he nether mentioneth the lawes of answering my saied booke which I set downe and proue by reason testimonie of holie Fathers and confession of Protestants ought to be kept in answering such a booke And which lawes I tell him before hand that vnles he ether keepe or refute I would accounte his answer no solid or lawfull answere but the babling of one who could neither sufficiently answere nor yet hould his peace Secondly because he maketh no other answere to the manifold and manifest depositions of the best learned Protestants which I haue my self brought and clearly confuted by the depositions or testimonies them selues against which confutation of myne he replieth nothing but standeth mute Thirdly because he so miserably mangleth the answere which I make to their Sophisme wherewith they by pretense of true Doctrin would proue that they haue alwaies had true Pastors and People who taught and beleiued it and so pittifully replieth to the saied answere as he plainly sheweth him self to be a true Heretike that is conuicted in his owne iudgement as I think euerie one that compareth his lecture with my Booke will clearly perceiue 4. But sith the Protestants cheife and almost whole pretense of the truth and euer being of their Church is the pretense of the truth of their doctrin by the Scripture I will euidently shew euen by the light of Reason and Prudence that they haue no reasonable or colourable pretense of Scripture but that it maketh expresly clearly and directly against theÌ„ and for Catholiks almost in all points of coÌ„trouersie For whereas there be twoe waies to shew Twoe waies to proue that the Scripture is against Protest that the holie Scripture is plainely against Protestants the one by conferring of diuers places together by bringing the exposition of the holie Fathers decrees of Councels and tradition of the Church the other by onely comparinge the expresse words of Catholiks and ProtestaÌ„ts with Protest Doctrin as clearly contrarie to Scripture as yea is to no. expresse words of holie Scripture touching the same matter I take not the first way which hithertoe Catholike writers haue followed because it is not so fit to the capacitie of commun people for whome especially I compose this worke but the second which is as cleare for euerie one that hath reason to see as it is cleare to see that Yea and Yea of the same matter agree and that Yea and Nay do disagree 4. This perhaps may seeme strange nay impossible to simple Protestants whose eares haue bene still accustomed to heare their ministers vaunt and brag of the word of God of the Scripture and Bible and to auouch that Catholiks haue nothing to alleadge for theÌ„ selues but traditions and word of men But I beseech such to suspend a while their iudgment and sith they wil haue the Protestants doctrin to be tried or iudged by nothing but by Scripture onely let them grant me these two conditions Two conditions to proue the Scripture to be against Protest 1. Touching the letter 2. Touching the sense of trying their doctrin by the Scripture which the very light of reason the authoritie of holie Fathers and the Confession of the best learned Protestants will enforce them to graunt The first condition is touching the words or letter of the holie Scripture The second is touching the sense or meaning of the saied words or letter For as the holie Scripture consisteth of two partes whereof the one is the word or letter the other is the sense therof so I require one condition for the word and an other for the sense 5. The condition touching the word or letter is that the words of holie Scripture be taken as they be in the The 1. coÌ„ditioÌ„ toâ—ching the letter proued Bible or booke of God without anie addition subtraction or transposition breefly without anie chopping or changing whatsoeuer This condition is so iust and reasonable as I think no reasonable man will denie it and neuertheles I wil proue it First because where God alone is Iugde there it is reason that all men be silent and onely harken what God saieth nor interrupt or corrupt his words Let vs heare Lib. 1. peccat c. 20. De vnit c. 13 Serm. 27. de verb. Apo. saieth S. Austin our lord and not ghesses or suspitions of men Againe I beleiue that which I read in holie Scripture not that which vaine Heretiks say And other where There is a controuersie risen let is goe to the Iudge let the Prophet iudge yea let God iudge by the Prophet let vs both hold our peace And yet againe let vs not heare This I say This thou saiest but let vs Lib. 6. cont Iul. c. 4. In Confutat Latomito 2. fol. 234. heare This our lord saieth Yea Luther writeth That mans word added vnto Gods word is a couer nay mans dung wherwith pure truth is hidden Moreouer seing Protestants impose silence to the Church Councells Fathers and all Catholiks in decision of matters of faith and therin admit onely the written word of God it were impudencie for them to request to speake Agayne if Protestants will mingle their owne words with the words of God they admit not the onely word of God for iudge of controuersies but partely also their owne and make one entire iudge of them both Finally Protestants are wonte to crie that the Scriture is the onely and profest rule of faith that they will heare Beza cont Heshus Daneus Cont. 3. 6. 7. Hospin part 2 Caluin cont versipel cont Cathalon nothing besides Scripture that nothing is to be taught but the pure written word nothing to be beleiued but that which is expressely conteined in the Scripture Let them heare therefore in these twoe hundred and sixte points in which I will compare their doctrine with the Scripture mere Scripture onely Scripture and let them harken to nothing but Scripture let all their owne words whatsoeuer be set aside let the Scriptures pure and onely words shew and iudge whether Catholik or Protestant doctrin in these 260. points here set downe be agreable or disagreable vnto it 6. The second condition touching the sense is That The 2. condition touching the sense proued the pure written word of God may iudge betwixt vs according to the pure sense therof which when it is spoken clearly or of purpose to tell vs what Gods meaning is of it self and according to the vsual acception of men it doth afford and this is euident also especiallie if the Church must not be admitted to be the infallible Interpreter of the true sense of Scripture But neuertheles I proue it First because Protestants cannot set downe anie condition which is so reasonable or indifferent to both partes Secondly because ether the Scripture in matters of controuersie clearly declareth her meaning by her self without any help or exposition of man or she doth not If she clearly declare her meaning by her self then needeth she no help of man
of faith in Christ of iustifying faith of faith of remission of sinnes The like hath Ambing apud Hospin in Concord discordi fol. 140. Beza de Praedest cont Caste l. vol. 1. p. 393. There is no mētion in the law of this benefit of free redemption by Christ For the declaratiō of this will belongeth to an other parte of Gods word which is called the Ghospell Apol. Cōf. Augustan c. de Iustific The Ghospell preacheth iustice of faith in Christ which the law doth not teach THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Moises wrote in the law of Christ that Moises wrote things concerning Christ That Moise commanded the people to heare Christ in all things The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the law neuer knew faith in Christ that Moises cōmandeth not faith in Christ that the law knoweth nothing of faith in Christ that in the law there is no mention of free redemption in Christ that the law teacheth nothing of faith in Christ ART IX WHETHER ANY VNWRITTEN word or Traditions be to be kept SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 2. Thessal 2. v. 15. Therefore brethren stand and hould the traditions Traditions not written to be helde which you haue learned whether it be by word or by our epistle CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Coūcell of Trent Sess 4. The holie Coūcell doth with equall pious affection reuerently receaue and honour traditions belonging to faith or manners as ether deliuered by Christs mouth or the holie Ghost and by continuall succession conserued in the Catholik Church PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 3. cap. 10. We care not for vnwritten Not to be helde traditions And Contro 2. q. 5. c. 18. We acknowledge no other word then that which is written And what doctrine soeuer is not written we hould for bastard doctrine Perkins in Cathol ref Contr. 20. c. 2. We acknowledge the onely written word of God Luther Postil in ferias S. Stephani Nothing is to be affirmed Nothing but that which is expressed in Scripture which is not expressed in Scripture Iacobus Andreae l. cont Hosium p. 169. That faith is no faith but an vncertain opinion which is not grounded vpon an expresse testimonie of Scripture Wigand apud Scusselb to 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 681. Onely those doctrines whose very words or equiualent for sense are extant in the Scripture are to be tought and deliuered in the Church Caluin in Gratulat ad Praecentorem pag. 377. Nothing is to be beleiued which is not expressed in Scripture And cont versipellem pagin 353. There is no mention of vnwritten traditions Beza in Rom. 1. v. 17. Christians acknowledge no other object of this faith then the written word of God Etad Reprehens Castell p. 503. Whosoeuer beleiueth in doctrine of religion that which is not written I say he embraceth opinion for faith and an idol for God Vallada in Apol. cont Episc Luzon c. 13. In all the holie No speech of an vnwritten word Scripture there is no speech of an vnwritten word Daneus Controu 7. pag. 1350. The foundation of Christian faith is one onely to wit the word of God and that onely written Hospinian part 2. Histor Sacram. fol. 23. The Magistrates of Zurich commāded that hereafter nothing should be proposed or preached in their Church but the pure fined word of God contained in the bookes of the Prophets and Apostles THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that traditions as well they which are learned by word as they which are learned by writing are to be obserued Catholiks teach the same Protestants expressely teach that onely written doctrin is to be tought nothing to be beleiued but what is written onely the pure fined written word to be tought no obiect of faith but what is written nothing to be beleiued but what is expressed in Scripture and that in verie words or in equiualent sense that there is no mention of vnwritten traditions no speech of vnwritten word that they care not for vnwritten traditions A SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF THE WORD of God or Scripture What we haue rehearsed in this chapter doth clearly shew that Protestants do farre otherwise iudge of Scripture then the Scripture it selfe and Catholiks doe For the holie Scripture together with Catholiks teacheth that in it are some things hard to be vnderstood that it cannot be vnderstood without the light of the holie Ghost that the Ghospell is or containeth a law that it doth preach pennance and good workes reproueth sinne promiseth saluation vnder condition of good workes and is not contrarie vnto the law of God that the law of Moises commandeth faith in Christ and that vnwritten traditions are to be obserued And Protestants defend all the contrarie They shew also that Protestants steale from the Scripture Protestants steale from Scripture her excellencie wherewith she surpasseth the capacitie of mans wit and from the Ghospell that it containeth any law preacheth pennance or good workes reproueth sinne promiseth saluation vpon condition of well doing and agreement with Gods law whereby we see what a libertin Ghospell they bring in to wit such as containeth Libertin Ghospell of Protestants no law preacheth no pennance or good workes reproueth no sinne promiseth saluation without all condition of well doing and is quite contrarie to the law of God And that they steall from the law of Moises that it commandeth faith in Christ and finally they take away all the vnwritten word of God CHAPTER V. OF SAINT PETER AND THE APOSTLES ART I. WHETHER S. PETER WERE first of the Apostles SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. MATHEW 10. v. 2. And the names of the twelue S. Peter first of the Apostles Apostles be these The first Simon who is called Peter CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Pontif. c. 18. Peter was put first by reason his dignitie PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Contr. 3. q. 5. c. 3. Wheresoeuer mention is made Not first of Peter if we looke well into the place we shall find that nothing is giuen to him which agreeth not to the other Apostles And Controu 4. quaest 2. c. Paul maketh himselfe equall to Peter in all points Tindal in Fox his Acts p. 1139. S. Paul is greater then Peter by the testimonie of Christ Articuli Smalcaldici pag. 345. We giue no prerogatiue to Peter Luther in Gal. 2. to 5. This place clearely sheweth that all the Apostles had equall vocation and commission There was altogether equalitie amongst them no Apostle was greater then an other Illyricus in Praefat. lib. de Sectis It appeareth that Christ gaue no primacie at all in his Church to any man Caluinus in Matth. 20. v. 25. Christ shewed that in his kingdome No primacie or firstnesse there was no primacie for which they contended Beza in Matth. 10. v. 2. What if this word First were added of some who would establish Peters primacie Festus Homius disput 12. All the Apostles were equall in dignitie authoritie
A CONFERENCE OF THE CATHOLIKE AND PROTESTANTE DOCTRINE WITH THE EXPRESSE WORDS OF HOLIE SCRIPTVRE WHICH IS THE SECOND PARTE OF THE Prudentiall Balance of Religion VVHEREIN IS CLEARELY SHEWED THAT IN MORE then 260. points of controuersie Catholiks agree with the holie Scripture both in words and sense and Protestants disagree in both and depraue both the sayings words and sense of Scripture WRITTEN FIRST IN LATIN BVT NOW AVGmented and translated into English ACTS IV. VERSE XVII IF IT BE IVST IN THE SIGHT OF GOD TO heare you rather then God iudge yee S. Athanasius Apol. de Fuga WHAT MVST WE STICK TO TO GODS words or these mens Fables AT DOWAY By the widdowe of MARKE WYON at the signe of the Phenix M.DC.XXXI The argument of the first booke VVHo in more then 260. points of controuersie speake with the holie Scripture in the very selfe same or equiualeÌ„t words when it speaketh of those matters expressely and of purpose and in that sense also which the words of Scripture of themselues without anie exposition of man do afforde and in which sense such words vse to be spoken and vnderstood of men they touching those points agree both in words and meaning with the holie Scripture And who speake of those points both in such words and sense as are contrarie to the foresaied words and sense they in those points disagree both in words and sense from the holie Scripture But Catholiks doe that and Protestants this Therefore c. The Maior semeth to be manifest by it selfe and is largely proued in the second booke Cap. 1. The Minor is shewed to the eye in all the first booke The argument of the second Booke VVHo not onely in more then 260. points of controuersie disagree from the foresaied words and sense of Scripture but also are forced openly to reiect some of the words thereof to blot out some to call others in question to change the order of others to change almost all kinds of the Scriptures speaches to expound her words by quite different and plaine contraries to reiect the vnanimous exposition of holie Fathers to confesse that some of their opinions were long since condemned for heresies that some are blasphemous and playne contrarie to Scripture such contradict not onely the words but also the true sense of Scripture But Protestants doe thus Therefore c. The Maior is manifest by it selfe and the Minor shewed to the eye in the second Booke APPROBATIO HOc opus cui titulus Collatio doctrinae Catholicorum ac Protestantium cum expressis sacrae scripturae verbis duobus libris comprehensa Latino serm one olim editum à duobus S. Theol. Doctoribus Parisiensibus approbatum nunc verò auctum in Anglicum sermonem fideliter conuersum nihil habet fidei Catholicae aduersum aut bonis moribus sed plurimum valet ad confutationem doctrinae haereticorum praesentis temporis proinde rectè praeli beneficio in lucem edetur Datum Duaci die 2. Ianuarij 1631. GEORGIVS COLVENERIVS S. Theol. Doctor eiusdem Regius ordinarius ac primarius Professor insignis Ecclâ—siae Collegiatae S. Petri Praepositus Canonicus Duacen sis Academiae Cancellarius librorum Censor THE PREFACE TO THE READER WHEREIN THE SCOPE MANNER OF PROCEDING AND PROFIT OF THIS BOOKE IS DECLARED REQVISITE TO BE READ BEFORE THE BOOKE THERE are now diuers years Gentle Reader since I published the first parte of the Prudential Balance of Religion in which by the weights of Prudence and Right Reason I weighed together the Catholik and Protestant religion according to their first Founders in our English nation to wit S. Austin and Martin Luther which booke hath neuer since bene answered by anie Protestant albeit diuers ministers and superintendents haue carped at it both in Pulpits and printed books shewing thereby that they wanted no will to answere it if they could haue performed it In the preface thereof I promised a second parte in which I would after the same