Lerinens Mâ—â—â— Dâ—â—â— tam non habit hoe illud quam non haec illa Bern. or these diuerse manners of Gods being doe not multiply the Diuine Essence no more then the diuers degrees of heate or light doe multiply the light or heatâ— so that I speake right when I say there are moe persons in the diuine Essence but it cannot be vttered without blaspheâ—y to say there are in God more Natures or more Gods then one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 NazianzeÌ„ Qui nescis TrinitateÌ„ ito ad Iordanem Mat. 3. Aug. Syst Th p 46 vide etiaÌ„ p. 35. seqq Dicamus tres sed non ad praiudiciaÌ„ vnitatâ— dicamus vnâ—â— sed non ad confussionem Trinitatis Ber. v. Syst Theol p. 49. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Na. Quomodò pluralitas in vnitate sit aut ipsa vnitas in pluralitate scrutari hoc temeritas est credere pietas est nosse vita vita aeterna est Bern. How many persons are there Three the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost which is proued by manifest Testimonies of holy Writ Matth. 28 19. Goe teach all nations baptizing them in the namâ— sc by the Authority and appointment of the Father thâ— Sonne and the Holy Ghost Iob. 15.26 When that Comforte shall come whom I will send tâ— you from the Father euen tâ— Spirit of Truth who proceedeth from the Father he well testifie of me where they are all three plainely named the Father from whom the holy Spirit is sent the Sonne who sendeth and the Holy Ghost who is sent 1. Ioh. 5 7. There bee three which beare record in Heauen the Father the Word and the Spirit and these three are one in Essence or Nature How proue you that these three persons bee that one God First I must haue it granted that these three persons are distinct because hee that sendeth is distinguished from him that is sent and hee from whom is distinguished from him that is sent Now Iâ—â—c 15. plainely saith that Christ is hee that sendeth the Holy Ghost him that is sent and the Father from whom the Sonne sendeth the holy Ghost Whence I doe necessarily inferre that these three manners of being in God are distinct which being graunted I shall easily prooue this three-fold manner of being or these three Persons in the diuine Essence to be that true God For first as touching the Father the very aduersaries themselues yeeld Christus est Deus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 coÌ„tra AriuÌ„ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contra Apolinar 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contra Nestor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contra Eutych Syst Theol. pag. 52. seqq that he is truely God And touching the Sonne wee haue manifest testimonies of the Scripture Rom. 9.5 Of whom namely the Israelites are the fathers of whom Christ came as concerning the flesh who is God aboue all blessed for euer If aboue all therefore about those who by reason of their excellent gifts are called Gods That the holy spirit is God these Sentences of Scripture plainely proue Acts 5.3 Peter saith to Ananias Why hath Satan filled thy heart that thou shouldest lye against the holy Ghost And presently he addeth vers 4. Thou hast not lyed vnto men but vnto God Therefore the holy Ghost is God Another place is 1 Cor. 2.10 The Spirit searcheth all things euen the profound things of God And the verse following For who knoweth the things c. Whence wee may thus reâ—reâ—son whosoeuer knoweth the secrets the profound secrets of God or which is all one whosoeuer is omniscient is God but the Holy Ghost is Omniscient Ergo The Maior is euident the Minor is exprâ—sly in the Text. Secondly whatsoeuer is in God is God but the Holy Ghost is in God Ergo. The Proposition is of certaine truth for that God who is a most simple Essence void of all difference and composition cannot consist of any thing which is not God The assumption is in the Text v. 11. where it is said As the reasonable soul is in man that is of the essence of man so the holy Spirit is in God Hitherto may tha testimony 1 Cor. 3.16 be referred â— August Enchirid. cap. â—6 Know yee not that yee are the Temple of God and that the holy spirit dwelleth in you where the latter words doe expound the former for it is all one as if the Apostle had said Know yee not that yee are the Temple of God seeing that the Holy Ghost dwelleth in you who is God But if the Aduersaries say that the spirit is nothing else saue the effects and gifts of God they are most manifestly confuted and confounded by the words of the Scripture 1 Cor. 12.4.5.6 There are diuersities of gifts but the same spirit there are diuersities of ministrations but the same Lord c. And verse 11. All these gifts worketh that one and selfe same spirit distributing c. Whence ariseth this argument He that distributeth a gift is not himselfe that gift that is distributed but the Holy Ghost is the distributer of all those gifts Ergo. The Proposition