all truth and that all things must be examined ruled and reformed by the same For it is not the rule of this verity and that of greatest consequence to witt that the bookes of the old and new Testament are canonicall and writen by deuine reuelation Again to reiect any booke from the number of the Canonicall as for example you doe reiect that of Tobias and admitt the Ghospell of S. Mathew you guide not your selues by this rule of the pure word but as you giue it out of the inward persuasion of the holy Ghost See how your articles destroy each other Tell me farther Do you hold that one may and ought to baptize little infants That we must not rebaptize hereticques which haue been baptized in the name of the B. Trinity that we must keepe holy sunday and not saturday you beleeue that the Mother of God remayned alwayes a virgin Notwithstanding you finde not one text of Scripture to iustify any of these points why do you then contradict your selues and your article which teacheth that the written word is the rule of all truth Doth not S. Paul in the. 2. to the Thessalon 2. vers 15. exhort saying Stand and hold fast the instructions our translation reads traditions which you haue learned eyther by our word or by our epistle Note that he makes mention of the word besides that which is written in Scripture and in the 2. to Timothe 2. Vers 2. The things which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses these commend to faythfull men which shall be fitt to teach others also Doe not you perceaue a diuine word taught not by writing but by word of mouth In the. 1. to the Cor. 11. Vers 34. Other things I will set in order when I come Such ordinances by word of mouth are they not as well deuine as those which are sett downe in writing I omit many other authorities to this purpose by the way only citing these for that it is not my intent to iustify and prooue vnto you in this treatise that which we beleeue My only scope is to shew vnto you that you are abused and that the pure word teacheth no such thing as your articles report This haue I performed in this article which I haue examined with the textes cited for the same for the Article saith that the written word is the rule of all truth and in the passages alledged we neyther read written word nor the rule of all truth Wherfore they haue not that which the article saith otherwise knowing to reade we should see it there For conclusion heereof the Caluinists in this article of greatest importance are therefore abused and by consequence in all the rest I before marked which are out of this deduced against vs which are in great number Reuew them and in so many points acknowledg your selues deceaued I haue at large examined this article aswell for that as hath been shewed it is of greatest importance as also for that the falshood therof being discouered the Ministers are bereaued of the most efficatious and ordinary meanes they had to defend themselues in these conflicts for they alwayes fly for refuge to this Proposition That nothing must be beleeued bus that which is in the Scripture Their custome is to question vs where finde you Purgatory in the Scripture or the reall presence of the body of Iesus Christ in the sacrament of the Altar c. For say they if it be not there it is superstition to beleeue it And by this meanes in lieu of reforming our pretended abuses by the pure word they cunningly engage vs to prooue our faith A wyly deuise Catholicks looke vnto their fingers and be sure that when they make you such questions you take not vppon you to be disputants but allthough you haue many authorities yett bring no place of Scripture to iustify your cause Marke well the wilines of the Aduersaries They are bound by their .31 article to reforme vs and by their 5 to do it by the pure word by this disguise and faire apparence drawing many to their part But their practise is after another fashion For knowing well that they are neuer able to performe that which they haue bound themselues vnto to disingage themselues from this obligation by a fine deuise they endeuour to make vs the plaintifs questioning vs after the fashion aforesaid And if in awnswere of their questions you bring some expresse textes for your self behold by this the Minister hath gott his neck out of the coller and hauing before hand quitt himself of all Anquity Fathers Miracles c. he will turne of the Scripture at his owne pleasure and in fine delude you though you haue ten cleere textes for your purpose Of this we haue dayly experience Handle him in an other fashion You must neuer lett him change his coate He is obliged by the Confession of his faith to shew you by the pure word your errours hold him to it there to his testimonies of the pure word which must sett downe your pretended errours Doe but this and I warrant you the Minister will quickly be brought vpon his knees and haue a care you release him not but keepe him downe But how vrge him still with this that he shew you some expresse text of Scripture which sayth That there is no Purgatory or That the body of Iesus Christ is not in the Eucharist It is his charge to do it who hath pawned his word to shew vs by the pure word our errours But if he hope to scape the torture by this sleight saying that he sufficiently sheweth our errour in that as he sayth we cannot shew by the Scripture Purgatory or the reall presence Haue a care that though you haue many cleere textes on your side bring none make not your selues Plaintifs for so he will be deliuered from the rack but presse him eagrely that he shw you that he promised or at least that nothing must be beleeued but that which is in the Scripture for by this maxime alone doth he argue you of errour And then that after he hath donne this you will produce your places Not being able to shew this proposition in the whole Scripture as by the precedent examen I haue shewd he cannot he is driuen to a non plus nor hath he any meanes to scape away Thus shall you shew breefly euidently that their 31. and 5. articles ar false which promised to reforme our pretended abuses by the pure word and cannot do it And that the Mimisters are egregious impostours which vnder such a faire pretext haue seduced so many thowsands of soules And you of the pretended religion put but your Ministers to this triall and you will see them presently fall speechles and your selues apparently abused Before we passe any farther I cannot omitt to examine breeflie one clause of the 24. article which I before let passe for that for it there is cited in the margent a texte which is not
