Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	believe_v	faith_n	justification_n	3,844	5	9.3520	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A00294	A booke intituled, The English Protestants recantation, in mattersof religion wherein is demonstratiuely proued, by the writings of the principall, and best learned English Protestant bishops, and doctors, and rules of their religion, published allowed, or subscribed vnto, bythem, since the comminge of our King Iames into England, that not onely all generall grownds of diuinitie, are against the[m], but in euery particular cheife question, betweene Catholicks & them, they are in errour, by their owne iudgments : diuided accordingly, into two parts, whereof the first entreateth of those generall grounds, the other of such particular controuersies, whereby will also manifestely appeare the vanitie of D. Morton Protest. Bishop of Chester his boke called Appeale, or, Ansuueare to the Catholicke authour of thebooke entituled, The Protestants apologie.	Broughton, Richard.	1617 (1617)	STC 10414; ESTC S2109	209,404	418

argue thus all those Bookes which Protestants in their authorised communion booke and bookes of Honolyes allowed by their conuocation and parlament and our Kinge doe prescribe to be vsed as canonicall scriptures as well as others and are so cited and practized ought to be receaued and allowed for canonicall But those Bookes which they denie and Catholicks receaue for canonicall are suche Therefore they ought to admitt them into the Canon of Holy scriptures The Maior proposition is euident for bookes Rules lawes and directions proposed by true authoritie as those be supposed of Protestants ar to be obeyed and followed The Minor proposition is likewise l. 1. homel l. 2. homel Artic. 25. Communion B. Tabl. direct of seruice Suruey of the Booke of comm prayer pag. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. Petit of 22. Preach exc ag hom and except 4. ag comm Booke Articl of Relig. Articul 6. moste certaine for their bookes of Homelyes receaued in the 25. Article of their Religion doe ordinarily so cite them and their Communion booke so termeth and vseth them too often to be alleadged in this place Whereuppon to be breife the Protestant Author of the Suruey of the booke of Common prayer affirmeth playnelye and often vrdgeth it That the Protestants of England must approue with the Romane Churche these bookes for canonicall So likewise doe the 22. preachers of London in their petition If any man shall Answeare that the Articles of their Religion exclude them from the canon of the scripture and so they cannot be saide to receaue them I answeare him againe that this is so farre from freeinge them in this point that it both excludeth them defineing and embraceing so contradictorie doctrines in so important busines from all hope of truthe and further proueth that these men buildeing all vppon scriptures haue either no scriptures at all or els such doubtfull vncertaine and vnresolued scriptures that true Religion which must be moste assured and infallible cannot be grownded or mayntayned by them For proofe whereof I will first recite their subscribed Article in this question and then frame my Argument Their Article is sett downe in these Articl of Rel. articul 6. definitiue wordes Holy scripture conteineth all thinges necessarie to saluation so that whatsoeuer is not read therein nor may be proued thereby is not to be required of any man that it should be beleeued as an Article of the faithe or be thought requisite or necessarie to saluation In the name of holy scripture wee doe vnderstand those canonicall Bookes of the old and new testament of whose authoritie was neuer any doubt in the Churche Of the first part of this Article I am to entreate in my chapter of Traditions hereafter Of the later part I will speake in this place onely first admonisheing my Readers in what ample maner D. Feild and others of that Religion Feild l. 3. c. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. pag. 60. 62. 63. 64. c. Feild l. 3. Titul c. 1. 2. take this worde the Churche for breuiate whereof the Titles of the first and seconde chapters of his third booke be these Of the diuision of the Christian worlde into the Greeke Latine Armenian Aethiopian and Nestorian Churches c. 1. of the harshe and vnaduised Censure of the Romanists condemninge all these Churches as Scismaticall and Hereticall cap. 2. Now this supposed I argue thus No bookes whose authoritie haue at any time beene doubted of in the Churche are by this Protestant Article to be allowed for Canonicall scriptures But all bookes that either Protestants or Catholicks receaue for canonicall haue in the Iudgment of these Protestants beene doubted of in the Church Therefore by these Protestants there be no canonicall scriptures at all The Maior proposition is euidently proued by their recited article defineing those bookes canonicall of whose authoritie was neuer any doubt in the Churche The Minor proposition is directly proued by D. Willet who writeth Willet Synop quaest 1. of scripture pag. 2. 3. edit An. 1594. and after published againe directly and at large how euery booke both of the old and new testament haue not onely beene doubted of but also denyed in this their Churche I suppose the laste edition of his booke was since the commeing in of his Maiestie my prescribed time otherwise it is so directly there proued by him that no Protestant can deny it And to shew the pitifull case of this their Protestant Article and Religion their Protestant Bishop of Wincester D. Bilson suru pag. 664. Bilson within my limitation writeth thus The scriptures themselues were not fully receaued in all places no not in Eusebius time Hee saith the Epistle of Iames of Iude the second of Peter the seconde and third of Iohn ar contradicted The Epistle to the Hebrues was contradicted the Churches of Syria did not receaue the seconde epistle of Peter nor the seconde and third of Iohn nor the Epistle of Iude nor the Apocalipse the like might be saide for the Churches of Arabia Will you hence conclude that these partes of scripture were not Apostolicke or that wee neede not receaue them now because they were