hope of reward the third of those qui Deo propter Deum serviunt which serue God onely for his owne sake Pererius Quest. 7. How S. Paul saith called to be an Apostle 1. Pererius note is somewhat curious here as if the Apostle should haue said I dare not call my selfe an Apostle but I am so called of all for here the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 called is not of the nature of a Participle but rather of a noune as Erasmus noteth and Beza and it is as much as if he should say by calling an Apostle so that this word rather sheweth the authoritie by the which he was called then the calling it selfe 2. here may be noted the difference which the fathers make betweene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which both signifie called but the first is vsed of them which are called and obey not the other of them which are effectually called and obey their calling which difference though it may well be obserued here yet it is not derpetuall as Math. 22.19 Many are called and fewe chosen the word is there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beza 3. not much vnlike is Origens distinction betweene electus and vocatus elected to be an Apostle and called to be an Apostle Iudas was an Apostle called but not elected which distinction if by election be vnderstood predestination it holdeth well otherwise in respect of the outward calling Iudas was both elected and called to be one of the twelue Tolet. 4. the difference which Augustine here noteth betweene vocari and congregari to be called and congregate or gathered together is not generally true the first he thinketh to be peculiar to the Church of Christ the other to be vsed of the synagogue and Church of the Iewes for the Prophets in the old Testament doe vse the word of vocation and calling Beza 5. there are two kinds of calling one is generall as to be called to the knowledge of God in what sense it is said many are called but fewe chosen there is a speciall kind of calling as to be called to some speciall office as the Apostle saith No man taketh this honour to himselfe but he that is called of God as Aron Heb. 4.5 S. Paul was called both wayes first to the knowledge of Christ when he was conuerted Act. 9. then he was separated to the office of his Apostleship Act. 13. Tolet. 6. And hereby S. Paul in saying called to be an Apostle noteth two things 1. that he did not take this honour vpon him by intruding himselfe but he was therevnto appointed of God Erasm. 2. he sheweth that the Apostolike dignitie is not attained vnto by any humane merits but by the grace onely and free gift of him that called Perer. ex Thoma Quest. 8. Of the office and calling of an Apostle what it was 1. The word Apostle is taken either aequivoce in an equivocall and improper sense and either in the better sort as Andronicus and Iunta are said to be notable among the Apostles Rom. 16.7 where the word is generally taken for one that is sent or in the worse as some are called false Apostles 2. Cor. 11.13 2. or the word is vsed vnivoce properly and that either in a kind of excellencie as Christ is called our high Priest and Apostle Heb. 3.1 or else it is applyed to the chiefe Ministers of the New Testament which were properly called Apostles Gryneus 2. Hierome maketh fowre kinds of Apostles that is of such as were sent as the word signifieth 1. Some were onely sent from God as the Prophets Isaias Ieremias with the rest 2. Some were ordained of God but by men as Moses consecrated Aaron to be high Priest and Iosuah to succeede him 3. Some are sent by men and not of God as they which enter by corruption and bribes 4. some intrude themselues being neither sent of God nor by men 3. the word Apostle generally signifieth any that is sent yet it properly also expresseth the highest office and dignitie of Apostles in the Newe Testament as S. Paul saith 1. Cor. 12.20 God hath ordained some in the Church as first Apostles secondly Prophets thirdly teachers 4. And though S. Paul were none of the 12. Apostles yet he and Barnabas were also ordained of Christ to be Apostles of equal authoritie with the twelue Quest. 9. Diuerse points wherein consisted the excellencie of the Apostleship 1. The Apostles were such as were immediately called by Christ to preach his gospel through the world as Matth. 28.20 Goe and teach all nations 2. They were such as had knowne Christ in the flesh and were eyewitnesses of his miracles and heard his sermons as S. Iohn saith That which we haue seene and heard declare we vnto you 1. epist. 1.3 And S. Paul though he had not knowne Christ in the dayes of his flesh yet he sawe him now beeing immortall and in glorie by reuelation 3. They had the keies of the kingdome of heauen after a more speciall manner that whatsoeuer they bound or loosed in earth should be bound and loosed in heauen as Peter did bind vp the sinne of Simon Magus and gaue sentence against Ananias and Saphira his wife 4. They had authoritie both to discerne the canonicall Scripture from that which was not canonicall as also to write newe canonicall bookes as Paul Matthew Peter Iohn Iude. 5. They had power to worke miracles to heale all manner of diseases and to cast out deuills yea the verie shadowe of Peter as he passed by was able to heale the sicke Act. 5.15 and the partlets and napkins that were brought from Pauls bodie to the sicke helped them Act. 19.12 6. They had the gift to speake with diuerse tongues and languages Pererius here addeth further that they had another speciall grace that speaking but in their owne tongue yet men of diuerse languages did so vnderstand them as if they had spoken diuerse languages of the same opinion is Erasm. annot Act. 2.8 But Beza well obiecteth that if this had beene so the miracle had not beene in the Apostles speaking but in the peoples vnderstanding neither yet is it to be thought that they spake diuerse languages at one and the same instant as Erasmus obiecteth but that they spake diuersly vnto seuerall people of diuerse languages as they were offred vnto them 7. This speciall prerogatiue the Apostles had to be iudges of men at the latter day as our Sauiour saith Matth. 19.28 That they shall sit vpon 12. seates and iudge the 12 tribes of Israel not that they shall sit as Iudges to giue sentence but by the word and doctrine which they had preached and the world refused shall men be iudged as our blessed Sauiour in this sense saith Ioh. 12.48 He that refuseth me and receiueth not my words the word that I haue spoken it shall iudge him in the last day 8. The Apostles had power by laying on of their hands to giue the holy Ghost which
1. Ioh. 2.2 He is the reconciliation for our sinnes 2. to be our Redeemer v. 24. Through the redemption that is in Christ. 3. to be our Mediator 1. Tim. 2.6 Our Mediator betweene God and man c. 4. to be our doctor and teacher Matth. 23.8 One is your Doctor to wit Christ. 5. to be our aduocate and intercessor 1. Ioh. 2.1 We haue an advocate with the Father Christ Iesus the Iust. 6. to be our defender and deliuerer Isay. 19.20 He shall send them a Sauiour and a great man that shall deliuer them 7. to be our Lawgiuer Iam. 4.12 There is one Lawgiuer which is able to saue and destroy 8. to be a faithfull and true witnesse Apocal. 3.14 These things saith Amen the faithfull and true witnesse 9. to be our iudge Act. 10.42 It is he that is ordained of God iudge of the quicke and dead 10. to be our Sauiour Philip. 3.20 From whence we looke for our Sauiour euen the Lord Iesus so Christ is all things vnto his seruants reis propitiatore â—aptiuis redemptor c. a reconciliation to the guiltie a redeemer to the captiues a Mediator vnto them at variance with God a teacher to the ignorant a lawgiuer to the dissolute an intercessor to them accused a defender to the assaulted a witnesse to the defamed a iudge to the oppressed and to the elect a Sauiour Gorrhan Doct. 12. The same faith both vnder the lawe and Gospel v. 25. Thomas well obserueth vpon this place that seeing the sinnes which were passed and committed vnder the lawe were forgiuen by no other way then in Christ that the righteousnesse of faith was at all times necessarie as S. Peter saith Act. 4.12 Among men there is giuen no other name vnder heauen whereby we must be saued and S. Paul saith 2. Cor. 14.13 That we haue the same spirit of faith 13. Doct. Of our redemption by Christ and the manner thereof v. 24. Thorough the redemption that is in Christ c. 1. This our redemption consisteth in our deliuerance from the power of Sathan sinne and death and in reconciling of vs vnto God 2. there is a double redemption the first in the forgiuenes of our sinnes nowe present the second when we shall be redeemed from corruption and mortalitie in the resurrection 3. This our redemption is not metaphorically so called but it is a verie true redemption there beeing all things concurring in redemption the captiues which are men the redeemer Christ the price his blood and from whom we are redemed from Sathan hell and damnation see contr 22. following 4. They which detaine the captiues are first God as a iust Iudge whom they had offended then Sathan as Gods minister sinne is as the bands death as the tormentor hell as the prison Pareus loc 5. 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. That the Sacraments of the old Testament did not iustifie ex opere operato by the worke wrought and so consequently neither the newe There are diuerse opinions among the Romanists concerning this point in question 1. Some of them think that the Sacraments of the old Testament did not iustifie at all though they were receiued in faith because they were not giuen to that ende to iustifie sed vt oneri essent but to be a burthen so Magister sentent 4. distinct 1. 2. Some are of the contrarie opinion that circumcision did iustifie ex opere operato by the work wrought though there were no faith in the receiuer as Alexander Bonaventure Scotus Gabriel as Bellarmine citeth them 3. But the common opinion on that side is that the sacraments of the old Testament did onely iustifie and conferre grace ex opere operantis by the worke or disposition of the receiuer and this they hold to be the difference betweene the old sacraments and the newe nostra conferunt gratiam illa sola significabant ours doe conferre grace theirs onely signified grace Bellar. and that those Sacraments did not conferre grace Bellarmine would prooue it out of this place v. 1. What is the profit of circumcision c. to the which question the Apostle maketh answear Much euerie way for chiefely because vnto them were committed the oracles of God herein was the preheminence of the Iewe before the Gentiles not that he was iustified by his circumcision but because the Lord gaue his oracles to the circumcised Bellar. lib. 2. de sacram c. 14. Now vpon this conclusion of Bellarmine thus it may be further inferred the sacraments of the old Testament did not iustifie by the worke wrought or conferre grace this Bellarmine graunteth but there was the same substance and efficacie of the old and newe sacraments for the Apostle saith that circumcision was the seale of the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 4.11 and so is baptisme Col. 2.12 And Christ was the substance both of their sacraments and ours for the rocke was Christ 1. Cor. 10.4 the conclusion then followeth that seeing their sacraments did not conferre grace no more doe the sacraments of the Gospel the difference then betweene the old sacraments and the newe is not the substance which is Christ and the proper effect thereof which is to be seales of faith but in respect of the more cleare signification and so in the more liuely illustration and confirmation of our faith for the more full discussing of this matter I referre the reader to the treatise of controuersies Synops. Centur. 2. err 97. Controv. 2. Of the Apochryphal Scriptures v. 2. Vnto them were committed the oracles of God Faius well obserueth hereupon thaâ— seeing all the old Scriptures which were Canonicall were committed vnto the Hebrewes then those books which were called Apochryphal that is of hidden and obscure authoritie are not to be accounted any part of the diuine Canonical Scripture such are the books oâ— the Macchabees of Tobi Iudith with the rest that goe vnder the name of Apochyphaâ— for they were not commended to the Church of the Hebrews because they are not writteâ— in the Hebrewe tongue neither did the Iewes place them in the canon of the Scriptures as Iosephus setteth it downe lib. 1. contra Appion see further Synops. Centur. â—â— error 1. Controv. 3. That the wicked and vnbeleeuers doe not eate the bodie of Christ in the Eucharist v. 3. The Apostle saith Shall their vnbeleefe make the faith of God without effect hence then it will be inferred by the Romanists that the promise of Christs presence in the Sacrament is not evacuated notwithstanding the vnbeleefe of the communicants Answ. True it is that the vnbeleefe of some doth not make Gods promises voide and of none effect in respect of God himselfe who for his part is readie to performe his promise or couenant where the condition is performed and on the behalfe of the elect to whom Gods promises are effectuall they receiuing them by faith but it followeth not that the promises of God should be effectuall vnto vnbeleeuers for Gods promises are made vnto
