Sadeel speaketh Lib. de Sacrament Manducat p. 300. Beza l. de vnione hypostat vol. 3. p. 97. Apol. 1. cont Saintem Martyr in locis class 2. c. 16. § 12. in Disput Oxionensi p. 227. l. 1. epist Zanchij pag. 411. Whitaker l. 2. cont Dur. sect 8. Wherevpon iustly saied Smidelin the Lutheran vnto Bezâ— in Colloq Montisbel p. 26. They giue greater power to their faith then to God Tilenus in Syntagm c. 7. Who pretend that Christ with Someâ—hings repugne to Gods power his bodie did penetrate the stone that couered his tombe or the dores shut do affirme that which repugneth to the nature of a glorified bodie and to Gods power in working miracles Dareus cited by Smidelin in Colloq Montisbel p. 178. by Schusselburg l. 1. Theol. Caluin art 3. Christ could not so much as will that his bodie were at once in manie places because he could not performe it And when C Bellarmin did argue in this sorte God in the booke of Numbers ca. 5. did giue water power to kill adulteresse weomen and c. 21. gaue the brasen serpent vertue to cure therefore he can giue the word of baptisme vertue to change the water Daneus answereth Controu 3. c. 20. in these words God can not giue that power to any creatures vnlesse he make them true God cannot make water to kill and substantiall Gods and transfuse his power into them It is false that water Numb 5. had power to kill or the brasen serpent Numb 25. had power to cure Besides many Protestants say that God cannot giue to the Sacraments power to worke grace nor to men power to forgiue sinnes or to worke miracles and such like THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that God is almightie that he can do all things that all things are possible to him and nothing impossible The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say the contrarie that God hath no absolute power that the saying of Scripture All things are possible to God hath some exception that his omnipotencie is tied to an order that he can not put a bodie in manie places at once or not extensiuely in place that he cannot giue to water power to kill that his omnipoteÌ„cie beareth not some thing extendeth not to some thing and that some things repugne vnto it ART XXV WHETHER GOD CAN MAKE a Camelle passe through a needls eye SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Marke 10. v. 25. 26. It is easier for a Camelle to passe through God caÌ„ make a Camelle passe through a needls eye a needles eye then for a rich man to enter into the kingdome of heauen With men it is impossible And Matth. 19. This is impossble but not with God CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarmin lib. 3. de Euchar. cap. 6. The Pelagians saied that it was impossble for a Camelle remaining a Camelle to passe through a needls eye but not if he were lessened to the smalnes of a thred This is refuted because it is not impossible with men for a Camelle to passe through a needls eye if he cease to be a Camelle and be changed into a small thred PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Willet Controu 13. q. 1. pag. 609. It is not proued out of It is impossible to God this place that God caÌ„ draw the huge bodie of a Camelle through a needle remaining still of that bignesse no more then that it is possible for God to bring a proud rich arrogant man to heauen his affections not altered both these are impossible to God And the same say Spalatensis l. 5. de Repub. c. 6. nu 179. Bel in his Iesuits Antepaste p. 47. and others Beza in Marc. 10. ver 26. Can God make that a Camelle remayning such as it is by nature may passe through a needls eye No. Bucanus in institutio loc 48. pag. 797. God can make that a Camelle passe through a needls eye but not leauing him such as he is by nature but making him so small as is needfull THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that God can make a Camelle passe through a needls eye Catholiks say the same Protestants saie that God can not make a Camelle passe through a needls eye as long as he retaineth the bignesse of a Camelle ART XXVI WHETHER THAT BE possible to God which shall neuer be SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Mathew 3. ver 9. I tell you that God is able of these stones to God can do that which shall neuer be raise vp children to Abraham Mathew 26. vers 53. Thinkest thou that I cannot aske my Father and he will giue me presently more then twelue legions of Angels CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarmin lib. 3. de Euchar. cap. 2. The Scriptures do most plainly teach that God can do manie things which he will neuer do PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Beza in Colloq Montisbel p. 25. We say that God is so almightie for so much as belongeth to his power considered by it He cannot do that which he hath not decreed to doe His power must be measured by his will selfe as he cannot do that indeed which he hath decreed not doe Ministri in Colloq Parisiens die 5. The omnipotencie of God must be measured according to his will and things which belonge to his nature The same insinuateth Caluin 1. Institut c. 16. § 3. Where he will not admitt any omnipotencie of God but onely that which is effectuall operatiue and is continually working THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that God can doe that which he will not doe The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that he can not doe that which he hath decreed not to doe that his omnipotencie must be measured according to his will that he hath no omnipotencie but that which is continually working ART XXVII WHETHER GODS TRVE Miracles be a sufficient testimonie of truth SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Ihon. 5. vers 36. But I haue a greater testimonie then Ihon Gods miracles a sufficieÌ„t testimonie For the workes which the Father hath giuen me to perfit them the verie workes themselues which I doe giue testimonie of me that the Father hath sent me Cap. 10. ver 38. If I doe not the workes of my Father beleiue me not But if I doe and if you will no beleiue me beleiue the workes Luke 11. v. 20. But if I in the finger of God do cast out Diuels surely the kingdome of God is come vpon you Marke 16. v. vlt. But they going forth preached euerie where our Lord working withall and confirming the worke with signes that followed CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarmin lib. 4. de Ecclesiast cap. 14. A miracle is a sufficient testimonie and where is a true miracle there is true faith PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 2. quaest 5. cap. 12. pag. 528. I say No miracle is a sufficient testimonie that out of nether kind of miracles true or apparent there can be taken a sufficient testimonie or a certaine argument gathered
true Church may some time faile to be visible Scarpe de Iustif Cont. 5. The members of the visible Church The whole visible Church may faile In the vttermost extent may faile yea the whole visible Church as such Vorstius in Antibellarm p. 136. Whence it followeth that the visible Church of Christ not onely in a great parte but euen whole taken in the vttermost extent may for sometime faile from the true faith and be wholy obscured Againe The externall Church of Christ may be obscured and faile More of their like sayings may be seene in my foresaied booke c. 4. THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainly teacheth that the Church of Christ cannot be hidden and biddeth vs to tell and heare her The same say Catholiks Protestants plainly teach that there is not alwaies a visible number of those who piously worshippe Christ that the Church may haue no apparent for me is not alwaies seene with eyes sometimes faileth to be visible that the whole visible Church as such may faile that the whole visible Church taken in her vttermost extent may faile from the faith that God oftentimes will haue no visible Church on earth Which are so opposite to Scripture as Protestants sometimes confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART VI. WHETHER THE CHVRCH be infallible in faith SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Isaie 59. vers vltim This is my couenant with them saieth Gods spirit euer in the mouth of the Church our Lord My spirit that is in thee and my words that I haue put in thy mouth shall not departe out of thy mouth and out of the mouth of thy seede and out of the mouth of thy seeds seede saieth our Lord from this present for euer Mathew 16. vers 18. And the gates of hell shall not preuaile Gates of hell preuaile not against her against it Ioan. 16. v. 13. But when the Spirit of trueth cometh he shall teach you all trueth 1. Tim. 3. ver 15. Which is the Church of the liuing God the The pillar of trueth pillar and ground of trueth CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton Controu 4. qu. 2. art vnico The Church in her determinations of faith is euer must certaine and infallible PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 4. cap. 3. God hath not promised to his The vniuersall Church may erre In necessarie matters The whole Church Church that she should not erre The vniuersall Church may erre The whole Church may erre It is euident that the true Church may for a time erre euen in necessarie matters Yea after Christs ascension and that descent of the Holie Ghost vpon the Apostles it is manifest that the whole Church did erre about the vocation of the Gentils and not onely the common sorte of Christians but euen the very Apostles and Doctors And quaest 5. cap. 17. The Church may for a time erre in some fundamentall points Beza de notis Eccles vol. 3. If some particular Church may erre euen in some principall head of Christian religion and yet leaue not therefore to be a true Church why may we not say the same of all particular Churches taken not onely seuerally but all together for this is the Catholik Church And the margēt The Catholik Church and in fundamentall points The whole Churrh saieth Some errors may creepe into the Church euen in some fundamentall head of saith Daneus Controu 4. l. 3. c. 17. The whole Church all Pastors generally may erre The whole Church may be deceaued slippe and erre Author Resp ad Theses Vademont p. 503. The Catholik And grieuously Church may erre and that sometimes most grieuously The like they teach commonly THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that Gods spirit and his word shall neuer departe from the mouth of the Church that the gates of hell shall not preuaile against her that the Holie Ghost teacheth her all trueth that she is the pillar and ground of trueth Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely teach that the Church the true Church the vniuersall Church the whole Church may erre most grieuously and in some fundamentall and necessarie matters that the whole Apostolik Church euen after the descent of the Holie Ghost did erre Which is so repugnant to holie Scripture as sometimes Protestants confesse it See lib. 2. c. 30. ART VII WHETHER THE CHVRCH be to be heard simply in all things SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Matth. 18. v. 17. If he will not heare the Church let him be Church simply to be heard to the as the Heathen and the Publican Luc. 10. v. 16. Who heareth you heareth me and who despiseth you despiseth me CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton Cont. 4. q. 2. art 3. We must simply and absolutely obey the voice of the Church in doctrine of faith PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 3. c. 3. We must not simply receaue whatsoeuer Not simply to be heard the Church teacheth but whatsoeuer she is commanded of God to teach and proueth by Gods authoritie And q. 5. c. 5. The Church is to be heard not simply in all her sayinges decrees sentences and commandments The same he hath Cont. 2. q. 4. c. 2. and l. 1. de Scriptura c. 11. Bucanus in Inst Theol. loco 43. Must we simply heare the voice of the Church and receaue whatsoeuer she teacheth No. Reineccius to 4. Armat c. 3. We must beleiue the Church in Not simply to be beleiued all things not taken simply and absolutely but relatiuely and with condition as farre as according to Scripture and out of that she proposeth diuine trueth THE CONFERENCE Scripture simply and absolutely biddeth vs to heare the Church and saieth that who heareth her heareth Christ The same say Catholiks Protestants denie that she is simply to be heard or obeyed ART VIII WHETHER TRVETH IN respect of vs do relie vpon the Church SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 1. Timoth. 3. ver 15. Which is the Church of the liuing God Church the pillar of trueth the pillar and ground of trueth CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton Controu 4. quaest 2. artic vnico The Church according to the ordinarie course is for faithfull men the pillar of all reuealed trueth and for faith it selfe the ground For the faitfull relie vpon the teaching of the Church as an vnmouable pillar PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Contru 2. q. 4. c. 2. The trueth of faith doth not Not pillar in regard of vs. relie vpon the Church as a foundation no not in regard of vs. Trueth doth not relie vpon the authoritie of the Church Againe If the trueth of faith did relie vpon the authoritie of the Church in respect of vs who then c. Bucer in Disp Cantabrig It is manifest enough that no Sustaineth not trueth Church is to be termed the pillar and ground of trueth as if she did sustaine and conserue trueth Melancthon in locis c. de Signis Eccles to 3. Faith doth not relie wpon the
Caluin Actor 17. vers 11. Where he saieth that the Thessalonians did not dispute whether Gods trueth were to be receaued onely they examined Pauls doctrine according to the rule of Scripture Plainely putting a difference betwene Gods trueth and Pauls doctrine Finally Zuinglius professeth Zuinglius will not beleiue what he cannot comprehend to beleiue nothing which he cannot comprehend For thus he speaketh in Hospin Part. 2. Histor fol. 72. God doth not propose to vs things that are incomprehensible Or as Melancthon reporteth ib. fol. 82. God doth not propose to vs such things to be beleiued as can no way be comprehended And in Schlusselburg l. 4. Theol. Caluin art 9. thus professeth his more then Diuelish infidelitie Albeit God with He will not beleiue God though he sware all his blessed Angels should come from heauen and sweare that in the Supper of the Lord the bodie and blood of Christ were giuē to all that receaue it yet nether could nor would I beleiue it vnlesse I should plainely see with my eyes and feel Christ with my hands The very same he insinuateth Respons and Bellicā tom 2. fol. What I pray you differ these men from the Protest imitate the libertins Libertins of whome thus writeth Caluin in Instructione cap. 9. We already saied that these men in the beginning were wont plainely to laugh if any alledged the Scriptures nor dissembled to hould them for fables yet they forbore not to vse thē if there were anie place which they could wrest to their purpose But when they perceaued that all good men did detest such sacrilege they put on this coate vnder which now they lurk to wit they professe not to reiect the holie Scriptures but feigning to admit them wrest and change them into allegories And do not the Protestants deride the Scripture when they call the words thereof a fiue-word speach beggerly letters impotent and magicall words and when they see that all good men detest such blasphemie do they not turne thē into figures or allegories Wherefore I make this my fourth argument Who not onely in so manie and so great matters contradict the expresse words of Scripture but also in manie and great points are compelled to forsake the letter thereof to call the manifeste sense into questiō to say that it is a begging of the question to argue out of it to deuise manie new senses for to reiect a place as ambiguous and to say that the sēse of Scripture is to be gathered rather out of a strāge then out of the proper place where it is purposely handled who finally deride the very kind of arguing out of the expresse words of Scripture and openly blaspheme them they are to be thought not onely to gainsay the true sense of Scripture but also to contemne the Scripture and God himselfe But so do Protestants Therefore c. CHAPTER V. THAT PROTESTANTS SAY THAT words of Scripture which make against them were not spoaken of certaine knowledge OVR fift argument to proue that Protestants repugne to the true sense of Scripture shal be because sometimes they denie that the words which were spoaken of God of Christ of the Apostles were spoaken by them of their certaine knowledge but onely by ghesse or coniecture For if out of that saying of God Ezechielis 3. vers 6. seq For not to a people of profound speach and of an vnknowne tongue art thou sent to the house of Israel nether to manie peoples of profound speach and of an vnknowne tongue whose words thou canst not heare and if thou were sent to them they would heare the We will proue that some can be conuerted which yet will not be conuerted Contra-remonstrantes in Collat. Hagae answere This is saied not in respect God did not certainely foresee what he saied of that which God did certainely forsee in these or those but in respect of that which according to all outward shew a man might iudge Forsooth God did not certainely foresee that other people would haue heard the Prophet if he had beene sent to them as he plainely affirmeth but like a man spoake by ghesse out of the externall appearance If we proue the same out of those words of Christ Math. 11. ver 21. If in Tire and Sidon had beene wrought the miracles that haue beene wrought in you they had done pennance Nor Christ in hairecloth and ashes Caluin vpon this place telleth vs that Christ disputeth not what God did foresee to become of these or those but what some of them would haue done for so much as could be gathered by the thing And ib. in v. 33. We admonished before that Christ speaketh after a humane manner and doth not tell out of the heauenlie oracle what he had foreseene was to be if he had sent to the Sodomits And lib. 6. de lib. arbitr pag 197. It is euident that Christ would by that kind of speach no other thing thē if one now should say There is no Turk so obstinate or rebellious to God or so impious who would not haue beene conuerted if he had read seene and heard those things with which Pighius will not amended The like haue Contra-remonstrantes loc cit So that Christ did not certainely foresee that the Tyrians and Sodomites would haue repented if they had seene the like miracles and yet he plainely affirmeth it If we proue that a man may fall from grace because S. Peter 1. cap. 1. vers 9. saieth For he that hath not these Scripture speaketh not of knowledge but of charitie tbings readie is blind and groping with his hand hauing foregotten the purgation of his ould sinnes Zanchius in Summa Praelect tom 7. col 276. answereth This place is to be vnderstood according to the iudgment of charitie The same he hath in Thesibus tom 8. col 700. and Piscator in Thesibus l. 2. p. 195. Forsooth S. Peter iudged charitably but not truely that such a man as he speaketh of had beene purged from his sinnes If we proue that God would haue all men to be saued because S. Paul 1. Timoth. 2. vers 4. Who will all men to be saued Perkins lib. de Praedest tom 1. col 139. saieth Paul Likewise S. Paul speaketh in this place according to the iudgment of charitie of Christians not according to the iudgment of secret and infallible certaintie In like sorte answereth Piscator loc cit and also to Hebr. 6. vers 5. cap. 10. vers 29. Where is it saied that some reprobates were sanctified with the blood of Christ If we proue that the wicked and reprobates may be in the bodie of Christ and put him vpon them because S. Paul saieth 1. Cor. 12. ver 13. We were all baptized into one bodie Gal. 3. v. 27. As manie of you as are baptized in Christ haue put on Christ Vorstius in Antibel p. 124. answereth The Apostle speakheth there out of the iudgment of charitie which accounteth all