is cleare enough The Assumption is plaine in the Text where it is said that the spirit worketh and distributeth al those gifts Another argument out of the same text may bee this Hee that is endued with a will hee cannot be a bare vertue or accident but is a substance subsisting by it selfe but the Holy Ghost c. Ergo. The Maior is cleare for whosoeuer willeth he vnderstandeth and whosoeuer willeth and vnderstandeth hee must bee a substance by it selfe subsisting The Minor is clearely set downe in the text where it is said The Spirit distributeth to euery one as he will Fuit principium essendi DEVS sequiter cognoscendi principium VERBVM DEI non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Verbum Christi Syst Th p. 167. Qui ScripturaÌ„ ignorat ChristuÌ„ ignorat Hieronym de Scriptura Zanch. Confess pag. 482. item in illud Pauli 2 Tim. 3.14 tom 8. p. 319 seqq I haue heard the doctrine concerning God tell mee now besides what the holy Scripture is It is that testimony and witnesse which God hath giuen to Mankind as touching his owne nature and will and as touching those thinges which appertaine to the saluation of man How is the holy Scripture diuided Three manner of waies first by reason of the Time wherein it was reuealed secondly by reason of that Authority it hath in proouing thirdly by reason of the Matter which it handleth How is the Scripture diuided in respect of the time wherin it was reuealed Into the Old and New Testament The Old Testament therefore is that part of the Scripture which God reuealed to the first of Man-kind people of the Iewes which liued vntill the Ministery of Christ which hee reuealed I say by the Prophets as by his Scribes and Notaries But the New Testament is called that part of the Scripture which God hath reuealed to Man-kind after the birth
est Petrus dicens tu es Christus filius Dei viui Non enim dictum est ei Tu es Petra sed tu es Petrus Petra autem erat Christus quem confessus Simō dictus est Petrus Aug. which hee setteth out by a Paranomasie or allusion vnto the name of Peter as if he said I rightly set vpon thee the name of Peter see the first Chapter of Iohn where Christ gaue Peter his name because thou in the name of the other Apostles hast made such a confession and vttered such a doctrine as vpon which as it were on a Rock my Church shall bee builded First then Christ commendeth Peter in the person of Peter all the Apostles for that they beleeued Christ to be the Sonne of God Secondly hee sheweth the profit and fruit of that confession to wit for that this doctrine and confession was to bee the foundation whereupon Christs Church should bee built so that it should neuer bee ouerturned by Satan Otherwise that Peter neuer vnderstood these words of himselfe as if hee were that stone or Rocke vpon which the Church is reared he himselfe professeth openly 1 Pet. 2.4 where hee saith that Christ is that very stone vpon the which the Church was to bee built The fourth errour is that they take for certaintie than Peter was Bishop of Rome and so consequently that hee was at Rome which not withstanding is vncertaine neither can it be firmely proued that Peter was euer at Rome but the contrary for that place which before wee cited Gal. 2. is very remarkable namely in that Paul did so deuide the Apostleship and part it with Peter they shaking hands on the motion that Paul should goe to the Gentiles to conuert them and Peter should labour in the conuersion of the Iewes This promise the right hand being giuen vpon it Peter should haue broke if hee had gone to Rome to conuert the Gentiles neither doe we reade that two Apostles went into the same Citie especially it being so farre off to preach the Gospell Wherefore sithence by the confession of all it is apparent that Paul preached the Gospel at Rome what neede was there that Peter should come thither especially at the very same time As the Papists say that they were both at Rome in Nero his time II. Out of the last Chapter of the second to Timoth v. 16. In my first defence saith Paul when I appeared before Nero there was none that stood to mee but all forsooke me I pray God it be not laid to their charge But if Peter had then beene Bishop of Rome as the Papists will haue it what a disgracefull thing had it been and vnworthy a Bishop to forsake his brother and his owne companion Bellarm. saith that Peter was at that time gone abroad to visite the Churches But wee answer that it was not meete that he should goe away then when hee should haue assisted his brother but should rather haue put off the visitation vnto some other time which hee would haue done doubtlesse if hee had beene at Rome Againe I say that Bellarm. coines that answer of his because he neither backs it with any place of Scripture nor of any Historian but speaketh it out of his owne braine III. This may be concluded by the circumstance of time for they say that Peter was 25 yeares at