that Augustine was then a Manichee and we denie not but by this and the like meanes one may be at the first mooued and induced but the firme beleefe of this point is a worke of the spirit See further Synops. Centur. 1. err 5. Controv. 5. Against the invocation of Saints v. 13. Now the God of hope fill you c. The Apostle teacheth vs onely to put our trust in God in calling him the God of hope and so the Prophet Ieremie saith c. 17.5 Cursed is the man that trusteth in man and maketh flesh his arme and in that he wisheth God to fill them with ioy we also learne onely to direct our prayers to God who is the author of all grace hence then is refelled the Popish invocation of Saints which both doth derogate from the honour of God who biddeth vs to call vpon him in the daie of trouble Psal. 50.15 and it deceiueth them with vaine hope that place any confidence in such prayers for Saints cannot helpe vs nor furnish vs with graces necessarie as here ioy peace faith hope are ascribed vnto God as his peculiar gifts it is then in vaine to pray O Saint Paul or Saint Peter helpe mee and haue mercie vpon mee as Papists vse to pray See further of this point Synops. Centur. 2. err 30. Controv. 6. Of the certaintie of saluation against the Popish diffidence and doubtfulnesse v. 13. That yee may abound in hope c. This word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to abound sheweth a fulnes and certaintie of hope which is nothing else but beeing armed with a costant and assured hope to continue vnto the end and out of this place we haue three speciall arguments for this certaintie of hope and assurance of saluation 1. The Apostle saith the God of hope fill you with all ioy but where is doubtfulnesse of mind and perplexitie of conscience there is no assured hope but such vncertaintie rather bringeth anxietie feare and greefe so Origen saith he which beleeueth and is armed by the vertue of the spirit certum est quod plenitudinem gaudij semper habet it is certaine that he hath alwaies fulnes of ioy where then there is fulnes of ioy there is abounding also in hope but by faith we haue fulnes of ioy therefore also fulnes of hope 2. the word here vsed to abcund in hope sheweth a certaintie of hope as Haymo well interpreteth that by the vertue of the holy Ghost plenam habeatis spem aeternae remunerationis yee may haue full hope of the eternall reward so also the ordinarie glosse which Gorrhan followeth vt per ista habita certiores sitis de aeterna beatitudine that by these things beeing once had yee may be certaine of eternall happines 3. the prayers of the faithfull cannot be in vaine but are effectuall to obtaine things appertaining to saluation but the Apostle here prayeth for abundance of hope and perseuerance to the end therefore the faithfull are sure so to abound and to perseuere see further also hereof Synops. Pap. Centur. 4. err 25. Controv. 7. Against the power of free will in spirituall things v. 13. The God of peace c. in that the Apostle prayeth vnto God to fill them with ioy and peace in beleeuing an argument may be framed against that old Pelagian heresie touching the power of mans free-will in things belonging to eternall life which argument is much vrged by Augustine against the Pelagians for if it were in mans power to attaine vnto these graces as faith hope then it were superfluous assidiuis precibus à Deo emendicare to begge them of God by continuall prayer Martyr See further hereof Synops. Cen. 4. err 43. Controv. 8. Whether the Apostles excusing of himselfe doe derogate from the authoritie of this epistle v. 16. I haue somewhat boldly after a sort written this may seeme to extenuate the authoritie of this Epistle for he which excuseth himselfe confesseth a fault but in the Canonicall writings no fault or error at all is to be admitted And yet if this excuse made by the Apostle doe not extenuate the authoritie of this Epistle no more can that excuse of the author of the booke of Macchabees preiudice the authoritie thereof 2. Maccha 15.39 where the Author saith thus If I haue done well and as the storie required it is the thing that I desired but if I haue spoken slenderly and barely it is that I could what doth this our Author say more then Saint Paul 2. Cor. 11.6 If I be rude in speach yet am I not rude in knowledge to this purpose Bellarm. lib. 1. de verb. c. 15. Contra. 1. Euery one which vseth excuse doth not acknowledge a fault but he that so excuseth as that he craueth pardon for his fault But so doth not Paul here he maketh an excuse to preuent an obiection as if he should haue said it may seeme vnto you that I haue written somewhat boldly but indeed I haue not I haue onely vsed that boldnes which became mine office according to the grace giuen vnto mee he therefore doth not craue pardon of a fault but defendeth and iustifieth that which might seeme to haue beene a fault 2. But the author of the bookes of the Macchabees doth excuse himselfe farre otherwise for he doubteth whether he haue well written or not as he ought and he craueth pardon if he faile saying it is that I could as if he should say he were worthie to be pardoned because he did it as well as he could this sheweth that he writ not by a diuine spirit for the spirit of God vseth not to craue pardon of any thing done amisse 3. And beside other arguments there are which doe make against the authoritie of this booke as 1. because all the Canonicall Scriptures were written by Prophets but in the Macchabees time there was no Prophet 2. Eusebius and Hierome thinke that Iosephus was the writer of those bookes but his writings are not canonicall 3. the author saith that he did epitomise the worke of Iason the Cyrenian but the spirit of God vseth not the help of others writings 4. this booke was not receiued into the Canon of the Iewes to whom all the oracles of God were committed 5. and it containeth diuerse things contrarie to the Canonicall Scriptures as is shewed else where Synops. Centur. 1. p. 15. 4. S. Paul in that place to the Corinthians excuseth not the slendernes of his writing as though he had written otherwise then he should but he iustifieth the simplicitie of his stile as his aduersaries did take it because he would not by humane eloquence obscure the vertue of the crosse of Christ which consisted not in the vaine shew of words but in the power and euidence of the spirit 1. Cor. 2.4 Controv. 9. That the Scriptures are perfect and absolute conteining whatsoeuer is necessarie to saluation both touching doctrine and manners v. 15. I haue written to you after a sort to put you in remembrance
beleefe in vs and on Gods behalfe his efficacious power Gryneus In the amplyfying and tractation of this definition all the rest of the epistle is bestowed as this proposition that we are iustified by the Gospel that is by faith and beleefe in Christ is further amplified by the contrarie that we cannot be iustified either by the workes of nature c. 11.2 or of the Lawe c. 3. but by grace and faith c. 4. by the effects of iustifying faith inward the peace of conscience c. 5. outward the fruites of holinesse c. 6. by the contrarie operation of the lawe which reuealeth sinne c. 7. but the Gospel freeth from condemnation c. 8. by the cause the free election of God c. 9. by the subiect the Gentiles called the Iewes reiected c. 11. See more hereof concerning the Methode in the generall argument of the epistle before 3. For the kind of epistle It is principally definitiue and demonstratiue for he defineth and determineth that we are iustified neither by the workes of nature nor of the law but by faith in Christ and prooueth the same by most euident demonstration Beside this epistle hath somewhat of all other kinds of epistles which are called accessaria accessarie and secundarie as it is both gratulatorie reioycing for their faith c. 1. and it is reprehensorie rebuking the Gentiles for their licentiousnes it is also exhortatorie exhorting to holinesse of life c. 6.12 and it is deprecatorie he praieth and maketh request praying for encrease of grace in them and for himselfe that he might haue some good occasion to come vnto them Aretius 4. Places of doctrine 1. Doct. Of the godly custome and vse of the Church in laying the foundation of religion which is Catechising This commendable vse was taken vp by the Apostles themselues as the Apostle sheweth Hebr. 6.1 he calleth it the doctrine of beginnings and the laying of the foundation as of repentance faith baptisme the resurrection of eternall iudgement And so in this epistle the Apostle deliuereth a perfect forme of catechisme which consisteth of three parts of the miserie of man by nature his reparation and restitution by grace and then of his thankfulnes afterward in his obedience of life for the benefits receiued which three parts the Apostle doth at large handle in this epistle what man is by nature he sheweth c. 1.2.3 what by grace c. 4.5.8 and of the fruits of regeneration he entreateth c. 6. c. 12. So that it is false which Bellarmine affirmeth that the Apostle deliuered no forme of catechising to the Church l. 4. de verb. Dei c. 4. for he doth it most plainly euidently in this epistle Pareus 5. Places of controversie 1. Contr. That it is knowne that this Epistle was written by S. Paul and is of diuine authoritie by the Epistle it selfe Bellarmine affirmeth that to know that any Scripture is diuine or Canonicall it can not be concluded out of the Scripture it selfe neither which were the writings of S. Paul or that the Gospel of S. Matthew was written by Matthew without the tradition of the Church Bellar. lib. 4. de verb. c. 4. Contra. 1. That the Epistles of Saint Paul are of diuine and Canonicall authoritie it appeareth euidently out of the writings themselues for they beeing written by Saint Paul who had the spirit of God 1. Corinth 7.40 and had Christ speaking in him 2. Cor. 13.13 and was taught of God from whome he receiued his doctrine by reuelation Gal. 1.12 it is not to be doubted but that his holy writings proceeded from the spirit of God and so are of diuine authoritie and he himselfe doubteth not to make them canonicall as he saith Gal. 6.16 Whosoeuer walketh according to this canon or rule c. And he denounceth anathema if any yea an Angel should teach any other Gospel then he had preached Gal. 1. 