be in it selfe cleare So Pareus in Gal. 2. lect 25. The Ghospell teacheth good works not of it selfe but borroweth the doctrine of workes from the law So the some Pareus Colleg. Theol. 9. disput 39. The Thessalonians tooke not vpon them to iudge or to debate whether Gods trueth were to be admitted but onely examined Pauls doctrine according to the touchestone of Scripture So Caluin act 17. vers 13. As if Paules doctrine and Gods trueth were not all one The Ghospell in a most large sense is taken for the whole doctrine of Christ and the Apostles Largely for the doctrine both of grace and faith and of repentance and new obedience but straitely and properly for the doctrine of grace by faith So Pareus l. 4. de Iustif c. 3. Finally the Scripture speaketh as the law not as the Ghospell by which distinction they delude manie places of Scripture as is to be seene in Luther de seru arbit to 2. f. 449. Caluin in Math. 19. vers 17. Pareus l. 4. de Iustif cap. 2. Schlusselb to 8. Catal. p. 441. to 2. p. 270. Of S. Peter and the Apostles they haue inuented these Of the Apostles new distinctions S. Peter is first of the Apostles in order not in iurisdiction The Apostles are foundations of the Church as those that found the Church not as those on which it is founded or as Iunius spaketh Cont. 3. l. 1. c. 10. The Church is founded vpon Peter as vpon a pillar not as on a foundation Of Pastors they distinguish That authoritie is in the Of Pastors word which they preach not in themselues That they gouerne the visible Church but not the Catholike That in case of necessitie they are made without mission but not otherwise See l. 1. c. 7. Of the Church they haue brought in these new distinctions Of the Church That for professiō of faith there is one Church visible an other inuisible That she is infallible in fundamentall points but not in others That she is to be heard when she preacheth Scripture but not otherwise That she is the pillar to which trueth is fastened not on which it relieth So saieth Riuet Tractat. 1. sec 39. Or as Andrews writeth in Resp ad Apol. Bellar. c. 14. She is so the pillar of trueth as that she relieth vpon trueth not trueth vpon her That the Church is necessarie to beleiue the Scriptures not to know them So whitaker lib. 3. de Script 396. That the Church is the staye and pillar of trueth not the foundation of trueth Heilbruner in Colloq Ratisb sess 7. Of the Sacraments they distinguish in this sorte They iustifie as signes or seales not as causes They are receiued Of Sacramēts whole and intire of the good but not of the badde that baptisme is the lauer of regeneration passiuely not actiuely So Daneus Contr. 2. c. 12. That baptisme is but one taken wholy but is twoe taken by partes So Beza part Resp ad Acta p. 44. That the Church is cleansed significatiuely by the baptisme of water but really by the baptisme of the spirit So Beza ib. p. 115. or as Polanus saieth in Disp priu p. 37. Sinnes are saied to be blotted out by baptisme not properly but in a figuratiue sense The same Beza in Hutter in Analysi p. 54. saieth I neuer simply saied that baptisme was the obsignation of regeneration in children but of adoption Perkins in Galat. 3. By baptisme actuall guilt is taken away but not potentiall Pareus in Gal. 2. lect 23. Absolutely we are all borne sinners but in regard of the couenant we are borne Christians or Gods confederats Of the Eucharist they haue these distinctions That it Of the Eucharist is the symbolicall bodie of Christ but not his true bodie That Christ his flesh killed doth profit vs but not eaten That it is exhibited in the Supper according to the vertue thereof not according to the substance That when S. Paul saieth 1. Cor. 11. He eateth iudgement to himselfe he meaneth not of damnation but of correction So wolfius in Schusselb l. 1. Theol. art 25. In like sorte they say that Preists forgiue sinne indirectly not directly directly as it is an offense of the Church indirectly as it an offense of God So Spalata l. 5. de Repub. c. 12. Of faith they make these distinctions That one is Catholike Of Faith or vniuersall or historicall an other speciall Againe that one is abstract naked simple an other concrete compounded incarnate So Luther in Gal. 3. to 5. That there is one habituall and actuall of men an other potentiall and inclinatiue of infants So Pareus l. 3. de Iustif c. 14. or as Polanus saieth part 2. thes p. 651. Infants haue not altogether the same faith that men haue yet they haue some thing proportionable Piscator in Thesibus l. 2. pag. 252. Adam before his fall had not iustifying faith or as Pareus writeth l. 1. de Amiss Grat. c. 7. Adam lost faith of the commandement but not faith of the promise Bullinger dec 5. serm 7. Infants are faithfull by the imputation of God Agayne They are baptized in their owne faith to wit which God imputeth to them Zanchius in Supplicat to 7. Manie reprobates are endued with a certaine faith much like to the faith of the elect but not with the same Perkins in Cathol 4. c. 5. There is one generall and Catholike faith wherewith a man beleiueth the articles of faith to be true and an other iustifying or particular faith Thus they distinguish of faith And in like sorte they distinguish of the iustification of faith to wit that it iustifieth relatiuely or correlatiuely not absolutely and as an instrument not as it is a worke Bucanus in Institit loc 3. Faith is saied to be imputed to iustice not properly but relatiuely Polan part 2. thes pag. 197. We are iustefied by faith not properly but relatiuely Reineccius tom 4. Armat cap. 21. Faith iustifieth as well absolutely as considered relatiuely Pareus in Galat. 3. lection 32. Faith is imputed to iustice relatiuely Agayne Faith iustifieth organically And in Colleg. Theol. 2. disp 10. We are saied to be iustified by faith but not formerly nor meritoriously but organically Touching the losse of faith they thus distinguish Zanchius in Supplication citat The elect loose faith in parte but not wholy Beza in Prefat 2. part respons ad Acta Faith sometimes sleepeth sometimes seemeth to be quite lost but yet is not lost Agayne There is a lethargie of faith but no losse The feeling or vse of faith is lost for a time but not faith it selfe Some reprobates do beleiue with a generall and historicall faith common to the Diuels themselues Tilenus in Syntagm capit 43. The faithfull become sometimes outliers but not runawaies or forsakers In like sorte they say that faith without works at the time of iustification is not dead but at other times if it be without workes it is dead Likewise Reineccius
for true doctrin Page 529. It is manifest that God giueth power of working these kinde of miracles to false teachers that he may tempt them to whome they are sent Which he repeateth againe page 530. and addeth Miracles may be wrought to confirme false doctrin And Controu 4. quaest 5. c. 3. pag. 688. I answere that though they Papists did worke true miracles such as the Diuel cannot imitate they were not therefore to be beleiued Daneus Controu 4. lib. 4. cap. 14. pag. 784. We denie True miracles not sufficient that true miracles are a sufficient testimonie of true doctrin Hospinian l. de Origine Templorum pag. 140. God permitteth the Diuels some times to worke true miracles God doth this partely to tempt the elect partely for the greater blindnesse of the reprobate Luther in capit 7. Matth. tom 7. fol. 92. I am nothing moued with miracles albeit in my sight they should raise the dead to life For all these may deceaue God also permitteth true miracles to be wrought for punishment of them who care not for truth THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that true miracles are a greater testimonie then S. Ihon that though we did not beleiue Christ yet we should beleiue his miracles that they are Gods confirmation of trueth that if one in the finger of God cast out Diuels certainly he preacheth the kingdome of God The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that euen true miracles are no sufficient testimonie or argument of true doctrin that though we could do true miracles such as the Diuel cannot imitate yet we were not to be beleiued that miracles may be done to confirme false doctrin that God giueth to false teachers power to worke true miracles for to tempt men that they are nothing moued with miracles no though they should see the dead raised to life THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF GOD. I did thinke that it would not be vngratefull or vnprofitable to the Reader if at the end of euerie chapter I set downe the summe thereof that thereby he might as once perceaue in how manie and how great matters which haue beene handled in eche Chapter Protestants contradict the pure word of God and also how like verie false Prophets they plaie the theeues in euerie chapter and steal some thing Caluin in Actor 22. v. 14. Writeth thus of Catholiks Papists haue made a new God They haue coyned for themselues a Whether Catholiks or Protestants make a false God young God The same he saieth otherwhere and manie Protestants which whether it agree to Catholiks or to them will easily appeare out of that which hath beene saied in this Chapter For as touching iniquitie or sinne the God of the holie Scripture and of Catholiks willeth it not worketh it not doth not predestinate nor tempt men vnto it doth not command necessitate or compell to sinne But the God of Protestants doth all these as appeareth out of the. 1. 4. 5. 6. 7. and 8. Article As concerning sinners the God of Scripture and Catholiks hateth all that worke iniquitie is angrie with the faithfull when they sinne and punisheth them for sinnes committed The Protestants God doth none of these as appeareth by the 9. 11. and 12. Article As for good workes the God of Scripture and of Catholiks is delighted with them is worshipped with them accepteth good works not commanded is appeased with good works will haue his commandments kept The Protestants God doth all the contrarie as is seene by the 13. 14. 15. 16. and 17. Arâ—icle As touching men or mankind the Scripture and Catholiks God loueth all would haue all saued would as a hen her chickins gather euen theÌ„ which will not come will not the death of a sinner nor damneth men but for sinne The Protestants God is quite contrarie as is euident by the 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. Article And finally concerning power the Scriptures and Catholiks God is omnipoteÌ„t can do those things which shall neuer be can make a Camell passe through a needls eye Such is not the Protestants God as is to be seene by the 23. and 24. Article Seing therefore so manie and so great properties agree to the Protestants God quite contrarie to those which the God proposed vnto vs by the holie Scripture and Catholiks hath it is euident that it is an other and a new God different from the God which the Scripture teacheth yea that it is as Caluin speaketh of the Libertins God an idol Cont. libert c. 14. which ought to be more detestable to vs theÌ„ all the PagaÌ„s idols or rather that it is the verie Diuel him selfe For what other can he be who willeth iniquitie will haue men to sinne worketh sinne procureth sinne is author of obduration is in like sorte author of crueltie as of loue predestinateth to sinne preordaineth sinne euen as it is sinne decreeth by a speciall decree that sinne be done pusheth to euill by him selfe immediatly and by a peculiar action necessitateth coÌ„pelleth to sinne coÌ„mandeth to lie and is author of temptation to euill and consequently is the Tempter and Father of lying which names the Scripture appropriateth to the Diuel who careth not for good workes is not delighted nor worshipped with them will not haue Gods commandments kept who commandeth that which he would not haue done and promiseth that which he will not performe who made death and is the Author of death and damnation the fontaine of perdition finally who damneth them that deserue it not and that for his mere pleasure These diuers other qualities before shewed do plainly declare who and what one he is whom Protestants teachers haue proposed to the world to adore as God who in trueth can be no other then the very Diuel It appeareth also out of that which hath beene rehearsed How manie and great attributes Protestants take from God Goodnesse in his Chapter that those coyners of a new God do plaie the theeues and steale from the true God manie of his principall properties For they steall away his goodnesse in saying that he willeth worketh decreeth sinne tempteth necessitateth compelleth to sinne careth not for good works nor is worshipped with them They take away his iustice in teaching that he hateth not all that worke iniquitie is not angrie with the faithfull when Iustice they sinne imputeth not their sinne to them will not haue his commandments kept commandeth that which he will not haue done and promiseth that which he will not performe They robbe him of his omnipotencie OmnipoteÌ„cie whiles they affirme that there are manie things which he cannot doe And in place of these admirable vertues they giue to him the contrarie vices For in steed of goodnesse they attribute vnto him malice wherewith he willeth worketh decreeth iniquitie and predestinateth necessitateth and compelleth men vnto it For Iustice they giue him Iniustice wherewith he iustifieth the impious remaining impious and damneth those that deserue it not And for
sect 8. In all these things the Apostles did alledge their testimonie and themselues also as witnesses of that trueth which they tought And l. 3. sect 3. The Apostles were witnesses of their doctrine and they gaue authoritie to their doctrine See him Cont. 4. l. 8. c. 9. PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 1. q. 3. c. 11. God alone is a sufficient witnesse None but God is a sufficient witnesse of himselfe And l. 3. de Scriptura c. 13. sect 3. The people did not beleiue Moises for himselfe but for that diuine and great miracle Beleife was giuen to Moises and Paul not for themselues but for Gods authoritie which appeared in their ministerie And ib. sect 1. The testimonie of the Church as of the Church is but humane And Contr. 1. q. 3. c. 11. cit The iudgment of the Church is humane The same followeth euidently of that which they saied in the former article For if the Apostles doctrine must be examined it is manifest that they are not sufficient witnesses of their doctrine The same Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 4. c. 3. Yea after Christs Not the Apostles ascension and that descent of the Holie Ghost vpon the Apostles manifest it is that the whole Church erred about the vocation of the Gentils and not the vulgar Christians onely but euen the very Apostles and Doctors These were great errours and yet we see that they were in the Apostles euen after the Holie Ghost had descended vpon them THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely affirmeth that the Apostles had the holie Ghost giuen them to testifie of Christ that they were ioyned with the holie Ghost witnesses of Christ that they were witnesses appointed of God that their testimonie is true that all may beleiue through Saint Ihon that the faithfull beleiued God and Moyses The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that none but God is a sufficient witnesse of the trueth that nether Paul nor Moises were to be beleiued for themselues that the testimonie of the Church is but humane That the Apostles erred and that greatly euen after the holie Ghost had descended vpon them ART VIII WHETHER THE APOSTLES learnt anie point of Christian doctrine after Christs ascension SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Ihon 16. v. 12. Yet manie things I haue to say to you but you The Apostles learnt some thing after Christ cannot beare them now but when he the Spirit of trueth cometh he shall teach you all trueth CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Ioan. 16. v. 12. By this testimonie is clearly proued that Christ tought not all by word of mouth but that both the Apostles and the Church learnt many things of the Holie Ghost PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Contr. 1. q. 6. c. 10. The holie Ghost did suggest no They learnt nothing other things then those which Christ had tought Caluin in Ioan. 14. vers 26. Marke what all these things are which he promiseth that he Spirit shall teach He saieth He shall suggest or bring to mind whatsoeuer I haue saied Whence it followeth that he shall not be a coyner of new reuelations And 4. Institut c. 8. § 8. That limitation is carefully to be noted where he appointeth the holie Ghost his office to suggest whatsoeuer he had tought by worde of mouth Beza in Ioan. 14. v. 26. The Apostles nether learnt nor tought any point of Christian and sauing doctrine after the departure of the Lord. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that manie things were tould to the Apostles which they could not beare in Christs time that the holie Ghost was to be sent to teach them all trueth The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that the Apostles learnt no point of Christian doctrine after Christs departure that the Holie Ghost reuealed no new thing to them that he suggested no other thing then Christ had tought ART IX WHETHER IVDAS WAS TRVELY a disciple or in the true Church of Christ SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Matth. 10. v. 1. seq And hauing called his twelue disciples Iudas was truely a disciple of Christ together he gaue them c. And the names of the twelue Apostles be these The first Simon who is called Peter and Iudas Iscariot who also betrayed him Et c. 20. v. 14. 47. Marc. 14. v. 10. 43. Luc. 22. v. 3. 47. he is called one of the twelue Ihon 12. v. 14. One therefore of his disciples Iudas Iscariot Actes 1. v. 17. Iudas who was the captaine of them that apprehended Iesus who was numbred among vs and obtained the lot of this ministerie v. 25. Shew of these twoe one whome thou hast chosen to take the place of this ministerie and Apostleship from the which Iudas hath preuaricated And the lot fell vpon Mathias and he was numbred with the eleuen Apostles CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarm. l. 3. de Eccles c. 7. Iudas was once of the true Church for he was an Apostle one of the twelue and called a Bishop of the Prophet Dauid psal 108. Which could not be true vnlesse he had beene of the Church PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 2. q. 1. cap. 7. I answere that the reprobate Iudas neuer of the Catholik Church Iudas was neuer of the true Catholik Church He held for a time a principall place in the outward societie of the Church because he was an Apostle but this made him not of the true Catholik Church But how he was one of the Apostles Austin telleth Tract 61. in Ioan. That how he was one in number not in merit Neuer an Apostle indeed Neuer true member of the Church are in shew not in vertue But what is in shew seemeth to be but is not indeed Daneus Controu 4. c. 2. Iudas Iscariot and Simon Magus were neuer true members of the true Church of God Of the same opinion are Protestants commonly who denie that anie reprobate can be in the true Church as we shall see hereafter c. 8. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Iudas was one of Christs disciples one of the twelue Apostles was numbred amongst them obtained the lot of their ministerie had the place of Apostleship which S. Mathias afterwards had The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that Iudas was neuer of the true Catholik Church seemed to be one of the Apostles but was not indeed ART X. WHETHER IVDAS WAS a Bishop SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Actes 1. v. 20. For it is written in the booke of psalmes Be Iudas was a Bishop their habitation made desert and be there none that dwell in it and his Iudas Bishoprick let an other take CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE C. Bellarm. cited in the former article Iudas is called a Bishop of the Prophet Dauid PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 1. c. 7. Iudas was an Apostle therefore no He was no Bishop Bishop because the Apostles were no Bishops The same say other Protestants who denie that the Apostles were
Concordiae Lutheran cap. 3. True faith is neuer alone but alwaies it hath charitie and Neuer without Charitie hope with it Luther Postilla in Dom. 2. post Trinitat It is impossible to beleiue where charitie wanteth In die Ascens Where faith is sincere it cannot be without workes In festo Sancti Nicolai As fire cannot want heat and smoke so cannot faith be without charitie Zuinglius in Math 19. to 4. It is impossible that iustifying faith be without workes True and iustifying faith can no more be without workes then fire without heat Bucer in Epitom doctrinae Argentin art 8. True faith in Christ can neuer be without liuelie trust in God and firme hope of euerlasting life and burning loue both towards God and men No more without Charitie then Christ without his Spirit Caluin in Antidot Concilij Sess 6. They shall no more seperate faith from charitie thē Christ from his Spirit In. 1. Ioan. 4. v. 7. Away with that foolish fiction of informed faith for if any deuide faith frō charitie he doeth as if he went about to take away heat from the sunne Beza in 1. Cor. 13. v. 2. Iustifying faith which apprehendeth Thou the sunne without heate Gods mercie in Christ in thought may be deuided from charitie but not indeed In 1. Timoth. 4. v. 1. Who separateth faith from the effects of the Spirit of Christ that is from mortification of sinne and viuification of iustice therein testifieth himselfe to be an infidell Pareus l. 3. de Iustif c. 15. Faith cannot be without charitie l. 4. c. 9. Loue canno more be seperated from faith then brightnesse from the sunne THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that faith may be without loue without charitie without workes yea with adulterie with murder with deniall of Christ And the same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that faith true and reall faith cannot be voide of good workes that it is impossible to beleiue without charitie that faith can no more be seperated from charitie then fire from heat the sunne from light or Christ frō his Spirit That faith without workes is a false faith an imaginarie fansie hypocrisie that it is a dreame to say that faith may be with mortall sinne Which contradiction of the Scripture is so manifest as sometimes Protestants confesse it See lib. 2. c. 30. ART IX WHETHER FAITH MAY BE without confession of mouthe SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Ihon. 12. v. 41. Of the the Princes also manie beleiued in him Faith without Confessiō of mouth but for the Pharises they did not confesse that they might not be cast out of the Snagogue S. Peters faith neuer failed as before is shewed and yet he confessed not yea denied and foreswore Christ Marke 14. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Iustif c. 15. S. Austin atributeth the same faith to them who did confesse Christ openly and to them who durst not confesse Nether can it be doubted but the faith of them who confessed was true faith in Christ. Therefore also the faith of them who confessed not was true PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Cont. 4. q. 6. c. 2. True faith can no more be seperated from confession of mouthe then fire from heat or the sunne Not without Confession of mouth from light and his beames Surely it is not true faith which breedeth not confession Againe If it yeeld and be ouercomen with feare it is not true faith Caluin in Rom. 10. v. 10. Nether can anie beleiue with but he will confesse with mouthe Zanchius in Confess c. 17. to 8. We beleiue that true faith cannot want plaine confession of truth where it needeth Volanus lib. 3. cont Scargam pag. 1071. God giueth true faith to none hut he openly and freely praiseth Christ setting aside all feare and confesseth him securely to be his Lord and Sauiour THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that diuers beleiued in Christ who yet for feare did not confesse him that Peters faith failed not though he did not confesse yea denie Christ Catholiks say the same Protestants plainely say that none can beleiue with hart but he confesseth with mouth that true faith can no more be separated from cōfession then fire from heat or the sunne from his beames that if it confesse not it is not true faith that God giueth faith to none but he opēly and freely confesseth ART X. WHETHER FAITH WITHOVT good workes be dead SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Iames 2. v. 20. Faith without workes is dead v. 17. So faith if it haue not workes is dead in itselfe v. 26. For euen as the bodie Faith without workes is dead without the spirit is dead so also faith without workes is dead 1. Cor. 13. v. 2. If I should haue all faith so that I could remoue mountaines and haue not charitie I am nothing CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Sess 6. c. 7. It is most truely saied that faith without workes is dead and idle PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Apologia Eccles Anglic. c. 301. True faith is liuelie and cā in no wise be idle Iewel ib. p. 302. A dead faith is no true faith Confessio Belgica art 24. It cannot be that this holie faith be idle in a man Whitaker Concion vlt. Who thinke that true faith can be idle or dead or void of good workes beleiue against the Confession True faith cannot be dead of our Church Luther in Gal. 2. to 5. The Papists and fanaticall fellows do so vnderstand that faith albeit true if it haue no workes is nothing worth This is false And Postilla in die Epiphaniae condemneth as a point of Papistrie Faith with out workes is vnprofitable Herbrandus in Compendio loco de Fide True faith can neuer be nor be saied to be dead Morlinus apud Schusselburg to 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 168. It is a blasphemous speech Faith without workes is nothing is worth nothing hath no vertue or efficacie p. 169. Who saieth that faith without the presence of workes is nothing simply saieth with the Papists That faith informed with good workes doth iustifie a man p. 178. It is a horrible obscuring and deprauing of Paul that faith without the presence of workes is nothing Schusselburg to 8. Catal. Haeret. p. 513. This proposition is blasphemous Faith in the moment of iustification is nothing if it be there without workes Is it a dead thing as some impious men affirme God will quaile and beat downe this blasphemie in them who do not repent p. 514. The speech of Iames is not to be wrested to the act of iustification For here faith though it be without Faith in the moment of iustification not dead though it be without workes workes and bring with it no merits or workes in the sight of God yet it is not dead In this strife albeit faith espie none of her good workes yet is she not dead albeit she be fainte and weake Bucer in Ioan. 12. Surely I thinke that the faith