manner weigh the forsaied religions according to their claimes to the holie Scripture and the expresse words thereof which here now I offer vnto thee The causes why I haue so long differred the publishing of this second parte are well enough knowne to them who know me and not needfull to be known of them who know me not And therfore I will not trouble thee with the rehearshall of them but here propose vnto thee the scope manner of Proceding and Profits of this second parte 2. As a man consisteth essentially of a Soule and Bodie and can neither be nor be imagined without them both So the true Church of Christ essentially consisteth Two things wholy necessarieto Christs Church of his true Doctrine which is the forme and as it were the soule of his Church and of lawfull Pastors and People who teach and embrace his Doctrine which Pastors and People make as it were the bodie of Christes Church And without both these partes to wit Christs true Doctrine and true Pastors teaching and People embracing it Christs true Church can no more be or imagined to be then a true man can either be or imagined to be without both the true bodie and true soule of a man And albeit the manifest need of both these partes to the true Church of Christ doth enforce Protestants to make some clame to them both and to pretend that they haue alvaies had both true Pastors who taught and People who beleiued their Doctrine yet their pretense to this parte of the Church is so weake and slender as but seldome and vpon mere necessitie they insist thereon But their greatest pretense and claime is to the true Doctrine of Christ and think thereby to proue that they haue alwaies had true Pastors and People who taught and beleiued their Doctrin as I haue shewed in a Booke of the Author of the Protestant Church and Religion wherein also I haue conuinced by ten Demonstrations all taken out of the open Confessions of the best learned Protestants both of England and other Countries that they neuer had anie one Pastor who taught or man who beleived the very fundamentall and most substantiall points of their religion before Luther arose but that he was first Author Inuentor and Father therof as some of them in plaine termes do call him 3. And although this Booke haue bene now these manie years published both in Latin and English and doth by the open confessions of the best learned Protestants ouerthrow the very foundation of their Church or rather shew that it hath no foundation at all besides their owne imagination yet hitherto no Protestant hath made anie shew of a solid answere vnto it I saie no shew of a why D. Prideaux lecture is no answer to the Author of Protest religion solid answere because that florish which Doctor Prideaux the Kinges diuinitie Reader in Oxford hath made in a lecture deserueth not the name of shew or shadow of an answer First because
speeches of Protestants as it was to me to write them out let him runne ouer the Summe which I make of their words or by the notes in the margent chuse which are fittest to his purpose And thus much for the māner of my proceeding in this booke 11. The profit of this work is manifould First because by it a short and easie way may be taken to make an end The profits of this worke of all controuersies and that out of Scirpture alone as Protestants desire to wit by mere rehearsall of the expresse words of Scripture of Catholiks and of famous Protestants touching 260. articles of controuersie For if it appeare that catholikes in 260. articles agree both in word and sense with the expresse words of Scripture and these spoken of purpose to declare her meaning vnto vs and that Protestants in those 260. articles directly contradict the said words and sense of the holie Scripture no man will doubt but that all Protestant doctrin for as it is contrarie to the Catholik is also contrarie to the holie Scripture An other commoditie is that in this booke are gathered those places of Scripture and they ranked according to order of their matters which in 260. articles directly and in their proper and vsual sense do approue the Catholik doctrin and condemne the Protestant A third commoditie is that hereby are at hand in euerie kind of controuersie such sayings of famous Protestants as not onely directely crosse the Scripture but also many of them are so blasphemous against God against Christ against the Saints the Church Sacraments Faith Good works so opposite to pietie vertue and religion so fauorable to vice and all licenciousnes so repugnant to reason as some Protestants will deny and others scarse beleeue that euer any of theirs taught such doctrin Whome I request The Authors fidelitie in citing Protetestants sayings to take the paines to looke vpon the bookes and places by me alledged and then to beleeue their owne eyes For I not onely gathered their sayings out of their owne bookes but also after I had my self gathered them and caused them to be faire copied out I diligently conferred them with their books and admitted none which he that read their bookes did non find to be truly cited out of them Wherfore I say for my self as Caluin said for him self against Gentilis There shal be no colour for them to cōplaine that they are slandered seing I request that iudgmēt be made of their impietie out of their owne mere words And they who haue had to deale with Protestants ether by word or writing know well how important a thing it is to be able to conuince them that they teach that which in in very deed they teach which may clearly be done by their sayinges here rehearsed 12. The fourth commoditie of this worke is thar hereby shall appeare that almost in all controuersies which betwene Catholiks and Protestants Catholiks do stick fast to the very words of Scripture and religiously keepe her letter and forme of speech and Protestants goe fare from the words at lest of Scripture and bring in a different yea quite opposit forme of speech Nether ought they to think this to be a small fault both because they boasting of the pure and expresse word of God ought also to keep the very letter thereof and not to reiect it and to vse the contrarie as also because the Apostle commandeth to auoide profane nouelties of words and to keepe the 1. Timoth. 6. 2. Timoth. 1. forme of holesome words which we haue learned of him which commandment they do not follow who forsake the Scriptures forme of speech and embrace the contrarie and finally because not onely the sense but also the words and forme of speech vsed by the Scripture did proceed from the holie Ghoste and therefore it is sacrilegious audacitie to reiect Gods words and Gods forme of speaking and to bring in mans words and fashion of speaking quite contrarie As if these new Ghospelers should teach God how to deliuer his mind or he ment to speake otherwise by them then he did by his Prophets Apostles and Euāgelists wherefore their impietie is not to be borne withall who when the Scripture most often and most plainly calleth the beleefe of wicked men or reprobats faith and neuer denieth it to be faith yet dare say that it Caluin 3. Instit c. 2. §. 10. is vnworthie the name of faith When the Scripture often times and most directly calleth the Eucharist the bodie of Christ and not once directly denieth it to be his bodie yet dare say it is not his bodie And the like they doe in many other matters wherin if they controll not the meaning of the holie Ghoste at least they correct his speech and reforme it according to the square of their new doctrin Far otherwise proceeded the holie Fathers who would not suffer so much as a letter or syllable of the holie Scripture to be altered And as S. Austin grauely aduertized Philosophers may speake as they please but we speake according Lib. 10. de Ciuit. c. 23. to a certaine rule lest licencie in words breed impious opinions of the thing which they signifie Yea Protestants them selues some times will seeme to be very carefull of the words and phrases of Scripture For thus speaketh Luther If the In Confutat Latomi f. 227 Scripture terme any thing sin beware thou beest not moued by any words of theirs who as if they could speake better deny it to be sin And Caluin There is to be taken out of Scripture a 1. Instit c. 13. §. 3. certaine forme of thinking speaking by which all the thoughts of our mynd and words of our mouth are to be examined Beza Ad defens Castell also I see that all godlie and learned Diuines haue euer taught that the holie Ghost gouerned not onely the mynd but also the tongue and pen in so much as concerning the wonders of God not onely nothing can be saied of any mā more truly or more habily but also nether so grauely nor so properly Likewise Bucer Prefat in Math. No wisdom of the flesh can reach to these misteries of the kingdome of God Therefore then we speake most plainly most perspicuously and most surely of matters of faith when we speake according to the rule and forme of Scripture And otherwhere we In Hospin part 2. Histor must learne of the Scripture and the holie Ghoste how to speake and think of euerie matter Wherefore the holie Ghost his formes of speaking ought not to be corrected according to the iudgment of our reason Thus they which if they and theires had followed we should not haue had so much speech contrarie to the Scripture 13. The fift and that no small cōmoditie is that by this worke wil be taken from ministers all their false pretense of Scripture and of the worde of God wherewith perpetually they crie that the Catholik
faith is grounded onely vpon mens authoritie and all their doctrin forsouth vpon the expresse Scripture and word of God and In c. 1. Galat. In Assert art 2. thereby draw the simple people to follow them The Pope faieth Luther hauing no Scripture wherewith to defēd himself vseth this onely and perpetuall argument against vs. The Church the Church Agayne Our opinion is deliuered by these words of God the contrarie by the words of men And otherwhere All the Scripture standeth an our sides through all letters and tittles Caluin Papists find no weapons in Scripture yea they In Actor 9. v. 22. In Antid sess 6. c. 8. see it wholy against them Agayne I haue the whole Scripture on my side And Sadeel Our doctrin doth relie vpon the expresse worde of God And in an other place we professed in the fift article of our French Confession that our faith is onely and wholie and expressly grounded vpon the word of God as it is contained De vocat Ministr Ad art 1. abiurat in the Scripture Fulk in Ioan. 5. note 2. Papists can not find a iote of Poperie allowed ether by expresse wordes of the Scripture or by necessarie cōclusiō out of the same And the like most vaine pretence this most impudent boast is most Apol. Anglic p. 20. Pareus praefat lib. de Grat. Caluin epist 193. Whitak praefat ad Demonst manifestly refuted in this booke wherein is clearly shewed that the Catholik doctrin in more then 260. points denied by Protestants is in expresse termes and most directly taught and deliuered by the Scripture and in the same points the Protestants doctrin condemned and that these in very deed do relie vpon their owne inferences out of Scripture their owne conferences of places of Scripture and oppose their owne expositions glosses tropes and figures against the expresse words and thunders of almightie God 14. The sixt commoditie is that though some obstinatly will not confesse that in all these 260. points or in most of them the Scripture or word of God doth expresly approue the Catholik doctrin and condemne the Protestant yet this he can not denie but in all these points the holie Scripture both for word and for sense fauoureth more the Catholik doctrin then the Protestant which if ignorant Protestants would mark they would not be so easily misled For as for words in all these 260. points we Catholiks aduantage ouer Protestants For words of Scripture vse the very same or equiualent words with the Scripture what she calleth faith we call faith what she calleth the bodie of Christ we call the bodie of Christ And so in others whereas Protestants do the quite contrarie as hath beene touched before and shall appeare in the whole booke And as for the forme of speach where the Scripture For phrase of Scripture affirmeth we affirme where the Scripture denieth we deny And contrarie wise the Protestants affirme where the Scripture denieth and deny where the Scripture affirmeth as shal be most euident to him that will read this booke Besids no parte or parcell of the Scripture forceth For partes of Scripture Catholiks to denie it but they hould all that Protestants account for Scripture and some what more whereas Protestāts are compelled to reiect manie bookes of those which Catholiks and the holie Church heretofore hath beleeued to be Gods word and fouly also to mangle and corrupt these bookes which they admit Moreouer Catholiks refuse no authenticall edition or translation of the For translations of Scripture Scripture but Protestants will sland to no translation And thus much touching the words of Scripture As for For the sense of Scripture the sense thereof Catholiks in all these 260. points do admit that sense which the expresse words of Scripture and they spoaken of purpose to declare Gods mynd doe of them selues proporse which sense Protestants reiect and force the quite contrarie Agayne scarce in any of these 260. articles Catholiks are driuen to any answere which hath any shew of a shift or euasion because in them as I saied they embrace the natiue and proper sense of the words of Scripture but Protestants in euerie one of them are driuen to sundrie and foule shifts because they refuse the naturall and plaine sense of Gods word Besids Catholiks in all these 260. points dare stand to the iudgment of the expresse worde of God according to that sentence which of them selues with out all helpe force or pressing of Catholiks they doe pronounce Protestants dare not in these articles stand to the iudgment of Gods expresse worde vnles they may wrest wring and interprete it as they thinke best Finally Catholiks in none of all these questions reiect that sense of Scripture which is deliuered by vnanimous consent of the holie Fathers Councells or Church Protestants refuse it in manie Seing therefore Catholiks haue the aduantage ouer Protestants not onely for Fathers Councells Church miracles the like but also that they haue such and so great aduantages ouer them in more then 260. points of controuersie both for the expresse worde and plaine sense of the Scripture it is plaine willfulnes and carelesnes of saluation to leaue Catholiks for to follow Protestants I would to God that Protestants would as they pretend follow the expresse word of God and embrace that Religion Note which the expresse word of God most fauoureth reiect that which it most disliketh and enquire diligently whether the Catholik or Protestant religion can in more points of controuersie proue her doctrin by the pure and expresse written word of God without the mixture of any word of man and by the pure sense therof which of it self it affordeth without any help or exposition of man when it is spoaken of purpose to declare Gods meaning vnto vs. Let that religion florish and be embraced which in this conflict ouercomet let that perish and be reiected which is ouercomen And what more reasonable then to preferre Gods pure word before that which is not pure mixt partely of Gods words partely of mans What more reafonable then to preferre Gods direct speech before mans inference or collection out of his speech What more reasonable then to follow rather Gods expresse words then mans glosses tropes and figures And finally what more reasonable then to follow that religion which in more then 260. points of controuersie is grounded vpon the pure word the direct word the expresse word of God and hath against it nothing but mans mixt word mans inference mans glosses rather then that which in all those points is condemned by the pure direct and expresse word of God and supported onely by mans mixt word mans inference and mans glosses For example That the Eucharist is the bodie of Christ we haue for vs in foure places of Scripture the pure direct and expresse word of God saying This is my bodie and against vs there is not so much as once any pure word of God