M. LE HVCHER MINISTER OF AMYENS IN FRANCE COMPELLED to fly from the pure word of Holy write strucke dumme and made to runne away Vppon the subiect of the B. Sacrament of the Altar By F. FRANCIS VERON of the Society of IESVS encountring him with the Bible of Geneua only In the presence of the Duke de Longueuille VVith a briefe and easie meanes by which each Catholicke may in like manner put to flight any Minister or Sectarie Sent from Sieur de la Tour one of the sayd Dukes Gentlemen to Sieur de Rotois Gentleman of the Kings game Printed Explication of the Title This Conference was held three seuerall times In the first the Father of the Society compelled the Minister to abandone the pure word of the holie scripture In the 2. he putt him to silence In the 3. he made him runne away Testimony of the said conference It is signed by the Father of the Society by the Duke of Longueuilles Gentlemen who accompanying theyr Lord were present therat and in parte by the Minister which refused to subcribe to that which putt him most to confusion The subcriptions follow in theyr proper place To the Reader TWo things there are good Reader which made me desirous of thy eternall good to turne for thy vse this little treatise into our language The one the breuity and pleasure it yealdeth the other the easines and perspicuity with which it confuteth it instructeth The first suteth well to that lazy humour which heresy hath brought into our country wherby men haue little gust to read ought that concernes their soules and scarse ought of that vnles it be well seasoned with extraordinary delight The other supposing thy capacity and affection to truth which if affection misleade me not is equall to that of most Nations and by heresy I hope not maliciously peruerted or at least not puruersly obstinate therin makes me presume thou wilt easily see and quickly leaue that blind mans maze of the falsly pure pretended word wherin thou hast beene long ledde round Both of them by Gods assistance promisse vnto me no little fruite of this small worke which is that I hartely desyre for thy soules good and Gods greater glory Farewell Thy welwiller in IESVS CHRIST D. V. A LETTER OF Mr. DE LA TOVR GENTLEMAN TO THE DVKE OF LONGVEVILLE VVritten vnto Mr. de Rotois Gentleman of the Kings game SYR the ardent zeale I know you haue of the good and glory of our Religion makes me suppose you wil receaue a singular content in the relation of a priuate conference had of late in the presence of my Lord the Duke of Longueuille and his followers of the Marques de Boniuet of the Lady de Bourcq diuers others aswell Catholiks as Sectaries between Father Francis Veron of the Society of IESVS preacher for this present in the great Church of this Citty M. le Hucher Minister of the Caluinists in the same place touching that point of our Faith of the body of the sōne of God in the Sacrament of the Altar The said Father agreeing to deale with that Minister by the Bible of Geneua only and the Confession of faith of the reformed This conference hath had three sessions at the first I was not present not being aduertised of the same Notwithstanding at the beginning of the second the actes of the former session were read alowed auowed by both parties as authenticall Wherfore I will make recitall of that which passed in the sight of my Lord vs that were attending on him besides a great multitude of diuerse of the one and the other Religion The said Father on the morrow after the last conference which was Sunday made an ample narration of the three passed meetings to aboue eight thowsand persones assembled in the Church of our Lady to heare his sermon The most heerof is signed as you will see after wherfore no man can iustlie call in question a matter so cleerly testified Our Deuine atchieued three famous victories For the Minister hauing promised conformably to the 31. and 5. articles of theyr Confession of their faith to shew by the pure word of the Bible that we erred in that beleefe we haue that the body of our Lord is in the Eucharist he was constrained in the first session and againe in the entrance vnto the second trial to sly from his fortresse of the pure word of force disclaiming from the pure scripture of Geneua and withall aknowledged and cōfessed that there was no expresse text in all the scripture euen by the Geneua translation which setting a side all illations did condemne vs of errour But quoth the Minister by necessary consequence out of the pure worde of God I will make it cleare that you do erre The night comming on made our combatant cease the pursuite not driue him farther who already sheltred himself within the ruinous edifice of a Consequence The Father told me that it was not of small importāce to make the Sectaries clearly see confesse that they haue not for themselues the pure scripture but only certain consequences for quoth he the cause that makes so many to beginne and continue in their reuolt from Gods Church is for that they persuade themselues that they haue on their sides the pure word of God for so saith the 5. article of their Confession that they admitt nothing for the rule of faith but the pure word they do veryly suppose that that Confession conteineth nothing but that which is in the pure worde After the approbation of that passed before the Minister at the second session was admitted to deduce his necessary consequence by which he would demōstrate how farre we wandred from the truth He first fetched long vagaries round about afterward the Father so dexterously put him beside all his proofes in briefe brought him to such pangues that for the finall proposition he had nothing to say against the Father but ô you deny to much after which he became alltogeather speechles as I wil more largely declare her after Certes you would haue been extraordinarily recreated to behold how he that erewhile made profession to proue by the pure word of God that we were Idolaters in lieu of the pure word had not a word to help himself saue this only that the Iesuite denied to much wee I am sure had good sport therin Ours which had thus chased the Minister still put him to these pāgues for a long time still vrging him thus M. Minister prooue your consequence Neither did he omitt to signifie plainly and alowde to the whole assemblie to what exigents the poore Minister was brought to who sustained the Confession of the faith of the reformed Religion and bragged to discouer by the pure word our errours Had not the quality of the Ministers cause been such as it was I should haue had compassion to haue seen him in that plight and so oppressed He desired they would giue him that
refuse this fashion of reforming For why should I not togeather with the Scripture help my self with all other rules to discerne the truth thereby Especially since that the Scripture no where saith that it self alone is the rule of all verity It seemes hard to me to renoūce al Antiquity Coūcels Miracles all the rest before sett downe Neuertheles to ioyne with you in Conference I am content of my owne accord to graunt you the title of Reformer by the pure written word am ready to renounce al those rules specified prouided allwaies that you keepe your promise to witt that you shew me my errours by the pure Scripture 3. There are diuers translations of the Scriptures by which I pray you will you please to reforme me Perchance you intēd by that of Geneua I might iustly refuse to be reformed by that Bible being it is so curtalled in diuers places corrupted and changed Yet to haue your reformation I wil do you this third fauour I am content to open my eyes and follow your Religion if you shew my by the pure word contained in the Geneua version both the truth of the faith you Euangelize allso my errours I haue donne you three great fauours 1. to graunt you the title of a Reformer 2. to be a Reformer by the pure word The third to make this triall by the pure word of the Geneua version But looke you bring me nothing els but the pure word for if in steede of it you shift me of with your interpretations you forsake the Confession of your faith breake the couenants made betweene vs. For I am not so vnaduised to renounce all Antiquity Councells Miracles and the rest for your interpretations and opinions Agreeably to this to your owne promise that which is sett downe in your 5. article I demaund two things at your hands First that you shew me by the pure word the truth of all those articles