Rome and 7 yeares at Antiocheia which make 32 yeares and yet they say that Peter was crucified at Rome vnder Nero and that hee came to Rome the 2 of Claudius the Emperour Now Claudius raigned but 13 yeares and Nero 13 so that both their Regiments lasted but 26 yeares Secundum Hieronym how then could Peter come the 2 of Claudius and continue 27 yeares Bishop of Rome and yet be crucified vnder Nero IV. We say that Eusebius and Hierome who are of that opinion doe not agree with themselues yea and Hierome especially manifestly contradicts himselfe For when as hee in one place had said that Peter was crucified vnder Nero afterward expounding those words of Ch. Mat. 23. Luk. 11.49 Behold I send unto you Prophets c. Flatly affirmes that Peter was crucified by the Iewes at Ierusalem When the Ancients therefore are opposite vnto themselues hereby it may appeare that they knew no certainetie in this point and consequently we see how much we are to detest the impudencie of the Popes which set downe for certainety that Peter was Bishop of Rome The fift errour is that they inferre the Pope of Rome to bee Peters successour for first there is no sure ground to euince that Peter was euer at Rome how then could the Pope of Rome succeed Peter Secondly if wee grant this to the Papists out of pitty Calu. Instit l. 4. c. 7. §. 23 that Peter was at Rome yet it doth not follow that the Pope of Rome was Peters successour for the Turke also hath his seate at Constantinople notwithstanding it doth not follow that the Turke is the lawfull Emperour of the East or of Greece the Emperours before hauing their lawfull residency and abode at Constantinople for the place makes not the succession lawfull but two things there bee which make lawfull succession first the power giuen of God secondly the imitation of the Predecessors in life and manners As Cyprian saith in a certaine place and after him Ambrose and Hierome Cathedram Petri non tenet qui fidem Petri non tenet True succession is succession in doctrine and hee cannot bee said lawfully to hold the Chaire of Peter who holdeth not the doctrine of Peter But neither of these the Pope of Rome hath first whence will hee proue that God hath giuen him that power to sit at Rome as the Monarch of the Church surely hee cannot bring so much as one letter out of the Scripture of God to proue this nay Christ inioyned the contrary to his Disciples to wit that one of them should not desire to bee aboue another 2. The true succession which is in doctrine the Pope of Rome hath not for if the Decrees of the Pope and the Epistles of Peter be compared together there will appeare as great difference betwixt them as betwixt light and darkenesse yea we are about to proue by and by that the Pope of Rome is the Ringleader of Idolaters so farre is he off from being Peters successor in Doctrine Which be the members of the Church They bee all the Faithfull which doe beleeue in Christ vnto eternall life for they all are vnited to Christ euen as the members of our body vnto their head They are vnited I say by the holy Spirit who produceth such like motions in them as are in the humane nature of Christ assumed that is hee maketh that the Faithfull become partakers of the Sacerdotall Propheticall and Regall power which is in Christ About which matter Peter Epist 1. c. 2. v. 9. speaketh most sweetly You are a chosen generation a royall Priesthood a holy Nation a people
Zanch. Miscellan 1. par p. 214 seqq Calv. Insti l. 3. c. 13. §. 3. who in their Trent Councell Session 6. boldly affirme that a man cannot hereof bee certaine in this life but ought alwayes to doubt of it and they adde that there can bee no greater sinne before God then that a miserable sinner should assure himselfe of Gods fauour yea and further they adde that whosoeuer shall holde that opinion ought to bee accursed To this their abominable errour we oppose most plaine places of holy Writt Rom. 8 vers 15. Yee haue not receiued the spirit of bondage but that spirit of Adoption by which wee crie Abba Father which spirit beareth witnes to our spirit that wee are the Sonnes of God This is a very horrible impiety that wee will not receiue the testimony of the Spirit but doubt of the truth certainty therof 1 Iohn 5.10 Hee that beleeueth in the Son of God hath the Testimonie in himselfe And surely if God would haue had vs to haue doubted Hoe dixit Deus hoc promisit si parum est hoc iurauit Aug. hee would neuer haue sworne that hee would bee mercifull to vs. But now he hath sworne thus much very euidently EZech. 