hissed out of all Christian Schooles not only by learned men but euen by women and children If the scripture of the olde Testament be sufficient say they the new Testament is superfluous Is there no mean betwéene sufficiency and superfluitie A man that hath wherewith to prouide him selfe of meate and drink apparell and lodging of the meanest sorte hath sufficient for his liuing But if any thing be added to this sufficiency wil you say it is superfluitie Is there no vse of riches or abundance aboue sufficiency but it is by by superfluitie The scripture of the olde Testament cōtaineth the word of God sufficiently for mens saluation but the newe Testament added therevnto containeth no new substance or matter of doctrine or article of beliefe necessarie to saluation but the same auncient and eternall worde of God most richly most plentifully most abundantly Wherefore that the Apostle giueth the commendation of sufficiency vnto the scripture of the old Testament yet so far of that it should hinder the credite of the whole scripture which nowe the Church enioyeth that it doeth a great deale more magnifically set foorth the vnsearchable treasures of Gods wisdom and holy word reuealed more at large more plainly and openly set foorth in the time of the Gospel then it was reuealed or set forth vnder the law Wherfore we may not reason w t the papists if the scripture of the old testamēt had béen sufficient the newe should haue béene superfluous but contrariwise if the olde Testament were sufficient the scripture of the newe and olde together must néedes be abundant That the scripture of the old Testament contained sufficient instruction vnto eternall life hath béene prooued alreadie sufficiently and yet for more clearnesse I will adde other reasōs and authorities to prooue the same richly and abundantly The whole doctrine of the Gospell of Christ is contained in the scriptures of the olde Testament which is sufficient for a Christian mans instruction therefore there is no want nor imperfection no vnsufficiency of the substance of doctrine in the scripture of the olde Testament Saint Paule in this verie place exhorteth Timothy to continue in those thinges whiche hée had learned and whiche were committed vnto him knowing of whome hée had learned them namely of the Apostle and secondly of the holy scriptures in which hée had béene instructed from an infant which were able to make him wise vnto saluation Sée you not here most plainly that the same thinges which Timothy had learned of Paule and which were committed vnto him that hée might perfectly fulfill the worke of an Euangelist which cannot be except hée preache the Gospell perfectly were contained in the scripture of the olde Testament which hée had knowne from a childe which Scriptures were not able to make him or any man wise vnto saluation excepte they contained all articles of Christian doctrine which a christian man is bound to know and beléeue And therfore vpon this ground hée inferreth that the whole scripture is profitable to furnish the man of God vnto all partes of his office and to make him perfect vnto euerie good worke Beside this the holy Ghost in the Actes of the Apostles commendeth the Berhaeans that they receiued the word of God with all readines of mind daily searching the scriptures if these thinges were so as y e Apostles preached Mark this text diligently they receiued the word of al redines as it was preached by the Apostles but they admitted nothing for the word of God but that they found to haue grounde and cōfirmation in y e scriptures in y e law the prophets wherfore the apostles preaching y e Gospel preached none other word of god but that which was cōtained in the scriptures of the old Testamēt For if they had preached any vnwrittē verities howe should the Berhaeans haue found the same in the scriptures And what speak I of the Apostles euen their lord maister y e sonne of God the word of God the truth of God offereth his whole doctrine to be tried by the scriptures of the old testamēt Search y e scriptures saith hée for in thē you think to haue euerlasting life they are the same y t beare witnes of mée Hee testifieth also y t all things that are writtē of him in y e law the prophets in the psalmes must be were fulfilled And whē he authorized his Apostles to preach y e Gospel performāce of all things that were written in the law the prophets He openeth their vnderstāding that they might vnderstād the scriptures which contained the worde of God perfectly sufficiently although the