c. 8. See epist ad Epictetum l. cit Apud Athanas Theodoret l. cit S. Grego Nazianz orat 2. de Theolog Councel did not inuent that word but set it downe testimonio patrum by testimony of their Fathers and Eusebius though an Arian confesseth the same And S. Gregory Nazian writing against the Arians saith that it should suffice vs that our Fathers thought not as they do and the same argumeÌ„t vseth also S. Athanasius writing against the Apollinarists And how vntruly he affirmeth that the Fathers did not say many vnwritten things are to be beleeued I refer my selfe to their testimonies alleadged aboue cap. 4. But saith Bel S. Athanasius proued homousion because though the word was not in Scripture the sense was A goodly reason He proued it out of Scripture therfore not out of Tradition as if one should say He proued it out of S. Ihon therfore not out of S. Paul 3. Origen saith Bel hom 25. in Math. Bel p. 118. and hom 1. in 1. Hierem counselleth vs to try al doctrins by Scripture This is vntrue vntruth 101. Origen For Origen speaketh not of al but only of our opinions and doctrins Our opinions and expositions saith he haue no credit without their testimonies Againe VVe must alleadge the sense of Scripture for testimony of al the words we vtter Terrullian calling that truth which is first and false which is after maketh nothing to his purpose Next he alleadgeth S. Austin saying That we must not consent euen S. Augustin lib. de vnit eccles c. 10. to 7. to Catholique Bishops error or priuat opinion against Scripture Error against Scripture is not to be followed Ergo nether Apostolical Traditions contested by the whole Church Surely Bel hath great facility in inferring quodlibet ex quolibet He bringeth also S. Chrisostom calling Gods lawes a S. Chrysost hom 13. in 2. Cor. to 4. most exact rule and bidding vs learn not what this or that man thinks and of these things enquire these points also out of Scripture Answer S. Chrysostoms meaning is that Gods word is most exact in the matter whereof he talked vz. whither pouerty be to be preferred before riches in which matter we ought saith he to leaue the opinions of this or that worldly man who prefer riches but seek what the Scripture saith of it And Bel to make him False translat 13. seeme to say That al truth is to be sought out of Scripture translated these words Deque his à Scripturis haec etiam inquirite thus Search the truth out of the Scriptures Englishing nether de his nor haec 4. After S. Chrysostom he citeth two pag. 120. Chap 5. parag 5. sentences out of Victoria cited by him and answered by vs before To whome he adioyneth Canus teaching That Priests are not Canus l. 3. de loc c. vlt. to be heard vnles they teach according to Gods law Certain And then inferreth That Papists teach plainly that no doctrine is to be receaued which is not tryed by Gods word True also if it be rightly vnderstood vz. of such doctrine as may be tryed not of deuine as Apostolical Traditions be which may not be tryed And of Gods whole word not of a part thereof as the Scripture is And that expounded not according to the humor of priuat spirits but according to the vniforme consent of Fathers Councels This most iust and reasonable rule of trying al matters in controuersy the Councel of Concil Trident sess 18. in saluo coductu dato Protestantibus Trent prescribed to the Protestants But they wil try deuine truth conteined not only in Traditions but also in Scripture that part by which they wil try the rest they wil expound according to their owne priuat spirits which is to make them selfs rule and iudges of al wherfore vainly doth Bel professe to agree with the Pope in al coÌ„trouersies pag. 120. if he wil be tryed by Gods word For vnles Bel be made iudge and tryer both of Gods word and of his meaning or as Protestants speake vnles he may iudge which is Scripture and which is the true sense there must nether tryal nor iudgement passe For vnles Protestants may haue al the law in their owne hands they wil accept no iudgement 5. But because Bellarmin graunteth that Bellarm. lib. 2. de Concil c. 52. singuli Episcopi al Bishops seuerally may erre and somtyme do erre and dissent one from an other so that we know not which of them is to be followed Bel thinketh pag. 121. that he hath a great catch yet remembring him self better that though Catholiques graunt that euery Bishop seuerally may erre yet deny that they can erre al when they are gathered in a Synode confirmed by the Pope he taketh occasion to make a long digression about Councels CHAP. XIII Of the authority of late general Councels GENERAL Councels in these our dayes are as certaine as before tymes This is against Bel