in Math. 6. v. 12. To remit sinne is nothing els but not to exact the punishment thereof Piscator in Thesibus l. 1. p. 428. The remission of sinne is nothing els but not to punish for sinne Kemnitius de Origine Iesuitarum c. de Peccato The remission of sinne is one thing the abolition is an other Or as Luther saied in the words cited It is one thing for sinne to be remitted an other to be taken away THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that God taketh away sinne putteth out sinne as a cloud or mist that he maketh our iniquities as farre from vs as the East is from the West that he found no iniquitie in Dauid that there is no damnation in them who are in Christ Iesus The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that manie sinnes innumerable sinnes great sinnes worthie of death great filthinesse worthie the wrathe of God remaine truely remaine are continually in those that are iustified that sinne liueth and preuaileth in the regenerate that sinne is not taken away no sinne quite taken away that it is not made to be no more that remission of sinne is nothing but forgiuenesse of the punishment Which are so contrarie to Scripture as sometimes Protestants confesse it See lib. 2. c. 30. ART VI. WHETHER SINNES BE simply forgiuen SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Ioan. 20. v. 23. Whose sinnes you shall forgiue they are forgiuen Sinnes simply forgiuen them CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 5. de Amiss Grat c. 7. Nether can it be graunted without impietie that the sentence of the Apostle that there is no damnation in the Iustified is not simply true PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Pareus l. 5. de Amiss Gratiae c. 7. It is most true that sinnes Not simply forgiuen are not simply remitted but with continuall praier of remission Et l. 4. de Iustif c. 17. he saieth that Christ doth not absolutely cleanse his people The same teacheth Illyricus in Apologia Confess Antuerpiensis c. 3. and all Protestants who say as we haue seene before that sinnes remaine in the iustified and that they are still guiltie of sinne and deserue damnation and that remission of sinnes is nothing but forgiuenesse of punishment For if onely punishment be forgiuen the iustified if the sinne stil remaine in them by which they are guiltie and deserue damnation manifest it is that sinne is not simply remitted to them THE CONFERENCE Scripture simply saieth that sinne is remitted The same say Catholiks Protestants simply say that sinne is not simply remitted ART VII WHETHER ALL THAT ARE iustified be equally iust or holie SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Iob. 1. v. 8. Hast thou considered my seruant Iob that there None like to Iob. is not the like to him on the earth a man simple and right and fearing God and departing from euill Numbers 12 v. 3. Moises was the mildest man aboue all men Moises mildest of all mē that dwelle vpon the earth Math. 8. v. 10. I haue not found so great faith in Israel Greatest faith Greatest loue Ioan. 21. v. 15. Iesus saied to Simō Peter Simon of Ihon louest thou me more then these Apoc. 22. v. 11. He that is iust let him be iustified yet and let the holie be sanctified yet CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE C. Bellarm. l. 3. de Iustif c. 16. Lutherans teach that all iust men are equally iust so that none is iuster then an other nor the same increaseth in iustice PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Luther in Math. Math 7. to 7. fol. 96. A Christian is as good and Euerie Christian as holie is S. Peter holie as S. Peter and Paul nether is anie greater or better then he Postilla in Domin 24. S. Peter is not better then the theife on The B. Virgin excelleth not the sinner We are as holie as the Saints Better then they the crosse Marie the mother of God doth not excell Marie the sinner In festo Natiu Mariae We are as holie as Marie and the other Saints If they were now vpon earth they would not be ashamed to subiect themselues to me and to all and to honour vs as better then they Brentius homilia in die Visitationis Marie is not preferred before all weomen for her owne holinesse or other such like vertues Polanus in Disput priuatis periodo 1. disput 37. One is not None more iust then an other No lesse then Christ more iust then an other before God Pareus l. 2. de Iustif c. 7. By Christs iustice imputed to vs we are accounted no lesse iust then Christ himselfe at least keeping the proportion of the head and members THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that there was none on earth like to Iob that Moises was the mildest man vpon earth that there was not so great faith in Israel as in the Centurion that Peter loued Christ more then others that the iust may be yet iustified The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that euerie Christian is as good and holie as the Apostles that we are as holie as our B. Ladie and the Saints in heauen that we are better then they that we are are as iust as Christ himselfe that one is not more iust then an other ART VIII WHETHER THERE IS ANIE iustice or grace inherent in the iustified SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Daniel 6. v. 22. My God hath sent his Angel and hath shut Iustice in Daniel vp the mouthes of the Lyons and they haue not hurt me because before him iustice hath beene found in me Luc. 1. v. 28. And the Angel being entred in saied vnto her B. Virgin full of grace Haile full of grace our Lord is with thee Act. 6. v. 8. And Steuen full of grace and fortitude Ephes 4. vers 24. Putte on the new man which according to God is created in iustice and holinesse of trueth 2. Tim. 1. v. 6. Resuscitate the grace of God which is in thee by Grace in Timothe the imposition of my hands CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Rom. 4. v. 2. The Scriptures plainely teach inherent iustice in man PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE French Confession art 18. Casting away all opinion of vertues No opinion of vertue No iustice in vs. Not a crume of iustice or merits we rest altogether in the obedience alone of Christ Caluin in Rom. 8. v. 3. There can be no iustice in vs. In Gal. 3. v. 6. Seing men haue no iustice in them they get it by imputation De caena p. 2. There is none of vs who can finde anie crūme of iustice in himselfe There is no good in vs. Et in Confess fidei p. 158. We openly confesse that there is nothing in vs which if God looke vpon he may not iustly condemne Beza in Confess cap. 4. sect 8. Faith compelleth vs to confesse Nothing in vs but cause of damnatiō that there is nothing in vs besides causes and proofes of damnation Humfrey ad Ration 2. Campiani p. 142.
them publicans and harlots haue beene saued nether if they be knowne make they a man better Finally they vse to vnderstand the Saintes departed this life by this terme The dead For so doth the Apologie of the Confession of Auspurg c. de Inuocat Sanctorum The confession of Saxonie c. 21. Melancthon in locis c. de Sacramentis c. de Caeremonijs c. de scandalo c. de libertate Whitaker l. 9. cont Dureum sect 36. Wherevpon Kemnitius 3. parte Examinis p. 228. saieth that the Saintes departed are vsually termed The dead CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that the soule cannot be killed and that it returneth to God The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the soule dieth that it is a Popes decree that the soule dieth not that it is a monstruous thing to say that it is immortall they adde also that it is by transfusion that after death it feeleth nothing that all or most infantes perish as beasts that the knowledge of the state of soules after this death is not necessarie to saluation nor maketh a man the better ART II. WHETHER MANS SOVLE BE the forme of his bodie SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Gen. 2. v. 7. Our Lord God formed man of the styme of the Soule forme of the bodie earth and breathed into his face the breath of life and man became a liuing soule CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME S. Thomas 1. parte q. 76. art 4. A reasonable soule is vnited to the bodie as a substantiall forme PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther cited in the former article I giue leaue that the Not substantiall forme of the bodie Pope make articles of faith to his followers Such are That the soule is a substantiall forme of the bodie In psal 22. to 3. f. 348. It is not determined according to the spirit of trueth nor according So also Farellus to the authoritie of Scriptures but by the Popes reed according to vaine traditions of men That the essence of God is nether generated nor generateth That the soule is a substantiall forme of the bodie That bread and wine are trāssubstantiated on the altar that one kinde is to be giuen to lay men for the whole Sacrament and like monsters Polanus in Sylloge Thesium parte 2. p. 518. Mans soule is No forme of the bodie no forme of the bodie against Bellarmin Bucanus Instit loco 8. p. 89. The soule is in one onely mēber Not in euerie member of the bodie and place of the bodie THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saith that the soule was infused of God into man and that by it he was made a liuing creature The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that mans soule is no forme of the bodie that it is monstrous to say that it is the forme of the bodie that it is in one onely parte and place of the bodie and not in the whole bodie ART III. WHETHER THERE BE ANIE resurrection of the dead SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. 1. Cor. 15. v. 16. For if the dead rise not againe nether is Christ The dead shall rise risen againe And if Christ be not risen againe vaine is your faith 1. Thessalon 4. v. 14. For if we beleiue that Iesus died and rose againe so also God them that haue slept by Iesus will bring with him And the same is most plainely taught in innumerable places CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Catechismus ad Parochos in Exposit Symboli As we beleiue that manie haue beene raised from death so we must beleiue that all shal be raised to life PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther l. de seruo arbit to 2. fol. 442. Behould experience what the most excellent witts amongst the Gentils thought of the life to come and the resurrection How much more excellent they were of wit did they not the more thinke the life to come and resurrection to be ridiculous Finally to this day the most Luther not free from denying the resurrection of the dead by how much they are of greater wit and learning do they not the more laughe at that article and accoūt it afable and that opēly And I would to God thoum y Erasmus and I were free from this leauen So rare is there anie faithfull soule touching this article Brentius apud Reginaldum cited in the first article Yea such wordes fall from diuers Protestants by which they signifie No resurrection of the dead that they beleiue not the resurrection of the dead as well when there are drunken as when they are sober in their familiar talkes Vorstius in Apologetica resp ad Homium p. 41. writeth thus Let them see who will enquire these things more curiously what amongst our men Caluin himselfe sometimes thought of this matter in his epistles p. 85. Where Farellus plainely enough Caluin denied the resurrection of the flesh telleth that he not onely doubted of the resurrection of this flesh but thought plaine contrarie from others at that time And neuerthelesse none accursed him therefore of heresie Yea among the Lutherans Iames Schegkius in Antisimonic sect 9. p. 420. Schegkius denied the resurrection of these bodies Openly denied that the same bodies should rise hereafter And yet he was curteously excused of his parteners and it no where appeareth that he was for that condemned of heresie ether of his owne men or of ours Caluin Epistola 104. thus writeth to Laelius Sozinus Sozinus denied the resurrection of the flesh whome Camerarius in vita Melancthonis much commendeth I see that you are not satisfied about the resurrection of the flesh Farellus who was the first Minister of Geneua and whome Caluin and Beza highly cōmend and his picture is put amongst the worthies of the new reformers denied the resurrection of this flesh For thus writeth Caluin to him as reporteth M. Reinalds in Caluinoturcismo l. 3. c. 22. It is no meruaile that the resurrection of this flesh seemeth a Nether Caluin maruaileth at it thing incredible to thee Thou thinkes it sufficeth if thou beleiuest that sometime we shall haue new bodies Behould the first Apostle of Geneua thought the resurrection of this flesh a thing incredible nether that seemed anie meruaill to his Coapostle Caluin Besides all they who as we rehearsed cap. 3. artic 20. denie that Christs blood rose againe denie that there was a perfect resurrection of Christ of whome his blood was a parte and consequently they must denie that the blood of other men shal rise againe and so there shall not be a perfect resurrection of men Moreouer Caluin in 4 c. 1. § 27. saieth that those Corinthians who denied the resurrection were not excluded from Gods mercie Sadeel and Theses Posnan c. 12. pag. 806. Protestants account deniers of the resurrection to be members of the Church and children of God and faithfull that they kept the name of a true Chruch which also saieth Riuet tract 1. sect 39. Beza 2 parte respons ad Acta Montisbel pa. 253.
grosse error as also he doth in his Epistle to the Galathians If we exhort to do pennance in hairecloth and ashes because Christ saieth Math. 11. ver 21. If in Tyre and Sidon had beene wrought the miracles that haue beene wrought in you they had done pennance in hairecloth and ashes lōg agoe Caluin ib. answereth Pennance is described by the externall signes which were then solemnely vsed in Gods Church not as if Christ vrged this matter but because he turneth his speach to the capacitie of the common people If we proue that we shall haue life euerlasting for giuing all our goods to the poore because Christ saieth Math. 19. v. 21. If thou wilt be perfect goe sell the things that thou hast and giue to the poore and thou shalt haue treasure in heauen Beza ib. answereth These words of Christ declare not how life euerlasting is of it self to be gottē but are spoakē to reproue him that was deceaued with false hope of his iustice Caluin ib. in v. 20. saieth Christs answere was directed according to the To the mans disposition mans disposition Gerlachius tom 2. disput 13. saieth The Lord in the places alledged Math. 19. and Luc. 10. accommodated To men be wicked with false doctrines To mēs errors his speach to them who asked him who were bewiched with an opinion of legall iustice and Pharisaicall doctrines And againe Christ might easily accommodate his speach to those errours Illyricus in Claue part 2. tract 1. col 32. writeth thus Christ after an other manner sheweth the way to the kingdome Christ shewed one way to some an othe◠to others of heauen to the Pharise to the lawyer and to that yong man vaunting of the fulfilling of the law and in other manner vnto Nicodemus boasting of his discipline and good habits gotten by long tyme and time goodnesse of nature and free will and yet in an other manner vnto miserable sinners wrastling with their conscience with the wrath of God and their sinnes Author respons ad Theses Valent. p. 800. thus teacheth That we may graunt that oftentimes in Scripture iustification is denied to the ould and attributed to the new testament Yet According to the Iews supposition none seeth not but that this is saied of the Apostle by supposition of the Iews who like to Papists did speake of the ould testament as of the law which should giue iustice by workes And p. 813. In that Gregorie is deceaued that he thinketh it followeth out of Pauls discourse that prepuce keepeth the law which in trueth the Apostle spoake vpon supposition not as if it were indeed or could be but to shew boasting of the law circumcision and all the other ceremonies was very vaine Nor content to haue thus deluded so manie and so weightie sentences of Scripture they giue a generall rule so to delude them Caluin in 1. Corinth 10. ver 3. It is the Generall rule to delude Scripture thus manner of the Scripture when it speaketh of Sacramēts or other things sometimes to speake according to the capacitie of the hearers and so it doth not respect the nature of thing but what the hearers thinke amisse And l. de Praedest p. 713. The Scripture when it talketh of the Sacraments vseth to speake in twoe sortes If it talke with hypocrites according to their wrong meaning it deuideth the trueth from the signes The like he hath Gal. 3. v. 27. in Ioan. 6. v. 32. Daneus tom 2. Corinth 4. pag. 217. Peter Martyr in locis closs 2. c. 16. § 14. in 1. Cor. 10. Et Polanus in disput priuat 32. saieth God oftentimes Scripture calleth iust who indeed are not so speaketh according to their opinion with whome he speaketh So are they in the Scripture called iust who indeed are not iust but onely in opinion ether of themselues or of others By these and manie such like sleights Protestants vse to delude the holie Scripture which if they be admitted nothing at all can be proued out of Scripture Wherefore I thus make my sixt argument Who not onely in 260. articles do contradict the expresse words of Scripture in their cleare sense but also in manie and weightie matters are forced to say that the Scripture speaketh not accordig to her owne mynde meaneth not as she speaketh speaketh by way of graunt concession or argument according to the mynd capacitie grosse opinion error of others and after a humane fashion not according to the nature of the thing they are to be thought to gain say the true meaning of the holie Scripture But Protestants do so Therefore c. CHAPTER VII THAT PROTESTANTS ARE FORCED to say that the Scripture speaketh ironically mimetically hyperbolically and by amplification and fiction MY seuenth argument to proue that Protestants contradict the true sense of the Scripture shal be because they are forced to say that manie and most weightie sentences of Scripture of faith good workes Sacraments redemption of sinnes meanes of purchasing heauen and the like were spoaken not in earnest but ironically mimetically hyperbolically by amplification and fiction Precepts ought to be kept Ironically For if we proue that Gods commandments can be done because Leuit. 18. Rom. 10. Gal. 3. is saied Who shall doe those things shall liue in them Luther in Gal. 3. tom 5. fol. 347. Answereth I wnderstand that this speach is an ironie or scoffe If anie proue the same because Christ saieth Luc. 10. v. Ironically 26. Doe this and thou shalt liue Luther loc cit answereth I vnderstand this place in common that this saying of Christ Doe this and thou shalt liue is a kinde of ironie and mockage Poach in Schlusselburg l. 4. Catal. Haeret. 4. 301. Albeit the lawyer do inquire of life euerlasting yet if Christs answere be vnderstood according to the law that is without speaciall faith life cannot be ment of eternall life without an ironie Et p. 312. I do not denie but Christs answere may he wnderstood of eternall life not according to the law but an other way to wit ether according to the Ghospell or by ironie Againe That saying and the like may be expounded three wayes First by ironie as Luther saieth Gen. 9. and Galat. 3. Secondly according to the law c. And Gerlachius tom 2. disput 13. There is a secret ironie of Christ If we proue that the commandments must needs be kept because Christ sayeth Math. 19. v. 17. If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandments Pareus l. 4. de Iustificat c. 2. p. 967. answereth Luthers ironie about this place may be defended And pag. 969. It was a serious conference and yet that hindereth not but that the Lord might vse an ironie And Gerlachius to 2. disp 13. cit It was a serious conference and yet there is a secret ironie If we proue that an ill man may haue faith because S. Iames cap. 2. speaketh thus to such a one Thou hast faith
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