2. Likewise that S. Paul was the author and writer of them it is euident both by the inscription and title and by the salutation in the ende of euery epistle and the benediction which he vseth The grace of our Lord Iesus Christ be with you all which he saith is the token or marke to know his epistles by 2. Thess. 3.17 3. The tradition of the Church is an vncerten thing that which is vncerten can not be a rule and measure of that which is most certen the testimonie of men can not assure vs of the testimonie of God Christ saith Ioh. 5.33 Ye sent vnto Iohn and he bare witnesse vnto the truth but I receiue not the record of men c. 36. I haue a greater witnes then the witnes of Iohn c. 2. Contr. That S. Pauls epistles are not so obscure that any should be terrified from the reading thereof In the Preface to Toletus commentarie the epistles of S. Paul are affirmed to be hard out of Hierome and Origen contr Whitakerum hareticum against Whitaker that heretike as it pleaseth that rayling taxer to call that learned godly man Contr. 1. True it is that as S. Peter saith some things are hard in S. Pauls epistles 1. Pet. 3.16 he saith not that many things are hard or that the Epistles are hard but onely some few things in them this letteth not but that his Epistles may safely be read of all that read them with an humble minde desirous to profit thereby the danger is onely to the vnlearned and vnstable which peruert them as they doe the rest of the Scriptures as S. Peter in the same place saith 2. And euen those hard places may be made easie by diligent reading as Chrysostome giueth this instance like as we know their minde whome we loue and obserue and are familiar with them vtique si lectioni cum animi alacritate volueritis attendere c. so you if you will with cheerfull attention giue your selues to reading ye shall neede no other helpe c. hinc vt innumera mala nata sunt quod scripturae ignorantur hence so many euills haue sprung vp because the Scriptures are not knowne hence so many heresies c. the ignorance then not the reading of Scripture breedeth heresies and thus he concludeth oculos ad splendorem Apostolicorum verborum aperiamtu let vs open our eyes to receiue the brightnes of the Apostolicall words c. they doe not then cast darknes vpon our eyes but bring brightnes and clearnes Chrysost. argum in epist. ad Rom. 3. Controv. Against the Ebionites which reteined the rites and ceremonies of Moses Whereas the Ebionites thought the rites of the Law necessarie and ioyned them together with the Gospel which heresie did much trouble the Church in the Apostles time and is at large confuted in the epistles of S. Paul to the Galatians and Colossians the same also in this epistle is conuinced and confounded for the Apostle renounceth the workes of the Law whether the ceremoniall and morall as hauing no part in the matter of iustification which he concludeth to be by faith without
Vriah to be killed and the same Ioab also was Dauids instrument to number the people though be misliked it himselfe 3. They which giue counsell or any kind of helpe or assistance to the euill for which cause Iehosaphat was reprooued of the Prophet Iehu because he aided the idolatrous king of Israel in battell and here they also are included which doe promote vnworthie and vnmeete persons to office and therefore S. Paul chargeth Timothie to lay hands suddenly on none neither to be partaker of other sinnes 1. Tim. 5.4 They which commend the wicked in their euill doing and so extenuate their sinne as Psal. 10.5 the wicked man is said to blesse the couetous 5. They which by any signe in word or deede seeme to giue consent vnto the sinnes of others as Saul kept their garments which stoned Steuen and to gaue consent vnto his death 6. They which are partakers with others in their sinne and part stakes with them as Psal. 50.18 When thou seest a theese thou runnest with him and art paraker with the adulterer 7. They which doe not rebuke and correct others when it is in their power which was the sinne of Hell who vsed too much connivence and forbearance toward his sonnes 1. Sam. 2.8 They which giue intertainement vnto the wicked as vnto theeues robbers strumpets and such like 9. Such as conceale and keepe secret others sinnes whereby their heart is hardened and so they continue in their sinne Hyper. Quest. 77. Whether all the Gentiles were guiltie of these sinnes which are here rehearsed by the Apostle Many among the Gentiles in respect of the rest were men of ciuill life and gaue example of diuerse morall vertues such among the Grecians were Aristides Phacion Socrates among the Romanes the Scipioes Catoes with others But yet none of them are exempted out of the Apostles reprehension 1. because none of them were free from the most of these sinnes though they were not guiltie of all 2. they wanted true faith and therefore their vertues were but speciosa peccata goodly sinnes 3. And in respect of their naturall corrupâ— disposition euen the best of them were enclined vnto all these sinnes sauing that the Lord bridled in some of them the corruption and badnesse of their nature that there might be some order and gouernement among the heathen otherwise their common wealths would soone haue come to confusion 4. And those which gaue any good example among the heathen were so fewe that they are not to be named among the rest Peter Martyr 4. Places of doctrine v. 1. Paul a seruant of Iesus Christ. Christs seruice is perfect freedome there are three kinds of seruice 1. the seruice of God which is either generall belonging to all Christians which is the seruice of their profession whereof the Apostle speaketh Rom. 6.19 or speciall which is in that vocation to the which any are called whereof see Matth. 25.14 Luk. 12.43 2. Ciuill seruice which may very well stand with the seruice of God see 1. Cor. 7.11 3. there is the seruice of sinne Rom. 8.16 and seruice to please men Gal. 1.10 and this seruice is contrarie to the seruice of God Pareus Called to be an Apostle There are two kinds of calling one is vnto saluation the other is to some office in this life The first is either externall which is generall to all by the light of nature and knowledge of the creatures especiall by the preaching of the word or internall by the inward working of Gods spirit which is peculiar to the elect The calling to some function in this life is either priuate as of men to their seuerall vocations or publike which is either Ciuill of Magistrates in the time of peace leaders and Captaines in the time of warre or Ecclesiasticall which is either immediate from God as of the Prophets and Apostles or mediate by men which is either ordinarie such as is the ordination of Bishops and Ministers now or extraordinarie by lot as was the election of Matthias Act. 1. To be an Apostle There is a threefold difference betweene Apostles and other Pastors 1. They were immediatly called of Christ the other mediately are appointed by men 2. in respect of their doctrine and writings both the authoritie thereof they are free from error and are part of the Canonicall Scripture but so are not the doctrine and writings of the other they must be subiect to the writings of the Apostles as also their doctrine was confirmed and ratified by miracles Mart. 3. in their authoritie and office the Apostles were not tied vnto any place but were sent to preach to the whole world but Pastours now haue their particular and speciall Churches Pareus Set apart God the father set apart Paul to be an Apostle Gal. 1.1 and Iesus Christ Act. 9. and the holy Ghost Act. 13.2 these three then are one God for it belongeth onely vnto God to send Prophets and Apostles and Pastors to his Church therefore all such are condemned whome the Lord hath not sent Ierem. 14.15 Gospel of God which is afterward vers 16. and chap. 15.19 and in other places called the Gospel of Christ which is an euident testimonie of Christs eternall Godhead Pareus v. 2. Which he had promised before c. Concerning the Gospel of Christ 1. Euangelium the Evangel signifieth a ioyfull message of the grace of Christ 2. though the Gospel be diuers in circumstance for there is Gospel promised by the Prophets and the Gospel performed by Christs comming yet it is one and the same in substance 3. the efficient and author thereof is God it is called the Gospel of God the materiall cause is Iesus Christ God and man the formall the declaration and manifestation of him to be the Sonne of God v. 4. the end is to saluation v. 16. the effects obedience to the faith v. 5. v. 3. concerning his Sonne here the person of Christ is described to be both God and man Man as he was borne of the seede of Dauid and he was also declared to be the Sonne of God Piscator According to the flesh In that the Sonne of God is said to be made of the seede of Dauid after the flesh it sheweth against the Nestorian heretikes that there are not two Sonnes but one Sonne the same both God and man and that according to the flesh he was made there the propertie of his natures is still reserued against the Eutychians and Suenkefeldians which destroied the vnitie of Christs humane nature By reason of this vnion of the diuine and humane nature of Christ that which was done in one of his natures is ascribed to his whole person and here we are to consider of a threefold communion of the properties of Christs diuine and humane natures one vnto the other 1. some things are really common to both his whole person and natures as such things which belong to the office of the Redeemer as to sanctifie
eviciâ—â—â— probavimus we haue prooued before Oecumen Genevens we haue sufficiently shewed by reason that all are vnder sinne so also the Syrian interpreter readeth pronuntiaviâ—â—s we haue pronounced and gloss interl rationibus ostendimus we haue shewed by reason 2. Vnder sinne which signifieth three things 1. that although the act of sinne doe passe yet there remaineth still a blot in the soule and conscience and a guiltines of sinne as Iosu. 22.17 we are not clensed from the wickednes of Peor vnto this day Perer. 2. to be vnder sinne is tenerireatu to be held guiltie of sinne Pareus to be subiect vnto the curse and malediction due vnto sinne Piscat and so guiltie to euerlasting damnation 3. and beside it signifieth the seruitude vnder sinne that they doe walke and liue in sinne and can not be deliuered from the tyrannie thereof Tolet. as to be vnder the law is to be in subiection thraldome and vnder the curse of it Pareus 16. Quest. Whence the Apostle alleadgeth these testimonies v. 10. to 18. 1. All these allegations according to the vulgar Latin edition are taken out of the 13. Psalme where all those sentences stand together in this order wherein they are cited here And one Lindanus a Popish writer would prooue hereby the Hebrew text to haue beene corrupted by the Iewes because onely v. 10 11 12. are there found Psal. 14. according to the Hebrew originall and he affirmeth that he had seene an Hebrew copie thought to haue beene Augustins the Monke that was sent into England where these eight verses doe stand in the Hebrew text as they are here alleadged by S. Paul But Pererius misliketh this assertion 1. he vrgeth Hieromes opinion who was more auncient then that Augustine who findeth not all these sentences in the Hebrew 2. it is not like that the Iewes could all conspire to corrupt the Greeke text who otherwise are found to haue beene alwaies most carefull to preserue the Scriptures vncorrupted neither had they any reason to rase out any of those sentences seeing therein is contained no manifest prophecie of Christ. 