pag. 123. saying that in our dayes they are like a nose of waxe and as vncertaine as the winde And because he denyeth not but that general Councels in some times haue bene certaine forsooth such as defyned nothing contrary to Protestantisme I wil only proue that they are now as certaine as euer First because Christ promyseth that he would be in the midst of them that are gathered in his name Math. 18. v. 20. S. Math. That the holy Ghost should teach vs al truth Iohn 16. That the gates of hel should not preuaile S. Iohn v. â—3 S. Math. against his Church Math. 16. v. 18. which promises are limited to no certaine tyme but are extended as he saith Math. vlt. euen to the end of the worlde Likewise Christs commaund of hearing his Church Math. S. Math. v. 17. S. Luc. 18. of hearing preachers sent by him Luc. 10. of obeying our Prelates and being subiect to them Hebr. 13. v. 17. bindeth as wel S. Paul in our dayes as before tymes wherfore either the Church Preachers and Prelates teaching in a general Councel in our dayes can not erre or Christ in our daies commaundeth vs to beleeue heresy and lyes 2. Secondly the present Church of our daies hath authority to decyde controuersies in faith Ergo we be bound to obey her decision Ergo it is no lye The Antecedent is an article of Protestants faith Article 39. Art 20. The first consequence I proue because who resisteth power in matters belonging to the power refisteth Gods ordinance and purchaseth damnation to him selfe Roman 13. vers 2. 3. which being true of temporal power and concerning wordly matters much more true it is of spiritual power and in matters of faith and saluation The second consequence is euident For God who is truth it selfe and can not lye can not binde vs especially See S. Gregory lib. 1. epist 24. vnder paine of damnation to beleeue and follow lyes Thirdly as Protestants except
lying dissembling and abusing Gods word euery where shew them selues in his books and now and then are noted in my answer No maruel therfore if one possessed of so many and so wicked spirits be so forward so spiteful so malicious against Catholiques as to callenge adiure them al iointly or seuerally to the combat with him Oh that I would please his Maiestie to admit this combat that Bel I the weakest of many thousands of Gods soldiers might try the truth not by writing which blusheth not as Tully said but face to face as the Bishop of Eureux and Plessy did before the French King I doubt not but if there were any blood in Bels body or any shame of men in his minde I shold make it appeare in his face But whiles this combat must be fought a far of only by paper shot and writing and our writings kept from the view of the people no meruail if Bel feare no shame of men whiles they may see him fight florish but must not behold ether defence or blowes of his aduersary If he be so confideÌ„t in his Heresy which he once vomited forth and now like the dog hath lickt vp again as he maketh shew of why hath he not in al this tyme of his Apostasy procured lycence for publike disputation or at lest why neuer repaired he to the Catholique Priests in prison Let him procure but one such safe conducte for Priests as the councel of Trent graunted Sess 13. 15. 18. three or fowre to Protestants when none of our English Ministers durst accept it he shal not need to challenge or adiure but shal be dared at his owne dore For Priests who willingly spend their blood in testimony of the truth which they teach wil far sooner spend their breath in defence therof are ready to make the like offer Epistle to the King as Bel doth in a different matter to iustify it before indifferent iudges against him or what Protestant soeuer vpon peril of their liues if their aduersaries wil aduenture the like peril And vpon this condition Bel I challenge thee and adiure thee accept it if thou darest What more could haue bene done to bring this so weighty a matter wherupon dependeth the eternal saluation of so many millions of soules to tryal face to face then hath bene done of Catholiques by speaking by writing by petition by supplication Puritans vpon one only supplication haue bene admitted to Conference Catholiques can vpon none And this is that which maketh Bel so bold to challeng vs to the open combat when he knoweth we can not appeare in open shew but vpon hazard of our liues And I wold to God that with danger yea with losse of life we might be lyceÌ„ced publikly to try this truth so important to the eternal life of our dearest countrimen But seeing there is no hope of this when I red Bels challenge it seemed to me not only an vnlearned thing patcht vp of obiections gathered out of Bellarmin and learnedly