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
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
at all For what need she help of others to declare her meaning who clearly declareth it her self And vndoubtedly if in any place she clearly declareth her meaning she doth it in those places in which she speaketh both clearly and of set purpose for to expresse her meaning But if by her self she doe not clearly declare her meaning in matters in controuersie without some help of man especially without the help of one of the opposite parties who contend about her meaning certainly she is A iudge must be able by himself to declare his mynd not fitt to be the onely iudge of controuersies as Protestants would haue her For who will saye that she alone is fitt to be iudge who alone and by her self is not able to vtter clearly her mynd Besids if the pure word of God may not iudge according to the pure sense which of it self it clearly yeeldeth but according to a different nay quite opposite sense which being conferred expounded wrested by man it is forced to yeeld who shall assure vs that Gods sense and not the sense of man whose and not Gods that conference inference and wresting is is made Serm. 14. de verb. Apost Tractat. 2. de Cant. c. 17. L. 6. cont Iulian c. 5. L. 2. de Baptismo c. 6. iudge of controuersies Let mens ghesses saieth S. Austin giue place for a time let vs take in hand diuine weapons Againe This is humane inference not dinine authoritie The arguments which you bring are humane these are diuine munitions And otherwhere let vs not bring false scales with which we may weigh what we will and how we will and saye as we please This is heauie This is leight But let vs bring the diuine scale of the holie Scripture and in that let vs weigh which is heauiest or rather let not vs wheigh it but let vs aknowledg it weighed of God Let vs set aside a while mens ghesses or imaginations of the conference or exposition of this or that place of Scripture let vs not bring deceitfull scales of mans conference inference or exposition of Scripture with which we may weigh what we will and how we will saying according as we please This is the meaning That is not the meaning This followeth That followeth not This is true that is false againe all which we may oppose those words of S. Austin This is mans inference mans conference mans exposition mans ghesse not diuine authoritie and let vs bring the diuine and sure scale of the pure meaning of Gods pure word and in that let vs weigh the doctrin of both partes or rather let vs acknowledge that which is weighed and allowed by God him self in this his scale Moreouer if mans help be necessarie to Scripture for the conference and expositiō of the places therof or inference of that which is to be inferred out of them so that without mans help it can not sufficiently decide questions of faith I aske of Protestants what men these must be whether we or they or some third who nether are Catholiks nor Protestants Sure I am they will nether admit ours nor other mens expositions of Scripture for their iudge and I think they wil be ashamed to exact of vs that we should admit their interpretatiō especially sith they refuse the conference inference and exposition of the holy Councells and Fathers Wherfore vnles they will stand to Protestants must be tried by the natiue and vsual sense of he words or thy no sense that sense of Scripture which is no way partial to wit which the Scripture it self by it self without any conference or exposition of man giueth they can name no sense of Scripture which both parties may admit for their iudge and to refuse all sense of Scripture whervpon both parties may reasonably agree is plainly to refuse all reasonable triall by scripture For seing the soule and kernel of the Scripture is the sense therof and that the letter or words is but the shell or bark of it as is euident and both holie Fathers and Protestants agree manifest it is that whosoeuer will not reasonably agree vpon any sense of the Church Councells or Fathers where it is spoken of set purpose to declare Gods meaning of it self without any mans exposition and according to the vsual vnderstanding of men it doth afford rather then the quite contrarie sense which by the wresting of Protestants it is compelled to carrie Let but this right reason and true prudence lift vp this Balance wherein I weigh the Doctrin of Catholiks and Protestants according to holie Scripture in more then 260. points and I nothing doubt but it will clearly see and iudge the Catholik doctrin agreable to Scripture and the Protestant quite opposite and contrarie And this is my purpose Scope and butte in this 1. The Scope of the first booke And of the second booke to which I adde a second wherin I manifestly shewe that Protestants Doctrin is not onely quite opposite in more