same in the new testament doctrine of fulfilling be set forth more richly more plentifully more plainly And lest you shoulde think this sufficiency of the scriptures to haue béen only after all the bookes of y e old testament were written which were many hundreth yéeres frō the first to the last So that from Moses vntill Malachy or from the beginning of the worlde vntill Malachies prophecy was receiued there was no sufficiency of true doctrine contained in the scripture I will plainly prooue vnto you that frō the time that the worde of GOD was first deliuered in writing there was sufficiency in that scripture for the perfect instruction of the church of that time And what soeuer bookes of scripture were afterward added was but a larger opening and playner demonstration of the same as GOD in wisedome and mercy dyd sée it conuenient and necessary for euerie age of the Church and his people liuing in those times The fiue bookes of Moses was the first scripture that was deliuered vnto the Church which contained a perfect and most sufficient doctrine of all thinges to be knowne and done of that people for the attainment of eternall life the other bookes that followed were but enlargementes and interpretations of the same doctrine that was contained in those fiue bookes For if they had béene additions of any newe doctrine they had béene contrarie to the prohibition of the same law and subiect to the curse of God Yea the principall triall of all Prophetes that succéeded was by the same lawe Insomuch that if a Prophet or dreamer of dreames did arise which taught an other God or an other worship of God not set foorth in the lawe hée was thereby discryed to be a false prophet although he could tell before of thinges that came to passe or worke myracles This argued sufficiently the perfection of the doctrine contained in that lawe against which no signes or miracles should be credited Also Iosua in his exhortatiō made vnto y e people after that hée had deuided the lande vnto them chargeth them to obserue and doe all that is written in the booke of the lawe of Moses that they turne not there from neither to the right hande nor to the left that is they doe neither more nor lesse but that is written in the
rather then in faith although it was such an error in discipline as gaue the onset to one of the greatest errors of y e pope I meane his supremacie which then was reiected and countermaunded of all sides Therefore I will come to Pope Liberius who at the first manfully resisted the Arrians insomuch that for his constancie hée was by the Emperor Constantius put out of his Bishopricke and driuen into banishment But afterward being ouercome with tediousnes of banishment and seduced by one Fortunatianus as S. Hierome affirmeth he subscribed to the Arrian heresie and was restored to his See at Rome from whence he chased Foelix that occupied the place in his absence Thus haue you a Pope deniyng the eternal diuinitie of our sauiour Christ conuicted of heresie by y e testimonie of Hieronime one that liued in the same Churche not long after Héere the Papistes stampe and starcle denying the testimonie of Hieronyme as sufficient Yet thus muche at least is gayned that Hieronyme beleeued not this Popishe principle The Pope cannot erre for then hee woulde not haue affirmed that Pope Liberius subscribed vnto hereise But yf Hieronyme alone bée not sufficient what say you to Anthanasius Is hée a credible witnesse Hée liued in the time of Liberius and knewe him hee affirmeth the same of him But if Athanasius bée not great enough to carry away the matter what say you to Pope Damasus one of his successours coulde hée erre or no Uerily Pope Damasus chargeth him with reuolting vnto heresie saying That hée subscribed but yet hee was not rebaptised and entred into Rome like a Conquerour holding councell with the heretikes I knowe the impudent Papistes when they are driuen to the wall by this example of Liberius for their last refuge doe say that hee subscribed indeede to the condemnation of Athanasius but not to the Heresie of Arries which is a shamelesse lye Ad subscriptioonem Haereseos to the subscription of heresies saith Saint Hierome The like dothe both Athanasius and Damasus affirme Therefore wée haue founde one Pope falne into a damnable errour After him wée finde that Pope Innocentius erred although not in so waightie a matter For Innocentius defined against the Pelagians that it was as necessary for infantes to eate the fleshe of Christe and drinke his blood in the Communion