answered by him but a witles challenge of some coward who seeing his enemy commanded vpon pain of death to keep his house callengeth him to the open field and more like to condemne the Author of folly and vanity then the Catholique religion of falsity before any discreet iudicious Reader Neuertheles because as I vnderstood some monthes after the publishing of it some vnaduised Protestants hearing Bels glorious vaunts and challeng had conceaued great hope of this their Champion thought his booke vnaÌ„swerable I took it in hand not knowing as then that any other wold vouchsafe to Author of the Forerunner of Bels dovvnefal medle with it haue left to my knowledg no one point therin vnanswered attending more to solue what he obiecteth then to coÌ„firme what Catholikes mantein though this also I haue done sufficiently as I hope for my intended breuity He termeth this challeng a downfal of VVhat Bel impugneth Popery and yet in the greatest part therof impugneth no point of Popery but ether perticuler opinions of priuat men or which is worse false imputations of his owne being so desirous of quarrelling as he fighteth with his owne shadow And what he impugneth he doth with so good successe as almost in euery Article he ouer throweth VVith vvhat succesâ—e what he meant to establish and confirme So that if he had giuen his booke the right name he shold haue called it the downfal of Bels foolery Of these eight Articles which he hath pickt out as most aduantagious for him self in which there are some things which as S. Austin speaketh l. de vtil cred c. 1. to 6. may be impugned to the common peoples S. Austin capacity but not be defended by reason of their difficulty but of few In the first he impugneth the Popes superiority ouer al Princes on pag 1. earth and his powre to depose them at his good wil and pleasure wherof the first is but the opinion of some few Canonists coÌ„monly reiected of al Catholiks and disproued at large by Bellarmin whose doctrine Bel accounteth the Popes owne doctrin saith it is approued by him The second no Catholik holdeth but it is Bels faulse slaunder of Catholiks In the second omitting p 19. the question of the being of Christs body in the blessed sacrament he impugneth the being of his quantity therein as a thinge saith he held of al papists as an article of their faith which is vntrue as is declared in the answer In the third he inueigheth pag. 37. against the Popes powre to dispense in matrimony before it be consummated which likwise is an opinion of Canonists commonly refuted of Catholik deuines In the fift omittinge true merit which is a point of faith he impugneth condigne merit as a thinge defined by the Councel of Trent p 75. which it is not In the seuenth Article in steede of Traditions conteining things necessary for mans saluation which in the beginning of the article he proposed to impugne he impugneth an erronious opinion p. 131. 132. 133. of Papias about Christs reigne after his iudgement and an other of S. Ireney about Christs age one history about Zachary S. Ihon Baptists father an other concerning ConstaÌ„tins baptisme a probable opinion of Popes priuate teaching the same doctrin with S. Peter and an other concerning our Ladies CoÌ„ception without sin In the eight he oppugneth the keeping of Gods commandments in such a sense as no Catholik dreameth of So that though he had flong down al these matters yet ther had bene no downfal of Popery Is not this fellow think you a iolly challenger of Pâ—pists a goodly downfeller of Popery Is not be one of â—hos 1. Timoth. 1 of whom S. Paul saith willinge to be Doctors of the law know nether what they say nor of what But if we marke the successe which this Champion hath whiles he yet florisheth by him self before â—is
aduersary enter the field and like Vergils Bul. A Eneid 12. beates the winde withal his might And casting sand doth florish to the sight it is admirable For omitting particuler coÌ„tradictions almost in euery Article he flingeth down the very main point which he wold establish As art 1. he wold proue that the Pope hath no superiority ouer Princes nor power to depose them and yet affirmeth that some Kings and Emperors haue humbled pag. 17. them selues yeelded their soueraign rights to him and that Popes liued in duetiful obedience pag 2. vnder Emperors vntil the year 603. which he proueth by S. Gregory and yet no les then S. Fabian S. Innocent 1. Symmachus S. Felix 2. Anastasius 2. Vigilius six Popes did in that tyme excommunicate their Emperors S. Gregory was the first that decreed the deposition of Kings and Princes In the second article after he had talked long against the real presence and sacrifice of the Masse he falleth to cal the sacrificing of Christs flesh with Preists hands p. 26. 