Exam. Kemnitij c. 29. We ought to aske nothing Nothing to be asked but what is promised of God but what he hath promised Caluin in Iacobi 1. v. 6. As we cannot pray but the word must goe before so must we beleiue before we pray For by praying we testifie that we hope for the grace which he hath promise Wherefore it is faith which relying vpon Gods promise assureth vs to obtaine that which we aske This is a notable place for to refute that doctrine of Poperie to wit that we must pray with doubt and vncertaine opinion of successe The like he hath 3. Instit c. 20. § 15. Confession of Saxonie cap. 22. The praier which is without faith that is where a man assureth not himselfe that God alloweth and heareth his praier is vaine Apologia Confessio Augustanae cap. de Tradition Of our praier we must be assured that it is effectuall that it is heard THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ praied for the taking away the cuppe of his passion S. Paul for taking away the pricke o the flesh Abraham for Sodom and the like and yet they had no promise nor particular faith that they should obtayne those things Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that it is lost labour and idolatrie to pray for anie thing which God hath not promised that we ought not to pray for any thing which God hath not promised ART XI WHETHER ANIE OBTAINE some thing of God for his owne or his praiers worth SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 1. Ioan. 3. vers 21. If our hart do not reprehend vs we haue We obtaine because we keepe the cōmandments Good heareth the iust confidence toward God and whatsoeuer we shall aske we shall receaue of him because we keepe his commandments 1. Peter 3. v. 12. The eyes of our Lord are vpon the iust and his eares vnto their praiers Iames 5. vers 16. The continuall praier of a iust man auaileth much CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. lib. 1. de bonis operibus c. 9. Scripture in diuers places witnesseth that iustice is required in him that praieth for to obtaine assuredly PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther Postilla in Dom. 5. post Pascha fol. 263. Whence None heard for his worthinesse it followeth that none receaueth any thing of God for his owne worth or the worth of his praier Thy worthines doth not helpe thee thy vnworthines doth not hinder thee Of the same opinion are other Protestants who denie that there is any worth in vs or in our workes THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that a good conscience breedeth confidence in God that they who keepe Gods cōmandments receaue what they aske that Gods eares are vnto the praiers of the iust that a iust mans praier auaileth much Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that the worthinesse of him that praieth profiteth nothing that no man obtaineth any thing of God for his owne or his praier worthinesse ART XII WHETHER IT BE LAWFVLL to pray publikely in the Church in an vnknowne tongue SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 1. Cor. 14. ver 17. the Apostle thus saieth of one that publikely praied in the Church in an vnknowne tongue For Praying in a strāge tongue is good thou indeed giuest thanks well CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in 1. Corint 14. v. 17. The Apostle condemneth not but approueth praier in an vnknowne tongue PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Scotica Confessio generalie We detest his Popes praiers It is detestable in an vnknowne tongue The like hath Cōfess Austria art 14. Heluet. c. 22. Iuel art 3. sect 1. saieth that it is not onely repugnant to the Repugnant to Scripture and commō sense Scriptures of God but also contrarie to the sense of nature Caluin 3. Instit cap. 20. § 33. Who can sufficiently wonder at the vnbridled licence of the Papistes who feare not to roare out their praiers in an vnknowne tongue Peter Martyr in 1. Cor. 14. vers 17. The Apostle in this his saying doth not approue the action But saieth Thou giuest thāks well because the words vttered by thee being of the Holie Ghost cannot but haue a good sense Et in ver 14. The idiots are reprehended Praying in Latin is reprehended Not to be suffered who pray in Latin Pater noster Aretius in locis part 3. fol. 21. It is manifest that a strange tongue is not to be suffered in Christs Church Beza in Respons ad Acta Colloq Montibel part 2. p. 26. Doth not the Apostle in expresse words forbidde to pray in a Forbidden tongue which is not vnderstood of those that are present THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that he who praieth in the Church in a strange tongue giueth thanks well The same say Catholiks
For from whence might they better draw their dreggs So plainelie he confesseth that his doctrine in the foresaied points contradicted the bookes of Machabes Tobie and Ecclesiasticus And notwithstanding S. Austin whome †Caluin 4. Instit c. 14. §. 26. Protestants account the best witnesse of antiquitie clearelie testifieth that manie ages agoe the holie Church held the bookes of Machabes for Canonicall Scripture For thus he writeth of them lib. 18. de Ciuitat c. 36. Which not Iewes but the Church holdeth for Canonicall And the like he saieth lib. 1. cont Gaudent cap. 23. Lib. de doctrin Christ c. 8. l. 2. Retract c. 4. and otherwhere Besides manie Protestantt as Caluin in Antidot cit p. 266. Whitaker Contr. 3. q. 6. c. 3. Perkins de Symbol p. 787. and also Hyperius Zanchius Lubbertus Hospinian Rainolds Feild and others alledged in the Protestants Apologie Tract 1. Sect. 3. confesse that the Councel of Carthage where S. Austin was present and subscribed thereto did reckon the bookes of Machabes in the nūber of Canonicall Scripture And to omit all other arguments drawne out of the Scripture and Fathers for the infallibilitie of the Church the Protestants themselues eftsoones confesse that the Church can discerne true Scriptures from false and that we are bound to yeeld to her iudgment For thus saieth Luther l. de Captiuit to 2. fol. 84. This indeed hath the Church that she can discerne The Church can discerne the word of God Hath authoritie to iudge the word of God from the word of men as Austin confesseth that he beleiued the Ghospell being moued by the authoritie of the Church The Confession of Wittenberg cap. de Eccles The Church hath authoritie to iudge of all doctrines And cap. de Concilijs She hath an assured promisse of the perpetuall presence of Christ and she is gouerned of the holie Ghost Melancthon Respons ad Acta Ratisbon tom 3. pag. 732. We acknowledge this authoritie of testifying the Apostolicall Scriptures or discerning the writings of the Apostles from counterfait doth agree to the true Church Caluin de vera ref p. 232. I denie not but that it is the proper office of Church to discerne true The proper office of the Church Scriptures from counterfeit Peter Martyr Praefat. 1. Epist ad Corinth We will easily graunt that the ancient Church was indued so much with the holie Ghost that by his leading and directiō they easily discerned betwene those which were proposed to them which were the true and sincere words of God and by this spirituall power they distinguished the Canon of Scriptures from apocryphall bookes And in locis Class 1. c. 6. § 6. We acknowledge the office of the Church to be that being indued with Gods Spirit she may distinguish the true and sincere bookes of holie writ from counterfeit and apocryphall Iuel in Defens of the Apologie pag. 204. The Church of God had the spirit of wisdome She hath the spirit of wisdome Can discerne true Scriptures whereby she might discerne true Scriptures from false Fulke in his Answere to a false Cathol p. 5. The Church of Christ indeed can discerne true Scriptures from false Perkins de Serm. Dom. tom 2. col 252. The Church hath the guift of iudging of greatest matters She can iudge of the booke of Scripture Hath the guift of iudging which are Canonicall which are not of the spirits of men and of their doctrines and therefore surely can iudge which companie of men is the true Church which is not Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 3. c. 1. pag. 315. We denie not that it belongeth to the Church to approue to acknowledge to receaue to promulgate to commend the Scriptures to all her children and we say that this testimonie is true and ought to be admitted of all Cap. 2. pag. 316. It is the office of the Church to iudge and discerne true sincere and right Scriptures from false counterfait and bastard And for to discharge Hath the spirit of Christ to distinguish this office she hath the Spirit of Christ by which she may distinguish trueth from lyes she knoweth the voice of her Spouse she is most iuditious and can discerne spirits Cap. 5. p. Her tradition conuinceth 322. I denie not that the Tradition of the Church is an argumēt by which it may be cōuinced which kookes are Canonicall which not Canonicall cap. 6. pag. 323. The Church hath the Spirit of God by which being taught she heareth the voice of he Spouse and acknowledgeth his doctrine cap. 7. pag. 324. Indeed we may Her authoritie cōpelleth be compelled by the authoritie of the Church to acknowledge the Canonicall Scripture I say as I often saied before that we are compelled by the authoritie of the Church to beleiue these bookes to be Canonicall And cap. 9. pag. 326. We graunt with Ireney A sound demonstration that the authoritie of the Church is a sound and breife demūstration a posteriori of Canonicall doctrine And l. 1. de Scriptura c. 1. sect 9. he affirmeth that the testimonie of the Church ought to be receaued and who receaueth it not is guiltie of sacriledge And lib. 2. cap. 4. sect 4. p. 227. I say the testimonie of the Church is sufficient to refute and conuince those who thinke amisse of the Scriptures The like he hath ib. p. 218. 228. and and other where often Out of which confessions of Protestants of the authorite and power of the Church to discerne and distinguish true Scripture from false we may thus argue It belongeth to the Church yea it is her function and proper office to discerne true Scriptures from false she hath that she can distinguish the word of God from the word of man she is taught of the holie Ghost indued with Gods Spirit hath the guift of iudging the spirit of wisdome for to discerne by her tradition it may be conuinced which bookes are Canonicall which not by her authoritie we may be compelled to acknowledge the Canonicall Scripture her authoritie is a sound demonstration of Canonicall doctrine her testimonie ought to be receaued of all and who receaueth it not is guiltie of sacriledge But this holie Church manie ages agoe hath iudged the bookes of Machabes to be Canonicall Therefore they are such The Maior or first Proposition is the confession of Protestants now rehearsed and the Minor is confirmed by the foresaied testimonie of S. Austin and the confessions of the forenamed Protestants And howsoeuer Protestants The Cath. aduantage ouer Protest will delude this argument they must needs confesse that Catholiks haue the aduantage of them in that Protestāts produce no testimonie which forceth Catholiks to reiect anie booke which anie Father testifieth to haue beene anciently held of the Church for Canonicall as Catholiks produce the testimonie of S. Iames which maketh the Lutherans to reiect his epistle which other Protestants confesse to be Canonicall and an other testimonie out of the bookes
testimonies Zach. 1. Where the Angel praieth O Lord of hostes The same saieth P. Martyr in Rom. 8. Schlus to 8. Catal. p. 65. They denie that Angels offer vp our praiers to God l. 1. c. 4. art 7. Which Beza teacheth to be cōtrarie to Scripture in Apoc. 8. v. 3. Ihon learned by this visiō that the praiers of Saints in this world to wit of those that dayly offer to God pure sacrifices of praiers and good deeds are offered to God by the ministerie of Angels They denie that we ought to pray to Saints lib. 1. c. 4 art 8. Which to be repugnant to Scripture thus confesseth Luther to 1. de 1 precept f. 12. I say that in anie case we must recurre to the suffrages of Saints as in Iob it is saied And turne thy selfe to some of the Saints and as Salomon alledgeth his father Remember Dauid O Lord. And also the Patriach Iacob saied of Ephraim and Manasse let my name be inuocated vpon these children Touching Scripture they teach that there is nothing Of Scripture hard in it lib. 1. c. 5. art 1. Which is against Scripture as confesseth Christian ad Portum lib. cont Verron We confesse saieth he plainely with S. Peter as in the Epistles of S. Paul so in the Scripture that there are manie things hard to vnderstād Whitaker lib. 6. cont Dur. sect 22. I confesse as Peter saieth that there in Scriptures manie things hard to vnderstand The like saieth Pareus in Gal. 2. lect 25. They teach that the law is contrarie to the Ghospel l. 1. c. 5. art 7. Of which doctrine thus Serranus cōt Hayum part 3. With a more grosse and dangerous ignorance doth he oppose the law of Moises and the law of the Ghospell like twoe principles of Maniche as if they were contrarie Concerning S. Peter They denie that the Church was Of S. Peter founded vpon him l. 1. c. 6. art 2. Which to be against Scripture thus confesseth Whitaker Cont. 4. q. 2. cap. 2. We denie not that Peter was the foundation and gouernour of the Church and if they require we will graunt also that this was promised to him in these words Et. l. 5. cont Dur. sec 4. Who doth not confesse that Peter is the rock and foundation of the Church They denie that the keys of heauen were giuen to Peter l. 1. c. 6. art 3. Which is against Scripture For thus Spalatensis l. 1. de Rep. c. 7. Christ expressely saieth to Peter I will giue the keys wherefore fairewell they and let them be gone who vsing force to the letter will haue the keys to be giuen or promised not immediatly to Peter but excluding Peters person ether to the whole Church or to some other that is not Peter Et Whitaker Cont. 4. q. 2. c. 4. I graunt that the keys were promised to Peter for the place doth conuince that and I will neuer repugne Eliēsis in resp ad Apol. Bellar. c. 8. Who doubts that the keys were promised to Peter They denie that the Apostles were foundations of the Church l. 1. c. 6. art 5. Which Rainolds in his Confer c. 2. sec 1. acknowledgeth to be against the Scripture in these words The 12. Apostles are called 12. foundations Apoc. 21. v. 14. Et Serran cōt Hayum part 3. All the Prophets and Apostles are termed in Scripture foundations of the Church Cōcerning Pastors of the Church They denie that there Of Pastors are alwaies some l. 1. c. 7. art 1. which thus censureth Melancthō apud Luther 10. 1. f. 483. Where the Church is there must be the right ordering of Ministers because the ordination of Ministers is one of the proper guifts of the Church according to that Ephes 4. He gaue Pastors c. Kemnice in Exam. part 2. tit de ordine The Sonne of God himselfe will haue the Ministerie of those that teach the Ghospell to be conserued with a continuall vocation in the Church So Paul saieth Ephes 4. Et Caluin in Ephes 4. vers 13. Here Paul admonis heth that the vse of the Ministerie is not for a time but perpetuall as long as we liue in the world Touching the Church they denie that she doth perpetually Of the Church endure l. 1. c. 8. art 4. And notwithstanding Whitaker Cōt 2. q. 3. c. 2. saieth Who denieth or doubteth that the Church is founded for cuer and to cōtinew for euer he is no Christian They denie also that she is alwaies visible l. 1. c. 8. art 5. Which thus condemneth Daneus l. de visib Eccles Who denieth the true Church of God and her to haue beene visible frō the beginning of the world he doubtlesse sheweth himselfe to be ignorant of the first page of the Bible Et Reineccius to 4. Arm. c. 3. The testimonies of Scripture teach that the visible companie neuer perisheth quite They teach that the Church can erre euen in fundamētall points lib. 1. c. 8. art 6. And yet Caluin writeth 4. Instit c. § 10. By which words Paul doth signifie that to the end Gods trueth faile not in the world the Church is a faithfull keeper thereof Touching Baptisme they denie that ether water or Of Baptisme the naming of the B. Trinitie is necessarie thereto l. 1. c. 10. art 1. 2. And yet Reineccius to 4. Armat c. 18. thus writeth Beza most fondely imagineth that in want of water we may vse other liquor And Beza l. quaestionum resp vol. 3. If anie should not baptize in the name of the Trinitie or for water especially wittingly should vse some other thing surely this would not be the baptisme which Christ instituted Pareus in Colleg. Theol. 9. disp 22. There is no Christian that doubteth that the baptisme of water according to Christs institution ought to be administred onely in the name of the Father c. They denie that baptisme is necessarie to Infants l. 1. c. 10. art 9. Of which thing Melancthon in Catechesi tom 3. giueth this iudgement I answere that baptisme is necessarie to Infants because Christs commandement is vniuersall Ioan. 3. vnlesse c. Vrbanus Regius in Epist ad Heminges to 2. The Catholik Church doth rightly beleiue out of the Scriptures that Baptisme is necessarie to saluation They denie that the children of the faithfull are in state of damnation before they be baptized l. 1. c. 10 art 9. Which thus cōdemneth Schlusselburg l. 1. Theol. art 18. It may be proued manie wayes out of the word of God that the children of the faithfull are not holie from their mothers wombs They say that baptisme is not the lauer of the soule nor purgeth sinnes l. 1. cap. 10. art 6. And yet thus writeth Beza in Prae. 2. part resp ad Montisb Did euer anie Christian denie that baptisme is the lauer of regeneration which the Apostle witnesseth in expresse words Et Shlusselb l. 1. Theol. art 18. This blasphemie of the Caluinists that Baptisme doth not purge sinnes the holie Ghost
speeches of Protestants as it was to me to write them out let him runne ouer the Summe which I make of their words or by the notes in the margent chuse which are fittest to his purpose And thus much for the māner of my proceeding in this booke 11. The profit of this work is manifould First because by it a short and easie way may be taken to make an end The profits of this worke of all controuersies and that out of Scirpture alone as Protestants desire to wit by mere rehearsall of the expresse words of Scripture of Catholiks and of famous Protestants touching 260. articles of controuersie For if it appeare that catholikes in 260. articles agree both in word and sense with the expresse words of Scripture and these spoken of purpose to declare her meaning vnto vs and that Protestants in those 260. articles directly contradict the said words and sense of the holie Scripture no man will doubt but that all Protestant doctrin for as it is contrarie to the Catholik is also contrarie to the holie Scripture An other commoditie is that in this booke are gathered those places of Scripture and they ranked according to order of their matters which in 260. articles directly and in their proper and vsual sense do approue the Catholik doctrin and condemne the Protestant A third commoditie is that hereby are at hand in euerie kind of controuersie such sayings of famous Protestants as not onely directely crosse the Scripture but also many of them are so blasphemous against God against Christ against the Saints the Church Sacraments Faith Good works so opposite to pietie vertue and religion so fauorable to vice and all licenciousnes so repugnant to reason as some Protestants will deny and others scarse beleeue that euer any of theirs taught such doctrin Whome I request The Authors fidelitie in citing Protetestants sayings to take the paines to looke vpon the bookes and places by me alledged and then to beleeue their owne eyes For I not onely gathered their sayings out of their owne bookes but also after I had my self gathered them and caused them to be faire copied out I diligently conferred them with their books and admitted none which he that read their bookes did non find to be truly cited out of them Wherfore I say for my self as Caluin said for him self against Gentilis There shal be no colour for them to cōplaine that they are slandered seing I request that iudgmēt be made of their impietie out of their owne mere words And they who haue had to deale with Protestants ether by word or writing know well how important a thing it is to be able to conuince them that they teach that which in in very deed they teach which may clearly be done by their sayinges here rehearsed 12. The fourth commoditie of this worke is thar hereby shall appeare that almost in all controuersies which betwene Catholiks and Protestants Catholiks do stick fast to the very words of Scripture and religiously keepe her letter and forme of speech and Protestants goe fare from the words at lest of Scripture and bring in a different yea quite opposit forme of speech Nether ought they to think this to be a small fault both because they boasting of the pure and expresse word of God ought also to keep the very letter thereof and not to reiect it and to vse the contrarie as also because the Apostle commandeth to auoide profane nouelties of words and to keepe the 1. Timoth. 6. 2. Timoth. 1. forme of holesome words which we haue learned of him which commandment they do not follow who forsake the Scriptures forme of speech and embrace the contrarie and finally because not onely the sense but also the words and forme of speech vsed by the Scripture did proceed from the holie Ghoste and therefore it is sacrilegious audacitie to reiect Gods words and Gods forme of speaking and to bring in mans words and fashion of speaking quite contrarie As if these new Ghospelers should teach God how to deliuer his mind or he ment to speake otherwise by them then he did by his Prophets Apostles and Euāgelists wherefore their impietie is not to be borne withall who when the Scripture most often and most plainly calleth the beleefe of wicked men or reprobats faith and neuer denieth it to be faith yet dare say that it Caluin 3. Instit c. 2. §. 10. is vnworthie the name of faith When the Scripture often times and most directly calleth the Eucharist the bodie of Christ and not once directly denieth it to be his bodie yet dare say it is not his bodie And the like they doe in many other matters wherin if they controll not the meaning of the holie Ghoste at least they correct his speech and reforme it according to the square of their new doctrin Far otherwise proceeded the holie Fathers who would not suffer so much as a letter or syllable of the holie Scripture to be altered And as S. Austin grauely aduertized Philosophers may speake as they please but we speake according Lib. 10. de Ciuit. c. 23. to a certaine rule lest licencie in words breed impious opinions of the thing which they signifie Yea Protestants them selues some times will seeme to be very carefull of the words and phrases of Scripture For thus speaketh Luther If the In Confutat Latomi f. 227 Scripture terme any thing sin beware thou beest not moued by any words of theirs who as if they could speake better deny it to be sin And Caluin There is to be taken out of Scripture a 1. Instit c. 13. §. 3. certaine forme of thinking speaking by which all the thoughts of our mynd and words of our mouth are to be examined Beza Ad defens Castell also I see that all godlie and learned Diuines haue euer taught that the holie Ghost gouerned not onely the mynd but also the tongue and pen in so much as concerning the wonders of God not onely nothing can be saied of any mā more truly or more habily but also nether so grauely nor so properly Likewise Bucer Prefat in Math. No wisdom of the flesh can reach to these misteries of the kingdome of God Therefore then we speake most plainly most perspicuously and most surely of matters of faith when we speake according to the rule and forme of Scripture And otherwhere we In Hospin part 2. Histor must learne of the Scripture and the holie Ghoste how to speake and think of euerie matter Wherefore the holie Ghost his formes of speaking ought not to be corrected according to the iudgment of our reason Thus they which if they and theires had followed we should not haue had so much speech contrarie to the Scripture 13. The fift and that no small cōmoditie is that by this worke wil be taken from ministers all their false pretense of Scripture and of the worde of God wherewith perpetually they crie that the Catholik
was not whashed by baptisme See artic 7. Scripture We were by nature the children of wrathe as also the rest As by the offence of one vnto all men to condemnation Protestants Originall sinne is not imputed to them the children of the faithfull are borne Saintes See art 9. Scripture In what then were ye baptized who saied in Ihons Some baptized in Saint Ihons Baptisme Not in that baptisme Some knew not of the Holie Ghost They knew of him baptisme Protestants It is demonstrated that they were neuer baptized in Ihons outward baptisme See more art 11. Scripture But they saied to him Nay nether haue we heard whither there be a Holie Ghost Protestants How could it be that Iewes had heard nothing of the Holie Ghost Se more art 12. CHAPTER XI OF THE EVCHARIST SCripture This is my bodie which is giuen for you This is my The Eucharist is the bodie of Christ It is not his bodie bloud of the new testament that shal be shed for manie Protestants The Sacramentall bread is called Christs bodie although indeed it be not Christs bodie The Eucharist is not truely the bodie of Christ Some do vrge that the lords bread is the verie bodie of Christ but we say the contrarie See more art 1. Scripture Vnles ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and Christs flesh to be eaten drinke his blood ye shall not haue life in you Protestants Christ did not command his bodie to be eaten Not to be eaten but symbolicall bread VVe eate and drinke nothing but bread and wine Christs corporall flesh can be no way eaten See more art 2. His flesh truly meate Scripture My flesh is truely meate Protestants It is farre from the bodie of the lord to be truly Not truly meate eaten See art 2. cit Scripture Drinke ye all of this For this is the blood of the Blood of the new testameÌ„to be drunk Not to be drunk The Chalice is the new testament There is sacrifice new testament Protestants Christ did not giue the blood of the new testament to drink See art 3. Scripture This chalice is the new testament in my blood Protestants That Cuppe was not the new testament This Cuppe was not the new testament it self See more art 4. Scripture In euerie place there is sacrificing and there is offered to my name a cleane oblation Protestants There is no more Sacrifice remayning in the There is none Church See more art 11. Scripture This is the chalice the new testament in my blood The Chalice shed for vs. which chalice as is euident by the Greek text shal be shed for you ProtestaÌ„ts The chalice was not shedde for vs. See more art 6. Not shedde for vs. We haue an altar We haue none Scripture We haue an altar whereof they haue no power to eate who serue the tabernacle Protestants Paule maketh no mention of an altar In the Apostolicall writings there is no mention of an altar Altars haue no place in the time of the Ghospell See more art 24. Scripture And the whole mulâ—â—tude of the children of Israel The Paschall lambe sacrificed Not sacrificed shall sacrifice him the paschall lambe at euen Protestants The holie Bible no where teacheth that the paschall lambe was immolated and sacrificed The paschall lambe was no sacrifice See more art 13. OF THE OTHER SACRAMENTS CHAPTER XII SCripture Whose sinnes you shall forgiue they are forgiuen Men can forgiue sinnes They can not Protestants Men do not forgiue sinnes who attributeth remission of sinnes to a creature robbeth God of his glorie It is proper to God alone to remit sinnes and so proper as he communicateth this glorie to none See more art 1. Scripture Confesse your sinnes one to an other Sinnes to be confessed to men Not to be coÌ„fessed to theÌ„ Grace by imposition of hands Not by it Protestants God requireth not this confession to manne Confession of sinnes is forbidden Nether Christ nor his Apostles would command it See art 2. Scripture Resuscitate the grace of God which is in thee by the imposition of my hands Protestants Grace was not giuen by the externall signe of imposition of hands Imposition of hands of it self hath no efficacie but the effect dependeth of God alone See more art 3. Scripture Euerie one that dismisseth his wife and marrieth an To marie after diuerce is aduantrie Not aduantrie Men dying are to be auoiled other committeth aduoutrie Protestants Who dismisseth his wife for whoredome and marrieth an other doth not commit aduoutrie See more art 6. Scripture Is anie man sick among you let him bring in the preists of the Church and let them pray ouer him anoiling him with oile Protestants The Preists were commanded that they should Not to be not anoile those that died See more art 7. CHAPTER XIII OF FAITHE SCripture This is the worke of God that you beleiue in him Faith is a worke whom he hath sent Protestants Faith is no worke It is false that faith is a Not to worke worke See more art 1. Scripture And now there remaine Faith Hope and Charitie Faith distinct from Hope these three c. Protestants Who wnderstand not that Faith Hope and Not distinct Charitie are the selfe same thinge wil be forced to let passe manie knotâ—es in Scripture vnloosed See more art 7. Scripture And now there remaine Faith Hope and Charitie Faith inferior to Charitie Not inferior these three but the greater of these is Charitie Protestants Faith is greater then Charitie Faith is better more worthie more noble then Charitie See more art 7. Scripture Of the Princes also manie beleiued in him but for Faith without confessioÌ„ the Pharises did not confesse Protestants True faith can no more be separated from confession Not without confession Faith of Christs Godhead helpeth of mouth then fire from heate See more art 9. Scripture These are written that you may beleeue that Iesus is Christ the Sonne of God and that beleiuing you may haue life in his name Protestants To beleiue that Christ is one person which is Helpeth not God and man would helpe none See more art 3. Scripture Of the Princes also manie beleiued in him but Faith without charitie for the Pharises did not confesse For they loued the glorie of man more then the glorie of God Protestants It is impossible to beleiue where charitie wanteth Not without charitie True faith can no more be without workes then fire without heate See more art 8. Scripture Faith without workes is dead Faith some times dead Neuer dead Protestants Who beleiue that true faith can be dead beleiue against the Confession of our Church True faith can neuer be saied to be dead See more art 10. Scripture VVithout faith it is impossible to please God Faith necessarie to saluation Not necessarie Faith without workes saueth not It saueth Beliefe doth iustifie Protestants