which you will haue me to beleeue which I am ready to do if I see them in the Bible euen of Geneua Secondly that by the same pure word you shew me my errours Both of these I demand for both of these you professe to do when as you say that the Scripture is the rule of all truth and you acknowledge no other For put the case I should erre in my faith I would be loth to leaue that to follow a worse No wise man I take it though his horse haue but one eye wil make exchāge for another that is blind I desire therfore to see by the pure word the truth of yours Which you cānot refuse to do for you are sent to illuminate vs shew vs the truth To be plaine therfore my first demaund is that you shew me by the pure word the Articles of your Confessiō by which I must be illuminated and made to knowe the right way In the 36. and 37. article you say that we receaue by faith or to vse your ordinary termes by the mouth of faith the body of our Lord. Shew me this in the pure word that the supper is the figure of his body Through all the Geneua Bible I find not so much as mention made of the mouth of faith neither do I finde any talke of a figure in those places where it speakes of the supper Shew me but this I will straight beleeue it and abiure my former Religion This if you do not I must needs hold you as you ar for impostours In the 11. article it is said Originall sinne doth continually remaine after Baptisme in asmuch as it is a fault howbeit the children of God are freed from the cōdemnation due for the same he through his gracious goodnes not imputing it vnto them Shew me this in the pure word of Geneua In the 24. article Iesus Christ is giuen vs for our sole Aduocate The strife between vs is about that worde Sole shew me that in the Geneua Bible In the 20. article We beleeue we are made partakers of that iustice to witt of Christians by faith alone All the controuersie lyeth in that word alone and whether workes donne in the faith of Christ be necessary shew me that worde alone in these places where mention is made of workes donne in the faith of IESVS CHRIST and not in these places where the Iudaicall workes of the law are excluded from Christian iustification for of these only do we dispute I haue turned the Bible for the places cited in the margent for these articles but cannot find any of these articles in the pure word Hauing quitt your hands well in shewing me the truth of that which you desire I should beleeue shew me as well that other thing I demaunde to witt the errours of those articles which I now beleeue The articles of my faith are for example to omitt that point of the B. Sacrement allready spoken of That there is a Purgatory Intercession of Saints Auricular Confession and the like I acknowledge the Sanctity of Pilgrimages of Religious vowes Against which in your 24. article you say Intercession of Saints is an abuse Purgatorrie an illusion and so of religious vowes Pilgrimages and the like Shew me my errour in these points that out of the pure word In your margent I find no text cited which is a shrewd suspiciō that you haue none Perchance you wil aunsweare that it sufficeth for a proofe of errour in these points that they are not found in the holy scripture because nothing must be beleeued but that which is in the scripture My reply to this is to know of you whether this proposition That nothing must be beleeued which is not in the holy scripture be found in the pure word of God or If it be not then you M. Minister in propounding this proposition to be beleeued of me do falsify your owne fayth and breake your promise for you sayd you wold not admitt any other rule of truth but the scripture which is in effect that you will bring forth nothing but that which is in scripture and now you thrust vpon me this proposition which is not there to be found this as a fundamental proposition vpon which ar builded many others but if this proposition be in the pure word shew it but take heede you bring nothing but the pure word When by the pure word you shall shew me the truth of your articles and the falshood of mine as hath been said before I am ready forthwith to acknowledge my errour to embrace your faith But remember I pray you your promise that you would by the pure word shew the truth of your faith and my errours and that I renounced all antiquity Councels Miracles Inhibitions Lawes visions vppon these termes only and no other Looke that in steed of the pure word you do not shift me of with your interpretations or your owne consequences for either that interpretation is in the Scripture or no if it be there bring forth
the Scripture and that the Scripture saie of each proposition you interprete that it is so to be vnderstood that you only are the organe to pronounce the same otherwise you leaue your owne faith and forge an other to your owne liking of which I shall argue with you after in the like sorte besides that you breake your promise I should be esteemed of small iudgment if I forsake Councells Miracles Antiquity and the rest for your interpretation If the Minister pretend to warrant his interpretation by some other passage of the Scripture for example if he vrge that those words This is my body must not be taken properlie but figuratiuelie because these others I ame a vine haue such a signification You shall aske him 1. Before you passe to any interpretatiō if he haue any plaine text which abstracting from all interpretation doth condemne vs of errour for example in that point of the B. Sacrament in which we beleeue there is the true body of our Sauiour If he haue any lett him bring that which is cleare and plaine and leaue that which is obscure if he haue none make him to confesse distinctly that he hath no place out of the pure word by which without his interpretation he can conuince vs of errour and heere you must insist on this point till he haue confessed this After this Confession comming to the interpretation he giues you shall 2. Demaunde if the Scripture say that these words This is my Body are to be interpreted by these I am a vine or no. If it say so lett him shew the place If not then the Minister breaks his couenants doth not serue as an organe of the Scripture only And heere the Minister is in little ease neither can he without renouncing their Confession which professeth to allow of nothing to rule them but pure Scripture passe any farther Neither is it needfull to pursue the matter anie farther this being concluded for heere haue you the Minister in the stocks and perchaunce it will be better to keepe the Ministre in this traunce speechles then to passe farther Yet if you desire an other victory that he which encountreth the Caluinist be learned or expert in the Scripture he may after the confession of the two former 3. Harken to the interpretation the Ministre brings and aunsweare these proofes he alleageth for that interpretation But allwaies remember that the Caluinist by their Confession of faith is come to instruct vs consequently bound to prooue his interpretation for vs if it conuince not it sufficeth to deny without obligation to giue any reasons for our deniall for by those the Minister will finde meanes to slippe away and will not be so quicklie caught he will seek many by-waies therfore as much as may be stoppe his passage Behold how you are to proceede when the Minister vndertakes to shew our pretended errours by text of Scripture without consequences or illations When he will discouer our errours by some consequence which he deduceth out of the