formely doubted of Therefore the Protestants of England haue no certayne and vndoubted scripture if they will stand to their suscribed Articles and their owne subscription Which this Protestant Bishop before seeing the absurditie thereof hath refused to doe Therefore they may not as they doe denie those other bookes which Catholicks admitt vppon so greate and highest warrants before in Protestants Iudgment because in former tymes they haue beene doubted of as those laste recited by the testimonie of their Bishop and all the rest as D. Willet hath wittnessed haue beene To these I might add more Arguments from these Protestants true Greeke Churche and the generall Councell of Florence both allowed by some of these writers and yet alloweing and warranting for canonicall all bookes receaued by Catholicks And other Arguments by them but these ar sufficient for this matter at this time And as demonstration is made that these Protestants either haue no true scriptures at all or not the true Canon of holy scriptures So it is as euident that their Religion cannot be proued true and infallible as true Religion is by euidences that in their proceedings ar doubtfull fallible or no holy canonicall scriptures but by them excluded from that number and sacred Canon CHAPTER V. OF THE INTEGRITIE AND excellencie of the Latine vulgare translation of scriptures vsed in the Romane Church and Protestants false corrupt and erroneous Translations in their owne Iudgment and Censure NOW lett vs entreate of the vulgare Latine translation of holy scriptures handled in the next Chapter for whose allowance by these Protestants I argue by them in this maner That Latine Translation of scriptures which is to be vsed in scholes and pulpits and for antiquitie to be preferred before all others was vsed in the Church thirteene hundred yeares agoe by S. Augustine preferred

faithe or be thought requisite or necessarie to saluation Now to proue my second proposition D. Feild will testifie that both these scriptures and the right order of deductions from them in matters of faith are deliuered vnto vs by tradition onely his ●ordes be these Much contention there hath Feild l. 4. pag. 238. cap. 20. beene about traditions some vrgeing the necessitie of them and other reiecting them For the cleareing whereof wee must obserue that wee reiect not all for first wee receaue the number and names of the Authors of bookes diuine and canonicall as deliuered by tradition This tradition wee admitt The number Authors and integritie of the partes of these b●oke● wee receaue as deliuered by tradition Thus much for the scriptures that their number Authors partes and euery chapter verse and sentence is by tradition Then their pretended deductions from thence must needs be such for in euery theologicall Syllogisme they must needs take eyther the one or both propositions from this graunted tradition and their conclusion must much rather be tradition as also the maner of deduceing for they graunt they are not expressely in scripture and to decide this D. Feild wittnesseth againe in this order The Feild sup pag. 238. 239. seconde kinde of tradition which wee admitt is that summarie comprehension of the cheife heades of Christian doctrine conteyned in the Creede of the Apostles which was deliuered to the Churche as a Rule of her faith The orderly connexion and distinct explication as these principall Articles gathered into an Epitome i● rightly named a tradition And howsoeuer hee will contend that the Articles are in scripture or may thence be deduced in which his fellowes in Religion hereafter will giue him deniall for Christs discendeing into Hell communion of Saincts and others yet hee must needs graunt that the Creede of the Apostles being composed by them and deliuered to the Church as a Rule of her faith before the scriptures of the new testament wherein hee will say it is conteyned were written is absolutely a Tradition And yet hee maketh it so absolute a thinge that to vse his wordes in it are implyed and whence are inferred all conclusions Theologicall But that the Feild supr cap. 20. true explication also of scripture is a tradition hee wittnesseth in these wordes The third is that forme of Christian doctrine and explication Feild pag. 239. of the seuerall partes thereof which the first Christians receauinge of the same Aposiles that deliuered to them the scriptures commended to posterities This may right be named a tradition for that wee neede a playne and distinct explication of many things which are somewhat obs●urely conteyned in the scripture Therefore seing these deductions from scripture are not without tradition and thinges obscurely conteyned may not be receaued as articles of Religion by them without a playne and distinct explication by tradition and the playne things of scripture by them before as also that epitome of our faith the Apostles Creede are traditions it is manifestly proued that all Articles and matters of faith are by tradition by these their writeings Further I argue thus whatsoeuer doctrine is of that necessitie that the denyall Feild 〈…〉 obstinately is Heresie must needs be a matter of faith and necessarie to saluation But by these Protestants there is such doctrine onely by tradition Therefore some matters of faith and necessarie to saluation are beleeued onely by tradition The Maior proposition is euidently true yet further confirmed by these Protestants D. Couells Couell exam pag 202. Ormer dial 2. wordes be these Hereticks are neyther simple Infidells nor Idolaters but obstinately erringe in some fundamentall poynt M. Ormerod writeth thus hee is an Hereticke which so swarueth from the wholesome doctrine as contemning the Iudgment both of God and the Church persisteth in his opinion Thus wee see that Heresie is not without deniall of a matter of faith wherein both the Iudgment of God and the Churche is contemned The Minor is proued by D. Feild in this maner where first to vse his wordes hee alloweth for a cleare Instance not to be proued by Feild pag. 240. scripture the perpetuall virginitie of Mary and after confesseth that Hiluedius for pertinatiousely deniall thereof was condemned of Heresie In that hee saith this is no