for it selfe To which question both the Scripture and Protestants answere negatiuely but this their agreement with the Scripture in this second question saueth not their disagreement from it in the former question which disagreemēt or contradictiō is that which here I vrge Moreouer nether man nor the diuell him selfe can will iniquitie as iniquitie or for it selfe because as such it is a pure priuation of good and nothing can be willed of any but as it is good ether true or apparent good Wherevpon Saint Denis with the consent of all Diuines and Philosophers saied None worketh looking onely De diuin nominibus c. 4. to ill Finally to say that God willeth sinne as it is a meane to some good end is to make him like to them who as the Apostle writeth Roman 3. say Let vs doe euill that good may follow whose damnation saieth he is iust Blasphemous therefore it is and against holie Scripture that God will iniquitie or sinne vnder what consideration soeuer he be saied to will it And so impious this is as the holie Fathers say that it taketh away a Tertull. exhortat ad Castit c. 2. Prosper l. 2. ad Vincent c. 10 all sinne and iudgment of God and is more b Augustin l. 1. de ordin c. 1. blasphemous then to deny Gods prouidence yea some Protestants confesse that it is contrarie to scripture as we shall see hereafter l. 2. c. 25. 30. ART II. WHETHER SINNE DOTH please God SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. 3. Kings 11. v. 6. And Salomon did that which was not liked Sinne pleaseth not God before our Lord. 1. Paralipomenon 21. v. 7. And that which was commanded displeased God and he strake Israel CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE Card. Bellarmin l. 2. de septem verbis Dom. c. 4. The greatnes of the sinne which Christ vndertooke to blot out by his passion was in some sorte infinite by reason of the infinit dignitie and excellencie of the person which was offended PROTESTANT EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Bucanus and Pareus in the former article God willeth sinne with his hidden and good pleasing will Caluin de Praedestinat p. 726. Whence therefore shall we Pleaseth God say that it came to passe that Pharao should so inhumanly rage but that it so pleased God partely for to trie the patience of his people partely to exercise his power Beza de Praedestinat cont Castel val 1. Theol. p. 376. Gods will dath embrace euen those things which simply he alloweth not yea reiecteth and punisheth yet decreeth them and in some sorte and for some respect is pleased with them And in Absters calum Heshusij ib. p. 324. We say that a lie pleaseth God as it is the iust punishment of them who preferred lies before trueth And as Smidelin obiected to his face in the Conference at Montebelgard p. 450. he taught that In a wonderfull and incomprehensible manner it pleased God and he would that our first parents should sinne THE CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS OF SCRIPTVRE CATHOLIKS AND PROTESTANTS Scripture expressely teacheth that sinne pleaseth not yea displeaseth God And in like sorte teach Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that God willeth sinne with his good pleasing will that euen those things which God approueth not do in some respect please him that lies do please him as they are punishments to men that it pleased God that our first parents should sinne ART III. WHETHER GOD HATE SINNE SCRITVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Psalme 44. v. 8. Thou hast loued iustice and hast hated iniquitie God hateth sinne therefore God thy God hath anointed thee with oile of gladnes aboues thy fellowes S. Wisdom 14. v. 9. But to God the impious and his impietie are odius alike Zacharie 8. v. 17. And thinke ye not euerie man in your hart euill against his freind and lying oathe loue ye not for all these things are such as I hate saieth our Lord. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarmin in psalm 5. v. 4. God hateth nothing more then sinne PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Peter Martyr in Rom. 9. Seing sinnes haue often times the nature of punishment it is manifest that God hateth them not as He hateth not sinne such Againe For so much as God is saied to not will or hate sinne that is to be vnderstood in so much as perteineth to the law and scripture and rule of life reuealed vnto vs. He is also saied to hate sinne because he punisheth it and willeth it not for it selfe but for some other end Wherefore as he worketh sinne he hateth it not The same also meane those who as we haue seene in the former article teach that sinne pleaseth God THE CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that God hateth iniquitie hateth sinne and that impietie is odious vn him The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that God hateth not sinne as it hath the nature of punishment nor as it is his worke that when he is saied to hate sinne that is to be vnderstood that he saieth so in Scripture ART IV. WHETHER GOD DOTH worke sinne or inquitie SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Sophonie 3. v. 5. Our lord in the middes thereof will not doe God doth not worke sinne iniquitie Isaie 53. v. 9. Because he hath not done iniquitie nether was there guile in his mouth Prouerbs 14. v. 22. They erre that worke euill Mathew 7. v. 18. A good tree can not yeeld euill fruits 1. Ioan. 3. v. 8. He that committeth sinne is of the diuel CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE Councell of Trent Sessione 6. Canone 6. If any shall saye that God worketh ill deeds as well as good not onely permissiuely but also properly and in themselues so that no lesse the treason of Iudas then the calling of Paule was his proper worke be h◠accursed PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Luther de seruo arbit to 2. fol. 459. diuers times saieth that God worketh euill in vs and by vs and fol. 433. as Zanchius God worketh sinne confesseth l. de praedestinat c. 7. saieth God worketh good and euill in vs rewardeth his good and punisheth his euill deeds in vs. Melancthon in Rom. 8. printed 1521. As they confesse God worketh properly aduldulterie that the vocation of Paule was the proper worke of God so we confesse that they are properly Gods workes as well those the which are called indifferent as to eate or drinke as those which are euill as Dauids adulterie God doth all things not onely permissiuely but also mightly that is so that Iudas is treacherie is his proper worke as the vocation of Paule Brentius in c. 3. Amos. printed at Francfurt by Peter God doth the euill of sinne Bruboch 1551. All things are done by the mightie hand and effectuall working of God as well the euils of sinne as the euill of punishment Caluin Institut l. 1. c. 18. § 3. Now haue I clearly enough shewed that God is called the Author of all those things which these Censurers will haue to fall out onely by
workes workes whereas there is no such God no such Godhead which is delighted with these things And to 7. Serm. in Hebr. 11. God careth not greatly what kind or what notable workes we doe Tindall in Fox his Acts printed 1610. p. 1138. There is no To make water pleaseth God as much as preaching work better then an other to please God To make water to wash dishes to be a sowter or an Apostle all is one To wash dishes and to preach all is one as touching the deed to please God Other Protestants as testifieth Schusselburg to 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 551. Melancthon in Respons ad artic Bauar to 3. and Manlius in locis tit de Eccles saye God careth not for good workes And the same also do they thinke who as we shall relate hereafter saye that before God good workes are mere iniquities filth stench and dung For surely God careth not for such things THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that good workes are a sweet sauour before God are liked of God please God are pleasing before God The like saye Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that God careth not for workes careth not at all for them doth not regard or respect them is not delighted with them careth not what notable workes we doe maketh no accounte of them yea greatly loatheth them that to wash dishes to make water to playe the cobler pleaseth God as well as to be an Apostle ART XIV WHETHER GOD BE WORSHIPED or serued with good workes SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Isaie 19. v. 21. The Egyptians shall know our Lord in that day and shall worshippe him in hostes and in giftes God worshiped by workes Luke v. 2. c. 37. Who departed not from the temple by fastings and praiers seruing night and day CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Ioan. 4. v. 23. Therefore God is so serued inspirit and trueth that as this worshippe doth not exclude the outward acts of pietie and workes of charitie towards our neighbour wherewith we worshippe and serue God in iustice so c. PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther delibertate Christiana to 2. fol. 5. For we do not Not glorified by workes glorifie God by working but by beleeuing Ibid. cont Regem Angliae fol. 334. God is serued by faith onely De bonis operibus Not serued by them to 5. fol. 580. Onely faith is the true worshippe of God In c. 1. Ionae to 4. fol. 412. The true God is not serued with workes There is one onely worshippe pleasing to God to will true faith Tindal in Fox before cited God is honoured on all sides in Not worshiped by workes that we count him righteous in all his laws and ordinances and also true in all his promises Other worshippe of God is none except we make an idoll of him Confession of Basil art 13. Faith is the onely true worshippe of God The like saye other Protestants who as we shall see hereafter teach that good works are sinne before God For God is not serued or worshipped with sinne but disserued and dishonored by it THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that God is worshipped and serued with good works The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that God is not glorified by working that God is not serued by works that faith is the onely true worshippe of God that God is serued by onely faith that onely faith is the worshippe of the true God that there is no other worshippe of God but to beleiue him right in all his laws and true in all his promises ART XV. WHETHER GOD DO ACcount those good workes which are not commanded SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Mark 14. v. 3. and 6. There came a woman hauing an alabaster box of ointment of pretious spike-nard and breaking the A worke not commanded good in Gods sight alabaster box she powred it out vpon his head But Iesus saied let her alone why do you molest her She hath wrought a good worke vpon me 1. Corint 7. 25. And as concerning virgins a commandment of our Lord I haue not but counsell I giue CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarmin l. 2. de Monachis c. 16. God is worshipped with euerie act of vertue though not commanded yet done for God PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Confessio Heluet. c. 16. God liketh not workes and worshippes chosen by vs. And Confessio Saxon. c. 17. We teach that works as they say not due are no worshippe of God Luther Postilla in festo S. Ioan. fol. 92. Nothing pleaseth Workes not commanded not pleasing to God God vhich is done without his commandment Melancthon in Disput to 4. p. 602. Works not commanded from heauen are no worhippe of God Caluin 4. Institut c. 13. § 2. All voluntarie worships which we deuise without his commandment are abhominable to God In Rom. 5. v. 19. They dote who vaunte to God of their works deuised by themselues who esteemeth them no more then dung Lobechius in Disput 9. p. 184. Without Gods commandment Nor good a worke though done with neuer so good intention nor forbidden nether is nor can be good THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely affirmeth that S. Magdalens anointing of Christ though not commanded was a good worke gratefull to him that virginitie is good though not commanded The same saye Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that God liketh no worke not commanded by him that no worke not commanded is any worship of God that no worke whatsoeuer not commanded of God is good that what we do without Gods commandment is no more respected of God then dung and is abhominable to him ART XVI WHETHER GOD BE PACIfied with good works SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 〈…〉 11. and. 13. But Moyses besought the Lord his God pacified by workes God saying why 〈…〉 furie angrie against thy people c. And our lord was pacified 〈…〉 the euill which he had spoken against his people 2. Paralipomen 30. v. 18. and 20. And 〈…〉 for them saying c. Whome our Lord heard and was pacified to the people Psalme 105. v. 30. And Phinees stood and pacified and the slaughter ceased Ezech. 43. v. 27. The preists shall make your holocausts vpon the altar and those which they offer for peace and I will be pacified toward you saieth our lord God CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Matth. 17. v. 21. Diuers examples in Scripture do teach vs the force and power of fasting ioyned with praier for to pacifie God PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther in c. 1. Ionae to 4. fol. 411. Papists haue an opinion that God can be pacified with our good workes whē as there is no No God that is pacified by workes where such a God In Galat. 2. to 5. fol. 363. The workes which I do according to Gods law do not pacifie his wrathe but prouoke it Workes prouoke Gods wrath Caluin 4. Inst c. 15. § 4. It is the doctrin of the Scripture that our good works are alwaies stained with
6. c. 9. Howbeit Christ died for all yet notwithstanding all receaue not the benefit of his death PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Perkins de Praedest to 1. col 144. It is maruailous absurd Redeemed not all that Christ on his parte should haue redeemed and reconciled to God all and euerie one and yet that in the ende manie of these should be damned De Serm. Dom. to 2. col 341. The opinion of vniuersall redemption is an inuention of mans braine Caluin in 1. Ioan. 2. v. 2. cit Vnder all he doth not comprehend the reprobats In 1. Tim. 2. v. 5. The vniuersall particle must be referred to all kind of men not to all persons Sadeel ad Art abiur 7. They speake amisse who say that by Redeemed not the sinnes of the whole world Christs death the sinnes of the whole world were redeemed Piscator l. 2. Thes p. 371. Christ died not vniuersally for all men but for the elect onely We denie that Christ died sufficiently for all but not effectually P. 177. Christ died nor for all but for some Bucanus Instit Theol. loco 36. Is not Christ the redeemer of all No. More of their like sayings may be seene in my Latin booke c. 1. art 19. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that Christ died for all that are dead that he gaue himselfe a redemption for all that he tasted death for all that he is the Sauiour of all men the Sauiour of the world the propitiation not onely of our sinnes but of all the whole world Catholiks teach the same Protestants expressely teach the contrarie that Christ on his parte redeemed not all and euerie one that vniuersall redemption is an inuention of mans braine that Christ died not vniuersally for all redeemed not the sinnes of the whole world nether sufficiently nor effectually died for all died but for some is not redeemer of all Which diuers Protestants confesse to be contrarie to Scripture See l. 2. c. 30. ART XX. WHETHER THE BLOOD wherewith Christ redeemed vs was putrefied and corrupted SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Acts 2. v. 27. Because thou wilt not leaue my soule in hell nor Gods holie did not see corruption giue thy Holie to see corruption 1. Peter 1. v. 19. Knowing that not with corruptible things gould or siluer you are redeemed from your vaine conuersation of your fathers traditions but with the pretious blood as it were of an immaculate and vnspotted lambe Christ. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE S. Thomas 3. par q. 34. art â— All the blood that flowed out of the bodie of Christ did rise in Christs bodie sith it belonged to the truth of his humane nature PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Perkins in Apoc. 1. to 2. col 41. The substance of that blood The substaÌ„ce of Christ blood perished of Christ which was shed did perish whatsoeuer the Papists do prate In Cathol reform CoÌ„tr. 10. c. 3. That blood which ranne out the feet and hands and siâ—e of Christ vpon the crosse was not gathered vp againe and put into the vâ—iâ—â—es Nâ—â— the collection was needls and none knowes what is become of this blood The same insinuateth Whitaker Contr. 2 q. 1 c. 9. p. 437. Beza in 2. part Resp ad Acta Colloq Montisbel p. 108. It were curious and profane to enquire what became of that selfe same blood which ranne out of the wounds of Christ and whether it were taken againe of him when he arose Musculus in locis Tit. de Caena We need not dispute of the blood of Christ what became of it after it was spilt on the grouÌ„d whether it were taken againe into his glorified bodie or no. Schusselbur lib. 1. Theol. Caluin art 20. reporteth Curaeus saying Christs blood shed for vs on the crosse was long Long since consumed Putrified since consumed And Erastus his companians teaching That Christs blood which he shed for our siâ—nes is putrified and no more in being Germanus Bauarus in Feuaâ—dent l. 4. Theomach Caluin c. 16. The substantiall blood of Christ is not giuen in the Supper because it was corrupted on the ground Corrupted THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that we were not redeemed with corruptible things but with the pretious blood of Christ that God suffered not his Holie to see corruption The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that it is profane to enquire what is become of Christs blood that long since it is consumed corrupted not gathered againe perished and is no more in being ART XXI WHETHER CHRISTS SOVLE descended to Hell SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Actes 2. v. 27. Thou wilt not leaue my soule in Hell Et v. Was in Hell 31. Foreseing he spake of the resurrection of Christ for nether was he left in Hell nether did his flesh see corruption CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Actor 2. v. 27. This place doth plainly proue the descent of Christ into Hell in soule according to the article of Christian beleefe PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker l. 8. cont Dur. sect 23. Caluin defendeth that Neuer went to Hell Descended not to Hell Christs soule neuer went to the places of Hell And l. 9. sect 27. I beleiue that Christs soule seperated from the bodie not onely did not descend to Hell but streight mounted to Heauen Rogers vpon the 3. Article of Protestants Confession saieth that Carlile against D. Smithe pa. 28. 77. calleth this article of Christ descent into hell an error and a fable A fable Perkins in Explicat Symboli to 1. col 678. If we say that Christ in soule descended into Hell we plainly take away that manifest opposition betweene the first and the second Adam Beza in Actor 2. v. 27. Who by Hell vnderstand the place which is commoÌ„ly called Hell as if the soule of Christ had indeed descended thither surely are much deceaued Serranus cont Hayum part 3. pag. 722. Beza desirous to Descent to Hell a fable stoppe the way to that Popish fable of the descent of Christs soule into hell c. Hemingius in Enchir. Theolog. class 3. pag. 263. It skilleth not greatly to know how Christ descended into Hell so that with true faith we hould that he deliuered vs from the power of Hell Aretius in locis part 1. fol. 72. Other Protestants denie To be taken out of the Creed all descent of Christ into Hell Some of them eagerly impugne this descent for they say that this sentence is to be taken out of the Creede Ministers of Anhalt apud Hospin in Concordia discordi fol. 87. The Diuines of Berge haue done well that through ours and other mens admonitions they haue put out the article of the descent into Hell THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely affirmeth that Christs soule was in Hell and our Creed saieth that he descended into Hell The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely denie that Christs soule descended to Hell went to the places of Hell and say that the descent of Christ into Hell is a Popish
and knowledge of tōgues and attētiue reading And p. 138. Vnderstanding is common to all that haue any iudgment but to knowledge there is need of the externall illustration of the holie Ghost by reason of the blindnesse of mans iudgment The same say all Protestants who teach as we haue seene in the former article that the Scripture is cleare THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that prophecie that is vnderstanding of Scripture is not made by priuat interpretation that to know the misteries of the kingdome of heauē is giuen to some as a peculiar guift not common to all that Christs disciples had need to haue their vnderstanding opened by him for to vnderstand the Scriptures The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the Scripture may be known by onely reading that to know what the Prophets or Apostles thought of euerie article of our religiō we need but a meane wit knowledge of tongues and attentiue reading That Scripture may be vnderstood without faith and without any peculiar light of the holie Ghost that to vnderstand the sense of the letter there is priuiledge of the Church that neuer so wicked men may know the trueth of the Scripture Which are so contrarie to Scripture as diuers Protestants confesse it See libro 2. cap. 30. ART III. WHETHER THE GHOSPEL be a law or containe any law SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Matth. 11. v. 30. My yoake is sweet and my burdē light c. 28. Christs Ghospell cōtaineth laws and precepts v. 19. Teach ye all nations baptizing them c. teaching them to obserue all things whatsoeuer I haue commanded you Ihon 15. v. 14. You are my freinds if you doe the things that I command you Galat. 6. v. 2. Beare ye one an others burdens and so ye shall fulfill the law of Christ The same is euident by other places which shal be cited in the two next articles and by the laws of baptisme and the Euchariste which are in the Ghospel Romans 2. v. 16. God shall iudge secrets of men according to my Ghospel Apocal. 14. v. 6. And I saw an other Angel flying through the middest of heauen hauing the eternall Ghospell to euangelize to them that sitte vpon the earth saying with a loud voice Feare our Lord c. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 4. de Iustif c. 2. The Ghospel containeth laws properly so called PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther de votis to 2. fol. 271. They know not the Ghospell The Ghospell is no law whiles they make a law of it Postilla in Dom. 3. aduentus fol. 36. None of thy workes must follow the Ghospell for it is not a law which requireth workes but onely faith because in it nothing is done but that Gods grace is offered and promised Confessio Wittenberg c. de Euangelio Vnlesse ye take the name of the law generally for doctrine certainly the Ghospell of Christ is not properly a law The same saieth Pareus in Galat 6. lect 71. Perkins in Gal. 6. to 2. The Ghospell must no wayes be called a new law So also Beza cont Sanct. Apol. 1. p. 305. Mart. in Rom. 7. p. 375. in 8. Melancthon in Disput to 4. p. 490. The ould testament is a law the new testament is no law The same say others as appeareth by what hath beene rehearsed cap. 3. art 7. and shal be more in the twoe next articles THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the Ghospell of Christ is a yoake and burden that therein he commandeth some things that Christ hath a law that he commanded the receauing of baptisme and the Euchariste that men shal be iudged according to the Ghospell that the eternall Ghospell commandeth men to feare God The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the Ghospell is no law no waies to be called a new law the new testament no law the Ghospell properly no law vnlesse by law you meane doctrin that it is no law that requireth workes ART IV. WHETHER THE GHOSPELL doth preach pennance and good workes SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Mathew 3. vers 2. Ihon Baptist thus began his preaching The Ghospell commandeth pennance of the Ghospell Doe pennance for the kingdome of heauen is at hand Matth. 4. v. 17. From that time Iesus began to preach and to say Doe pennance for the kingdome of heauen is at hand Luc. 5. v. 23. I came not to call the iust but sinners to pennance c. 24. v. 26. It behoued Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day and pennance to be preached in his name and remission of sinnes vnto all nations Actes 2. vers 38. S. Peter thus preached the Ghospell Doe pennance and be euerie one of you baptized And S. Paul c. 17. v. 30. God now denounceth vnto men that all euerie where doe pennance CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 4. de Iustif c. 2. The Ghospell threatneth wrath and indignation to them who do not receaue our Sauiour nor do pennance PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE The Diuines of Targa apud Hospin in Concordia discordi The Ghospell properly is no preaching of pennance fol. 66. If the Ghospell be simply and properly taken for preaching to wit of the grace of God in Iesus Christ then it is no preaching of pennance but oney a preaching of remission of sinnes The like teach others ib. fol. 104. And the Diuines of Onely cōmandeth to beleiue Berga ib. fol. 140. The Ghospell teacheth and commandeth onely to beleiue in Christ Luther Postilla in die Natiuit fol. 60. We read and heare nothing preached in the Ghospell but mere grace and mere bountie In die Ascensionis fol. 264. I often times saied that the Ghospell cannot abide that workes be preached how good or great soeuer they be And in Inst de Moise fol. 449. The The Ghospell telleth not what it to be done or omitted Ghospell preacheth not to vs that this or that is to be done or omitted or exacteth any things of vs. The Diuines of Saxonie apud Schusselb tom 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 803. condemne Maior because he would haue the Ghospell properly taken to be a preaching of pennance and remission of sinnes Kemnitius in locis tit de Iustif p. 222. If we say that the Proper doctrin of the Ghospell is not of newnesse of life proper doctrin of the Ghospell is not onely of faith in the free promisses for Christ but also of newnesse of life or good workes then streight it followeth that good workes also enter into iustication as a partiall cause And pag. 224. Who would haue the the Ghospell properly so termed to containe not onely the promise of grace but also the doctrin of good workesse such vnderstand not what they say For by this means the difference of the law and the Ghospell is confounded Liber Concordiae 1. c. 5. p. 594. We reiect as false and pernicious Doctrin that the Ghospell properly is a preaching of pennance The Ghospell requireth not workes and not onely