then 260. points both in words and meaning to the holie Scripture but also that they are forced to reiect many and great partes of the Scripture to alter that parte which they admit to weaken all force of Scripture to say that much of the Scripture was not spoken of certaine knowledge or not according to the meaning of the speaker to teach that most weightie sentences of the Scripture were spoken ironically mimetically and hyperbolically to change the most vniuersall propositions of the Scripture into particulers to limitate speeches not limited by the Scripture to alter absolute speeches into conditionall to make causall propositions not causall to expound words in some sorte which were spake simply The contents of the second booke which were spaken of one time to interprete them of an other to make one saying of many to vnderstand words that signifie the doing of a thing of an endeauour to doe it which signifie working a thing of the way or meane therto which signifie that a thing is to expound that it ought to be words which signifie a true thing to expound them of a shew or apparent thing to expound the words of Scripture of different yea wholy diuerse contrarie matters to deuise improprietes and all figures of speeches to feigne friuolous and neuer before heard of distinctions to reiect the exposition of the Fathers Councells and Church to confesse that they teach Doctrin damned in ould time for heresie to frustate the ends of the incarnation and passion of Christ to take out of the world all vertue and giue free scope to all vice and finally to confesse that much of the Protestant doctrin is contrarie to holie Scripture All which clearly shewe that Protestant leaders doe not onely teach doctrin contrarie to the Scripture but also do in very deed mock and contemne it 8. The manner of my proceeding is this First I deuide Manner of proceeding in this booke the matters which are in controuersie
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
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
that is a Hedge sparow all and whole It not this a trick of arte Yes surely not vnknowne nor vnsemely to stage plaiers Thus Luther who as being best practised in this arte could best of all others describe it Finally it appeareth that Protestants haue not onely forged a new faith but also a new tongue a new Grammar a new frame of speach For concerning Propositions they bidde vs vnderstand an Affirmation by a Negation and a Negation by an Affirmation and words they bidde vs expoūd by diuerse by disparate and contraries to these which they signifie with other men And this new Grammar of theirs Luther acknowledgeth in these words Gal. 3. tom 5. fol. 345. Those words To doe To worke are to be taken Protestants new Grāmar or language three manner of waies Substantially or naturally Morally and Theologically Insubstances natures and morall matters these words are taken in their vsuall and naturall signification but in diuinitie they are made plainely new words and get a new signification Wherefore when thou readest in Scripture of Fathers of Prophets of Kings that they wrought iustice c. remember that such and the like sayings are to be vnderstood according to the new and Theologicall Grammar of Protestants wherefore I admonish yee agayne that the sentences which the aduersaries obiect out of Scripture of workes and reward be alwaies to be vnderstood Theologically by the definition As if they obiect that saying of Daniel 4. Redeeme thy sinnes by almes streight we must runne to the Theologicall grammar and not to the morall The like he hath in cap. 4. Genes fol. 60. Nor much otherwise writeth Kemnice libr. de origin Iesuit pag. 47. When he saieth It is most certaine that the Holie Ghost would that in this article of Iustification not onely the things themselues and the meaning but also the very names should be by a peculiar signification distinct from the words of Philosophers Schlusselburg also Praefat. libr. Theolog. Caluin distinguisheth betwene the Grammar of Nations and of Deuines and saieth that that taketh the word of Iustice actiuely but this taketh it passiuely The like hath Gesnerus loc 2. de Iustif pag. 47. But what we ought to thinke of these inuentors of Luthers Censure of these new word mongers a new Grammar themselues doe sometimes tell vs. For thus writeth Luther lib. de seruo arbitr tom 2. fol. 435. Whoe will not mock or rather hate this vnsemely changer of words who against all vse endeauoureth to bring in such kinde of speach as to call a begger a rich man By this abuse of speach anie man may bragge of anie thing But this is not the parte of Diuines but of Cooseners and Stageplayers And Caluin libr. contr Libertin cap. 3. The libertines at Libertines the first bouldly reiected the Scriptures but when they saw that thereby they were abhorred of all