point of Christian faith but a Feild sup cap. 20. seemely truthe deliuered vnto vs by the Church of God fitting the sanctitie of the blessed Virgin and the honor due to so sanctified a vessell of Christs Incarnation as her bodie was hee speaketh truely in allowing it for a Tradition but denying it to be any point of Christian faith and yet telling vs that Heluidius for deniall of 〈◊〉 was condemned of Heresie hee both contradicteth himself the truth and his fellowe Protestants before assureing that Hereticks be they that obstinately erre in fundamentall points as D. Couell writeth or as M. Ormerod noteth swarue from the wholesome doctrine as contenininge the Iudgment both of God and the Church Where it is euident that a matter of faith is denied in euerye Heresie and also that things deliuered onely by tradition as D. Feild acknowledgeth the perpetuall virginitie of our blessed Ladie to be are the worde and Iudgment of God Further these Protestants seeme to condemne the Anabaptists and denyers of the necessitie to baptise Infants yet D. Feild writeth thus Feild pag. 239. The foarth kinde of Tradition is the cōtinued practise of such things as neyther are conteyned in the scripture expressely nor the example of such practise expressely there deliuered Of this sorte is the baptisme of Infants which is therefore named a tradition because it is not expressely deliuered in the scripture that the Apostles did baptize Infants nor any expresse precept there found that they shoulde doe it And his wordes of the plurall signification The fourth kinde of traditions such things of this sor●e● c. are sufficient argument that hee alloweth diuers other Traditions of this nature That which he addeth wee fynde the scripture to delyuer the grounds of it is expressely Feild pag. 228. Couell def of Hook pag. 85. against himself before and D. Couell thus assureing vs in these wordes doctrines deriued exhortations deducted Interpretation● agreeable are not the worde of God and D. Feild Feild supr pag. 226. priuate Interpretation is not so proposed and vrged as if they woulde binde all others to receaue it Yet all men are bownde to receaue and firmely beleeue articles and matters of faithe Further D. Willet telleth vs that Vigilantius Willet Antilog pag. 13. was condemned of Heresie for denying reuerence to Relickes and yet Protestants generally teach that doctrine is not conteyned in holy scriptures D. Feild writeth Feild pag. 138. l. 3. cap. 29. in these wordes Aerius condemned the custome of the Churche in nameing the deade at the altare and offeringe the sacrifice of the Eucharist for them For this his

Whitsontide was generally receaued as a Tradition deliuered by the Apostles then the times themselues not being either commaunded or directly exemplified in scripture must also be allowed by tradition And yet the Sabboth day in the old lawe which was abrogated by this tradition of the Sonday the Lords day as hee nameth it was so expressely commaunded by scripture that in order it is the third of the ten cheife commaundements and one of the first table belongeing to the worshipp of God Therefore a Tradition so powerable as to giue a ceaseinge to the expresse writtē worde lawe and commaundement of God must needs be of equall power And the Christians feaste of Easter likewise crosseing with and euacuateing the Pascha of the lawe written and without scripture onely by the prerogatiue of Tradition cannot be inferior especially seeing as before the Quartadec●mans denyers thereof were condemned as Hereticks by the primatiue Church for that cause And the like reason is of the feast of Whitesontide in the Church of Christ receaued by the same Rule of Easter onely by vnwritten tradition yet clearely abolisheinge and takeinge away the written lawe and word of God in that behalf Further I argue thus whatsoeuer is not a perfect and compleate Rule and Square in matters and questions of Religion without the help and dyrection of vnwritten traditions cannot be termed an absolute Rule in this kinde But the scripture and written worde of God by these Protestants is such Therefore by them no absolute and perfect Rule in matters of faithe The Maior is euidently true in the light of nature otherwise one and the same thinge in the same respect might be absolute and not absolute perfect and not perfect and two Contradictories might be true which is vnpossible The Minor proposition is thus proued by D. Feilde who speakeing of traditions Feild l. 4. cap. 20. pag. 239. vnwritten and yet allowed by him hath these wordes The third kinde of tradition is that forme of Christian doctrine and explication of the seuerall partes thereof which the first Christians receauing of the same Apostles that deliuered to them the scriptures commended to posterities This may rightly be named a tradition for that wee neede a playne and distinct explication of many things which are somewhat obscurely conteyned in the scripture Which is sufficient proofe that tradition vnwritten is the cause why many things are beleeued by faith grownded vppon tradition not written which the scriptures could neuer warrant vs to beleeue For things obscurely handled and not playnely and distinctly explicated which as hee saith is by tradition cannot be the formall obiect of faith by any possibilitie for seeing true certayne and vndoubted Reuelation from God euen by Protestants is the formall cause of beleeueinge things obscurely conteyned or taught cannot haue this priuiledge And yet by D. Feilds wordes many thinges be in this state without the assistance of tradition and yet firmely to be beleeued Therefore not the obscuritie in scripture but to vse his wordes a playne and distinet explication of many thinges by tradition receaued by the first Christians from the Apostles commended to posterities is the formall cause and reason of beleeueinge such verities Now to drawe to an end in this question of traditions D. Feild to his fowre before acknowledged kindes of traditions The holy scriptures the Creede of the Apostles the forme Feild pag. 238. l. 4. of Christian doctrine and explication of the seuerall parts thereof which the first Christians receaueinge of the same Apostles that deliuered