title and power Againe Peter had no primacie amongst the Apostles CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that S. Peter was the first of the Apostles Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that S. Peter had no primacie at all and suspect that the word First is added to the Scripture they say also that Saint Peter had nothing which was not common to the other Apostles that all the Apostles were equall in dignitie authotitie title and power that there was altogether equalitie amongst thē and none greater then an other that S. Paul was equall to S. Peter in all points nay greater then he by the testimonie of Christ ART II. WHETHER THE CHVRCH was built vpon S. Peter himselfe PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Math. 16. v. 18. And I say to thee That thou art Peter and vpon The Church built vpon S. Peter this rock will I build my Church And I will giue thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Promptuar Cath. in Festo Petri Pauli S. Chrisostome doth diligently teach that twoe things were here giuen to Peter The one the guift of the Father to wit the reuelalation of the word incarnate The other the proper guift of the Sonne to be the rock of the Church PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 4. q. 2 c. 2. Peter is not the rock because Not vpon S. Peter Christ doth not build his Church vpon Peter Luther in Matth. 16. to 5. vpon this that is vpon me not vpō thee Item He cannot be vnderstood to build vpon Peter Zuinglius l. de vera falsa relig cap. de Clauibus I will build my Church vpon this rock not vpon thee for thou art not the rock Againe Onely Christ not Peter is the rock vpon the which the Church standeth Bucer in Matth. 16. Faith in Christ is that rock vpon which the Church is saied to be built not that man Peter Caluin in Math. 16. v. 19. He faigneth that Peter is called the foūdation of the Church But who seeth not that he giueth that to the person of a man vhich was spoaken of Peters faith Beza in Matth. 16. v. 18. But Mathew or whosoeuer was his interpretour seemeth by this difference of words to distinguish Peter from that rock on which the building relieth Zanchius l. de Eccles c. 9. The opposition of the Fathers is not admitted in this place vpon this rock that is vpon Peter Vorstius in Antibell p. 64. Our men vse to answere that by the name of Rock not the person but the faith or confession of Peter or Christ himselfe is to be vnderstood More of their like sayings may be seene in my Latin booke c. 5. art 2. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that Christ speaking to Peter himselfe hath in the words which immediatly goe before that clause vpon this rock c as also in the which immediatly follow it and designing S. Peters person both by his Father and by his proper name Peter which he had giuen to him Which both in the Syriack tongue in which Christ spoake and in the Hebrew tongue in which Saint Mathew wrote his Ghospell is wholy one and the selfe same word that Rock is and also in the Greek language is equiualent or synonimall with it as Protestants confesse and finally designing him by that pronoune This saied vpon this Rock which is as much as is he had saied vpon this Peter I will build my Church The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that S. Peter is not the Rock of the Church not the foundation not he vpon whome the Church is built Which is so manifest a contradiction of Scripture as manie Protestants confesse it See libr. 2. cap. 30. ART III. WHETHER THE KEYES OF the kingdome of heauen were giuen to S. Peter himselfe SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Mathew 16. vers 18. 19. And I say to thee That thou The keyes giuen to S. Peter art Peter And I will giue to thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Prompt Cathol in Festo Petri Pauli The power of the keyes was promised by Christ to Peter alone and therefore it was truely giuen PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 9. quaest 5. c. 3. Surely the keyes of the Not to any one men Church were not giuen to any one singular man but to the Church it selfe Bucher in Matth. 16. This power of the keyes is in the whole Church but the authoritie of administring it is in the Preists and Bishops as in ould time in Rome the power was in the people the authoritie in the Senate Articuli Smalcaldici We must needs confesse that the keyes belong not to the person of any one man hut to the Church Daneus Contr. 3. c. 10. p. 244. Christ called faith the rock Not to Saint Peter to which rock not to Peter he gaue these keyes and the strength against the power and gates of Hell THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that Christ promised and consequently gaue the keyes of Heauen vnto S. Peter The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that the power of the keyes is not in the priests and Bishops that they were not giuen to Peter nor to any one singular man Which contradiction of the Scripture is so plaine as some Protestants acknowledge it See l. 2. c. 30 ART IV. WHETHER S. PETERS faith failed SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Luc. 22. v. 31. And our Lord saied Simon Simon behould Saint Peters faith failed not Sathan hath required to haue you for to sift as wheat But I haue praied for thee that thy faith faile not CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Lucae 22. v. 32. Christ doth in those words manifestly teach that S. Peters faith should not faile PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Cont. 4. q. 2. c. 2. Whē Bellarmin had saied Peter lost charitie but not faith when he denied Christ answereth It seemeth that a greater wound was giuen to his faith then to his Saints Peters faith failed charitie Againe That was surely a short apostasie Hutterus in Analysi Cōfess Augustan art 12. It is a blasphemous speech of Beza when he writeth That Peter denying Christ did not loose his faith Reineccius to 1. Armat c. 22. Peter retained not faith And to 3. c. 4. For a time Peters faith surely failed whiles he denyed Christ Daneus Contr. 3. c. 10. Bellarmin dreameth when he saieth that Peters faith could not faile For by the deniall which afterward he made it appeareth to be false which he impudently affirmeth of the indefectibilitie of Peters faith The same he hath ibid. lib. 4. cap. 3. Lambertus and Schusselb l. 1. Theol. Caluin art 14. saieth that Peter when he fell had not that true faith wherewith we trust in God alone and the infidelitie preuailed against Peter Iunius Contro 3. l. 1. c. 10. Certainly Peter erred from faith THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely
Children in state of saluation of infidels I leaue to the iudgment of the almightie and iust albeit I can finde no cause of damnation in them De Peccato orig f. 119. Of Christians children we are sure that they are not dāned for originall sinne albeit to cōfesse plainely that opinion seemeth more probable to vs which we taught to wit that we must not rashly condemne the children of Heathens In Elencho fol. 36. We impiously condemne not onely children of Heathens but also of Christians And de Ratione fidei fol. 540. We rashly condemne the children of Christiā parents yea of Heathen parentes Vorstius in Antibellarm p. 542. In this point the Protestāts do not wholy agree but ether say that all children whatsoeuer are through Christs grace saued as Zuinglius and manie more or at least all elect children whether they be borne of faithfull or other parents though not baptized are saued as the most Protestants say And he addeth These mens opinion is much more secure but the sentence of the former is more gentle and probable enough and therefore not roshly to be condemned Hermingius in Enchiridio class 3. p. 322. If the children of Infidels die without baptisme we must leaue them to Gods iudgment The same also followeth out of that which Caluin loco cit Beza ad reprehens Castel vol. 1. p. 502. and others say that childrē of faithfull parents are sanctified and comprehended in the couenant of life vnto the thousand generation THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the children of the faithfull are by nature or natiuitie the children of wrath as others are that death passed vnto all that condemnation passed vnto all The like say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that Christian children are sonnes of God before they be christened that they are borne Saints that originall sinne is not imputed to them that they are holie within the Church and bodie of Christ before they be baptized Saints by supernaturall grace members of Christe from the wombe borne children of the Church and from the wombe Saints before God Likewise they say of Infidels children that they finde no cause of condemnation in them that they are rashly and impiously condemned that all children whosoeuer or at least all elect children though not baptized are saued that such as come of faithfull though after a thousand generations are sanctified and comprehended within the couenant of life Which are so contrarie to Scripture as sometimes Protestants confesse it l. 2. c. 30. and S. Austin saieth L. 3. de Anima c. 9. Do not beleiue do not say do not teach that infants dying before they be baptized may attaine remission of originall sinne if thou wilt be a Catholik ART X. WHETHER THE BAPTISME of S. Ihon and of Christ were the same SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Marc. 1. v. 8. S. Ihon saieth I haue baptized you with water S. Ihons baptisme differēt from Christs but he shall baptize you with the Holie Ghost Act. 19. ver 2. S. Paul saied to them Haue ye receaued the Holie Ghost beleiuing But they saied to him Nay nether haue we heard whether there be a Holie Ghost But he saied In what then were you baptized Who saied In Ihons baptisme vers 5. Hearing these things they were baptized in the name of our Lord Iesus CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE Councel of Trent Sess 7. Can. 1. de baptismo Isanie shall say that Ihons baptisme had the same vertue that the baptisme of Christ be he accursed PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Whitaker ad Ration 8. Campiani saieth of the baptisme of S. Ihon and Christ It was the same ceremonie the same doctrin Not different the same grace Willet Cont. 12. q. 7. p. 585. Ihons baptisme was not diuers frō Christs baptisme but was all one with it in propertie and effect Zuinglius de ver falsa relig c. de baptismo It is altogether one baptisme whether you call it Ihons or Christs Et de Baptismo to 2. f. 75. It will appeare that that outward baptisme of water which Iohn vsed agreeth with the externall baptisme of Christ and the Apostles and that there is no difference at all betweene them Caluin in Luc. 3. v. 3. It is false that the baptismes of Ihon and Christ were diuers Beza lib. quaest respons pag. 344. I say that indeed it was one onely and the same baptisme administred first of Ihon and after by Christs commandment Bucanus in Inst Theol. loco 47. What differ the Baptisme of Ihon Baptist and of Christ Not in Author not in substance not in doctrine not in signe or ceremonie not also in effector or signification More of their like sayings in my Latin booke c. 9. art 10. THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that S. Ihons Baptisme was giuen in water Christs baptisme in the Holie Ghost that S. Ihons baptisme was not giuen in the name of the Holie Ghost in so much as they who had beene Baptized with it knew not that there was a Holie Ghost that they who had beene baptized with S. Ihons baptisme were baptized againe with Christs baptisme The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that S. Ihons and Christs baptisme was all one ceremonie one doctrine one grace was not diuers but all one in propertie and effect altogether one that there was no difference at all betweene them not diuers one onely and the same not different in Author substance doctrine signe ceremonie effect or signification ART XI WHETHER THOSE EPHESIANS whereof is spoaken Actor 19. had beene baptized with S. Ihons baptisme SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Act. 19. v. 3. But he S. Paul saied In what thē were ye baptized The Ephesiās baptized with S. Ihons baptisme Who saied In Ihons baptisme v. 5. Hearing these they were baptized in the name of our Lord Iesus CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Actor 19. v. 5. We must beleiue and stedfastly beleiue that those twelue Ephesians had beene before baptized of Ihon. PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker lib. 8. cont Dur. sect 70. I denie that those men They were not baptized with S. Ihone baptisme whereof Luke maketh mention in the Actes were baptized againe Caluin 4. Institut c. 15. § 18. I denie that they were baptized againe Zuinglius de Baptismo to 2. f. 80. Behould an other argument whereby it is demonstrated that those Ephesians were neuer baptized in Ihons outward baptisme Resp ad Hueber f. 104. If thou hadst had any consideration of those things thou wouldst neuer haue come to that madnesse to say that these disciples had beene baptized of Ihon. Beza in Actor 19. v. 2. We must needs say that there is not treated of any peculiar historie of twelue men who were ether baptized or rebaptized of the Apostle or of baptisme Sadeel ad Art 10. Abiurat We no where read that Ihons disciples after his death following Christ were rebaptized of the Apostles THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the saied Ephesians were first baptized
with the baptisme of S. Ihon and after with the baptisme of Christ Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that they were not baptized againe were not baptized with Ihons baptisme and that it is madnesse to say it that in the foresaied place of the Acts there is no speech of baptisme or baptizing Which are so contrarie to Scripture as Protestants sometime confesse it See lib. 2. cap. 30. ART XII WHETHER THE FORESAIED Ephesians had heard of the Holie Ghost SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Act. 19. v. 2. And he S. Paul saied to them Haue ye receaued The Ephesiās had not heard of the holie Ghost the Holie Ghost beleiuing But they saied to him Nay nether haue we heard whether there be a Holie Ghost CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE D. Stapleton in Actor 19. v. 5. S. Paul saied to these Ephesians because they had answered that they had heard nothing of the Holie Ghost In what then were you baptized PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Caluin in Actor 19. v. 2. How could it be that Iewes had heard They had heard of the holie Ghost nothing the Holie Ghost Surely hence we gather that Paul spoake not so much as in generall of the Holie Ghost and therefore there is a figure in the word Ghost Beza in Actor 19. v. 2. It were most absurd to beleiue that they who had beene baptized of Ihon and professed themselues disciples of Christ were ignorant that there was anie holie Ghost Bucanus in Instit loco 47. What those twelue men denie that they had heard that there was a Holie Ghost is not to be vnderstood of the being or person of the Holie Ghost but figuratiuely of the visible manner of powring downe his guifts Reineccius to 4. Armaturae c. 18. If demaund and answere had beene simply made of the Holie Ghost in respect of his person and grace it would follow that they had had no knowledge of the person of the Holie Ghost But the consequent is absurd THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that the saied Ephesians had not so much as heard that there was a Holie Ghost Catholiks say the same Protestants plainely say that it could not be that they had not heard of the Holie Ghost that it is absurd most absurd to thinke that they were ignorant of the Holie Ghost THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF BAPTISME The things which we haue in this Chapter rehearsed do clearly shew how differently Protestants beleiue of baptisme from the Scripture For the Scripture together withe Catholiks teacheth that water and the inuocatiō of the holie Trinitie be necessarie to baptisme that baptisme is necessarie by necessitie both of precept and of meane to saluation that Simon Magus and reprobats receaue whole baptisme that baptisme is effectuall in the reprobates that baptisme cleanseth sinnes but pardoneth not sinnes that are to be done that children of the faithfull are in state of damnatiō before they be baptized that Christs baptisme is different from S. Ihons baptisme All which Protestats denie They shew also that Protestants play the theiues with baptisme and steale from it the necessitie of water and of the inuocation of the holie Trinitie the necessitie of precept and meane to saluation the integritie and efficacie thereof in the reprobates the vertue of cleansing sinnes in anie whomsoeuer the difference and excellencie aboue the baptisme of S. Ihon which being taken away Christs baptisme remaineth onely in name and they likewise Christians in name onely Thus much of Baptisme Now of the Eucharist CHAPTER X. OF THE EVCHARISTE ART I. WHETHER THE EVCHARIST or that which Christ after his last supper gaue with his hands vnto his Apostles was his bodie and blood SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. MATHEW 26. v. 26. Christ saied of that which with his hands he gaue to his Apostles to eate This is my bodie The same is Marc. 14. v. The Eucharist is the bodie of Christ 14. And Luc. 22. ver 19. This is my bodie which is giuen for you And 1. Cor. 11. v. 24. This is my bodie which shal be deliuered for you Moreouer Ihon. 6. ver 15. he saieth The bread which I will giue is my flesh for the life of the world Mathew 26. v. 28. Christ saieth of that which he gaue The blood of Christ his Apostles to drinke This is my blood of the new testament which shal be shed for manie vnto remission of sinnes Marc. 14. v. 24. This is my blood of the new testament that shal be shed for manie Luc. 22. v. 20. This is the Chalice the new testament in my blood which shal be shed for you 1. Cor. 11. v. 25. This chalice is the new testament in my blood CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent sess 13. c. 3. The Apostles had not yet receaued the Eucharist of the hands of our Lord and yet he truely affirmed that to be his bodie which he gaue And cap. 4. Because Christ truely saied that that was his bodie which he offered vnder forme of bread therefore c. PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Iuel in Denfense of the Apologie part 2. c. 10. diuis 1. p. Not the flesh of Christ 209. The bread of the Sacrament is one thing and the flesh of Christ is an other There is great difference betweene the bread of the Sacramēt and the flesh of Christ Art 8. sect 5. The sacramentall bread is called Christs bodie although indeed it be not Not indeed his bodie Christs bodie So also art 21. sect 1. Bel in his Iesuits Antepast p. 44. The meaning of Christ is Not his reall blood not This is my naturall bodie and my reall blood Spalatensis l. 5. de Repub. c. 6. n. 108. The holie bread is not Not the bodie of Christ the bodie of Christ n. 112. The bread is called the bodie of Christ not that it is the bodie of Christ The Eucharist though it be Not truely called the bodie of Christ Yet it is not truely and really the bodie of Christ ibid. pag. 165. It is false to say The bread is the bodie of Christ Melancthon epist ad Com Palatin apud Hospin part 2. Not the true bodie of Christ Histor f. 260. Paul doth not say as they of Breme do Bread is the substantiall bodie of Christ nor as Hes husius doth Bread is the true bodie of Christ Hospinian himselfe lib. cit f. 261. The bread of the Supper Not his substantiall bodie is not the substantiall bodie of Christ Which he repeateth fol. 254. The verie like words of the Heluetians her rehearseth f. 161. 153. of the Tigurins 161. of the Strasburgians f. 100. of the Witenbergians fol. 292. of Hardenberg 297. and of Engelhard fol. 25. Zuinglius l. de Caena to 2. f. 283. These words of Christ This Not corporall flesh is my bodie can no way be vnderstood of substātiall and corporall flesh Which he hath againe l. de relig c. de Euchar. and in Subsidio to 2. fol. 247. And Sermon
and more by Bullinger in Hospin part 2. fol. 344. Where he saieth Who knoweth not that we are of their number who do not admit this word Substance nor euer would admit it THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ gaue to his Apostles his bodie to be eaten and his blood to be drunke that vnlesse we eate his flesh we shall not haue life that his flesh is truely meate The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that Christs flesh eaten profiteth nothing nothing at all that Christs true flesh cannot be eaten spiritually can be no way eaten that it is farre from Christs bodie to be truely eaten that Christs bodie is not exhibited in the Supper according to the substance thereof that those words Take eate are not spoaken of Christs bodie that Christs neuer gaue his bodie to be receaued the Euangelists neuer commanded vs to receaue and eate it that what is giuen to be eaten is Christs symbolicall bodie is but symbolicall bread is nothing but bread and wine onely a signe of Christs bodie that Christ gaue bread to the Apostles and not his bodie Which are so coÌ„trarie to the holie Scripture as themselues sometimes confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART III. WHETHER CHRIST GAVE the blood of the new testament to be drunke SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Mathew 26. v. 28. Drinke ye all of this For this is my blood The blood of the new testament to be drunâ—k of the new testament CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Mathew 26. vers 28. Christ professeth that what we drinke in the chalice is the blood of the new testament PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Zuinglius in Subsidio to 2. fol. 245. Christ did not giue the Not the blood of the new testament blood of the testament to drinke Which he repeateth againe And of the same opinion all the rest are who ether denie that Christ gaue his true blood to drinke as we haue seene in the former chapter for Christs true blood is the blood of the new testament or denie that the Eucharist is the testament as we shall heare art seq THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ gaue the blood of the new testament to be drunke The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely denie it ART IV. WHETHER THE EVCHARISticall Chalice be the testament of Christ SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. The Chalice was the new testament Luc. 22. v. 20. Christ saieth This is the chalice the new testament in my blood 1. Corinth 11. vers 25. This chalice is the new testament in my blood CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarm. l. 1. de Euchar. c. 11. As for the figure which they put in the word Testament I say there is none there and he auoucheth that the Eucharist is properly the testament of Christ PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Iuel art 10. sect 1. Nether was that cuppe in deed and really the It was not ths new testament new testament So also art 12. sect 16. Willet Cont. 13. q. 1. p. 595. The wine in the cuppe was not the new testament 596. The blood is not the testament Peter Martyr in Hospin part 2. Histor fol. 257. Nether the cuppe it selfe nor the liquor contained in it is indeed the testament Zuinglius in Subsidio to 2. fol. 245. This cuppe was not the blood of the testament nor the testament itselfe De Caena fol. 291. The blood of Christ is not the new testament and much lesse can we say that this drinke is the new testament howbeit it be called by this name And the reason why against the expresse word of God he denieth the chalice to be the testament of Christ he giueth l. de Relig. c. de Eucharist in these words If the cuppe be the testament it followeth that it is the true and sensible blood of Christ Oecolampadius apud Zuinglium to 2. fol. 499. It must needs be that this chalice or cuppe be the signe of the couenant or new testament not the new testament itselfe indeed Beza in Lucae 22. v. 20. edit An. 1565. Wine is called the couenant it selfe whereas it is onely a symbol or badge of the couenant or rather of that wherewith the couenant is made to wit of the blood of the Lord. In Colloq Montisbel pag. 38. I maruail that you call the Supper of the Lord a testament which seemes very strange to me The Supper of the Lord is not the testament itselfe but onely a parte of the testament that is the seale thereof The Cuppe cannot be the testament THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the chalice of the Eucharist is the new testament Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that nether the chalice nor the liquor therein contained is the new testament that nether the wine nor the blood of Christ is the new testament that the Cuppe cannot be the new testament but is onely a symbol or badge thereof or rather of the blood wherewith the testament was made That the Lords Supper is not the testament and that it were strange to call it so Which contradictioÌ„ of Scripture is so euident as diuers Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART V. WHETHER AT THE VERIE time of Christs celebration of the Eucharist his bodie was giuen and deliuered and his blood shedde for vs SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Luc. 22. v. 19. And taking bread he gaue thanks and brake Christs bodie was giueÌ„ and his blood shed at Supper and gaue to them saying This is my bodie which is giuen for you And S. Paul 1. Corinth 11. vers 24. in Greek hath which is broken as also S. Mathew 26. vers 28. S. Mark 14. v. 24. S. Luke c. 22. v. 20. speake of the blood or of the Chalice in the present tense Which is shedde CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Math. 26. v. 28. Those words Which shal be shedde for you are to be redde in the present tense according to all the Euangelists in the Greek text and the sense is which is now distributed for you and is by reall participatioÌ„ sprinkled and inwardely powred into euerie one of you PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Iuel art 17. sect 4. Christ gaue his bodie to be broken and his blood to be shedde not at his last supper but onely vpon his crosse and not where else Spalatensis l. 5. cap. 6. sect 229. saieth that the forecited words can be no way true of the present time Peter Martyr cont Gardiner col 354. But I pray you tell vs once what that is which remaineth and is broken If you say Not giuen or shedde at the Supper Accidents you wil be laughed at by children If you say The bodie of Christ you wil be blasphemous Col. 812. But who will say that Christ himselfe or his bodie is broken in the Supper Moulins in his Bucler part 2. pag. 91. Christ did not say that his blood was shedde in the Eucharist Pag. 87. He speaketh of a shedding which was not yet made but to
Church there is Sacrifice and offering of a cleane oblation and Sacrifice in iustice The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that there is no more Sacrifice in the Church And yet Whitaker Controu 3. quaest 6. pag. 2. 615. writeth thus Without Preisthood there is no Church And Vallada Apologia cont Episcop Luzon c. 26. No man denieth but the celebration of the Eucharist is a true Sacrifice ART XII WHETHER THERE BE AN altar in the Church SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Hebrewâ— 13. v. 10. We haue an altar whereof they haue no Christians haue an altar power to eate which serue the tabernacle Isaie 19. ver 10. In that day there shal be an altar of our Lord in the middest of the land of Egypte and a title of our Lord to the border thereof CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 24. c. 1. The Apostle Paul writing to the Corinthians when he saieth that they who are polluted with participation of the table of Diuels cannot be made partakers of the Table of our Lord by a table in both places vnderstandeth an altar PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Caluin in 1. Corinth 9. vers 19. There are no altars to They haue noÌ„â—â—tar sacrifice Beza in Colloq Montisbel p. 350. Paul maketh mention Paul speaketh not of an altar of a table of the Lord and not of an altar Ad Repetit Sanctis c. 4. I confesse there is no altar in the Christian Church And l. Quaest Resp vol. 3. In the Apostolicall writings there is no mention of an altar but onely of a table of the Lord. Peter Martyr in Rom. 11. Altars haue no place in the time of the Ghospel Herein also the Protestants doctrine is well knowne THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that we haue an altar The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that we haue no altar that Paul maketh no mention of an altar that there is no mention of an altar in the writings of the Apostles ART XIII WHETHER THE PASCHAL lambe was sacrificed SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Marc. 14. v. 12. And the first day of the Azimes when they Pascal lambe sacrificed sacrificed the Pasche Exod. 12. ver 6. And the whole multitude of the children of Israel shall sacrifice him Pascal lambe at euen CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 24. c. 1. The multitude of the children of Israel did sacrifice the ould Pasche in remembrance of their going out of Egypt PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Perkins in Cathol reform Controu 11. c. 5. The Paschal No sacrifice lambe was a sacrament but no sacrifice The same hath Plessie l. 2. de Missa c. 2. Reineccius to 4. Armaturae c. 19. The holie Bible no where Not sacrificed teacheth that the Paschal lambe was immolated and sacrificed Tilenus in Syntagmate c. 64. We do not graunt that the Paschal lambe was a sacrifice properly called yea Moises expressely denieth that it was a sacrifice Pareus in Colloq Theol. 9. disput 27. The Minor is false That the Paschal lambe was a sacrifice properly called Beza in Marci 14. v. 12. I vsed the word of Killing rather then of Sacrificing that the domesticall bankets of the Pasche might be distinguished from those Sacrifices which in the temple were done of the Preists THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the Paschal lambe was sacrificed Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that it was not sacrificed that it was no proper sacrifice that it was a domesticall banket that Moises expressely denieth it to be a Sacrifice Which is so repugnant to Scripture as same Protestants confesse it See lib. 2. c. 30. THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF the Eucharist Out of all which hath beene rehearsed in this chapter it is cleare how different an Eucharist Protestants haue from that which the holie Scripture proposeth For the Scripture and Catholiks with it teacheth that the holie Eucharist is the true bodie and blood of Christ that it is his testament that Christs flesh is to be eaten that whilest the Eucharist was instituted Christs bodie was giuen and his blood shedde for vs that the chalice was shedde in remission of sinnes that bread is a necessarie matter of the Eucharist that vnleauened bread is a couenient matter and that we must prepare our selues to receaue the Eucharist Moreouer the Scripture teacheth that there is a Sacrifice and altar in the Church and that the Paschal lambe which was a figure of the Eucharist was sacrificed all which Protestants do denie It is cleare also that Protestants do steale from the What Protest steale from the Eucharist Eucharist the trueth of the bodie and blood of Christ the nature of his testament the necessitie of bread the conueniencie of vnleauened bread to make it of and necessitie of our preparation to receaue it They steale also eating and drinking from the flesh and blood of Christ oblation and shedding of them when the Eucharist was instituted And from the Church they steale both Sacrifice and altar and sacrificing froÌ„ the Paschal lambe And thus much of the Eucharist Now of the other Sacraments CHAPTER XI OF THE OTHER SACRAMENTS ART I. WHETHER PREISTS CAN forgiue sinnes SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. MATHEW 16. v. 19. And I will giue to the the keyes Preists can forgiue sinnes of the kingdome of heauen And whatsoeuer thou shalt loose on earth it shal be loosed in heauen Math. 16. v. 19. Amen I say vnto you whatsoeuer you shall binde vpoÌ„ earth shal be bound also in heauen and whatsoeuer you shall loose vpon earth shal be loosed also in heauen Ihon. 20. v. 24. And he saied to them receaue ye the Holie Ghost Whose sinnes you shall forgiue they are forgiuen them and whose you shall retaine they are retained CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 14. Can. 9. If anie shall say that the Sacramentall absolution of the Preist is not a iudiciall act but a bare ministerie of pronouncing or declaring that sinnes are forgiuen be he accursed PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Perkins Galath 4. tom 2. The Pope challengeth to They cannot himselfe proper and iudiciall power of forgiuing and reteining sinnes Zuinglius in Art 51. to 1. Who attributeth remissioÌ„ of sinnes to a creature robbeth God of his glorie and is an idolater In resp ad Luther to 2. f. 430. These words whose sinnes you shall forgiue c. haue not that sense as if Christ in speaking theÌ„ would giue his disciples power to forgiue sinnes In Exposit fidei They cannot certifie a man of forgiuenes of his sinnes ib. f. 557. Wherefore all these things seeme friuolous I absoluethee I certifie thee that thy sinnes are forgiuen This is deceit and mere trifles Et in Hebr. 6. to 4. he saieth that Christ spooke the words cited out of Math. 18. by hyperoche or ouerlashing Bullinger in Marci 2. Men do not forgiue sinnes but teach that they are or haue beene forgiuen in Christ by faith Caluin in Ioan. 20. v.