pure word of God for example we beleeue that the body of our Lord is in the B. Sacrament of the Altar he will prooue by consequence deduced out of the pure and sole Scripture that he is not there after this manner In the 3. of the Actes it is said that Heauen must conteine him vntill the Consummation of the world therfore he is not on the earth Behold his sillogisme That body which is in heauen is not on the earth the body of Iesus Christ is in heauen therfore it is not on the earth He must put his argument in this forme 1. Before you come to aunswere his argument you must aske the Minister if he haue any plaine text which without consequence doth condemne vs of errour in this point or no If he haue lett him bring it out who professeth to reforme vs by the pure word If he haue not make him confesse that he hath no plaine text by which his consequence sett a part we are conuinced of errour heere you must stay and exact this confession of the Minister before you passe farther Hauing made the Minister acknowledge this though you may content your self with this victory whereby you make him renounce the 5. article of their Confession of faith and haue ouerthrowen that piller which detaines most of the Sectaries who follow that part in their errours who imagine they haue on their side the pure word of God and that they builde vpon the Scripture only and peraduenture it wil be better to proceed no farther to the end to make it eccho oftener in the eares of these who are abused by them Neuerthelesse he that will continew the chace and hauing rowzed the deere from his lodge pursue him farther 2. Giuing the Minister leaue to deduce his consequence after the deduction thereof the Catholicque must not straight examine the truth of the same nor shew so quickly that it is false but first lay hold on him and make him shew that his consequence is deduced out of the only pure word of holy Scripture as he promissed to deduce the same and his 5. article doth oblige him You must therfore proceede in this fashion It is a thing vndoubted and knowen to all that euery consequence to be good must be inferred out of two propositions If then one of those two out of which the Minister deduceth his consequence be not in the Scripture as it happeneth ordinarily in the arguments of the aduersary against vs heere you must demurr and make it manifest that the aduersarie heere abandonnes his Confession of fayth and fayles of his promisse in not shewing our pretended errour by cōsequence deduced out of the pure and only Scripture For example in the syllogisme before sett downe That body which is in heauen is not on the earth the body of Iesus Christ is in heauen therfore it is not on the earth you shall examine the Minister whether the first proposition of this argument be in the pure word or no. If it be lett him shew it Cleere it is it is not there but it is a philosophicall proposition wherfore the Minister which deduceth his consequence out of that and the second adioyned which is in the 3. of the Actes doth not proue my errour by consequence deduced out of the pure word but by consequence deduced out of Philosophy and out of the word of God and maketh such articles of faith as are deduced out of Philosophy or Aristotle 2. You must declare that euery consequence must be deduced out of two propositions placed in the true forme of a syllogisme and that the consequence is inferred both from the propositions and from the forme of the syllogisme of which forme the Scripture speakes nothing nor prescribes any rules about that matter but only Aristotle and Philosophy Wherfore the Minister in proouing his consequence is not founded vpon the Scripture alone which treates not of formes of consequences And because
it belongs to Aristotle to iudge if the consequence be good or no the Minister building vpon consequence must admitt for his iudge in the controuersies of our fayth not the pure Scripture but Aristotle or els at least choose for vmpyre in this cause the word of God together with Aristotle 3. You must demaund of the Minister if the Scripture do teach that one must beleeue as an article of faith not only that which the Scripture saith but also that which by necessary consequence followeth therevpon or no if he say so make him shew the text which without doubt he cannot throughout the whole bible if no such be founde then doth the Minister build his articles of fayth vpon a proposition which is not in the pure word to witt vpon this That that which followeth out of Scripture by necessary consequence must be beleeued as an article of saith Howbeit the Scripture frames no such article but the Minister only and that not by the pure Scripture but by humane reason from which notwithstanding in his 5. Article he disclaimed wholy For he wold haue vs take at his handes for an article of faith that proposition which by consequence followeth out of the Scripture though the termes of that proposition deduced out of Scripture for an article of fayth be not there sett downe Hence is it that all the articles of the Confession of these sectaries which are founded vpon a consequence are not articles of fayth being that they haue not for them theyr only rule of truth the sole Scripture Heere againe you must hold him They will say perauenture that IESVS Christ and the Apostles proued many thinges by consequence I graunt it But in so doing they themselues made new Scriptures or holy write which priuiledge I thinke the Minister haue not But they neuer taught that the Scripture which they alledged was the singular and sole rule of all truth and that they spake not but by the mouth of the Scripture as these Pretenders professe and thyr poore flocke which thinke they are as good as theyr wordes persuade themselues 3. If he that buckle with the Minister be learned and will after he hath often driuen the deere from his fortresse of the pure worde course him alonge the plaine champion of humane and philosophicall reasons though according to my aduise it be ordinarily more expedient to content our selues with that before sett downe for to cure him if it be possible after the aboue said he may passe to the examen of the truth or falshod of his consequence whether the propositions from which it is deduced be they taken from philosophy or holy writt be true or false and whether the forme of the argument be according to the rules of Philosophy and so deny that which the Minister assumed falsly Still hauing in minde that the Minister is putt to the proofe not the Catholick who beares the personne of the party instructed be sure not to change that personne For the drift of all the Ministers fetches is to vnload himself of that obligation to prooue his consequence which he will bring to passe by this sleight if he can make him that defends the disputant For example In the argument proposed That body which is in heauen is not on the earth The body of Iesus Christ is in heauen Therfore it is not on the earth You shall deny the first proposition and lett the Minister prooue it If that his proofes come on to long he enter to farre into Philosophicall quiddities lett the Catholicke note that it is in his free choice to curbe the Minister short when he listeth demaunding him if all the propositions which he hath brought to prooue his consequence be in the Scripture or no. If they be lett him bring them forth Many of them questionles are drawne out of Philosophy or grounded vpon humane reasons If they be not the Minister which out of them inferres his