to them the scriptures commended to posterities and the continued Feild pag. 239. practise of such thinges as neither are conteyned in the scripture expressely nor the example of such practise expressely there deliuered thoughe the growndes reasons and causes of the necessitie of such practise be there conteyned and the benefitt or good that followeth of it hee addeth the fift kinde in these wordes The fift kinde of traditions comprehendeth Feild supr pag. 239. such obseruations as in particulare are not commaunded in scripture nor the necessitie of them from thence concluded though in generall without limitation of times and other circumstances such things be there commaunded Of this sorte many thinke the obseruation of the lent faste to be the faste of the fourthe and the sixt dayes of the weeke and some other This supposed as also the Feild pag. 242. same Protestant Doctors Rules before to know true traditions the consent and doctrine of the Churche the moste renowned for learninge the constant Testimonie of the pastors of an Apostolicke Church amonge which next to generall Feild pag. 202. Councells bynding and commaunding all the Church of Rome is especially to be obeyed reuerenced and respected as moste priuiledged from error yt must needs be euident by these Protestants that Traditions whether deliuered in scripture to be deduced from them or to be receaued without scripture are to be adiudged for the Romane Churche for that before is proued by them to be the true Church of Christ the Pope of Rome to be the supreame commaunding Ruler in it that the scriptures receaued by it are Canonicall and the vndowbted worde of God and all true and Iuridicall expositions and deductions from them are onely for the doctrine of the same Churche of Rome And so their other grounted Rules of generall Councells and Learned Fathers to be handled in the next chapters doe also teach vnto vs the same doctrines by these Protestants for by their Iudgment they may not nor can proceede in such b●sines but by the holy scriptures and true expositions and deductions from them allreadie proued by these Protestants for the present Roman Church Therefore I conclude this question with this Arguments following Whatsoeuer doctrines in Religion generall Councells the highest binding and commaunding Rule and authoritie ouer all Christians in the Iudgment of Protestants haue defined by the Bishops and Fathers assembled in them in matters of Religion by traditions written or vnwritten are to be receaued and embraced of all But all or the cheefest Articles in question betweene Catholicks and Protestants are directly concluded by the grounte of these Protestants by the Councells and Bishops in them assembled at Nyce the seconde the greate Laterane Florence and Constance Basile cited and allowed for generall Councells by the Protestant Bishop of Winchester D. Bilson D. Willet D. Couell M. Bils Middlet papist ●9 119. 120. 124. 125. Willet synop cont 1. q. 7. Liniban ap Parkes and others in such maner as the present Church of Rome now teacheth Therefore they ought so to be receaued and embraced of all Christians bothe propositions are graunted before by these Protestants or in these citations Therefore nothinge remayneth to be proued in this Argument And because these Protestants Parkes pag. 137. 180. Couell def of Hook pag. 21. Parkes ag lymb pag. 176. Willet Antil pag. 178. c. Abbot ag Hill pag 38. 48. 49. 51.

of S. Paule How shall they call on hym in whome they doe not beleeue being vrged to Rom. 10. proue that faith goeth before prayer and other good workes without which they teach a man is not iustified and which themselues vrge in a sence like to that as they thoughe vntruely suppose against prayer to Angells and Saincts in whome wee doe beleeue yet the beleeuing allthough not in them that it is lawfull to pray to them sufficeth in that case hee maketh his supposed faith a very chimericall fiction and no true reall thinge of that nature but is forced to this absurditie to say assuring faith and prayer proceeding after Wottō def of Perkins pag. 209. faith be simul tempore bothe together in the same instant of time Which is vnpossible being diuers distinct acts specified from diuers obiects produced by diuers powers and operations of the soule one precedent going before the other following and to vse his owne words proceeding after Therefore by himself except before and after Prius Posterius be simul and simul tempore together and together in tyme which euery yonge logitian in Cambridge will tell him is moste childish and absurde both this his Answere is a new grosse absurditie and that his former doctrine that cannot be otherwise defended is of like qualitie which will more appeare in the next argument by this mans diuinitie also Therefore I argue fur●her thus Nothinge that wanteth assurednes but hath doubteinge and is not without doubt can be a matter of faith But this Protestant position euen by their owne confession wanteth assurednes hath doubting and is not without doubt Therefore it is no matter of faith or true faith The Maior or first proposition is so certainely true that Protestāts generally acknowledge as the truthe is that nothing can be more certayne and vndoubted then faith for being grownded vppon the vnfallible word and Reuelation of God which it moste vndoubtedly certayne true assured and without all doubt vnpossible to be otherwise ●f God be God and truthe it self How can there be any place of doubt of any thinge of that nature and therefore that common sayeing Dubius in fide est infidelis hee that doubteth in faith is an Infidell so much as in him lyeth makeing God vnworthe to be beleued is ordinaryly allowed with Protestants The Minor proposition is also proued by Protestants and M. Wotton himself wittnesseth of this their Imagined faith in these wordes Without doubt it is not And againe in this Wottō def of Perkins pag. 135. 