saing directly and expresly This is not my bodie But onely mens inference out of a mixt word to wit Christs bodie is in heauen and can not be in two places which word is mixt partely of Gods word for the former parte and of mens word for the latter And shall we thinke that in a matter of faith which we can not know but by Gods teaching his pure and expresse word is not to be preferred before mens inference out of a mixt word which is in parte mens word What els can we thinke vnles we will euen in Gods matters preferre men before God 15. The seauenth cōmoditie is that in this word are discouered all or the most vsuall shifts wherewith Protestāts vse to delude the testimonies of holie Scripture Which surely is no lesse profitable then to know the deceits of enemies with whom we are to fight And as Tertullian saieth VVoe be to him who whiles he is in this life knoweth not De resur c. 19. the secrets of Heretiks And these are the especiall profits and commodities which may be reaped by this work Now let vs remoue certaine scruples or hinderances of the reaping of them 16. The first scruple may be about the vulgar Latin trāslation Obiections or difficulties remoued which I follow in citing the words of Scripture But to omit all which Catholiks produce for to proue that translation to be authenticall because this is no place to treate of that matter Protestants cōfessions hereof may suffice which may be seene in the Protestants Apologie for the Rom. Church Treat 1. Sect. 10. subd 4. to which I add that Casoubon writeth I acknowledg the Latin translation of the bible to be holie Scripture and I account an vnperdonable fault to so much as doubt thereof That Iuel art 17. sect 4. saieth It hath bene euer more generally receaued in the Church That Beza in Luc. 1. confesseth That the ancient interpreter did most religiously translate the Scripture And in Luc. 8. v. 54. That him self had twoe ancient Greek copies which meruailously agreed with the vulgar Latin And Prefat in Testam That the vulgar interpreter had a truer Greek copie then theirs now are Whitaker also Cont. 1. q. 2. c. 7. graunteth that the Latin Fathers commend it and iustly Hounfrey l. 1. de Rat. interpret affirmeth That the old Interpretor seemeth enough addicted to the proprietie of the word Moreouer Luther and Protestants commonly confesse that Catholiks haue the word of God that the Fathers vsed the Latin translation in their disputes for maintenance of the Catholik faith and confutation of Heresies Besids Fulk in his preface to the Testament saieth that none of them calleth the vulgar translation of the new testament Papisticall as though it were translated by Papists or els made so greatly for Papists when it is rightly vnderstood Finally the vulgar Latin translation differeth not from the originall Hebrew or Greek text but in very few of those places which here I cite and therefore it wil be but vayne to cauil here about this matter 17. The secōd scruple may be that some times the very why Protest can not excuse them selues by the Scripture Scripture contradicteth it self in shew of words and neuertheles in sense and meaning is neuer repugnant to it self And therefore it is not so great meruail if Protestāts some time contradict the words of Scripture nether can it be thereof inferred that the contradict the sense To this I answer that the Scripture nether so often nor in so many and so weightie matters nor so manifestly and directly contradicteth it self in words as Protestants doe Nether need we so many and so incredible shifts for to reconcile the words of Scripture as Protestants need to reconcile their sayings with the Scripture Besids God may speak as he pleaseth therefore may for to exercise our faith and studie mingle some shew of contradiction in his words but Protestants are bound to speak as God speaketh and not to gaine say so much as his words as doubtles they would not if their meaning were not repugnant to his Agayne we may not out of anie seeming contradiction in Gods words infer anie opposition in his meaning because we know that he can not be contrarie to him self but we know that Protestants can not be contrarie to Gods meaning as we see that they be contrarie to his words and therefore out of their so frequent so manifest so direct contradicting of his words we iustly inferre that they also contradict his meaning as we would inferre the same of anie Heretiks whatsoeuer Moreouer this cauil will no more help Protestants then it will help anie other Heretiks sith there were euer scarce anie who so often so plainly so directly contradicted the expres word of God as Protestants haue done And therefore ether we may inferre out of the Protestants contradicting the words of God that they also contradict his true meaning or we can not inferre that of anie Heretiks whatsoeuer But of this more in the second booke cap. 1. 18. The third scruple may be that perhaps also VVhy they can not excuse them selues by Catholiks some Catholik writers haue in shew of words contradicted the Scripture But to this I answere that this is to accuse others not to cleare them selues Let them first answere for them selues before they recriminate others And if anie of them will goe about to lay the like fault vpon Catholiks let him keep these most iust and equal conditions First let him not medle with other matters then such as are in controuersie betwixt vs and them as I touch no other matters Secondly let him bring forth in so manie controuersies so manifest and so direct testimonies of holie Scripture agreeing with their doctrin both in wordes and sense and opposite to our doctrin as I haue brought Thou must proue saieth Tertullian as euidently as we proue Giue me a proof which I demand like to Cont. Prax. c. 11. De vnit c. 6. 24. mine And S. Austin Produce as cleare testimonies as these are which we produce to you We demande some manifest place which needeth no interpreter Thirdly let him shew that the Councell of Trent contradicteth as directly so many and so expres places of Scripture and that in so weightie matters as we haue shewed that theire confessions of faith of which as they say they make almost as great account of as Vorstius praefat Antilpraefat Syntagm we doe of the Councell of Trent Fourthly let him shew that so many and so famous Catholik writers haue in so many and so great controuersies contradicted the expres propositions or assertions of the holie Scripture as we haue shewed of the Protestant writers I say Propositions or Assertions because it is a farre greater matter to contradict the proportions of Scripture in which it pronounceth a thing to be or not to be to be such or not to be such then to varie onely from some of the
words wherewith here or there it signifieth this or that thing As for example it is a farre greater matter to deny the Eucharist to be the bodie of Christ which the Scripture often times plainly affirmeth then not to call it bread as some times the Scripture doth but neuer directly saieth that it is bread Wherevpon Spalatensis l. 5. de repub c. 6. writeth thus It is one thing for a seeming thing to be called by the name of the true thing which the appearence doth shew An other to be said This is that The first may and is borne withall in all equiuocall termes but not the latter Wherefore let him omit these kinds of matters Fiftly let him shew that Catholiks haue done thus not by the way treating of other matters but of set purpose as Protestants haue done who most often then contradict the Scripture in plaine termes euen then when they answere it or comment vpon it Lastly let him shew that Catholiks haue beene forced for the maintenance of their doctrin to denie so many bookes to corrupt so many places of holie Scripture to deuise so many and so incredible shifts as we haue shewed the Protestants haue done or let him be ashamed to say that Catholiks are as faultie in this kind as Protestants be Moreouer though they could proue that some Catholiks haue bene as faultie herein as they are which they can neuer proue yet that would nothing preiudice the Chatholik Church because her faith is not the doctrin of one or of many Catholiks but the common of them all But the Protestant faith is in many points the doctrin of some or of manie of them euerie one of them making that a point of faith which him self gathereth out of Scripture whether his fellows beleeue it or no. Besids the Catholik Church if she find anie thing in the writinges of her children contrarie to holie Scripture she nether alloweth nor dissembleth it but commandeth it to be blotted out as is euident by the Expurgatorie Indices but the Protestant ether approueth or dissembleth the errors of her writers and so maketh them her owne VVhy all CoÌ„tradictioÌ„s here related may be abiected to the Prot. Church 19. The fourth scruple may be that all the CoÌ„tradictions against holie Scripture which are here rehearsed out of Protestant writers were not made nor allowed of all Protestants or of their Church and therefore all of them are not to be imputed to all ProtestaÌ„ts or to their Church I answere First that very many of the Contradictions against holie Scripture here set downe are found in their Confessions of faith and in other writings set forth in their common name which Contradictions are most iustly attributed to their Church and these alone suffice to shew that the very faith and common doctrin of Protestants is directly opposite both to the word and sense of holie Scripture Secondly almost all these Contradictions are taken out of the writings of the first the chiefest and famousest teachers guides and leaders of Protestants and therefore ether Protestants must acknowledge these Contradictions or reiect the doctrin of their first and chefest Maisters as directly contrarie to Gods word Thirdly all the Contradictions or Antitheses here produced are taken out of famous writers and mainteiners of the Protestant faith whose doctrin the Protestant Church hath not publikly condemned nor compelled the Authors thereof to recall it nor commanded it to be taken out of their writings and therefore if not by publike consent yet by silence and dissembling approueth it and so as I saied before maketh it her owne Fourthly Protestants obiect to the Catholik Church whatsoeuer any Cotholik writer though neuer so obscure hath written why then may not we better obiect vnto their Church what many and the most famous of their writers haue published Finally my intention in this workes not to shew the Contradictions of this or that Protestant man or Church against the holie Scripture but of the Protestants in generall especially of the cheefest and most famous But whether the Contradictions of Scripture made by And though they could not yet that would suffice many and famous Protestant writers and not condemned but dissembled by their Church be to be obiected to their Church or no these points ensuing will suffice to my purpose First that the commun fairh of Protestants is in many and weightie articles directly contrarie to the expresse word and cleare meaning of holie Scripture as is euident by that which in diuers articles I recite out of their Confessions of faith and other their common writings The second is that touching many other matters that self same doctrin which I cite out of other Protestants is conteined in their Confessions of faith though it be not deliuered there in termes so expresly opposite to the words of holie Scripture as it is by other Protestants The third is that much of that Protestant Doctrin which here if cite as opposite to holie Scripture is in very deed the common beleef of Protestants albeit it be not inserted in their Confessions The fourth point is that those Protestants whose words I alledge knew the common Apol. Anglic Cont. 2. q. 5. c. 8. L. 3. de Eccles c. 42. doctrin of Protestants as well as anie who now will denie or reiect that doctrin The fift is that Iuel Whitaker Feild and diuers other Protestants auouch that there is no materiall difference in doctrin amongst the cheefe ProtestaÌ„ts which ether they must confesse to befalse or maintaine the doctrin which here I cite out of their cheefest writers The sixt point is that housoeuer the doctrin which I cite is not in all points the Doctrin of this Protestant man or Church yet it is as I saied Protestant doctrin taught and maintained by famous Protestants such as our English Protestants hould communion withall and account them their brethreÌ„ in Christ And therefore ether let theÌ„ defend their doctrin or refuse their coÌ„munion The seuenth point is that whether all or most of the Protestant doctrin which here I cite as opposite to holie Scripture be the coÌ„mon doctrin or beleefe of ProtestaÌ„ts or no this alone would suffice to my purpose that the doctrin of the first chefest and famousest Protestant preachers and leaders is in more then Note 260. points of controuersie quite opposite to the expresse words of holie Scripture For thereby euerie one may see that the first cheefest ProtestaÌ„t preachers did not teach the word of God but the word of the Diuel quite contrarie thereâ—o were not ministers of the word of God but ministers of the Diuel not Reformers but Deformers not sent of God but thrust on by the Diuel not lightned from heaune but blinded from hel not Apostles but Apostatas not Pastores but wolues who vnder a most false pretence of the word of God did most directly impugne it drew Cristians from Gods truth to the Diuels lies from the lap of the Catholik
pastors as is shewed in the saied booke c. 2. cit and Caluin in Ezechiel c. 3. v. 9. saieth that Papists chalenge the name of the Church because they pretend a continuall succession And indeed saieth he we are forced to confesse that they haue the ordinarie ministerie And who can denie but the true Pastors of Gods Church are true owners of Gods worde which they haue authoritie to preach Thereby they confesse that Catholiks are true possessors of the holie Scripture For thus writeth Luther to 2. Germ. fol. 279. cited by Scarpius in Eccles c. 6. VVe confesse that vnder Poperie are manie Christian goods yea all Christian good and that it came from thence to vs. Namely we confesse that in Poperie is true holie Scripture true baptisme true office of preaching true Sacrament of the altar true keyes to forgiue sinnes true Catechisme Nay I say that in Poperie is true The kernell of Christianitie in Poperie Christianitie yea the very kernell of Christianitie and manie great Saintes And Hall Chalmeley and Batterfeild graunt that Luther wrote thus and seeme to allow it Luther also to 6. in c. 28. Genes saieth we confesse that Papists haue the Church because they haue baptisme absolution the text of the Ghospel and there are manie godlie men amongest them The eight proofe shal be from the Confession of such 8. title Confession of strangers as nether are Catholiks nor Protestants For as Vorstius writeth in Antibell p. 181. Iewes Turkes and Pagans do think that the Christian religion consisteth cheefly in Poperie And Whitaker Cont. 2. q. c. 2. No other famous Church can be named in these latter times which was thought to be the Church and was called the Church but the Roman Church Nether let anie think that such as want faith can not be sufficient iudges in this matter For albeit they be not sufficient iudges in the question of the trueth of doctrin yet are they sufficient in question of facte as this is And in this Ioseph lib. Antiq. Euseb l. 7. c. 24. sorte the Heathens in the time of the ould law iudged betwene the Iewes and the Samaritans and in the time of the Ghospel betwene the Catholiks and the Samosatenians And as Christians can iudge what kind of Mahometans are the true owners of the Alcoran though they think not the Alcoran to conteyne true doctrin So may Infidels iudge what kinde of Christians be true owners of the Ghospel though they beleeue not the Ghospel to be the worde of God The ninth proof may be taken from the agreement of 9. title Agreement with Scripture the Cath. doctrin both in words and sense with the holie Scripture as shall appeare in this booke Which proofe though taken alone doe not conuince that Catholiks are true owners of the Scripture yet in conuinceth that they are true owners rather then Protestants who so farre disagree from the Scripture both in words and sense The tenth proofe shal be that Protestants against these 10. title weaknes of Protest Proofes so manie and so forcible proofes for the Catholiks can bring no other proofe for their right to Scripture then that they haue the true doctrin of Scripture Which argument taken alone is as I shewed at large in my saied booke De Authore c. lib. 2. c. 15. a fond Sophisme or Foularie First because Schismatiks haue the true doctrin of Scripture as I there proued by reason by the testimonie of holie Fathers and the confession of Protestants and yet are no true owners of the Scripture because they are no true mēbers of the Church as I there also proued Secondly for Protestants to proue that they be true owners of the Scripture because they haue the true doctrin thereof is to proue one vnknowne and false thing by an other as vnkowne and false Which is not to proue at all because all proofe must be from a thing more knowne Thirdly they nether proue that they haue the doctrin of the Scripture by expresse words of Scripture for these are quite against them as shal be shewed in this booke nor by plaine inference out of the words of Scripture as appeareth by the Catholiks answers vnto all their proofes nor finally they haue proued any thing before a lawfull iudge but all their proofes are such as euerie Heretike maketh Besides if truth of doctrin doe proue true right to Scripture it farre more maketh for Catholiks and no more for Protestants then for anie other Heretiks Out of all which hath beene saied in this Chapter it is most euident that if the light of reason may be iudge in this matter Catholiks must needs be counted the true owners of the holie Scripture because they haue all the foresaied Titles then the which both fewer and weaker would make a claime to worldlie matters out of all question of all which Protestants can pretend none but the last Secondly it is euident that if Catholiks be the true If Cath. be true owners of the Scripture all controuersies are ended owners of the Scripture the sacred testament of Christ they are also true owners of the holie Sacraments of the keyes of heauen to binde and loose sinnes of the means of saluation and of all the goods which Christ hath by his will and testament bequeathed to his Church For vndoubtedly all these things pertaine to them to whome Christs testament doth belong Thirdly it is euident that if Catholiks be true owners of the Scriptures Protestants be vniust vsurpers of them as Iewes Turkes and Infidels are and haue no more right to keep or vse them against Catholiks then theeues haue to vse true mens goods or weapons against them For cleare it is that Catholiks and Protestants are opposite Churches as I haue shewed in the foresaied booke De Authore lib. 1. c. 2. and lib. 2. c. 6. and that one of them is a false Church whereas the Scriptures were giuen and belong to one onely Church Wherefore we may well say to Protestants as Tertullian de Prescript c. 37. saied to Heretiks of his time VVho are you when and whence came you what doe you in mine being not mine By what right Marcion Luther doest thou fell my woods By what licence Valentin Caluin doest thou turne away my water By what authoritie Apelles Zuingle doest thou charge my bounds It is my possession what doe you strangers here sow and feed at your pleasure And the same say we to Protestants Let them first shew what right they haue to Scriptures before they argue out of them let them render vs our weapons or shew what iust title they haue to them before they fight with them against vs. For as the same Tertull. saieth c. 15. Here we first stop them that they are not to be admitted to anie dispute of Scriptures VVe must see whether they may haue them or no to whom belongeth the Scripture that he be not admitted to it to whom it appertaineth not And c. 19. The