men they meant to deale more closely and more couertely that making shew not to cast away Scripture they might turne it into allegories and wrest it into diuerse and strange senses changing a horse into a man and as the common speach is feigning the horne of a lanterne to be a cloude And capit 7. Like as Egyptians and other vagabonds such as those who going out of Bohemia wander vp and downe the whole world vse a certaine peculiar speach which none vnderstand but those of their owne crew and brotherhood So c. I denie not but they vse the common words but so they alter their signification as no man can vnderstand what the matter is which is proposed nor what they would affirme or denie Beza also l. de puniend Haer. vol. 1. Theol. Sathan when he could not quite cast the Scripture out of the Church yet by vaine allegories made it altogether vprofitable which course now the libertines and Anabaptistes do take Bullinger Concion Anabaptiste Arians Seruetians Familistes 25. in Apocal. thus writeth of the Arians and Seruetians They turne and winde the words of God with their Giganticall bouldnesse as they list Whitaker l. 1. de Script c. vlt. sect 4. The Familists do leaue almost no article of our faith vntouched whilest with their allegories they turne and corrupt all things And Reinolds in his Conference cap. 2. sect 2. The Familists for to saue their phrensies from the Scripture reiect the literall sense which is the very edge thereof and put that vp into the scabarde of their fanaticall dreames and allegories The like hath Perkins in Conflictu Christi tom 2. This they note in the Libertines Familists Anabaptists and others whereof themselues are no lesse guiltie then those be as appeareth by what hath beene already related But as Luther him selfe saieth Genes 6. tom 6. fol. 84. Who would suffer this libertie in deprauing the true sense in the fables of Terence or Virgils Ecloges and shall we suffer it in the Church And Defension verb. Cenae tom 7. fol. 397. Surely I cannot see that they can be excused by anie plausible pretext as if vpon a good meaning they had beene deceaued by some curiofitie or spirituall blindnesse as it happeneth to most Heretiks But it appeareth that they mocke the word of God vpon obstinacie and malice For I doe not thinke that it can be that these sillie trifles and toies should in earnest moue a man in his wittes whether he were a Turk or Iew much lesse a Christian Thus the Protestants owne Prophet and Father speaketh of Protestants Wherefore thus I argue in the 20. place Who not onely gaynesay the words of holie Scripture so directly and so often as is shewed in the first booke but also in so manie and so great matters expound the words thereof by diuerse by disparates and by contraries so that they bring in a new grammar a new language and signification of words neuer heard of before they manifestly contradict nay mock the true sense of holie Scripture But Protestants doe so Therefore c. CHAPTER XXI THAT PROTESTANTS ARE COMpelled to deuise improprietie of words and all kinds of figures THE 21. Argument wherewith we will proue that Protestants doe contradict the true sense of holie Scripture is because when the proprietie of the word is against them they deuise improprieties and all kind of figures Caluin 4. Instit c. 8. § 2. Authoritie is not properly giuen to Not properly men Beza in Confess c. 5. sect 27. Nether Pastors nor Doctors can properly binde or loose anie man Zanchius de Eccles c. 9. Power of forgiuing sinnes is not properly giuen to the Apostles or to others for they doe not properly forgiue sinnes Vorstius in Resp ad Homium p. 31. I doe not say that faith it selfe doth properly iustifie vs. Perkins in Cathol Reform Cont. 5. c. 3. The kingdome of heauen is called a reward not properly but by a figure Et Cont. 10. c. 4. These words This is my bodie must not be vnderstood properly but by a figure Pareus l. 5. de Iustif
dead of praier to the dead of forbiddacne of marriage and other such like doctrines This consent we denie to be a note of the Church for in all these things they did dot consent with the Ancient fathers with mutuall consent Apostolicall Church Duditius in Beza epist 1. saieth thus If it be trueth which the ancient Fathers haue professed with mutuall consent that is all on the Papists side Thus they touching their dissent from the Fathers In like manner they confesse that they dissent from the Church and Councells For thus P. Martyr in 1. Cor. 3. That The Church alwaiâ—s praied for dead The ancient Church The Church at 500. also vseth to be obiected to vs. That the Church hath alwaies praied for the dead which truely I doe not denie Whitaker CoÌ„t 2. q. 5. c. 7. I answere True it is that Caluin saieth and the Centurie writers that the ancient Church erred in manie things as of limbus of free will of merit of