152. pag. 161. maner I may graunt the faithfull ordinarily are not assured of their saluation by such a faith as hath no doubteing in it And further thus our faith is not without some doubteing and our feeleing not so stronge as it should and may be And they haue spoken so longe in defence of this their fantasticall faith that they proued themselues not to haue a sownd and certayne faithe of those things that of all others are moste generally beleeued of all excepting Atheists that there is a God for amonge Protestants the same Protestant faith there be such doubts Whether there be a God or no. Wherefore M. Parkes a Protestant writer amonge them might iustly speake of his English fellowes in Religion in this maner Heresie and Infidelitie Ioyne and labour to subuert Parkes Apol. pref and ouerthrowe all grownds of Christian Religion Thus hee of these Protestants Againe I argue in this maner from the 16. article of their Religion Where it is thus Artic. 16. defined After wee haue receaued the holy Ghost wee may depart from grace and fall into syn And after it teacheth that true repentance procureth forgiuenes of syn Now this true repentance either goeth before or followeth this their Imagined iustifieing faith If it goeth before this their faith then that faith iustifieth not because man is made iust before any Act of that applying faith is exercised If this Repentance followeth then againe that their supposed faith doth not iustifie for by their owne doctrine a synner Impenitent is not iust For theyr applying faith is to apply as they say the promises of Christ vnto vs but Christ in scriptures is so fare from promisinge saluation to man impenitent that hee promiseth and denownceth damnation That both these Acts should be together is vnpossible as I haue demonstrated against M. Wotton in the like case before This is also proued by the Arguments concerning predestination in the former chapter for those Protestants which hold this Iustification by faith defend also assurednes of predestination teaching that euery one that is at any time iust is predestinate and so the one is as well knowne vnto them as the other and either of them a matter of faith with these men Againe faith and hope be distinguished faith is the grownds of things to be hoped Faith Hope Charitie these three But where there is assured faith to obtayne a thinge or hauing a thinge Hope is there euacuated Againe These Protestants with the scriptures graunt that the iuste and iustified are in heauen But faith is not in heauen being euacuated by beatificall vision therefore Iustice is not by faith Againe faith is not discursyue D. Feild Feild pag. 226. Couell def of Hooker pag. 85. writeth as truthe is that priuate Interpretations bynde not and D. Couell saith doctrines deriued are not the word of God then they are not matter of faith But all these pretensed faithes of these Protestants are onely their owne priuate interpretations applications and deriued doctrynes for no scripture saith that any one Protestant in particular D. Willet D. Powell or other is iustified or shall be saued Therefore no faith much lesse iustifying faith CHAPTER III. WHEREIN BY THESE PREsent English Protestant writers the Catholicke doctrine of Iustification by inherent grace and Iustice is proued against the same Protestants and their opinion NOW it will be no difficultie for a Christian man to beleeue doctrine of inherent grace ●ustice iustification by good workes if hee will as all Christians doe are ought graunt and beleeue any iustification at all For the contrary opinion of Protestants being euen by Protestants our Aduersaries themselues confuted that of the Catholicke Church must needs be true In which question the Councell of Trent for Catholicks Concil Trid. sess 6. can 11. defineth thus If any shall say a man is iustified either by onely Imputation of the Iustice of Christ or the onely remission of syns excluding grace and charitie which is diffused in their harts by the holy Ghost and is inherent or that the grace whereby wee are iustified is onely the fauour of God lett him be Anathema For proofe of which doctrine euen by my contry Protestants and to procure their conformitie as they ought first I argue thus Wheresoeuer there be degrees of Inherent Iustice and man more or lesse accordingly so iustified there must needs be inherent Iustice and iustification by

ensue Transsubstantiation the Sacrifice of Masse worshipping of Imadges Iustification by workes the supreamacie of the Pope prohibition of Marriadge in the cleargie which hee calleth the grossest points of popery Hee addeth also an equalitie of Bishops onoly approueth the Hebrue scripture Iustification by faith and disliketh free will These bee all their Exceptions neither doth the Booke of Articles of their Religion make mention of any other much materiall except Sacraments whereof hereafter then either such as I haue allreadie handled or bee comprised in these Cataloges Allthough all in these remembred are not the doctrine of the Parlament Protestant Church of England But Additions and new Inuentions of particular Puritanes as D. Willets Hebrue scriptures equalitie of Bishops c. In which excepting that which I haue spoken of the scriptures before consonant to the Councell of Trent I must leaue him to bee censured as a periured man hauing sworne to their Articles by their owne Religion lawes and proceedings For the rest most of them bee proued by themselues before as Popes supremacie Indulgences Imadges Iustification by workes or inherent Iustice not onely by faith and free will All the others I am now to examine And first of Transsubstantiation and Christs reall presence in the blessed Eucharist Because it comprehendeth as well this maner of Christs presence and a true Sacrifice as they all graunt vppon proofe of that veritie as the question also of D. Sutcliffs termed half communion For if Christ bee substantially truly and wholly present in both kinds Then it is not an half but whole communion and receauing of Christ for hee must needs bee equally receaued and participated vnder the one as vnder bo●h kindes and formes according D. Thom. 3. p q. 80. ar 3. Gabr. lect 84. Ric. d. 11. Caiet 3. p. q 3. ar 3. Sot d 12. q. 1. ar 12. pet Sot lect 20. Euchar L●des Claud. de Saincts Ruard alij to the common opinion of schooles aswell longe before the Councell of Constance as after teaching that no more fruite is communicated and giuen to the Receauers and Communicants by both then by one