22. He made the Apostles onely witnesses or preachers of this benefit of remission of sinnes And 4. Instit c. 11. § 1. For Christ gaue not this power properly to men but to his word whereof he madde men ministers Beza in Confess c. 5. sect 27. We must beleiue that nether They cannot properly binde or loose Pastors nor Doctors can properly binde or loose anie or open the kingdome of heauen to anie For it is proper to God alone to remit or retaine sinnes and indeed so proper as he communicateth this glorie with none at all Zanchius de Eccles c. 9. to 8. Power of forgiuing sinnes is not giuen properly to the Apostles themselues or to others but to their Ministerie or to the Ghospell For they do not properly forgiue sinnes but the Ghospell bringeth remission of sinnes to those that beleiue Daneus Cont. 4. c. 9. Christ gaue power of forgiuing sinnes to his Apostles as to Ministers that do onely declare his benefit towards faithfull men not as such that worke and effect the forgiuenesse of sinnes CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that the keyes of the kingdome of heauen are giuen to pastours of the Church that what they loose or forgiue on earth is loosed or forgiuen in heauen that the Holie Ghost was giuen them that by vertue of him they might forgiue sinnes The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that God communicateth power of forgiuing sinnes to none at all that it is idolatrie to attribute this power to anie creature that Ministers of the Ghospell do not properly loose any that they forgiue not sinnes but onely declare it that they are onely witnesses declarers of this benefit that vertue of forgiuing sinnes is giuen to the Gospell not to men Which is so plainly against the Holie Scripture as some Protestants confesse it See lib. 2. c. 30. ART II. WHETHER WE MVST CONfesse our sinnes to men SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Iames 5. v. 16. Confesse your sinnes one to an other Sinnes are to be confessed to men Actes 19. v. 18. And manie of them that beleiued came confessing and declaring their deeds CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 14. Can. 6. If anie shall denie that Sacramentall Confession was instituted or is necessarie by Gods law be he accursed PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE French Confession art 14. Auricular Confession was forged Not to be confâ—ssed to men in Sathâ—ns shoppe It is a deuise of men Willet Controu 14. q. 6. p. 736. It is not necessarie to make confession at all to men Confessio Argentinensis c. 20. Nether Christ nor the Apostles would commana it Luther in Postilla Epiphaniae God requireth not this confession to men Serm. de 10. Leprosis tom 7. Confession of sinnes is forbidden Caluin in Refutat Cathalani The lawmade of auricular Law of confession diuelish confession is diuelish It is an intolerable corruption if you search into it from the beginning and foundation Iuel defens Apologie part 2. c. 6. diuis 1. Thus much onely we say That priuat confession to be made vnto the Minister is nether commanded by Christ nor necessarie to saluation THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely commandeth that we confesse our sinnes to men and telleth that the first Christians did confesse their sinnes That same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that it is not necessarie to confesse to men that nether Christ nor his Apostles commanded it that God requireth it not that it is forbidden is a diuelish law and deuise of man and of Sathan ART III. WHETHER GRACE BE GIVEN by Imposition of hands SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 2. Tim. 1. v. 6. I admonish thee that thou resuscitate the grace Grace giuen by imposition of hands of God which is in thee by the imposition of my hands Actes 8. vers 18. And when Simon had seene that by the imposition of the handes of the Apostles the Holie Ghost was giuen he offered c. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 23. Can. 4. If anie shall say that by holie ordination the Holie Ghost is not giuen be he accursed Et ib. c. 3. saieth that by holie orders grace is giuen PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Caluin in 2. Tim. 1. ver 6. cit The question is whether grace Not giuen by imposition of hands were giuen by the externall signe of imposition of hands To which questioÌ„ I answere As often as Ministers were ordered they were commended to God by the praiers of the whole Church and by this means grace was obtained of God for them but not giuen them by vertue of that signe The same Caluin in Actor 8. v. 15. Luke here speaketh not of the common grace of the Spirit wherewith God doth regenerate vs for sonnes to himselfe but of especiall guifts In c. 6. v. 6. Hence we gather that imposition of hands sith it was vsed of the Apostles is a comelie and seemlie rite but yet hath not of it selfe any efficacie or vertue but the force and effect dependeth of God alone Beza Apologia altera cont Sainctem vol. 2. p. 325. In the Ministerie the ceremonie of imposition of hands doth not make a Minister as you verie ignorantly vse to vrge but testifieth to the Church that he is already made And l. quaest respons vol. 3. pag. 347. We must hould that there were neuer any Ministers of the Church made by imposition of hands but who had beene lawfully called to the Ministerie were so put as it were in possession of their function Of the same opinion are they who thinke that Imposition of hands is not necessarie to Ministers as Brentius in Apol. pro Confes Writemberg c. de ordine Herbrandus Disput 11. Beurlinus in Refutat Soti c. 67. Conciliabulum Parisiens An. 1565. artic 7. and much more they who forbidde imposition of hands as Pseudosynodus Dordracensis An. 1574. art 23. in these words The brethren concluded that Imposition of hands is to Imposition of hands forbidden be omitted THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the grace of God and the Holie Ghost are giuen by Imposition of hands The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that grace is not giuen by imposition of hands that it hath no efficacie or vertue but that the effect is of God alone that by it pastours are not made yea that it is not necessarie to them but to be omitted ART IV. WHETHER HANDS BE TO BE imposed vpon them that haue beene baptized SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Act. 8. v. 16. and 17. For he Holie Ghost was not yet come Hands imposed vpon the baptized vpon anie of them but they were onely baptized in the name of our Lord Iesus Then did they impose their hands vpon them and they receaued the Holie Ghost Act. 19. v. 5. and 6. Hearing these things they were baptized in the name of our Lord Iesus and when Paul had imposed his hands on them the holie Ghost came vpon them CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME
D. Stapleton in Actor 8. v. 17. In these words is descricbed an other Sacrament of the Church different from the baptisme which is called Imposition of hands by reason of the forme which Luke here telleth that the Apostles vsed PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Caluin in Actor 8. v. 17. cit Let vs remember that Imposition Imposition of hands is now a vaine fansie of hands was the instrument of God at what time he bestowed the visible graces of his Spirit vpon his seruants but since the Church hath wanted such riches it is onely a vaine fansie And 4. Institut c. 19. § 6. he calleth Catholiks Stage players because they say they imitate the Apostles in imposing hands vpon those that are baptized Gualterus in Actor 8. homilia 58. We know that out of this place Papists haue brought in the Sacrament of Confirmation but it is so ridiculous as c. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the Apostles imposed their hands vpon those that were baptized The same Catholiks say Protestants expressely say that it is a vaine fansie and ridiculous to impose hands vpon those that are baptized ART V. WHETHER MATRIMONIE be a Sacrament SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Ephesians 5. v. 31. For this cause shall man leaue his father Matrimonie a Sacrament and mother and shall cleaue to his wife and shal be twoe in one flesh This is a great Sacrament but I speake in Christ and in the Church CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councell of Trent Sess 24. can If anie shall say that Matrimonie is not truely and properly one of the seauen Sacraments of the Euangelicall law instituted by Christ our Lord but inueÌ„ted of men in the Church nor giueth grace be he accursed PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Confessio Heluet. c. 19. We confesse that Matrimonie is a No SacrameÌ„t profitable institution of God but not a Sacrament In like sorte the English Confession art 25. Iewel defens Apolog. p. 185. Marriage of it selfe is nether Of itselfe not good good nor ill Whitaker l. 8. cont Dur. sect 64. What more foolish then to make a Sacrament of Matrimonie Caluin 4. Instit c. 19. § 34. What sober man would euer haue thought that Matrimonie was giuen for a Srcrament And others as we shall see hereafter c. 15. art 2. say that Matrimonie is nothing nor maketh a man any whit the better THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that Matrimonie in Christ the Church that is among Christians is a great Sacrament The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that Matrimonie is no sacrament that it is follie and madnesse to make it a sacrament that of it selfe it is not good is nothing nor maketh a man better Which contradiction of Scripture is so manifest as same Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART VI. WHETHER ONE WIFE BEING diuorced one may marrie an other SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Luke 16. vers 18. Euerie one that dimisseth his wife and No marriage after diuorce marrieth an other committeth aduoutrie and he that marrieth her that is dimissed from her husband committeth aduoutrie Marc. 10. v. 11. Whosoeuer dimisseth his wife and marieth an other committeth aduouttie vpon her And if the wife dimisse her husband and marrie an other he committeth aduoutrie v. 6. Which God hath ioyned together let no man separate 1. Cor. 7. v. 10. But to them that be ioyned in matrimonie not I giue commandment but our Lord that the wife departe not from her husband and if she departe to remaine vnmarried or to be reconciled to her husband And. v. 39. A woman is bound to the law so long time as her husband liâ—eth but if her husband sleepe she is at libertie let her marrie to whome she will onely in our Lord. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE Councel of Trent Sess 24. Can. 7. If anie shall say that the Church doth erre when it taught and doth teach according to the Euangelicall and Apostolicall doctrine that the bande of Matrimonie caÌ„not be broken for the adulterie of one of the married parties and that nether no not the innocent partie which gaue no cause of the adulterie can marie againe whiles the other partie liueth be he accursed PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRMI Willet Controu 15. quaest 2. pag. 782. For fornication our New marriage after fornication Sauiour hath granted libertie both to dissolue matrimonie and to marrie againe Confessio Saxonica cap. 18. Marriage is not forbidden to the innocent partie when the cause being knowne she is pronounced free Confessio Scotica We detest his Popes crueltie against the innocent reiected by diuorce Pseudosynod of Midelburg An. 1581. art 57. If anie for adulterie haue separated himselfe from his wife and will not be reconciled againe with her and desire leaue of a new marriage the Presbyterie the adulterie being first proued shall declare that it is lawfull by the word of God Luther in 1. Cor. 7. to 5. What if the one partie will not be recoÌ„ciled to the other but will abide separated and the other not able to containe should be enforced to marrie what should be doe may he marrie with an other I answere that without doubt And other offences he may Againe If the husband would teach or force his wife to steale to adulterate or committe any other crime against God it is the same reason of diuorce with the other that vnlesse they be reconciled a new marriage may be made Furthermore What if the second marriage did not fall out right that the one partie should vrge the other the husband the wife or contrariewise to liue wickedly like Pagans or if the one would flie from the other vntill the third or fourth marriage were made may he marrie of wife as often as she is such as we haue spoaken of so that he haue at once ten or more fugitiue wiues And againe shall it be lawfull A woman may haue ten husbands liuings for the wife to haue ten or more husbands who all are fled from her I answere that we cannot stoppe S. Pauls mouth who as often as it is needfull will vse his doctrine his words are cleare The like he hath ib. Sermon de matrimonio where also fo 123. he addeth If the Mistresse will not let the Maide come Bidembachius in Consensu Iesuitarum Christian p. 1588. Who reiecting his wife for whordome marieth an other doth not commit adulterie Beza in Confess c. 5. sect 39. To whome diuorce is lawfully Mariage lawfull after diuorce graunted if reconcilement cannot be procured within the time appointed to them we giue leaue to marrie a new And epist 10. he writeth that Bucer and most of the ProtestaÌ„t Churches in Germanie giue leaue to marrie a new for leprosie to whome saieth he we leaue their iudgment free as is reason Perkins de Serm. Dom. to 2. col 261. By reason of whordome Whordome dissolueth mariage marriage is dissolued The same is the common doctrine of Protestants as you may see
more in my Latin booke art 6. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that euerie one and whosoeuer dimisseth his wife and marrieth an other committeth aduoutrie that a woman parted from husband must be reconciled to her husband or remaine vnmarried that she is bound to the law of marriage so longe as her husbād liueth that man cannot separate those whome God hath ioyned The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that who hauing put away his wife for adulterie marrieth an other doth not commit aduoutrie that one may marrie againe for aduoutrie for malitious forsaking for deniall of coningall dutie for incitation to wickednesse for leprosie that whordome dissolueth marriage that one may haue ten or more fugitiue wiues at once that if the Mistresse will not the Maide may be called ART VII WHETHER THEY WHO lie a dying are to be anointed with oile SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Iames 5. v. 14. Is anie man sick among you Let him bring in the preistes of the Church and let them pray ouer him anoiling The sick are to be anointed with oile him with oile in the name of our Lord praier of faith shall saue the sicke and our Lord shall lift him vp and if he be in sinnes they shal be remitted CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 14. Can. 2. If anie shall say that the holie anoiling of the sicke giueth not grace nor remitteth sinnes nor lightneth the sicke but that is now ceased as if in ould time is had beene onely the grace of curing be he accursed PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Confessio Saxonica art 19. That which is now called extreme Not to be anointed with oile vnction is now a spectacle full of superstition Confess Heluet. c. 19. calleth it a deuise of man Et Confess Writemberg An vnprofitable and idle ceremonie Caluin 4. Institut c. 19. § 18. Of the same nature is the anoiling of the sick to wit an histrionicall hipocrisie It pertaineth not now to vs. Beza in Confess c. 7. sect 11. The sacrament of anoiling is idle and vaine and now altogether superstitious Hospinian part 2. Histor f. 23. The preists were commanded that they should not anoile those that dyed for that was superstitious and contrarie to the expresse word of God THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that those thall lie a dying are to be anoiled with oile and it promiseth remission of sinnes to them The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that this anoiling pertaineth not to vs that it is hypocrisie an idle and vaine ceremonie and contrarie to the expresse word of God ART VIII WHETHER THE SACRAments of the ould law were of equall vertue with oures SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Hebr. 10. v. 1. For the law hauing a shaddow of good things to Sacraments of the ould law shadows of the new come not the very image of the things c. Coloss 2. vers 17. Let no man therefore iudge you in meate or in drinke or in parte of a festiuall day or of the new moone or of the Sabboths which are a shaddow of things to come but the bodie Christs CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE Councel of Trent Sess 7. cap. 2. If anie shall say that the very sacraments of the new law do not differ from the Sacraments of the ould law but because they be other ceremonies and ether rites be he accursed PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Whitaker l. 8. cont Dureum sect 39. Paul expressely teacheth Equall to the Sacraments of the new law that the Israelites had the same sacraments in substance which Christ deliuered vnto vs. Confessio Heluet. c. 19. For so much as belongeth to that which is the cheefe and the substance in the sacraments the sacraments of both people were equall Lutherus l. de Captiuit to 2. fol. 75. It cannot be that the new sacraments do differ from the ould sacraments Caluin 4. Institut cap. 14. § 23. The Apostle speaketh not more honorably of them then of these In the sacraments he maketh them equall to vs. Whatsoeuer he gaue vs in the Sacraments the same the Iewes in ould time receaued in theirs what vertue ours haue the same also they felt in theirs Beza ad Repetit Sanctis c. 8. p. 30. Vnlesse with the Apostle you make the ould sacraments the same indeed there wil be litle or no difference at all betweene the true God and the false God of Marcion THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that the Sacraments of the ould law differed from the sacraments of the new as much as a shaddow differeth from the image or from the bodie it selfe The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that in substance they were the same were equall did not differ that what vertue we receaue in our Sacraments the Iewes felt the same in theirs THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF the other Sacraments The things which haue be declared in this chapter do euidently demonstrate how differently Protestāts thinke of the other Sacraments from the holie Scripture For the Scripture together with Catholiks teacheth that Preists forgiue sinnes that sinnes are to be confessed to men that grace is giuen by Imposition of hands that hands are to be imposed vpon those that are baptized that Matrimonie is a Sacrament that one wife being put away it is not lawfull to marrie an other that those who lie a dying are to be anointed with oile that our Sacraments are more excellent then those of the ould law All which are denied of Protestants They also shew that Protestants in this matter also keepe their ould custome and steale from Preists power to forgiue sinnes steale away the necessitie of confessing sinnes to men from the baptized they steale imposition of hands and from the imposition of hands vertue to giue grace from Matrimonie also they steale the nature of a Sacrament and the indissolubilitie thereof from those that die their anoiling and from all our Sacraments their excellencie and vertue aboue the Sacraments of the ould law And thus farre of the Sacraments Now touching Faith CHAPTER XII OF FAITH ART I. WHETHER FAITH BE A WORKE or to beleiue be to doe SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. I HON. 6. v. 28. 29. They saied therefore to him Faith is a worke what shall we doe that we may worke the workes of God Iesus answered and saied to them This is the worke of God that you beleiue in him whome he hath sent Act. 16. vers 30. The Gailer saied to S. Paul and Hilas Maisters what must I doe that I may be saued But they saied To beleiue is to doe Beleiue in our Lord Iesus and thou shalt be saued and thy house Iames 2. v. 19. Thou beleiuest that there is one God Thou doest well CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Ioan. 6. v. 30. The worke of faith because it is a worke of man wherewith he beleiueth and giueth glorie to God is an actiue and free worke PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther de Captiuit Babilon to 2. fol. 71. Faith is no
Gods word to be true but that the diuels themselues do beleiue so much ART VI. WHETHER FAITH BE DIstinct from Hope and Charitie SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 1. Cor. 13. ver 13. And now there remaine Faith Hope Charitie Faith is distinct from Hope and Charitie these three but the greater of these is charitie Ibid. ver 2. If I should haue all faith so that I could remoue mountaines and haue not charitie I am nothing CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in 1. Corint 2. v. 12. We beleiue S. Paul not Caluin that these faith hope charitie are three They are three they are distinct they are not one and the same there is one nature of faith an other of hope an other of charitie PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Zuinglius l. de ver fals relig c. de Merito to 2. But who Faith all one with Hope and Charitie vnderstand not that faith hope and charitie are the selfe same thing to wit this trust in God wil be forced to let passe manie knots in Scripture vnloosed Againe If hope saue and faith saue faith and hope shal be the same thing And soone after Faith and charitie must be the same thing Nether let here anie merueill and feare that these three Theologicall vertues are confounded of vs. Surely we haue learned this out of Scripture that vnlesse euerie one of these vertues be each other it is quite nothing much lesse a vertue Et c. de Euchar. Faith is hope and trust In Resp ad Luther f. 397. The same nature and of spring is of faith and loue yea both these are one the selfe same thing The like he hath in 1. Cor. 13. to 4. And generally all Protestants confound faith with hope in that they say as we shall see hereafter art 14. that faith is trust and trust ether is strong hope or as we shall heare P. Martyr there teach differeth not from hope THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that Faith Hope and Charitie are three things The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that they are the selfe same thing that they are confounded that each one of them is the other ART VII WHETHER FAITH BE greater then Charitie SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. 1. Cor. 13. v. 13. And now there remaine Faith Hope Charitie Faith lesse then Charitie these there but the greater of these is charitie CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE S. Thomas in 1. Cor. 13. v. 13. These three remaine now but charitie is greater then all PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Confessio Augustana c. de discrim ciborum in Melancthon to 3. The doctrine of Iustice by faith must be eminent in Faith aboue workes the Church that faith which beleiueth sinnes to be remitted for Christ be placed farre aboue workes Et c. de bonis operibus Amongst good workes the chiefest and highest worshippe of God is faith it selfe Tindal in Fox p. 1144. We can shew vnto God no greater The diuinest of all Gods guifts honour then to haue faith and trust in him Perkins in Hebr. 11. Hence we gather that faith is more diuine then all the rest of Gods guifts Peter Martyr in locis clas 3. c. 3. § 6. Faith as it is a worke surpasseth by manie degrees other workes Luther in Galat. 3. to 5. fol. 346. If charitie be the forme of faith as they dote streight waies I am forced to thinke that charitie is the chiefest and greatest parte of Christian religion and so I leese Christ In c. 4. fol. 382. Who so teach faith as they attribute more to charitie then to faith they greatly dishonour Christ and wickedly depraue his word De Captiuit Babil to 2. The most excellente worke of all The chiefest f. 74. Faith is the most excellent worke of all workes Postilla in Feria S. Ioannis fol. 93. Whatsoeuer the Ghospell teacheth or commandeth of workes it so teacheth and commandeth as it maketh faith the chiefe Et in Dom. Quinquagesim f. 207. More noble then Charitie Faith is more worthie better and more noble then charitie Herbrandus in Compendio Theol. loco de Iustificat Faith is the chiefest and hardest worshippe which we can giue to God Lobechius Disput 9. Faith hath the first and highest degree amongest all goods Reineccius to 4. Armaturae c. 18. Yea faith is greater then Greater then Charitie Aboue Charitie charitie Caluin in 1. Cor. 13. v. 13. If we sift all the effects of faith and compare them faith wil be found to be superiour in manie points Yea charitie it selfe as the Apostle teacheth 1. Thessalon 1. is the effect of faith but without doubt the effect is inferiour to the cause THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Charitie is greater thē Faith The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that faith is to be placed aboue workes is greater nobler better then charitie more diuine then the other guiftes of God that charitie is inferiour to faith ART VIII WHETHER FAITH MAY BE without Charitie or good workes SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Ioan. 12. v. 42. Of the Princes also manie beleiued in him but Faith without workes for the Pharisees they did not confesse that they might not be cast out of the Synagogue For they loued the glorie of men more then the glorie of God 1. Cor. 13. v. 2. If I should haue all faith so that I could remoue mountaines and haue not charitie I am nothing Iames 2. v. 14. What shall it profit my brethren if a man say he hath faith but hath not workes Dauid also when he abused the wife of Vrias and procured him to be slayne had not charitie towards his neighbour nor towards God whome he so greatly offended Nor S. Peter had charitie to Christ when he denied and foreswore him In whome at those times faith was without good yea with verie euill workes CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Session 6. cap. 15. We must teach that by euerie mortall sinne the grace of iustification is lost though not faith PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Concion vlt. p. 695. Who thinke that true faith Faith neuer void of good workes may be idly or void of good workes do beleiue against the Confession of our Church That is a false faith which is not ioyned with the keeping of the commandments Iewel in Defense of the Apologie p. 304. Yea say Faith True faith without workes without workes is neuerthelesse a true and reall faith Verily so is fire without heat a true and reall fire If the wicked without good workes haue a true and reall faith then may you also say that the Diuel likewise hath a true and reall faith This faith is no faith It is onely an imaginarie and Mathematicall phantasie Apologia Confess Augustanae c. 3. Our aduersarie teach Not with mortall sinne that faith may be with mortall sinne c. 5. They dreame that faith can stand with mortall sinne C. de resp ad argumenta Faith without good workes is hypocrisie Liber
the Pharises THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that manie Princes who confessed not Christ and loued the glorie of men more then of God did beleiue in Christ that manie beleiued in Christs name whome Christ trusted not that a euill man doth well in beleiuing The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that the foresaied Princes did not beleiue had not true faith were no beleiuers that those whome Christ trusted not did not beleiue in the sight of God that their faith was not true not sincere but hypocrisie that onely the godlie and the adopted sonnes of God are partakers of true faith that the faith of the impious and wicked is feigned dissembled an imagination or image of faith not true faith that the impious are not faithfull ART XXI WHETHER FAITH BE proper to the Elect SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Act. 8. ver 13. Then Simon Magus also himselfe beleiued Simon Magus had faith and being baptized he cleeued to Philippe Seing also signes and very great miracles to be done he was astonished with admiratiō Heb. 6. v. 4. For it is impossible for them that were once illuminated Also some reprobates haue tasted also the heauenlie guift and were made partakers of the Holie Ghost c. and are fallen to be renewed againe to pennance CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE D. Stapleton in Actor 8. v. 13. Simon Magus had true faith Card. Bellarm. l. 3. de Iustificat c. 14. Faith is not proper to the elect PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Whitaker l. 8. cont Dur. sect 48. True faith is proper to the the elect In Concion vlt. In no reprobate true faith is found Zuinglius in Math. 19. tom 4. The Scripture sometimes Simon Magus had no faith indeed Beleiued not all saieth that some beleiued who professed faith which indeed they had not as appeareth of Simon Magus in the Actes In exposit Fidei to 2. fol. 558. There are some who beleiue not at all as were Iudas and Simon Magus Caluin in Actor 8. v. 3. c. The mynd of Simon was wrapped in dissimulation of faith Beza cont Illyric vol. 2. p. 131. Simon Magus was quite faithlesse Was quite faithlesse In Colloq Montisbel p. 379. Indeed he wanted faith indeed he beleiued not Volanus l. 3. cont Scargam p. 1070. Scarga foolishly attributeth true faith to Simon Magus Daneus Contr. de Baptismo c. 14. He obiecteth that Simō Magus lost faith and that other Apostates did the like But I denie that they haue or euer had true faith Pareus l. 3. de Iustif c. 14. Simon was an hypocrite beleiuing onely with mouth not with harte And he addeth Nether maketh it any matter that Luke absolutely saieth that he beleiued And as for reprobats Caluin 3. Institut c. 2. § 11. None are illuminated vnto faith None but the predestinate haue faith Faith peculiar to the Elect but they who are predestinated to saluation In Confessione p. 106. I acknowledge that faith is a peculiar guift giuen to the elect alone Beza in Conf. c. 4. sect 20. Faith is the guift of God proper and peculiar to the elect alone Bucer in Matthaei 16. They are safe for euer who once haue gotten true faith Musculus in locis titul de fide Faith in Christ is onely of the elect Zanchius de Praedestinat c. 4. to 7. The reprobates neuer Reprobates neuer beleiue truely truely beleiue in Christ And the same is the common doctrine of the Protestants THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that the reprobate Simon Magus did beleiue was baptized cleeued to Philippe and was astonished at the miracles wrought by S. Philippe that euen they who cannot be recalled to pennance were once illuminated Catholiks say the same Protestants plainely say that Simon Magus did not beleiue at all was wholy faithlesse indeed wanted faith indeed beleiued not had not true faith beleiued onely with mouth not with hart that onely the elect are illuminated vnto faith that reprobates neuer truely beleiue and that it maketh no matter that the Scripture absolutely saieth the contrarie These are so opposite to Scripture as some Protestants confesse it See lib. 2. c. 30. ART XXII WHETHER FAITH BE by hearing SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Rom. 10. ver 15. Faith then is by hearing and hearing is by Faith is by hearing the word of Christ. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 6. c. 6. They are disposed to iustice whiles stirred vp and holpen by Gods grace conceauing faith by hearing they are freely moued to God PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker l. 1. de Scriptura c. 11. sect 4. All true faith cometh Faith not by preachers from the Scripture not by the labour of the Preachers Againe All the Fathers with one voice teach that faith riseth of the Scriptures onely not of the authoritie of the Church Et c. 13. sect 8. Reading maketh that we may know the Scriptures and the doctrine of the Scriptures Et Cont. 145. cap. 8. Faith riseth of the Of the Scripture onely Scripture alone And in the same place thus expoundeth the aforesaied wordes of the Apostle By hearing that is by the sense of the Scripture rightly vnderstood Zuinglius in Exegesi to 2. fol. 347. We do not thinke that faith can be gotten by words but that faith being mistresse the words which are proposed may be vnderstood De Prouidentia cap. 6. tom 1. When Paul writeth to the Romans that faith is Not by outward hearing by hearing after the same manner he attributeth that to the nearer and more knowne cause to vs which belongeth onely to the Holie Ghost not to outward preaching The like words hath Oecolampadius apud Schlusselburg libro 1. Theol. Caluin art 1. Caluin in Ioan. 5. vers 9. 3 Christ is not otherwaies rightly knowne but by the Scripture THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that Faith is by hearing and addeth there also that it is not without a Preacher The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that faith is not otherwaies then by Scripture that it is by onely Scripture by reading that it is not by the labour of the preachers not by the authoritie of the Church that it is by the Holie Ghost and not by externall preaching that it cannot be gotten by words ART XXIII WHETHER FAITH IS or can euer be lost SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Luke 8. vers 13. For they vpon the rock Such as when they Some beleiue for a time heare with ioye receaue the word and these haue no rootes because for a time they beleiue and in time of temptation they reuoult Ioan. 20. vers 29. Then he saieth to Thomas Be not incredulous S. Thomas lost his faith but faithfull And v. 25. Thomas saied Vnlesse I see c. I will not beleiue 1. Tim. 1. v. 19. Certaine haue made shipwrak about faith c. 4. Others leese faith v. 1. In the last times certaine shall departe from the faith c. 6. v. 10. Certaine haue erred from the faith