consequence doth not deduce it out of the pure word or which is all one prooues not by consequence deduced out of the pure and only word that the Catholicke erreth which was that he vndertooke and moreouer denieth his Cōfession of faith for he drawes his cōsequence ioyntly out of the word of God and out of diuers propositions which are not in holie write Is not this to flinch from their worde and to renounce their articles of faith or rather do not the Minister his confession of faith abuse people in promising that which they neither do nor canne performe Behold a breefe and easy methode to encounter all Ministers and Sectaries Is it not obuious euen for those who are not students in deuinity to putt it in practise There needs no more but eyes to see and to vnderstande English to know if the pure word without additions interpretations or consequences of others do say such a thing or no. Do you not by this meanes euidently perceaue that all the Ministers are abusers and how the whole troope of Sectaries is misledde Yea I dare say double abusers For first the Minister abuseth men in that he promiseth by the pure word to shew them that which he would haue them beleeue next that he will by the pure word lay open their errours pretended and yett performeth neither the one nor the other Wherfore the Ministers promising in their 31. and 5. articles to performe them both and yet effecting neither as by the forsaid practise is made euident are impostours and double impostours as this methode which euery Catholick may vse doth apparently declare And so I haue fulfilled my promise which was to lay downe a short and easie methode by which all Catholiques may euidently shew that each Minister in all and euery point of his pretended religion is an abuser consequently that all their followers are abused This therfore is my aduice to all Sectaries to those especially which seeke sincerly theyr Saluation Your Confession promiseth you the pure word of God and you suppose that according to that promise there is nothing in your articles of fayth which is not in the pure word Practise this methode and you shall euidently and easily perceaue how you are abused Place on the one syde the Principall articles of your faith which I haue cited before That original sinne remaines after Baptisme as it is a fault That Iesus Christ is our only Aduocate That faith alone iustifieth and which is cheefe of all That the B. Sacrament is a figure of the body of our Sauiour which is eaten by faith Then ouer against each of these articles set downe the textes which are cited in the margent for eache of them doubtles if you had any plaine text of Scripture which taught that which is in that articles it wold haue been coated in the margent you shall cleerly see that the pure word setting aside interpretations and Ministeriall consequences hath not that which is in your article neither is there required ought
but your eyes and skill to reade to see whether that be in the pure word or no. And that your Ministers preach that the Scripture is easie and that euery one there may learne his owne saluation you vnderstand I ame sure signification of English why then finde you not in the pure word that which the Ministers make you beleeue Assure your selues if you find it not it is because it is not there Confront therfore the place cited in the margent of the article with the article and you shall see how egregiously you are mocked And that you may see this more manifestly doe this following Write in one line one article or if it haue many partes one only clause of the same And if you finde any text of Scripture cited for that article or peece therof write in a second line the words of the text cited vnder the other line If you find no text cited as in many places there is not put vnder the first line a cypher for that if there were any text to authorize that article it would be cited This being donne compare the first line with the second If you find in the second line a cypher you are cleerly cosened If you find a text of Scripture see if that being precisely taken without medly of some thing els that is to say you must vnderstande this signifieth or the like containe that article proposed if it do not know that you are deceaued I my self haue paralelled these articles with the textes alledged in the margent take you but the like paines and I will assure you that in steed of the pure word you shall oft tymes finde a cypher other tymes in the text cited you shall not find one worde of the article and in breefe you shall not find there one article or entiere clause of those in Controuersy between vs. Behold how you are deluded ARTICLES OF THE CONFESSION OF FAITH OF the pretended reformed Churchs confronted with the pure word of holy writt Where it is euidently shewed that the textes of Scripture euen in the Geneua Bible cited in the margent of these articles conteine nothing of that which those articles teach against the Catholick faith which is A breefe easy meanes by which euery Caluinist may manifestlie perceaue how he is abused and wherby each Catholicke may shew the same vnto him To saue you the paines deceaued Countrymen which I wished you to take I haue heere confronted the articles of your faith controuerted with the places cited in the margēt after the fashion before sett downe and haue cited these textes according to the Geneua translation Compare them with me beginning at the 24. article In this article these clauses following are sett downe without any text cited in the margent for proof of any of them wherfore in steede of Scripture I wil giue you vnder euery clause for proofe a Cypher Article 24. 1. VVe hold that Purgatory is an Illusion Proofe o. 2. By the abuse and deceipt of Sathan Monasticall vovves vvere introduced Proofe o. 3. Out of the same vvare-hovvse proceeded Pilgrimages Proofe o. 4. Out of the same vvare-hovvse vvas brought in Auricular Confession Proofe o. 5. Out of the same vvare-hovvse sprang Indulgenees Proofe o. 6. Out of the same vvare-hovvse proceeded all other things by vvhich vve thinke to merite grace and saluation Proofe o. 7. VVe reiect all others meanes vvhich men presume to haue to reconcile themselues to God as derogatory from the death and passion of Iesus Christ. Proofe o. 8. It is lavvfull for vs to pray but only according to that forme vvhich God sett dovvne in his vvord Proofe o. In the 31. article you say The estate of the Church in our times vvas interrupted and hath failed that God hath raised some after an extraordinary manner to renevv the same being ruinated and desolate Proofe o. Behold how the Ministers and theyr Confession of faith do abuse you and how often in one only article They promise you not to instruct you but by the holy Scripture and proposing vnto you all these clauses to be beleeued they prooue none of them by any text of Scripture nor bring as much as one place of Scripture for confirmation of them Examine the articles you will finde more then a hundred clauses as well affirmatiues as negatiues for proofe wherof there is no text coated because in deed they haue it not iudge then if you be abused or no. And who I pray you can in equity accuse another vnles he produce some lawe commaunding or prohibiting some thing violated by the party accused Euery accusation commended to be truly an accusation not a calumny must be founded vpon the breach of some lawe and accompanied with it proofes These Reformers doe not only accuse but making themselues iudges doe condemne