according to their order and in euerie matter I distinguish manie articles which I propose in forme of question After I set downe the expresse words of Scripture Next I bring the decrees of the Councell of Trent or the Instructions of the Catechisme of that Councell And where I find not their determinations I alledge the doctrin of S. Thomas or of D. Stapleton or Cardinal Bellarmin Against these I produce the assertions of one or manie famous Protestants directly opposite to the doctrin of the Scripture and of the Catholiks Lastly I gather together a summe of the words of the holie Scripture together with a summe of the sayings of Protestants that thereby the opposition betwene the doctrin of them both may the better appeare As for the words of Scripture Plessie of the Church c. 5. p. 145. Let them bring one text that is cleare and euident and we are readie to yeeld vnto them I bring not all which might be brought of euerie article because nether is that necessarie to my purpose sith God is as much to be beleeued in one word as in manie nether as the Councell of Arausica saieth truly will manie testimonies of Scripture auaile any thing with him to whome few are not sufficient but I bring those onely testimonies which to me seemed most opposite to the words of Protestants Nether do I proue that the words of Scripture which I cite be cleare and vttered of purpose to declare vnto vs Gods mynd of that matter wherof they treate or do of themselues and according to their accustomed acception amongst men manifestly afford that sense in which Protestants gayne saye them because al thefe points are manifest by them selues and the shifts which Protestants vse to delude them do manifestly proue them Nether also do I proue that Protestants can not at least touching the most of these Articles produce any such testimonies of Scripture which in expresse words may seeme directly and without any inference conference or exposition of theirs to speake for them as in these 260. points the testimonies which I bring do speake for vs. First because this being a denial it is of it self sufficiently proued vnles the Protestants can demonstrate their contrarie affirmation Secondly because this is euident to euerie one who See Tertul. l. de Resur c. 3. Luther de verb. Caenae fol. 389. considereth the testimonies brought by ProtestaÌ„ts which in verie few and almost no matters at all in controuersie betwixt vs and them are such as of them selues without the addition of some humane principle or illation they may so much as seeme to be directly opposite vnto vs. Which if ProtestaÌ„ts would consider they should easily see almost in all controuersies as much difference betwene our proofes out of Scripture and theirs as there is betwixt the expresse word of God and humane discourse Nether may they saye that they are not bound to proue Why Protest are bound to prooue their negatiue points of doctrin those points wherin they contradict vs because their denial needeth no proof Both because in some controuersies they are the affirmers and we the deniers as when they say that God will and worketh sin tempteth and predestinateth to sin That Christ was truly a sinner feared his daÌ„nation suffered the paines of hel the like In which questions seing Catholiks proue their denial by expresse words of Scripture much more ought Protestants by the like expresse words to proue their affirmation As also because it is one thing simply to deny or not to beleeue the Catholik affirmation as euerie Iew Turk or infidel doth an other thing not onely to denie it or not beleue it but also to condemne it as an vntruth contrarie to See Tertul. de Corona c. 2. Scripture and to auouche the denial as a truth taught by Scripture For albeit a simple denial or not beleefe need no proofe yet such a mixt denial as denying the opposite affirmation affirmeth it self to be auouched by Scripture and the affirmation to be condemned thereby hath as great need of proofe out of Scripture as any other affirmation whatsoeuer Moreouer these denials are articles of faith with Protestants and as such are put in their Confessions of faith and therfore ether ought to be proued by Scripture as other articles are or they must confesse that they can not proue out of Scripture the greatest parte of their faith which principally consisteth of these negatiue articles or denials of our faith 9. As for Catholiks for the most parte I produce the Why one Cath. saying is alledged words of one onely of the foresaied Authors because the agreement of Catholiks in matters of faith is wel enough knowne I might if I would haue my self set downe the Catholik doctrin in euerie article in the same words in which the Scripture deliuereth her doctrin of the same or perhappes haue found the Catholike doctrine proposed by some Catholikâ— Author in the verie same words which the Scripture vseth But that Protestants should not saye that it was no maruel if the Catholik doctrin be deliuered in the Scriptures words by any Author whatsoeuer or when it is done of purpose I would not set it downe but in the words of some famous Catholik writer those spoaken not of purpose to accomodate their speech to the phrase of Scripture but spoaken to declare and expresse the Catholik doctrin And here by we may see that when the Catholik doctrin is to be sett downe most plainly and distinctly by theÌ„ who best know it of it nature it requireth to be deliuered with the very same or the likewords which the Scripture vseth Whence we may also gather as I shal herafter that the Catholik doctrin is in very deed one and the self same with the doctrin of the Scripture 10. For the like cause I haue alledged the words onely Why manie Protâ—stants sayingâ— alledged of famous Protestants such as almost all were not onely writers but also Professors of Protestant diuinitie lest any should attribute their words to ignorance And some times I haue cited diuers sayinges of the same Author partly lest any should think that such words fell from him vnawares partely also because some times they contradict the Scripture in so different manners of speech as if they would that none should be ignorant therof partely also to the end that the Catholik Reader may make choice amongst manie sayings of Protestants which he iudgeth most opposite to the Scriptures words Nether yet do I feare that the multitude of Protestants sayings opposed against the Scripture may scandalize any weake Catholik for seing the Scripture most directly contrarie to them and armed with this sheild he wil no more regarde the Protestants words then so many barkings of of doggs against heauen so many cries of Ieves against Christ so many blasphemies of damned men against God And if it be wearisome or irkesom to the Catholik Reader to read all the blasphemous
Church to the den of theues from the assured path of saluation to the open way of damnation Finally I aduertise the Reader that if at anie time I vse anie sharp words against Protestants I intend them onely against their teachers and leaders yet vse I the common name of Protestants that the rest may know that the crimes which I obiect vnto them proceed of their doctrin and thereby flie and reiect it lest they become partakers of the crimes I shew them the gulfe of impietie into which their guides doe lead them let them not be offended with me that I set before their eyes the impietie of the doctrin which they are tought but let them be angrie with their teachers who vnder the most false pretense of Scripture and Gods word haue thaught them such impious doctrin and so contrarie to Gods words And I hartely pray God and euer shal that he open their eyes that they may see the most imminent and greiuous danger wherein they stand and auoide it lighten with his true light that zeale which they haue to his word Rom. 10. lest they perish for euer with them who had zeale but not according to knowledge Whether Catholiks or Protestants be the true owners of the holie Scripture FIRST CHAPTER BECAVSE this question of the true owners How important this question is of the holie Scripture is of such moment as by it may be decided all controuersies as shall hereafter appeare and withall the decision thereof is so easie and cleare as euerie one may perceaue it and notwithstanding hath not as yet to my knowledge beene particularly handled of anie albeit as we shall see out of Tertullian it should haue beene handled before anie question of Scripture I will begin first with it And because Protestants auouch them selues to be the true owners of the Scripture I need not proue to them that ether Catholiks or they are the true owners thereof which the very question doth suppose but it will suffice against them that I shew that according to all reason Catholiks are to be iudged the true owners of Scripture rather then they The first proofe hereof I will take from the actuall The first title for Cathol actual possession possession of the Scripture in which Catholiks peacably were when Luther and the Protestants first began to chalenge the Scripture for theirs For reason teacheth vs to iudge the Possessor of anie thing to be the true owner of the same and possession to be a sufficient title of houlding it vnles the contrarie be manifestly proued and conuinced as we see dayly in lands and temporall goods and otherewise the dominion of things would be vncertaine amongst men Wherevpon the law teacheth the Possessor to plead possession as a sufficient title and to say possideo quia possideo I possesse because I possesse But Protestants can not manifestly disproue no nor yet colourably impugne the right of the Catholiks possession of the holie Scripture as shall hereafter appeare Therefore according to all reason Catholiks vpon this title of their possession are to be iudged true owners of the Scripture The second proof I will take from the Catholiks vndoubted Second title peacable possession possession thereof and vnquestioned by Protestants for manie ages That Protestants did not for manie ages call the Catholiks possessions of the Scripture into question is manifest by the manie and plaine confessions of Protestants that their Church was inuisible before Luther for manie ages which I haue related in my second booke of the Author of the Protestant Church c. 4. And reason teacheth vs to accounte him the true owner of a thing who without all question or clame of anie hath hould it peacably for manie ages together Wherevpon the law alloweth prescription of certaine yeares after which time expired it permitteth not the possession to be called in question Besides it is no way likelie that the true Church of God would suffer her self to be bereaued of so heauenlie a treasure as is the holie Scripture and yet not once in anie corner of the world for manie ages crie after the theefe or chalenge her treasure which she did see was held of others Will men euerie day venture their liues for sauing or recouering a little land or goods and would not the Church of God the onely true owner of the Scripture for manie ages once open her mouth to chalenge so heauenlie a treasure especially the Scripture being as Protestants teach the onely Martyr in disput oxon p. 143. Pareus Coll. Theol. 3. disp 2. externall infallible meane to attayne faith and as necessarie to the saluation of the Church as meate is to the life of man what care had the Church offo great a treasure left vnto here by Christ what account made she of faith and saluation if for manie ages she would not so much as chalenge the onely externall infallible and necessarie means to obtayne them Would the primitiue Church suffer so manie torments and cruell death as we read in the Ecclesiastical Historie rather then loose the holie Scriptures which the Heathens would haue taken from her and would she afterward suffer Papists to take it from her without muttering one word or laying clame to it for manie ages together Moreouer how had she faith how obtained she saluation if for maine ages she lost the onely externall infallible and necessarie meanes to obtayne them The third proof is that the Catholiks possession of the Scripture is farre more ancient then the Protestāts possession Third title ancientest possession thereof For euident it is that that Christian Church which is the first and ancientest possessor of the holie Scripture is the onely true owner of the same because the Apostles and Euangelists left their writings first and Qui prior est tempore potior est iure Reg. iuris onely to the true Church and gaue her the testament and last will of Christ her sponse so that the true Christrian Church had the Scripture before anie false Christian Church had it and likewise certaine it is that she neuer lost it since it was deliuered vnto her but as she is the pillar of truth so she hath faithfully kept this heauenly truth deliuered vnto her in writing and consequently is ancienter possessor of the Scripture then anie false Christian Church can be And this reason the ancient Christians vsed against Heretiks as appeareth by these words of Tertullian lib. de Praescript c. 37. It is my possession I possesse it of ould I possesse it first I am the herie of the Apostles And lib. 4. cont Mart. c. 4. I say my Bible is true Marcion saieth His. I say Marcions Bible is corrupted Marcion saieth Mine is corrupted what shall end our controuersie but order of time giuing authoritie to that which is found to be ancienter and reiecting that which is later For in that falsitie is a corruption of trueth trueth must needs be before falsitie
pastors as is shewed in the saied booke c. 2. cit and Caluin in Ezechiel c. 3. v. 9. saieth that Papists chalenge the name of the Church because they pretend a continuall succession And indeed saieth he we are forced to confesse that they haue the ordinarie ministerie And who can denie but the true Pastors of Gods Church are true owners of Gods worde which they haue authoritie to preach Thereby they confesse that Catholiks are true possessors of the holie Scripture For thus writeth Luther to 2. Germ. fol. 279. cited by Scarpius in Eccles c. 6. VVe confesse that vnder Poperie are manie Christian goods yea all Christian good and that it came from thence to vs. Namely we confesse that in Poperie is true holie Scripture true baptisme true office of preaching true Sacrament of the altar true keyes to forgiue sinnes true Catechisme Nay I say that in Poperie is true The kernell of Christianitie in Poperie Christianitie yea the very kernell of Christianitie and manie great Saintes And Hall Chalmeley and Batterfeild graunt that Luther wrote thus and seeme to allow it Luther also to 6. in c. 28. Genes saieth we confesse that Papists haue the Church because they haue baptisme absolution the text of the Ghospel and there are manie godlie men amongest them The eight proofe shal be from the Confession of such 8. title Confession of strangers as nether are Catholiks nor Protestants For as Vorstius writeth in Antibell p. 181. Iewes Turkes and Pagans do think that the Christian religion consisteth cheefly in Poperie And Whitaker Cont. 2. q. c. 2. No other famous Church can be named in these latter times which was thought to be the Church and was called the Church but the Roman Church Nether let anie think that such as want faith can not be sufficient iudges in this matter For albeit they be not sufficient iudges in the question of the trueth of doctrin yet are they sufficient in question of facte as this is And in this Ioseph lib. Antiq. Euseb l. 7. c. 24. sorte the Heathens in the time of the ould law iudged betwene the Iewes and the Samaritans and in the time of the Ghospel betwene the Catholiks and the Samosatenians And as Christians can iudge what kind of Mahometans are the true owners of the Alcoran though they think not the Alcoran to conteyne true doctrin So may Infidels iudge what kinde of Christians be true owners of the Ghospel though they beleeue not the Ghospel to be the worde of God The ninth proof may be taken from the agreement of 9. title Agreement with Scripture the Cath. doctrin both in words and sense with the holie Scripture as shall appeare in this booke Which proofe though taken alone doe not conuince that Catholiks are true owners of the Scripture yet in conuinceth that they are true owners rather then Protestants who so farre disagree from the Scripture both in words and sense The tenth proofe shal be that Protestants against these 10. title weaknes of Protest Proofes so manie and so forcible proofes for the Catholiks can bring no other proofe for their right to Scripture then that they haue the true doctrin of Scripture Which argument taken alone is as I shewed at large in my saied booke De Authore c. lib. 2. c. 15. a fond Sophisme or Foularie First because Schismatiks haue the true doctrin of Scripture as I there proued by reason by the testimonie of holie Fathers and the confession of Protestants and yet are no true owners of the Scripture because they are no true mēbers of the Church as I there also proued Secondly for Protestants to proue that they be true owners of the Scripture because they haue the true doctrin thereof is to proue one vnknowne and false thing by an other as vnkowne and false Which is not to proue at all because all proofe must be from a thing more knowne Thirdly they nether proue that they haue the doctrin of the Scripture by expresse words of Scripture for these are quite against them as shal be shewed in this booke nor by plaine inference out of the words of Scripture as appeareth by the Catholiks answers vnto all their proofes nor finally they haue proued any thing before a lawfull iudge but all their proofes are such as euerie Heretike maketh Besides if truth of doctrin doe proue true right to Scripture it farre more maketh for Catholiks and no more for Protestants then for anie other Heretiks Out of all which hath beene saied in this Chapter it is most euident that if the light of reason may be iudge in this matter Catholiks must needs be counted the true owners of the holie Scripture because they haue all the foresaied Titles then the which both fewer and weaker would make a claime to worldlie matters out of all question of all which Protestants can pretend none but the last Secondly it is euident that if Catholiks be the true If Cath. be true owners of the Scripture all controuersies are ended owners of the Scripture the sacred testament of Christ they are also true owners of the holie Sacraments of the keyes of heauen to binde and loose sinnes of the means of saluation and of all the goods which Christ hath by his will and testament bequeathed to his Church For vndoubtedly all these things pertaine to them to whome Christs testament doth belong Thirdly it is euident that if Catholiks be true owners of the Scriptures Protestants be vniust vsurpers of them as Iewes Turkes and Infidels are and haue no more right to keep or vse them against Catholiks then theeues haue to vse true mens goods or weapons against them For cleare it is that Catholiks and Protestants are opposite Churches as I haue shewed in the foresaied booke De Authore lib. 1. c. 2. and lib. 2. c. 6. and that one of them is a false Church whereas the Scriptures were giuen and belong to one onely Church Wherefore we may well say to Protestants as Tertullian de Prescript c. 37. saied to Heretiks of his time VVho are you when and whence came you what doe you in mine being not mine By what right Marcion Luther doest thou fell my woods By what licence Valentin Caluin doest thou turne away my water By what authoritie Apelles Zuingle doest thou charge my bounds It is my possession what doe you strangers here sow and feed at your pleasure And the same say we to Protestants Let them first shew what right they haue to Scriptures before they argue out of them let them render vs our weapons or shew what iust title they haue to them before they fight with them against vs. For as the same Tertull. saieth c. 15. Here we first stop them that they are not to be admitted to anie dispute of Scriptures VVe must see whether they may haue them or no to whom belongeth the Scripture that he be not admitted to it to whom it appertaineth not And c. 19. The