27. Without doubt he saieth that glorying is excluded because we can bring forth nothing that is our owne which is worthie of the approbation or commendation of God Againe When we come to the rule of faith all All glorying in workes cast downe glorying of workes is cast downe The like he hath 3. Instit c. 14. § 16. and 17. Peter Martyr in Rom. 3. The will of God taketh great care All glorying excluded of this that all glorying be excluded from vs. Againe Seing God will haue glorying excluded it is cleare how much they erre who maintayne merits In c. 4. It cannot be that any haue glorie before God THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that we may glorie in God that euerie one shall haue glorie in himselfe that they to whome we haue done well shal be our glorie before God that our glorie is the testimonie of our conscience The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that all glorie of workes is cast downe that all our glorying is excluded that we can haue no glorie before God that in workes there is neuer so litle wherevpon to glorie but rather to be ashamed ART X. WHETHER ALL GOOD workes be equall before God SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Mathew 22. vers 38. Thou shalt loue thy Lord thy God The greatest commandment from thy whole hart c. This is the greatest and first commandment Luc. 10. v. 42. Marie hath chosen the best parte The best parte Well and better 1. Cor. 7. v. 38. Therefore both he who ioyneth his Virgin in matrimonie doth well and he who ioyneth not doth better cap. 12. v. vlt. And yet I shew you a more excellent way cap. 13. v. 13. And now there remayne faith hope charitie these three but the greater of these is charitie CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE D. Stapleton in 1. Cor. 7. v. 38. To ioyne in marriage is good not to ioyne is better Could the latter be preferred before the former in more plaine words PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Tindal in Fox his Actes pag. 1138. There is no worke better No worke better then other then an other to please God To make water to wash dishes to be a souter or an Apostle all is one To wash dishes and to preach all is one as touching the deed to please God Luther de votis to 2. f. 291. Let vs not distinguish betweene All workes equall with God workes they are equall with God wich are great and litle with vs and amongst themselues In Psal 14. to 3. In faith all workes are equall Againe To one that beleiueth in God all is one whether he fast or pray or serue his brother For he knoweth that he serueth and pleaseth God equally in all things whether they be great or litle workes pretious or base short or long De bonis operibus to 5. ◠578. In this faith all workes are made equall Then falleth downe all difference of workes whether they be great or litle long or short manie or few For workes are not gratefull to God in themselues but for faith Ib. in c. 3. Petri fol. 468 Before God there is no worke better then other but by faith all are made equall Confessio Heluet. c. 29. It is most certaine that these works which in true faith are done of parents by the dueties of marriage and housekeeping do please God no lesse then praiers fasting and almes THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that in Gods commandments there is one which is the greatest that in workes there is the best parte good and better greater and excellenter The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that before God all workes are equall no worke exceedeth an other that all please God equally that to wash dishes pleaseth God as much as to preach to be a sowter as much as to be an Apostle that the dueties of marriage please God no lesse then praying fasting and giuing of almes ART XI WHETHER ALL GOOD workes be commanded of God SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. 1. Cor. 7. v. 25. As concerning virgins a commandment of Some good worke not commanded our Lord I haue not but counsail I giue v. 36. But if anie man thinke that he seemeth dishonoured vpon his virgine for that she is past age and if it must be so let him do that he will He sinneth In the free choice of men not if she marrie CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE C. Bellarm. l. 2. de Monachis c. 8. It is the sentence of all Catholiks that there are manie true and proper Euangelicall counsails which are nether commanded nor indifferent but gratefull to God and commended of him PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Confessio Scotica art 14. We affirme that those wholy Onely commanded workes are good No counsails are good workes which by faith are done according to his commandment Luther l. de votis tom 2. fol. 272. Religious men are pursuaded of this sacrilegious and blasphemous opinion of counsails and precepts Againe The counsails which they imagin are for the most parte those whereof Christ speaketh Math. 5. to which adde virginitie and continencie But that all these are not counsails but necessarie commandments this proueth first of all c. In cap. 9. Isaiae to 4. The Turke is better then these who haue brought in this horrible errour of counsails De bonis operibus to 5. fol. 577. There is no worke good but that which God hath commanded Hutterus in Analysi Conf. Augustan pag. 413. Wherefore workes cannot nor must not be called truely good but such as are commanded of God p. 415. Away with that detestable madnesse which the Papisticall Sophisters haue most bouldly bewrayed in making commandments and Euangelicall counsails Caluin in 1. Cor. 9. v. 18. We do not acknowledge any worke to be good and acceptable to God which is not contained in the law of God 4. Instit c. 13. § 12. There is none so small a word vttered of Christ which we must not necessarily obey In Math. 5. v. 44. How preposterous and vnsauourie the inuention of counsails is appeareth c. Beza in 1. Cor. 7. v. 25. I willingly auoid that false distinction betwixt precepts and counsails Daneus Controu 5. pag. 949. There are not some precepts other counsails Volanus l. 1. cont Scargam p. 1005. Those which they call Counsails are precepts counsails of Christ Christ himselfe plainely teacheth to be his earnest precepts which all must obey THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that virginitie is not commanded of God but counsailed of the Apostle that one without sinne may marrie his virgin or not marrie her The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely teach that virginitie is necessarily commanded that there is no worke good but that which is commanded that there are no counsails distinct from precepts that the counsails are precepts that they are madde worse then Turkes and blasphemous who distinguish betweene counsails and precepts Which are so plaine against Scripture as diuers Protestants confesse it
of Of it selfe nether good nor badde workes which of themseues are nether properly good nor badde Of this kind is fasting sobrietie and desire of keeping virginitie in those who haue the guift of continencie And c. 5. sect 39. Nether virginitie nor marriage we reckon amongst those things which simply and of theÌ„selues make vs better and more gratefull to God Daneus Contr. 5. p. 1045. Virginitie is no vertue but a thing No vertue indifferent And generally all Protestants when the Apostle calleth virginitie good in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will not haue him vnderstood of a good that is honest or vertuous but onely of a good that is profitable THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that virginitie is honest that it is a holines in bodie and soule that it is better and happier then marriage and that it is to be desired for the kingdome of heauen Catholiks say the same Protestants plainely say that virginitie is a thing indifferent is nothing not simply good not good of it nature not of it selfe a vertue not simply good not a vertue not wholy to be desired not required of God and in the religious a diuelish thing ART III. WHETHER THE STATE OF virginitie be better then the state of marriage SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 1. Cor. 7. v. 38. He that ioyneth his virgin in matrimonie doth Virginitie better then marriage well and he that toyneth not doth better ver 40. More blessed shall she be if she so remaine CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 24. Can. 10. If anie shall say that it is not better and happier to abide in virginitie or single life then to marrie be he accursed PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker ad Ration 8. Campiani Virginitie is neuer better Not better then marriage but in some sorte Marriage is often times simply better then virginitie Willet Controuers 15. quaest 5. pag. 806. Virginitie is Not more holie not a more holie and cleane thing in it selfe then marriage is before God in themselues nether is more holie then ether Confessio Witten bergeÌ„sis C. de votis We must not thinke Not more excellent that this kinde of single life is of selfe before the iudgment seat of God more excellent and more holie then marriage Luther Serm de Matrimonio to 5. f. 126. Single life in it Much more baste thou marriage Marriage a most diuine state selfe is much more baser then marriage And fol. 124. he calleth marriage a diuine life in 1. Cor. 7. f. 107. the highest religion and most spirituall state 107. truely heauenly spirituall and diuine state if it be compared with this spirituall state Againe We conclude that marriage is like gould and this spirituall state dung In Genes 2. to 6. fol. 26. To beget children is after preaching To get children is the cheifest worke of the word of God the cheifest worke And in c. 21. fol. 257. Married mens life consisteth in the highest degree of spirituall life Vrbanus Regius in locis to 1. f. 345. Preaching of the word Virginitie in it selfe baser then marriage of God maketh the state of virginitie better then marriage by reason of greater impediments which yet in it selfe is baser Bindebachius in Consensu cit p. 799. If you consider these kinds of life virginitie and marriage by themselues they are indifferent and before God nether is more holie then the other Caluin in 1. Cor. 7. v. 35. Here thou hast twoe things worth noting The one is to what end single life is to be desired to wit not for it selfe nor because it is a perfiter state In like manner Beza vpon the same place Serranus cont Hayum part 3. p. 159. If marriage be the Nothing better then mar-marriage seminarie of mankind if the ornament if the stay as all the Polititians euer taught can ther be any thing better or more excellent in life then marriage THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that virginitie is better and more happie then marriage The same say Catholiks Protestants expressâ—ly teach that virginitie is not a perfecter state theÌ„ marriage not more holie not more excellent that it is baser then marriage much baser that marriage is the highâ—â—â— religion most spirituall state and that in this life nothing is better or more excellent then marriage What religion I pray you haue these men whose cheife religion and most spirituall state is marriage and who account nothing in this life better then marriage to beget children the cheifest worke beside preaching ART IV. WHETHER GOD WOVLD haue men to liue single SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 1. Cor. 7. v. 7. I would all men to be as my selfe Et v. 27. Art God exhorteth all to single life thou loose from a wife seeke not a wife Math. 19. v. 12 He that can take let him take Apocalips 14. v. 4. These are they which were not defiled with weomen For they are virgins These follow the lambe whether soeuer he shall goe CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in 1. Corinth 7. vers 8. The Spirit of God by the mouth of the Apostle exhorteth to constant virginitie and single life PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther in Disput to 1. f. 383. The word Increase and multiplie All commaÌ„ded to increase is naturally ingrafted and necessarily imposed generally vpon all that are men De votis to 2. f. 272. Plainely Christ did not counsaill virginitie but rather discouraged In 1. Cor 7. to 5. f. 105. Paul will haue vniuersally all to be married Serm. de Matrimonio S. Paul will haue all married f. 119. Increase and multiplie is not a precept but more theÌ„ a precept He is a baud that flieth marriage Epistola in Wofgangum to 7. f. 505. God pronounceth the sentence that he will God will haue none vnmarried haue none to be vnmarried but multiplie He that will liue vnmarried plainely fighteth against God To take a wife and to eate and drinke both alike are inforced by necessitie and God commandeth a like both to be done Et Epistol ad Equites Teuto 2. To marrie as necessarie as to eate or drinke Church men commanded to marrie Preists commanded to marrie Germ. Ienen fol. 214. The word of God commandeth Church men to marrie wiues Confessio Augustana c. de Coniugio Paul saieth that such a one is be chosen Bishop as is a husband Et Apologia eiusdem cap. 15. They bidde ws shew a precept which commandeth Preists to marrie as if Preists were not men Melancthon Resp ad Acta Ratisbon to 4. Paul will haue a Preist to be married Zuinglius in Paraenesi ad Heluetos to 1. f. 114. The holie Ministers commanded to marrie And Bishops Scripture is so farre from forbidding Ministers of the Church to marrie that it commandeth it more then once fol. 115. When they heare Paul in so expresse words commanding that a Bishop be married to a wife c. Bullinger in 1. Timoth.
mouth Math. 3. v. 4. And his S. Ihons meate was locusts and wild And S. Ihon Baptiste honie Luc. 1. v. 15. And wine and sicer he shall not drinke c. 7. ver 33. For Ihon baptist came nether eating bread nor drinking wine The like is saied of the mother of Sampson Iudic 13 v. 4. and of the Rechabits Hieremie 35. Rom. 14. v. 21. It is good not to eate flesh and not to drinke Good not to eate flesh or drinke wine wine nor that wherein thy brother is offended or scandalized or weakened CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm de bonis operibus in part l. 2. c. 7. If Ionadab could for euer forbidde his children and nephews wine and both his commandment and their obedience pleased God why cannot our mother the Church forbidde her children some meates for a time so that both the Churches precept and our obedience please God PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker ad Ration 9. Campiani It is madnesse to haue Madnesse to vse choice of meates for religion Foolish and wicked No seruice of God anie choice of meates for religion sake Perkins in Cathol Contr. 12. cap. 2. We hould this distinction of meates both to be foolish and wicked Confessio Argentinensis c. 9. We haue omitted that choice of meate which was commanded vpon certaine dayes which Saint Paul attributeth to the doctrine of Diuels Caluin in Luc. 1. v. 15. We must not imagin a seruice of God No seruice of God Fond superstition in oâ—stayning from wine Beza in Confess cap. 5. sect 41. This choice of meats which some make a seruice of God we doubt not with the Apostle to call a diuelish and most fond superstition THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressâ—ly saieth that Daniel many days abstained froÌ„ fleâ—h wine and desiderable bread that S. Ihon Baptiste nether eate bread nor drunke wine or sicer that it is good not to eate flesh nor to drink wine Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that the choice of meats is superstitious foolish madnesse wicked and diuelish doctrine that there is no seruice of God in abstinence from wine And thus much of Fasting ART VIII WHETHER IT BE LAWFVLL to pray for all SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 1. Timoth. 2. vers 1. I desire therefore first of all things that We must pray for all men obsecrations praiers postulations thanks giuings be made for all men Exod. 32. v. 32. Moises thus praieth for the idolatrous people Moyses praied for all Ether forgiue this trâ—spasse or if thou do not strike me out of the booke that thou hast written CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. lib. 1. de Septem verbis Dom. c. 1. saieth that Christ vpon the crosse praied for Pilat and the chiefe Preists Scribes and people of the Iews PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Rainolds in Apologia thesium p. 245. Nether must we pray We must not pray for euerie one for euerie one For we are forbidden to pray for them that sinne to death Wherefore where we are bidden to pray for all the world All designeth all kinds not all of euerie kinde Beza in Ioan. 5. ver 16. Hereof it followeth that no sinnes Not for reprobates are veniall to the reprobates and therefore we must not make praiers for the sinnes of the reprobates Daneus in orat Dom. p. 593. saieth that Thy will be done belongeth not properly to reprobates as if we praied God that they quietly and willingly submitt themselues to God and doe and execute his will out of their harte faithfully and obediently Piscator in Thesibus lib. 3. loco 11. We ought to pray for all Nor for those that sinne to death that are aliue they onely excepted whome we see do sinne to death The same also saieth Bucanus in Instir loco 17. to which he addeth loco 37. that a man must not pray for the obdurated or those that sinne against the Holie Ghost THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that we must pray for all and that Moises praied for the idolatrous people amongst whome manie were reprobates The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that we must not pray for all not for reprobates not for those that sinne to death not for the indurated not for those that sinne gainst the Holie Ghost ART IX WHETHER IT BE LAWFVLL to pray for the dead SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 2. Mach. 12. vers 43. And Iudas making a gathering sent twelue thousand drachmes of siluer to Hierusalem for sacrifice to be offered the for sinnes of the dead Et ver 16. It is therefore a A holie thing to pray for the dead holie and healthfull cogitation to pray for the dead that they may be loosed from sinnes CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 25. c. 1. The Catholik Church teacheth that the soules detained in Purgatorie are holpen by the suffrages of the faithfull PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Iewel art 18. sect 3. p. 433. This kinde of praier for the dead It is superstitions is mere superstitious and vtterly without warrant of Gods word Confessio Seotica generalis We detest his Popes praiers Detestable for the dead Caluin Epistola 366. That forme of praier God giue the One may wish well to the dead but not pray dead a good and happie resurrection because it is not fitting to the rule of good praier is to be reiected yet I do not denie but that one may make such a wish Brentius in Dom. 12. post Trinit Albeit we may wish all happines to the dead yet praier for them is vaine Confessio Witten bergen c. de Memoria de functorum Charitie requireth that we wish all rest and happines in Christ vnto the dead But there is no testimonie of Propheticall and Apostolike doctrine that they be holpen by our praiers THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the people of God vnder the law offered sacrifices for the dead which Caluin also confesseth 3. Instit c. 5. § 8. and that it is a holie and healthfull thing to pray for them that they be loosed from their sinnes The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that it is lawfull to wish good to the dead but that to pray for them is vaine superstitious and detestable And yet Luther Serm. de de Diuite Lazaro to 7. f. 268. de Captiuit Babylon f 72. and cont Catharin f. 151. Et in Hospin Concordia discor f. 225. Apologia Confess Augustan c. de vocabulis Missae Agenda Anglica apud Bucerum p. 427. 449. Zuinglius art 60. Vrbanus Regius and others allow praying for the dead ART X. WHETHER IT BE LAWFVLL to pray for that which God hath not promised SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Math. 26. ver 39. Christ thus praieth My Father if it be Christ praied for that which was not promised to him And S. Paul And Abraham and Dauid possible let this chalice passe from me 2. Cor. 12. vers 8. For the which thing thrice I besought our Lord that
Protestants expressely say that such kinde of praier is to be condeÌ„ned and expressely forbidden of the Apostle ART XIII WHETHER WE BE COMmanded to say our Lords praier SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Luc. 11. ver 1. 2. One of his disciples saied to him Lord teach We are commanded to say our Lords praier vs to pray as Ihon also taught his disciples And he saied to them when you pray say Father c. Math. 6. vers 9. Thus therefore you shall pray Our Father c. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 1. de bonis operibus cap. 4. Our Lords praier excelleth all other formes of praier in authouitie breuitie perfection order efficacie necessitie In necessitie because there is no other forme of praier which all Christians in the very words are commanded to keepe and vse but this PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Bucer in Mat 6. Note pray in this manner not these words Not commanded as the common people hitherto was foolishly perswaded thinking that they had praied well when they had mumbled vp these words Nether are we here taught in what words we should pray but what we ought to aske with hartie desire Caluin in Math. 6. v 9. Christ biddeth not his disciples pray in these words but onely sheweth them whither they ought to referre all their desires and praiers THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ commanded that wheÌ„ we pray we say Our father The same say Catholiks ProtestaÌ„ts expressely say that Christ taught vs not to say these words that he taught not what words we should pray withall that it is a foolish persuasion to thinke that the recitall of our our Lords praier were a good praier Which is so contrarie to Scripture as some Protestants coÌ„fesse it See lib. 2. c. 30. ART XIV WHETHER IT BE LAWFVLL to vow any thing to God SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Psal 75. v. 12. Vow ye and render to our Lord your God Lawfull to vow Isaie 19. v. 21. it is saied of the time of Ghospell And they shall vow vowes to our Lord and pay them Eccles 5. vers 3. If thou hast vowed anie thing to God differre not to pay it But whatsoeuer thou hast vowed pay it CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 2. de Monachis c. 17. Vowes haue neuer ceased in Christs Church since the promulgation of the Ghospell PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Tindal in Fox his Actes p. 1138. Vowes are against the ordinance Vnlawfull of God Which Fox there mantaineth Luther de Ratione Confitendi to 2. fo 28. I for my parte could wish that there were no vowes at all among Christians besides these which which we made in baptisme De Captiuit Babylon fol. 77. One thing here I adde which I would that I could perswade all men that is that all vowes whatsoeuer were taken away and auoided fol. 78. It is not a litle contrarie to Christian Contrarie to Christian life life that a vow is a certaine ceremoniall law a humane tradition or presumptioÌ„ from which the Church is freed by baptisme Vrbanus Regius de Noua vet doctrina tom 2. fol. 26. Iudaical That rite of vowing was Iudaical and is now abolished as sacrifices are Zuinglius in Explanat art 30. I speake of vowes in generall Contempte of God that by Christ they are abolished To vow is a curiositie contempte and abasing of God and exaltation of men Wherefore Sinfull seing vowes proceed of perfidiousnesse and fight against God they are sinnes Peter Martyr l. de votis col 1337. Vowes do no more continue the Ghospell being now reuealed and brought in And 1383. Become not Christians I saied indeed and recall not but make good that vowes do not become Christians Daneus Contr. 5. p. 1020. God no where hath commanded or prescribed that any thing should be vowed vnto him THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that Christians shall vow to God and exhorteth them to vow and to pay their vowes The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that vowes are against Gods ordinance that they fight against God proceed of perfidiousnesse are sinnes nnes humane presumption curiositie contempt of God and that God neuer appointed them that they are abolished continew no longer become not Christians and that it were to be wished that they were all taken away ART XV. WHETHER ALMES DELIVER from death and sinne SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Tob. 4. v. 11. Almes deliuereth from all sinne and from death Almes deliuer from sinnes and death c. 12. v. 9. Almes deliuereth from death and that is it which purgeth sinnes and maketh to find mercie and life euerlasting Luke 11. v. 41. Giue almes and behould all things are cleane vnto you CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Promptuar Morali Dom. 1. post Pentecost By the liberalitie of almes we oftentimes auoid the iust punishments of sinnes and manie assaults of the Diuel PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Aretius in locis part 1. f. 90. Almes deliuereth not from teÌ„porall Nether from temporall nor eternall death Not from sinne death nor also deliuereth from eternall death Confessio Wittenbergens c. de Eleemosyna What need had there beene of the passion of Christ to blot out sinnes if they be blotted out by the merit of almes Apologia Confess Augustanae c. de Resp ad argumenta We will not say that speech of Tobie is an hyperboll although it must be so vnderstood lest it detract from the praises of Christ Vallada in suo Apologia cap. 22. This manner of speech of Tobie is hyperbolicall THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that almes deliuereth from death and sinne The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that it deliuereth not ether from temporall or eternall death that if it did deliuer from sinne Christs death had not beene needfull ART XVI WHETHER IT BE LAWFVLL to sell all and giue it to the pore SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Math. 19. v. 21. If thou wilt be perfect goe sell all that thou Perfect men must giue all to the pore hast and giue to the pore and thou shalt haue treasure in heaueÌ„ v. 27. Then Peter answering saied to him Behould we haue left al things and haue followed thee Act. 4. v. 32. Nether did anie one say that ought was his owne of those things which he possessed but all things were common vnto them CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Mathei 19. v. 21. It was the errour of Vigilantius and it is now of Caluin and of all Heretiks to denie that voluntarie pouertie is a meane and instrument of greater perfection PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Apologia Confessio Augustanae cap. penult The forsaking Forsaking of goods not counsailed A humane tradition Not Catholike doctrine of goods hath no commandment nor counsaill in the Scripture Againe It is a mere humane tradition and vnprofitable worshippe Confessio Wittenbergens c. de votis The kinde of vowing single lâ—fe pouertie and obedience agreeth not with the true Catholik doctrine