of Superstitions forgery and high treason against the deuine Maiesty the holy Fathers and vs all besides in those 8. poyntes sett downe and in diuers others which I omitt pronouncing theyr bloody sentence by which they declare both them and vs to be superstitious deceauers instruments of sathan in the promulgations of those diuelish illusions rehearsed This sentence pronounced for execution of the same they haue ouerthrowen our Monasteries prophaned our holy places and set fire on our Churches Of what crime doe they accuse vs do they condemne vs what deuine law doe they prooue to haue ben violated by vs They neyther prooue nor so much as cite any law any letter of holy write against which the holy Fathers we haue offended And yet they accuse vs they condemne vs. Shameles wretches but yet withall impudent liars They promise not to behaue themselues but only as instruments of the holy Scripture and not to propose ought but that And yet they pronounce the eight forsayd sentences without citing one sole passage of the Scripture See o you sectaries how palpably they abuse you But to see this more cleerly and withall to take away from the Ministers all meanes to circumuent you to your vtter ruine Consider with like attention that which ensueth In the 5. article they wold make you beleeue that the pure word which is conteined in the bookes of holy Scripture is the rule of all truth and that nothing must be beleeued but that which is in the pure word This article is of great consequence for reposing and grounding your selues vppon this and not vppon any other thing you reiect all the traditions of the Romane Church you giue your sentences of condemnation against vs you will not allow of neyther Antiquity nor Custome nor Multitude nor Humane wisedome nor Sentences nor Inhibitions nor Edicts nor Lawes nor Councells nor Visions nor Miracles And albeit all these make against your doctrine you make no bones thereof you scorne them all saying that you will nothing but the pure Scripture all the rest proceeds from men subiect vnto errours and that all other things must be examined ruled and reformed according to
the same pure word This article therfore is of great consequence and with good reason to be beleeued ought to be found in the holy Scripture which if the Ministers should frame in the force of their owne braynes they deserue doubtles to be banished all honest company as men impudently bold which seeke to make the world renounce all things abouesaid for a proposition of their owne inuention and contradict themselues hauing before said they would only carry themselues as the organe of the wholy Scripture Let vs therfore set downe in one line first the article then vnder that the text cited in the margent for proofe thereof Article 5. The vvritten vvord is the rule of all truth or els as you commonly say Nothing is to be beleeued but that vvhich is in the vvritten vvord In the margent of this article you cite 4. textes for proofe of the contents 1. Text. You shall not add any thing to the vvorde vvhich I commaunde nor take any thing from the same Saith Moyses to the people of Israel Deuter. 4. Vers 2. 2. Text. That vvhich I commaund you that shall you doe neither shall you adde any thing nor diminish Deut. 12. Vers 32. Examen Heere is not any worde of the article in these passages for you neyther finde written word nor rule of all truth which are the two termes of the article wherfore this pure word doth not conteine that which the article affirmeth Lett vs weigh it more exactly 1. Moyses spake vnto the Iewes of that only which he ordained to witt of the Iudaicall law and of no other 2. he spake not of the written worde of which alone the article is but vniuersally of the word 3. Albeit he spake vnto Christians and of the only written word haue we increased the bookes of Moyses haue we added ought vnto them 4. Thinke you that the Prophets composing new Scriptures and ioyning them with the bookes of Moyses haue infringed this precept 5. if Moyses forbid to beleeue any thing but that which he ordayned we must neyther beleeue the Psalmes of Dauid nor the other Prophets nor the Ghospell for he ordained not that which these conteyne Perceaue you not how ridiculous a thing it is to alledge this text to verify by the pure word your article which sayth the written word is the rule if all truth The same article is prooued by an other passage Galat. 1. Vers 8. 3. Text. Although vve or an Angell from heauen preach othervvise then that vvhich vve haue preached vnto you be he accursed Examen In this text I neither read written word nor rule of all truth which are the two termes of the article wherefore the text hath not that which the article teacheth Nay it containes not one only word therof come to the examen 1. Is there in the text anie mention of the written word of which onlie we dispute and the article speakes of no other 2. Who knoweth not that the Apocalipse was reuealed and writt after that epistle of S. Paule and yet besides that which S. Paule euangelized it also must be beleeued Or is he which preacheth and beleeueth the Apocalipse accursed Or rather is S. Paule accursed who preached manie things afterward which are not in that epistle to the Galathians who is there of so small capacitie that in the reading of this chapter doth not see that the word otherwise is the same in sense with against The Apostle as it is manifest at the verie opening of the epistle crieth out against those which togeather with the law of Christ would ioyne Circumcision against the doctrine of the Apostles The wordes immediatlie going before make the matter more cleere I maruaile saith he to the Galat 1. Vers 6. 7.8 that leauing him who hath called you vnto the grace of Christ you are so soone transferred vnto an other Ghospell which is not another vnles there be some that trouble you will inuert the Ghospell of Christ But although we or an Angell from heauen preach to you otherwise then that which we haue preached to you be he accursed Is it not euident that S. Paul reiecteth that only which is against that which he had preached Then it is apparent also that this text makes nothing for that which the article contains to witt That the written word is the rule of all truth The last passage cited for the forsaid article is out of the Apocalipse 22. Vers 18. in these wordes 4. Texte I testifie to euerie one hearing the vvordes of the prophecie of this booke If any man shall add to these things God shall adde vppon him the plagues vvritten in this booke And if anie man shall diminish of the vvords of the booke of this prophecy God shall take avvay his part out of the booke of life and out of the holy Citty and of these things that be vvritten in this booke Neither do I reade in this passage written word of the entyre Bible of which only the Article intreats nor rule of all truth wherfore the text sayth not that the pure word of the entire Bible is the rule of all truth as the Article auerreth rather the text consents not in one only terme with the article Examine it 1. Is it not manifest that S. Iohn spake not but of the word conteyned in the Apocalipse which the Ministers will not allowe to be the rule of all truth to what purpose then for proofe of that Article That the pure word of the entire Bible is the rule of all truth do they bring out this text 2. if S. Iohn sayd that nothing must be added to that word of the Apocalipse in this sense and after this Ministerial paraphrase that nothing must be beleeued