kinde this supposed I Argue thus in this Question Whatsoeuer doctrine the highest binding authoritatiue and commaunding Iudgment which by these Protestants before is a generall Councell hath determined defined concluded is to bee embraced and mayntained But the doctrine of Christs reall presence and Transsubstantiation is such Therefore to bee embraced and maintayned The Maior is euident and often graunted by many of these Protestants among whome D. Feild writeth thus The Bishops assembled in a generall Councell may interpret Feild l. 4. c. 16. the scripture and by their authoritie suppresse all them that shall gayne say such Interpretations and subiect euery man that shall disobey such determinations as they consent vppon to excommunication and censures of like nature The Minor is also proued Couell defof Hook pag. 21 Parkes against Limbom pag. 176. Tom. ● Cōcil in Concil Later Bergam hist an 1213. Genebr hist an 1215. Palmer Floren. chron an 1215. Concil Lateran cap. 1. by them directly in this maner for first both D. Couell and M. Parkes cite and allow the Councell of Laterane as a Rule of faith And hauing present in it the Patriarkes of Greece Constantinople and Hierusalem 70. Metropolitanes 400. Bishops and other Fathers aboue 800. together with the Legates both of the Greeke and Romane Empire with the Orators of the Kings of Hierusalem Fraunce Spayne England so especially binding vs and Cyprus I trust the rest of them cannot deny it to bee generall if euer any was so termed this beeing farr the greatest that euer was in the worlde now that it defined Christs reall presence in the blessed Sacrament is euidently demonstrated by these expresse words of the Councell graunted by Protestants Verum Christi Corpus Sanguis in Sacramento altaris sub speciebus panis vini veraciter continetur transsubstantiatis pane in Corpus vino in Sanguinem potestate diuina The true bodie and blood of Christ is truely conteyned in the Sacrament of the altare vnder the formes of breade and wyne the breade beeing transsubstantiated into his bodie and the wine into his blood by the diuine power Therefore all English Protestants are Feild l. 4. c. 16. suppressed by D. Feilds sentence before from gayne saying it And to shew further that this was no new and straunge doctrine then first held and defined but of the auncient primatiue Fathers thus I argue againe in this question Whosoeuer held that there is in this Sacrament a conuersion mutation of one thinge into an other and not in shape but in nature that breade is made Christs bodie that the visible creatures are chaunged into the substance of Christs body blood c. Doe and must needs graunt transsubstantiation and Christs reall presence in the B. Sacrament But the auncient Fathers doe this Therefore they teach and graunt Transsubstantiation The Maior is euident those termes beeing equiualent with transsubstantiation and seme the verie same both in effect and name The Minor is proued by M. Perkins in these Perkins probl pag. 153. 154. words The Auncients when they speake of the supper haue many formes of speache which shew a conuersion Ambrose vseth the name of conuersion and the name of mutation Ciprian saith it is chaunged not in shape but in nature Origen saith that breade is made the body by prayer Gaudentius saith Christs bodie is made of breade and his blood of wyne Eusebius Emissenus saith that the Preist by secret power doth chaunge the visible creatures into the substance of Christs bodie and blood And that the breade doth passe into the nature of our Lords bodie Anselmes saith that the breads doth flitt into Christs bodie Fulbertus saith it is transfused Algerus saith it is transiected and transferred into Christs bodie Hitherto this Protestants words of those auncient Fathers doctrine in this point to which hee might haue added many more and more conuincing But hee knew these too many and manifest against them as appeareth by this his friuolous glosse vppon their expresse sentences confounding and confuting himself in his owne words which bee these But the Auncient Doctors where they speake of the conuersion and chaunge of the breade they vnderstand the chaunge of the vse and condition not of the substance What man but impudent and voide of all shame and grace would Father vppon so many holy and renowned Learned Fathers so grosse equiuocation or rather flatt lyinge to speake one thinge and meane an other as hee speaketh and this in so cheefe and materiall article of Faith and Religion wherein not the least equiuocation may bee vsed if it could saue the life of thousands or millions of men And to confound this Sacramentarie by his owne fellowes First D. Feild Feild pag. 150. writeth thus The bodie of Christ is present in and with the sanctified Elements The primatiue Church

and the Hebrue Greeke Apostles also as Athenians But now sixe yeares triall hath taught that it is one thinge to dreame of tongues an other to knowe them And now they are said to be at a stand And would willingly giue ouer but that the Kings authoritie requireth an end But that your most learned Maiestie may se what is to be hoped for from them least the Churches be forced to buy bables for the word of God I will in few words deleuer that it may appeace that such pore students are not to be suffered to lest with the Kinge and the flocke Hitherto this greate linguists oration his exceptions are to tedious to be recited Onely because these men haue so magnified the Hebrue text of the old testament in respect of the septuaginta and vulgare Latine now this greate searcher of Hebrue monuments can heare onely for hee neuer se either of them of two perfect Hebrue copies of the old testament in all the world and both they be in the Iewes custodye one in Hierusalem and the other at Nehardegh in Mosopotamia Veteris testamenti duo exemplaria tam accurata atque mens humana prouidere potuit seruantur à Iudaeis Hierosolymis alterum alterum Nehardeghae in Mesopotamia Then if wee haue no better comfort from these Hebritians for a true Hebrue text then that England neither hath had or can procure any and none is to be had but from our Enemyes the Iewes and yet if they could procure a true copie which they haue not done there is not any one in England by their owne Iudgments able truely to translate it and these last translators were weary of their entreprise and would haue giuen it ouer after sixe yeares experience of their disabilitie but that the Kings Maiesties pleasure was to haue one end or other wee may not easely admitt such translations for holy scriptures nor Religion deduced from them for a true Religion And ●his the rather because since the birth of this new translation it is condemned by their owne approued writeings I will omitt others and onely cite one place out of their late commended history of the world in these Histor of the world l. 1. cap. ● §. 