27. golden words and to say that if we wold be iudged by a doctrin of Bellarmins which a litle before he had said was the Popes doctrin the controuersy about the real presence wold be at an end In the fourth article after he had long labored to proue inuoluntary motions of the flesh to be formal sin and called the contrary damnable doctrin he both affirmeth and proueth such inuoluntary motioÌ„s in S. Paul to haue bene no sin because they pag. 48. were against his wil. In the fift Article after he had spent many leaues to fling down condigne merit at the last he auoucheth that if we wold be iudged by Bellarmins p. 78. 79. others doctrin published in print that controuersy wold be ended yet immediatly before he had affirmed that Bellarm. taught his doctrin of merit which is the very some which commonly al Catholiks hold after mature deliberation and graue consultation with al the best learned Iesuits in the world and with the Pope him self What is this but to confesse that in vain he impugneth the Popes doctrin of merit Such is the force of truth saith S. Austin that it is more forceable to Lib. cont Donat. post collat c. 24. pag. 81. wring out confession then any rack or torment In the sixt Article he admitteth the distinction of mortal and venial sin in a godly sense as he saith and yet streight after concludeth absolutly that al sins are mortal and saith that we flatter our selfs in our cursed deformed venials In the seuenth article after he had spent 27. leaues to fel down Traditions called them falshoods and vanities p. 93. and pronounced them accursed of S. Paul who receaue them at last him self p. p. 134. 135. 134. and 135. accepteth one Tradition about the Bible whither it be Gods word or no wherby he beateth down whatsoeuer before he had set vp against the Traditions of the Church In the last he graunteth that Gods commandements are possible to be kept in a godly sense and yet afterward absolutly concludeth that we can not possibly keep them Thus we see this silly fellow p. 149. as he hath bene of opposit religions and professions so playing ambedexter now the minister now the Priest now the Protestant now the Catholik what aduersary need such a challenger who is so great an aduersary to him self what successe is he like to haue of a mean aduersary who hath this euil euent of his own brauado He promiseth to subscribe if one argument pag. 31. Preface to Iesuits Seminary Preistes which he maketh vpon S. Austins words be answered or if any could conuince him ether to haue alleadged any writer corruptly or to haue quoted any place guilfully or to haue charged any other falsly But al this is fraudulently done only to gain credit with the simple and ignorant Reader of a sincere and inuincible challenger For himself wel knoweth how often that argument out of S. Austin hath bene solued by Catholiks against which solution because Bel cold not reply he wold quite dissemble it And his allegations of See S. Hilary lib. ad Constant S. Hierom cont lucifer vincent lyrin cont hereses Authors is too too shamful as shal appeare in the processe of this answer Scripture he alleadgeth but as the Diuel did when he brought it against our Sauiour corrupting ether the words or meaning Fathers he bringeth but quite against their wil and meaning and no maruel for he forbeareth not his professed aduersaries such as in our daies haue written against Protestants and wil make them wil they nil they turne Protestants as he hath done like the spider suck poison out of sweet flowers And I doubt nothing more then that if he find this answere to strong for him to impugne he wil ether proclaime me a Protestant as Daue of Recusancy pag. 22. his breethren do Bellarmin or procure him self as his Father Iewel did to be quit by proclamation against my book But Bel if thou didst meane sincerely to repent if thou beest conuinced remember whence thou Apoc. 13. art fallen and do penance or if thou intendest obstinatly to fight it out harken to S. Hierome Hieron apolog cont Ruffinum and take some shame becoming a man if thou wilst haue none belonging to a Christian and deale plainly set downe the Catholike doctrin truly alleadg Authors incorruptly cite the places rightly answer directly yea or no to euery thing obiected and then in Gods name verte omnes tete in facies contrahe A Eneid 12. quicquid siue animo sine arte vâ—les and I dare warrant thee it shal be answered But thee my dear Countryman seduced by Bel such like who walking in craftines adulterate Gods worde for whose sake al this 2. Cor. 4. v. 2. pain is taken I beseech for Christs sake haue some care of thy saluation consider how of late your Church seruice and discipline hath bene condemned by more then Petition exhibited in April 1603. a thowsand ministers of enormities abuses not agreable to Scripture and want of vniformity of doctrin al your English Bibles the very foundation of your faith adiudged to be il translated and some to contein very partial See Conference at Hampton Court vntrue and seditious notes and too much sauoring of dangerous and traiterous conceits and order taken to make a new translation Alas pag. 45. 