3. and concerning that Hebrew copie Ioannes Isaac sometime professor of the Hebrew tongue at Coâ—â—â— writing against Lindanus thinketh it was patched together by some vnskilfull Hebriciâ—â— who might turne the Latine into Hebrew 2. Pererius thinketh that the Hebrew text is not corrupted in that place yet he would haue the vulgar Latine translation to be retained because of the antiquitie thereof which â—â—serteth all those verses in the 14. Psalme But if he acknowledge the Hebrew to be perfect and the Latine translation to put in more then is in the Hebrew why should not the Latine text be corrected according to the Hebrew 3. Therefore the truth is as Hierome thinketh proem l. 16. comment in Esaiam that this whole text is not taken out of the 14. Psalme sed partim ex Isaia partim ex Psalmis esse contextum but is framed together partly out of the Prophet Isai partly out of the Psalmes the 10 11 12 verses here are alleadged out of the 14. and 53. Psalme the first part of the 14. v. is out of the 5. Psal. v. 10. the second out of the 140. Psal. v. 3. the 14. v. out of the 10. Psal. v. 7. the 15 16 17. v. out of Isa. 59.7 8. the 18. v. out of Psal. 36.1 Pareus the same is also affirmed by Origen that these testimonies are cited partly out of the Psalmes partly out of the Prophet Isai but the 16. v. Destruction and calamitie are in their waies he saith non recordor vbi scriptum sis c. I remember not where it is written but I thinke it may be found in some one of the Prophets c. this may seeme strange that Origen so diligent a searcher of the Scriptures should not finde where these words are seeing they follow in the very same place of the Prophet Isai as Hierome also obserueth 4. But that is well obserued by Origen that whereas S. Paul doth not follow the very same words which are in the Psalme puto dari in hoc Apostolicam authoritatem I thinke saith he that this is done by Apostolike authoritie to teach vs when we vse the testimonie of Scripture sensum magis ex eo quam verba rapiamus that we rather take the sense then the words c. 17. Qu. Of the matter and order obserued by the Apostle in citing these testimonies In these testimonies the Apostle first sheweth the sinnes of men then their punishment their sinnes either of omission in leauing some duties vndone to v. 13. then of commission in committing such things as were euill to v. 16. the sinnes of omission are either concerning faith or manners concerning faith three waies nec credunt per fidem they neither beleeue by faith there is none iust nec intelligunt per scripturam neither doe they vnderstand by the Scripture nor seeke God per investigationem by searching after him v. 10 11. Concerning manners 1. they decline out of the way in turning away from God 2. they are become vnprofitable that is to their brethren 3. neither doe they good that is to themselues v. 12. The sinnes committed are of two sorts ad inducendum alios in errorem to bring others into error ad incutiendum terrorem and to smite into them terror the first is done three waies 1. openly in corrupting with euill words their mouth is an open sepulchre 2. secretly in deceiuing they haue vsed their tongues to deceit 3. in cloaking their malice with fained words the poison of aspes is vnder their lippes They doe strike terror into them 1. mala imprecando in wishing euill their mouth is full of cursing 2. necem intentando by threatning death and destruction there is bitternes in their mouth 3. in shedding of blood Then followeth their punishment which is of two sorts 1. poena non culpa a punishment and no fault either eternall destruction or temporall calamitie with the meritorious cause in their waies 2. there is a punishment which is both a punishment and a sinne which is first their wilfull ignorance and blindnes v. 17. they haue not knowne the way of peace then their obstinacie the feare of God is not before their eyes Gorrhan But this distribution may seeme to be too curious we therefore will content our selues with this plaine enumeration of sinnes which are here set downe by the Apostle 1. be accuseth all men of iniustice and vnrighteousnes there is none righteous v. 10. 2. of ignorance and blindnes there is none that vnderstandeth v. 11. 3. of apostasie and falling away from God to abominable idolatrie v. 12. 4. of deceit and craft 5. of cursing and bitternes v. 13. 6. of crueltie their feete are swift to shed blood 7. they are turbulent and enemies to peace v. 17. 8. they are prophane casting off all feare of God v. 18. Pareus 18. Quest. How none are said to be iust seeing Noah and other
to shew the difference between the originall of the flesh which was from Abraham and of the soule from God but this distinction is nothing pertinent to the thing in question 4. Therefore by according to the flesh the Apostle rather vnderstandeth the works of the law so Theodoret the ordin glosse and the reason hereof is this because the Apostle doth not simply denie vnto Abraham all kind of righteousnes but that which is by works Beza so Phil. 3.3.9 the righteousnes in the flesh of the law are taken for the same with the Apostle Gryn But in this sense great aduantage may seeme to be giuen vnto the Popish sophisters who thinke that onely Abrahams works done before he had faith while he was yet in the flesh are excluded from iustification not those which came after vpon the which reason Pareus seemeth to incline to the other exposition to ioyne according to the flesh with Abraham our father But we neede not for this reason to refuse the other exposition for euen the workes which proceede from faith if any merit or worthines be reposed in them may be said to be after the flesh for the Apostle opposeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by fauour and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by debt v. 4. that then which is by debt and merit of the worke is according to the flesh and is opposite to fauour and grace Quest. 3. Of the meaning of the 2. verse v. 2. If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath wherein to reioyce 1. Origen Ambrose Chrysostome doe thus frame the argument if Abraham were iustified by workes he had no glorie with God but he had true glorie with God therefore he was not iustified by workes so also Faius collecteth the argument assuming affirmatiuely but the assumption is put negatiuely with the Apostle but not with God so that thus rather the argument holdeth if Abraham were iustified by workes he hath wherein to glorie with God he hath somewhat to glorie in as beeing iustified by his workes but he had not wherein to glorie with God Ergo thus Beza Pareus 2. Gorrhan maketh all this verse the proposition If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath wherein to glorie but not with God but such glorie but not with God Abraham had not for if it be vnderstood of true glorie in deed such glorie none can haue but from God if false glorie among men Abraham would no such glorie But in this collection the Apostle should denie that Abrahams workes had no praise or glorie at all among men whereas the Apostle seemeth to graunt so much that his workes might be praise worthie among men but before God they could not iustifie him 3. Chrysostome hath here a distinction of glorying one is by workes which a man cannot haue with God an other is by faith which is before God and Pet. Martyr approoueth this distinction and thinketh that by the glorie of God c. 3.23 are depriued of the glorie of God the Apostle meaneth our iustification by faith wherein the glorie of God sheweth it selfe but an other word is vsed there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth glorie here the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 glorying or reioycing and indeede before God we cannot glorie either of works or faith for he is said to glorie with God that can bring any thing to God of his owne now seeing faith also is a gift of God we cannot glorie in it as the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 4.7 why gloriest or boastest thou as though thou hadst not receiued it But whereas the Apostle saith he that glorieth let him glorie in the Lord he speaketh not of any glorying of any gift which any man hath but of the meere grace of God and the meaning is let him giue all glorie vnto God confessing that he hath nothing of himselfe 4. Now whereas the Apostle saith he hath wherein to glorie Oecumenius vnderstandeth this of glorying in himselfe but so would not Abraham glorie at all among men therefore by glorying here is vnderstood nothing els but the praise and commendation of men his workes might cum honor abilem reddere make him honourable with men but not with God Lyran. Tolet here distinguisheth betweene the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here vsed which signifieth praise and glorie and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before expressed c. 20.23 which signifieth glorying boasting annot 3. but this distinction to be perpetuall he sheweth not Quest. 4. How the Apostle alleadgeth that testimonie concerning the imputation of Abrahams faith for righteousnesse v. 4. 1. The Apostle readeth in the passiue it was imputed whereas Gen. 15.16 whence this testimonie is cited it is put in the actiue vaiaâ—h shebeha and he imputed it 1. the reason hereof Tolet. annot 5. thinketh to be that the Septuagint and the Hebrewes did read without prickes and then the word might be taken either actiuely or passiuely but this is no found opinion to thinke that the Hebrew pricks came in so late for so there should be great vncertentie of the Scripture and further set the pricks aside yet the word is not expressed with the same letters when it is actiuely and passiuely put for Gen. 15.6 the word is as before it is set downe but Psal. 106.31 where it is put passiuely the word is techasheb it was imputed the letters are diuers and further in this place Gen. 15.6 there is an affix of the feminine gender which sheweth a difference in the verie letters of the word beside the pricks 2. some thinke that the Apostle writing by the same spirit which Moses did by his Apostolike authoritie did so cite this Scripture Faius but this would haue giuen great offence vnto the Iewes and converted Gentiles if the Apostles should haue cited the Scriptures otherwise then they were found in the old Testament 3. Therefore it was more safely affirmed that the Apostle followeth the Septuagint which was the receiued translation among the Gentiles Mar. specially seeing they keepe the sense of the place and the rather because this reading in the passiue is warranted by an other Scripture Psal. 106.31 where it is read in the passiue and it was imputed vnto him 2. An other difference in this reading is that the Apostle beside that he changeth the voice turning the actiue into the passiue doth not interpret the Hebrew affix he imputed 〈◊〉 that is Abrahams faith God imputed for so the word cenunah faith beeing vnderstood after the manner of the Hebrewes in the verbal word heemin he beleeued answereth vnto the affix ha of the feminine gender but this the Apostle afterward euidently supplieth v. 9. that faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnes 3. A third difference there is that in the Hebrew text there is no preposition set before the word tzedekah iustice as here the Apostle translateth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for righteousnes but there Moses saith he imputed it vnto him for righteousnes but this doubt is easily remooued for Psal.