as to bee Baptised As testifieth of him Saint Augustine saying Qui parvulis definiuit c. Whiche hath defined that little children can by no meanes haue life except they eate the fleshe of the Sonne of Man Some Papistes cauill that although the Pope may erre yet hée cannot erre in his definitiue sentence Beholde Augustine saith that Innocentius hath héere desined of this matter and yet it is an error which the Papistes them selues doe not holde at this day And yet Augustine affirmeth that this was the errour of all the Westerne Churches in his time But if any man thinke Saint Augustine no sufficient witnesse to depose against Pope Innocentius let him take paines to reade the Epistle of Pope Innocent himself sent vnto the Bishop of Africa assembled in councell Where y e words of Augustine cited out of him are plainely set downe But héere I knowe the vaine replie of the Papistes will bée readie to obiect that Pope Innocent and Augustine with the rest of the Catholike Bishops in that time did practise in déede to minister the communion to infantes as soone as they were baptised but that was no error so long as they did not hold it to bée necessary for infants to receiue the Communion Thus they graunt the practise and denie the errour eyther in the opinion or in the practise of those times But if they were not so impudent y t they had framed their foreheads not to blushe at any lye they woulde neuer against so cléere testimonies both of Augustine and Innocentius séeke to excuse them of that opinion which they doe so willingly maintaine The Pelagians denied that Baptisme was necessary for the saluation of infants whcih they said were without sinne both Augustine and Innocentius prooue the necessitie of Baptisme by the necessitie of communicating which may bot be graunted to any that is not Baptized Therefore saith Innocentius in his diffinitiue Epistle to the Affricane Bishops Illud vero quod eos vestra fraternitas asserit praedicare paruulos aeternae vitaepraemiis etiam sine baptismatis gratia posse donari perfatuum est c. But that thing which your brotherhood affirmeth them to preach that young children may obteine the rewards of eternall life euen without the grace of Baptisme it is a very foolishe thing For except they shall eate the fleshe of the Sonne of man and drink his blood they shall haue no life in themselues But they whiche defende this vnto them without regeneration seeme to mée that they will make fustrate Baptisme it selfe Beholde saith Augustine vpon these wordes Pope Innocent of blessed memory euery Bishop was called Papa in his time saith that little children cannot haue life without the baptisme of Christ and without the participation of the body and blood of Christ. By which saying you sée they affirme as well the necessitie of the one Sacrament as of the other For what other thing mooued them to giue the Communion to infants but because they thought it necessary to saluation while they missevnderstoode those wordes of Christ in the sixt of Iohn as though they had béene spoken of Sacramentall eating of Christes body as they did the other in the third of Iohn as though Chirst had spoken of the sacrament of Baptisme whiche hee saith of the necessitie of regeneration Furthermore where the Papists are inforced to affirme that it was not erronious but a laweful practise to minister the Communion to infants as to baptise them although the one bée not so necessary as the other the plaine doctrine of the Scripture doth confute them For S. Paule forbiddeth any man or woman to presume to the Lordes Table without examination and iudging of themselues which thinges because infantes cannot performe it can be none other but a méere prophanation of the Lordes Supper to minister it vnto young infants euen as it was of them which ministred it vnto dead bodies vpon the same erronious persuasiō of the necessitie thereof vnto eternall life And whereas the blinde Cardinall Hosius affrmeth that infants may aswell examine themselues by other men as in baptisme they beléeue by other men and therfore by the Churches authoritie without grounde of Scripture are baptized I answere if wee had not better grounde of Scripture then either the authoritie or reason of the Popishe Churche for the baptisme of infants wée woulde not practise if any more then we doe minister the Communion to infants But wée baptise them not for the faith of other mē but for the couenant of God which extēdeth euen to the séede of the faithfull so that there children are holy and not vncleane as the children