46. 47. what certainty can you haue of that religion which more then a thowsand of your Ministers professe to haue no vniformity of doctrin and abuses contrary to Scripture what goodnes can there be in that faith which is builded of an euil foundation as by your owne iudgmeÌ„ts your Bibles hitherto haue bene yea what faith at al can there be in this mean tyme whiles the old Bibles are condemned as naught and a new not yet made If these Ministers
Simon Magus Ergo good works are no reuelation of saluation 2. because In omnibus actionibus in quibus tibi es bene conscia nuÌ„quam audeâ—s esse securus Ambros epist 84. Iob v. 21. euen the worker is not assured that his work is good wanting no coÌ„dition requisit to goodnes for as Iob saith c. 9. although I be simple this same my soul shal not knovv and much les others can be assured of the goodnes of the work for they not knowing the purpose and intention for which the worke is done according to that of Ieremy Mans hart is inscrutable vvho Hierem. 17. v. 9. 1. Corinth 2. v. 11. shal knovv it and that of S. Paul vvhat man knovveth the things of man but the spirit of man that is in him can neuer be assured that the worke is fully good 3. though I and others were assured that I do good works this day yet nether I nor others can be assured that hereafter I shal do good works whensoeuer I shal haue possibility or tyme and yet Bel pag 61. 72. auoucheth that vnles we do good works when we haue tyme or possibility therto we can not be saued Ergo good works make no vndoubted assurance of saluation 4. good works are sinful and offensiue to God as Protestants affirme Ergo according to their doctrin they can be no euident signe of Gods fauor and of our saluation but rather of his wrath and our damnation And if Bel be so wel skilled in mens fortunes as by their works he can euidently foretel their saluation let him play the Aegiptian and tel Protestants whether they shal be saued or damned For if he can assure them of their saluation he wil get more in one day then his fifty pound pension wherewith he is hyred to preach and write against Catholiques and I can send him to one Protestant noble man who wold giue him ten thowsand pownd to be assured of his saluation Finally this doctrin of his is not only against Catholiques but also against his Maister Caluin who saith labascit Caluin 3. instit c. 11. parag 11. fides c. faith quaileth if it respect good works for none of the holiest men shal finde there wheron to trust And good reason for if good works be sinne as Caluin and Protestants teach what assurance or confidence can sinne giue vs of saluation 4. His fourth position is That good works Bel pag. 61. are nether cause of predestination nor of iustification nether do nor can merit ex condigno eternal life Touching the first point of predestination there is no controuersy For al Catholiques do with S. Austin against the August l. de bono perseueran epist 105. alibi Pelagians deny predestination to grace to proceed of our merits and the same do Deuines commonly affirme of predestination to glory though this be no matter of faith See Bellar. l. 2. de Grat. lib. arb c. 15. Nether is there any difficulty about the second point concerning iustification For Conc. Trid. sess 6. c. 8. though faith and repentance dispose to iustificatioÌ„ yet Catholiques thinke them not to be proper cause and merit therof as Caluin Caluin 3. instit c. 14. parag 11. Perkins refor Cathol p. 64. VVillet contract 17. q. 3. part â— p. 588. Perkins and Willet confesse But the third point of meriting de condigno is that about which I saith Bel contend with the Papists at this present and namely with the Councel of Trent But because he proceedeth in this article confusedly enough confounding Bel impugneth a Schole point for a point of faithe many questions together and in stead of a point of Catholique faith impugneth a schoole point I wil particulerly by Conclusions set downe the Catholiques opinions concerning this matter CHAP. III. The Catholiques doctrine touching merit particulerly set dovvne and proued AS about any matter the first kinde of