death of the bodie for Christ doth not separate from Christ but ioyneth more surely vnto Christ. 2. Likewise Chrysostome derideth their conceit which take here anathema in the better part and interpret it to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a treasure laid vp for thiâ— had beene no great matter for the Apostle to haue to wished qâ—is delicatulorum hominum sic non optaret the most nice and daintie man might haue so wished Chrysostome and againe in this sense the Apostle woul not haue said à Christo from Christ but coram Christo before Christ Mart. 3. Some referre this wish of the Apostle vnto the time before his conuersion and here are three opinions 1. Some giue this sense that for the zeale of the Iudaicall law he wished then to be separate from Christ and choose to be a persecutor of his disciples Lyran. and the ordinar gloss following Ambrose 2. the commentarie going vnder the name of Hierome saith that the Apostle doth now lament and bewayle his sinne for that before his conversion he wished to be separate from Christ for his brethren sake ex Pareo 3. Tolet preferreth this sense I wished to be an anathema from Christ that is to be a knowne persecutor of the Christians and to be held of them accursed for my brethrens sake Tolet. in commentar But these interpretations faile diuersly 1. this had beene no great matter for Paul yet beeing an enemie to Christ to haue wished for the loue vnto his brethren so to continue still Perer. disput 3. 2. neither had this beene to the Apostles purpose who intendeth by this his wish to shewe his loue vnto his brethren but if he had onely spoken of his desire before his conversion it might haue beene answeared that howsoeuer he might stand well affected to his brethren then his minde was altered now Mart. Perer. 3. The Apostle had taken a vaine oath herein for there was none which doubted of his hatred to the name of Christ before his calling that he needed not to haue confirmed it by an oath Pareus 4. neither doth he lament here for his owne sinne but for the present condition and state of his brethren as is euident v. 4. where he reckoneth vp the auntient priviledges of his nation which they had now depriued themselues of Mart. Pareus 4. Some thinke that the Apostles meaning is that he could haue wished his calling had beene deferred yet and that he for a time had beene separated from Christ and not to haue beene yet called but that his brethren might haue come to Christ before him but the same difficultie remaineth still for if S. Paul might haue wished before to be an anathema from Christ for the glorie of God why not also nowe ex Mart. 5. Some thinke that by an anathema is vnderstood onely dilatio visionis fruitionis Christi a deferring of the vision and enioying of Christ that S. Paul to conuert his brethren to the faith wished still to remaine in the flesh and to be absent from Christ as see the like Philip. 2.23 so Oecumenius Lyranus But this is not to be an anathema from Christ onely to haue the fruition of glorie deferred Perer. numer 12. 6. Some vnderstand this separation from Christ to be indeede depriued of the glorious vision of Christ but they will haue it limited for a time volebat ad tempus privari fruitione Christi he would for a time be depriued of the fruition of Christ for the good of his brethren Thomas in comment But he that is once separated and standeth as accursed from Christ cannot but alwaies so remaine 7. Some thinke that S. Paul spake thus impetu quodam charitatis wishing himselfe to be damned for his brethren by a violent passion of charitie and not well considering what he wished But then S. Paul had sinned if he made such a vowe or wish quadam incogitantia without any consideration or bethinking himselfe it had shewed great rashnesse ex Mart. Pareo 8. Some thinke that the Apostle vseth an hyperbolicall speach when one speaketh more then he intendeth as the Prophet Dauid saith They that hate me are more then the hatres of mine head Psal. 69.4 so here the Apostle the more to expresse his loue toward his brethren doth vse this hyperbolicall speach as though euen for their sakes he wished to be a castaway Dyonis Carthusian But thus they will onely make this a colourable and flourishing speach of the Apostle which was no doubt a zealous and serious wish and desire in him 9. Pareus maketh mention of an odde interpretation which he heard deliuered by one ann 1568. that afterward played the Apostata from Christ who by Christ in this place vnderstood the anoynted Priests alleadging for his authoritie Eusebius who in that prophesie Dan. 9. so vnderstandeth the word Messiah Christ But beside that the word Christ beeing absolutely put without any addition is not so taken in Scripture and Eusebius interpretation is therein distasted and misliked of the best interpreters this had beene a vaine and superfluous wish in S. Paul for in the beginning of his conversion he was odious to the high Priests and euen then they tooke counsell to kill him Act. 9.23 10. There remaine then two expositions which may be ioyned both together in one Chrysostome saith that S. Paul desired priuari fruitione gloria Christi to be depriued of the glorie and fruition of Christ Oecumenius goeth yet further that he wisheth vt per â—eam perditionem glorificaretur Christus that Christ by my vtter perishing may be glorified in the saluation of the Iewes and Cassianus c. 6. collat 23. interpreteth to be an anathema from Christ aeternis addici supplicijs to be addicted vnto euerlasting punishment Both these doe hang one vpon another for he which is depriued of euerlasting ioy is cast downe to euerlasting punishment This then is the Apostles desire aterni boni fruitione privari to be depriued of euerlasting happinesse Martyr excludi ab omni salutis expectatione to be excluded from all hope and expectation of saluation Calvin he wisheth aeternam abiectionem à Christo to be cast off for euer from Christ Pareus abijci in aeternos cruciatus to be cast into euerlasting torment Osiander And that this was the Apostles meaning appeareth by the like zealous desire in Moses who also wished to be blotted out of the booke of life rather then God should haue beene dishonoured in the destruction of Israel both of these were readie suo exitio aliorum saluti subvenire by their destruction to haue helped forward the saluation of others Gryneus Mart. But against this interpretation it is diuersly obiected 1. Obiect S. Paul could not wish to be separated from Christ but he must desire also to be alienated from his loue and fauour which thing to desire it had beene sinne Answ. Chrysostome answereth that the Apostle would not by any meanes be separated from the loue of Christ nam propter Christi
in seeking asking invocating as here the Apostle saith lib. 1. de iustific c. 17. Contra. 1. The Apostle saith not neither can it be concluded out of his words that we are saued by calling vpon God but invocation is a sure note and argument of saluation because it is an euidence of their faith whereby they are iustified and saued 2. but faith iustifieth onely passiuely as it apprehendeth Christ not actively in respect of the work and merit thereof for we are iustified by the righteousnes of God by faith in Christ Rom. 3.22 but the act and work of faith is a part of mans righteousnes not of Gods therefore so faith iustifieth not but as it apprehendeth the righteousnes of God in Christ See further Synops. Centur. 4. err 53. Controv. 17. That faith onely iustifieth not invocation Bellarmine out of this place whosoeuer calleth c. would confirme an other of his errors that faith pro parte sua for it part iustifieth if other things be not wantings for saluation is here ascribed to invocation lib. 1. de iustif c. 12. Contra. 1. The same answer may suffice for here saluation is not ascribed vnto invocation neither doth the Apostle shew how but who they are which shall be saued namely they which call vpon him which is an act and effect of faith for without faith there is no invocation the argument then followeth not they which call vpon God shall be saued therefore for their calling vpon God they shall be saued for this were like as if one should reason out of these words of S. Paul Act. 27.31 Except these abide in the shippe ye can not be safe all that did abide in the shippe were safe therefore because they did abide in the shippe they were safe for the shippe brake and some were saued by swimming some vpon boards and other pieces of the shippe Controv. 18. Against the invocation of Saints v. 14. How shall they call on him in whom they haue not beleeued c. This place is strongly vrged against the Popish inuocation of Saints by our Protestant writers as Pareus Faius and others for if we are to call vpon none but in whom we must beleeue and we are onely to beleeue in God Ioh. 14.1 Ye beleeue in God beleeue also in mee it followeth that God onely must be called vpon The Rhemists in their annotation here answer by a distinction of beleefe that none can inuocate Christ as their Lord and Master vnlesse they beleeue him so to be but they may trust also in Saints that they can helpe them and so also may beleeue in them as their helpers and this phrase they say to beleeue in men is found in Scripture as Exod. 14.31 they beleeued in God and in Moses for so it is in the Hebrew Contra. 1. Seeing the Scripture curseth him that trusteth or putteth any confidence in man Ierem. 17.5 how can Papists escape this curse that are not ashamed to professe their trust and confidence in man 2. though that in the Hebrew phrase the preposition beth which signifieth in be vsed yet it is no more then is expressed in the Latine phrase in the datiue case and so the Latine translator well obserueth crediderunt Deo Mosi they beleeued God and Moses the meaning is no more then this that they beleeued Moses as a true Prophet of God that it came to passe as he had foretold 3. and seeing all our faith and confidence must be grounded vpon the Scripture but in the Scripture men haue no warrant to trust in Saints that they can helpe them this is but a vaine confidence 4. Neither are there diuers kinds of a religious beleefe and confidence there is a ciuill kind of assurance which is the good perswasion that one may haue of another but all our religious beleefe must be onely setled vpon God 5. And so to conclude Augustine saith in Psalm 64. non potest esse Deo grata oratio quam ipse non dictavit c. that prayer cannot be acceptable to God which he that is Christ hath not indited But Christ hath not endited any praier vnto any but vnto God onely therefore that forme of prayer is onely acceptable to him See further hereof in D. Fulkes answer to the Rhemists vpon this place Controv. 19. That we must pray with confidence and assurance Mr. Calvin also vpon these words how shall they call on him in whom they haue not beleeued c. confuteth the opinion of the schoolemenâ— qui se dubitanter Deo offerunt which doubtfully offer their prayers to God and so Bellarmine saith that it is not necessarie for a man in his prayer to beleeue and be perswaded that God will heare him lib. 1. de â—onis operib c. 9. Contra. But the Apostle here requireth an assured beleefe in him that prayeth and our Sauiour saith Whatsoeuer ye desire when ye pray beleeue that ye shall haue it and it shall be don vnto you Mark 11.24 See further Synops. Centur. 4. err 88. Controv. 20. Against the vaine pompe of the Pope of Rome in offering his feete to be kissed v. 15. How beautifull are the feete c. This maketh nothing at all to countenance the pride of the Romane Antichrist who hath offered his feete to be kissed of Kings and Emperours 1. the Prophet first and the Apostle following him meaneth not any such particular gesture to be offered to the feete but by a figure is vnderstood the reuerence due to the person of those which preached the Gospel and this rather confoundeth the pride of the Pope and his Cardinals that ride in state on their trapped horses whereas the Apostles trauailed on foote preaching as they went and therefore it is saide how beautifull are the feete 2. and this honour is onely belonging to them which preach the Gospel but the Pope and his Cardinals are so farre from preaching the Gospel that they by all meanes suppresse it and persecute with sword and fire the professors of it Martyr See hereof more Synops. Centur. 2. err 29. Controv. 21. Against humane traditions v. 17. Faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the word of God c. Hence it is euident that nothing must be preached but the word of God and that saith onely is builded thereupon all humane traditions must giue place and whatsoeuer is vrged beside the word of God The Papists indeed are not ashamed to call their traditions verbum Dei non scriptum the word of God not written which is not farre from blasphemie to make their own inuentions and traditions equall with the word of God which is not to be found but onely in the Scriptures for the word of God is certaine we know who is the author thereof it is consonant to it selfe and remaineth for euer but their traditions are of obscure and vncertaine beginning they are contrarie to themselues and are chaungeable Basil hath this notable testimonie concerning the authoritie of the Scriptures calling it the