God That execrable and accursed praiers sacrifices doe not rather prouoke the wrath of God then his fauour Are not all the wayes of the impious vngodly man abhomination vnto the Lorde And howe shoulde that which God abhorreth dispose a man or how shoulde a man dispose himselfe by that which God abhorreth to bée a méete vessell to receiue the grace and fauour of God Forasmuch then as all men are vngodly or wicked before they bee iustified fréely by the grace of God all their works must needes bée vngodly wicked and vniust For they are only good and righteous workes which came from a righteous man from a man made righteous or iustified through faith by the grace of God according to the spirit of sāctificatiō which is giuen to thē only that are iustified although neither al the works of a iustified mā are good nor any perfectly good because we haue receiued y ◠spirit in measure our sanctificatiō is begunne not perfected in this life therefore our Sauiour Christe praieth that his father would sanctifie his Apostles in his truth of whō he confessed before y t they were holy cleane that is sāctificatiō was begun in thē by his word which they had hearde in which worde of truth he now praieth that they may more more be sanctified made holy Wherefore all Popish preparations vnto sanctificatiō howsoeuer they denounce the denier of thē to bee accursed are in the sight of God no better then abhominable accursed euen by this worde For God only is the authour beginner continuer perfecter of sanctification séeing that our sauiour Christe prayeth for the continuance perfection of sanctification who was alredy begun in his Disciples who were baptised who had receiued the holy Ghoste who were to bee preserued increased in y t holines which they had receiued by this we learne y t we must daily pray for y e increase of sanctification and séeke it at the handes of God alone who hath promised vpon our earnest prayers to graūt his holy spirite by which wée shalbée daily more and more renewed in the inner man to hate sinne and to loue righteousnesse that the fruites of mortification renouation which are the two parts of sanctificatiō may appeare daily in our life cōuersatiō For this grace of continuāce increase in sāctificatiō y e apostle boweth his knées to the father of our Lord Iesus Christ by the example of Christ himselfe for the Ephesians that he would giue vnto them according vnto the riches of his glory to bee strengthened in the inner man by his spirite And therefore as the beginning of sanctification is only frō Gods grace with out all merite or good disposition of ours so is also the continuance increase perfection of the same the frée gift of God giuen vnto vs according to the riches of his glory and not procured either in whole as the Pelagiās say or in part as the Papists teach by the merites and desertes of men Wherby they make not God the whole only authour perfector of sāctificatiō but ascribe vnto mans merites a portion of this his glory while they affirme that by well vsing of the first graces of God wée may and do merite and deserue the second whereas the Lorde God testifieth by the Prophet Ezechiel that hee will haue all nations to know that it is hée which sanctifieth Israel vnto whō also our sauiour Christe hath recourse in his prayer when he saith Sanctifie them in thy trueth By this hée declareth y t he desireth true sanctificatiō not coūterfet hypocrisie for fained holines dissembled sanctificatiō is worthily saide to bée double iniquitie The corrupte nature of man without the spirit of God is prone and readie vnto hypocrisie and feigned holinesse but all lying and dissimulation is abhominable vnto God wherefore that his Disciples might please God in true holinesse righteousnesse before him all y e daies of their liues He prayeth vnto his father to sanctifie thē in his trueth So shall they not séeke to mocke God with holinesse pretended and wickednesse intended but studie to serue him with an vpright heart vnfeignedly to seeke his honour walke in his wayes all the dayes of their life Moreouer where hée saith Sanctifie them in thy trueth hée sheweth euidently that as there is but one trueth which is the trueth of God so all other meanes and wayes of sanctification then in his trueth are false wayes and meanes and that no true holinesse is attained vnto by them but false holinesse false sanctification although it be neuer so well intended For true sanctification is only in Gods trueth Sanctifie them in thy trueth And this is