works and the other things before rehearsed Agayne I say that the Church which was 500. or 600. years after Christ did not hould in all points the doctrine of the Apostles For she held some errors Casaubon epist ad Cardin. Perron It was a most ancient custome that in the publike praiers of the Church remembrance should be made of the The ancient Church dead and rest praied for them of God The ancient Church by this means approued her faith of the resurrection to come Zuinglius in Elencho tom 2. speaking of the ceremonies In the beginning of the Church Generall Councells of baptisme saieth We know that in the beginning of the Church these things were vsed The like they confesse touching Councells For thus Confessio Anglica art 21. Generall Councells may erre and sometimes haue erred euen in the things which belonge to the rule of pietie Vrban Regius in Interpret All Councells The ancient Councels loc to 1. It is more cleare then the light that all Councells haue pernitiously erred Caluin 4 Insit c. 9. § 10. There is some thing wanting euen in those ancient and purer Councells There was a notable example hereof in the Councell of Nice Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 7. c 7. auoucheth that the Councell of Nice and Chalcedon haue erred Nether doe Protestants onely dissent froÌ„ the vniforme consent of Fathers Councels and Church but also they make small account thereof For thus P. Martyr in loc Tit. Not Fathers euen agreing Script § 16. But at least say they then are the Fathers to be allowed when they agree amongst themselues No not then alwaies Et lib. de votis As long as we abide in the Fathers we shall alwaies remayne in the same errors Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 5. c 8. The agreing exposition of the Fathers is no rule of expouÌ„ding Not witnesses without exceptioÌ„ Scriptures Cont. 2. q. 7. c. 7. We denie not but the Fathers be witnesse of the trueth but so as they be not without exception for all haue erred l. 6. cont Dur. sect 3. The consent of Fathers is not sure and free from error Et ad Demonst 7. Sanderi Not the whole Senate of Fathers Nether will we thinke that thou hast demonstrated any thing though thou couldest bring the whole Senate of Fathers against vs. Rainolds in his Conference p. 151. Trueth is not to Not all be tried by consent of Fathers Psal 150. If not one or twoe of the Fathers but all haue thought it nor thought it onely but haue written it nor written it onely but thought it not obscurely but clearely nor seldome but often nor for a time but perpetually yet their consent were not secure And he termeth vniuersalitie antiquitie consent rotten postes Yea in his 5. Thesis he will haue the Roman Church to be no true Church because she forbiddeth the Scriptures to be expounded contrarie to that sense which our holie mother the Church doth hould or contrarie to the vniforme consent of Fathers By which forbiddance saieth he are often reiected those senses which the spirit by the tenor of the words and sentences doth teach to be the meaning of the holie text MortoÌ„ in Apol. part 1. l. 1. c. 69. Sometimes neglecting the persons of the Fathers it is most safe to fech the prime antiquitie out of the Apostolicall writings Which is saieth he the Protest defense to reiect the Fathers prore and puppe of the Protestants defense Caluin 4. Instit c. 9. § 12. Let no names of CouÌ„cells of Pastours of Bishops hinder vs that we trie not all the spirits of them all with the square of Gods word for to finde whether they be of God Daneus CoÌ„tr. p. 289. Touching the saying of the Fathers this is our breif answere to them all We regard not what the Fathers haue saied but how Saying of Fathers not reguarded truely Et Cont. 5. p. 698. We must not looke what the Fathers haue written but what they should haue writteÌ„ Vorstius in Antib p. 395. The Protestants doe not thinke that they ought much to care what the ancient Fathers haue thought or written of this Not to be cared for matter Pareus l. 5. de Iust c. 5. I say that Scripture is to be expouÌ„ded by Scripture not by Fathers Et l. 2. de Grat. c. 14. Though all the Fathers agreed well yet were it weake Reineccius to 1. Arm. Not all fathers together c. 9 WheÌ„ all Doctors of the Church with a common consent doe teach some thing to come from Apostolicall tradition is that to be beleiued to be Apostolicall tradition No. Gerlachius disp 22. de Eccles The Fathers haue straied from the path of trueth not in these onely wherein they disagree with themselues and with others but in those also which they haue vniformely deliuered Celius Secundus de Amplit regni Dei lib. 1. Should then the Their authoritie nothing at all authoritie of so manie ancient Fathers the consent of ages auaile nothings Nothing at all Polanus in thes part 3. p. 546. We cite them â—estimonies of Fathers