question is about the existence whether it be or no the second about the nature or quality what a one it is and the last about the causes thereof why it is such or such So about merit of eternal life the first kinde of question is whether there be any or none The second about the nature of this merit whether it be ex condigno and worthely deserue the reward or de congruo only haue a certaine coÌ„gruity agreeablenes therto And if it be de condigno whether it be absolute and suppose or require no condition of Gods promise to reward it or conditional supposing the said promise Likewise whether it be perfect hauing iust and arithemetical equality to the reward as a penny hath to a penny worth or imperfect hauing only due proportion and vertual equality to the reward as accidents be a proportionat disposition to substance and great labors for Gods Church a proportionat desert of a Bishoprik and seed vertually equal to the tree The third kinde of question is about the causes of this nature of merit to wit whether this condignity of merit rise partly of any proportion or sufficiency which is in the merit vnto the the reward or wholy and entirely of Gods free acceptation who seeing vs do the best we can to deserue heauen accepteth it as a condigne and sufficient merit therof though of it selfe it be not And to these questions I wil answer by the Conclusions ensuing 2. First Conclusion There is merit of eternal life and our supernatural works done by Gods grace wherof only we speak in this matter are meritorious of eternal life and glory This is a point of faith with Catholiques defyned in the Councel of Trent sess 6. can 32. and denyed Concil Trident Bel pag. 75. by no Catholique though Bel falsly affirme the contrary of some and taught of holy Fathers and antient writers as Bel pag. 61. confesseth and therfore graunted by him selfe in words though he expound merit by Impetration This he calleth a godly sense which is indeed his vsual vngodly shift vsed of him hereafter art 6. 8. of Protestants commonly when they dare not deny an Authors words to deny his meaning For who seeth not that merit is a quite Merit quite different from impetration different thing from Impetration for to merit is to deserue to impetrate is to obtain by request beggars may be said to impetrat but not to merit their almes and an hyred seruaÌ„t meriteth not impetrateth his wages Merit supposeth some iustice Impetration only prayers in the obteiner and liberality in the giuer merit may be though the reward be not giuen Impetration supposeth the graunt therof Merit answereth to reward Impetration to gift Merit requireth at lest some proportion in the worke to the reward Impetration none at al. 3. And euident it is that Fathers by merit vnderstaÌ„d not impetration For S. Austin S. Augustin tom 2. Deus proposuit regnum caelorum vaenale in ep 93. S. Ireney S. Basil prope fin S.
against them 4 Out of S. Thomas he citeth That we Bel p. 102. S. Thom. 1. part q. 36. art 2. must speak nothing of God which is not in Scripture by vvords or sense But this is nothing against Tradition of other things An other place he citeth out of â— p. q. 42. ar 4. VVhatsoeuer Christ vvold haue vs read of his doing and sayings he commanded the Apostles to vvrite as vvith his ovvne hands This also maketh nothing against vs. Both because S. Thomas saith not what Christ wold haue vs beleeue but what he wold haue vs read and Traditions be such as Christ wold haue vs beleeue though we read them not as appeareth by his Apostle 2. Thess 2. v. 15. Hoâ—d the Tâ—aditions vvhich you haue learnt ether by speech or by my epistle As also because S. Thomas speaketh not of al points of beleefe but only of Christs sayings and doings besids which the very sayings and doings of the Apostles recorded in their acts epistles or testifyed by Tradition are to be beleeued I omit a pettie vntruth which Bel vntruth 82 often repeareth That vve nether vvil nor can deny S. Thomas doctrin But S. Thomas his S. Thomas mynd concerning Traditions appeareth by his words 2. Thess 2. It is euident that there are things vnvvritten in the Church taught by the Apostles and therfore to be kept For as S. Dionis saith The Apostles thought it better to conceale many things 5. He citeth also Victoria saying I am Bel p. 103. Victoria de sacrament not certaine of it though al say it vvhich is not conteined in Scripture But Victoria meaneth of things spoken not by Tradition but by probable opinion as the conception of our lady without original sinne and such like or he meaneth of things nether actually nor vertually conteined in Scripture as Traditions be according to our 2. Conclusion cap 1. An other place he alleadgeth out of Victoria writing That for opinions Victor de augmento charitatis relect 8. vve ought no vvay to depart from the rule of Scriptures What is this to the purpose Let Bel proue that we ether for opinions or any thing els depart from Scripture and let him not slander vs as he doth That vve beleeue Bel p. 103. 