Perkins in reform Cathol cap. 8. p. 166. The second is the vow of pouertie and monasticall life in which men bestow all Against Gods will they haue on the pore and giue themselues wholy and onely to praier and fasting This vow is against the will of God The like he hath in Casibus Conscient col 1125. Morton l. 1. Apologiae c 40. Your doctrine of giuing all Sauoureth heresie sauoureth rather heresie then religion Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 5 c. 7. Monks and Iesuits nether marrie Is Anabaptisticall wiues nor haue anie thing proper but haue all things cōmon But this to haue all things common is Anabaptisticall Melancthon in locis tit de Paupertate The Ghospell nether counsaileth nor commandeth to leaue our goods vnlesse they be taken from vs nether counsaileth it nor commandeth to make things common THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that to giue all to the pore is a meane of perfection that the Apostles forsake all and that the first Christians had all things commō The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the Scripture counsaileth not to forsake our goods that it is a mere humane tradition that it agreeth not with true Catholik doctrine that it rather sauoureth heresie then religion that to haue all things common is Anabaptisticall ART XVII WHETHER PENNANCE BE commanded to all SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Act. 17. v. 30. God now denounceth vnto men that all euery Pennance cōmanded to all where doe pennance c. 20. v. 21. Testifying vnto Iews and Gentils pennance towards God and faith in our Lord Iesus Christ And To Iewes and Gentils c. 8. v. 22 it is saied to Simon Magus Do pennance from this thy wickednesse Luc. 24. v. 27. It behoued Christ to suffer and to rise againe To all natiōs from the dead the third day and pennance to be preached in his name and remission of sinnes vnto all nations CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 3. de Paenitent cap. 2. Who haue committed a mortall sinne are bound by Gods law to doe pennance PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Perkins in Apoc. 2. to 2. This precept of repentance is not giuē Pennance not commanded to euerie one seuerally to euerie one but onely to the Church of God or to that people which at last shal be the Church Caluin de Praedest pag. 706. God is saied to will life as he God willeth not pennance to all but by word willeth pennance But this he willeth because by his words he inuiteth all to it And of the same mynd are others who say that God willeth not the saluation of any but of the elect onely otherwise then by his word For if indeed he will not haue the reprobate do pennance but onely in word or shew surely nether doth he command them to do pēnance otherwise then in word and in outward shew THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that God denounceth pennāce to all men euerie where to Iews and Gentils to all Nations to Simon Magus The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that God commandeth not pennance to euerie one but onely to his Church or to these who at last shal be his Church that he doth not will pennance to all but onely in word ART XVIII WHETHER CHASTISMENT of the bodie be a parte of pennance SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Math. 11. v. 21. Woe be to the Corozain woe be to thee Bethsaida For if in Tire and Sidon had beene wrought the miracles that haue beene wrought in you they had done pennance in Bodily chastizment a parte of pennance hairecloth and ashes long agoe Iob. 42. v. 6. I reprehend my selfe and do pennance in imbers and ashes Ionas 3. v. 6. And he rose vp out of his throne and cast away his garment from him and was clothed in sackcloth and sate in ashes And he cried and saied in Niniue from the mouth of the King and his Princes saying Men and beasts and oxen and cattell let them not taste any thing nor feed and let them not drinke water And let men and beasts be couered with sackclothes Ioel. 2. v. 12. Conuert to me in all your harte in fasting and in weeping and in mourning CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Math. 11. erv 21. It is conuinced out of this place that pennance properly consisteth not onely in change of life and repentance but also in penall workes PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Willet Contr. 14. q. 1. p. 711. Ashes sackoth was no parte of No parte of pennance repentance but an outward testification of their inward griefe Whitaker Praefat. ad Demonstrat Sanderi I saied that pennance did not consist in certaine externall punishments but in inward griefe conceaued of the remembrance of sinne and in amendment of life Caluin in Math. 11. ver 21. Pennance is here described by externall Christ regardeth notmuch corporall pennance signes whereof then there was solemne vse in the Church of God not that Christ insisteth much vpon this vpon this point but he accomodateth himselfe to the capacitie of the common people Et Concione 158. in Iob Sackcloth and ashes are onely an externall signe of pennance Beza in Math. 11. v. 21. cit Which custome of casting ashes vpon themselues was after word trāslated to those whome they called Penitents I wish it had beene done with more iudgment and better successe Vorstius in Antibellarm p. 439. Painfull workes are onely outward and oftentimes deceitfull and feigned signes of pennāce Wherefore they are not partes of true pennance THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that pennance in sackcloth and ashes is good that God biddeth vs to conuert to him in fasting weeping and mourning that the Niniuits did pennance in sackcloth and ashes and Iob in embers and ashes The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that Christ did not much insist vpon sackcloth and ashes that they are no partes of pennance but onely an outward signe thereof that pennance consisteth not in outward punishment that the custome of casting ashes vpon penitents was done without good iudgment ART XIX WHETHER THE PENNANCE of the Niniuites were true SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Ionas 3. v. 10. And God saw their Niniuites workes that they were conuerted from their euill way and God had mercie on Pennance of Niniuites was true the euill which he had spoaken that he would do to them and he did it not Et ver 5. And the men of Niniue beleiued in God and they proclaimed a fast c. Math. 12. v. 41. The men of Niniue shall rise in iudgment with this generation and shall condemne it because they did pennance at the preaching of Ionas CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Catechismus ad Parochos cap. de Paenitentia There are most cleare examples of the Niniuits of Dauid of the Penitent woman of the Apostles all which imploring the mercie of God with manie teares obtained pardon of their sinnes PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Beza lib. quaestion vol. 1. Theol. pag. 674. God
he loueth he dishonoureth Christ c. de votis It is an impious opinion that we obtaine remission of sinnes for our workes Confessio Bohemica art 7. Good workes are to be done not Iustification not by workes that we thinke that we obtaine remission of sinnes for them Gallica artic 22. We are not iustified by workes Belgica artic 24. Good workes are of no moment at all for to iustifie vs. Argentinensis Workes helpe not to iustification cap. 3. Good workes helpe nothing for to make vs iust of vniust Heluetica cap. 15. We receaue this iustification not by any workes Whitaker ad Ration 8. Campiani In iustifying vs God maketh no reckoning of our workes For the iust liueth not of workes Perkins in Serie Causarum cap. 51. To be iustified by good Abraham not iustified by workes workes is both false and ridiculous In Gal. 3. Abraham was not iustified by his good workes In c. 4. That doctrine which dreameth of Iustification by workes bringeth in idolatrie Et in c. 5. it ouerturneth the foundation of religion Luther de libertate tom 2. fol. 4. A soule is iustified by no workes In Gal. 1. to 5. Sinne is taken away by no workes In c. 3. Abraham was iustified by no other thing at all but faith Epist Abrahā not iustified by workes ad Liuones to 7. All doctrine of iustifying and sauing vs by workes is impious diuelish and high blasphemie against God Et to 1. fol. 393. We must firmely beleiue against the Diuel that the woman was saued by onely faith before she loued Caluin 3. Instit c. 11. § 6. In iustification there is no place for workes c. 14. § 5. Workes helpe nothing to iustifie vs. cap. 16. § 1. Men are not iustified by workes We say they are not iustified by workes In Gal. 2. v. 15. We cannot be iustified by workes Beza in Confess cap. 4. sect 17. How can we be iustified by Workes do not iustifie workes l. Quaest p. 689. Good workes do not iustifie Peter Martyr in locis classe 3. c. 4. § 8. Iustification is not had of workes Bullinger de Iustif fidei Serm. 6. Abraham was not iustified by his workes Aretius in locis part 2. f. 78. We are not iustified of workes Zanchius in Confess c. 21. art 4. We constantly confesse that a man is not iustified of workes Man is not iustified by workes Polanus in Disp priuat perio do 1. disput 36. Not because the woman loued much therefore her sinnes were remitted her Pareus in Gal. 2. lect 24. The Apostle denieth that workes ether alone or with faith do iustifie Rogers artic 11. Workes haue no place or portion in the Workes with faith do not iustifie matter of our iustification CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that Abraham was iustified by workes that Rahab was iustified by workes that the womans sinnes were forgiuen because she loued that men must repent for to haue their sinnes forgiuen The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that Abrahā was iustified by workes by nothing els at all but by faith that the womās sinnes were not forgiuen because she loued that sinne is not taken away by any workes that we are not iustified by any workes that workes haue no place are of no moment or reckoning in iustification that it is impious diuelish ridiculous and most blasphemous against God to dreame of Iustification by workes ART II. WHETHER IVSTIFICATION be by faith onely SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Iames 2. v. 24. Do you see that by workes a man is iustified Iustification not by faith alone and not by faith onely CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE Councel of Trent Session 6. can 9. If anie shall say that the impious is iustified by faith alone so as he vnderstandeth that nothing els is required to cooperate to the grace of iustification and that it is no way necessarie that he be prepared and disposed by motion of his owne will be he accursed PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Confessio Saxonica c. de Remiss Peccat Wittenbergica c. de Iustif Articuli Smalcaldici part 2. c. 1. liber Concordiae c. 3. Confessio Anglica art 11. Heluetica cap. 15. Belgica art By onely faith 22. Bohemica art 6. teach in expresse termes that we are iustified by onelie faith And the same in other words teach Confessio Augustana c. de fide Argentinensis c. 3. Gallica art 20. Apologia Confess Augustanae c. de Iustif We are iustified By faith alone by faith alone if by iustification we meane to be iust of vniust or to be regenerated Againe Faith alone doth iustifie alone maketh iust of vniust By faith onely we receaue remission for Christ Et c. de Resp ad Argumenta Remission of sinnes and Onely by faith iustification is receaued onely by faith These things we obtaine onely by faith Luther de libertate to 2. fol. 4. A soule is iustified by faith By nothing els alone In Gal. 2. to 5. Faith iustifieth and nothing els Vrbanus Regius in Catachesi fol. 136. We are Iustified by faith onely Schusselburg l. 1. Theol. Caluin art 15. Paul teacheth that By faith alone a man is iustified by faith onely by faith alone Zuinglius ad Matthaeum Rutling to 2. f. 151. We are iustified by faith alone Caluin in Galat. 2. v. 16. We are iustified by faith alone Beza in Rom. 3 vers 20. What was the Apostles intent To teach that no man is iustified by anie other means then by faith We are iustified by onely faith Peter Martyr in 1. Cor. 1. It belongeth to faith onely that we be iustified by it Whitaker ad Ration 1. Campiani That is our doctrine most true and most holie That a man is iustified by faith alone Perkins in Catechesi tom 1. col 487. How canst thou be Onely by faith made partaker of Christ and of all his benefits and fruitfully enioye them Onely by faith Rogers artic 11. Onely by faith we are accounted righteous before God THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that a man is not iustified by faith onely The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that a man is iustified by faith onely by faith alone and no other way then by faith that nothing iustifieth but faith ART III. WHETHER THE IVSTIFIED be indeed and in the sight of God iust SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Gen. 7. ver 1. God thus speaketh to Noë I haue seene thee Noē iust in Gods sight iust in my sight c. 6. v. 9. Noë was a iust and perfect man Iob 32. v. 2. And Eliu was angrie and tooke indignation and he was angrie against Iob for that he saied himselfe to be iust before God Luc. 1. v. 6. And they were both iust before God Iust before God 1. Cor. 5. v. 21. Him that knew no sinne for vs he made sinne that we might be made the iustice of God in him Ephes 1. ver 4. He chose vs in him before
that by which he is iustified before God as if by onely faith we were iustified before God but yet that it were impossible to obtaine eternall saluation without workes cap. 4. in Epitome art We beleiue teach and confesse that good workes Workes wholy excluded from saltion are wholy to be excluded not onely when we treate of the iustification of faith but also when we dispute of our eternall saluation Againe We reiect and condemne these speeches Good workes are necessarie to saluation Zuinglius in Expostulat ad Lindouerum to 1. fol. 204. Faith alone saueth vs. Caluin in Rom. 10. v. 10. We are saued by faith alone In c. 1. v. 7. It is faith alone which bringeth euerlastingnesse of life Beza in Explicat Christianismi c. 8. vol. 1. pag. 199. Who Saluation relieth not vpon workes teach that mens saluation relieth vpon workes ether wholy or in some parte do plainely ouerturne all the Ghospell Pareus l. 4. de Iustif c. 4. The Ghospell promiseth saluation vnder the condition of faith alone Daneus Contr. de Baptismo c. 17. All the manner of our saluation purchased by Christ standeth in faith in him THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that faith alone can not saue vs. The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that faith alone saueth alone bringeth life that by faith onely we are saued that saluation is promised vpon conditiō of faith onely that workes concurre not to saluation worke nothing to saluation are not necessarie to saluation are not holesome ART IV. WHETHER ALL MEN BOTH good and badde be to be iudged SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Apoc. 20. v. 12. And I saw the dead great and litle standing Great and litle are to be be iudged in the sight of the throne and bookes were opened and an other booke was opened which was of life and the dead were iudged of those things which were written in the bookes according to their workes And the sea gaue the dead that were in it and death and Euerie one All. hell gaue their dead that were in them and it was iudged of euerie one according to their workes 2. Cor. 5. v. 10. For we must all be manifested before the iudgmēt Euerie one seat of Christ that euerie one may receaue the proper things of the bodie according as he hath done ether good or euill Mathew 25. vers 32. And all nations shal be gathered before All nations him and he shall seperate them one from an other as the pastour seperateth the sheepe from the goates Then shall the King say to them that shal be at his right hand Come ye blessed c. Then shall he say to them also that be at his left hand Goe ye away c. Act. 10. v. 43. It is he that of God was appointed iudge of the liuing and of the dead Hebr. 22. v. 22. But you are come to mount Sion and the cittie All. of the liuing God and the iudge of all God CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Catechismus ad Parochos in Exposit Symboli Of which article that is the sense and meaning that in the last day Christ our Lord shall iudg all mankind PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther apud Scioppium in suo Ecclesiast c. 5. Christians Onely infidell know that onely infidels who will not receaue the Ghospell are to be iudged of Christ in the last day Let vs learne and note this Not the faithfull well that we feare not death and the last iudgment for Christ is not to come to iudge vs but he will iudge them who beleiue not Bullinger Concione 90. in Apoc. f. 163. The impious are Impious not the pious to be iudged but not the pious The good because they are iustified and absolued appeare in iudgment with glorie to iudge after their manner and fashiō the wicked but not to be iudged of anie Tilenus in Syntagmate c. 67. The elect do know that nether Not the elect their deeds nor all their words are to be called to the account of this iudgment The like say others as we haue shewed before c. 3. art 10. THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that all the dead shal be iudged according to their workes that all must be manifested before the tribunall of Christ that all Nations shal be gathered to Christs iudgment that Christ is iudge of the quicke and the dead that God is iudge of all The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that the impious are to be iudged but not the pious that the good are not to be iudged of anie that onely infidels shal be iudged ART V. WHETHER THERE BE ANIE to whome seeking eternall glorie according to patience of good workes euerlasting life is rendred SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Roman 2. vers 6. and 7. Who will render to euerie man There are some such according to his workes to them truely that according to patience in good worke seeke glorie and honour and incorruption life eternall CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Rom. 2. v. 6. cit If Christ alone shall bring those workes to which the Apostle here saieth that eternall life is rēdred he should not haue saied He will render to euerie one according to his workes but to euerie one according to Christs workes PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Beza in Rom. 2. v. 6. What is here saied of Sophisters as if There are no such anie out of Christ or regenerate in Christ are found such in the iudgment of God as these here are described doth varie much frō the scope of the Apostle For that surely is most absurd Or as he hath in edition of 1565. Shall anie man bring these workes to which the Apostle saieth that life eternall shal be rendred Ether men not regenerate or the sonnes of God But nether Abraham surely hath whereof to glorie before God THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that there are some to whome seeking glorie according to patience of good workes eternall life is rendred The same say Catholiks Protestāts plainely say that there are no men to whome life eternall is rendred according to their workes nor that there are anie workes to which eternall life is rendred ART VI. WHETHER THE SOVLES OF reprobates departed this life do now suffer the paines of hell SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Iude. v. 7. As Sodome and Gomorrha and the citties adioyning Sodomites in eternall fire in like manner hauing fornicated and going after an other flesh were made an example sustaining the paine of eternall fire Luc. 16. vers 22. And the rich man also dead and he was Diues in torments buried in hell And lifting vp his eyes when he was in torments c. Numbers 16. ver 33. And they went downe into hell quicke couered with the ground Are in hell CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME S. Thomas Suplement q. 69. art 2. As soone as the soule is loosed from the bodie ether it is cast into hell or mounteth to heauen vnlesse it be hindred
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
other meaning in these words of anie man who should speake them but this which they will not vnderstand in the Apostle 5. From the sense in which they contradict The fift head we will take from the sense of those words of Scripture which the Protestants contradict For the sense in which the Protestants oppose themselues againsts the Scriptures words is not forced or violent but obuious easie open and which the words of themselues do plainely shew and in which such words vse to to spoaken and vnderstood of men And euident it is that all words ought to be vnderstood according to such a sense and that such a sense is the true sense of them vnlesse the contrarie be manifestly proued For this is the verie rule of vnderstanding words which the †Luther de verb. cenae to 7. Melancthon in Hospin p. 74. Martyr in loc tit de Euchar Perkins in 1. Gal v. 8. Pareus l. 5. de Illyricus in Claue part 2. tom 7. Protestāts themselues sometimes do vehemently vrge and vnlesse it be obserued the vnderstanding of words wil be vncertaine and according to euerie ones fansie Wherefore vnlesse Protestants do euidently conuince that those words of Scripture which they contradict are to be vnderstood in an other sense then in that which of themselues according to their ordinarie acception amongst men they beare they cannot denie but in contradicting this ordinarie sense of the words of Scripture they contradict the true sense of them And therefore the Reader in this matter must diligently marke that Catholiks are not bound to proue that the words of Scripture or of Protestants be to be taken in their vsuall and ordinarie sense amongst men but that this is to be supposed as a rule and vndoubted principle of vnderstāding words vnlesse the contrarie be demonstrated And if anie denie it he is not to be admitted to anie disputation which is grounded in words or testimonies because he denieth the verie first principle of vnderstanding words which being denied all dispute grounded on words is vayne Wherefore that Protestants who say that Catholiks do begge that point which they ought to proue when they vrge that the words of Scripture are to be vnderstood according to the sense which they openly shew and in which men vse to speake and vnderstand such words know not what ought to be proued in disputations out of words and what is to be supposed as a principle thereof Whereupon Kemnitius himselfe in Examen parte 2. tit de Missa saieth What madnesse is it to leaue the plaine sense which hath certaine and manifest testimonies of Scripture and to deuise a new exposition And the same say other Prostants as we shall rehearse hereafter †In Perorat But if Protestants will haue ether the words of Scripture or anie other words whatsoeuer to be vnderstood in an other sense then that wherein they vse to be vnderstood of men all the burden of prouing lieth vpon them Which because they cannot proue we iustly conclude that they contradict the true sense of the words of Scripture which we before haue alledged and frame this argument Whosoeuer contradict that sense of the Scriptures words which of themselues they beare and in which they are vsually vnderstood of men and cannot demonstrate that they are to be vnderstood in an other sense they contradict the true sense of the words of Scripture But Protestants do so Therefore they contradict the true sense of the holie Scripture The Maior or first proposition is as I saied the principle and ground of all dispute out of words and the Minor or second proposition is euident by the answeres of Catholiks vnto the proofes which Protestants bring for to shew that the words of Scripture are to be vnderstood in an other sense then they shew or men vsually vnderstand them in The sixt head is taken out of the circunstances which 6. From the circunstances of the words make for the natiue and vsuall sense of those words of Scripture which Protestants contradict For example Christ saied simply of that which he gaue with his hands to his Apostles after his last Supper This is my bodie and the Protestants simply say of the same This is not Christs bodie and consequently contradict Christs words not onely in their plaine natiue and vsuall sense but also which is confirmed by all their circunstances of end of time of place of the speaker and of the hearers As for the circunstance of the end it is plaine that the end of these words was to tell clearely the Apostles what indeed that was which he then gaue them And all his other words were ether spoaken of other matters or if of the same matter yet they were spoaken to this end to tell the Apostles what it was which then he gaue them but to what end they should vse it or for some such like purpose And that the foresaied words do clearly expresse what that was which at that time Christ gaue to his Apostles is so euident as our aduersaries themselues confesse For thus a Admonit vlt. Caluin I denie not but Christment to speake most clearly And b Cont. Selnec Beza If the question be about the word of God surely we haue none more expresse and in which we more willingly rest then the institution of the Supper it selfe This is my bodie Authores Admonit de libro Concordiae c. 3. p. 91. The words of the Supper are most cleare and of themselues abundantly sufficient for to be rightly vnderstood And the same c Whitaker ad Rat. 3. Zuinglius in Expl. art 18. Riuet tract 3. sect 12. Polanus part 1. thes de caena others confesse The circonstance also of the time confirmeth the same For it was the last when Christ was to conuerse with his Apostles in humane māner and therefore it was behouefull that if euer he should then speake in must plaine and vsuall sense especially speaking of a matter newly then instituted by him and bequeathed by him by his last will and testament and necessarily to be knowne of them and yet which could no waie be knowne of them but by Christs words But euident it is that the most cleare manner of speaking is to speake in the plaine natiue and vsuall sense of words And consequently Christ who by our aduersaries confession ment to speake most clearely speake in the plaine natiue and vsuall sense of his words The circunstance of place also concurreth For the place where Christ spoake these words was free and void of strangers so that thereby no occasion could be to meane otherwise then the words vsually did beare The circunstance also of the Speaker doth much confirme the same For he was the word it selfe the wisdome of his Father who both best knew how he ought to expresse his meaning about a new thing which could not be knowne of vs but by his words was most desirous that we should know what it was
of the Anthropomorphites then thou canst obiect it to vs in this mysterie For the Anthropomorphites in no place of Scripture had an expresse word which directly saied God hath a bodie We haue a most expresse word wherewith Christ saied most directly of that which he gaue to his Apostles This is my bodie The Anthropomorphites had no expresse word which was of purpose spoakē to tell vs what God was we haue an expresse word spoaken purposely to this end and onely to this end to tell vs what the Eucharist is The Anthropomorphites had no expresse word which anie circunstances of moment did conuince to be vnderstood in their proper sense we haue an expresse word which all circustances do confirme ought to be vnderstood in their natiue and vsuall signification The Anthropomorphites had a word but as a thing which the very light of reason did shew to be otherwise then the word did signifie we haue the word of a new thing neuer heard of before and which can no way be knowne by the light of reason but onely by the word of God Finally to omit al other differences taken from the Church Fathers and Councels the Anthropomorphites had the word of a matter which the Scripture other where most manifestly denieth we haue the word of a matter which Deuter. 4. Actor 7. Ioan. 4. the Scripture no where directly ether clearely or obsculy denieth nether the deniall thereof can any way be wroūg out of the Scripture but by adding a false humane principle and by making a deceitfull humane argument Thus manie and thus great differences are there betwene the word wherewith we make the Eucharist the bodie of Christ and the word wherewith the Anthropomorphites made God to haue a bodie as I thinke are not betwene the word which the Anthropomorphites alledged and the word wherewith anie other article of Christian faith is proued And thus much touching the first argument taken from the opposition betwixt the words of the holie Scripture and of Protestants in 260. articles and such words of the Scripture as were spoaken of purpose for to tell vs what we were to beleiue and in their open and plaine sense which they manifestly shew and in which such words vse to be spoaken and vnderstood of men which argument as a foundation of all the rest that follow shal be included in euerie one of them CHAPTER II. THAT PROTESTANTS CONFESSE that they contradict the sense of those words which the Catholik Church manie ages agoe and manie of themselues beleiue to be the words of God THE second argument wherewith we will proue that Protestants contradict the true sense of the holie Scripture we will take from their confession wherein they confesse that they contradict the sense of those words of which some of them to let passe all other proofes are acknowledged by diuers Protestants and all of them were manie ages agoe iudged by the Catholik Lutherans confesse that their doctrine is against S. Iames Epistle Church to be a parte of the holie Scripture For Luther and the Lutheran Protestants do confesse that the cheifest point of Protestancie to wit of Iustification by onelie faith doth verilie contradict the Epistle of S. Iames where he saieth Yee see that a man is iustified by workes and not by faith onely For thus writeth Luther in his Preface vpon that Epistle I iudge it to be the writing of no Apostle for this cause First because directly against S. Paul and all other Scripture it attributeth iustification to workes And in Luther saieth S. Iames doated c. 22. Gen. tom 6. fol. 282. Iames concludeth ill It followeth not as Iames doateth Therefore the fruites do iustifie let our aduersaries therefore be packing with their Iames. Melancthon de Sacris Concion to 2. fol. 23. But if they cannot be mittigated by anie exposition as those words of Iames Yee see c. these absolutely are not to be admitted Magdelburgenses Cētur 1. l. 2. c. 4. col 54. The Epistle of Iames swarueth not a litle from the analogie of Apostolik doctrine whiles it ascribeth iustification not to faith onely but to workes And Centur. 2. c. 4. col 71. The Epistle of Iames attributeth iustice to workes contrarie to Paul and all other Scriptures Schlusselburg lib. 1. Theol. Caluin art 15. fol. 50. Iames contrarie to Paul attributeth iustice to workes And tom 8. Catal. Haeret. pag. 500. he saieth of S. Iames. He fighteth directly with Paul and all the rest of the Scripture by giuing iustice before God to mans workes The same confesse Pomeranus and Vitus Theodorus cited by Coccius to 1. lib. 6. art 23. and Pappus cited by Gretser l. 1. de verbo Dei c. 18. and the same is insinuated by Hunnius de Iustific pag. 219. Wherevpon Daneus in Enchirid. Augustini c. 67. saieth It troubleth manie now a dayes so that some haue cast out the Epistle of Iames others haue called it straweish And Pareus l. 4. de Iustif c. 18. Luther could not accord Iames with Paul but by casting away the whole Epistle Beza also in Iac. 2. v. 14. Manie haue cast away this Epistle for this cause as if it were contrarie to true doctrine Nether do onelie Lutherans iudge thus of S. Iames his Epistle but also some Sacramentaries For Musculus de locis tit de Some Sacramentaries reiect Sainct Iames. Iustificat saieth That impertinentlie he alledgeth the examples of Abraham That he confoundeth the word of faith and setteth downe a sentence different from Apostolicall doctrine And ib. tit de Scriptur pa. 172. plainelie professeth that he houldeth it not for authenticall Scripture And the Confession Heluet. c. 15. saieth The same saied he Iames not contradicting S. Paul otherwise he were to be reiected And neuerthelesse commonly all Sacramentaries account S. Iames Epistle to be a parte of holie Scripture in so much as the English French and Flemish Protestants haue put it in their Confessions as a point of their faith Wherefore thus I argue in forme what contradicteth the Epistle of S. Iames contradicteth the holie Scripture The cheifest point of Protestancie touching Iustification by onely faith cōtradicteth the Epistle of S. Iames Therefore it contradicteth the holie Scripture The Maior or first Proporsition is not onely beleiued and tought of all Catholiks but also commonelie of Sacramentaries And the Minor or second Proposition is graunted by the Lutherans In like sorte all Protestants acknowledge their doctrine Protestants confesse that they teach contrarie to Machab. Tobie c. of not praying for the dead to be contrarie to those words of 2. Machab. c. 12. It is a holie and holesome cogitation to pray for the dead that they may be loose from their sinnes Wherevpon Caluin in Antidoto Concil Trident. sess 4. p. 265. saieth Out of the 2. of Machabes both Purgatorie will be proued and the Intercession of Saints out of Tobie Satisfactions Exorcismes and what not They will borrow no few matters of Ecclesiasticus