â—specially when we handle points of religion controuerted with Papists not for our sake but for Papists that we may refute Papists by the Fathers whome they haue Fathers cited as Heathens made their iudges as in ould time the Fathers refuted the HeatheÌ„ by the testimonies of the Sybills of Poets Philosophers orators and Heathen Historians As therefore the Fathers vsed the testimonies of Heathens against HeatheÌ„s So we produce the testimonies of Fathers against Papists Muscul in loc tit de Scrip. As for me I require not the testimonies of Fathers for to giue authoritie to Canonicall Scripture and to make distinction betwene it and the Fathers writings contenting my selfe with the authoritie and canon of the Scripture it selfe But because our aduersaries endeauour to trouble the trueth by pretext of Fathers I well alledge them where they are against their endeauours but when they cite any thing
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
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
other expresse words are directly contrarie And let that faith or rather infidelitie fall perish vanish which in more then 260. articles is condemned of such words of God and in such a sense and in most points is onely supported by humane consequences humane conferences and humane reasons or arguments These are the points Christian Reader taken out of How Protest handle the letter of Scripture the first booke which I desire to fasten and engraue in thy memorie which yet will be more forcible if thou adde to them things which I haue set before thy eyes in thy second booke For there I haue shewed that the holie Scripture doth so manifestly condemne the Protestants doctrine as that touching the letter thereof they are forced to reiect some openly others priuilie to scrape out to call some in doubt to adde some to translate some wrong and change the order of others Touching the propositiōs How the sayings of Scripture they are compelled to say that some of them were certainlie knowne of God himselfe others not spoaken according to his owne mynd others spoaken ironically mimeticallie hyperbolicallie by fiction and amplification and to change vniuersall propositions into particulars vnlimited into limited absolute into conditionals these that were spoakē simply into those that were spoakē in parte and those that were spoaken of one time into those that were spoaken of an other Touching the single How the simple words words of Scripture they are forced those words which signifie the doing of a thing to expound of endeauour to doe it those which signifie the cause to expound of the way or means to an end Which signifie that a thing is to expound that it ought to be Which signifie a true thing to expound of an apparent or signe thereof to expound words by diuerse by disparate or vnlikelie yea by opposites or contraries to deuise all kinde of figures when the proprietie of the word is against them to find out new and neuer heard of distinctions to reiect the vnanimous exposition of Fathers Church and Councels to frustrate the ends of the passion of Christ to take out of the world all true vertue and to open the way to all vice to confesse that they hould opinions her to fore condemned for heresies of the Church and Fathers to acknowledge that some of their opinions are plainely blasphemous and finally which is the end of this worke directly opposite to holie Scripture Who I say in more then 260. articles of cōtrouersie not onelie oppose themselues to the expresse words of Scripture spoaken of purpose to tell vs Gods meaning cōcerning matters that farre passe all mās reach in their proper sense and in which men vsuallie vnderstand them and to which no other places of Scripture are directlie opposite but also laie violent hands vpon the sacred letter or word change almost all the kinds of propositions which the Scripture vseth impiouslie depraue the sense of the words reiect the exposition of Fathers Church and Councells make voide the ends of Christs passion take away all vertue and bring in vice and finallie confesse that diuers of their opinions are blasphemous contrarie to scripture they are to be accounted auoided and eschewed not onely as Heretiks condemned by the Scripture and holie Church but euen of themselues A note to the Reader I HAVE not set downe the editions of the Protestants bookes which I cite in this worke because I haue done that in my booke de Authore Prot. Ecclesiae put forth An. 1619. Where he that list may see them as also he may there see the laws which I prescribe to him that will answere ether that booke or this Moreouer in this English worke I doe not cite the English words of our English Protestant writers because I had not their English works at hand but translate them out of their Latin works Besides I am not so curious to cite the leafe or