the cause that the Gentiles in all their consecrations and blessinges could neuer attaine vnto true sanctification but were more more polluted in them because they presumed to séeke sanctification without the truth of God So that although euery thing which they tooke in hand and did was prophane vnholy yet their Temples their Gods their sacrifices their ceremonies their whole religiō was most of all vnpure vnholy vngodly yea most of all filthy detestable and abhominable and of all Christians to be abhorred forsaken because it was false holinesse sanctification and religion which they held and practised Euē so is it in the false religion holines sanctification of the Popists nothing is more abhominable detestable then y e which hath most of their false consecration and is accompted of them most holy as their holie water their holie bread their holie Candles Crosses and such like and especially their holie Masse wherof they make greatest account and their holie Father whom they name affirme not only to be most holy but to be holinesse it selfe But they will defend their coniured water and other their Popeholy ceremonies not to be false holinesse or vntrue consecrations for that they are sanctified in the trueth of God which is his worde for all the creatures of God are sanctified by the worde of God and prayer Thus doth Bristow take vpon him to defende their exorcising or coniuring water salt and suche lyke creatures that they may serue to bee vnto saluation both of bodie and soule Although I might easily answere that it is one thing to consecrate another thing to coniure yet who woulde beléeue they should be driuen to such impudent shifts and malicious wrestings of the scripture if they them selues did not professe it For the sense of the Apostles wordes in that place where he saith that al the creatures of God are good and none to be reiected being receiued with thanksgiuing for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer the sense I say is manifest to be vttered of all y e creatures of God which are sanctified vnto Christians by Gods woorde and by prayer in the ordinarie lawfull vse of them and especially of meates forbiddē
holy scripture therfore the booke of the lawe of Moses was perfect and sufficient for the instruction of that people And what sayeth our Sauiour Christ vnto the Saduces which receiued no parte of the olde Testament but only the fiue bookes of Moses Doeth hée not say they erred because they knowe not the Scriptures and power of God And what Scripture but the scripture of those fiue bookes out of which hée doeth so pithily and effectually prooue the article of the resurrection of the dead that hée stopped the mouthes of those obstinate and arrogant heretikes And who doubteth but euen as that one article of the resurrection was by our Sauiour Christ so substantially prooued so all other articles of Christian beliefe by that diuine wisedome of his might as necessarily bée concluded out of those fiue bookes of Moses This alwayes is to bée remembred that it was neither necessarie nor conuenient for the Church of those times vnto which these bookes alone were committed to vnderstand or know these articles of our beléefe so plainly so distinctly so largely as they were after reuealed by the Prophets especially by the scriptures of the new Testament But that al necessary points of saluatioÌ„ euery thing there to belonging was sufficiently perfectly set foorth in those scriptures which the wisdom of God thought to be conuenient for their instruction So y e they shoulde not depend vpoÌ„ the vncertain credit of meÌ„ but alwaies haue the touchstone of Gods word contained in his holy writing inspired by his spirit to trye examine all doctrines teachers thereby But now y e wée haue shewed that the holie scripture is a sufficient most pleÌ„tifull testimony of the word of God let vs sée what other witnes of Gods word the Papists woulde thrust vpon vs. The word of God say they beside y â— which is contained in the scriptures is continued also partly by tradition partly is reuealed by the sentence and oracle of the church of the chiefe shepheard therof which is the Pope all which is of equall authoritie and certaintie with that which is contained in the holie scriptures And first concerning tradition the scripture it selfe doth testifie that it is to be receiued whether it be by writing or vnwritten For so the Apostle coÌ„maundeth the Thessalonians saying Hold fast the traditioÌ„s which you haue learned whether it be by word of mouth