Ghospell or the new testament must haue beene tried by the ould See more art 6. CHAPTER VII OF THE PASTOVRS OF THE CHVRCH SCripture If my couuenant with the day can be made voide Pastours alwaies c. also my couuenant may be made voide with Dauid my seruant that there be not of him a sonne to reigne in his throne and Leuits and Preists my ministers Not alwaies Protestants It is false that the externall ministerie must be perpetuall The Church hath osten no man Pastour Some short time the Church may be depriued of Pastours See more art 7. Scripture Thou art Peter c. And to thee I will giue the Authoritie in the Pastours keyes of the kingdome of heauen Protestants The authoritie is not in the Prelats but in the Not in them worde the Church hath nothing but mere ministerie See more art 2. Scripture Thou art Peter c. and whatsoeuer thou shalt One pastor cā excōmunicate bind on earth it shal be bound also in heauen Protestants VVe must remember that this power of excommunicating One cannot is giuen to no one man but to the whole companie of the Presbiterie See more art 3. Scripture And he Paul walked through Syria and Silicia Pastours can make lawes confirming the Churches and commanding them to keepe the precepts of the Apostles and the Auncients Protestants The Church hath no power to make lawes See They can not more art 4. Scripture The Holie Ghost hath placed you Bishops to rule Pastors rulers of the Church Not rulers the Church of God Protestants The true nature of a ruler of the Church is in no pure man one or manie See art 5. Scripture You shal be called the preistes of the lord Pasters to be called preists Not to be so called Protestants Who administer the word and Sacraments amongst the people nether may nor ought to be called preists See more art 7. Scripture But how shall they preach vnles they be sent No preaching without mission Without mission Protestants Euen they who are not lawfully called may preach the word fruitfully Euerie Christian man hath authoritie to preach Christ in what place soeuer where they are desirous to heare See more art 8. Scripture Moises and Aaron in his preists Moises a preist No preist Protestants Moises did not exercise at all the preisthood but was onely a Prophet See more art 10. CHAPTER VIII OF THE CHVRCHE SCripture There shal be made one fould and one pastor Church but one onely Not one onely Protestants We say that there are twoe societies of men that is twoe Churches to the one belong the predestinate to the other the reprobate Christ and the things themselues teach vs that there are twoe Churches See more art 1. Scripture VVe are one bodie all that participate of one All those one bodie who participate one Sacramēt bread Protestants The godlie are no more ioyned in one bodie with Not all those the wicked then light with darkenes Christ with Belial See more art 2. Scripture The gates of hell shall not preuaile against her of Church can not faile It can faile his kingdome there shal be no end Protestants It is no meruaile though the Church be cleane fallen downe long agoe Antichrist had rooted out the Church euen from the ground Christes kingdome was cast flat downe See more art 4. Scripture You are the light of the world A cittie can not be Church can not be hidde hidde situated vpon a mountaine Protestants Often times God will haue no visible Church It can be hidde on earth The whole visible Church may faile See more art 5. Scripture Which is the Church of the liuing God the pillar Church is infallible and strenght of trueth Protestants The vniuersall Church may erre The Church Not infallible may erre The Catholik Church may erre and that most greeuously See more art 6. Scripture If he will not heare the Church let him be to thee Church simply to be heard Not simply to be heard as the Heathen and the Publican Protestants VVe must not simply receaue whatsoeuer the Church teacheth See more art 7. CHAPTER IX OF TEMPLES OR MATERIAL CHVRCHES SCripture Who Anna departed not from the temple by Churches for priuate praier fasting and praiers seruing day and right Protestants Churches are for preaching onely It is no lawfull Not for priuat praier end of Churches that the faithfull may priuatly pray in them See more art 1. Scripture Twoe Cherubins also thou shalt make of beaten Images to be set in Churches Not to be set in Churches gold on both sides of the oracle Protestants The Iewes had no manner Image nether painted not grauen in their temple God abhorreth images We must not suffer that Images be in Churches See more art 3. Scripture reporteth these words of a Heathen This Heathens thought idols to be Gods They thought not so Paule saieth that they are no Gods which be made by hands Protestants It is a lie that the Heathens did beleiue the Images of their Gods to haue beene their Gods them selues See more art 4. CHAPTER X. OF BAPTISME SCripture Vnlesse a man be borne againe of water and the Water necessarie to baptisme Not necessarie Spirit he can not enter into the kingdome of God Protestants Though water be wanting yet if the baptisme of one cannot be differred with edification I would baptize as well with anie other liquour as with water See more art 1. Scripture Going teach ye all nations baptizing them Baptisme cōmanded of Christ Not cōmanded of him c. Protestants Baptisme is of lesse importance then that the lord should haue greatly cammanded anie thing about it See more art 3. Scripture Vnlesse one be borne of water and the Holie Baptisme necessarie to saluation Not necessarie Simon Magus was baptized He was not baptized Baptisme profiteth all Not all Ghost he cannot inter into the kingdome of God Protestants Children who die before they be christened are not shut out of the kingdome of God See art 4. Scripture Then Simon Magus also himself belieued and being baptized he cleaned to Philippe Protestants That Simon Peter and Simon Magus receaued the same whole baptisme is most false See more art 5. Scripture As manie of you as haue beene baptized in Christ haue put on Christ Protestants Baptisme bringeth no commoditie to those that are not elect See more art 6. Scripture Christ loued the Church cleansing it by the lauer Baptisme purgeth sinne It purgeth not sinne of water in the worde Protestants VVho will say that we are cleansed by this water Doest thou thinke that water is the lauer of the soule No. Baptisme cannot wash away the filth of sinnes See more art 7. Scripture Be baptized and wash away thy sinnes Sinnes washed away by baptisme Not by baptisme All borne in in state of dānation Not all Protestants Paule
Infants are saued by Gods election albeit they be taken out of this life not only without baptisme but also without faith See more art 15. Scripture What shall it profit if a man say he hath faith but hath not workes Shall his faith be able to saue him Protestants Faith iustifieth without good workes Faith void of good workes is imputed to iustice See more art 17. Scripture Whosoeuer beleiueth that Iesus is Christ is borne of God Abraham beleiued and it was imputed him to iustice Protestants Faith doth not iustifie vs by the worke beleife Not iustifieth See more art 18. Scripture To him that beleiueth in him who iustifieth the Faith reputed to iustice impious his faith is reputed to iustice Protestants The act of beleiuing is not our iustice Not the Not reputed act or worke of our faith that is our beleife iustifieth vs. See more art 19 Scripture Of the Princes also manie beleiued in him but for Certaine princes beleiued They beleiued not Manie beleiued They beleiued not Faith cause of Saluation Not cause thereof SimoÌ„ Magus beleiued He beleiued not Faith by hearing Not by hearing the Pharises they did not confesse Protestants We do not graunt that thoses Princes had true faith We denie that they truely beleiued See more art 20. Scripture Ihon. 2. Manie beleiued in his name Protestants Their faith was not true but hypocrisie See art 20. cit Scripture Thy faith hath made thee safe Protestants Faith doth not worke cause or procure our Saluation See more art 16. Scripture Simon Magus also him selfe beleiued Protestants Some beleiue not at all as Simon Magus He was quite faithlesse indeed he beleiued not See more art 21. Scripture Faith is by hearing Protestants Faith cometh not by the labour of the preachers Faith riseth of the Scripture alone not of the authoritie of the Church Faith can not be gotten by words See more articul 22. Scripture For a time they beleiue and in time of temptation Faith some time lost they reuolt Protestants True faith can neuer be lost It cannot be by Neuer lost anie means that those who beleiue should leese their faith See more art 23. Scripture reporteth that Christ saied to Thomas Be S. Thomas faith not incredulous but faithfull And that Thomas saied Vnlesse I see c. I will not beleiue Protestants Faith was not vtterly extinct in Thomas Faith He lost it not lay in his hart See more art 23. cit Scripture He that beleiueth in the Sonne hath life euerlasting Faith rewarded Protestants There is noe reward to faith No reward can be Not rewarded rendred to faith See art 24. Scripture Reporteth that Christ saied to the woman The womans faith pure who touched the hem of his garment Thy faith hath made the safe Protestants It may be that some errour or vice was mingled Not pure with the womans faith Perhaps she slipt a litle out of the way See more art 25. CHAPTER XIV OF GOOD VVORKES IN GENERAL SCripture saieth to a sinner beleiuing that there is one Some workes of a sinner good God Thou doest well and Rahab the harlot was not she iustified by workes Protestants VVhat workes soeuer goe before iustification None good are euill What can sinners alienated from God doe but is execrable in his iudgment See more art 1. Scripture In all these things Iob sinned not with his lips The iust sinne not in euerie worke In euerie worke Good workes sweet before God Vnsweet Protestants The iust man sinneth in euerie good worke All saints in euerie good worke do sinne See more art 2. Scripture Noë offered holocaustes vpon the altar and our lord smelled a sweell sauour Protestants Our workes stincke before God if they be called to a strait account Whatsoeuer we can giue to God is stenchie See more art 3. Scripture Remember how I haue walked before thee in trueth Some workes perfect and in a perfect hart Protestants All our good workes are imperfect They are None perfect partely euill See more art 4. Scripture Phinees stood and pacified and the slaughter ceased Some workes iust before God None iust before hmi and it was reputed to him vnto iustice Protestants Who make their workes euen those which they imagin to doe by the grace of Christ iustice before God make idols of them See more art 5. Scripture What is our hope or ioye or crowne of glorie Are Glorie before God not you before our lord Iesus in his coming Protestants It can not be that anie haue glorie before God Not glorie before him See more art 9. Scripture He who ioyneth his virgin in matrimonie doth Some workes better then others None better then others Some workes counselled None counselled well and he who ioyneth not doth better Protestants Before God there is no worke better then other See more art 10. Scripture As concerning virgins a commandment of our Lord I haue not but counsell I giue Protestants There are not some precepts and others counsells See more art 11. Scripture If you will not forgiue men nether will your Father Some workes necessarie to forgiuenesse Not necessarie forgiue you your offenses Protestants The pardon which we aske to be giuen to vs dependeth not vpon that which we giue to others See more artic 12. Scripture Patience is necessarie for you that doing the will Some necessarie to saluauation Not necessarie Some profitable None profitable of God you may receaue the promise Protestants Good workes are not necessarie to saluation See more art 13. Scripture Pietie is profitable to all things hauing promise of the life that now is and of that to come Protestants To teach that workes are holesome and profitable is diuellish and apostaticall from faith workes are vnprofitable to Christian iustice and likewise to saluation See more art 14. Scripture Be ye in nothing terrified of the aduersaries which Affliction cause of saluation to them is cause of perdition but to you of saluation and this of God Protestants The Scripture no where teacheth that the afflictions Not cause of saluation which the Saints suffer of the wicked are cause of their saluation See more art 15. Scripture Possesse you the kingdome prepared for you For I Workes cause of enioying heauen Not cause was an hungred and you gaue me to eate Protestants None shal be saued for his workes The kingdome of heauen is not giuen for good workes The iust are not rewarded for the workes of iustice which they haue done See more art 15. cit Scripture Labour that by good workes you may make sure Workes make cerâ—aintie of saluation They make it not your vocation and election Protestants We are vtterly vndone if we be sent to our workes when we must seeke the certaintie of our saluation See more art 16. Workes cause that God loueth vs. Not cause Scripture The Father him selfe loueth you
for it selfe To which question both the Scripture and Protestants answere negatiuely but this their agreement with the Scripture in this second question saueth not their disagreement from it in the former question which disagreemēt or contradictiō is that which here I vrge Moreouer nether man nor the diuell him selfe can will iniquitie as iniquitie or for it selfe because as such it is a pure priuation of good and nothing can be willed of any but as it is good ether true or apparent good Wherevpon Saint Denis with the consent of all Diuines and Philosophers saied None worketh looking onely De diuin nominibus c. 4. to ill Finally to say that God willeth sinne as it is a meane to some good end is to make him like to them who as the Apostle writeth Roman 3. say Let vs doe euill that good may follow whose damnation saieth he is iust Blasphemous therefore it is and against holie Scripture that God will iniquitie or sinne vnder what consideration soeuer he be saied to will it And so impious this is as the holie Fathers say that it taketh away a Tertull. exhortat ad Castit c. 2. Prosper l. 2. ad Vincent c. 10 all sinne and iudgment of God and is more b Augustin l. 1. de ordin c. 1. blasphemous then to deny Gods prouidence yea some Protestants confesse that it is contrarie to scripture as we shall see hereafter l. 2. c. 25. 30. ART II. WHETHER SINNE DOTH please God SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. 3. Kings 11. v. 6. And Salomon did that which was not liked Sinne pleaseth not God before our Lord. 1. Paralipomenon 21. v. 7. And that which was commanded displeased God and he strake Israel CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE Card. Bellarmin l. 2. de septem verbis Dom. c. 4. The greatnes of the sinne which Christ vndertooke to blot out by his passion was in some sorte infinite by reason of the infinit dignitie and excellencie of the person which was offended PROTESTANT EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Bucanus and Pareus in the former article God willeth sinne with his hidden and good pleasing will Caluin de Praedestinat p. 726. Whence therefore shall we Pleaseth God say that it came to passe that Pharao should so inhumanly rage but that it so pleased God partely for to trie the patience of his people partely to exercise his power Beza de Praedestinat cont Castel val 1. Theol. p. 376. Gods will dath embrace euen those things which simply he alloweth not yea reiecteth and punisheth yet decreeth them and in some sorte and for some respect is pleased with them And in Absters calum Heshusij ib. p. 324. We say that a lie pleaseth God as it is the iust punishment of them who preferred lies before trueth And as Smidelin obiected to his face in the Conference at Montebelgard p. 450. he taught that In a wonderfull and incomprehensible manner it pleased God and he would that our first parents should sinne THE CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS OF SCRIPTVRE CATHOLIKS AND PROTESTANTS Scripture expressely teacheth that sinne pleaseth not yea displeaseth God And in like sorte teach Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that God willeth sinne with his good pleasing will that euen those things which God approueth not do in some respect please him that lies do please him as they are punishments to men that it pleased God that our first parents should sinne ART III. WHETHER GOD HATE SINNE SCRITVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Psalme 44. v. 8. Thou hast loued iustice and hast hated iniquitie God hateth sinne therefore God thy God hath anointed thee with oile of gladnes aboues thy fellowes S. Wisdom 14. v. 9. But to God the impious and his impietie are odius alike Zacharie 8. v. 17. And thinke ye not euerie man in your hart euill against his freind and lying oathe loue ye not for all these things are such as I hate saieth our Lord. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Card. Bellarmin in psalm 5. v. 4. God hateth nothing more then sinne PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Peter Martyr in Rom. 9. Seing sinnes haue often times the nature of punishment it is manifest that God hateth them not as He hateth not sinne such Againe For so much as God is saied to not will or hate sinne that is to be vnderstood in so much as perteineth to the law and scripture and rule of life reuealed vnto vs. He is also saied to hate sinne because he punisheth it and willeth it not for it selfe but for some other end Wherefore as he worketh sinne he hateth it not The same also meane those who as we haue seene in the former article teach that sinne pleaseth God THE CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that God hateth iniquitie hateth sinne and that impietie is odious vn him The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that God hateth not sinne as it hath the nature of punishment nor as it is his worke that when he is saied to hate sinne that is to be vnderstood that he saieth so in Scripture ART IV. WHETHER GOD DOTH worke sinne or inquitie SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Sophonie 3. v. 5. Our lord in the middes thereof will not doe God doth not worke sinne iniquitie Isaie 53. v. 9. Because he hath not done iniquitie nether was there guile in his mouth Prouerbs 14. v. 22. They erre that worke euill Mathew 7. v. 18. A good tree can not yeeld euill fruits 1. Ioan. 3. v. 8. He that committeth sinne is of the diuel CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE Councell of Trent Sessione 6. Canone 6. If any shall saye that God worketh ill deeds as well as good not onely permissiuely but also properly and in themselues so that no lesse the treason of Iudas then the calling of Paule was his proper worke be h◠accursed PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Luther de seruo arbit to 2. fol. 459. diuers times saieth that God worketh euill in vs and by vs and fol. 433. as Zanchius God worketh sinne confesseth l. de praedestinat c. 7. saieth God worketh good and euill in vs rewardeth his good and punisheth his euill deeds in vs. Melancthon in Rom. 8. printed 1521. As they confesse God worketh properly aduldulterie that the vocation of Paule was the proper worke of God so we confesse that they are properly Gods workes as well those the which are called indifferent as to eate or drinke as those which are euill as Dauids adulterie God doth all things not onely permissiuely but also mightly that is so that Iudas is treacherie is his proper worke as the vocation of Paule Brentius in c. 3. Amos. printed at Francfurt by Peter God doth the euill of sinne Bruboch 1551. All things are done by the mightie hand and effectuall working of God as well the euils of sinne as the euill of punishment Caluin Institut l. 1. c. 18. § 3. Now haue I clearly enough shewed that God is called the Author of all those things which these Censurers will haue to fall out onely by
Ether the doores of themselues opened to Christ or he passed through the walls Piscator in Respons ad Buscherum c. 13. As if it were not more probable that Christ by his diuine power did open the shut doores More of their like sayings may be seene in my Latin booke chapt 2. art 23. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ entred to his disciples the doores being shut and when the doores were shut The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the doores were not shut in the instant of Christs entrance that Christ truely opened the doores that the doores of themselues opened and gaue place Which doctrin diuers Protestants confesse to be contrarie to Scripture See lib. 2. c. 30. ART XXIV WHETHER CHRIST PENEtrated the Heauens SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Hebrews 4. v. 14. Hauing therefore a great high Preist that Christ penetrated the Heauenes hath penetrated the Heauens Iesus the Sonne of God CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 3. de Euchar. c. 6. It cannot be temerariously saied of the bodie of Christ that the Heauens were broaken when he ascended to his Father PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Vorstius in Antibellarm p 402. The question is begged in Did not penetrate heauē all the examples which are bought to proue penetration of quantites whereas in truth no such thing is any where redde in Scripture Spalatensis lib. 5. de Republic cap. 6. num 182. I admit no penetration Gualterus in Ioan. 20. calleth it a monstruous new doctrin to say that twoe bodies can be at once in the same place Tilenus in Syntagm cap. 8. saieth that Christ ascended without penetration of quantities And the Ministers in the Conference at Paris 1588. affirmed that he could not ascend but renting and breaking the Heauens THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that Christ penetrated the Heauens The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that in Scripture there is no example of penetration that they admit no penetration that it is a monstruous new doctrin that Christ ascended without penetration and could not ascend but by renting the heauens ART XXV WHETHER CHRISTS DO IN heauen pray for vs SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Ihon 14. ver 16. And I will aske the Father and he will giue Christ our aduocate with the Father Maketh incession for vs. you an other Paraclete 1. Ihon 2. v. 1. But and if any man shall sinne we haue an aduocate with the Father Iesus Christ the iust Rom. 8. vers 34. Christ Iesus that died yea that is risen also againe who is on the right hand of God who also maketh intertercession for vs. Hebrews 7. v. 25. Whereby he is able to saue also for euer going by himselfe to God alwaies liuing to make intercession for vs. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Sanctis c. 20. Christ praieth for all Et. l. 2. de Missa c. 8. Christ is our onely immediate intercessor with his Father Tolet in Ihon. 16. Annot. 35. The holie Fathers teach that Christ in heauen as man praieth his Father for vs albeit some denie it but improbably PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Peter Martyr in 1. Corint 13. But they must know that Christs intercessiō with the Father for vs is nothing else but that Christs intercession nothing but c he is alwaies present with the Father and that by his prosence because he was deliuered to death for vs Gods mercie towards the elect is most speedily obtained Caluin in Ioan. 16. v. 26. But when it is saied that Christ praieth for vs to his Father we must not imagin any carnall thing of him as if falling at his Fathers fect he humblie made Maketh not būble praier praier but the vertue of his Sacrifice wherewith he once pacified God to vs being euer of force this effectuall blood with which he clensed our sinnes and the obedience which he performed are a continuall intercession for vs. And in Rom. 8. v. 34. he saieth that because his death and resurrection are in steed of an eternall intercession and haue the efficacie of a liuely praier he is saied to intercede for vs. The like hath Perkins de Serie Causarum to 1. col 21. Bezain Confess c. 4. sect 16. Nether therefore may we imagin Praieth not as a Suppliāt that Christ as a Suppliant praieth for vs but he reconcileth vs to the Father by the perpetuall odour of his onely sacrifice and maketh our praiers effectuall before God Bucanus in Instit Theol. loco 35. Christ not by a gesture or praier as casting himselfe at his Fathers feet doth humbly pray for vs but both by the merite and vertue of his death and also by offering our praiers to the Father The like say others as may be seene in my Latin booke c. 2. art 25. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Christ in heauen is our aduocate asketh for vs maketh intercession for vs. The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that Christs intercession is nothing else but his presence with his Father that he doth not humbly make praier for vs that his death and resurrection are in steed of praier that he praieth not for vs as a Suppliant that he doth not humbly pray for vs. A SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF CHRIST In the former Chapter we shewed that Protestants crie that we make a new God and that this fault rather falleth vpon them now we will shew that they obiect the like vnto vs concerning Christ and that themselfes are faultie therein M. Perkins in Cathol reform Controu 9. cap. 11. thus writeth of Catholiks They worshippe an other Christ then we doe And in Conflictu Christi cum Diabolo tom 2. col 130. The Papists Christ is a feigned Christ In Apocal. 2. col 189. The Papists Christ is a false Christ yea Protestants new Christ an idol of Christ But out of that which hath beene related in this chapter it will appeare that the Catholiks Christ is the true Christ described vnto vs by the Scripture and that the Protestants Christ is a quite different and opposite Christ For the Christ which Scripture and Catholiks propose is as he is man to be worshipped to be called vpon head of the Church lawmaker iudge can forgiue sinnes worke miracles None of which things agree to the Protestants Christ According to Protestants Christ as man was ignorant most truely a sinner was afraied of his saluation but not according to Catholiks According to Scripture and Catholiks Christ merited some thing for himselfe truely merited our redemption and that by his bodilie death or blood nether was his blood corrupted but according to Protestants he merited nothing for himselfe merited not our redemption with a iust price but by acceptation of his Father nor by his corporall death but by some greater matter and his blood was corrupted nor is now any more in being According to the Scripture and Catholiks Christ died for the wicked for the damned for all descended into hell was free