14. Chron 2. cap. 21. v. 16. The Protest new transl sup words The ill translation of Ethiopia for Chus is amonge other places made moste apparant in the second of Chronicles in these words So the Lord styrred vpp against Iehoram the spiritt of the Philistines and the Arabians which confine the Ethiopians The Geneua translation hath it which were besides the Ethiopians the new English readeth thus more ouer the lord stirred vpp against Iohoram the spiritt of the Philistines and of the Arabians that were neare the Ethiopians Now how farre it is betweene the Philistines and the Negros or Ethiopians euery man that looketh in a mapp may Iudge For hee Philistines and Arabians doe mixt and ioyne with the land of the Chusites and are distant from Ethiopia about two and thirtie or three and thirtie degrees and therefore not their next neighbours but all Egipt and the deserts of Sur and Pharan are betweene them And to aggrauate this matter the more these new Protestant translators takeing vppon them to translate the old testament out of the Hebrue and new out of the Greeke and onely alloweing those texts in words are so farre from performing it in deeds that in the old testament they haue forsaken the Hebrue text diuers thowsands of times as may be proued by their owne merginall obseruations of that matter my leasure was not to recompt them all but in Genesis the first booke they haue thus behaued themselues aboue two hundred tymes and after the same rate in all the rest As in the 5. 20. and 25. chapter of the booke of Iudges fourtye times Fyfteene tymes in Sam. l. 1. cap. 18. in the 2. Booke of Samuel in cap. 22. thirteene times in cap. 1. 7. 18 20. in fower chapters aboue fyfty times in the third booke of Kings And so they deale with the Greeke in the new testament and in the old testament where the scripture is written in the Chaldy and Hebrue mixed as in the time of captiuitie so they vse the Chaldy tongue as in Esra cap. 4. they forsake the Hebrue thrise and the Chaldye eleuen or twelue times in the second chapter of Daniel they leaue it thirteene times in the third chapter twelue times in the 5. chapter neyne times c. and in these and other places where they refuse the originall tonge as for example the Hebrue they doe it not many times to preferre either the vulgare Latine Septuagin●a or Syriacke but their owne conceipt and Imagination Yet in places where they forsake the originall to preferre any of the other it is euidently against their owne profession and Religion and in places of their former translations censured by Mr. Gregory Martyne or other English Catholicks they often times neither regard their owne or ours but giue vs new scriptures and reuelations of their owne thoughe not many times in greate matters and so in this multiplication and chaunge of scriptures they haue also multiplied and chaunged Religion deduced from them and for that one Article of their auntient creed I beleeue in the holy ghost may now say by such proceedings wee beleeue in the foure and fourtie English Protestant holy Ghosts For whosoeuer reiect all texts of scripture as their owne marginall obseruations tell vs they doe though as before often not in great things yet sometimes otherwise and deny vnwritten traditions of this kinde must needs be in such estate CHAPTER VI. PROVETH BY THESE PROtestants that the true and Iuridicall exposition of scriptures is against them and for the doctrine of the Romane Church AFTER these I am to entreate of the true lawfull and Iuridicall Exposition of holy scriptures And that it belongeth to the Church of Rome haueing both the true scriptures the true translation of them and it self haueing power and authoritie being the true Church of Christ to propose it to all Christians and not to these Protestants for no companie or congregation of men wanting and denying diuers bookes of scriptures in which diuers Articles of Religion as prayer to Angels their patronadge prayer and sacrifice for the Deade meritt of good workes c. are directly proued not so apparently taught in other scriptures besides followeing and alloweing erroneous and corrupt translations can haue the true and Iuridicall exposition of scriptures especially hauing no Iurisdiction ouer others by their owne graunt But the English Protestants are in this state Therefore they haue not this true lawfull and Iuridicall exposition of scriptures Bothe propositions are graunted before and so nothinge remaineth to be proued in this argument Further I argue thus No priuate Interpretation of scriptures by conference of places and such Rules as Protestants assigne for Interpreteinge scripture is bindeing or iuridicall But all Protestant Expositions in respect of true byndeing