the citizens of the outward Church that is all that professe faith to be faithfull But charitie beleiueth all things and therefore is deceaued which is farre from the certaintie of faith Which is as much as to say S. Paul or the Scripture was deceaued in these sayings If we proue that God would haue some to be conuerted who will not because he saieth Math. 23. vers 37. Hierusalem Hierusalem how often would I gather together thy children as the hen doth gather together her chickins vnder her wings and thou wouldst not Beza de Praedestinat cont Castel vol. 1. pag. 398. answereth If we will attribute this speach to Christ as he was God doste thou not know that God for to allure his children to him through his infinite goodnesse by taking vpon him humane affections doth sometime stammer with vs God stammereth Fiftly therefore I proue that Protestants contradict the true sense of Scripture in this sorte Who not onely gainesay the expresse words of holie writ so as we haue seene but also are forced in manie and great misteries of faith to say that the Apostles Christ and God himselfe did not certainely foresee what they saied and that the holie Ghost did not speake of certaine knowledge but by coniectures as men do they gaynesay the true meaning of the holy Scripture But Protestants do so Therefore c. CHAPTER VI. THAT PROTESTANTS AFFIRME manie weightie sayings of the Scripture not to haue beene spoaken according to the mynd of the Authors MY sixt argument shal be because Protestants are driuen to say that Scripture speaketh not according to it owne mynd and according to trueth but according to the errour and opinion of others and that in manie and great matters as of faith of good workes of sacraments of the very meane of attayning saluation and the like For if we proue that wicked men may haue faith because S. Iames speaketh not according to his owne mynd S. Iames cap. 2. vers 18. speaketh thus to such a one Thou hast faith and I haue workes v. 19. Thou beleiuest that there is one God thou doest well Caluin on that chapter v. 14. saieth Let vs remember that he speaketh not according to his owne mynd as oft as here he nameth faith If we proue that the keeping of the commandements Nor Christ is necessarie to saluation because Christ saieth Math. 19. v. 17. If thou wilt enter to life keepe the commandements Pareus l. 3. de Iustificat c. 12. p. 812. answereth The Lord sendeth him to the workes of the law not that he thinketh this way of saluation possible but for to confund his hypocrisie Brentius in Pareus l. 4. de Iustificat c. 2. and in Gerlachius tom 2. disput 13. saieth Christ so answered as he rather shewed him the way to He shewed the way to perdition eternall damnation Which answere saieth Pareus c. 2. cit is no lesse true then that saying of the Apostle yee are euacuated from Christ who are iustified by the law If we proue that iustice is necessarie to saluation because Christ saieth Mat. 5. ver 21. Vnlesse your iustice abound more then that of the Scribes and Pharises you shall not enter into the kingdome of heauen Pareus l. 4. de Iustif c. 4. p. 964 answereth Not that this inward iustice was possible to the He shewed an impossible way disciples or to anie other man but that the exactnesse of the law and there impossibilitie being acknowledged they might forsake the endlesse way of the law and seeke life in the Ghospell If we proue that God rewardeth good workes because the Scripture often speaketh so Zuinglius l. de relig c. de Merito answereth There are some so doltish that whatsoeuer thou criest they thinke God giueth all things to merits and where these are not that there his grace is in vaine hoped for whose weaknesse or rather perfidiousnesse God abuseth and inuiteth to good workes by hope of reward that so nothing may be wanting to his seruants And Ochinus in Schlusselburg lib. 1. Theol. Caluin art 23. dareth call in question whether Christ spoake those words which he would haue spoaken We answere saieth he that it may be that when He spoake not that he would Christ saied This is my bodie he would haue saied The bread signifieth my bodie The like they meane when they say that the holie Scripture speakeâ—h by graunt or concession Scripture speaketh by concessioÌ„ or grauÌ„t For thus Caluin in lac 2. v. 12. That he termeth it faith is by way of concession orgraunt And 3. Instit c. 17. § 11. That the Apostle calleth faith a vaine opinion which is farre from the nature of faith is by way of graunt Beza in Iac. 2. ver 14. Iames calleth it faith by way of graunt that he may not seeme to striue about words In like manner Illyricus and others Kemnitius in locis part 2. tit de Argumentis writeth that in those sayings If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandments Who shall doe these shall liue in them Doe this and thou shalt liue The doers of the law shal be iustified Christ and Paul answere by way of concession or graunt If we proue that we can clense our selues from sinne because 2. Cor. 7. v. 1. it is saied Let vs clense our selues from all inquination of the flesh and spirit perfecting sanctification in the feare of God Caluin 2. Instit c. 5. § 11. answereth By concession or graunt it is attributed to vs which belongeth to God And if we proue that there are some litle precepts because Christ saieth Math. 5. v. 19. One iot or tittle shall not passe of the law till all be fulfilled Caluin vpon that place saieth Where Christ termeth litle precepts it is a kind of concession or graunt If we proue that God will render eternall life according to the patience of good workes because Rom. 2. v. 7. is saied God will render to euerie man according to his workes to them truely that according to patience in good worke seeke glorie honor and incorruption life eternall Beza vpon that place answereth In this description of iust iudgment this is saied of the Apostle by way of graunt or concession as also when streight after he saieth ver 13. Not hearers but doers of the law are iustified If we proue that some do keepe the law because it is written Rom. 2. v. 26. If then the prepuce keepe the iustices of the law shall not his prepuce be reputed for circuncision Beza vpon that place answereth These things are saied of the Apostle by way of graunt or concession as also I noted before verse 9. If we proue that the sacraments of the new law be Scripture speaketh by contention better then the sacraments of the ould because S. Paul in the Epistle to the Hebrews preferreth them before these Caluin 4. Instit c. 14. § 25. saieth This we must especially note that in all these places
grosse error as also he doth in his Epistle to the Galathians If we exhort to do pennance in hairecloth and ashes because Christ saieth Math. 11. ver 21. If in Tyre and Sidon had beene wrought the miracles that haue beene wrought in you they had done pennance in hairecloth and ashes lōg agoe Caluin ib. answereth Pennance is described by the externall signes which were then solemnely vsed in Gods Church not as if Christ vrged this matter but because he turneth his speach to the capacitie of the common people If we proue that we shall haue life euerlasting for giuing all our goods to the poore because Christ saieth Math. 19. v. 21. If thou wilt be perfect goe sell the things that thou hast and giue to the poore and thou shalt haue treasure in heauen Beza ib. answereth These words of Christ declare not how life euerlasting is of it self to be gottē but are spoakē to reproue him that was deceaued with false hope of his iustice Caluin ib. in v. 20. saieth Christs answere was directed according to the To the mans disposition mans disposition Gerlachius tom 2. disput 13. saieth The Lord in the places alledged Math. 19. and Luc. 10. accommodated To men be wicked with false doctrines To mēs errors his speach to them who asked him who were bewiched with an opinion of legall iustice and Pharisaicall doctrines And againe Christ might easily accommodate his speach to those errours Illyricus in Claue part 2. tract 1. col 32. writeth thus Christ after an other manner sheweth the way to the kingdome Christ shewed one way to some an othe◠to others of heauen to the Pharise to the lawyer and to that yong man vaunting of the fulfilling of the law and in other manner vnto Nicodemus boasting of his discipline and good habits gotten by long tyme and time goodnesse of nature and free will and yet in an other manner vnto miserable sinners wrastling with their conscience with the wrath of God and their sinnes Author respons ad Theses Valent. p. 800. thus teacheth That we may graunt that oftentimes in Scripture iustification is denied to the ould and attributed to the new testament Yet According to the Iews supposition none seeth not but that this is saied of the Apostle by supposition of the Iews who like to Papists did speake of the ould testament as of the law which should giue iustice by workes And p. 813. In that Gregorie is deceaued that he thinketh it followeth out of Pauls discourse that prepuce keepeth the law which in trueth the Apostle spoake vpon supposition not as if it were indeed or could be but to shew boasting of the law circumcision and all the other ceremonies was very vaine Nor content to haue thus deluded so manie and so weightie sentences of Scripture they giue a generall rule so to delude them Caluin in 1. Corinth 10. ver 3. It is the Generall rule to delude Scripture thus manner of the Scripture when it speaketh of Sacramēts or other things sometimes to speake according to the capacitie of the hearers and so it doth not respect the nature of thing but what the hearers thinke amisse And l. de Praedest p. 713. The Scripture when it talketh of the Sacraments vseth to speake in twoe sortes If it talke with hypocrites according to their wrong meaning it deuideth the trueth from the signes The like he hath Gal. 3. v. 27. in Ioan. 6. v. 32. Daneus tom 2. Corinth 4. pag. 217. Peter Martyr in locis closs 2. c. 16. § 14. in 1. Cor. 10. Et Polanus in disput priuat 32. saieth God oftentimes Scripture calleth iust who indeed are not so speaketh according to their opinion with whome he speaketh So are they in the Scripture called iust who indeed are not iust but onely in opinion ether of themselues or of others By these and manie such like sleights Protestants vse to delude the holie Scripture which if they be admitted nothing at all can be proued out of Scripture Wherefore I thus make my sixt argument Who not onely in 260. articles do contradict the expresse words of Scripture in their cleare sense but also in manie and weightie matters are forced to say that the Scripture speaketh not accordig to her owne mynde meaneth not as she speaketh speaketh by way of graunt concession or argument according to the mynd capacitie grosse opinion error of others and after a humane fashion not according to the nature of the thing they are to be thought to gain say the true meaning of the holie Scripture But Protestants do so Therefore c. CHAPTER VII THAT PROTESTANTS ARE FORCED to say that the Scripture speaketh ironically mimetically hyperbolically and by amplification and fiction MY seuenth argument to proue that Protestants contradict the true sense of the Scripture shal be because they are forced to say that manie and most weightie sentences of Scripture of faith good workes Sacraments redemption of sinnes meanes of purchasing heauen and the like were spoaken not in earnest but ironically mimetically hyperbolically by amplification and fiction Precepts ought to be kept Ironically For if we proue that Gods commandments can be done because Leuit. 18. Rom. 10. Gal. 3. is saied Who shall doe those things shall liue in them Luther in Gal. 3. tom 5. fol. 347. Answereth I wnderstand that this speach is an ironie or scoffe If anie proue the same because Christ saieth Luc. 10. v. Ironically 26. Doe this and thou shalt liue Luther loc cit answereth I vnderstand this place in common that this saying of Christ Doe this and thou shalt liue is a kinde of ironie and mockage Poach in Schlusselburg l. 4. Catal. Haeret. 4. 301. Albeit the lawyer do inquire of life euerlasting yet if Christs answere be vnderstood according to the law that is without speaciall faith life cannot be ment of eternall life without an ironie Et p. 312. I do not denie but Christs answere may he wnderstood of eternall life not according to the law but an other way to wit ether according to the Ghospell or by ironie Againe That saying and the like may be expounded three wayes First by ironie as Luther saieth Gen. 9. and Galat. 3. Secondly according to the law c. And Gerlachius tom 2. disput 13. There is a secret ironie of Christ If we proue that the commandments must needs be kept because Christ sayeth Math. 19. v. 17. If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandments Pareus l. 4. de Iustificat c. 2. p. 967. answereth Luthers ironie about this place may be defended And pag. 969. It was a serious conference and yet that hindereth not but that the Lord might vse an ironie And Gerlachius to 2. disp 13. cit It was a serious conference and yet there is a secret ironie If we proue that an ill man may haue faith because S. Iames cap. 2. speaketh thus to such a one Thou hast faith
An ill man hath faith Ironically Thou beleiuest that there is one God Thou doest well Beza ib. answereth That which followeth Thou hast faith is spoaken ironically And Caluin ib. v. 18. Erasmus is much deceaued in that he acknowledgeth not an ironie in these words The speech is ironicall And Thou doest well is added for to extenuate And likewise in Rom. 3. v. 30. he saieth I thinke that there is an ironie in the words And lib. 6. de lib. arbit pag. 198. Salomon Mans is to prepare his heart Ironically saieth Prouerb 16. it is mans parte to prepare the hart and the Lords to gouerne the tongue Who seeth not that it is an ironicall description of mans arrogancie who challengeth to himselfe all high matters and hath not the least matter in his power If we proue that good workes do cleanse from sinne Almes cleanseth sinne Ironically because Christ saieth Luc. 11. v. 41. But yet that that remaineth giue almes and behould all things are cleane vnto you Vallada in his Apologie c. 22. pag. 300. answereth Christ is farre from teaching that by almes sinnes are redeemed that on the contrarie he derideth and rebuketh the Pharisees that they had this opinion And the Apologie Conf. August c. de respons ad argum There are manie who interprete it to be an ironie This interpretation is not absurd nor hath anie thing which is contrarie to other Scriptures P. Martyr in Rom. 11. Those words Giue almes c. may be expounded three waies The first is to say that the speach is ironicall And this he repeateth in locis class 3. c. 4. § 34. Aretius also in locis part 1. fol. 90. saieth Others chuse rather to take this sentence of Christ ironically If we proue that sinnes may be redeemed by almes because Daniel saieth c. 4. ver 24. Redeeme thy sinnes by almes Schlusselburg tom 8. Catal. pag. 524. saieth There are Almes redeeme sinne Ironically some that expound this place ironically Which he doth not dislike If we proue that the commandements may be kept because Luc. 18. v. 22. a man that saied he had kept them all Christ reprehendeth not but saieth Yet one thing thou One thing lacking Ironically lackest Sell all that euer thou hast and giue to the poore c. Beza ib. answereth Yea all things lack seing no man can keepe euen one commandment so as the law appointeth wherefore Christ speaketh with a holie ironie If we proue that a sinner hath free will or power to conuerte himselfe because God saieth Oseae 5. ver vlt. Going I will returne to my place vntill you faile and seeke my Men seeke God Ironically face Whitaker and Rat. 9. Campiani answereth Which words truely he spoake ironically and mimetically And lib. 9. cont Dur. sect 25. It is manifest that the Lord spoake ironically Thus you see in how great matters they say that the Prophets Apostles Christ and God himselfe spoake ironically or scoffingly when they speake against thē which is indeed to make the Prophets Apostles Christ and God himselfe to be scoffers or rather to scoffe and mock them Now let vs see how they say that the Scripture speaketh mimetically or by imitation of others If we proue that faith is a worke because Christ Faith is a worke Mimetically saieth Ioan. 6. v. 29. This is the worke of God that you beleiue in him Beza ib. answereth Perhaps this kind of speach is borrowed of the common vses and is to be expounded by mimesis or imitation as if one comming to a Phisician should aske of him for how much money would he cure him and the Physician should answere in these words All the money which I demaund of you is this that you trust me and be perswaded that I seeke nought but your health If I say the Physician should thus answere who could gather out of this answere that money is the trust which the Physician demandeth of the sicke man for to obey holesome aduise Wherefore they are very ridiculous that I may omit other paralogismes who out of that place do gather that faith is a worke Pareus l. 1. de Iustificat c. 16. Faith is improperly called a worke For Christ calleth faith in it selfe a worke of God according to the speach of the Iewes who asked him And Whitaker lib. 8. cont Dur. sect 88. Christ called faith a worke ether mimetically or because it is the worke of the holie Ghost If we proue that that faith whereof S. Iames speaketh Faith iustifieth Mimetically is iustifying faith because c. 2. v. 24. he saieth Yee see that a man is iustified by workes and not by faith onely that is Man is iustified by faith but not by onely faith Pareus l. 4. de Iustificat c. 18. answereth He addeth that Antithesis And not by faith onely by mimesis or imitation of the hypocrites we are iustified by faith onely yee see saieth he this is false If we proue that Christs flesh is truely eaten because he saieth Ioan. 6. My flesh is truely meate Zuinglius in Exegesi tom Christ flesh eaten Mimetically 2. fol. 333. answereth He finely obserueth the imitation of the Iewes who ether thought or would seeme to thinke that he was but a mere man And vpbraiding to these men their error he saieth His flesh is truely meate The same he repeateth in Ioan. 6. tom 4. fol. 308. And addeth fol. 334 According to etheologie and mimesis which are a kind of alleosis that is by imitation wherewith he spoake according to the speach and opinion of his enemies he vseth the word Flesh and meaneth Saieth Flesh and meaneth Spirit the Spirit that is his Diuinitie as often as he attributeth life to his flesh If we proue that there are twoe testaments because S. Paul saieth Gal. 4. For these are twoe testaments the one truely One testamēt Mimetically c. Zuinglius in Elencho tom 2. fol. 3. answereth Paul calleth it one testament not that it was truely a testament but by etheologie or imitatiō of them who so called it And he addeth who more stifly embraced shaddows as it is the grosse dispositiō of men more then they ought would rather leese light then darknesse not vnlike to that madde man who greatly complained that his freinds had procured him to be restored to his witts After the manner of these men Paul saieth that there are twoe testaments See how he saieth that Saint Paul speaketh like a madde man And in Ioan. 6. tom 4. p. 305. Where Christ calleth faith a worke he saieth Christ plaieth in the word worke and calleth faith a worke because they looked to workes So in the Epistle to the Rom. and Galat. by imitation he calleth grace the law of the spirit And in Math. Grace called a law Mimetically 19. pag. 107. The Lord continueth in his imitation and accommodateth his speach to the mynd of the yong man who after a Pharisaicall manner did think that
iustification and life euerlasting were to be gotten by workes And in Iacob 2. p. 549. he saieth that when S. Iames termeth faith that which is without workes he speaketh by imitation imitating them Faith without workes Mimetically who bragged of dead faith which is no faith as of liuelie and true faith Illyricus also in Claue tract 4. col 332. saieth that by imitation the Ghospell is called the law of faith Rom. 3. and faith a The Ghospell law of faith Mimetically worke Ioan. 6. and in like manner it is saied Make to your selues freinds of the mammon of iniquitie If we proue that those things which are written in the booke of wisdome were spoaken of Salomon because the praier to God which is in the 9. chapter can agree to no other Whitaker Controu 1. quaest 1. c. 12. answereth That might be done mimetically by imitation of the writer Salomon praieth to God Mimetically whosoeuer he was And the same saieth Rainolds Praelect 20. and. 21. As if imitations which are grounded in lyes and that in praiers to God were to be admitted in Scripture What other thing were this for Scripture but to imitate others in lyes and euen then when it speaketh to God And thus much of their Mimeses or imitation Now let vs see some of their hyperboles If we proue that faith may moue mountaines because Faith may moue mountaines Hyperbolically Christ saieth Math. 17. ver 20. If you haue faith as a mustard seed you shall say to this mouÌ„taine Remoue from hence thither and it shall remoue Caluin ib. in v. 19. answereth It is certaine that it is an hyperbolicall kind of speach wheÌ„ he saieth that by faith trees and mountaines may be remoued The same hath Illyricus vpon this place If we haue proue that almes deliuereth from sinne because Almes deliuereth from sinne Hyperbolically it is saied Tobie 4. v. 11. Almes deliuereth from all sinne and from death Vallada in his Apologie cit pag. 304. answereth This kind of speach of Tobie is hyperbolicall And Apologia Confess August c. de respons ad argum We will not say that it is an hyperbole albeit it must be so taken least it detract from the praise of Christ whose proper office is to deliuer from death and sinne If we proue that one man by his praier may procure One man procureth life to an oâ—her Hyperbolically life to an other because it is saied 1. Ioan. 5. vers 16. He that knoweth his brother to sinne a sinne not to death let him aske and life shal be giuen him sinning not to death Caluin ib. answereth If you vnderstand of man that he giueth life to his brother it is an hyperbolicall speach If we proue that God hath promised reward to good God rewardeth works Hyperbolically workes Zuinglius de Prouident c. 6. answereth These are hyperboles and hyperoches If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandements Who shall doe the will of my father c. and what promises soeuer els are made to workes Thus they deuise hyperboles in Scripture and yet Pareus lib. 1. de Iustific cap. 15. and in Galat. 1. Lect. 9. saieth I dare not say that there is an hyperbole in Scripture sith it ouerlas heth the trueth and seemeth to be a kind of lie If we proue that faith can be without charitie because Faith without charitie A fiction S. Paul saieth 1. Cor. 13. v. 2. If I haue all faith so as I remoue mountaines and haue not charitie I am nothing P. Martyr ib. answereth The Apostle speaketh by fiction for to exaggerate the dignitie of charitie Who seeth not that Paul speaketh here hyperbolically And in Rom. 11. When the Apostle Impossible Charitie extolled by fiction by all means extolled charitie he vsed a fiction for to extoll it But Luther Postilla in Domin Quinquagesimae saieth Paul brought an impossible example If we proue that faith may be without workes because S. Iames saieth cap. 2. v. 18. Shew me thy faith without Faith without workes workes Caluin ib. answereth In that he biddeth shew faith without workes he argueth from an impossible thing And in v. 17. It is cleare enough that the Apostle doth reason from an impossible thing If we proue that widdows marrying after they haue giuen their faith to the contrarie are damned because as S. Paul speaketh 1. Timoth. 5 vers 12. they haue made voide their first faith Caluin 4. Instit c. 13. § 18. answereth The Widows leese their first faith By Amplification Apostle for amplification sake addeth that they haue broken or made voide their first faith Wherefore in forme thus I argue Who not onely in so manie and so great matters contradict such words of Scripture and in such a sense as we haue seene but also in manie and great matters are forced to say that the Scripture seaketh ironically mimetically hyperbolically by way of fiction and of amplificatioÌ„ and by impossibilities they are to be thought to contradict the true sense of the Scripture But Protestants do so Therefore c. CHAPTER VIII THAT PROTESTANTS ARE COMpelled to turne the most generall propositions of the Scripture into particulars THE eight argument wherewith I will proue that Protestants coÌ„tradict the true sense of holie Scripture shal be because in manie and weightie mattie to wit of God of Christ of the Church of Sacraments of faith and the like they are forced to turne the most vniuersall propositions of Scripture into particulars For touching God If we proue that he hath a will to haue mercie on all because Rom. 11. v. 32. it is saied God Touching God hath concluded all into incredulitie that he may haue mercie on all Beza ib. answereth The vniuersall particle All is to be restrained to wit as he saieth l. de Praedest cont Castel All that is Some p. 360. All who shall beleiue The like he hath in Colloq Montisbel p. 421. and in Resp p. 216. 223. and Caluin 3. Instit c. 24. § 17. But Zanchius l. 1. de Nat. Dei c. 2. tom 2. cal 562. saieth that this place and also that other Preach the Ghospell to euerie creature and the like belong onely to the elect If we proue the same because Sapient 11. v. 24. it is saied Thou hast mercie on all c. P. Martyr in Rom. 9. answereth But it easily appeareth that these things are to be vnderstood All that is Some of the vniuersall companie of the elect If we proue that God hath a will to saue all because 1. Timot. 2. v. 4 it is saied of God Who will all men to be saued Bucer in Math. 6. answereth That he saieth All is as much as if he had saied some of all Et Idem apud Zanchium l. de Perseuerant to 2. col 343. That place 1. Timoth. 2. Who will all and 1. Ioan. 2. He is the propitiation c. cannot be vnderstood but synechdochically for manie that is for
ver 13. Not the hearers of the law are iust with God but the doers of the law shal be iustified Caluin ibidem answereth This sentence hath onely this meaning If iustice be sought by the law we must fulfill the law because the iustice of the law consisteth in the perfection of workes Peter Martyr ibid. That which he saieth hath this meaning If anie were to be iustified before God by the iustice of the law he must fulfill the law Pareus libr. 4. de Iustificat cap. 14. The Apostlesaieth indeed Doers of the law shal be iustified but he meaneth conditionally if there be anie And Illyricus in Claue part 2. tract 4. writeth thus Roman 2. When Gentils doe those things which are of the law that is if they did them Againe Doe this and thou shalt liue is put for If thou doest them thou shalt liue If we proue that there are some which loue their neighbour and fulfill the law because it is saied Rom. 13. v. 8. Who loueth his neighbour hath fulfilled the law Caluin ib. answereth Paul saieth not what men doe or not doe but speaketh vpon condition which you shall not find any where fulfilled And if you proue that the law may be fulfilled because the Apostle saieth Galat. 6. v. 2. Beare yee one an others burdens and so yee shall fulfill the law of Christ Caluin ibid. answereth Because none performeth altogether that which Paul requireth therefore we are all farre from perfection If we proue that single life is simply good because S. Paul saieth absolutely 1. Cor. 7. v. 1. It is good for a man not to touch a woman P. Martyr in locis Classe 3. cap. 7. § 17. answereth They should see that what Paul hath of the praises of single life are neuer spoaken absolutely If we proue that virginitie may be absolutely counselled Of good workes to men because S. Paul 1. Corinth 7. v. 7. saieth absolutely I would all men to be as my selfe And ver 25. A concerning virgins a commandement of our Lord I haue not but counsaile I giue And ver 28. Art thou loose from a wife seeke not a wife Caluin in ver 25. cit answereth Because it is a slipperie matter and full of difficulties he speaketh alwaies vnder condition And in v. 27. This second member must be taken vnder condition If we proue that some may fall from grace because S. Of Iustification Paul saieth Gal. 5. v. 4. You are fallen from grace Pareus in Galat. 1. lect 7. answereth The Apostle speaketh that conditionally And in cap. 5. vers 4. lect 61. For the Apostle affirmeth not that the Galathians were fallen but threatneth that if that if they will be iustified by the law that it will come to posse that they fall wherefore thus I make my tenth argument Who beside the foresaied opposition on to so manie and such words of holie Scripture are forced to change manie and weightie absolute sayings of Scripture into conditionals they contradict the true meaning of the holie Scripture But Protestants doe so Therefore c. CHAPTER XI THAT PROTESTANTS CHANGE Conditionall Propositions of the Scripture into Absolute and delude them diuers other waies THE eleuenth argument for to proue that Protestants contradict the true sense of holie Scripture shal be because they are sometimes forced to change conditionall propositions thereof into absolute and to delude them diuers other waies For if we proue that our freindshippe with God dependeth of our keeping the commandements because Christ saied conditionally Ioan. 15. v. 14. Yee are my freinds if yee doe the things that I command yee Caluin ibid. answereth He meaneth not that we obtaine so great honor by anie merit of ours but onely admonisheth vs vpon what condition he receaueth vs into fauour and vouch safeth to reckon vs amongst his freinds But this wil be more euident by that we shall shew in the next chapter how they of causall propositions make no causall Diuers others waies they delude and frustrate the conditionall propositiōs of holie Scripture For if they can by anie colour they expound them of onely faith or of the holie ghost So they delude those places Ioan. 6. vers 53. Vnlesse yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood yee shall not haue life in yee and Ioan. 3. ver 5. Vnlesse a man be borne agayne of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdome of God Which teach that Sacraments are necessarie to saluation Or if they must needs expound them of good workes they will not expoūd thē of doing all necessarie good workes and auoiding all necessarie euill but of some onely or in parte or of endeauor to doe or auoid them so they delude those sayings of the Scripture Rom. 8. v. 13. If you liue according to the flesh you shall die but if by the spirit you mortifie the deeds of the flesh you shall liue Caluin ib. He promiseth vs life if we endeauour to mortifie the flesh For he doth not exactly require the death of the flesh but onely biddeth vs endeauour to tame the lustes thereof And the like he doth in manie other places as may be seene hereafter c. 16. And in like manner they delude all other sentences of Scripture which teach that if we wil be saued or iustified we must doe good workes and eschew euill And according to this they say that we must doe some good or haue some good workes that we must haue a begun or imperfect newnesse of life and keepe the lawe in some sorte or fashion Luther in Isaiae 8. to 4. f. 83. The holie Ghost is giuen that we may satisfie the law in some parte In some parte And in Psal 51. to 3. fol. 455. We will fulfill and keepe the law but with a large that is with a true Euangelicall dispensation Confessio Saxon. c. 9. It is needfull that there be some obediēce Protest dispensation Some obedience Some beginning In some sorte In some kind To begin in those that are iustified Schlusselb to 4. Catal. p. 176. The iustified are free from the accusation and damnation of the law not from beginning of obedience Bucer in Rom. 8. Christ giueth that spirit whereby we auoid sinne in some sorte Pareus l. 3 de Iustif p. 645. Saints doe not doubt of some kind of inherent iustice and l. 4. c. 7. It is enough if we endeauour to begin the new obedience of the law according to all the commandements So that wheresoeuer the Scripture saieth conditionally If thou wilt be iustified or saued doe this or doe not that they vnderstand it with a large dispensation that is doe somewhat or doe not somewhat of it or begin or endeauour to doe or not doe it But if this shift will not serue because the Scripture speaketh conditionally of keeping the whole law as Math. 9. v. 17. If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandements and the like thē they say it is the