come to passe that God will finite thee 3. and whereas he calleth him painted wall vehemens est oratio aspera à convitio tamen aliena it is a vehement speach and sharpe but yet farre from railing to this purpose M. Beza with whom I consent in the two latter parts of his answear but I doubt of the first for it appeareth by their obiection that stood by revilest thou the Lords high Priest that Ananias was at this time the high Priest 6. Hierome as Erasmus here alleadgeth him graunteth that S. Paul here shewed some humane infirmitie neque cam praestitisse mansuet udinem neither did shew that mildnes which Christ shewed when he was smitten and Erasmus yeeldeth that Paul here non caruit humanis affectibus wanted not humane affections as he elswhere complaineth of the pricke of his flesh and there was contention betweene him and Bernabas But we must not be so easily drawne to charge so holy an Apostle with this infirmitie of hastie choller and anger who was most patient 7. Erasmus thinketh that S. Paul might truely say he knewe him not to be the high Priest because he shewed himselfe not to be as an high Priest in this action sed re tyrannum but a tyrant indeede But this is too nice and curious for euen a Tyrant is a magistrate and so to be reuerenced though he be an euill one 8. Some thinke aright that Paul indeede was ignorant that Ananias was high Priest and adde further that if he had knowne he had so beene he would not haue vsed that sharpe tearme of painted wall Osiander Pererius disput 2. numer 9. But the Apostle knewe that he was not onely forbidden to rayle vpon the Magistrate but vpon any whomsoeuer 9. Some thinke that S. Paul is in this his vehement defense to be excused quia ab ea â—â—â—prudenter factum because it was done of him ignorantly Iun. in parall but though S. Pauls ignorance might excuse him for reuiling the high Priest yet it had beene a fault to haue reviled any by this meanes S. Paul could not then be excused altogether by his ignorance 10. For the full solution then of this question these three positions are to be admitted 1. that S. Paul simply was ignorant that Ananias was high Priest whereof Chrysostome giueth two reasons his long absence from Ierusalem and this tumultuous assembly where no order was obserued adde hereunto that the high Priest was changed euerie yeare and S. Paul beeing persecuted for his profession and preaching of Christ had no leasure nor lift to enquire who was high Priest and whereas it is obiected that the high Priest might haue beene discerned by his place apparell and the reuerence giuen vnto him Iunius answeareth well that the high Priest was not to weare his priestly robes out of the temple and it seemeth in this tumultuous assembly the Tribune beeing absent who should haue kept order that they rather stood plano pede on plaine foote then sat in any order and it seemeth also that either small reuerence was yeelded at all in this disordered meeting or that it was past before S. Paul came in 2. Againe I graunt with Augustine Beda Beza that this was no imprecation but a prediction of Gods iudgement vpon this ambitious and vniust high Priest as is before shewed 3. Neither was that a reuiling tearme to call him painted wall but a vehement and sharpe obiurgation as Christ rayled not when he denounced woe vnto the Scribes and Pharises or called Herod foxe Beza and S. Paul as Cyprian obserueth spake thus roundly to shewe the disorder of that whole assembly and the wrong which he had receiued lib. 1. cp 3. And whereas it will be obiected that S. Paul in his answear did confesse he had railed though it were not indeede convitium sed libera obiurgatio a reviling but a franke rebuking as Erasmus saith Beda well sheweth the reason why S. Paul so did graunting so much to the peoples importunitie that it was reuiling which indeede was not erudiens alios atque ergo eos qui in potestate sunt modestius conuersari monens c. therein iustructing others and admonishing them to carrie themselues modestly toward them which are in authoritie and thus much of this question See more thereof in the handling of that Scripture Hexapl. â—â— Exod. 22.28 whence is produced this testimonie by the Apostle but I insist vpon this answear now resolued vpon here Quest. 23. How we should reioyce with them that reioyce and weepe with them that weepe v. 15. 1. Because one may forbeare from cursing his enemies and may in words wish him well and yet not doe it of loue the Apostle proceedeth to the verie roote of loue which is in the affection of the heart Chrysost. 2. And whereas the former precept onely concerned our enemies this may be practised both toward our friends and our enemies Tolet. 3. But Origen obserueth well that we must vnderstand this precept of the Apostle not of euerie kind of ioy and griefe but in honest and lawfull things as if any man reioyce in his honour wealth or such like we are not to reioyce with such our Sauiour would not haue his Apostles to reioyce because they had cast out deuils Luk. 10. but if we see ab aliquo aliquod tale opus geri quod in coelo scribi dignum sit c. any such worke to be done by one which is worthie to be written in heauen as any worke of iustice mercie or that one is conuerted from the error of his life with such an one must we reioyce likewise we must not weepe with those which lament their dead flent damna temporalia and weepe for the losse of temporall things but if any man weepe and lament for his sinnes or such like lachrymae tungenda sunt cum talibus we must ioyne with such in teares c. to the same purpose also Haymo following Origens steppes 4. But they must be vnderstood to speake comparatiuely that they which reioyce or mourne for temporall things onely or excessiuely they must rather be reprooued then by our ioyning with them in like affection be fed still in their humor for this precept bindeth vs to reioyce in the outward prosperitie of the brethren and mourne for their temporall losses also but not so much as for spirituall so here we must distinguish of ioy and griefe dolor ordinatus a moderate sorrowe as when one mourneth for the losse of a friend as a mother for the death of her children thus Christ wept in compassion with Marie weeping for Lazarus there is dolor inordinatus an inordinate sorrowe for temporall things when men lament too much for the losse of them and in this sense we must correct their error and yet comfort them what we can Pareus 5. Chrysostome noteth further that the Apostle in the first place saith reioyce with them that reioyce because this is the harder precept for nature teacheth many to
shew that he is God because euerie knee shall bowe vnto him and euery tongue shall confesse him to be God adoration and praise which doe belong onely vnto God are giuen vnto Christ and in that place the Prophet yet speaketh more euidently am not I the Lord and there is no God beside me And here where the Apostle said v. 10. we must all stand before the iudgement seat of Christ v. 12. he saith We must giue account vnto God the tribunall seate then of Christ is the tribunall of God Doct. 7. Of the authoritie of the Scriptures v. 11. For it is written c. The Apostle speaking of our appearing before the iudgement seat of Christ doth not affirme it onely but prooueth it by the Scriptures teaching vs thereby that the Scriptures and written word of God are the only rule and line of our faith and that nothing ought to be imposed vpon the Church as a matter of beleefe but that which is warranted from thence the Scriptures are able to make the man of God perfect 2. Tim. 3.17 he then that seeketh any doctrine beside that which is taught in the Scriptures as not content with that which is perfect would adde further that which is superfluous idle and vnnecessarie Doct. 8. That no kind of meate is vncleane in it selfe v. 14. I knowe c. that there is nothing vncleane in it selfe c. All kind of meats then which are appointed for the food and nourishment of mans bodie are in themselues lawfull and cleane beeing receiued with giuing of thankes And if they be lawfull and cleane the restraint of them by any prohibition for religion and holines sake is superstitions and inclining to Iudaisme It is the mind onely and opinion that polluteth and defileth meats so the superstition of Papists in making conscience of some kind of meates is so farre from making them more holy and acceptable vnto God that they thereby defile and pollute the good creatures of God they should therfore remember that charge which was giuen vnto Peter from heauen Act. 10.15 What God hath cleansed pollute thou not 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. Whether to abstaine from certaine meates be an act of religion and a part of Gods worship or a thing in it selfe indifferent The latter is affirmed and maintained by Protestants the other is stifly defended by the Romanists but that the state of the question may better appeare first the diuerse kinds of fasting and abstinence are to be considered 1. There is a naturall abstinence which is onely from such meates as agree not with the stomack and are enemies to the helth of the bodie 2. A morall abstinence is from such meates and drinkes as a man findeth to distemper him and to disturbe his memorie and other faculties of his minde as the drinking of wine and strong drinke 3. A ciuill and politike abstinence is to refraine eating of flesh some certaine daies for the maintenance of navigation and the vtterance of fish and for sparing the breed of cattell as the Lenton fast is now kept in England 4. There was beside these a Iudaicall fast which was of two sorts either a totall and generall abstinence as from swines flesh and other meates counted vncleane by the law or an abstinence for a time which was either generall of the whole nation as to abstaine from eating of vnleavened bread for seauen daies in the feast of the Passeouer or particular of some professed persons as of them which had taken vpon them the vow of the Nazarites which was neither to take wine nor any strange drinke See the law of the Nazarites Numb 6. 5. Beside these there was an hereticall fast and abstinence of such as abstained from certaine meates counting them euill and vncleane in themselues which was the opinion of the Manichees and Tatiane heretikes which kind of impious abstinence the Apostle speaketh against 1. Tim. 4. 