the Pharises THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that manie Princes who confessed not Christ and loued the glorie of men more then of God did beleiue in Christ that manie beleiued in Christs name whome Christ trusted not that a euill man doth well in beleiuing The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that the foresaied Princes did not beleiue had not true faith were no beleiuers that those whome Christ trusted not did not beleiue in the sight of God that their faith was not true not sincere but hypocrisie that onely the godlie and the adopted sonnes of God are partakers of true faith that the faith of the impious and wicked is feigned dissembled an imagination or image of faith not true faith that the impious are not faithfull ART XXI WHETHER FAITH BE proper to the Elect SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Act. 8. ver 13. Then Simon Magus also himselfe beleiued Simon Magus had faith and being baptized he cleeued to Philippe Seing also signes and very great miracles to be done he was astonished with admiratiō Heb. 6. v. 4. For it is impossible for them that were once illuminated Also some reprobates haue tasted also the heauenlie guift and were made partakers of the Holie Ghost c. and are fallen to be renewed againe to pennance CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE D. Stapleton in Actor 8. v. 13. Simon Magus had true faith Card. Bellarm. l. 3. de Iustificat c. 14. Faith is not proper to the elect PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Whitaker l. 8. cont Dur. sect 48. True faith is proper to the the elect In Concion vlt. In no reprobate true faith is found Zuinglius in Math. 19. tom 4. The Scripture sometimes Simon Magus had no faith indeed Beleiued not all saieth that some beleiued who professed faith which indeed they had not as appeareth of Simon Magus in the Actes In exposit Fidei to 2. fol. 558. There are some who beleiue not at all as were Iudas and Simon Magus Caluin in Actor 8. v. 3. c. The mynd of Simon was wrapped in dissimulation of faith Beza cont Illyric vol. 2. p. 131. Simon Magus was quite faithlesse Was quite faithlesse In Colloq Montisbel p. 379. Indeed he wanted faith indeed he beleiued not Volanus l. 3. cont Scargam p. 1070. Scarga foolishly attributeth true faith to Simon Magus Daneus Contr. de Baptismo c. 14. He obiecteth that Simō Magus lost faith and that other Apostates did the like But I denie that they haue or euer had true faith Pareus l. 3. de Iustif c. 14. Simon was an hypocrite beleiuing onely with mouth not with harte And he addeth Nether maketh it any matter that Luke absolutely saieth that he beleiued And as for reprobats Caluin 3. Institut c. 2. § 11. None are illuminated vnto faith None but the predestinate haue faith Faith peculiar to the Elect but they who are predestinated to saluation In Confessione p. 106. I acknowledge that faith is a peculiar guift giuen to the elect alone Beza in Conf. c. 4. sect 20. Faith is the guift of God proper and peculiar to the elect alone Bucer in Matthaei 16. They are safe for euer who once haue gotten true faith Musculus in locis titul de fide Faith in Christ is onely of the elect Zanchius de Praedestinat c. 4. to 7. The reprobates neuer Reprobates neuer beleiue truely truely beleiue in Christ And the same is the common doctrine of the Protestants THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that the reprobate Simon Magus did beleiue was baptized cleeued to Philippe and was astonished at the miracles wrought by S. Philippe that euen they who cannot be recalled to pennance were once illuminated Catholiks say the same Protestants plainely say that Simon Magus did not beleiue at all was wholy faithlesse indeed wanted faith indeed beleiued not had not true faith beleiued onely with mouth not with hart that onely the elect are illuminated vnto faith that reprobates neuer truely beleiue and that it maketh no matter that the Scripture absolutely saieth the contrarie These are so opposite to Scripture as some Protestants confesse it See lib. 2. c. 30. ART XXII WHETHER FAITH BE by hearing SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Rom. 10. ver 15. Faith then is by hearing and hearing is by Faith is by hearing the word of Christ. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 6. c. 6. They are disposed to iustice whiles stirred vp and holpen by Gods grace conceauing faith by hearing they are freely moued to God PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker l. 1. de Scriptura c. 11. sect 4. All true faith cometh Faith not by preachers from the Scripture not by the labour of the Preachers Againe All the Fathers with one voice teach that faith riseth of the Scriptures onely not of the authoritie of the Church Et c. 13. sect 8. Reading maketh that we may know the Scriptures and the doctrine of the Scriptures Et Cont. 145. cap. 8. Faith riseth of the Of the Scripture onely Scripture alone And in the same place thus expoundeth the aforesaied wordes of the Apostle By hearing that is by the sense of the Scripture rightly vnderstood Zuinglius in Exegesi to 2. fol. 347. We do not thinke that faith can be gotten by words but that faith being mistresse the words which are proposed may be vnderstood De Prouidentia cap. 6. tom 1. When Paul writeth to the Romans that faith is Not by outward hearing by hearing after the same manner he attributeth that to the nearer and more knowne cause to vs which belongeth onely to the Holie Ghost not to outward preaching The like words hath Oecolampadius apud Schlusselburg libro 1. Theol. Caluin art 1. Caluin in Ioan. 5. vers 9. 3 Christ is not otherwaies rightly knowne but by the Scripture THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that Faith is by hearing and addeth there also that it is not without a Preacher The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that faith is not otherwaies then by Scripture that it is by onely Scripture by reading that it is not by the labour of the preachers not by the authoritie of the Church that it is by the Holie Ghost and not by externall preaching that it cannot be gotten by words ART XXIII WHETHER FAITH IS or can euer be lost SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Luke 8. vers 13. For they vpon the rock Such as when they Some beleiue for a time heare with ioye receaue the word and these haue no rootes because for a time they beleiue and in time of temptation they reuoult Ioan. 20. vers 29. Then he saieth to Thomas Be not incredulous S. Thomas lost his faith but faithfull And v. 25. Thomas saied Vnlesse I see c. I will not beleiue 1. Tim. 1. v. 19. Certaine haue made shipwrak about faith c. 4. Others leese faith v. 1. In the last times certaine shall departe from the faith c. 6. v. 10. Certaine haue erred from the faith
they change into particulars whensoeuer they make against them Which is so great and so manifest an abuse of Scripture as What some Protestants thing of turning vniuersall propositions into particulars some of themselues crie out against it For thus Iacobus Andreae in Colloq Montisbel p. 418. speaketh to Beza It is impietie to exclude anie man from this vniuersall promise p. 419. It is manifest impietie and abhominable doctrine contrarie to the expresse letter to make a particular promise of an vniuersall Et pag. 421. It is horrible to heare so manifest an vniuersall proposition to be made a particular Wherefore I thus frame my eight argument Who besides the foresaied opposition to the expresse words of Scripture are compelled in so manie and so great matters to change so manie and so manifest vniuersall propositiōs of the holie Scripture into particulars they are to be iudged to gainsay the true sense of the Scripture But Protestants do so Therefore c. And the more forcible this argument ought to be against them because themselues teach That as often as there is an vniuersall proposition in Scripture it must not be limited by anie distinction vnlesse that be grounded vpon certaine and cleare words of Scripture For otherwise euerie doctrine may be deluded by subtilitie of distinctions So Gerlachius tom 2. disp 24. CHAPTER IX THAT PROTESTANTS DO LIMITATE manie vnlimited Propositions of the Scripture MY ninth argument that Protestants contradict the true sense of Scripture I will take frō thence that they are forced to limitate manie vnlimitated propositions of Scripture touching great matters as of God of Christ of the Church and the like For if we proue that God doth not at all tempt to euil Touching God because S. Iames saieth absolutely c. 1. v. 13. God is no tempter of euill and he tempteth no man P. Martyr in locis clas 1. c. 15. § 9. answereth When Iames denieth that God tempteth he denieth it not altogether but in that sorte in which those carnall Christians of his time did affirme him to tempt as if they when they sinned had not beene in fault Caluin vpon this place He speaketh here of inward temptations which are nothing but inordinate desires which prouoke vs to sinne And he rightly denieth God to be author of them Pareus l 2. de Amiss Grat. c. 8. Iames doth not remoue from God simply all temptation but onely the inward temptation and such as may make a man excusable If we proue that God willeth not iniquitie at all that is nether for it selfe nor for anie other thing because ps 1. v. 5. it is saied without anie limitation Thou wilst not iniquitie they limitate this saying manie waies as that God willeth not iniquitie for it selfe or by his word or by allowance or delighte in it as appeareth by what we rehearsed l. 1. c. 2. art 1. If we proue that God of himselfe willeth not the death of anie man because he saieth Ezech. 33. v. 11. I will not the death of the wicked and c. 18. v. 32. I will not the death of him that dieth Zanchius l. 3. de Nat. Dei c. 4. q. 4. answereth If thou vrgest the word I will not the death of a sinner and that God speaketh of his good pleasure I say that place is to be vnderstood of the elect onely Beza 2. art resp ad Acta Montisbel p. 196. That restriction of conuersion sheweth that this is to be vnderstood onely of them to whome is graunted the grace of conuersion which surely is proper to the elect Piscator in Thesib l. 2. p. 187. The Prophet speaketh not here of euerie sinner but of him onely that is conuerted But Luther lib. de seru arbitr tom 2. fol. 450. saieth God willeth manie things which by his word he sheweth that he willeth not So he will not the death of a sinner to wit by word but he willeth it by his vnsearchable will If we proue that God willeth the conuersion of euerie sinner because he saieth without limitation Ezech. 33. v. 11. I will not the death of the wicked but that he be conuerted and liue Caluin l. de Praedest p. 786. and de Prouident p. 737. answereth God is saied to will life as he is saied to will pennance and this he willeth because by his words he inuiteth all to it but this is not contrarie to his secret counsaile wherein he hath decreed to conuert none but his elect Piscator in Thesibus lib. 2. pag. 236. saieth That God speaketh there of the wicked who is conuerted If we proue that Christ euen as he is God would gather those who will not be gathered because he saieth absolutely Math. 23. v 37. How often would I gather together thy children as the hen doth goth gather together her chickins vnder her wings and thou wouldest not Perkins de Praedest tom 1. col 157. answereth I say that Christ speaketh here not as he was God but as he was minister of the circumcision The same saieth Luther lib. cit fol. 451. and others If we proue that God calleth euen the reprobate because he saieth without limitation Apocal. 3. v. 20. I stand at the dore and knock Perkins loc iam cit answereth Those at whose dore Christ standeth are the faithfull and the conuerted If we proue that God euen by inward vocation calleth the reprobate because without all limitation it is saied Math. 23. v. 37. How often would I gather thy Children And Isaiae 65. v. 2. I haue spred fourth my hands all the day to an incredulous people And c. 5. v. 4. What is there that I ought to doe more to my vineyard and haue not done to it Et Prou. 1. v. 24. I haue called and you haue refused Contra-remonstrantes in Collat. Hagae p. 245. seq limitate all these sayings onely to outward calling And Pareus l. 1. de Grat. lib. arb c. 11. to onely calling by outwarde means After which manner Protestants also limitate those words Math. 22. v. 14. Manie are called but few are chosen If we proue that men may resist the holie Ghost speaking within them because without limitation it is saied Acts 7. v. 51. You haue alwaies resisted the holie Ghost Caluin ib. answereth They are saied to resist the holie Ghost who obstinately reiect him speaking by the Prophets for here is no speach of inward reuelations which God inwardly inspireth to anie but of the outward ministerie If we proue that Christ did not teach his Apostles all Touching Christ the points of faith because himselfe saieth Ioan. 16. v. 12. Yet manie things I haue to say to you but you cannot beare them now But when he the Spirit of trueth cometh he shall teach you all trueth they limite this to rites and discipline Beza ib These words are to be vnderstood of those things which pertained to the execution of the Apostolicall function and foundation of Churches If we proue that Christ was Mediator of
be in it selfe cleare So Pareus in Gal. 2. lect 25. The Ghospell teacheth good works not of it selfe but borroweth the doctrine of workes from the law So the some Pareus Colleg. Theol. 9. disput 39. The Thessalonians tooke not vpon them to iudge or to debate whether Gods trueth were to be admitted but onely examined Pauls doctrine according to the touchestone of Scripture So Caluin act 17. vers 13. As if Paules doctrine and Gods trueth were not all one The Ghospell in a most large sense is taken for the whole doctrine of Christ and the Apostles Largely for the doctrine both of grace and faith and of repentance and new obedience but straitely and properly for the doctrine of grace by faith So Pareus l. 4. de Iustif c. 3. Finally the Scripture speaketh as the law not as the Ghospell by which distinction they delude manie places of Scripture as is to be seene in Luther de seru arbit to 2. f. 449. Caluin in Math. 19. vers 17. Pareus l. 4. de Iustif cap. 2. Schlusselb to 8. Catal. p. 441. to 2. p. 270. Of S. Peter and the Apostles they haue inuented these Of the Apostles new distinctions S. Peter is first of the Apostles in order not in iurisdiction The Apostles are foundations of the Church as those that found the Church not as those on which it is founded or as Iunius spaketh Cont. 3. l. 1. c. 10. The Church is founded vpon Peter as vpon a pillar not as on a foundation Of Pastors they distinguish That authoritie is in the Of Pastors word which they preach not in themselues That they gouerne the visible Church but not the Catholike That in case of necessitie they are made without mission but not otherwise See l. 1. c. 7. Of the Church they haue brought in these new distinctions Of the Church That for professiō of faith there is one Church visible an other inuisible That she is infallible in fundamentall points but not in others That she is to be heard when she preacheth Scripture but not otherwise That she is the pillar to which trueth is fastened not on which it relieth So saieth Riuet Tractat. 1. sec 39. Or as Andrews writeth in Resp ad Apol. Bellar. c. 14. She is so the pillar of trueth as that she relieth vpon trueth not trueth vpon her That the Church is necessarie to beleiue the Scriptures not to know them So whitaker lib. 3. de Script 396. That the Church is the staye and pillar of trueth not the foundation of trueth Heilbruner in Colloq Ratisb sess 7. Of the Sacraments they distinguish in this sorte They iustifie as signes or seales not as causes They are receiued Of Sacramēts whole and intire of the good but not of the badde that baptisme is the lauer of regeneration passiuely not actiuely So Daneus Contr. 