these three but the greater of these is charitie Caluin ib. answereth It is manifest Not in all points that charitie is here saied to be the greater not in all points but as farre as it shal be perpetuall and now is the cheife in conseruing the Church Whitaker l. 9. cont Dur. sect 24. The Not euerie way Apostle saieth that charitie is greater then hope and faith not euerie way but onely in parte Hunnius de Iustif p. 154. preferreth Not simply charitie before faith and hope not vniuersally or simply but in parte And Luther Postilla in Dom. Quinquagesim who doth not acknowledge that Paul speaketh here of the continuance of charitie and of the other guifts not of their dignitie or vertue If we proue that the Church is to be simply heard because Of the Church she is simply called the Pillar and strength of trueth 1. Tim. 3. Academia Nemaus Resp ad Tournon pag. 546. answereth Let the Church be the keeper and interpreter of trueth Not simply not simply and absolutely but in parte Serranus cont Hayum part 3. p. 145. When the Church is called the mother of the faithfull the pillar and strength of trueth those sayings of the authoritie of the Church nether ought nor can be vnderstood simply but in parte or in somesorte Author respons ad Thes Vademont But in parte p. 492. and 523. I answere the Church is called the pillar and strength of trueth not simply but in somesorte And p. 689. God hath not commanded to obey the pastour or the Church simply but in somesorte If we proue that single life is simply good because S. Paul 1. Corinth 7. simply saieth It is good for a man not to Not absolutely touch a woman Reineccius tom 4. Armaturae cap. 23. answereth The Apostle speaketh so not simply and absolutely but in some sorte and respectiuely And ib. addeth that when S. Paul saieth It is good for a man to be so Pauls counsaile is to be taken in some sorte to wit of an incommodious thing Et Whitaker l. 8. cont Dur. sect 86. Paul praiseth virginitie not in it selfe but for some other end If we proue that Virginitie is simply better then marriage because simply it is saied 1. Cor. 7. v. 38. Who ioyneth Not simply but vpon condition his virgin in marriage doth well and who ioyneth not doth better Beza ib. answereth That is prouideth better for his children and that not simply but vpon conditions before expressed by the Apostle In like sorte is that to be vnderstood which is added She is more happie who marrieth not againe Zuinglius also ibid. When he saieth He doth better and soone after He Vpon comparison shal be more happie he meaneth not simply but in comparison If we proue that there may be some perfect men in this life because some are simply so called 1. Cor. 2. Philippen 3. and other where Pareus lib. 2. 2. de Iustificat cap. 7. answereth He attributeth perfection to himselfe and to others In comparisō not absolutely but in comparison of Catechumens And l. 4 c. 11. Most places speake of perfection not absolutely but in respect of In respect the most corrupted world So also Lobechius disput 9. p. 191. If we proue that there are some men iust perfect keepers of the commandements and the like because the Scripture simply calleth some so Pareus l. 4 de Iustificat c. 11 answereth These Saints are praised that they were perfect Not absolutely followed the Lord in all their heart c. not absolutely but because they were sincere worshippers of God And Hunnius de Iustif p. 169. They are termed perfect after their manner that is imperfectly and in comparison of the wicked And Illyricus in Claue part 2. tractat 4. writeth thus Tobie 4. Almes deliuereth from sinne to wit concerning some temporall punishment not touching sinne or eternall punishment In like sorte Redeeme thy sinnes with almes Daniel 4. And Author Gratiani Antiiesuitae part 2. p. 33. The Iesuit obiecteth that Paul 1. Cor. 10. affirmeth the Sacraments of the ould law to haue beene I some sorte types I answere saieth he It is true but in some sorte not simply And p. seq to that Heb. 10. v. 1. The law hauing a shaddow of future goods he thus answereth These things are spoaken comparatiuely of the Apostle not simply Finally Caluin Admonit vlt. p. 830. saieth Because the bread is a Sacrament of the bodie it is the bodie in some sorte Let this therefore be my 13. argument Who beside the foresaied opposition to the expresse words the Scripture in manie and great controuersies are forced to expound that in some sorte or in parte or respectiuely which is spoaken of the Scripture simply and absolutely they contradict the true meaning of the holie Scripture But Protestants doe so Therefore c. CHAPTER XIV THAT PROTESTANTS WILL NOT expound there sayings of the Scripture of that time whereof it speaketh MY fourtenth argument shal be taken from that Protestants are forced to expound the sayings of Scripture of a different time from that of which Scripture speaketh and that in manie and great matters For if we proue that at the very time of the institution Of the Eucharist Not is shed but shalle of the Eucharist Christs bodie was giuen and broken his blood shed for vs because three Euangelists and Saint Paul in Greek relating Christs words vse the participle of the present tense as also doth S. Luke in the vulgare Latin text neuerthelesse Protestants will not vnderstand Christs words of the time then present but onely of the time thē to come as we shewed l. 1. c. 11. art 5. If we proue that those that are iustified are now in herently Of iustification lust by those words Rom. 8. v. 29. Whome he hath foreknowne he hath also predestinated to be made conformable to the image of his Sonne 1. Cor. 15. v. 49. As we haue borne the Conformable not now his hereafter image of the earthlie let vs also beare the image of the heauenlie Pareus l. 2. de Iustif c. 3. answereth We graunt all this of the state to come when we shall be fully conformable to the image of Christ by iustice and glorie keeping the proportion of the head and members but it maketh nothing for our aduersarie for the present state If we proue that in this life our sinnes are taken from vs Of Sinnes because the Scripture saieth that God taketh away cleanseth blotteth out sinne Pareus l. cit c. 7. answereth The Sinnes taken away not now but hereafter phrases of Scripture speake of sanctification of the Church now indeed begun but hereafter to be perfected by which the filth of sinne now beginneth by the vertue of Christs spirit to be taken away by the rootes to be blotted out cleansed and purged out of our flesh and at length shal be quite taken away and blotted out
Which 1. As farreforth saieth that which in the words of Consecration signifieth As farreforth As saieth he the Pronoune which in those words The bread which I shall giue is my flesh which I shall giue for the life of the world Moulins in his Bucler part 2. pag. 51. saieth that those words Iacob 5. If he be in sinne they shal be forgiuen him signifie as much as health shal be restored to him all sinnes being forgiuen for which God had afflicted him And he addeth in the next page Christ doth teach vs Math. 9. Forgiuen 1. Arise that to say to the sicke Thy sinnes are forgiuen thee and to say Arise and walke are equiualent things Let then he and his fellow Mynisters say Arise and walke when they preach of remission of sinnes They expound also by disparate or quite differeÌ„t things For thus Zuinglius in Schlusselburg lib. 1. Theol. Caluin art 2. Bodie in the words of the Supper may be taken also for the Bodie 1. Churche Church Et in Ioan. 6. to 4. he saieth By which also the words of Christ wax cleare This is my bodie where Bodie is put for Bodie 1. Death Death In lib. de Relig. cap. de Euchar. to 2. Now followeth a rite whereby it appeareth that this is the sense and that Bodie here Is it not a participation of the bodie of our Lord. 1. Cor. 10. is otherwise taken then for the Symboll of his bodie to wit for the Church In lib. de Caena fol. 294. he saith that by Communication of the bodie of Christ by Communion Communion 1. Sermon Chalice 1. Our selues you may vnderstand a sermon or the Church Et 1. Cor. 10. that the sense of these words The Chalice of blessing which we blesse c. is The Cuppe of thankesgiuing with which we giue thanks what other thing I pray you is it but our selues Agayne Blood 1. Christians He calleth the blood of Christ those who trust in his blood Et in Exegesi f. 359. Flesh in this place Ioan. 6. is put for the Diuine Flesh. 1. Diuinitie Bodie and blood 1. Faith Nature In Explic. art 18. to 1. f. 37. Thou seest here Ioan. 6. that the bodie and blood of Christ is nothing els but the word of faith to wit that his bodie dead for vs his blood shed for vs redeemed vs. And in other places oftentimes saieth that the word Bodie in the words of Consecration signifieth a Figure or Symboll of Christ his bodie The same Zuinglius in Exegesi tom 2. fol. 350. thus writeth Eate 1. â—eleiue Vnlesse yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of man c. is as much as who beleiueth not to wit the Ghospell being preached shal be condemned In Ioan. 6. tom 4. To eate bread and flesh is Eate 1. Trust nothing els but to beleiue Againe To eate is to trust In Elenc fol. 30. When faith is saied to saue faith is taken for the election of God In lib. de baptis fol. 61. In the 6. of the Acts the Beleiue 1. Heare word of Beleiuing is taken for to heare the doctrine or to adioyne himselfe to the number of the beleiuers The same man Epist ad Lindouer to 1. fol. 204. Thou seest here 1. Pet. 3. Baptisme Baptisme 1. Faith hath made vs safe fiâ—st that baptisme is taken for faith In lib. de Relig. c. de Baptis to 2. fol. 201. It was cleare to him that they had beene baptized by Apollo that is taught In lib. de Baptis f. 61. We saied that baptisme was taken for the inward Baptisme Faith Baptisme 1. Doctrine faith 1. Pet. 3. Et f. 63. We must note that the words of Baptizing in these words of Paul Act. 16. is taken for doctrine Et f. 81. In what then were yee baptized must not be vnderstood of the externall baptisme of water but of doctrine and instruction In Subsidio ib. f. 254. Baptisme 1. Pet. 3. is taken for Christ when Baptisme 1. Christ he saieth that we are saued by baptisme Et in Resp ad Huber fol. 107. he addeth that Baptisme 1. Pet. 3. is taken for Christ or for the very Ghospell Moreouer l. de Baptis to 2. fol. 73. Baptisme 1. Ghospell he thus writeth They haue oftentimes learned of vs that by water in this place Ioan. 3. ought to be vnderstood the knowledge Water 1. Knowledge Keyes 1. Words of Keyes 1. Faith Keyes 1. Preaching Loose and binde 1. Preach Binde 1. Leaue in error Binde 1. Not beleiue Forgiue 1. Assure of Christ and the comfort of faith Et in Explic. art 50. to 2. f. 92. The keyes are nothing els but the pure word of God and the sincere preaching of the Ghospell In Exegesi ib. f. 258. The keyes are not other thing but faith of the Ghospell Resp ad Luther ib f. 378. It is cleare that the keyes are nothing but the preaching of the Ghospell Agayne in Explic. art 50. to 1. f. 93. We learne that in Luke to loose and binde is nothing els but to preach the Ghospell lib. de Relig. c. de Clauibus to 2. f. 191. It appeareth here that to Binde is nothing els but to leaue in error And in Schlusselb l. 1. Theol. Caluin art 9. The words of Binding and loosing signifie nothing els but to beleiue and not beleiue Perkins in Cathol ref Contr. 3. c. 3. writeth thus I answere that we doe not aske remission of sinnes because we are not certaine of it but rather because that certaintie is weake and infirme that continually indued with new grace of Christ we may dayly increase and be comforted Daneus Contr. 7. pag. 1317. Saints are saied to gouerne the Saintes 1. Christ world Apoc. 2. and 3. We graunt saieth he that the godlie both now and after death doe gouerne the wicked world in so much as Christ gouerneth it of whose kingdome they are partakers as being his members Et to 2. Contr. de Baptis c. 4. he saieth that in those wordes Vnlesse a man be borne of water and the And. 1. Oâ— holie Ghost the particle And is to be taken for the disiunctiue particle Or. Et Contr. de Euchar. c. 10. 11. he will haue the verbe Is in the words of Consecration to stand for Is. 1. Signifieth Signifieth Representeth Sealeth Rainolds in Apol. Thes p. 333. saieth that the Apostle 2. Thessalon 2. in those words Hould traditions c. by the Speach 1. Scripture word Speach comprehendeth other Scriptures or as Iuel in Defens Apol. part 2. cap. 9. sec 1. Will haue it The very substance of the Ghospell Others in Whitaker Contr. 1. q. 6. c. 10. will haue whether put for Also as Beza putteth in the very Whether 1. Also text of that place Whitaker Contr. 11. q. 5. c. 4. by Preists in those words of Preists 1. Chiefe men the psal 99. Moyses and Aaron in his preists will haue to be meant
be in it selfe cleare So Pareus in Gal. 2. lect 25. The Ghospell teacheth good works not of it selfe but borroweth the doctrine of workes from the law So the some Pareus Colleg. Theol. 9. disput 39. The Thessalonians tooke not vpon them to iudge or to debate whether Gods trueth were to be admitted but onely examined Pauls doctrine according to the touchestone of Scripture So Caluin act 17. vers 13. As if Paules doctrine and Gods trueth were not all one The Ghospell in a most large sense is taken for the whole doctrine of Christ and the Apostles Largely for the doctrine both of grace and faith and of repentance and new obedience but straitely and properly for the doctrine of grace by faith So Pareus l. 4. de Iustif c. 3. Finally the Scripture speaketh as the law not as the Ghospell by which distinction they delude manie places of Scripture as is to be seene in Luther de seru arbit to 2. f. 449. Caluin in Math. 19. vers 17. Pareus l. 4. de Iustif cap. 2. Schlusselb to 8. Catal. p. 441. to 2. p. 270. Of S. Peter and the Apostles they haue inuented these Of the Apostles new distinctions S. Peter is first of the Apostles in order not in iurisdiction The Apostles are foundations of the Church as those that found the Church not as those on which it is founded or as Iunius spaketh Cont. 3. l. 1. c. 10. The Church is founded vpon Peter as vpon a pillar not as on a foundation Of Pastors they distinguish That authoritie is in the Of Pastors word which they preach not in themselues That they gouerne the visible Church but not the Catholike That in case of necessitie they are made without mission but not otherwise See l. 1. c. 7. Of the Church they haue brought in these new distinctions Of the Church That for professiō of faith there is one Church visible an other inuisible That she is infallible in fundamentall points but not in others That she is to be heard when she preacheth Scripture but not otherwise That she is the pillar to which trueth is fastened not on which it relieth So saieth Riuet Tractat. 1. sec 39. Or as Andrews writeth in Resp ad Apol. Bellar. c. 14. She is so the pillar of trueth as that she relieth vpon trueth not trueth vpon her That the Church is necessarie to beleiue the Scriptures not to know them So whitaker lib. 3. de Script 396. That the Church is the staye and pillar of trueth not the foundation of trueth Heilbruner in Colloq Ratisb sess 7. Of the Sacraments they distinguish in this sorte They iustifie as signes or seales not as causes They are receiued Of Sacramēts whole and intire of the good but not of the badde that baptisme is the lauer of regeneration passiuely not actiuely So Daneus Contr. 2. c. 12. That baptisme is but one taken wholy but is twoe taken by partes So Beza part Resp ad Acta p. 44. That the Church is cleansed significatiuely by the baptisme of water but really by the baptisme of the spirit So Beza ib. p. 115. or as Polanus saieth in Disp priu p. 37. Sinnes are saied to be blotted out by baptisme not properly but in a figuratiue sense The same Beza in Hutter in Analysi p. 54. saieth I neuer simply saied that baptisme was the obsignation of regeneration in children but of adoption Perkins in Galat. 3. By baptisme actuall guilt is taken away but not potentiall Pareus in Gal. 2. lect 23. Absolutely we are all borne sinners but in regard of the couenant we are borne Christians or Gods confederats Of the Eucharist they haue these distinctions That it Of the Eucharist is the symbolicall bodie of Christ but not his true bodie That Christ his flesh killed doth profit vs but not eaten That it is exhibited in the Supper according to the vertue thereof not according to the substance That when S. Paul saieth 1. Cor. 11. He eateth iudgement to himselfe he meaneth not of damnation but of correction So wolfius in Schusselb l. 1. Theol. art 25. In like sorte they say that Preists forgiue sinne indirectly not directly directly as it is an offense of the Church indirectly as it an offense of God So Spalata l. 5. de Repub. c. 12. Of faith they make these distinctions That one is Catholike Of Faith or vniuersall or historicall an other speciall Againe that one is abstract naked simple an other concrete compounded incarnate So Luther in Gal. 3. to 5. That there is one habituall and actuall of men an other potentiall and inclinatiue of infants So Pareus l. 3. de Iustif c. 14. or as Polanus saieth part 2. thes p. 651. Infants haue not altogether the same faith that men haue yet they haue some thing proportionable Piscator in Thesibus l. 2. pag. 252. Adam before his fall had not iustifying faith or as Pareus writeth l. 1. de Amiss Grat. c. 7. Adam lost faith of the commandement but not faith of the promise Bullinger dec 5. serm 7. Infants are faithfull by the imputation of God Agayne They are baptized in their owne faith to wit which God imputeth to them Zanchius in Supplicat to 7. Manie reprobates are endued with a certaine faith much like to the faith of the elect but not with the same Perkins in Cathol 4. c. 5. There is one generall and Catholike faith wherewith a man beleiueth the articles of faith to be true and an other iustifying or particular faith Thus they distinguish of faith And in like sorte they distinguish of the iustification of faith to wit that it iustifieth relatiuely or correlatiuely not absolutely and as an instrument not as it is a worke Bucanus in Institit loc 3. Faith is saied to be imputed to iustice not properly but relatiuely Polan part 2. thes pag. 197. We are iustefied by faith not properly but relatiuely Reineccius tom 4. Armat cap. 21. Faith iustifieth as well absolutely as considered relatiuely Pareus in Galat. 3. lection 32. Faith is imputed to iustice relatiuely Agayne Faith iustifieth organically And in Colleg. Theol. 2. disp 10. We are saied to be iustified by faith but not formerly nor meritoriously but organically Touching the losse of faith they thus distinguish Zanchius in Supplication citat The elect loose faith in parte but not wholy Beza in Prefat 2. part respons ad Acta Faith sometimes sleepeth sometimes seemeth to be quite lost but yet is not lost Agayne There is a lethargie of faith but no losse The feeling or vse of faith is lost for a time but not faith it selfe Some reprobates do beleiue with a generall and historicall faith common to the Diuels themselues Tilenus in Syntagm capit 43. The faithfull become sometimes outliers but not runawaies or forsakers In like sorte they say that faith without works at the time of iustification is not dead but at other times if it be without workes it is dead Likewise Reineccius
Fratres Finally Luther in Postilla domest Dom. 1. Aduentus saieth Oh sorrow The world dayly becometh worse by The world worse by Luthers doctrine this doctrine and Castalio in Caluin de Prouident These are the things Caluin which thy aduersaries reporte of thy doctrine and warne men to iudge of this doctrine by the fruits thereof For they say that thou and thy disciples carrie manie fruits of thy God that most of you are contentious reuengefull myndfull of wrong and endowed with such vices as thy God doth suggest Where thus I argue in the 27. place Whose doctrine is not onely so opposite to the expresse words of Scripture as was seene in the first booke but also taketh away encouragements to vertue yea all vertue out of the world and remoueth impediments of sinne and giueth allurements theertoe that is opposite to the true sense of holie Scripture But such is the doctrine of Protestants Therefore c. CHAPTER XXVIII THAT PROTESTANTS HAVE NO infallible interpretation of Scripture THE 28. Argument to proue that Protestants must needs contradict the true sense of holie Scripture is because they haue no sure and infallible means to attaine to the true meaning thereof But before we proue that they haue no infallible mean to come to the right sense of Scripture we must proue that Scripture at lest in some points of faith needeth some means to interpret or expound it to wit ether because no where it deliuereth some points of faith so clearely that the onely words thereof sufffice to captiuate the vnderstanding or because though some where it deliuer clearly enough some points of faith yet other where it seemeth so to teach the contrarie as without some infallible interpreter it would seeme vncertaine whether of the twoe it did teach That therefore Scripture doth not of it selfe teach That Scripture needeth an Interpreter clearely all points of faith so as it need no interpreter for that purpose I proue first out of the Scripture it selfe For the holie Eunuch did read the Scripture speaking of the passion of Christ Actor 8. and yet being asked of Philip whether he vnderstood what he read answered And how can I if none shall shew me You see that the Scripture did not clearely foretell the passion of Christ as that a pious man by the onely words thereof without an interpreter could vnderstand the meaning thereof And Luk. vlt. v. 27. And beginning from Moyses and all the Prophets he did interprete vnto them in all the Scriptures the things that were concerning him Et v. 45. Then he opened their vnderstanding that they might vnderstand the Scriptures But if Christs disciples did not vnderstand the Scriptures which spoake of him and the Apostles had need that Christ should open their vnderstanding for to vnderstād the Scriptures it is euident that the Scriptures by themselues doe not so plainely teach all matters of faith as they need no interpretation for to be rightly vnderstood of the faithfull Besides 2. Pet. vlt. it is saied that in S. Pauls epistles there are some things hard to be vnderstood And that these hard things do containe points of faith is cleare both because without cause they should be limited to other things as also because it is added that the learned and vnstable doe depraue these hard things to their owne destruction but such things are especially matters of faith Moreouer if the Scripture did so clearely teach all points of faith that for them it needed no interpreter it would follow that the guift of interpretation had beene superfluously giuen to the Church for to expound Scripture in matters belonging to faith Secondly I proue this out of the Fathers but for breuities sake I will content my selfe with one testimonie of S. Austin He lib. de Vtil cred c 7. to one that saied When I read the Scriptures by my selfe I vnderstood them thus answereth Is it so Without some skill in poetrie thou darest not read Terentian Maurus Asper Cornutus Donatus and manie more are necessarie for to vnderstand anie Poet and thou fallest vpon those bookes without a guide and darest giue thy opinion of them without a teacher Loe how plainely he saieth that we can not vnderstand the Scriptures by our selues and by how familiar an example he proueth it Thirdly I proue it by the verie cōfession of Protestāts For Protest confesse that Scripture alone sufficeth not thus writeth Whitaker Cōt 1. q. 4. c. 1. When Bellarmin maketh this to be the state of the questiō Whether the the Scripture by it selfe be so cleare as without anie interpretatiō it sufficeth of it selfe to determine and decide all controuersies of faith he fighteth without an aduersarie for surely in this point we are not against him Agayne They say that we thinke but falsely that all things in Scripture are plaine and that they without anie interpretation are sufficient to determine all controuersies without Behould how plainely he denieth that Protestants think that Scripture of it selfe without anie interpretatiō is sufficiēt to end all controuersies of faith And the like hath Iunius l. 3. de verb. Dei c. 3. When he graunteth that Scripture needeth an interpreter Kemnice 1. part Exa p. 104. It hath need of the guift and helpe of interpretatiō And the Magdeburgiās Cēt. 1. l. 2. c. 4. The Apostles thought that the Scripture cānot be vnderstood without the holie Ghost and an interpreter and the same meā all other Protestāts who admit that the Scripture is obscure or that the guift of interpretatiō is needfull for the expositiō thereof For doubtles they meane that as well of such places of Scripture wherein points of faith are deliuered as of others this Caluin 4. Inst c 17. § 25. clearely enough insinuateth where whē Catholiks obiected that they had the word of God wherein he affirmeth that the Eucharist is his bodie he answereth Indeed if they may banish the guift of Interpretatiō out of the Church Wherefore he thinketh that there is in the Church the guift of Interpretation euen for to expound Scriptures touching points of faith such as the Eucharist is Furthermore Plessie l. 3. de Eccl. c. 3. writeth that the cōtrouersie of Schisme cānot be properly decided by the Scripture because it is rather a question of fact then doctrine If therefore Scripture by it selfe can determine nether the questiō of Schisme nor yet all controuersies of faith it is manifest that the interpretation of some is necessarie and that also infallible because fallible interpretatiō is not sufficiēt to put vs out of doubt And surely Protestants must needs teach that Scripture by it selfe alone is not sufficient to decide all controuersies of faith both because els it had decided all controuersies amongst themselues or betwene anie that are not obstinate as also because scarce in anie controuersies that are betwixt vs and them Scripture doth so much as in shew directly and immediatly giue sentence for them but they haue need to
the coūsail of creation Gesnerus in Compend loc 30. The Scripture doth plainely testifie that God hath in earnest a will that all should be saued Affelmā de Praed § 36. The Scripture testifieth by words by oath by telling by oblation that God would haue all mē saued They teach that God doth not call al mē to him nor offer his grace to thē l. 1. c. 2. art 21. of which thus writeth Illyricus in Claue part 2. tract 4. Some by misunderstanding predestinatiō vse hurtefully to restraine the vniuersall promises and callings of the Ghospell and to make them particulars by which error of theirs they quite ouerthrow the Ghospell of Christ Gerlachius to 2. disp 15. The plaine testimonies of Scripture do proue the vniuersall will of God Hemingius in Schlus l. 1. Theol. Calu. art 11. Who denie grace to be vniuersall do corrupt the doctrine of the Ghospell oppose themselues and others The like hath Confess Saxon. c. 4. They denie that Gods wrath is appeased by good works l. 1. c. 2. art 16. And yet thus hath Confessio Aug. art 11. We confesse that by good works present calamities are aswaged as I saye teacheth c. 58. The like hath Apol. Conf. c. de resp ad Argum. Touching Christ they denie that he is God of God l. 1. Of Christ c. 3 art 1. And yet the Ministers of Poland in Zāchius epist 1. say it is Iudaisme He denieth say they with the Iews that Christ is God of God They teach that Christs humanitie is not to be inuocated or adored l. 1. c. 3. art 3. Of which thus writeth Caluin Admonit vlt. They pretend that there is no where anie precept of adoring Christs bodie Surely of Christ as man it is properly spoaken God hath exalted him and giuen him c. Wherefore Austin rightly gathereth frō hence that Christs flesh is to be adored in the person of the Mediator They teach that Christ as man is not head of the Church l. 1. c. 3. art 6. And yet thus writeth Kickerman l. 3. System p. 322. There is giuen also to the flesh of Christ for the vnion the highest power of office to be head of the Church This is that which he saieth All power is giuen to me that is full power of gouernement in the Church They teach that Christ is not iudge as he is man l. 1. c. 3. art 8. And yet Lobechius disp 19. Whence it is rightly gathered that Christ hath iudiciall power not onely by his deitie but also by his humanitie as it is euident by manifest testimonies of Scripture The like hath Caluin in Ro. 2. v. 16. They denie that Christs humanitie hath power to giue life l. 1. c. 3. art 4. Of which thus Hutter in Anal. p. 293. Who shall dare to denie that power of giuing life was giuen to Christs humanitie he doth manifestly accuse Christ who Ioan. 6. oftentimes attributeth this power to his flesh They say that Christ did not make a new testamēt l. 1. c. 3. art 9. of which point thus pronounceth Gerlachius to 2. disp 14. This is no other thing then to contradict the Apostle Et Schlusselb l. 1. Theol. art 17. The word of God teacheth that there are twoe couenants or testaments and not one and the same in substance The same saieth Illyricus praefat in nou testam They denie that Christ redeemed vs with his blood or corporall death l. 1. c. 3. art 17. Of which doctrine this censure giueth Serranus contr Hayum part 3. The Scripture affirmeth that we are purged by the blood of Christ that our sinnes are plainely expiated that God by that price paied for vs was truely appeased Calu. res ad Sadolet p. 126. Runne ouer all the Oracles of God if the onely blood of Christ be euery where proposed for the price of satisfaction for pacification for oblation with what bouldenesse darest thou c. Moulins in his Bucler p. 154. saieth that it is the summe of the Ghospell that Christs death was a full and entire satisfaction They say that Christ did not dye for those that are damned l. 1. c. 3. art 18. Of which point thus writeth Hutter in Anal. art 3. It is false which the Caluinists feigne that the sacrifice of the passion and death of Christ was not offered for all but for some onely The impietie of which doctrine all the Scripture doth greatly refute Gerlachius to 2. disput 15. They lye horribly that God the Father did apoint the satisfaction of his Sonne for some onely Against this blasphemie we oppose the most cleare words of the Scripture Polanus part 3. thes Christ died for all Ro. 5. v. 2. Cor. 5. v. 15. And Roger Art 3. putteth it as an error in faith They say that the blood of Christ wherewith we were redeemed is corrupted and now no more in being l. 1. c. 3. art 20. Which Schusselb l. 1. Theol. at 20. proueth to be contrarie to Scripture They denie that the Soule of Christ descended into hell l. 1. c. 3. art 21. Which is contrarie to Scripture as testifieth Lobechius disput 6. in these words We beleiue and embrace with simple faith as true and aggreable to Scripture and the Creeds that Christ truely descended into hell Luther in ps 16. According to the words of the Prophet the Soule of Christ in substance descended into hell They denie that Christ entred to his disciples the dores being shut l. 1. c. 3. art 23. Which is repugnant to Scripture according to Luther in def verb. cenae to 7. The testimonies saieth he of Scripture are manifest that Christ passed through the dores shut vnto his disciples And Zuinglius in Histor resur tom 4. The Euangelist Ioan doth witnesse that the dores were shut and that Iesus entred in the dores being shut They denie that Christ praieth for vs in heauen l. 1. c. 3. art 25. which is opposite to Scripture as Melancthon confesseth in resp ad art Bauar saying He is to be detested who denieth that Christ now praieth for vs sith it is plainely written to the Hebrews Alwaies liuing that he may pray for vs. Et Kemnice in Exam. part 3. c. de Inuoc saieth that it is repugnant to Scripture and depriueth Christ of a parte of his Preisthood Touching Angels and Saints They teach that the glorie Of Saintes of all Saints is equal l. 1. c. 4. art 3. which is against Scripture in the iudgement of Caluin in 1. Cor. 15. v. 41. It is most true and it is proued by the testimonies of Scripture that there be differēt degrees of honor and glorie of the Saints They denie that Angels or Saints pray for vs cap. 4. art 4. which the same Caluin auoucheth to be against Scripture In Zachar. 1. v. 12. The Scripture witnesseth that Angels suppliantly pray to God for vs Zacharie saieth that the Angel praied O Lord of hostes Apol. Conf. Aug. c. de Inuoc We graunt that Angels pray for vs. For there are