and knowledge of tōgues and attētiue reading And p. 138. Vnderstanding is common to all that haue any iudgment but to knowledge there is need of the externall illustration of the holie Ghost by reason of the blindnesse of mans iudgment The same say all Protestants who teach as we haue seene in the former article that the Scripture is cleare THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that prophecie that is vnderstanding of Scripture is not made by priuat interpretation that to know the misteries of the kingdome of heauē is giuen to some as a peculiar guift not common to all that Christs disciples had need to haue their vnderstanding opened by him for to vnderstand the Scriptures The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the Scripture may be known by onely reading that to know what the Prophets or Apostles thought of euerie article of our religiō we need but a meane wit knowledge of tongues and attentiue reading That Scripture may be vnderstood without faith and without any peculiar light of the holie Ghost that to vnderstand the sense of the letter there is priuiledge of the Church that neuer so wicked men may know the trueth of the Scripture Which are so contrarie to Scripture as diuers Protestants confesse it See libro 2. cap. 30. ART III. WHETHER THE GHOSPEL be a law or containe any law SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Matth. 11. v. 30. My yoake is sweet and my burdē light c. 28. Christs Ghospell cōtaineth laws and precepts v. 19. Teach ye all nations baptizing them c. teaching them to obserue all things whatsoeuer I haue commanded you Ihon 15. v. 14. You are my freinds if you doe the things that I command you Galat. 6. v. 2. Beare ye one an others burdens and so ye shall fulfill the law of Christ The same is euident by other places which shal be cited in the two next articles and by the laws of baptisme and the Euchariste which are in the Ghospel Romans 2. v. 16. God shall iudge secrets of men according to my Ghospel Apocal. 14. v. 6. And I saw an other Angel flying through the middest of heauen hauing the eternall Ghospell to euangelize to them that sitte vpon the earth saying with a loud voice Feare our Lord c. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 4. de Iustif c. 2. The Ghospel containeth laws properly so called PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther de votis to 2. fol. 271. They know not the Ghospell The Ghospell is no law whiles they make a law of it Postilla in Dom. 3. aduentus fol. 36. None of thy workes must follow the Ghospell for it is not a law which requireth workes but onely faith because in it nothing is done but that Gods grace is offered and promised Confessio Wittenberg c. de Euangelio Vnlesse ye take the name of the law generally for doctrine certainly the Ghospell of Christ is not properly a law The same saieth Pareus in Galat 6. lect 71. Perkins in Gal. 6. to 2. The Ghospell must no wayes be called a new law So also Beza cont Sanct. Apol. 1. p. 305. Mart. in Rom. 7. p. 375. in 8. Melancthon in Disput to 4. p. 490. The ould testament is a law the new testament is no law The same say others as appeareth by what hath beene rehearsed cap. 3. art 7. and shal be more in the twoe next articles THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the Ghospell of Christ is a yoake and burden that therein he commandeth some things that Christ hath a law that he commanded the receauing of baptisme and the Euchariste that men shal be iudged according to the Ghospell that the eternall Ghospell commandeth men to feare God The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the Ghospell is no law no waies to be called a new law the new testament no law the Ghospell properly no law vnlesse by law you meane doctrin that it is no law that requireth workes ART IV. WHETHER THE GHOSPELL doth preach pennance and good workes SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Mathew 3. vers 2. Ihon Baptist thus began his preaching The Ghospell commandeth pennance of the Ghospell Doe pennance for the kingdome of heauen is at hand Matth. 4. v. 17. From that time Iesus began to preach and to say Doe pennance for the kingdome of heauen is at hand Luc. 5. v. 23. I came not to call the iust but sinners to pennance c. 24. v. 26. It behoued Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day and pennance to be preached in his name and remission of sinnes vnto all nations Actes 2. vers 38. S. Peter thus preached the Ghospell Doe pennance and be euerie one of you baptized And S. Paul c. 17. v. 30. God now denounceth vnto men that all euerie where doe pennance CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 4. de Iustif c. 2. The Ghospell threatneth wrath and indignation to them who do not receaue our Sauiour nor do pennance PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE The Diuines of Targa apud Hospin in Concordia discordi The Ghospell properly is no preaching of pennance fol. 66. If the Ghospell be simply and properly taken for preaching to wit of the grace of God in Iesus Christ then it is no preaching of pennance but oney a preaching of remission of sinnes The like teach others ib. fol. 104. And the Diuines of Onely cōmandeth to beleiue Berga ib. fol. 140. The Ghospell teacheth and commandeth onely to beleiue in Christ Luther Postilla in die Natiuit fol. 60. We read and heare nothing preached in the Ghospell but mere grace and mere bountie In die Ascensionis fol. 264. I often times saied that the Ghospell cannot abide that workes be preached how good or great soeuer they be And in Inst de Moise fol. 449. The The Ghospell telleth not what it to be done or omitted Ghospell preacheth not to vs that this or that is to be done or omitted or exacteth any things of vs. The Diuines of Saxonie apud Schusselb tom 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 803. condemne Maior because he would haue the Ghospell properly taken to be a preaching of pennance and remission of sinnes Kemnitius in locis tit de Iustif p. 222. If we say that the Proper doctrin of the Ghospell is not of newnesse of life proper doctrin of the Ghospell is not onely of faith in the free promisses for Christ but also of newnesse of life or good workes then streight it followeth that good workes also enter into iustication as a partiall cause And pag. 224. Who would haue the the Ghospell properly so termed to containe not onely the promise of grace but also the doctrin of good workesse such vnderstand not what they say For by this means the difference of the law and the Ghospell is confounded Liber Concordiae 1. c. 5. p. 594. We reiect as false and pernicious Doctrin that the Ghospell properly is a preaching of pennance The Ghospell requireth not workes and not onely
teacheth that Christ praied that S. Peters faith should not faile which vndoubtedly he obtained The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely teach that S. Peter lost his faith erred from faith did not retaine faith did apostotate that his faith failed that infidelitie preuailed against him Which is so open a contradiction of Scripture as diuers Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART V. WHETHER THE APOSTLES were foundations of the Church SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Apocalip 21. v. 14. And the wall of the cittie hauing twelue The Apostles foundations of the Church foundations and in them twelue names of the twelue Apostles of the lambe Ephes 2. v. 20. You are citizens of the Saintes and the domesticals of God built vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Iesus Christ himselfe being the highest corner stone CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Pontif. c. 11. All the Apostles were foundations of the Church PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 4. q. 1. c. 2. It is contrarie to the analogie Not foundations of the Church of faith that any man should be a foundation of the Church Moulin in his Bucler p. 380. The Apostles were not the foundations Peter Martyr in locis clas 4. cap. 3. § 4. If we read in the Fathers as we do in the Apocalips that there are twelue foundations here foundation is not put for the route of the building but for great stones which are next to the foundation Beza in Ephes 2. vers 20. The Apostles and Prophets were builders of this temple that is of the Church of God as also now faithfull Ministers are but not the foundation it selfe Herbrandus in Compend Theol. loco de Eccles The Apostles are not the foundation of the Church but by their doctrine of Christ they laied the foundation THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that there are twelue foundations of the Church and in them written the names of the twelue Apostles that we are built vpon the foundatiō of the Apostles Christ being the cheefe corner stone where there is manifest distinction made betwene the foundation on which we are built and Christ Catholiks say the same Protestants expressely say that the Apostles were not foundations that they were not foundations of the Church but builders not foundations but great stones next to the foundation that no man can be a foundation of the Church Which are so contrarie to the Scripture as some Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART VI. WHETHER THE APOSTLES were simply to be heard or beleiued without examination of their doctrine SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Luc. 10. v. 16. He that heareth you heareth me The Apostles were simply to be heard 1. Thessalon 1. v. 12. We giue thankes to God without intermission because that when you had receaued of vs the word of God you receaued it not as the word of men but as it is indeed the word of God The same also is proued by the testimonies cited in the next article CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton Defens cont Whitak l. 3. sect 5. It is absurd to iudge of the Apostles doctrine Antidot Act. 17. v. 11. Christ hath ioyned his trueth and the Apostles preaching so narrowly as he saied who heareth you heareth me Why then not also who examineth your doctrine examineth my trueth PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker Controu 2. quaest 5. cap. 11. If the Apostles be not simply to be heard but to be examined according to the rule Not simply to be heard of Scripture and to be receaued so farre forth as they agree with it and to be reiected as they differre much lesse c. And l. 2. cont Dureum sect 2. When Paul preached to the Berheans they examined the Scriptures for to know fully whether those things which Paul tought agreed with Scriptures And this their example is allowed with the highest testimonie of the holie Ghost and proposed to all Christians to be imitated Caluin in Actor 17. vers 11. The Thessalonians did not take vpon to examin whether Gods trueth were to be receaued or no onely they examined Pauls doctrine to the line of Scripture For the Scripture is the true touchstone by which all doctrins are to be examined And seing the Spirit of God praiseth the Thessalonians it prescribeth in their example a rule for vs. It was lawfull for the disciples to examine Paules doctrine And 4. Institut c. 8. § 4. The Apostles in their verie name do shew how farre their commission stretcheth Forsooth if they be Apostles let them not prate what they list but faithfullie deliuer his commandments who sent them Luther Praefat. Assert Artic. to 2. If S. Pauls Ghospell or the new testament must haue beene tried by the ould Scripture whether it were so or no what did we who would haue the Fathers sayings examined by the Scripture Daneus Contr. 4. p. 611. It is most false that he writeth that the doctrine and sentence of the Apostles was not examined of the disciples and auditours Yea Christ himselfe commandeth his owne doctrine to be so examined Io. 5. 39. THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that who heareth the Apostles heareth Christ that their word is not the word of men but the word of God and as such receaued of such as are faithfull The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the Apostles are not to be heard simply but first to be examined that all Christians ought to imitate the Betheās in examining S. Pauls doctrine that the Apostles must not prate what they list that the Ghospell must be tryed by the ould testament ART VII WHETHER THE APOSTLES were sufficient witnesses of the trueth SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Ihon 15. v. 27. The Spirit of trueth shall giue testimone of me The Apostles were sufficiēt witnesses and you also shall giue testimonie because you are with me from the beginning c. 21. v. 24. This is that disciple which giueth testimonie of these things and hath written these things and we know that his testimonie is true c. 1. v. 7. This man came for testimonie to giue testimonie of the light that all might beleiue through him Actes 1. v. 8. You shall receaue the vertue of the Holie Ghost comming vpon you and you shal be witnesses vnto me in Hierusalem and in all Iewrie and Samaria and euen vnto the vtmost of the earth c. 5. v. 32. And we are witnesses of these words and the Holie Ghost whome God hath giuen to all that obey him c. 10. v. 42. Him God raised vp the third day and gaue him to be made manifest not to all the people but to witnesse preordinated of God to vs who did eate and drinke with him after he rose againe from the dead 3. Ihon. v. 12. And we giue testimonie and thou knowest that our testimonie is true Exode 14. v. 31. And they beleiued our Lord and Moises his seruant CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton Defens Contr. Whitaker l. 1.
properly Bishops THE CONFERENCE The Scripture expressely saieth that Iudas had the office of a Bishop which an other Apostle tooke The same say Catholiks The Protestants say that Iudas was no Bishop THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF SAINT Peter and the Apostles Out of that which hath beene rehearsed in this chapter it clearly appeareth that the Protestāts in an other māner describe S. Peter and the Apostles thē the holie Scripture and Catholiks doe For the Scripture and Catholiks teach that S. Peter was first of the Apostles that he was the rock on which Christ built his Church that he had the keyes of the kingdome of heauen that his faith did not faile All which Protestants denie Besides the Scripture and Catholiks say that the Apostles were foundations of the Church were simply to heard without examining their doctrine were sufficient witnesses of trueth learnt diuers things of the holie Ghost All which are denied by Prorestants Moreouer the Scripture and Catholiks say that Iudas was truely a disciple and Apostle of Christ and also a Bishop which Protestants in like manner denie Wherefore Protestants steale from S. Peter his honour that he is the first of the Apostles his authoritie that he is the rock of the Church and his power of the keyes and stedfastnesse of faith And frō the rest of the Apostles they steale that they were foundations of the Church simply to be hearde sufficient witnesses of truth and that they learnt any thing of the holie Ghost CHAPTER VI. OF PASTORS OF THE CHVRCH ART I. WHETHER THERE BE ALwaies pastors of the Church SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. HIEREMIE 33. v. 21. Thus saieth the Lord If my Pastours alwaies couenant with the day can be made voide and my couenant with the night that there be no day and night in their time also my couenant may be made voide with Dauid my seruant that there be not of him a sonne to reigne in his throne and leuites and preists my ministers Ephes 4. v. 12. And he gaue Pastours and Doctours to the consummation of the saintes vnto the worke of the ministeric vnto the edifying of the bodie of Christ vntill we meete all into the vnitie of faith and knowledge of the Sonne of God CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in 1. Cor. 15. v. 15. Impious Caluin doth bouldly and often times say that Pastours Doctours Prelats Bishops Maisters of Churches all vniuersally for manie ages haue wholy straied from the Christian trueth and beene seducers PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Luther in psal 129. to 3. The Church vnder Antichrist had no true ministerie Caluin de vera reform p. 322. Not without cause we auouch Not alwaies that for some ages the Church was so torne and scattered that it was destitute of true Pastours And p. 322. I graunt indeed that it can neuer come to passe that the Church perish but when they referre that to Pastours which is promised of the perpetuall continuance of the Church therein they are much deceaued Beza de notis Eccles vol. 3. Forsooth it fell out that the lawfull order was then wholy abolished in the Church as it is manifest that it hath beene now for some ages not so much being left as the smalleste shadow of the cheifest partes of ecclesiasticall vocation Sadeel ad Art abiurat pag. 533. It is false that the externall ministerie must be perpetuall Daneus Controu 3. p. 426. The Church eftsones hath no man Postour And Controu 4. p. 757. The true Church hath ofte wanted Prelats Lukbertus l. 5 de Eccles cap. 5. We say that for some short time the Church may be depriued of Pastours CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS Scripture expressely saieth that there shal be Pastours as long as there shal be day and night that Pastours are giuen vntill we meete all in one faith The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the Church may be depriued of Pastours that Pastours may perish that the ministerie must not be perpetuall that the Church sometime had no true ministerie was for some ages destitute of true Pastors that lawfull order was for some ages quite abolished in the Church not so much as the slēderest shadow of the chiefest partes of ecclesiasticall vocation being left Which are so plaine against Scripture as sometimes Protestants confesse it See l. 2. c. 30. ART II. WHETHER AVTHORITIE of gouerning the Church be in the Pastours them selues SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Matth. 16. v. 18. seq Thou art Peter c. And to thee I will giue Pastours haue authoritie to gouerne the keyes of the kingdome of heauen Actes 20. v. 28. The Holie Ghost hath placed you Bishops to rule the Church of God 1. Cor. 4. v. 21. What will you In a rodde that I come to you or in charitie and the spirit of mildnesse 2. Cor. 13. v. 10. These things I write absente that being present I may not deale hardly according to the power which the Lord hath giuen me And c. 10. v. 6. Hauing in readinesse to reuenge all disobedience 2. Tim. 1. v. 11. I am appointed a preacher and Apostle and Maister of the Gentils Hebrews 13. vers 17. Obey your Prelats and be subiect to them CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Triplicat cont Whitaker c. 13. We see that Paul putteth the authoritie in the Prelats PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Whitaker l. 1. de Script c. 13. sect 12. The authoritie is not Authoritie is not in the Pastours in the Prelats but in the worde for whose administration the Prelats do serue Againe I acknowledge no ruling which the Church hath All the authoritie is in God and in his word the Church hath nothing but mere ministerie Spalatensis l. 5. de Repub c. 2. n. 40. Church gouernours are most like to Phisitiās The Phisitian appointeth holesome things and forbiddeth vnholesome prescribeth diete c. but hath no They haue no iurisdiction iurisdiction or cōmand ouer the sick As it is the Phisitians office to gouerne the sick that is without iurisdiction So it is the office of the ecclesiasticall rectors to gouerne the Church that is the faithfull Caluin 4. Instit c. 8. § 2. We must remember that what authoritie or dignitie the Holie Ghost in the Scripture doth giue to Preists or Prophets or Apostles or Successours of Apostles all that is giuen not properly to the men themselues but to the ministerie whereof they are officers or to speake brefly to the word whose ministerie is committed to them The same he hath in Ioan. 16. v. 8. in Math. 20. v. 25. and in Iacob 4. v. 12. Beza in Math. 20. v. 25. What then will you say Haue the No power at all ouer consciences Ministers of the word of God no power at all None truely they no not ouer cōsciences for instructiō whereof they are appointed But they are legats of Christ to say and doe in his name sacred not ciuill matters who alone hath all right of commanding and