2. c. 12. That baptisme is but one taken wholy but is twoe taken by partes So Beza part Resp ad Acta p. 44. That the Church is cleansed significatiuely by the baptisme of water but really by the baptisme of the spirit So Beza ib. p. 115. or as Polanus saieth in Disp priu p. 37. Sinnes are saied to be blotted out by baptisme not properly but in a figuratiue sense The same Beza in Hutter in Analysi p. 54. saieth I neuer simply saied that baptisme was the obsignation of regeneration in children but of adoption Perkins in Galat. 3. By baptisme actuall guilt is taken away but not potentiall Pareus in Gal. 2. lect 23. Absolutely we are all borne sinners but in regard of the couenant we are borne Christians or Gods confederats Of the Eucharist they haue these distinctions That it Of the Eucharist is the symbolicall bodie of Christ but not his true bodie That Christ his flesh killed doth profit vs but not eaten That it is exhibited in the Supper according to the vertue thereof not according to the substance That when S. Paul saieth 1. Cor. 11. He eateth iudgement to himselfe he meaneth not of damnation but of correction So wolfius in Schusselb l. 1. Theol. art 25. In like sorte they say that Preists forgiue sinne indirectly not directly directly as it is an offense of the Church indirectly as it an offense of God So Spalata l. 5. de Repub. c. 12. Of faith they make these distinctions That one is Catholike Of Faith or vniuersall or historicall an other speciall Againe that one is abstract naked simple an other concrete compounded incarnate So Luther in Gal. 3. to 5. That there is one habituall and actuall of men an other potentiall and inclinatiue of infants So Pareus l. 3. de Iustif c. 14. or as Polanus saieth part 2. thes p. 651. Infants haue not altogether the same faith that men haue yet they haue some thing proportionable Piscator in Thesibus l. 2. pag. 252. Adam before his fall had not iustifying faith or as Pareus writeth l. 1. de Amiss Grat. c. 7. Adam lost faith of the commandement but not faith of the promise Bullinger dec 5. serm 7. Infants are faithfull by the imputation of God Agayne They are baptized in their owne faith to wit which God imputeth to them Zanchius in Supplicat to 7. Manie reprobates are endued with a certaine faith much like to the faith of the elect but not with the same Perkins in Cathol 4. c. 5. There is one generall and Catholike faith wherewith a man beleiueth the articles of faith to be true and an other iustifying or particular faith Thus they distinguish of faith And in like sorte they distinguish of the iustification of faith to wit that it iustifieth relatiuely or correlatiuely not absolutely and as an instrument not as it is a worke Bucanus in Institit loc 3. Faith is saied to be imputed to iustice not properly but relatiuely Polan part 2. thes pag. 197. We are iustefied by faith not properly but relatiuely Reineccius tom 4. Armat cap. 21. Faith iustifieth as well absolutely as considered relatiuely Pareus in Galat. 3. lection 32. Faith is imputed to iustice relatiuely Agayne Faith iustifieth organically And in Colleg. Theol. 2. disp 10. We are saied to be iustified by faith but not formerly nor meritoriously but organically Touching the losse of faith they thus distinguish Zanchius in Supplication citat The elect loose faith in parte but not wholy Beza in Prefat 2. part respons ad Acta Faith sometimes sleepeth sometimes seemeth to be quite lost but yet is not lost Agayne There is a lethargie of faith but no losse The feeling or vse of faith is lost for a time but not faith it selfe Some reprobates do beleiue with a generall and historicall faith common to the Diuels themselues Tilenus in Syntagm capit 43. The faithfull become sometimes outliers but not runawaies or forsakers In like sorte they say that faith without works at the time of iustification is not dead but at other times if it be without workes it is dead Likewise Reineccius
out of the Fathers writings against vs I plainely say that I will not binde my selfe to their authoritie In like sorte they make litle reckoning of the Church Authoritie of the Churche auaileth nothing Councels For thus writeth Whitaker ad Rat. 3. Camp Can the Church afford vs no confirmation of doctrine no arguments of faith None Et Cōt 1. q. 5. c. 10. The practise of the Church is the opinion of men The sentences of the Fathers is an opinion of Merely humane men The definition of Councels is the iudgement of mē Vorstius in Antib pag. 1. saieth that the testimonie of the Church is merely humane Et p. 382. An Argument from the practise of the ancient Church concludeth nothing Protest contemne Fathers Church and Councels Not to be regarded Contemned Finally they professe to cōtemne both Fathers Church and Coūcells For thus writeth Luther de ser arb to 2. fol. 433. The Fathers authoritie is not to be regarded Et l. de Concil Twentie years agoe I was forced to contemne the Fathers commentaries Melancthon in loc edit An. 1523. I am of opinion that in matters of religion mens commentaries are to be fled like the plague Reineccius to 4. Armat cap. 15. There are Fathers who hould the same error with the Papists whose testimonies we reiect as false and fond Bullinger dec 5. Serm. 4. We answere in one word to the ancient writers of the Church whome they obiect vnto vs testifying I know not what of Peters primacie we doe not so much care what the Fathers thought Litle moued as what Christ hath instituted Caluin 3. Institut cap. 14. § 38. I am litle moued with those things which euerie where are to be found in the writings of the Fathers touching satisfaction Et de ver reform Nether care I for the sentences of the Fathers which these Moderators bring for to tread downe the trueth What to doe with Father◠Humfrey in Proregom What haue we to doe with Fathers with flesh and blood or what pertaineth it to vs what the false synods of Bishops doe decree Whitaker lib. 8. cont Dur. sect 62. I care litle for the Fathers Sect. 69. I care not what We care not What to doe with Coūcels the Fathers thought of Ihons baptisme Cont. 1. q. 5. c. 10. What haue we to doe with Churches or Councells vnlesse they shew that those things which they define be aggreable to Scripture Et l. de Script c. 1. sect 7. An argument which is taken from the bare testimonie of the Church to confirme the Scriptures or anie parte of them or anie point of our faith I say is inualide vneffectuall and vnfit to perswade Iuel in Apol part 4. saieth that Way of the Church fanaticall the way to find the trueth by God speaking in the Church and Councels is very vncertaine very dangerous and in a manner fanaticall Thus thou seest Reader that Protestants confesse that in manie and great matters the Fathers the ancient all Fathers all from the Apostles time the ancient Fathers with mutuall consent all antiquitie likewise the ancient Church the Church of the first 500. or 600. yeares the Church in the very beginning Finally generall Councells all generall Councells are opposite to them and that the Catholik doctrine doth consist of the sentences of the Fathers hath beene beleiued and receaued since the Apostles time and all deliuered by the Fathers with mutuall consent Moreouer thou seest how litle they esteeme the vniforme consent of Fathers Church and Councells yea in plaine termes professe to contemne it I dispute not now how the vniforme cōsent of Fathers of the Church and Councells is infallible in matters of faith which hath beene manifestly proued by many Catholiks writers onely I propose to the Readers consideration how much Note Protestants doe preiudice their cause in the iudgement of all reasonable men by reiecting and contemning the vniforme consent of Fathers of the Church and Councells touching the exposition of Scripture Forsooth yong mē contemne most ancient few very manie disagreing those that most agree men of meane wit or learning those that were most wittie and learned men of small diligēce those that haue beene most diligent vulgar yea profane men those that were most holie nether will admit such and so manie men now happily reigning with Christ who nether knew vs nor them so that could not be partiall ether for iudges or arbiters or witnesses sufficient of the sense of Scripture but quite reiect them as insufficient to decide this controuersie Surely hereby it is euident that the sense which Protestants attribute to the Scripture is not euidēt and cōsequently no point of faith seing so manie so learned so wittie so holie so diligent searchers of Scripture in so manie ages could not finde it For as Andrews saieth in Tortura Torti It is monstrous if among so manie eyes eagles eyes eyes dayly conuersant in Scriptures I adde eyes lightened by the holie Ghost none perceaued this sense grounded as they say must plainely If it had beene most plainely grounded I thinke some Father would haue seene through a lattise at least he would not haue denied it and taught the contrarie Yea it followeth that the sense in which Catholiks expound the Scripture is manifest seing so manie and so great Fathers haue vniformely deliuered it nor deliuered it onely but also condemned those who followed that sense which the Protestants embrace as Heretiks as shall appeare in the Chapter following I adde also that Casaubō in his epistle to Card Perron thus writeth The King will willingly graunt that now it is not lawfull No end of controuersies without the Fathers for anie to condemne those things which are euident to haue beene approued by the Fathers of the first ages by an vniforme consent for good and lawfull Agayne If the testimonie and weight of the primitiue Church be taken away the King willingly graunteth that amongst men the controuersies of these times will neuer haue an end Luther also in Defens verb. Caenae to 7. If this frame of the world shall continew some ages humane means wil be agayne set downe after the manner of the Fathers for to take away distinctions and laws and decrees wil be made for to reconcile and to keepe agreement in religion In forme therefore thus I make my 23. argument Who not onely gainesay the expresse words of holie Scripture in such sorte as hath beene set downe in the former booke but also confesse that in manie and gerat matters they contrarie to the vniforme consent of holie Fathers of the Church and Councels yea reiect and contemne it they are also contrarie to the true sense of holie Scripture Protestants doe so Therefore c. CHAPTER XXIV THAT PROTESTANTS CONFESSE that their doctrine was in ould time condemned for Heresie THE 24. argument for to proue that Protestants cōtradict the right sense of holie Scripture shal be because it is
maintainers of the trueth These are such things as that now it may onely seeme to be wanting to set the Diuel himselfe in the throne of God and of trueth And Epist 16. What I Good counsell of Beza admonished before I admonish now in the Lord agayne and agayne to wit that at lest they would consider with themselues from whome and to whome are they gone For that I may imitate the words of S. Austin l. 2. cont Iulian. c. 10. Hath long time so confounded the highest with the lowest Shall light so be termed darkenesse and darkenesse light that Aërius Iouinian Vigilantius become to see and Austin Hierome Epiphanius be blinde But in some I thus argue in the 24. place whose doctrine in manie and greatest points is opposite to the expresse words of Scripture and besides as themselues confesse was condemned of the ancient Church and holie Fathers for heresie that is repugnant to the true sense of Scripture But such is the doctrine of Protestants Therefore c. CHAPTER XXV THAT PROTESTANTS THEMSELVES sometimes confesse that diuers of their opinions be blasphemous THE 25. argument wherewith we will proue that Protestants contradict the true sense of the Scripture shal be because it is so manifest that diuers of their doctrines which in the former booke I shewed to be opposite to the expresse words of Scripture are blasphemous as partely the very Authors of them partely other learned Protestants being compelled by their conscience and the euidencie of the matter doe confesse it Concerning God Protestāts teach that he willeth sinne Blasphemie that God willeth sinne as hath beene seene l. 1. c. 2. art 1. Which doctrine to be blasphemous thus confesseth Caluin in Resp ad Nebulon. p. 732. Was it a doubtfull blasphemie to make God the author of of sinne to will sinne to thrust to sinne Beza de Praed cōt Castel vol. 1. Theol. p. 372. Out of these things none of these blasphemies followeth to wit ether that God is the author of sinne or is delighted with sinne or also willeth sinne Et p. 397. It cānot be saied without blasphemie that God willeth iniustice Ib. l. Quest Resp p. 681. What then Shall we say that God willeth iniquitie God forbidde For this is the most horrible blasphemie of all Zanchius l. 3. de Nat. Dei c. 4. We should surely say that God is the cause and author of sinne if we should say that properly speaking he willeth sinne or would haue sinne to be done Hutterus in Analysi Cōf. Aug. p. 625. The blasphemie of Sacramentaries is execrable who are not ashamed to referre the most dolefull fall of our first parents and all that world of euils which thereō insued not in regard of the punishmēt but of the sinne vnto an absolute and eternall decree of God and to his effectuall working and immutable will Et p. seq But let heauē be astonished the elements amazed at such mostrous blasphemies whereof no pious man should suffer to heare the onely outward noise without shaking much lesse should assent vnto them in his heart And Ioannes Andrae in Colloquio Montisb p. 422. This assertion that man fell by Gods will is impious and horrible to heare and so contrarie to the expresse and reuealed word of God They teach also that God willeth sinne euen as it is That God willeth sinne as sinne sinne as hath beene shewed lib. 1. cap. art 2. But that this is blasphemous is acknowledged by Beza l. de Praedest p. 410. in the words If euer we had thought to speake or write that sinnes as sinnes proceed from the will of God we would confesse that we were worthie of all punishment Lobechius also Disp 21. This principle of Diuinitie is firmely to be held and to be beleiued with all our heart that God nether willeth nor commandeth ill deeds as they are such much lesse worketh or helpeth them or by an eternall decree doth destinate or secretly driue men to commit them They teach also that God worketh sinne and is the That God is cause of sinne cause and author of it as is to be seene l. 1. c. 2. art 4. And yet Caluin l. de Prouident p. 742. aliâs 736. confesseth that it is a monstrous blasphemie that wickednesse is done not onely by the will of God but also he being the author thereof And pag. 471. Thou wranglest with me as if I had saied that sinne is the iust worke of God which in all my writings I euer more detest Instruct contr Libertin cap. 14. God must denie himselfe and become a Deuil if he did worke euill which these men doe attribute vnto him The like he hath libr. de Praedestin pag. 711. And in Actor 2. ver 23. saieth I denie that God is the author of euill because in this word an euill affection is insinuated Beza in Absters Calumn Heshus pag. 316. calleth it blasphemie That God worketh the wickednesse of the wicked And de Praedest cont Castel p. 401. God forbidde that anie of ours should haue saied or written as thou auonchest that God ether giue or permit or worke an euill will or anie wicked or filthie desires when as euen our thoughts doe altogether abhorre from these kinde of blasphemies P. Mart. in locis classe 1. c. 14. If God wrought sinne he were a sinner Kemnice in locis part 1. tit de Causa Peccati All mens mynds and eares do so abhorre from that speach God is the cause of sinne that therefore the Maniches did feigne an other God Vrsin in Miscellan p. 72. Thou saiest that these are the speaches of manie of men God doth effectually worke in the reprobate that they sinne With all our heart we accurse this speach and doctrine Whitaker ad Rat. 9. Campia That is horrible Campian and not to be spoaken which thou saiest that anie should make God the Author of sinne He deserueth that God should streigth with a thunder boult cast him into the bottomlesse pit of hell Pareus in Colleg. Theol. 1. disput 2. The Fathers iustly condemned that impious doctrine of the Maniches and Libertins ascribing the cause of fall and sinne to God the Creator And Disput 3. God was not nor is not the efficient cause of sinne which heretofore was the blasphemie of the Maniches and now is of some Libertines They teach that God doth predestinate and ordaine That he predestinated men to sinne mē to sinne as is related l. 1. c. 2. art 5. Which to be blasphemous confesseth Vorstius in Amica Collat. sect 89. in the words which doctrine that God doth destinate men to sinne I scarce beleiue that thy selfe wilt thinke to be voide of blasphemie if thou doest well consider it Hutter in Anal. Confes August c. 9. The troupe of Sacramentaries Beza Caluin Renecher doth not feare to write with a most execrable and most wonderfull blasphemie that some are fatally and absolutely destinated not onely to their last end to wit damnation but also to the