or by our Epistle So say they the scripture it self commandeth vnwritten verities traditions beside the scripture to be holden fast and not to bée despised therefore the scripture alone is not sufficient to teache vs the worde of truth but we must also leane vnto vnwritten traditions There is no Papist almost that openeth his mouth or setteth his pen to paper to defend tradition but this is the principall bulwarke to maintain vnwritten verities receiued by tradition A sore place I promise you Out of which if you will gather rightly you must thus coÌ„clude Saint Paul had taught the Thessalonians partly by preaching and partly by writing and taught the truth in both necessary to be reteined therfore the holy scripture doth not contain al doctine néedful vnto saluation Or thus S. Paule in one or two Epistles had not comprehended all necessarie truth therefore all necessary truth is not comprehended in all the bookes of the scripture For hée speaketh not of traditions that were no where written but not written in his Epistle Signifying whatsoeuer hée did deliuer vnto them either by worde of mouth or by his Epistle was the truth of GOD whiche they were bounde to beléeue and yet hée deliuered nothing for any doctrine of saluation vnto them but that whiche hée confirmed by the scriptures of the olde Testament as it is manifest by y e which S. Luke reporteth of their neighbours the Berthaeans which dayly searched the scriptures if those thinges which Saint Paul taught were eueÌ„ so Wherfore this place doth nothing fauour vnwritten traditions y t are altogether beside the holie scripture but only such as are not contained in the first second Epistle to y e Thessalonians but were preached by S. Paul and tried by the scriptures The strongest bulwarke being thus rased made euen with the ground what force can there bée in their other féeble fortresses why do you so exclaime against tradition vnwritten veritie striue so much for your Castle of only scripture say they know you not that the Churche of God continued more then two thousand yeares without any worde of the Bible written how was the word of God then continued but by vnwritten traditioÌ„ There is not therfore such necessitie of the scriptures seeing y e church could so long continue the pillar stay of truth without theÌ„ but y e nowe hauing the scriptures for witnesse of some parte of Gods word shée may coÌ„tinue the rest y â— is necessary for the instruction of Gods people by tradition only w t out the scriptures Heere is a godly shew for traditioÌ„ but indéed nothing els but a vain shew w tout any pithe of matter yea containing manifest vntruth false matter For the word of God was not so long coÌ„tinued only by traditioÌ„ of men but by a much more certain testimony of truth namely by diuine reuelatioÌ„ from god which was renued in euery age y t the word of God might not stand vpon the bare credite of men or be left to the vnsure deceiueable deliuery of men from hand to hand but be euermore confirmed by heauenly oracle that y e Church might be certaine not to be carried away by vntrue reports of deceueable men but to depend alwaies vpon the mouth of god For in al that time the lord had a regard that his people should not be like children wauering carried about with the wind of euery doctrine by the deceit of men and by their craftinesse which haue a methode of errour as the Apostle saith of the church of Christ since his ascention therfore hée did in all generations beside the tradition and deliuerie of the doctrine of truth from the parentes to their children posteritie sâ—â—rre vp Prophets Preachers coÌ„firmed by extraordinary wonderful reuelatioÌ„s and gifts of his holy spirite which testified of that truth word of God that was continued by tradition y t it should neither bée doubted of among so many errors as Satan raysed vp nor be corrupted either by the subtletie of the deuil or by the infirmitie forgetfulnes of men Wherefore the tradition being thus coÌ„tinued coÌ„firmed was not a bare traditioÌ„ deliuery of meÌ„ such as the Papists would draw vs vnto from the holie scriptures but a most certaine and vndoubted testimony of Gods word his truth such as he in wisdome did sée to be most coÌ„uenient for his church in that season Beside this heauenly diuine reuelation which alwaies waighted vpon Gods word in those times continued by tradition