which is not therin contained then he which should beleeue the Ghospell the Epistles of S. Paul of S. Iohn and others and the old testament should be accursed Where were the Ministers witts thinke you when to proue that nothing must be bleeued but that which is in the Bible they alledged this passage 3. To adde to the Apocalipse is to thrust in somthing as part of that sacred booke doe we doe so What frantik people are your Ministers and you o Caluinists how grossely doth your Confession of fayth abuse you which treats you in such a fashion as if you had not eyes to reade nor iudgment to vnderstand the signification of one pure text How many Ministeriall glosses ar heere wanting to make these textes speake that which this article contaynes Lett vs go on Whence haue you that the bookes of the old and new Testament are holy Scripture how know you that these bookes are Canonicall By the inward persuasion of the holy Ghost so you aunsweare in the 4. article That he makes vs decerne them from other Ecclesiasticall bookes It is not then by the holy Scripture that you know this for your inward persuasion is not the written word Consequently it is false That the pure word is the rule of
clause you cite two textes 1. Texte I am the liuing bread that came dovvne from heauen if any man eate of this bread he shall liue for euer and the bread vvhich I vvill giue is my flesh vvhich I vvill giue for the life of the vvorld Iohn 6. Vers 51. Examen First I reade not in this text signes which testify but this expressely that Christ is the liuing bread not comon bread made of flowre and baked but which is his flesh which sayth he I will giue for the life of the world As also in the geuing of it he sayd Take This is my body which shal be giuen for you Was it a signe or figure of his body which was nayled one the crosse was it not his proper body This clause then is false 2. The ministers whoe haue promised to propose nothing but the pure Scripture how doe they thrust vppon vs this clause so weighty The body of IESVS Christ is not contained and included within the bread nor the blood c. Without any written word see theyr fraude and how well they keepe theyr word in a matter of greatest moment 2. Texte IESVS tooke bread and hauing giuen thankes brake it and said take eate This is my bodie vvhich is broken for you do this in commemoration of me In like manner after supper he tooke the cuppe saying this cuppe is the nevv testament in my blood this do ye as often as you shall drinke therof in remembrance of me 1. Corinth 11. Vers 24. Examen Who can finde out in this texte Signes which testify figure signe of the body of IESVS Christ which is not in the bread nor the bloud in the chalice all which the article teacheth The text then helpes them nothing nay how could the text more cleerly reiect the aduersaries beleefe which is that the body is not vnder the bread nor the bloud within the chalice Let the Caluinistes consider if they be abused or no The Ministers haue entred bondes to shew by the pure word That the supper is a signe which tesstifieth a figure of the body of our sauiour which is not vnder the bread and of the bloud which is not within the chalice and to cancell theyr obligations they bring for paiment this texte of Scripture in which being it is written downe if you reade it not eyther you want your sight or they deceaue you Rather see you not the contrary then say they are doubled iuglers An other clause of that Article After affirming that IESVS Christ doth nourish and quicken vs with the substance of his body and of his bloud that which the Catholickes beleeue also they add in which we disagree without aledging any texte for the same wherefore put vnderneath for proofe a cypher as before 1. VVe hold notvvithstanding that this is donne spiritually Proofe o. 2. The supper is a figure of the body or In the supper is figured the bodie of IESVS Christ Proofe o. 3. Because the misterie of this supper is celestiall it cannot be taken but by faith or to vse their vulgar phrase by the mouth of faith Those vvhich bring vvith them a pure faith as a vessell receaue trulie that vvhich the signes testifie commonlie they say That in the supper is eaten the bodie of IESVS Christ by the mouth of faith and in the 53. Sunday of their Catechisme it is said to haue the veritie of the Sacrament vve must lift vp our hartes to heauen vvhere it is Proofe o. Behold many articles and of greate consequence proued by a Cypher Behold how you are abused The Ministers make you beleeue all this not being able to shew for it any texte of Scripture The consequence will be that your supper is purely their owne inuention This by your principles I shew For you haue no pure textes which say that which you affirmatiuely beleeue of the supper of which you hold those three thinges aforesayd principally It is figure c. that by the mouthe of fayth the body eateh c. you should distinctly sett downe that which of our fayth you deny in this matter from that which therein you positiuely beleeue for how be it that we did erre of which I haue shewed the contrary and that your negatiue propositions IESVS Christ is not in the Eucharist and the like were true it followeth not that that which you affirmatiuely beleeue most needes be true and that you erre not therein Because one goeth wrong one way is he which takes an other certaine to goe right may not both be out of their way Examine therfore your assertions and you finde not any shew of textes that teache that the supper is a figure of the body c. nor which speake of the mouth of faith Consequently your whole supper is a humane inuention Which being so in my opinion in the eating a good capō or a cock you may more easely remember the death of the sonne of God for that therein is made mention of the crowing of a cock then in eating a bit of bread For which cause you shall do more prudently to make of them a figure memorie then of a peece of bread which is no more holie then that you eate commonlie at your table It may be that some Caluiniste thinking himselfe better skilled in the Scriptures then the Ministers which composed the Confession of faith and cited for proofe therof those sacred textes they iudged most fauourable will vrge to prooue the supper to be a figure that which our Sauiour said Iohn 6. Vers 63. It is the spirit which quickeneth the flesh proffiteth nothing the words which I speake vnto you are spirit and life For awnswere 1. You must vnderstand that your Ministers are at variance whether in the 6. of S. Iohn anie thing be spoken of the supper Caluin in the fourth booke of his Instit cap. 17. § 33. Kemnicius and Zuinglius deny it How then will you establish this firme article of your faith vpon so weake a foundation doubted of by these of your owne faction How can you serue your selues of that passage against vs either for your figure or for your Spiritually 2. I reade not in this text figure and if anie one say that spiritt and figure is all one I may not beleeue him without his proofe and that by the pure Scripture And who perceaues not how ridiculous this deuise is the diuells are spirites are they figures the Angells and our soules are spirittes are they also figures God himself is he not a most pure spiritt is he a figure it belongs not to me to explicate this place I only shew that the pure word saith not that which the article conteineth consequently the Ministers mock vs. Yet by the way knowe that the sense of this texte is that our Sauiour would not giue vs to eate his flesh dead and in peeces as we eate of the ordinarie flesh as the Capharnaites imagined to eate of flesh in this manner proffitteth nothing