a contradictorte proposition to the words of Christs institution For Christ saieth This which I giue you to eate is my bodie The Sacramentaries denie it and say That which thou giuest vs to eate is not thy bodie The like hath Musculus art cit They teach that Christ is not in the Supper l. 1. c. 11. art 1. And neuerthelesse thus writeth Beza in Hospin part 2. Histor fol. 301. Manie thinke that we would exclude Christ from the Supper which is plainely impious We are so farre from saying that Christ Iesus is absent from the Supper that aboue all men we most repugne this blasphemie Concerning faith they teach that it is not simply necessarie to saluation l. 1. c. 13. art 15. Which is blasphemous Touching Faith in the iudgement of Luther in Genes 47. tom 6. Zuinglius saieth he wrote of late that Numa Pompilius Hercules Scipio Hector do enioy euerlasting happines in heauen with Peter and other Saints Which is nothing els then plainely to confesse that they thinke there is no faith no Christianitie The like saieth Beza l. de puniend Haeret. Touching good works they denie that it is necessarie Touching good workes they should be present when we are iustified l. 1. c. 14 art 12. Of which doctrine thus pronounce the Electorall Ministers in Colloq Aldel p. 343. It is horrible dishonor to God and a barbarous doctrine to professe that in the very instant and act of iustification not onely merit but also necessitie of the presence of good works is excluded They say that all the good works of iust men are sinnes and mere iniquities lib. 1. cap. 14. art 2. Of which doctrine Zuinglius giueâ—h this verdict in Exposit Fidei to 2. Some of ours haue saied paradox like that euerie worke of ours is abhomination They say also that we may not doe good for reward l. 1. c. 14. art 19. Of which doctrine Remonstrantes in Collat. Hagae p. 95 giue this censure Who denie that the faithfull may doe good workes in regard of reward due to good works he peruerteth and denieth the nature of faith of Gods law of eternall life and death Touching sinne they teach that in the faithfull it doth Touching sinne not expell grace l. 1. c. 16. art 6. Of which Hutter thus writeth They plainely make the Apostle a liar who with open mouth pronounceth that euerie fornicator vncleane and couetous man is excluded out of the kingdome of heauen and also Christ our Sauiour who pronounceth this sentence against those that denie him whosoeuer shall denie me c. They teach that men shall not be damned for their sinfull works but onely for incredulitie l 1. c. 16. art 10. And yet Beza in 2. part Resp ad Acta Montisb pag. 218. after he had recited these positions of Iames Andrews Onely incredulitie damneth men Men are not damned because they haue sinned addeth Durst euer man before this so impudently bring into Gods Church so false so monstrous so abhominable doctrine Et p. 215. Surely your speach seemed into lerable to vs that men are not damned for sinne The like hath Vrsin in Miscellan p. 84. Touching Iustification they teach that a iustified man Touching Iusication cannot leese grace by any sinne that he committeth lib. 1. c. 17. art 12. Which doctrine is thus censured by Wittembergenses in Schlusselb lib. 1. Theol. art 7. It is a great madnesse of the Anabaptistes and other frantike men who say that the iustified cannot fall or at least not leese the holie Ghost and become againe guiltie of Gods wrath albeit they breake Gods commandments against their conscience Hutter in Anal. cit p. 562. It is a blasphemous speach of Zanchius saying that forgiuenesse of sinnes once obtained is not made voyde by sinnes folowing and that the holie Ghost once giuen to the iustified remaineth with him for euer And of Beza writing that Peter denying Christ and Dauid falling into adulterie did not leese the holie Gost Adamus Francisci loc 6. The Caluinists with a horrible madnesse imagin that the regenerate caÌ„not fall into mortall sinne and that if they fall notwithstanding they retaine Gods grace the holie Ghost and faith Et Confess August c. 11. condemneth the Anabaptistes who denie that they who are once iustified can againe leese the holie Ghost They teach that a Sinner doth not cooperate to his conuersesion but that he is iustified doing nothing as a logge or els rebelling lib. 1. c. 17. art 15. Which doctrine thus the Wittembergians condemne in Schlusselb to 5. Catal. Haer. With all our hearts we abhor from that doctrine dishonorable to God and full of Blasphemies against the Sonne of God A man is conuerted not onely as a logge but also resisting and we say that by such speach not onely securitie and profane contempt of God but also horrible sinnes of men are bolstered Of free will they teach that man hath no freedome in good or euill deeds l. 1. c. 21. art 2. Which doctrine Melancthon lib. de Causa Peccati to 2. thus condemneth We doe not applaude the madnesse of the Stoickes or Maniches who are dishonorable to God and pernitious to mans life feigning that men do necessarily commit sinne Finally Iames Andrews in Colloq Montisb condemned manie doctrines of Beza as blasphemous as pag. 381. That the elect though they sinne grieuously doe retaine the holie Ghost pag. 393. That onely the elect infants are adopted in baptisme p. 447. That Christ died not for the sinnes of the whole world p. 422. That God will haue some to perish Et p. 423. That God will not haue mercie on some and that he created some to this end to shew his wrath in them Vorstius also in Parasceue oftentimes condemneth Piscators doctrine of blaphemie And scarce is there anie Protestant that writeth against an other who doth not accuse him of blasphemie Wherefore let this be my 25. argument Whose sundrie doctrines are not onely so opposite to the expresse words of Scripture as hath beene shewed in the first booke but also so blasphemous as sometimes the very Authors of them partely other learned Protestants their brethren do confesse it they are opposite to the true meaning of holie Scripture But manie doctrines of the Protestants are such Therefore c. CHAPTER XXVI THAT PROTESTANTS DOE FRVSstrate and make voide the ends of the coming and passion of Christ MY 26. argument wherewith I will proue that ProtestaÌ„ts coÌ„tradict the true sense of holie Scripture shal be because manie of their positions doe frustrate and make voide the coming and passion of Christ For one end of the coming and passion of Christ was Protest say Christ tooke not away sinne to take away and exhaust our sinnes 1. Ioan. 3. v. 5. And you know that he appeared to take away our sinnes Hebr. 9. v. 28. Christ was offered once to exhaust the sinnes of manie But Protestants as we shewed l. 1. c. 17. art 5. say that Christ did not take
Fratres Finally Luther in Postilla domest Dom. 1. Aduentus saieth Oh sorrow The world dayly becometh worse by The world worse by Luthers doctrine this doctrine and Castalio in Caluin de Prouident These are the things Caluin which thy aduersaries reporte of thy doctrine and warne men to iudge of this doctrine by the fruits thereof For they say that thou and thy disciples carrie manie fruits of thy God that most of you are contentious reuengefull myndfull of wrong and endowed with such vices as thy God doth suggest Where thus I argue in the 27. place Whose doctrine is not onely so opposite to the expresse words of Scripture as was seene in the first booke but also taketh away encouragements to vertue yea all vertue out of the world and remoueth impediments of sinne and giueth allurements theertoe that is opposite to the true sense of holie Scripture But such is the doctrine of Protestants Therefore c. CHAPTER XXVIII THAT PROTESTANTS HAVE NO infallible interpretation of Scripture THE 28. Argument to proue that Protestants must needs contradict the true sense of holie Scripture is because they haue no sure and infallible means to attaine to the true meaning thereof But before we proue that they haue no infallible mean to come to the right sense of Scripture we must proue that Scripture at lest in some points of faith needeth some means to interpret or expound it to wit ether because no where it deliuereth some points of faith so clearely that the onely words thereof sufffice to captiuate the vnderstanding or because though some where it deliuer clearly enough some points of faith yet other where it seemeth so to teach the contrarie as without some infallible interpreter it would seeme vncertaine whether of the twoe it did teach That therefore Scripture doth not of it selfe teach That Scripture needeth an Interpreter clearely all points of faith so as it need no interpreter for that purpose I proue first out of the Scripture it selfe For the holie Eunuch did read the Scripture speaking of the passion of Christ Actor 8. and yet being asked of Philip whether he vnderstood what he read answered And how can I if none shall shew me You see that the Scripture did not clearely foretell the passion of Christ as that a pious man by the onely words thereof without an interpreter could vnderstand the meaning thereof And Luk. vlt. v. 27. And beginning from Moyses and all the Prophets he did interprete vnto them in all the Scriptures the things that were concerning him Et v. 45. Then he opened their vnderstanding that they might vnderstand the Scriptures But if Christs disciples did not vnderstand the Scriptures which spoake of him and the Apostles had need that Christ should open their vnderstanding for to vnderstād the Scriptures it is euident that the Scriptures by themselues doe not so plainely teach all matters of faith as they need no interpretation for to be rightly vnderstood of the faithfull Besides 2. Pet. vlt. it is saied that in S. Pauls epistles there are some things hard to be vnderstood And that these hard things do containe points of faith is cleare both because without cause they should be limited to other things as also because it is added that the learned and vnstable doe depraue these hard things to their owne destruction but such things are especially matters of faith Moreouer if the Scripture did so clearely teach all points of faith that for them it needed no interpreter it would follow that the guift of interpretation had beene superfluously giuen to the Church for to expound Scripture in matters belonging to faith Secondly I proue this out of the Fathers but for breuities sake I will content my selfe with one testimonie of S. Austin He lib. de Vtil cred c 7. to one that saied When I read the Scriptures by my selfe I vnderstood them thus answereth Is it so Without some skill in poetrie thou darest not read Terentian Maurus Asper Cornutus Donatus and manie more are necessarie for to vnderstand anie Poet and thou fallest vpon those bookes without a guide and darest giue thy opinion of them without a teacher Loe how plainely he saieth that we can not vnderstand the Scriptures by our selues and by how familiar an example he proueth it Thirdly I proue it by the verie cōfession of Protestāts For Protest confesse that Scripture alone sufficeth not thus writeth Whitaker Cōt 1. q. 4. c. 1. When Bellarmin maketh this to be the state of the questiō Whether the the Scripture by it selfe be so cleare as without anie interpretatiō it sufficeth of it selfe to determine and decide all controuersies of faith he fighteth without an aduersarie for surely in this point we are not against him Agayne They say that we thinke but falsely that all things in Scripture are plaine and that they without anie interpretation are sufficient to determine all controuersies without Behould how plainely he denieth that Protestants think that Scripture of it selfe without anie interpretatiō is sufficiēt to end all controuersies of faith And the like hath Iunius l. 3. de verb. Dei c. 3. When he graunteth that Scripture needeth an interpreter Kemnice 1. part Exa p. 104. It hath need of the guift and helpe of interpretatiō And the Magdeburgiās Cēt. 1. l. 2. c. 4. The Apostles thought that the Scripture cānot be vnderstood without the holie Ghost and an interpreter and the same meā all other Protestāts who admit that the Scripture is obscure or that the guift of interpretatiō is needfull for the expositiō thereof For doubtles they meane that as well of such places of Scripture wherein points of faith are deliuered as of others this Caluin 4. Inst c 17. § 25. clearely enough insinuateth where whē Catholiks obiected that they had the word of God wherein he affirmeth that the Eucharist is his bodie he answereth Indeed if they may banish the guift of Interpretatiō out of the Church Wherefore he thinketh that there is in the Church the guift of Interpretation euen for to expound Scriptures touching points of faith such as the Eucharist is Furthermore Plessie l. 3. de Eccl. c. 3. writeth that the cōtrouersie of Schisme cānot be properly decided by the Scripture because it is rather a question of fact then doctrine If therefore Scripture by it selfe can determine nether the questiō of Schisme nor yet all controuersies of faith it is manifest that the interpretation of some is necessarie and that also infallible because fallible interpretatiō is not sufficiēt to put vs out of doubt And surely Protestants must needs teach that Scripture by it selfe alone is not sufficient to decide all controuersies of faith both because els it had decided all controuersies amongst themselues or betwene anie that are not obstinate as also because scarce in anie controuersies that are betwixt vs and them Scripture doth so much as in shew directly and immediatly giue sentence for them but they haue need to
conferred by them and ioyned with some humane principle and brought into sillogisticall forme Whereas a Iudge must be such as by himselfe without anie helpe of ether of the parties he can giue sentence Besides the sentence of the Iudge and especiallie if there can be no appeale from him must be so cleare as no man can doubt for whether partie it is But such is not the sentence of Scripture in manie controuersies Agayne there is controuersie betwene vs about diuers bookes of which the rest of the Scripture saieth nothing Finallie before Moises the Church had no Scripture and for sometime after Christ it had no parte of the new testament and yet she neuer wanted a Iudge And as we saw in the Chapter before Protestants confesse that Scripture of it selfe is not sufficient to determine all controuersies of faith and therefore not to iudge all Wherefore we must needs haue some other Iudge For these and the like causes some Protestants seing how absurd it is that Scripture is the onely Iudge in the Church say that Christ or the holie Ghost speaking in the Scripture is the Iudge Whitaker c. 7. cit We say that this Iudge is the holie Ghost speaking in the Scripture In like sorte Confes Heluet. c. 12. Academia Nemaus loc cit Lutherans in Colloq Ratisb sess 9. and others But seing Christ or the holie Ghost is no otherwise in the Scripture then as in a signe of his will to say that the holie Ghost as he is in Scripture is Iudge is no other thing indeed then to say that the Scripture is iudge And as the King as he is in his written laws is not a sufficient iudge of the common wealth because els eueÌ„ after his death he should be iudge but besides there must be a liuing iudge who both heareth and speaketh who can heare the parties and giue senteÌ„ce So nether is the holie Ghost a sufficient iudge is in the holie Scripture Others therefore acknowledge that there must be in the Church a speaking iudge or man For thus Eliensis loc cit Wherefore we all of long time demand a free and lawfull synod Protest admit a liuing Iudge in words And Lutherans in Colloq cit sess 9. We professe that God hath giuen some power to the Ministers and Doctors of the Church to iudge of controuersies of religion Neuerthelesse in trueth they denie the verie nature of the Iudge For ether they will not admit such a Iudge as we are bound to obeyâ— as appeareth by that they denie the vniuersall Church all Pastors or generall Councels to be infallible yea Moulins in the preface of his Bucler saieth that there But not in effect can be no greater temeritie then to desire that men sinners may be infallible iudges of the seÌ„se of the law And the LutheraÌ„s loc cit It is simply and absolutely certaine that the Ministerie may erre But this in trueth is to denie the Iudge whose end is The iudge in the Church admitteth not appeale to make peace and to compose debates which he cannot doe vnlesse men be bound to obey him and all the foresaied authorities reasons which proue that there ought to be a iudge in the Church proue also that he ought to be such from whome we may not appeale Wherevpon Whitaker CoÌ„t 1. q. 5. c. 4. thus writeth I answere that those words Deuteron 17. cit are to be vnderstood of authoritie to define hard contentions and controuersies as Ecclesiasticall by the Minister and politicall by the Magistrate that there might be in both some from whome there should be no appeale els there would be no end of contending But this he meaneth onely in the Nether in outward nor inward Courte externall or outward courte not in the inward courte of conscience For thus he addeth A great weight of iudgement was in the Priest and what he had once determined was good in the externall courte that so controuersies and debates might be ended And Cont. 4. q 1. cap. 2. Controuersies may be brought to the externall Courte and there defined but conscience resteth not in that Courte But this shift is easilie refuted First because the distruction of the externall Courâ—e is without cause deuised in this matter Secondlie because the peace of the Church especially consisteth in the internall courte to wit in faith Wherefore in this Courte we may not appeale from the Iudge of the Church otherwise there would neuer be peace of conscience Thirdly the practise of the Church in the Councell of the Apostles and in other generall Councels sheweth that the Iudge of the Church hath power to end controuersies euen in the inward courte of conscience Finallie if one were bound to obey the iudgement of the Church in the outward Courte and not in the inward it would follow that sometimes he were bound to denie Gods trueth before men to wit if the Church should define against Gods trueth Besides the authoritie of the Church is spirituall and ouer the soule and therefore her power of iudging extendeth it selfe euen to the inwarde Courte of the â—oule Wherefore let this be our 29. argument Whose doctrine in manie and weightie matters doth so contradict the expresse words of Scripture as they dare not admit anie Iudge in the Church they are to be thought to contradict the true sense of the Scripture But such are Protestants Therefore c. CHAPTER XXX THAT PROTESTANTS DOE SOMEtimes confesse that their doctrine doth contradict the holie Scripture THE last proof which we will make to shew that Protestants doe contradict the true sense of Scripture shal be taken from their owne confession wherewith sometimes they confesse it implicitlie sometimes plainelie and expressely Implicitly they confesse it diuers wayes First because they acknowledge that they Protest cannot reconcile their doctrine with the Scripture know not how to reconcile their doctrine with the holie Scripture Luther de seru arbit to 2. fol. 466. How this is iust that he God condemneth those that deserue it not is now incomprehensible yet it is beleiued till the Sonne of man be reuealed Et f. 486. In the light of grace it is vnanswerable how God condemneth him who with all his power can doe nothing but sinne and be guiltie Here both the light of nature and the light of Grace teach that it is not the fault of wretched man but of vniust God Et to 1. f. 390. It is a wonderfull probleme that God rewardeth iustice which himselfe reputeth iniustice Melancthon in Rom. 9. edit 1. This misterie is inexplicable that God both willeth sinnes and yet truelie hateth them Peter Martyr in locis Class 1. c. 16. § 9. It is no meruaile that we cannot vnderstand how it is not contrarie to Gods iustice to punish sinnes and by tempting to enforce them because God can doe more then we can vnderstand Caluin 1. Institut capit 18. § 3. By reason of the weaknesses of our vnderstanding we doe not