that the Councell of Basill lacked the Popes confirmation No truely for although I might alledge the confirmation of Pope Foelix whiche was chosen by the same Councell after they had deposed Eugenius for his contumacy the Bull of Pope Nicholas the fift which succéeded Pope Eugenius and confirmeth all thinges decreed in the Councell of Basill yet I will stande vpon the very same Eugenius the fourth which gathered held the Councell of Ferraria and Florentia against the Councell of Basill For euen the same Eugenius after he had in thrée solemne Buls in which hée complayned that the Councell of Basill vsurped authoritie aboue the Pope decreed the dissolution of the same condemning all the doings thereof at the length was compelled to reuoke his own Bulles and to declare that the Councell was lawfully coÌ„tinued notwithstanding his Bulles and decrees to the contrarie His Bull of reuocation is to be seene in the 16. Session of the Councell of Basill Beside this in the nexte Session hée was sworne by his legates when they were incorporated into the Councell to defende that Councell and by especiall wordes to defend the decrée of the Councell of Constance made in the fourth Session therof by which the Councell is decreed to bée aboue the Pope and the Pope bounde to obey the Councell and the decrées therof Last of all by his Presidentes hée accepted such presidency of the Councell as the councell would graunt which was without all iurisdiction of compulsion béeing him selfe compelled to retaine that order of proceeding with the councell before his presidency was admitted had obserued and woulde not change now that they were content to make him in his legates there president What certaintie of truth therefore may bee looked for in the determinations of Popes and generall councelles you may easily perceiue You haue heard the couÌ„cell against the pope and the pope against the Councell Councell against Councell one pope against another pope and the same pope against himselfe and all this is one question whether the pope or the generall Councell ought to bée taken as an infallible rule of truth that cannot erre Out of which contrarie decréees no other certaintie can bée concluded but y t it is certaine they may both erre and therfore it is euident that there is none other certaine and vndoubted recorde of the worde of truth but onely the newe Testament and the olde the holy Canonicall bookes of the holy Scriptues as it were easie to confirme euen by the iudgement of the most auncient and best approoued Fathers but that I haue alreadie helde you so long as I may not procéede any further After the sufficiencie of the holy Scriptures to teach vs al truth being thus maintained and the obiections made by the aduersaries coÌ„futed I had thought to haue added an other discourse concerning the right certain way of interpretation and vnderstanding of the holy Scriptures but because the time is so far spent y t I shall not be able to go through it I will altogether omitt it desiring God of his infinite mercy that as hee hath testified by his sonne our sauiour Christ Iesus y t we can haue no accesse vnto his Maiestie without sanctificatioÌ„ in the word of truth so it would please him by his holy spirit to coÌ„secrate dedicate vs wholy vnto his pleasure that following the infallible rule of truth described in his holy word we may glorifie his name in this life and after be partakers of eternall felicitie purchased vnto vs by the only merites of our Lord Sauiour Iesus Christ vnto whome with the father the holy Ghoste one eternall God be al honor glory power dominioÌ„ now and euer Amen ¶ Imprinted at London at the three Cranes in the Vintree by Thomas Dawson for George Bishop 1581. 2. Pet 1. Leuit. 11. 19. 20. 1. Pet. 1. In Psal. 96. In Epist. ad Eph. hom 18. In Psal. 9. 6. Apoe 19. 20. 22. Apoc. 7. Hebr. 12. Iam. 1. 1. Cor. 1. 2. Cor. 3. Gene. 8. Gene. 6. Iohn 15. Sess. 6. Can. â— Rom. 14. Heb. 11. Ephe. 2. Iacob 1. Rom. 4. Prou. 15. 21. Prou. 18. Rom. 4. Rom. 3. Ioh. 13. 15 Leu. 11. Ephe. 3. Ezech. 37. 1. Tim. 4. Rom. 8. In Epist. ad Himer 2. Thess. â— Psal. 51. Rom. 1. 1. Cor. 6. Prouer. 30. Deut. 12. Deut. 4. 12. Esaye 8. Iohn 5. Iohn 17. Rom. 5. Rom. 8. 2. Tim. 3. 2. Timo. 3 2. Tim. 3. Act. 17. Ioan. 5. Luk. 24. Deut. 13. 2. Thes. â— Ephes. 4. Hebr. 11. Rom. 10. Gen. 4. Gen. 5. Acts. 7. Lib. 3. Cáp. 2. Lib. 2. Cap. 35 Luke 3. Lib. 2. Ca. 26 Lib. 3. Cap 3â— â—usch lib. Cap. vlt. Ephe. 2. Rom. 10. 1. Tim. 4. Apoc. 2. Gal. 2. Rom. 3. Ioan. 16. Act. 10. Gal. 2. 1. Tim. 5. Ephes. 5. Gal. 5. Rom. 3. Iac. 2. Lib. 5. Cap. 26 In Catalog 5. Cap. Inpatifi Contra. 〈◊〉 lib. 1. Cap. 2. Contra. du Epist. Pelag. lib. 2. Cap. 4. 1. Cor. 11.