page as I was in the Latin edition because the vnlearned will not be able to seeke the Latin and the learned Reader will rather I suppose peruse my Latin copie where he shall find the leaues or pages as carefully cited as I could doe by the errors of the Scribe or Printer whose fault no discret reader will impute to me and whose error I hope is no where to be found both in the number of the chapters and of the leaues or pages together So that the one of them may bring the Reader to the place which I alledge if the other chance to be misprinted Laus Deo Virginique Matri AN INDEX OF THE CHAPTERS and Articles contained in the first booke CHAPTR 1. Of the owners of Scripture Whether Catholiks or Protestants be true owners of the Scripture CHAP. 2. Of God ARt 2. Whether God willeth sinne page 45. 2. Whether sinne pleaseth God p. 49. 3. Whether God hateth sinne p. 50. 4. Whether God worketh sinne p. 51. 5. Whether God ordaineth sinne to be p. 33. 6. Whether God commandeth sinne p. 56. 7. Whether God tempteth to sinne p. 57 8. Whether God necessitateth to sinne p. 59. 9. Whether God hateth all that sinne p. 61. 10. Whether God iustifieth the sinner remaining a sinner p. 62. 11. Whether God be angrie with the faithfull when they sinne p. 65. 12. Whether God be delighted with good works p. 67. 14. Whether God be serued by good works p. 69. 15. Whether God esteeme of good works which are not commanded 70. 16. Whether God be appeased by good workes p. 71. 17. Whether God will haue his commādements kept p. 73. 18. Whether God loueth all men p. 75. 19. Whether God would haue all men to be saued p. 77. 20. Whether God would haue some cōuerted who will not conuert p. 78. 21. Whether God call all men p. 80. 22. Whether God of himselfe will the death and damnation of men p. 81. 23. Whether God dāneth men for sinne p. 85. 24. Whether God can doe all things p. 86. 25. Whether God can make a Camell passe through a needls eye p. 88. 26. Whether God can doe that which shall neuer be p. 90. 27. Whether Gods miracles be a sufficient proof of trueth p. 91. Chap. 3. Of Christ Art 1. Whether God the Sonne had his being of his Father p. 96. 2. Whether Christ was predestinated the Sonne of God p. 97. 3. Whether Christ as man is to be adored p. 98. 4. Whether Christ as man could worke miracles p. 100. 5. Whether Christs humanitie be euerie where p. 102. 6. Whether Christ as man be head of the Church p. 104. 7. Whether Christ as man made lawes p. 105. 8. Whether Christ as mā be Iudge 107. 9. Whether Christ made a new testament p. 109. 10. Whether as man he were ignorant p. 111. 11. Whether as man he were a sinner p. 113. 12. Whether he refused to doe the office of a Redeemer p. 116. 13 Whether he was assured of his saluation 118 14 VVhether he had commandment
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
Christ merited to him selfe exaltation THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ was exalted and had a name giuen him aboue all names because he humbled him selfe that he was crowned with glorie because of his passion The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that Christ did not merit his exaltation did not merit any thing to him selfe could not merit to be iudge of the world and head of Angels ART XVI WHETHER CHRIST REDEEmed vs with a sufficient price or truely merited our redemption SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 1. Cor. 6. v. 20. You are bought with a great price Christ bought vs with a great price 1. Timoth. 2. v. 6. For there is one God one also mediatour of God and men man Christ Iesus who gaue him selfe a redemption in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for all 1. Peter 2. ver 18. Knowing that not with corruptible things gould or siluer you are redeemed from your vaine conuersation With his pretious blood of your fathers tradition but with the pretious blood as it were of an immaculate and vnspotted lambe Christ 1. Ihon 3. v. 16. In this we haue knowne the charitie of God because he hath yeelded his life for vs. c. 4. v. 10. He hath loued vs and sent his sonne a propitiation for our sinnes Mathew 20. ver 28. The Sonne of man is come to giue his life a redemption in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for manie Rom. 3. v. 24. Iustified gratis by his grace by the redemption in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is in Christ Iesus Psalm 129. v. 7. Because with our Lord is mercie and with him plenteous redemption CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME S. Thomas 3. part artic 2. Christ suffering of charitie and obedience did giue God some thing more then the recompence of the offence of all mankinde did exact The passion of Christ was not onely a sufficient obut also a superaboundant satisfaction for the sinnes of mankinde PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Tindal