Christi c. 23. They who haue giuen their first promise to God of a single life haue indeed iudgement and reprehension Caluin vpon this place saieth that these widdows gaue away their libertie to marrie and did free themselues from the bound of marriage for all their life and did depriue themselues of the libertie to marrie How then did not they sinne by marrying Touching Iustification they teach that it is neuer last Of Iustification l. 1. c. 17. art 15. Which is contrarie to Scripture to Scripture as Confess Saxon. cap. 11. confesseth in these words By the saying of Luke He goeth and bringeth other spirits and the like sayings it is manifest that some regenerate do contristate and cast of the holie Ghost and are afterward cast away of God and become guiltie of his wrath and eternall punishment Touching eternall life they denie that it is a reward l. 1. Of eternall life c. 18. art 1. And yet thus speaketh Apologia Confess Aug. in Melancthon tom 3. The Scripture calleth eternall life areward Agayne The name of reward in this manner agreeth to eternall life because eternall life rewardeth good works Touching Hell they denie that it is a place l. 1. c 18. act Of Hell 7. Which to be contrarie to Scripture thus confesseth Bucanus loc 4. Hell is a certaine place hid and horrible appointed of God for damned men and Angels to their eternall paine Nu. 16. 30. Math. 8. 12. Et Piscat or l. 1. loc 22. The Scripture euerie where testifieth that the damned shall suffer these torments in hell to wit a place vnder earth appointed for their punishment And Regius in loc tit l de Peccato The Scripture expressely deputeth twoe places for soules heauen for the good and hell for the badde Touching the law of God they denie that we may pray Of Gods law for the fulfilling of it lib. 1. c. 19. art 5. And yet thus writeth Perkins in Explic. orat Dom. Be done that is let obedience be giuen to it let it be fulfilled of all men Concerning mans will they denie that it is free in euill Of mans will l. 1. c. 21. art 2. And yet thus writeth Regius in locis tit de Peccato To say with Maniche that man cannot auoide sinne this error is heresie Rogers on the 10. Article The Maniches affirmed how man is not voluntarily brought but necessarilie driuen vnto sinne These and manie moe Protestanticall doctrines Protestants themselues confesse to be contrarie to the true sense of holie Scripture Why then may not we conclude that ProtestaÌ„ts do contradict the holie Scripture seing besides all the foresaied arguments they themselues plainely confesse it of manie points of their doctrine Which was the end and scope of this worke PERORATION Or Conclusion to the Reader THov hast seene good Reader in this worke Catholiks aduantages for Scripture ouer Protestants what great aduantage Catholiks haue ouer Protestants euen for the written word of God or holie Scripture Thou hast seene that the Catholik doctrine in more then twoe hundred and sixtie points of coÌ„trouersie relieth vpon the expresse word of God whereas the Protestants Doctrine relieth vpon humane principles humane conferences humane consequences that is vpon the word of man Thou hast seene that the holie Scripture in all these foresaied articles giueth sentence for the Catholik doctrine and condemneth the Protestant in expresse words and those purposely spoaken and in their plaine vsuall sense in which such words vse to be spoakeÌ„ and taken of men then the which no sentence can be giueÌ„ clearer or manifester Thou hast seene how manie how voluntarie how intollerable corruptioÌ„s both of the words and sense of Scripture Protestants are forced to make lest they should seeme to be condemned by the sentence of holie Scripture They haue now that Iudge to whome alone they appeale let them heare him let them submit themselues to his sentence He speaketh plainely directly and purposely and as I saied in the plaine and vsuall sense in which men vse such words that I may not say also in the sense in which he is vnderstood of the holie Fathers and the Catholik Church Now all and the onelie pretext of Protestants touching the Scripture is taken away For who vnlesse he will shut his eyes doth not see but that they are most plainelie condemned of the Scripture who are condemned of it in so manie and so weightie articles in such plaine words and so cleare sense and that it is but a vaine strugling to seek to obscure the clearnesse of such a sentence by humane glosses and expositions such as were neuer wanting nor euer wil be wanting to anie Heretik The Protestants haue often cried that the Scripture is the onelie rule and foundation of faith that faith relieth onelie vpon Scripture which I would to God they would follow in the foresaied 260. articles and let goe their owne glosses and consequences which are not sound in Scripture and follow them who produce the expresse word of God against the word of man Which counsail though it of it selfe be most reasonable yet because they will more willinglie follow it when they shall heare it approued by their owne Maisters I will here set downe the words of some of them Luther in Postilla in Festo Assumpt Alwaies Protest aduise vs to follow them that follow Scripture sticke to thâ—se things which are clearely deliuered by the Scriptures and relie not vpon that which hath not manifest authoritie in Scripture The Protestante Princes in Praefar libr. Concordiae In true simplicitie of faith they shall firmely insist in the plaine words of Christ which is the surest manner and fittest to teach the ignorant Melancthon in Actis Wormat. tom 4. When the letter is plaine it is manifest we must not goe from it Et ib. in Resp ad Staphilum Nether is it to to be doubted but that the letter when there is no obscuritie or anbiguitie is to be preferred before all the decrees of all men Againe Where the word is manifest and without obscuritie or ambiguitie it is impietie to teach or thinke the contrarie And in Hospin part 2. Histor fol. 115. What wil be in time of tentation Harken to this Protestants when the conscience shall aske what cause it had to goe from the recaued doctrine of the Church Then these words This is my bodie wil be lightnings What will the terrified mynd oppose against these with what Scripture with what word of God will she strenghthen and perswade her selfe that it was need to interpret them by a metaphor They seeme not to be well acquainted with these disputes who so much delighte in wit as them more admire subtilly deuised reasons then the words of Scripture Iames Andrews in Colloq Montisbel pag. 456. Let them examine and iudge the doctrine of both partes not by humane glosses but by the word of God Zuinglius libr. de Author sedit tom 2. As often
as thou seest Christian Doctors to cōtend and disagree stick to him who bringeth a cleare euident and expresse oracle of God Caluin l. de ver ref p. 326. We denie that it is lawfull for vs to goe from the certaine words of Christ And 4. Instit c. 17. § 35. Our soules relie vpon the onely certaine word of God when they are called to account Sadeel libr. de Human. Christ I cannot sufficiently admire them who by those things which are not extant in Scripture will take awaye the things which are approued by most certaine and euident testimonies of Scripture And de ver peccat remissio No opinion is Theologicall which is against the expresse places of Scripture Fulk in Hebr. 6. not 3. Nether is the exposition of anie man to be receaued that goeth directly against the words of the text and the manifould testimonies of the Scripture Vorstius in Amica Collat. sec 101. Who simply so affirme and teach al these things they are secure before God because they can safely retire themselues vnder the sheild of the holie Scripture But who denie them or by meruailous glosses obscure or corrupt them thy finde no where sure footing There is nothing more secure thē simply to stick to the cleare word of God expounded by it selfe and contrariewise nothing more dangerous then to adde or detract neuer so litle of our owne especially in matters of so great moment Thus the cheife Protestant maisters which if ether themselues would haue followed or their disciples yet would follow soone would there be an end of these controuersies With what assurance ô God may Catholiks appeare Confidence of Cath. for their faith before thy tribunall for to answere for the faith which they maintaine against Protestants seing they finde it is auouched in so manie and so great articles by thy expresse words spoaken not by the way but of set purpose to tell vs what thou wouldest haue vs beleiue of these matters and in their cleare and plaine sense which they manifestly beare and in which such words vse to be taken of men so that vnlesse thou doe deceaue then or be deceaued they cānot in these points be deceaued But with what distrust Desperation of Protest or rather desperation will Protestants appeare seing they haue left that which so expresse words of God do auouch follow that which they most clearelie condēne onelie humane consequences humane glosses humane subtilities doe vphould Then these words of God wil be as Melancthon saied lightnings or as S. Austin speaketh thundrings Lib. 1. contr Parm. c. 2. and heauenly lightnings and Protestants cōsequences figures and glosses will vanish to nothing Then it will clearelie appeare that Protestants without all word of God without all diuine authoritie but onelie vpon their owne fancies haue preferred their consequences their conferences their idle reasons before Gods expresse word and that they might not seeme to haue done so haue changed the true and natiue sense of Gods words into a strange figuratiue and violent sense And shall we Neuer anie so contrarie to Scripture as Protestants thinke that these men are Ghospelers restorers of the Ghospel or sent of God and their doctrine the pure Ghospell Whereas neuer was there doctrine more opposit to the Ghospell nor euer anie who in so manie and weightie matters so directlie opposed themselues to the plaine words and open sense of the Ghospell O bouldnesse of men that durst do thus against the expresse word of God himselfe O impudencie of them who would auouch such doctrine for the Ghospell And ô blindnesses or madnesse of them who suffer themselues to be deceaued of such men in a matter so euident O bewiched and blinded mē awaken at lenght open your eyes consider your estate search the Scriptures here set before your eyes and compare them with the doctrine of your Maisters and consider whether they who in so manie and so great matters speak so contrarie can speake with the same spirit thinke the same thing Demand of your Maisters 1. by what authoritie Demands to be made to Ministers of God by what word of God they dare speake contrarie to the words and phrase of Scripture of so manie and so great matters 2. by what authoritie or word of God they dare thinke of so manie and so great matters otherwise then the expresse word of God spoaken purposelie and in it plaine and open sense taught them to thinke 3. By what authoritie or word of God they haue changed the proper vsuall and manifest sense of his words into figuratiue vnusuall and violent senses If they can alledge no expresse authoritie or word of Ministers draw men from Gods expresse word to their consequences God for their so doing as in trueth in most of these Articles they can giue no colour of Gods expresse word but oneliepretend their consequences their conferences their reasons suffer not your selues by this most deceitfull and fond humane pretext to be drawne from Gods expresse and their manifest sense Let vs saieth S. Austin heare our Lib. de peccat mer. c. 20. our Lord not the ghesses and suspicions of men But that God speaking to men speaking according to the manner of men speaking of diuine and supernaturall things which cannot be knowne of vs but by his words and speaking of them purposely for to declare his mynd concerning Note them should so often and in so manie and so wheigtie points thinke otherwise then he speaketh or otherwise thinke then his words do shew or otherwise then men to whome he speaketh vse to vnderstand them and yet not once should expressely say the cōtrarie is not Gods word but the ghesses and suspicions yea the impostures and lies of men In this point therefore consisteth almost all the The Summe whether Catholiks or Protest be to be followed summe of deliberation whether Catholiks or Protestants be to be followed to wit whether in supernaturall matters which cannot be knowne but by Gods expresse words we ought to follow rather the expresse words of God purposely spoaken of him for to tell vs those matters Is whether Gods word or mans reason rather then the consequences conferences reasons of some new slart vp men not well agreing among themselues Then the which consultation none can be easier For if euen in matters which are subiect to sense reason we ought to preferre Gods word before reason of what men soeuer how much more in things which farre surpasse the reach of mens sense or reason ought we to preferre it before the reasons of a few new and iangling fellows Let that faith liue florish and triumphe which Let that faith preuaile which Scripture most fauoureth in diuine matters that cannot be knowne but by Gods words is authorized by Gods expresse word spoaken of purpose to declare Gods mynd and in the plaine and opē sense wherein men vse to take such words and against which sense no