to saluation but flesh animated by his spirite and quickened by his deuine life in this manner we eate it In which fashion we cannot eate anie other flesh for it must first be dead before it nourish vs. Remember finally that I doe not by this Scripture prooue my faith this suffiseth me that in these words you reade not either figure of body or that we hold that it is donne spiritually in such manner that the body is not contained there this I say suffiseth to make you know you are misledd For since you reade it not which doubtles if it were there you might the pure word warranteth not that which this article containeth Behold Syr the arte which in this letter I promised to discouer vnto you is it not a rare worthy hunting-game haue you ere this seene such coursing F. Veron in teaching it me told me that which I know will giue it no small luster in your eye that he receaued the origine and substance therof from the R.F. Gontery which famous hunter was the authour and inuentour of this so efficacious and facile sport who also vsed no other in his disputes a-against the Ministers iudging this the best and most powerfull of all And you know well that that fearfull scourge of the Hereticke is most expert in these combats 〈◊〉 being so beaten a soldiour in those warres each prudent man wil make a great esteme of his aduise herein He hath putt to slight the Ministers of Dieppe of Caen of Sedan c. and among the rest some Allmaines he founde at Tourlac But how Truly by no other meanes but this by the pure Scripture alone and that after the Geneua Translation by the practise before set downe Sauing that he brideled them in more shortly for he neuer suffered them in any point debated to proceed by consequences which they said they would deduce out of the Scripture vnles they first subscribed that they could not enter combate with vs by the pure written word I should now sende you the relation promised of this Conference between F. Veron and the Minister Hucher but because the printer by reason of the great frostes could not dispatch the same so soone as I hoped not to keepe you wholy in suspence I send you the summary thereof togeather with the meanes to buckle with the Sectaries The whole Conference is vnder the presse you shall haue it within eight daies ioyne it to this fashion of hunting which I now send you for in that you will see the practise of this kinde of chace vsed by the Father in this conflict Heere will you also see by this so succesfull and remarkable victory the efficacy of this arte It is scarcely possible to putt a man to more confusion then the Minister was in The fame of this victory strooke the sectaries to the harte Seeing the title of this epistle before it was printed they were much offended at it but all partes thereof are easily iustified by the Actes of the Conference signed Behold out of them the Ministers owne wordes He hauing promised to shew by the pure word that IESVS Christ is not in the Eucharist after a little pressing said The truth is that these vvords the body of IESVS Christ is not in the Eucharist are not in the Scripture And after being vrged a little harder he confessed besides twice before all the assembly that he had not any text in Scripture which setting aside all consequences conteyned formally and expresly the sense of this proposition IESVS Christ is not in the Eucharist which notwithstanding he before vndertooke to shew by the pure word and so to reforme the Iesuite in his errour Is not this as much as to confesse that he could not by the pure word reforme vs in this point is not this to forsake it is not this to renounce the office and exercise of a reformer thinke you these fittes proceede from a merry hart wherfore with reason the epistle beares for title The Minister of Amiens constrained to renounce the pure vvord of holy vvrite He stayed so long dumme and in presence of so many personnes and of such quality that there is no tergiuersation and refused so long time in the third session to come to the proofe of that in which the day before he was struck speechles or also to deale in any other point that the flight is as euident as the day light VVherfore the epistle hath right vnto his title VVithin few dayes you shall see the narration at large well subscribed and signed in the meane tyme notwithstanding for iustification of the summary thereof sett downe in the beginning of this letter I haue procured these subscriptions following Subscriptions of the Conference the summe vvherof is contained in the beginning of this letter VVEE the subsigned Gentlemen of the Duke of Longueuille being present with our said Lord at the Conferences of which the narration is before set downe do testifie that they haue truly passed as it is declared Giuen at Amyens the 12. of February 1615. Pelletot Foucaucourt Le Cheualier de Moyencourt Gondreuille Tannere Goustimenil Courtauenel Certaine poincts collected out of this practise and other experiences of this kind reduced to six heads for the more warie proceeding of Catholiques with Sectaries of our age THE 1. poinct Seeing that our new Sectaries doe suppose vs Catholiques to be deceaued in our beleefe and that they ar sent to reforme vs by the onlie vvritten vvord of Scripture er the Catholique enter into conference with anie Sectarie let him first demaund what he vnderstandeth by the onlie vvritten vvord of Scripture whither the Old and new Testament with all the parts of eche both as we Catholiques doe or els what Then let the Catholique request the Sectarie to proue by the onlie vvritten vvord as he tooke vppon him that the whole Bible or such parcels as he doth admit for holie Scripture or reiect ar in deede or at not holy Scripture He cannot doe it but by Tradition and by the Catholique Church her authoritie The 2. is No Catholique conferring must seeke to proue our opinions which the Sectaries disalowe of for we ar in possession and defendants not plainetifes The 3. is The Catholique must not in any case permit the Sectarie to bring anie proofe whatsoeuer other then the onlie vvritten vvord of Scripture and this also without anie interpretation glose or consequence of his owne braine The 4. is Let not the Catholique suffer his Aduersary to leape from pale to pearch and from one Controuersie to another vntill he be conuinced of errour in his beleefe and this by the onlie vvritten vvord The 5. is The Sectarie not proouing by the onlie vvritten vvord that which he promised as not able to performe it the Catholique must constraine ether him or some els there present to subscribe that he could not prooue what he vndertooke in such sort as he ought to haue donne The 6. and last is The Catholique must confer and consider with attention the places of Scripture alledged by Sectaries to disproue our doctrine for ordinarilie they make no more to the purpose then appeare to a nut For example to prooue that vve must beleeue the onlie vvritten vvord they bring forth these places Deuter 4. v. 2. Deuter. 12. v. 32. Galat. 1. v. 8. Apocalip 22. v. 18. which make nothing against vs or for them For by the first and second we should according to the sense of our aduersaries beleeue nought els but that which is in the Deuteronomie by the third nothing but that epistle of S. Paul by the last nought els but the Apocalipse See theire madnes and foolery and looke to theire water