in Fox his Acts printed An. 1610. pag. 1136. Christ Christ merited not heaueÌ„ with all his works did not merite heauen Daneus Controu 2. lib. 5. p. 210. Three necessarie conditioÌ„s of merite do faile in the workes of a creature and of Christ man towards God For by the vnion hypostaticall Christ doth not He did not merit merite Page 200. Christ as man properly merited nothing with God P. 202. Yea not in this forme of a seruant could Christ merite any thing to himselfe because in this forme he was a credture But a creature can merite nothing of his Creator Caluin 2. Instit c. 17 § 1. Truely I confesse that if any would simply and by himselfe oppose Christ vnto the iudgment of God there were no place for merite because there will not be found in man any worth which may merite before God § vlt. With what merits could man obtaine to be iudge of the world and head of Angels 3. Instit c. 11. § 12. It is fondly obiected of him that the power of iustifying farre supasseth both men and Angels seing this dependeth not vpon the worth of any creature but of Gods ordination If the Angels would satisfie God they would auaile nothing because they were not destinated to this end but this was proper to Christ man who was subiect to the law for to redceme vs from the curse of the law And Respons ad quaest Sozin Christ could merit nothing but through the pleasure of God Et in Ioan. 4. v. 10. When Christ is sated to haue appeased the Father towards vs this is referred to our sense For as we are guiltie to our selues we cannot conceaue God but as angrie and offended till Christ absolue vs from the guilt Wherefore touching the feeling of our faith God beginneth to loue vs in Christ Spindlerus apud Scusselburg l. 4. Theol. Caluin c. 5. The His death no sufficient redemption for all sinnes Lutherans erre in saying that Christs death was a sufficient redemption 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the sinnes of all and euerie man Piscator apud Vorstium in Parasceue c. 6. Christ died not sufficiently much lesse effectually for all Welsingius apud Homium in Specim Controuer Belgic His blood satisfied not Gods iustice art 21. That Christs blood satisfied Gods iustice for our sinnes is no where extant and it is plainly contrarie to the free and iust remission of sinnes which God hath offered to vs by Christ And the same say other Protestants as Caluin reporteth 2. Instit c. 17. § 1. and Beza in Absters calumn Heshusij p. 324. Slatius apud Homium loc cit There is question whether Christ properly satisfied not Christ properly satisfied for vs. We denie it And the same hath Vorstius ib. Who also addeth That Christ satisfied by a certaine acceptation not by exact identitie Pareus l. 5 de Iustific c. 3. To merit is the parte of seruants To merite is serutle and sordid serutle and sordid THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ bought vs with a great price that he gaue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is a ransom or price of redemption for vs that he redeemed vs with his pretious blood that God gaue his life for vs sent his sonne a propitiation for our sinnes that with God there is plentuous redemption Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say the contrarie that Christ could not merite heauen had no place for merit if we respect the iudgment of God did not merite three conditions necessatie to merite wanted in his works that power of meriting in him depended of Gods pleasure and ordination That properly he did not satisfie for vs that his blood did not satisfie Gods iustice that his death was not a sufficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or ransom for all that to merite is seruile and sordid ART XVII WHETHER CHRIST REDEEmed vs by his blood or corporall death SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Coloss 1. ver 22. And you whereas some time alienated and Christ redeemed vs by his death By his blood By he oblacion of his bodie enemies in sense in euill works yet now he hath reconciled in the bodie of his flesh by death vers 20. Pacifying by the blood of his crosse whether the things in earth or the things that are in heauen Hebrews 10. v. 10. In the which will we are sanctified by the oblation of the bodie of Iesus Christ once c. 9. vers 12. By his owne blood entred once into the Holies eternall redemption being found Ephes 1. v. 6. In whome we haue redemption by his blood the remissâ—on of sinnes 1. Peter v. 19. You are redeemed with the pretious blood as it were of an immaculate and vnsported lambe Christ Acts 20. v. 28. The holie Ghost hath placed you Bishops to rule the Church of God which he hath purchased with his owne blood Apocalips 5. v. 9. Thou hast redeemed vs to God in thy blood CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME S. Thomas 3. part q. 48. art 5.