Reg. 15. Luc. 1. Actor 13. he saieth this is not meant of true iustice or perfection but of apparent So that with these men nothing is true if it be against them but onely apparent as is indeed their religion Wherefore thus I argue in forme Who beside the foresaied opposition to the expresse words of Scripture in manie and great matters words which signifie true things are forced to expound them of apparence outward shews testifications and significations before men they contradict the true sense of Scripture Protestants doe so Therefore c. CHAPTER XX. THAT PROTESTANTS ARE FORCED to expound the words of holie Scripture by diuers disparates and contraries THE 20. argument wherewith we will proue that Protestants doe contradict the true meaning of holie Scripture shal be because they are coÌ„pelled to expound the words thereof by things that are quite different yea disparate or nothing like and plaine concrarie of which doings of theirs amongst innumerable I will note some few examples They expound the words of Scripture by things different or diuerse For thus dealeth Zuinglius in Marci 1. to 4. p. 141. All were baptized that is saieth he were taught in Baptized 1. Taught the Ghospell In Ioan. 3. v. 5. The kingdome of God is here taken for heauenlie doctrine and preaching of the Ghospell In histor resur pag. 401. The sense is Whose sinnes you forgiue that is Forgiue 1. Preache to whome you shall tell the forgiuenesse of sinnes In Roman 5. pag. 419. Sinne in this place As sinne by one man c. is Sinne. 1. Disâ—ase Faith 1. Preaching taken for a disease In cap. 10. pag. 434. Faith is by hearing Here marke that Faith is taken of Paul for the manifested will of God and for the manifest and publike preaching of faith amongst the Iews and Gentils In 1. Cor. 7. p. 463. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Good is here taken for commodious and quiet Et tom 2. in Elencho Faith 1 Gods election Which 1. Whiles Blessed 1. Bad Fairewell fol. 34. Faith iustifieth that is the election of God In Subsidio f. 245. Which is powred out for manie that is whiles or as it is powred out for manie In Exegesi f 355. And it happened as he blessed that is bidde them fairewell Et in Exposit fidei fol. 558. It is cleare that the name of Merit or Reward is in holie Scripture but insteed of a Free guift Caluin in Luc. 1. ver 15. Replenished with the holie Ghost expoundeth To be indued with greater grace aboue che common vulgar sorte In c. 7. ver 48. he expoundeth Forgiue vs Forgiue 1. Seale our trespâ—sses thus Seale more and more mercie in our hearts In c. 8. v. 13. They beleiue for a time thus They giue an honor to the Ghospell like to faith In Math. 7. vers 21. By doing Doe Gods will 1. Beleiue the will of the Father he vnderstandeth Philosophically to frame his life and manners to the rule of virtue and to beleiue in Christ In cap. 21. vers 32. The name of Iustice here signifieth Iustice 1. Doctrine nothing els but that Ihons doctrine was pure and right In cap. 23. vers 22. To sit in the chaire of Moises is nothing els then to deliuer out of the law of God how men ought to liue In Ioannis 3. vers 5. By water he vnderstandeth Water 1. Holie Ghost Charitie in vs. 1. Towards vs. the Holie Ghost In Actor 8. ver 18. by the Holie Ghost Singular guifts In Rom. 5. v. 5. by the Charitie of God diffused in vs he vnderstandeth our knowledge of Gods charitie towards vs. In 2. Co. 2. v. 10. I haue giuen in the person of Christ that is saieth he sincerely and without simulation In 1. Timot. 1. and 6. by Faith he expoundeth Holesome doctrine Faith 1. Holesome doctrine In Tit. 1. v. 16. Appoint Bishops that is Be president in the choice of them And in Hebr. 9. v. 26. Destruction of sinne he expoundeth freing from the guilt of paine Sinne. 1. Guilt of paine Beza in Math. 3. v. 1. by Desert vnderstandeth A hillie countrie And in vers 6. by Confessing their sinnes Professing Desert 1. Hillie place themselues to be sinners And in cap. 5. vers 20. Vpon that Vnlesse your iustice abound c. by the Kingdome of heaueÌ„ he meaneth the Church militant and by Enter Teach Peter Martyr in Roman 18. saieth When the Scripture Faith 1. Gods mercie saieth that we are iustified by faith when we heare the name of faith we must vnderstand the obiect of faith to wit the mercie of God Polanus in Syntagm l. 6. c. 36. Faith is imputed to iustice Faith 1. Christs iustice that is the iustice of Christ which faith apprehendeth is imputed Sadeel ad art 44. abiurat When we are saied to be iustified by faith by the name of faith we must vnderstand Christ And so also Bullinger dec 3. serm 9. The Confession of Saxonie c. de Remiss Peccat This saying is to be vnderstood correlatiuely we are iustified by faith that is we are iustified by confidence of the Sonne of God Zanchius de Perseuerant tom 7. col 143 by that You are Faith 1. Confidence fallen from grace vnderstandeth you are fallen from the doctrine of grace or from the Ghospell Pareus l. 2. de Iustif c. 7. Grace 1. Doctrine by Perfect charitie vnderstandeth sincere Et lib. 4. c. 7. by worke your saluation Doe those things which are necessarie for to obtaine saluation Perkins in Cathol reform Contr. 5. c. 3. saieth In all the promises of the Ghospell in which God doth voluntarily binde himselfe to reward our workes the obligation doth not directly pertaine to vs but in respect of the person and obedience of Christ Apologia Confess Aug. c. de Implet legis Because Loue. 1. Beleiue she loued much that is say they because she truely worshiped me with faith and with exercises and signes of faith Et de Resp ad Argum. When the text saieth that eternall life is rendered to workes it meaneth that it is rendered to those that are iustified Agayne Almes is saied to deliuer from death and to purge from sinne not in it selfe but in the cause thereof that is in faith Almes i. Faith Brentius hom 1. in festum om sanctorum To hunger after iustice is to haue a iust cause and yet not be able to follow it in law Reineccius to 4. Armaturae c. 19. by Sacrifice the Phase vnderstandeth Kill it lest he should be confessed that the pascal lam be was sacrificed Illyricus 1. Ioan. 2. v. 3. The keeping Keeping 1. Knowing of the coÌ„mandements in this place signifieth the true knowledge of his doctrine Piscator in Thesibus l. 2. p. 192. 2. Pet. 2. They denie the Lord who hath bought them that is whome before they had professed that he had bought them Et p. 472. he Buye 1. Professe to buye
away or exhaust our sinnes but leaueth thē in vs. An other end of his coming and passion was to destroie and dissolue sinne Hebr. 6. v. 6. this that our ould man is Nor destroied sinne crucified with him that the bodie of sinne may be destroied And cap. 9. ver 26. But now once in the consummation of the worlds to the destruction of sinnes he hath appeared by his owne hoste And 1. Ioan. 3. vers 8. For this appeared the Sonne of God that he might dissolue the works of the Diuel But Protestants say that sinne is not destroied in the regenerate but that it abideth and liueth in them as is to be seene l. 1. c. 17. art 5. A third end was to cleanse vs from sinne Tit. 2. v. 14. Nor cleansed sinne Who gaue himselfe for vs that he might redeeme vs from all iniquities and might cleanse to himselfe a people acceptable Et 1. Ioan. 1. v. 7. And the blood of Iesus Christ his Sonne cleanseth vs from all sinne But Protestants say that the regenerate are not cleansed from sinne but remaine vncleane impure filthie as is to be seene l. 1. c. 17. art 4. A fourth end was that we might be truely sanctified Nor truely sanctified vs. and become holie and immaculate in the sight of God Ioan. 17. v. 19. And for them I do sanctifie my selfe that they also may be sanctified in trueth Ephes 1. v. 4. As he chose vs in him before the constitution of the world that we should be holie and immaculate in his sight in charitie But Protestants denie that we are truely sanctified or holie and immaculate in the sight of God See li. 1. c. 17. art 3. A fift end was that we should follow or doe good Nor made vs to follow good workes works Tit. 2. v. 14. That he might cleanse to himselfe a people acceptable a pursuer of good works But Protestants denie that our workes are truely good and say that they are mere sinnes See l. 1. c. 14. art 2. A sixt end was that we should liue iustly and piously in Nor mad vs liue in holinesse before God holinesse and iustice before God Luc. 1. v. 74. That without feare being deliuered from the hand of our enemies we may serue him in holinesse and iustice before him all our dayes Tit. 2. v. 12. For the grace of God our Sauiour hath appeared to all men instructing vs that denying impietie and wordly desires we liue soberly and iustly and godly in this world But Protestants denie that the workes or liues of the iust are pious holie or iust before God See lib. 1. cap. 14. art 5. A seuenth end of Nor made vs to fulfill the law Christs coming was that the iustification of the law might be fulfilled in vs. Rom. 8. v. 3. God sending his Sonne in the similitude of the flesh of sinne euen of sinne damned sinne in the flesh that the iustification of the law might be fulfilled in vs. But Protestants say that the law cannot be fulfilled in vs but onely in Christ See lib. 1. c. 19. art 1. An eight end was to preach a day of retribution Luc. 4. v. 19. To Euangelize vnto the pore he sent me to preach the acceptable yeare of our Lord and the day of retribution But Protestants denie that there is anie day of reward or retribution but onely of mere bountie and liberalitie See l. 1. c 18 art 1. To these I adde that thus writeth Perkins in Gal. 1. v. 3. It is the fault of our age that all professe Christ yet manie admit not Christ but their owne deuises to wit a Christ who must be a Sauiour to deliuer them from hell but not a Lord to giue them commandements this they cannot suffer But Protestants as we shewed l. 1. c. art 7. denie Christ to be a lawgiuer or Lord to giue commandements according to Perkins admit not Christ but their owne deuises Wherefore thus I make my 26. argument Whose doctrine Nor preached reward not onely in so manie and so great points is against the expresse words of God and in their vsuall sense but also doth make voide and frustrate so manie ends of the coming and passion of Christ it doth contradict the true sense of Scripture Such is the Protestants doctrine Therefore c. CHAPTER XXVII THAT PROTESTANTS TAKE AWAY encouragements to vertue yea all vertue and in steed of them put allurements to vice and remoue the impediments thereof MY 27. argument that Protestants contradict the true meaning of holie Scripture shal be because they take away the encouragements to vertue yea all vertue out of the world and in place of them put allurements to vice and remoue the impediments thereof They take away encouragements to vertue because as Protest take away encouragements to vertue we shewed l. 1. c. 2. art 13. they teach that God careth not for good workes art 14. that he is not honored with thē art 16. that he is not appeased with them And c. 14. Art 6. that there is no dignitie or worth in them Art 7. that there is no reward promised to them Art 10. that all good workes are equall before God Art 12. and 13. that they are not necessarie to iustification or saluation Art 15. that they are not cause of saluation Art 16. Not so much as a testimonie of iustification or saluation Art 18. that we ought not to doe them Cap. 17. artic 15. That a sinner doth not cooperate to his iustification Cap. 18. art 1. That saluation is no reward or retribution Art 2. No crowne of iustice Art 3. That it is of faith onely And cap. 21. art 1. That our will is not free in morall works Art 3. That it doth not cooperate with the grace of God to good works But who can denie but that Gods fauour towards good works their worth and reward their efficacie and necessitie to iustification and saluation mans freedome and cooperation to acts of vertue and saluatiō be great spurres and encouragements to vertue Which notwithstanding all and others such like Protestants take away They take also away all vertue For first they denie to fulfill the law diuers particular vertues as faith the roote of all vertue which they say is vitious and vnworthie the name of vertue l. 1. c. 13. art 12. They take away the highest degree of Chastitie to wit virginitie c. 15. art 2. and the perfectest part of Temperancie to wit Fasting ib. art 5. and all choice of meates artic 7. They takeaway also praier for all men art 8. Vows art 14. and Eremiticall life art 15. Besides they takeaway all inherent iustice c. 17. art 8. and denie that the iustified are truely iust art 3. or cleane art 4. but retaine sinne in them art 5. Finally they take away all vertue For they teach that all the good works of sinners or of good men are sinnes yea mere sinnes c. 14. art 1. and 2. that
conceaue how God in different manner willeth and willeth the same thing Againe Where we conceiue not how God will haue that to be done which he forbiddeth to doe let vs remember our weaknesse Et 3. Instit c. 24. § 17. When he had saied that God willeth that which he professeth that he will not he addeth Albeit according to our vnderstanding Gods will be manifould yet in himselfe he willeth not this and that but by his manifould wisdome maketh our vnderstanding astonished till it shal be graunted to vs to know that wonderfully he willeth that which now seemeth contrarie to his will And cap. 11. § 11. This is a meruailous manner of iustifying that they that are couered with Christ iustice feare not the iudgement which they deserue and whilest iustly they condemne themselues they are iudged iust out of themselues De Praedest pag. 704. Let our faith adore a farre of with decent sobrietie the hidden counsail of God wherewith the fall of man was preordained And pag. 711. How it was appointed by the foresight and decree of God what was to become of man and yet God is not to be madde partaker of the sinne as if he were ether author or allower thereof seing it is clearely a secret farre beyond the reach of mans wit let vs not be ashamed to confesse our ignorance In Ioan. 12. ver 27. But it seemeth that this doth not become the Sonne of God that an inconsiderate desire escapeth him which he must streight renounce for to obey his Father I confesse saieth he that truely this is the follie of the crosse which is a scandall to proud men Nay it is not the follie of the crosse but the impietie of Caluin to attribute an in cōsiderate desire to Christ And in Math. 26. vers 39. If anie obiect that the first motion which should haue beene bridled before it went further was not temperate as it beseemed I answere saieth he that in this corruption of our nature there cannot be seene the feruor of passions with that temper which was in Christ but we must yeeld this honor to the Sonne of God that we iudge not of him by our selues Forsooth the impostures of Caluin not onelie wāting all word of God but also quite cōtrarie thereto must be beleiued though they cannot be vnderstood and the Catholik doctrine of the Eucharist and the like must not be beleiued because it cannot be vnderstood Beza in Explicat Christianismi c. 3. After a wonderfull and incomprehēsible manner it pleaseth God that euen that which as it is sinne he alloweth not yet is not done without his will De Praedest cont Cast p. 340. When he had saied that God decreeth the causes of damnation and that none can resist his decree he asketh Is not then all the falut in God and answereth This difficultie is vnexplicable for men Agayne How God is not in fault if he ordayne the causes of dānation we thinke with the Apostle that it is a question vnexplicable for mans wit Et in Colloq Montisb p. 427. There is no parte of Christian doctrine from which sense and humane reason doth more abhorre Pareus l. 2. de Amiss Grat. c. 13. after he had saied p. 358. that God doth enforce mē to sinnes as they are his secret iudgements addeth p. 363. that this manner is vnexplicable Indeed this their excuse of the inexplicabilitie of the thing were tolerable if the Scripture did clearely teach what they say but seing it doth not clearelie teach so as appeareth by the answers of Catholiks yea so clearely teach the contrarie as Protestants are forced to confesse that they know not how to reconcile so manie of their positions with the Scripture it is a verie great proofe that in verie deed their doctrine is repugnant to Scripture An other manner whereby implicitlie they cōfesse that Protest confesse that the words of Scripture seeme against them their doctrine is repugnāt to Scripture is because in manie and great matters they acknowledge that the words of Scripture and such as are of purpose spoakē for to declare vnto vs what we ought to beleiue of such matters seeme to fauour vs more then them are hard to them and torment them shrewdly Luther in Postill Dom. 9. post Trin. This dayes Ghospell if it be nakedly looked into without the Protestant spirit is plainely Papisticall Zuinglius l. de Rel. c. de Merito None denieth but that in Scripture there are almost more places which attribute merit to our works then denie it And in Explanat art 20. The places of Scripture at first sight seeme to attribute some what to Merit Bullinger Dec. 3. Serm. 9. We acknowledge that the Scripture euerie were doth seeme to attribut life and iustice to good works Rainolds in Confer c. sect 1. What if in that other place the Scripture in shew do fauour you more then vs. And he addeth that he easilie graunteth that the shew of the words of Scripture maketh more for vs then for them Agayne I will graunt 〈◊〉 the words of Christ This is my bodie in shew do fauour more your reall presence then that sacramentall which we mantaine And in an other place In shew of words our Sauiour seemeth to haue promised the keys to Peter onely Herbrand in Compendio Theol. pag. 340. saieth If the letter be vrged in those The letter against Protestants words of Daniel Redeeme thy sinnes by almes they be contrarie to their doctrine The same confesseth Hunnius l. de Iustif of those words of Tobie Almes deliuereth from all sinne and from death And the same is euident by infinit places of Scripture which Protestants are forced to expound figuratiuelie because the proprietie of the word is for vs. Zuinglius Epist ad Matthaeum Rutling to 2. thus speaketh Now remaineth that which in this matter is the hardest A hard matter for Protest to wrest the words of all to wit how we may wrest the words of Christ which they terme words of consecration Here verily we must stretch all the veyns of faith Et in Resp ad Billican he saieth that he vseth pulleis and presses to wring out the sense of the words of consecration and addeth We denie that anie one They need pullies and presses litle droppe at least sincere and pure will come from them vn-vnlesse they be prest with the weight of other places And againe How manie had we some years agoe who could acquit themselues handsomely of those words of Christ Thou art Peter c. and shew the figure of the speach And yet it was no hindrance that we could not handsomely dispatch our selues of the word Caluin 3. Instit c. 2. § 11. I know it seemeth hard to some where faith is attributed to the reprobates In Luc. 3. vers 9. As for Merit that knot is to be loosed which hindreth manie For the Scripture so often promising reward to works seemeth to attribute some merit to them Peter Martyr in Dom. 4. Hom.