33.11 As I liue saith the Lord that is as truely as I am and liue I will not the death of a sinner but that hee liue Also Iohn 5.24 Verely verely J say vnto you whosoeuer beleeueth in the Son hath eternall life And Woe bee to thee then saith Saint Austin if thou beleeue not God when he sweares to thee But the Papistes obiect Obiect Tria considero in quibus tota spes mea consistit Charitatem adoptionis veritatem promissionis Potestatem redditionis c. Bern. They that are weak are subiect to falling and they cannot bee sure of the grace of God Answ Who so are weake they may easily fall I limit the proposition thus vnlesse there bee one that is mightier who vpholdeth them Now God it is that holdes vs vp and that helpeth our infirmities And therefore certaine wee may be of the forgiuenesse of sinnes and of the grace of God not by any thing in our owne nature indeed which is weake but by the helpe and assistance of the holy Ghost making vs strong according to those sayings of holy Writ Psal 37.24 Though the righteous fall he shall not bee cast off because the Lord putteth vnder his hand Iohn 10.28 I wil giue vnto my sheepe eternall life neither shall they perish for euer neither shall any one take them out of my hand my Father which hath giuen mee them is greater then all that is hee can supply their wants readily and vphold them mightily Rom. 8.38 I am perswaded that neither life nor death neither things present nor things to come shall bee able to separate vs from the loue of God which is in Christ Again they obiect that place Obiect 1 Cor. 10.12 Hee that standeth let him take heed that he fall not I answer Solut. That the Apostle there speaketh of hypocrites which doe perswade themselues falsly that they stand and further he speakes also of the weaknesse of men touching which wee cannot be enough admonished to the end that wee may thinke saluation not to lie in our owne strength but in the grace of God only Obiection They vrge also that place Eccles 9.1 A man knoweth not whether hee is worthy loue or hatred Solut. Whereto I answere First that this is a fallacie not beeing limitted wee ought then thus to limit it A man knoweth not of himselfe but hee may know it The fathers speake against a vaine presumptioÌ„ not a godly assurance God reuealing it vnto him and the holy Spirit witnessing it Secondly a man knoweth not by those humane causes by the euent of Fortune and the chances and changes of these outward things And therein the Text it selfe is a mouth to expound it selfe for there it is said that a man by externall changes such as are riches pouertie health sicknesse honour contempt that a man cannot by these things nor any other externall estate iudge and certainely know whether hee bee in the fauour of God or be hated by him And therefore that their Argument is not sound which argue thus as many doe I am rich Ergo I am the sonne of God or I am poore Ergo God doth hate me This iudgement then whether wee bee in the fauour of God or not wee must take from Gods Word Sithence therefore it is certaine that a faithfull soule may bee assured of the fauour of God and the forgiuenesse of sinnes and may bee made partaker of the peace of Conscience as it is said Ro. 5.1 Being iustified by faith we haue peace thence another thing doth necessarily follow De perseuerantia Zanch. Miscellan 1. part p. 91. seqq iteÌ„ pag. 347. to wit That a man when hee is once receiued into the fauour of God and hath obtained remission of his sinnes that hee I say cannot fall away from the Grace of God nor lose his Faith nor be obnoxious vnto eternall daâ—nation For because we ought not to doubt of the grace of God therefore neither can wee fall away from the grace of God for if we could fall away from it then wee might doubt of it but we being once receiued into the grace and fauour of God that wee cannot altogether loose that grace of God the Scripture witnesserh Rom. 8.1 There is no condemnation to those which are in Christ Iesus if no condemnation then perpetuall fauour if no condemnation then also no time is wherin they may slide from the grace of God fall into condemnation for by no condemnation is excluded both all the kinds thereof and all occasions of falling thereinto Hitherto appertaineth that place Ipse ergo eos facit perseuerare in bono qui facit bonos qui autem cadunt pereunt in Praedestinaâ—orum numero non fuerunt August which before wee haue cited Iohn 10.28 My sheepe none shall take out of my hand which is all one as if hee had said My sheep shal neuer be taken out of my hand Which must be diligeÌ„tly noted against the Papists who affirme that a man after that he is taken into the fauor of God may fall again out of his fauour euen as if he had neuer been in fauor but may haue of a mercifull God an vncompassionate and irreconcileable God euen as when one falls out of the fauour of the King in stead of a gentle and kinde master hee hath now an angry and cruell Lord. Obiect But here they obiect that place in the 51. Psalme where Dauid after that horrible sinne of his was committed prayeth Restore vnto mee the ioy of my saluation vers 12. therefore say they hee had lost the fauour of God Solue I answer that the Papists doe not halfe well enough looke into the text for it is not said Restore vnto me my spirit