6. Adde vnto this the superstitious abstinence of the Papists which make the fasting and refraining from fleshmeates vpon the fift and sixt day of the weeke and in the time of Lâ—uâ— to be a necessarie part of Gods worship and a thing meritorious and satisfactorie This is the abstinence that now is in question 7. Yet a religious fast we acknowledge which is when vpon some daies appointed by the Church publikely or when any are disposed priuately to fast the more feruently to giue themselues vnto praier which the Apostle speaketh of 1. Cor. 7.5 But this is done without any opinion of merite or holines in the act it selfe but as it helpeth and confeâ—â—eth to a spirituall end the more earnest invocation of God and humble supplication before him 8. There was also a scrupulous kind of abstinence in the primitiue Church when some Christians did abstaine of conscience from eating things which were consecrate to Idols of the which S. Paul entreateth 1. Cor 8.10 Now the fast and abstinence which is controverted betweene vs and the Papists is the superstitious fast before the 6. whose opinion is this that to abstaine from flesh and other kinds of meates in the time of lent and vpon other daies of restraint is a necessarie part of the diuine worship meritorious and satisfactorie habet meritum satisfactionem apud Deum it meriteth and satisfieth before God c. Tolet in his annotations here and the precept of fasting obligat sub peccato mortali bindeth vnder the daunger of mortall sinne we will examine some of their reasons Argum. 1. The Apostles by their synodicall decree prouided that they should abstaine from certaine meates as strangled and blood Ans. 1. The Pastors of the Church haue not now the same power and authoritie to make Canons to bind the conscience which the Apostle had who were guided by the immediate direction of the spirit 2. they did not enioyne abstinence from flesh-meate egges milke and such like as the Romanists doe but onely from such meates as were forbidden by the law 3. neither did they enioyne this abstinence as a part of the divine worship for then it should bind still but onely for a time to avoid offence in respect of the Iewes newly conuerted Argum. 2. Those things which the Church commandeth are necessarily to be kept and observed for our Sauiour saith he that heareth you heareth mee c. But such is the Ecclesiasticall law and precept of fasting Ergo c. Ans. 1. Not euery thing the Church commandeth is to be obserued as a part of Gods worship but those things onely which the Church propoundeth by the warrant and authoritie of Gods word and so is our Blessed Sauiour to be vnderstood otherwise whosoeuer preacheth any other Gospel or any thing contrarie thereunto is to be held accursed 2. neither are we to regard what the false and Antichristian Church now commandeth no more then our B. Sauiour and his Apostles did hold themselues bound to the superstitious decrees of the Pharisies Argum. 3. The law of fasting is
v. 5. he was wounded for our transgressions and it followeth he was broken for our iniquities and againe the chasticement of our peace was vpon him and with his stripes are wee healed verse 6. the Lord hath laied vpon him the iniquities of vs all verse 8. For the transgression of my people was he plagued v. 10. he shall make his soule an offering for sinne v. 11. he shall beare their iniquities v. 12. he bare the sinnes of many and praied for the transgressors what could be more euidently expressed or how in more full and effectuall tearmes could the force and efficacie of Christs death redeeming and iustifying vs from our sinnes be described 3. Controv. Against the enemies and adversaries to the Scriptures the Marcionites Libertines with others v. 4. Whatsoeuer is written c. Those heretikes which impugne the Scriptures doe either condemne them as vnnecessarie or of no vse or reiect them as superfluous for such as are perfect or hold them as defectiue and imperfect and such as haue neede of other helps and supplies the first are the Manichees and Marcionites which condemne the bookes of Moses and the old Testament the second the Libertines which doe cleaue vnto their fantasticall dreames which they call revelations and say the Scriptures are onely for such as are weake the third are the Romanists which doe beside the Scriptures receiue many traditions which they call verbum Dei non scriptum the word of God not written which they make of equall authoritie with the Scriptures 1. Against the first Origen in his commentarie here sheweth how the things written aforetime in the old Testament were written for our learning and giueth instance of these places Thou shalt not muzle the mouth of the oxe c. which S. Paul applieth to the Ministers of the Gospel 1. Cor. 9. and that allegorie of Abrahams two sonnes the one by a free woman the other by a bond which S. Paul expoundeth of the two testaments Gal. 4. and that of Manna and the rocke which signified Christ 1. Cor. 10. by this induction Origen confuteth those heretikes which refused the old Testament 2. The Libertines also and Anabaptists are confuted which thinke the Scriptures serue onely for the weake seeing the Apostle who counteth himselfe among the strong v. 1. here saith whatsoeuer is written is written for our learning the Apostle confesseth that he among the rest receiued instruction and learning from the Scriptures Those then are impudent and shamelesse creatures which doe take themselues to be more perfect then S. Paul as needing not the helpe of the Scriptures 3. Our adversaries the Papists are here in an other extreame for as the Libertines allow the Scriptures onely for the vse of the simple so they contrariwise denie them to the simple and vnlearned and challenge a propertie in them onely to themselues that are professed among them of the Clergie and to such other to whome they shall permit the reading of the Scriptures But S. Paul here writing to the whole Church of the beleeuing Romans both learned and vnlearned both Pastors and people saith generally they are written for our learning and so our blessed Sauiour speaking vnto the people of the Iewes saith Search the Scriptures Ioh. 5.39 And as for that other part of Pharisaicall leauen in adding vnwritten traditions beside the Scriptures it is also reiected by warrant of the Apostles words here whatsoeuer things are written are written for our learning things then not written are not for our learning as hauing no certentie nor foundation And S. Paul els where setting forth the manifold vse and profit of the Scriptures addeth That the man of God may be absolute and made perfect c. 1. Tim. 3.17 if perfection of knowledge and to euery good worke may be attained vnto out of the Scriptures all other additions are superfluous See further hereof Synops. Centur. 1. err 12. 4. Controv. Of the authoritie of the Scriptures that it dependeth not vpon the approbation or allowance of the Church Whatsoeuer is written c. From hence also may be confuted an other point of Popish doctrine that the Scriptures receiue their authoritie and allowance from the Church for the word of God in the Scriptures is sufficient of it selfe and we doe beleeue the Scriptures because we are perswaded by the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures that they are the word of God 1. For if the Scriptures should receiue their authoritie from the Church then it would follow that God must submit himselfe to the iudgement and approbation of men and the Prophet Dauid saith Euery man is a lyer can they then which are natura mendaces lyers by nature giue approbation and authoritie to the truth and further seeing faith commeth by hearing of the word of God Rom. 10.17 and the faithfull are begotten by the immortall seede of Gods word as the holy Apostle Saint Peter saith how can they that are begotten beget credite and authoritie vnto that which first begat them 2. We graunt that there are certaine motiues and externall inducements to prepare vs to this perswasion of the Scriptures that they are the word of God as 1. That they were written by Prophets which were stirred vp of God and inspired with his spirit for how otherwise could plaine and simple men as Amos that was a keeper of cattel the Apostles that were fisher men be made able to such great workes 2. they were confirmed by miracles 3. the predictions of the Prophets as of Daniel and the rest were fulfilled in their time and place but God onely can foretell and foreshew things to come 4. Beside the Scriptures haue beene miraculously preserued as the bookes of the Law in the time of the captiuitie and vnder the tyrannie of Antiochus that committed them to the fire so since both the old and new Testament haue beene by impious Tyrants as Iulian the Gothes and Vandales sought for to be vtterly extinguished but yet God hath preserued them whereas many humane writings of Philosophers Historiographers and others haue perished by fire as when Ptolomes librarie was burned at Alexandria and by other casualities 5. adde hereunto the consent of all nations that haue receiued the Christian faith who with one consent haue acknowledged the Scriptures for the word of God All these and such other motiues may be inducements vnto vs at the first to receiue the Scriptures but the full perswasion is wrought in vs by the spirit of God in the reading and learning of the Scriptures themselues that we may say touching these motiues as the Samaritanes did vnto the woman that called them to see Christ that they beleeued him not so much vpon her report as for that they had heard him themselues Ioh. 4. 3. But that saying of Augustine will be obiected Evangelio non crederem nisi Ecclesiae Catholicae me commoverit authoritas I had not beleeued the Gospel if the authoritie of the Catholike Church had not mooued mee I answer
avouched by this Egesippus as how Peter and Simon Magus did striue which of them should raise Neros cousin that was dead and he that could not doe it should die and how Peter fleeing out of Rome met Christ at the gates and asked him Domine quo vadis Master whether goest thou and he answeared I come againe to be crucified whereupon Peter returned and was crucified for this is contrarie to S. Peters owne doctrine that the heauens should containe Christ vntill his second comming Act. 3.21 To Ireneus testimonie we answear 1. whereas he saith that Matthew wrote his Gospell at what time Peter and Paul preached at Rome this cannot agree with the historie of times for Matthew is held to haue written his Gospel in the 3. yeere of Caligula from which yeare vnto the 2. of Nero when S. Paul is held to haue first come vnto Rome are verie neere 20. yeares 2. and as Ireneus is vncertaine in this so an other opinion he hath of the like credit that Christ should be 40. or 50. yeare old when he preached and this he saith he receiued of all the Elders of Asia who testified id ipsum tradidisse eis Iohannem that Iohn deliuered the same vnto them and yet the other opinion of Epiphanius that Christ died in the 33. yeare of his age and beganne to preach at 30. is held of all to come neerer vnto the truth Hierome is as vncertaine 1. he saith that Paul came to Rome in the 2. yeare of Claudius and yet he granteth that before he had been at Antioch and from thence went and preached to the dispersed brethren in Pontus Galatia Bithinia Cappadocia Asia which might hold him not much lesse then 14. yeares as shall be shewed afterward so that he could not in this account come to Rome til the 2. of Nero. 2. Hierome is as vncertaine in other things in his epistle to Marcella he thinketh Adam was buried in mount Calvarie in his epitath of Eustach he will haue him buried in Chebron in his epistle to Evagr. he thinketh Iob came of Esau and in his cōmentarie vpon Genesis that he discended of Nahor Abrahams brother To Eusebius these exceptions may be taken 1. that he was an Arrian and beeing an Arrian wrote his historie which maketh it of the lesse credit 2. he is contrarie to himselfe for l. 3. c. 2. he affirmeth that Peter came not to Rome till the last yeare of Claudius See Christ. Carlil in his booke of the life and peregrination of Peter 1. dis This shall suffice concerning the contrarie arguments and obiections made by the Papists now ours follow for the demonstration of the contrarie part of Peters not beeing at Rome where first I will set downe the opinion of the Protestants and then produce their reasons Though the Protestants in generall and by the most full and sufficient warrant of Scripture do hold that Peter was not at Rome as Bishop there or founder of that Church and so in effect doe agree in the substance yet I finde some difference among them in certaine points coincident to this question 1. Some directly affirme and prooue it by euident places of Scripture that Peter was not at Rome at all as Vl. Vellanus whose obiections Bellarmine rather maketh an offer to confute then indeed confuteth them l. 2. de Rom. Pont. c. 5.6 2. Some goe yet further and affirme that Peter neither liued at Rome nor yet died there nor S. Paul neither but assigneth Ierusalem to be the place where S. Peter was crucified by warrant of that place Matth. 