authoritie of the Church THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that the Church is the pillar and ground of trueth The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that the Church doth not sustaine or conserue the trueth that faith relieth not vpon her authoritie that trueth doth not relie vpon her authoritie as a foundation no not in regard or respect of vs. THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF the Church What hath beene repeated in this Chapter doth make manifest that Protestants describe vnto vs a Church quite different from that which the holie Scripture and Catholikes propose For the Scripture and Catholiks teach that the Church is but one Protestants say there are twoe Churches They say she containeth both badde and reprobates that she endureth for euer is alwaies visible infallible in faith is simply in all things to be heard and is the pillar of faith touching vs All which points Protestants denie They also make manifest that Protestants steale from the Church a great parte of her to wit the badde and reprobate faithfull and manie of her chiefe properties namely vnitie perpetuitie continuall visibilitie infallibilitie and our dependencie vpon her in beleife And thus much of the Church Now of Temples or materiall Churches CHAPTER VIII OF TEMPLES OR MATERIALL CHVRCHES ART I. WHETHER THE CHVRCHES be also for priuat praier SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. KINGS 3. cap. 8. ver 41. Moreouer also the stranger Place of praier for a straÌ„ger which is not of thy people Israel when he shall come from a farre countrie for thy name and shall pray in this place thou shalt heare in heauen in the firmament of thy habitation and shalt do all things for which the stranger shall inuocate thee 2. Paralipomen 6. vers 21. Whosoeuer shall pray in this For whomsoeuer place heare out of thy habitation that is from the heauens and be propitious Mathew 21. vers 13. It is written my house shal be called a house of praier Luc. 2. v 37. Who departed not from the temple by fastings For S. Anne and praiers seruing night and day c. 24. v. 53. And they were alwaies in the Temple praising and blessing God CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Cardin. Bellarm. lib. 3. de Santis cap. 4. The Churches of Christians are rightly instituted for to pray also priuate praiers PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Tindal in Fox Actes 1610. pag. 1138. Churches are for preaching For preaching onely onely And Fox addeth This article containeth nether errour nor honestie Vorstius in Antibellarm p. 327. Nether is this a lawfull end Not for priuat praier of Churches that the faithfull pray priuaty in them Luther in Festo Dedicat. Templi fol. 447. The people which beleiue in Christ are all iust and subiect to no law especially Not dedicated to praier that pertaineth to ceremonies of temples And therefore now amongst them there is no temple dedicated to praier And hereupon Protestants in Confes Heluet. c. 23. bidde them beware that they wearie not the people with to long praier And in Confess Argentinen cap. 21. They detest our long paier as also doth Caluin in Matth. 6. ver 7. and finally in their Synod at Dordrach art 46. they define that publik euening praiers are not to be brought in where they are not in vse and to be taken away where they are So well these men loue praiers in Churches THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that Gods Church is the house of praier for all people a place of praier where the stranger may make his praier and be heard that Anna night and day praied in the temple that the Apostles were alwaies in the temple praising God The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that Churches are onely for preaching that is no lawfull end of Churches to pray priuatly in them that Christians haue no temple dedicated to praier and forbidde long and euening praier in Churches ART II. WHETHER CHVRCHES BE to be adorned SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Exod. 35. is described the wonderfull adorning of the tabernacle Churches are to be adorned made by Gods commandment and 3. Reg. 6. the most rich ornaments of the temple made by Salomon Psalme 25. v. 8. I haue loued the beautie of thy house Marc. 14. v. 15. Say to the maister of the house that the Maister saieth where is my refectorie where I may eate my Paske with my disciples And he will shew you a great chamber adorned and there prepare for vs. CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Ioan. 12. v. 3. Sumptuous dâ—cking and honorable adorning when they are done in the honour of God and for his worshippe ether in the adorning or magnifencie of Churches or in solemne administration of Sacraments doe please God PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Perkins in Problemate c. de ornatu temploruÌ„ The errour Not to be adorned of adorning temples began to be strange in Constantins time and the Fathers theÌ„ being caried away with the custome do exact the adorning of temples Caluin in Math. 26. v. 11 Let vs not deuise sumptuous worshippes of God with the Papists In Ioan. 12. v. 6. Surely God careth not for externall pompe wherefore they are preposterous interpreters who out of Christs answere do infer that costly and magnificall worshipps do please God Tigurini apud Hospin part 2. Hist fol. 24. The ornaments of Churches belonge not to the true worshippe of God Vorstius in Antibellarm p. 327. It is not onely superfluous but also vaine and superstitious and in parte ethnicall also and Iewish to make great and vnprofitable expenses in adorning Churches as euerie where vseth to be done in Poperie For that theatricall brauerie is contrarie to the simplicitie of Christian religion THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely teacheth that God himselfe comcommanded the tabernacle to be adorned that Salomon by his instinct adorned the temple that Dauid loued the beautie of Gods house that Christ made choice of a great and adorned chamber wherein he should celebrate the Eucharist The same say Catholiks ProtestaÌ„ts expressely say that the adorning of Churches is an errour superfluous vaine superstitious ethnicall and Iudaicall and contrarie to Christian religion that magnificall and costlie worships please not God ART III. WHETHER IT BE LAWEFVLL to put the Images of Angels or Saintes in Churches SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Exod. 25. v. 18. God thus commandeth Two Cherubins Images in the Temple also thou shalt make of beaten gould on both sides of the Oracle And vers 22. And I will speake to thee ouer the Propitiatorie and from the middest of the two Cherubins which shal be vpon the arke of testimonie all things which I will coÌ„mand the children of Israel by thee 3. Reg. 6. vers 23. And he Salomon made in the Oracle two Cherubs of oliue trees of ten cubits in height And v. 27. And he put the Cherubs in the middest of the inner temple CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Councel of Trent Session 25. c. de Inuocat The Images of Christ and other Saintes
As for infused Not anie iustice grace that is inherent iustice we say and teach that no gotten habit no ingrafted vertue no infused qualitie not any iustice by which we may be iustified before God is inherent in vs but that there is ingrafted and inherent all wickednesse all rebellion and stubburnesse of the flesh Pareus lib. 2. de Iustificat cap. 7. We are void of inherent We are void of inherent iustice iustice therefore we need imputed iustice lib. 3. cap. We haue already shewed that there is no inherent iustice in the iudgment of God THE CONFERENCE Scripture expressely saieth that there was iustice in Daniel before God that our B. Ladie and Saint Steuen were full of grace that grace was in Timothe that we must putte on the new man who is created according to God in iustice of trueth that is true iustice The same say Catholiks Protestants expressely say that there is no iustice in vs before God there can be no iustice not a crumme of iustice no vertue no good nothing but cause of damnatiō and which deserueth to be damned ART IX WHETHER IVSTICE INHErent in vs can be imputed to vs SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Psal 105. v. 30. Phinees stood and pacified and the slaughter Zeale imputed to iustice ceased and it was reputed to him vnto iustice Rom. 4. v. 3. Abraham beleiued God and it was reputed him Also faith to iustice v. 5. To him that worketh not yet beleiueth in him that iustifieth the impious his faith is reputed to iustice v. 9. We say that to Abraham faith was reputed to iustice And in like sorte v. 4. it is saied that reward is imputed to the worker and v. 8. that sinne is imputed to the sinner CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME D. Stapleton in Rom. 4. ver 2. Dauid the Prophet most expressely saieth that the zeale of the honor of God and of his law in Phinees was reputed him to iustice PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE Pareus l. 2. de Iustif c. 3. What inhereth is not imputed For No inherent thing imputed that is properly imputed which is not had That is not imputed which is had according to Pauls discourse l. 3. c. 1. What inhereth is not imputed Piscator in Thesibus l. 2. pag. 68. If any say Reward is imputed according to debt abuseth the word Imputed And pag. 72. It implieth contradiction that inherent iustice should be imputed Moulins in his Buckler art 19. sect 31. It is certaine that faith as it is a vertue inherent in vs cannot be imputed to vs Our actions are not imputed for they are not our actions or vertues but of others which are imputed to vs. THE CONFERENCE Scripture plainely saieth that the zeale of Phinees was imputed to him for iustice that Abrahams beleife was reputed to him that the faith of the beleiuer is reputed to him The same say Catholiks Protestants plainely say that what inhereth is not imputed that inherent vertue cannot be imputed that it implieth contradiction that inherent iustice should be imputed ART X. WHETHER THE IVSTIFIED be infallibly certaine and by diuine faith that they are iustified SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH. Eccles 9. ver 1. Man knoweth not whether he be worthie of None knoweth that he is worthie of loue Or whether he be simple loue or hatred but all things are reserued vncertaine for the time to come Eccles 5. v. 5. Of sinne forgiuen be not without feare Iob 9. v. 21. All though I shall be simple the selfe same shall my soule be ignorant of Hier. 17. v. 9. The hart of man is peruerse and vnsearchable None knoweth his owne hart who shall know it CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE Councel of Trent Sess 6. cap. 9. None can know with certaintie of faith which cannot be deceaued that he hath obtained grace PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME Commonly they teach that euerie faithfull man is iustified by a speciall or peculiar faith wherewith he beleiueth that his sinnes are forgiuen For thus they professe in Confess Augustana apud Melancthonem to 3. art 4. They We are iustified by beleiuing our selues to be such are iustified when they beleiue that they are receaued into grace and that their sinnes are remitted for Christ This faith God imputeth for iustice Et art 5. God iustifieth those who beleiue that they are receaued into grace for Christ And Apologia Confess Augustanae c. de Iustificat This Speciall faith of our owne iustification iustifieth vs. speciall faith wherewith euerie one beleiueth that his sinnes are remitted for Christ and that God is appeased and pacified for Christ obtaineth remission of sinnes and iustifieth vs. And c. de Paenitentia Remission of sinnes cometh by that speciall faith wherewith euerie one beleiueth that his sinnes are forgiuen him for Christ Whitakerus ad Ration 8. Campiani p. 41. Whosoeuer beleiueth that his sinnes are remitted this verie faith absolueth him The same teach commonly all Protestants and manie of them are named in my Latin booke And because it is well enough knowne I will alledge no more of their sayings to prooue that they thinke themselues to be iustified by a speciall faith wherewith they beleiue that they are iustified Whitaker Concione vlt. This one thing I say Whosoeuer We haue certaine faith of our iustification denie vs to be certaine of our saluation with certaintie of faith leaue vs no faith l. 8. cont Dur. sect 47. None are iustified but who know that they are iustified Iuel Defense of the Apologie pag. 149. Our people be As certaine as if Christ saied so to vs. so certaine of the remission of their sinnes in the blood of Christ as if Christ himselfe were present and spoake it to them Perkins de Baptismo tom 1. col 820. He beleiueth not the Ghospell vnlesse he likewise be perswaded that he is the sonne of God And same ibid. col 206. The true faithfull are certaine by faith that their sinnes are forgiuen them Rainolds thesi 2. p. 71. That they are elect faith perswadeth euerie pious man touching himselfe and charitie touching others Luther in 1. Petri 1. to 5. Thou must beleiue that thou art a We must beleiue that we are Saints Saint and that with so great certaintie and constance that thou fearest not to leese thy life for it In Psal 14. to 3. f. 245. It can be no waies faith vnlesse it be an vndoubted opinion wherewith a man is certaine aboue all certaintie that he pleaseth God and hath him propitious in good and indulgent in euill Caluin in Math. 21. v. 21. Christ doth not acknowledge that No beleiuer without speciall faith anie beleiue but such as without doubt do thinke that God is propitious to them The same he hath in Rom. 1. v. 6. 3. Instit c. 2. § 16. In Antidoto Concilij Sess c. 10. What lewdnesse I pray is it that none can know by certaintie of faith that he hath obtained grace And in Catechismo cap.
none euer anie haue contradicted the true sense of the Scripture the Protestants haue done it First because they haue as often and in as manie and as weightie matters contradicted the expresse words of Scripture as euer anie haue Secondly because they haue contradicted as expresse and cleare words and those as purposely spoaken to declare the Scriptures meaning as euer anie words were which anie haue cōtradicted Thirdly because they haue contradicted them in as plaine cleare and vsuall sense and which is confirmed by as manie circunstances and by light of reason and experience as euer anie words of Scripture were contradicted in Fourthly because they contradict these kind of words in this kind of sense with as euident want of the like words which may seeme plainly and directly of themselues without all inference or exposition of man to beare the contrarie sense as euer anie did Thou seest also what a maine difference there is betwene The differēce betwene the grounds of the Cath. and Protest faith the foundations of the Catholik and Protestant beleefe touching these articles For whereas the foundation of the Protestant beleife concerning the Eucharist is no expresse word of God which is purposely spoaken to declare this matter and which of it selfe without all helpe of man doth plainely and directly pronounce that it is such as they beleiue but ether mans word onely or mans discourse framed at least out of one humane principle the foundation of the Catholik faith is Gods expresse and cleare word spoaken of him purposely for to declare what the Eucharist is which of it selfe without anie helpe of vs clearely and directly auoucheth that the Eucharist is such as Catholiks beleiue it to be and against which words no other expresse words of God directly contrarie to these can be opposed but onely humane arguments and discourses These as S. Austin speaketh are the proofes of our course these the foundations these the strength Whatsoeuer Lib. de vnit c. 19. In Psal 21. they gayne say men say but this God saieth Yet let vs heare what it is which men say against God They except saieth Caluin that they haue the word by 4. Instit c. 17. §. 25. which the will of God is made manifest A most iust exception doubtles especially in matters of faith and such as cannot be knowne but by Gods word and against them who so much brag of Gods word For if we haue Gods word we haue also Gods meaning vnlesse they can demonstrate the contrarie Whereupon well saied Tertullian Ether denie that these are written or who art thou that Contr. Praxeam c. 23. thou thinkest that they are not to be vnderstood as they are written Forsooth saieth Caluin if we giue them leaue to banish out Loco cit §. 20 of the Church the guift of interpretation which may bring light to the word Againe We vsing daily studie do embrace that sense which the Holie Gost doth suggest And once more The reuerence of Christs words is not a pretext iust enough why they should so reiect all the reasons which we obiect Behould Reader once more the difference betwene the Catholik and Caluins faith The Catholik faith by the aduersaries confession What Caluin opposeth against the expresse word of God is grounded vpon the expresse and plaine words of God Caluins faith relieth vpon his guift of interpretation his studie the suggestions of his spirit his reasons which he dare oppose yea prefer before the expresse word of God But we demand that seing we haue for vs the expresse word of God wherewith Gods will touching the Eucharist is made manifest he produce the like word of God whereby it may be made manifest that the Caluinists haue the guift of interpretation rather then the Catholiks or the Lutherans or anie sorte of Christians or that that guift of interpreting which interpreteth Gods expresse words spoaken by him of supernaturall matters of purpose to declare what they are contrarie to their vsuall sense is the guift of God But if he cannot produce anie such word of God it were starke madnesse to forsake Gods expresse word and the plaine meaning thereof which besides Sacramentaries all Christians els do embrace and to follow a guift of interpretation ether vncertaine or feigned Besides Protestants do banish the guift of infallible interpretation out of the Church in saying that she may erre in matters of faith and interpretatation of Scripture why then do they in this matter pretend such a guift and oppose it against Gods expresse words Moreouer to expound words which by their owne confession are most cleare is no other thing then as S. Austin saieth to cast darknesse vpon cleare light Nether Serm. 14. de verbis Apost banish we the guift of interpretation out of the Church which neuer interpreted these words but in their natiue and vsuall sense but we denie that Heretiks haue the guift of interpreting the Scripture and affirme that their new expositiō directly contrarie to Gods words both expresse and of purpose spoaken to declare this matter and condemned by Gods Church is no interpretation but a deprauation and corruption Furthermore we reiect no interpretation which may bring light to the word but we denie that Caluins interpretation is such but rather quite extinguisheth the cleare light of the word For what greater darknesse can be cast vpon light then in expresse words spoaken of purpose to declare a matter and by which a new doctrine is deliuered a new Sacrament instituted a last will is made and which were spoaken of the Maister of trueth vnto his disciples when he was to forsake them to expound Is by Is not and Body giuen for you by A bare figure or Signe thereof And thus we haue heard what Caluin opposeth against Gods expresse word now let vs see how he would diminish the force and authoritie of the same I confesse saieth he that they haue the word A confession surely much to be esteemed especially proceeding In Act. 9. v. 21. from such an aduersarie as is accustomed to crie That Papists find no weapons for them in the Scripture But he should also haue confessed as the trueth is that Protestants haue not such a word to wit which plainely and directly denieth the Eucharist to be the bodie and blood of Christ For thereby it would haue appeared more clearelie whether Catholiks or Protestants find the better weapons in the Scripture But he addeth Yet such a word as the Anthropomorphites had when they made God to haue a bodie Yea such a word as thou or anie Christian hath when he maketh God to haue beene incarnated to haue suffered to haue risen againe and to haue ascended to heauen and as I dare say a clearer word also if the words themselues and the foresaied circunstances be considered So that Differences betwene the Cath. and the Anthropomorphites more iustly may anie Heretik who denieth the foresaied mysteries obiect to thee the example