83. vntruth vvhatsoeuer the Pope telleth vs though it be neuer so repugnant to Scripture For who shal be innocent if it suffice to accuse 6. Lastly he quoteth S. Anselme 2. Timoth 3. and Lyra Math. 19. but omitteth their words because they make litle for him S. Anselm saith that Scripture and meaneth the old Testament can make one sufficiently learned to get saluatioÌ„ to keape the commandements and what is more is not of necessity but of supererogation Which how litle it maketh against the beleefe of Traditions were supererogation to declare And thus much touching the sufficiency of Scriptures now let vs entreat of their hardnes or difficulty CHAP. VI. Of the Difficulty or easynes of Scriptures SCRIPTVRES are difficult and hard Scriptures to vnderstand This is against Bel pag. 107. but expresly taught by S. Peter 2. Pet. â— Peter 3. v. 16. where speaking of S. Pauls epistles he saith In vvhich are some things hard to be vnderstood To this Bel frameth three answers Bel p. 107. First that S. Peter saith not the vvhole Scripture is hard to vnderstand but some things in S. Pauls epistles This is not to the purpose because we say not that the whole Scripture that is euery part thereof is hard to vnderstand But graunt with S. Chrysostom 2. S. Chrysost Concion 3. de Lazaro Thessal hom 3. VVhatsoeuer is necessary to euery mans saluation is manifest out of Scripture And with S. Austin lib. 2 doct Christ S. Austin c. 9. Al those things vvhich concerne faith and manners are plainly set dovvne in Scripture And lib. 2. de pec mer. remiss c. vlt. tom 7. I beleeue euen in this point vve shold haue most cleare testimony of Gods word if man could not be ignorant of it without losse of saluation Yet Lex partim in aperto est partim etiaÌ„ inuelatis tegitur Nazianz orat â— de Theolog withal affirme with the same holy Doctor in psal 140. If Scripture were no where obscure it vvold not exercise vs. And the like he saith serm 13. de verb. Apost Only we affirme that absolutly the Scripture is hard and to The Scripture absolutely hard though not euery place thereof this it sufficeth that some places are hard As for away to be dangerous it sufficeth that some places be perilous though others be secure 2. His second answer is That S. Peter only saith some places are hard to the vnlearned vvhich are vnstable And like is his third answer That they are hard to the vvicked vvhich depraue them But to answer thus is in deed to depraue Scriptures and to shew him selfe to be one of the vnlearned and vnstable wherof S. Peter speaketh For S. Peter absolutly saith some things in S. Pauls epistles are hard not respectiuely to these or other kind of men In vvhich epistles saith S. Peter S. Peter some things are hard to be vnderstood vvhich the vnlearned and vnstable depraue to their owne perditioÌ„ Behold he saith not some things are hard to the vnlearned and vnstable but absolutly some things are hard which hard things the vnlearned and vnstable depraue And as S. Austin saith lib. de fid oper c S. Augustin tom 4. 14. one special hardnes meant by S. Peter in S. Pauls epistles is his difficult speech and high commendation of iustifying faith which now Protestants depraue to their owne perdition in gathering therof that faith alone doth iustify as some gathered in the Apostles tyme against which opinion especially as the same holy Doctor witnesseth S Peter S Ihon S. Iames and S. Iude S. Augustin cit writ their epistles An other special difficulty meant by S. Peter saith S. Austin 10. c. 16 are his words 1. corinth 3. If any build vpon the foundation c. 3. Againe if Scripturs be not hard what See S. Chrysost hom 3. de Lazaro tom 2. S. Hierom. meant S. Philip to ask the Eunuch who was as holy studious a man as S. Hierom ae he him selfe testifyeth epist ad Paulin If he vnderstood them What meant the Eunuch Act. 8. v. 30. v. 31. to answere 6 How can I if some do not shew me Could not an holy man so wise as he was being Treasurer to the Q of Ethiopia vnderstand easy matters If Scripturs be so easy what need had K. Dauid to pray for Psalm 118. v. 34. Ib. v. 18. vnderstanding to search Gods law for opening his eyes to consider the wonders of it what hapned to the Apostles that they could not vnderstaÌ„d Christs parables what Math. 13. v 36. c. 15. v. 16. needed the gift of interpretation giuen to some 1. corinth 12.