thinke be plurall That whosoeuer by their Interpretations should allowe such absurdities cannot haue the true interpretation of scriptures Now the Minor is easely proued by him also for all men are bownde to obey lawfull superioritie and authoritie such as hee saith a generall Councell hath ouer all Christians in these cases his wordes before cited be these They that haue supreame Feild l. 4. ● 16. pag. 228. power that is the Bishops assembled in a generall Councell may interpret the scripture and by their authoritie suppresse all them that shall gaynesay such Interpretations and subiect euery man that shall disobey such determination as they consent vppon to excommunication and Censures of like nature Wherefore seing generall Councells haue this bindeing and commaundeing power ouer all men by these Protestants and yet by their Article before may erre and haue Art 21. sup erred euen in things pertayning vnto God the whole Christian worlde with so many absurdities may be in this damnable error the Church might cease not be Catholicke Christ Feild pag. 203. should be without a Church which D. Feild before esteemeth greate absurdities Againe thus I argue They which straungely peruert bely depraue abuse and falsefye holy scriptures cannot be thought to be true interpreters of them But M. Parkes so testifieth of our Parkes ag lymbom def of the 1. 2. 3. testim English Protestants Therefore they cannot be thought to be true Interpreters of them Notheing remaineth in this Argument to be proued Further I argue thus No Interpreters or expositors of scripture whose Interpretations be partiall vntrue seditious sauoureing of Treason poysen the Ghospell c. are to be Iudged true and Iuridicall But the English Protestants hy their owne testimonyes be such Therefore not to be iudged true and iuridicall interpreters The Maior is true and euident And the Minor thus proued first by the Protestant Confer at Hampt pag. 47. conference in these wordes The notes annexed to the Geneua translation some are very partiall vntrue seditious and sauoureing to● much of daungerous and trayterous conceits Yet these were allowed and published as publicke and approued interpretations An other Protestant writeth in this maner The Bishops Aduerment An. 1604. notes betray our Lord and Redeemer and befoole the rocke of saluation they are the verie poyson to all the Ghospell M. Ormerod writeth thus of his fellowe Ormer pict purit q. 4. Protestants They fill the margents of their bookes full of places of scripture in a wronge sense that by this meanes they might more easely deceaue the simple people They neither care for Maior Minor nor Conclusion so they may say some thinge They point their margents with shamefull abuseing of scripture To these I might add more arguments as that by their owne testimonies they are Hereticks Scismaticks haue no ttue Churche no true Religion and the like as amonge other reasons from themselues why Catholiks may not communicate with them in spirituall and religeous affayres is proued in a late treatise against them I will therefore passe them ouer as allready proued CHAPTER VII WHEREIN BY THESE PROtestants is proued that vnwritten traditions lawfully proued are the word of God equally as the holy scriptures That many such are and all confirme the doctrine of the Church of Rome and condemne Protestants Religion AFTER this entreateinge of holy scriptures the written worde of God lett vs come to that parte of his sacred worde delyuered by traditions and vnwritten verities preserued and proposed to faithfull Christians by the holy spouse and Church of Christ whose Iudgment Rule and direction is so dignified aboue all Inferiour Iudgments by these Protestants before Concerninge the validitie and authoritie of truely proued traditions I argue thus All Rules Groundes and Authorities in matters of Religion that are equall with holy scriptures in the Iudgment of Protestants the highest Rule in such causes are ●eghely to be reuerenced and obeyed of all Christians But the holy traditions and vnwritten verities deliuered by Christ and Apostles being lawfully proued are of this nature Therefore to be reuerenced embraced and receaued The Maior proposition is euidently true for where there is absolute equalitie there is not inferioritie but paritie as is manifest in all equalities The Minor is thus proued in this maner first M. Wotton speakeing of such hath these Wotton def of Perk. pag. 405. pag. 436. supr words out of all question wee are bounde to keepe them and telleth vs that M. Perkins was of the same opinion D. Feild speaketh thus concerninge traditions In this question by tradition wee vnderstand such partes of Christian doctrine or Feild pag. 238. l. 4. cap. 20. discipline as were not written by them by whom● they were first deliuered For thus our Aduersaries vnderstand traditions which they diuide into diuers kindes First in respect of the authors so makeing them of three sortes Diuine Apostolicall and Ecclesiasticall Secondly in respect of the matter they concerne in which respect they make them to be of two sortes for either they concerne matters of fai●he or matters of manners and these later againe either temporall or perpetuall vniuersall or particular All these in their seuerall kindes they make equall with the words precepts and doctrines of Christ the Apostles and pastors of the Church left vnto vs in writeinge Neither is there any reason why they should not so doe if they could proue any such vnwritten verities For it is not the writeing that giueth things their authoritie but the worthe and credit of him that deliuereth them though by worde and lyuely voyce onely Thus the authoritie of Traditions is iustified by Protestants to be equall with the scriptures if they can be proued Now because Protestants mayntayneinge the sufficiencie of scripture for matters of faith deny traditions of that nature I argue in this maner All Articles and matters of faith are in Protestants Iudgment proued and deliuered to vs by tradition Therefore some articles and matters of faith are in their Iudgment or so must be graunted to be deliuered by tradition The consequence is euident for euery generall proposition includeth the particular The Antecedent is thus proued by them Whosoeuer doe graunte those things which by them conteyne all matters and Articles of faith to be delyuered by tradition must needs allowe traditions in matters of faith But these Protestants doe so Therefore they must allowe such traditions The Maior is euident for whatsoeuer conteineth all excludeth none and so comprehending all comprehendeth also some and the parts of that all The Minor is likewise proued in this maner supposeing the Common opinion of these Protestants set downe in the sixt Article of their Religion Articl of Relig. art 6. in these wordes Holy scripture conteyneth all things necessarie to saluation so that whatsoeuer i● not reade th●rein nor may be proued thereby is not to be required of any man that it should be beleeued as an Article of the