23.34 where our Sauiour saith that Ierusalem shall kill and crucifie some of the wise men and Prophets whom he should send thither Christopher Carlil who alleadgeth Lyranus and the interlinear gloss vpon that place that Peter was crucified at Hierusalem for none els of the Apostles were crucified there Linus also affirmeth that Peter was slaine at Ierusalem by Agrippa the last king of the Iews when also Iames the lesse was killed with Ioses Simon and Iude. 3. Some of our writers denie not Peter to haue beene at Rome but they affirme he could not come thither so soone nor continue there so long 25. yeares from the 2. of Claudius as Beza saith non invitus concedam c. I will not vnwillingly graunt that Peter was at Rome and there put to death but not the other annot in 1. Pet. 5.14 so also Gualter id ego non facile negaverim c. I will not easily denie that Peter in the last yeare of Nero receiued the crowne of Martyrdome because of the consent of auncient writers c. to the same purpose also D. Fulke annot 4. in 16. c. ad Roman 4. To this we adde further that howsoeuer we absolutely denie not but that Peter might be at Rome yet it is more probable he was not certainely out of the Scripture it can not be prooued that he was there at all and it is not de fide a thing concerning faith neither to be held as an article of faith as the Church of Rome doth defend it because the Scripture only must be a rule of our faith and further it is euident out of the Scripture that Peter was not at Rome till Pauls first beeing there in bonds where the historie of the acts of the Apostle endeth whatsoeuer he was afterward which Pareus thinketh to haue beene the 11. yeare of Nero but it was rather the second yeare when S. Paul came thither first and his second arrivall was in the 11. yeare for this Epistle was not written in the 8. yeare of Nero as Pareus thinketh but rather in the ende of Claudius raigne while Narcissus was yet in authoritie see before in the ende of the 5. and 10. quest Our reasons against Peters beeing at Rome in manner and forme aforesaid are these Our first argument shall be out of the Scripture 1. it is evident that Peter was at Ierusalem the third yeare after Pauls conversion for there he staied with him 15. dayes which was the 37. yeare of Christ he was not then yet at Rome 2. 8. yeare after this he was imprisoned by Herod which was the 43. yeare of Christ and the 3. yeare of Claudius Euseb. l. 2. c. 11. Ioseph l. 19. c. 7. Peter thē was not yet at Rome 3. Sixe yeare after this was Peter at Ierusalem for there S. Paul found him 14. yeare after his first comming thither Galat. 2.1 then was celebrated the Apostolicall counsel mentioned Act 15. when each gaue to other the right hand of fellowship this was the 9. yeare of Claudius as witnesseth Hierome hitherto Peter had not visited Rome neither will it suffice to say that he came from Rome thither to the councell for then what time will they leaue vnto Peter to visit Antioch and the Churches of Asia Bythinia Cappadocia Galatia and Egypt where Nicephorus saith he preached lib. 2. c. 35. in all these places he preached as it appeareth by his 1.
Marcionites Libertines and others 4. contr Of the authoritie of the Scripture that it dependeth not vpon the approbation or allowance of the Church 5. contr Against the invocation of Saints 6. contr Of the certentie of saluation against the Popish diffidence and doubtfulnes 7. contr Against the power of freewill in spirituall things 8. contr Whether the Apostles excusing of himselfe doe derogate from the authoritie of this epistle 9. contr That the Scriptures are perfect and absolute containing whatsoeuer is necessarie to saluation both touching doctrine and manners 10. contr Against the Popish sacrifice of the Masse which the Papists make the peculiar act of their Priesthood 11. contr Against the superstitious order of Monks and Friers 12. contr That miracles are not necessarie in the Church 13. contr Against the vaine pompe of the Popish pontificall ornaments 14. contr Of the idle boastings and vaine-glorious excursions of the Iesuits 15. contr Against the pompous processions and Persian-like traine of the Popes Legats and Cardinals 16. contr Against the Anabaptisticall communitie 17. contr Against the invocation of Saints 18. contr Against the merit of praiers Controversies out of the 16. Chapter 1. contr Against cloistered Nunnes 2. contr The Church not alwaies visible and consisting of multitudes 3. contr All doctrine is to be examined by the Scriptures 4. contr That Papists not Protestants serue their owne bellie 5. contr That Protestants are no schismatikes 6. contr Why the Gospel was kept secret so many yeares vnder the kingdome of Antichrist against the obiection of the Papists 7. contr Against the Popish doxologie ascribing glorie with Christ vnto the virgin Marie 8. contr Whether S. Peter were euer at Rome and continued there Bishop 25. yeares The summe of the Controversies handled in this Commentarie beside Doctrines and Morall observations maketh in all about 290. The Questions and Controversies summed together make toward a thousand beeing in all 950. This COMMENTARIE by Gods gratious assistance was finished April 10. Ann. Dom. 1611. anno aetatis Authoris currente 48. To God onely wise be praise through Iesus Christ for euer Rom. 16.27 The Printer to the Reader Whereas the copie was in many places darke and obscure as beeing but once written as it was first framed by the Author neither could he be present himselfe to ouersee the worke I pray thee Courteous Reader with patience to amend the faults which fell out to be more then either we had thought or could by our diligence which was not wanting preuent The first figure sheweth the page the other the line exp signifieth to put out r. read f. for Pag. 2. lin 30. for S. Matthew read S. Marke p. 5 25. r. letter 6 29 r praeponit and f. propoundeth preferreth p. 12 3.r which in f and 〈◊〉 3 29 f. Ianuarie r. December 14.56 r. how often 15 20 of the 16 f. officer r ofineâ— 18. r Hortiensiâ— l. 28. exp and. p. 20. r. Phrygia paccaltana 24 r. ipsius Corinthi 26 parte s. puto 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 29 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 34 3. r. of his 37. r opponit 39.12 r. finite f. infinite 41. r. advers Praxeam 42.17 significatur 45.30 collato 44.61 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 9. r. illo 45.20 f. he saith â— he saith not 16 25. r incontaminatam 47.40 r quidam 52.56 r it that is the Gospel 56.3 〈◊〉 601.7 r 〈◊〉 eat f immiserat 62.54 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the best thing liuing and eternall and the heauen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 64.3 r consecutive 67 21. it exp 70.36 r. and is not 71.1 r de placit 43 Midata 72.35 incorruptible 36. r. pro f pio 75.14 r. actiones f. notimâ—â— 50 and f. end 76.57 r depriving 77.9 r. ea parte 21. r. as with 81.24 pâ—â—naâ— exp 37. impr be 82.29 impugnatio 83.33 Venerecu 8â— 27 implacable 36 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—0 45 Mahometane 91.2 r. in elatione 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 21 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—3 21 r. conversation 38. satisfaction 96 34. Tharasius 107 56. furnished 110 19. proposition 111.9 strange 117.17 maintained f. mentioned 120 46. r not now 121. â—9 r. esse 122.32 in doing 127 43. r. circumcision f. remission 131.4 carnall f. morall 141 â—7 Apostolici 40. Christians f. heathen 1â—4 4. then f. that 156.51 their f. then 56. meriteth not 57 accepertâ—nt 162.30 denieth f. decreeth 166 6 treated of 169.25 satisfied f. â—o testified 170.31 framing f. straining 172.40 ipsam 174.9 of f if 180 49 qua f quia 52. vertue f. veritie 181.5 Catharinus 15 antididagma 184.20 whereas f wherein 188.23 and yet f. nor yet 189 53. execration f. operation 56. r. is not 194.6 application 13. amplified 196.42.16 f. 6.201.18 iustificandi 23. oppositions 204 30. exp of 206.12 exp not 208.15 foreshewer f. foreshewen 55. quae f quia 209 26 it is euident f it was euideÌ„tly 213.51 retracteth f returneth 216.1 we not haue 47. should not 229.36 is ioyned 230.24 Gods grace f. his 233.50 we f. he 51. vnto him 234.33 positiuely f. passiuely 35. rendreth f. readeth 49 sinned not 237.7 the one f. the other 241.29 forth f. faith 244.55 might f must 247. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 39 exp place 250.11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 17. Phoâ—â—s 256 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 257.1 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 54. one f our 263.29 obfuscationem 34. depravation 266.23 m f an 270 51. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 53.1.3.24 f. 2.14.272.20 if men were f. of men 277.4 forme f. former 278.20 and to come f the come 28. out of a vessell not originally c. 279 23. is for 47. a weake consequent 286.13 and f. on 290.12 exp if 50. birth f both 29â— Flacius f. Florius 293 8 omittendo 45. severall f. severe 295.55 observeth f. ascribeth 298.14 forme of f. former 301.17 vnto f. vpon 302.12 cura 303.41 was in those f. or those 307.28 life f death 309.34 â—â—der f order 45. maketh f. worketh 313.30 propounded f. provided 52. minde f. word 315.42 defect f. desert 49. the woman is free 319.28 exp of 320.12 dum f. nondum 321.12 depraved 19. cum hominibus 24. repeated 322.17 the things which 18. some f. foure 29. prisons f persons 324 2◠〈◊〉 328.11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 44. the present 333.27 expositum exposed 38. potuit non mort 334 vet f. not 24. prioribus f principibus 335.27 regulâ—breâ—â—er 336 21. warre f. marrie 337.29 accepted 338.17 as of one 340.11 ad Eustâ—ch 341.56 preparatorie 344.51 in f. to 351.25 some f. sinne 352.21 ioyne f. coine 355.38 contumacie f continuance 365.37 creature f. nature 368.11 restored 27. Hexemer f. Hypertum 373.50 waite f. waile 375.57 in f. not 376.20 interpellare 45. impatient 377.11 expositions 49. neither f. either 380.11 arithmeticall 15 not in 492.23 perfited f. excepted 57. whatsoeuer 395 37. ouerthroweth 397.11 wall f. will 398 51 ad gloriam 400.51 as long 401.8 are mentioned 404.4 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