words of Christ but thinke of some other thing and with inward eyes behould them as mysteries And Victorinus ib. In the question of the Supper of the Lord we must looke with the left eye vpon the words of Christ and with the right behould the natures of Christ and the writings of Antiquitie Yee see them professe that the foundation and strength of their opinion is a humane principle that their reasons are to be preferred before Christs words that we must not simply looke vpon Christ words but thinke vpon some other thing that we must looke vpon Christs words with the left eye and with the right vpon nature Which is the very doctrine of Suencfeldius in Schlusselburg art 23. cit Remoue saieth he from thy sight Take and Eate This is my bodie and then consider what is the nature of mans bodie of eating of Sacraments and of ould figures and so thou shalt find most certaine trueth In like sorte they confesse that they learnt not their faith out of Scripture Zuinglius Resp ad Serm. Lutheri to 2. fol. 372. Faith cannot be learnt or discussed out of words but the Protest haue not their faith out of Scripture teacher of it is God and after we haue it deliuered from him we may see the same in words And in Exegesi fol. 347. We do not thinke that faith can be gathered out of words but that faith being the mistresse the words which are set before vs may be vnderstood How I pray you should we gather faith out of words sith we ought not to come to expound Scriptures But being already armed with faith And OEcolampadius in Hospin part 2. Histor fol. 70. I come not to Scripture but being before hand armed with faith Their first shift is to scoffe and deride the manner of Protecst soffe at plaine proofes out of Scripture arguing out of the expresse words of Scripture P. Martyr in Schlusselburg l. 4. Theol. Caluin artic 20. calleth our argument taken out of the words of the institution of the Eucharist a Fiue word proofe And in Dial. col 130. thus speaketh I alwaies thought that yee were not so wise as yee Gods word not enough should be in labouring so much for an opinion both absurde and vnprofitable and hauing nothing to mantaine it but Christs word This is my bodie Caluin 1. Instit cap. 2. § 3. saieth that they are madde who endeauour to defend the images of God and Saints by the example of the Cherubins The same saieth Hospin l. de orig Templorum pag. 254. and Beza 2. part respons ad Colloq Montisbel pag. 31. termeth the same a stinking argument Whitaker ad Rat. 3. Campiani maketh this to be a Sophisme Saint Iames commandeth to Foolish to striue about Christs words anoint the sick therefore we must anoint them Zuinglius de Peccat orig tom 2. fol. 122. saieth How foolish should he seeme who for words of Scripture would auouch that we are washed from originall sinne by the water of baptisme OEcolāpadius cōplaineth that the words of the Institutiō of the Eucharist are obiected to him as a Helene and the samewords Caluin termeth Aiax his buckler and the onely refuge of Papists Finally they are sometimes driuen to blaspheme the They blaspheme the very words of Scripture words of Scripture and to say that they will nether beleiue them nor God himselfe P. Martyr cont Gardiner col 423. termeth the words of the Institution of the Eucharist a litle speach of fiue words and col 1095 a fiue word speach Zuinglius Respons ad Billican tom 2. f. 264. Poore letters Burensis in Schlusselburg Praefat. in tom 3. Catal. Haeret. Foure impotent words Sheldon l. of Antichrist pag. 82. in scoffe Fiue omnipotent words Hospin part 2. Histor fol. 63. Fiue magicall words Gratianus Anties tom 6. doctrinae Iesuit fol. 158. speaketh in this sorte To be present according to Gregorie is to draw Christs bodie out of heauen by fiueuerbicall or magicall power Volanus l. 2. cont Scargam pag. 1047. Feigning to your selues a new Christ of bread made by the fiue-word-breath of a Preist Moreouer Zuinglius as before is rehearsed called Christs words of the indissolubilitie of mariage drie words and l. de Relig. c. de Euchar. saieth that the words of conscration are too drie for some mens capacitie Poach in Schlusselburg tom 4. Catal. pag. 305. thus writeth It must needs be that the law sith it nether Gods law in lie is Christ nor in Christ is contained in error lie and death And the Scripture as Luther saieth in his disputations is not to be vnderstood against Christ but for Christ and therefore to be referred to him or not to be accounted true Scripture Luther being sore vrged by the words of Scripture touching works and the law teacheth his followers to answere thus tom 5. in 3. Galat. fol. 345. Simply we must answere in this sorte Here is Christ there the testimonies of the Scripture touching workes and the law But Christ is Lord of the Scripture Thou vrgest the seruant that is the Scripture this seruant I Luther leaueth the Scripture to Papists leaue to thee I vrge the Lord who is King of the Scripture And speaketh yet more plainely German edit Wittemb tom 1. in these words Albeit the Papists do bring a huge loade of Scriptures in which good works are commanded I care nothing He careth not for all the Scripture for all the sayings of the Scripture though more were brought Thou Papist art very insolent and proud with the Scripture which yet is vnder Christ and the Lord. Wherefore I am nothing He is not moued with it moued thereby Go too foresooth relie vpon the seruant as much as thou wilst but I relie vpon Christ the true Maister Lord and Emperour of the Scripture Him I will beleiue and I know he cannot lie to me nor lead me into error I had rather honour and beleiue him then to suffer my selfe to be drawne one finger breth from my opinion for all the sayings of the Scripture Loe how Luther careth not for all the sayings of the Scriptures is nothing moued with will not alter his opinion for them all and leaueth them to the Papists And in like sorte tom 1. disput de Fide fol. 387. saieth But if our aduersaries vrge the Scripture against Christ we vrge Christ against the Scripture We haue the Lord they haue the seruant Papist haue the Scripture And in Colloq cap. de verbo Dei fol. 22. speaking of his followers saieth The Scripture is contemned corrupted and mocked of vs. Yea Zuinglius in Elencho tom 2. fol. 10. affirmeth that when Paul wrote the Commentaries of the Euangelists and the Epistles of the Apostles were not of authoritie and that Paul did not attribute so much to his Epistles as that Paul did not thinke his Epistles diuine whatsoeuer was contained in them was holie The like is insinuated by
the citizens of the outward Church that is all that professe faith to be faithfull But charitie beleiueth all things and therefore is deceaued which is farre from the certaintie of faith Which is as much as to say S. Paul or the Scripture was deceaued in these sayings If we proue that God would haue some to be conuerted who will not because he saieth Math. 23. vers 37. Hierusalem Hierusalem how often would I gather together thy children as the hen doth gather together her chickins vnder her wings and thou wouldst not Beza de Praedestinat cont Castel vol. 1. pag. 398. answereth If we will attribute this speach to Christ as he was God doste thou not know that God for to allure his children to him through his infinite goodnesse by taking vpon him humane affections doth sometime stammer with vs God stammereth Fiftly therefore I proue that Protestants contradict the true sense of Scripture in this sorte Who not onely gainesay the expresse words of holie writ so as we haue seene but also are forced in manie and great misteries of faith to say that the Apostles Christ and God himselfe did not certainely foresee what they saied and that the holie Ghost did not speake of certaine knowledge but by coniectures as men do they gaynesay the true meaning of the holy Scripture But Protestants do so Therefore c. CHAPTER VI. THAT PROTESTANTS AFFIRME manie weightie sayings of the Scripture not to haue beene spoaken according to the mynd of the Authors MY sixt argument shal be because Protestants are driuen to say that Scripture speaketh not according to it owne mynd and according to trueth but according to the errour and opinion of others and that in manie and great matters as of faith of good workes of sacraments of the very meane of attayning saluation and the like For if we proue that wicked men may haue faith because S. Iames speaketh not according to his owne mynd S. Iames cap. 2. vers 18. speaketh thus to such a one Thou hast faith and I haue workes v. 19. Thou beleiuest that there is one God thou doest well Caluin on that chapter v. 14. saieth Let vs remember that he speaketh not according to his owne mynd as oft as here he nameth faith If we proue that the keeping of the commandements Nor Christ is necessarie to saluation because Christ saieth Math. 19. v. 17. If thou wilt enter to life keepe the commandements Pareus l. 3. de Iustificat c. 12. p. 812. answereth The Lord sendeth him to the workes of the law not that he thinketh this way of saluation possible but for to confund his hypocrisie Brentius in Pareus l. 4. de Iustificat c. 2. and in Gerlachius tom 2. disput 13. saieth Christ so answered as he rather shewed him the way to He shewed the way to perdition eternall damnation Which answere saieth Pareus c. 2. cit is no lesse true then that saying of the Apostle yee are euacuated from Christ who are iustified by the law If we proue that iustice is necessarie to saluation because Christ saieth Mat. 5. ver 21. Vnlesse your iustice abound more then that of the Scribes and Pharises you shall not enter into the kingdome of heauen Pareus l. 4. de Iustif c. 4. p. 964 answereth Not that this inward iustice was possible to the He shewed an impossible way disciples or to anie other man but that the exactnesse of the law and there impossibilitie being acknowledged they might forsake the endlesse way of the law and seeke life in the Ghospell If we proue that God rewardeth good workes because the Scripture often speaketh so Zuinglius l. de relig c. de Merito answereth There are some so doltish that whatsoeuer thou criest they thinke God giueth all things to merits and where these are not that there his grace is in vaine hoped for whose weaknesse or rather perfidiousnesse God abuseth and inuiteth to good workes by hope of reward that so nothing may be wanting to his seruants And Ochinus in Schlusselburg lib. 1. Theol. Caluin art 23. dareth call in question whether Christ spoake those words which he would haue spoaken We answere saieth he that it may be that when He spoake not that he would Christ saied This is my bodie he would haue saied The bread signifieth my bodie The like they meane when they say that the holie Scripture speakeâ—h by graunt or concession Scripture speaketh by concessioÌ„ or grauÌ„t For thus Caluin in lac 2. v. 12. That he termeth it faith is by way of concession orgraunt And 3. Instit c. 17. § 11. That the Apostle calleth faith a vaine opinion which is farre from the nature of faith is by way of graunt Beza in Iac. 2. ver 14. Iames calleth it faith by way of graunt that he may not seeme to striue about words In like manner Illyricus and others Kemnitius in locis part 2. tit de Argumentis writeth that in those sayings If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandments Who shall doe these shall liue in them Doe this and thou shalt liue The doers of the law shal be iustified Christ and Paul answere by way of concession or graunt If we proue that we can clense our selues from sinne because 2. Cor. 7. v. 1. it is saied Let vs clense our selues from all inquination of the flesh and spirit perfecting sanctification in the feare of God Caluin 2. Instit c. 5. § 11. answereth By concession or graunt it is attributed to vs which belongeth to God And if we proue that there are some litle precepts because Christ saieth Math. 5. v. 19. One iot or tittle shall not passe of the law till all be fulfilled Caluin vpon that place saieth Where Christ termeth litle precepts it is a kind of concession or graunt If we proue that God will render eternall life according to the patience of good workes because Rom. 2. v. 7. is saied God will render to euerie man according to his workes to them truely that according to patience in good worke seeke glorie honor and incorruption life eternall Beza vpon that place answereth In this description of iust iudgment this is saied of the Apostle by way of graunt or concession as also when streight after he saieth ver 13. Not hearers but doers of the law are iustified If we proue that some do keepe the law because it is written Rom. 2. v. 26. If then the prepuce keepe the iustices of the law shall not his prepuce be reputed for circuncision Beza vpon that place answereth These things are saied of the Apostle by way of graunt or concession as also I noted before verse 9. If we proue that the sacraments of the new law be Scripture speaketh by contention better then the sacraments of the ould because S. Paul in the Epistle to the Hebrews preferreth them before these Caluin 4. Instit c. 14. § 25. saieth This we must especially note that in all these places
Paul speaketh not simply but by way of contention or arguing Let vs therefore remember that here he disputeth not of ceremonies taken in their true and naturall signification hut wrested to false and wicked interpretation not of the lawfull vse of them but of their superstitious abuse Diuers times also they are forced to say that the Scripture speaketh after a humane manner and according to the mynd capacitie or errour of others not according to the nature of the thing For if we proue that reward is giuen to almes because Christ saieth Luc. 16. v. 9. Make vnto you freinds of the mammon of iniquitie that when you faile they may receaue you into the eternall tabernacles Caluin excepteth that Christ speaketh After a humane māner after a humane manner If we proue that some are truely iust because Math. 1. v. 19. it is saied Ioseph her husband for that he was a iust man Illyricus vpon that place answereth Here he is called iust after the common manner that is honest and desirous to be honest If we proue that God giueth sufficient means of saluation to some who yet are not saued because he saieth Isaiae 5. v. 4. What is there that I ought to do more to my vinyard and haue not done Pareus l. 1. de Grat lib. arb cap. 11. answereth He speaketh not as God but after a humane manner like a vineroll The like saieth Caluin lib. de Prouident pag. 744. If we proue that Christ hath bought euen those who denie him because it is plainely saied so 2. Pet. 2. v. 1. Grossius Professour at Basel in Apol. pro Disput inaugurali saieth The Lord is saied to haue bought such both according to the custome of Scripture which according to the iudgment of charitie saieth that all are redeemed saints and cleansed from sinne whosoeuer are baptized and professe Christ albeit they be not all such before God as also according to their owne opinion Scripture speaketh according to mens false opinion After a humane māner and boastes For whome the Lord hath indeed bought they neuer denie him Zuinglius in Exposit fidei tom 2. fol. 558. writeth this Worke◠do not merit but when the Scripture promiseth reward to workes it speaketh after a humane manner Because men giue to thē that haue well deserued and the guifts are called rewards God also calleth his guifts reward or recompense The like hath Bullinger in Rom. 2. And Reineccius tom 4. Armaturae c. 7. saieth that those words of the Angel Tob. 12. I offered thy praied to our Lord are spoaken after a humane manner For saieth he there is no need that Angels should offer our praiers to the Lord for God is not farre of Caluin 3. Instit c. 18. § 9. answering to that place Math. 19. v. 17. If thou wilt enter to life keepe the commandements saieth As if it were not manifest that Christ did accomodate his speach to them with whome he had to doe Polanus in Disput priuat 38. saieth This place in which Christ commandeth to keepe the precepts of the law is to be vnderstood in According to mens supposition parte to wit according to the supposition of the yong man Masculus in Ioan. 6. saieth In that Christ calleth faith a worke of God it is an application wherewith he accomodateth According to mens words himselfe to the words of this people And Luther in Galat. 2. tom 5. fol. 317. Paul through too great zeale and indignation By too much zeale and indignation of spirit calleth Grace a law whereas in trueth it is nothing els but the greatest and infinit libertie in Christ. Beza in Cyclope vol. 1. pag. 306. The Apostle Hebr. 7. v. 18. calleth the former precept vnprofitable But he speaketh vpō In supposition of aduersaries the supposition of his aduersaries So delt Christ with the Capharnaites Christ according to their supposition saieth his flesh profiteth nothing And in Ioan. 6. v. 31. But here agayne Christ speaketh vpon their supposition with whome he discourseth Et in Dial. cont Heshus vol. 1. p. 285. 306. and cont Westphal p. 241. saieth The Apostle in all that treatise of the ould sacraments according to his aduersaries supposition considereth the ceremonies a parte from Christ and by themselues The like hath Tilenus in Syntagmate cap. 57. But Gratianus Antiiesuita tom 6. doctrinae Iesuit part 2. pag. 3. speaketh yet worse saying According to this impious supposition the According to an impious supposition Scripture speaketh contemptibly of the Sacraments and calleth Circumcision some where Prepuce other where Concision other where vnprofitable and Manna also viuificall bread If therefore we proue the keeping of the law to be necessarie to life because Christ saieth Luc. 10. ver 28. Doe this and thou shalt liue Caluin ib. in ver 26. answereth Christ speaketh here about obtaining life as he was asked For he According to the demand telleth not plainely as he doth otherewhere how men may come to life Christ in this answere doth accommodate himselfe to the lawyer and respecteth the demaund See also Whitak l. 8. cont Dur. sect 38. If we proue that the Eucharist is a nobler food then manna because Christ saieth Ioan. 6. v. 27. Worke not the meate that perisheth but that endureth vnto life euerlasting Caluin 4. Instit c. 14. § 25. answereth Christ accommodateth According to the grosse opinion his speach to the grosse opinion of the Capharnaites The same he hath in Ioan. 6. versus 50. If we proue that the Eucharist is of more vertue then Manna was because Christ saieth Ioan. 6. v. 58. Your fathers did eate manna and died he that eateth this bread shall liue for euer Caluin 2. INstit c. 10. § 6. answereth The Lord spoake According to carnall mens capacitie to heares who onely sought to be filled with meate of the bellie and cared not for the true food of the soule doth somewhat accommodate his speach to their capacitie but especially he maketh the comparison of manna and of his bodie according to their meaning And in 1. Cor. 10. v. 3. Christ accommodateh his speach to the meaning of the hearers We see that the Lord speaketh Not according to the nature of the thing not there according to the nature of the thing but according to the meaning of the hearers If we proue that Christ added somewhat to the rigor of the law because he saieth Math. 5. v. 22. You haue heard that it was saied to them of ould Thou shalt not kill c. But I say vnto you who soeuer is angrie with his brother shal be in danger of iudgment Caluin ib. answereth Christ indeed To the capacitie of the valgar sorte To their grosse error To the capacitie of the common people bringeth the words of the law but he accommodateth himselfe to the common capacite of the vulgar sorte And in Rom. 2. v. 26. The Apostle doth accommodate his speach according to their
causes betwene euen to infidelitie it selfe by an absolute decree of reprobation which goeth before all causes Episcopius apud Hom. in Specim Contr. Belg. p. 36. Great iniustice and hypocrisie should be attributed to God if by a secret will he did define and ordaine that those things should be done which by his reuealed will he forbiddeth and will not haue done Arminius ib. saieth Bellarmin obiecteth against the opinion of our Doctors that thereof will follow that God is the Author of sinne that God truely sinneth that God alone sinneth and that sinne is no sinne By this complainte I see no wrong done to your doctrine Perkins They teach that God doth command sinne as we haue proued l. 1. c. 2. art 6. Which to be blasphemie confesseth That he commandeth sinne Beza in Resp ad Acta Montisbel pag. 182. in these words That God commandeth that which he will not punisheth that which he commandeth is the author of euill surely all these things are full of horrible impietie and blasphemie And Zanchius in Depuls calum to 7. col 255. I haue alwaies taught that it is blasphemie to say that God commandeth men to sinne They teach that God doth push and tempt men to That he tēpteth to sinne sinne as is to be seene l. 1. c. 2. art 7. And yet Caluin Resp ad Nebulon. p 732. saieth Was it a doubtfull blasphemie that God pusheth men to sinne And in 1. Ioan. 3. v 8. It is proper to the Deuil to push men to sinne De Praedest pag. 711. If euer I had saied that it had beene done by the instinct of the holie Ghost that the first man should forsake God perhaps Pighius might iustly iusult ouer me Beza de Praedest vol. 1. Theol. p. 404. The name of Tentation doth not agree to God sith it signifieth nothing but inticement to euill which God can no waies doe In Math. 3. v. 3. Tentations which entice vs to euill come not but from Satan And in Respons ad Acta Montisb part 2. pag. 186. Nether he being infinitly good could push a created good to euill Melancthon in Schlusselb l. 1. Theol. Caluin artic 8. They doe inferre that God doth push the mynds and hearts of men to doe wickedly this is a damned error Et lib. de Causa peccati to 2. That same Cyclopicall cauillation of some is to be reiected that therefore God sinneth not in pushing men to euill because there is no law for God This Cyclopicall imagination is detestable Whitaker ad Rat. 8. Camp God did not adde new spurres to Dauid and Iudas for to sinne God forbidde that anie Christian should so much as thinke so Hutter in Anal pag. 683. It cannot be saied or thought without great wickednesse or impietie and blasphemie that God is the efficient impelling inclining cause of sinne They say that God imposeth necessitie or forceth men That he forceth to sinne to sinne as is shewed lib. 1. c. 2. art 8. which to be blasphemie confesseth Whitaker libr. 8. cont Dur. sect 7. We haue alwaies reiected as blasphemous that God doth force and push men to sinne and putteth euill wills into them Kemnice in locis part 1. pag. 169. condemneth this proposition God forceth to sinne And Moulins in Arnolds flights saieth That God doth push and necessitate to sinne is a horrible and Diuelish doctrine They teach that God doth iustifie a wicked man remaining That he iustifieth the wicked wicked as appeareth l. 1. cap. 2. artic Which to be blasphemous is acknowledged by Tilenus in Syntagm c. 41. in these words We denie not that he is made and is iust whome God pronounceth iust which surely the iust iudgement of the most iust iudge doth require whose iudgement is according to trueth They say that God doth not care for good works as That he careth not for good workes we haue shewed l. 1. cap. 2. art 13. of which doctrine thus speaketh Melancthon Resp ad art 24. Bauar What a horrible and barbarous speach is this And Kemnice in loc part 2. tit de bonis oper termeth it a fanaticall paradox They say that God hath no will to saue all nor calleth That he hath no will to saue all all to him as is to be seene l. 1. cap. 2. art 19. And neuer the lesse liber Cōcordiae c. 11. pronoūceth that these doctrines are false horrible and blasphemous That God hath no will that all men should doe pennance and beleiue the Ghospell That when God calleth vs to him he hath no will in earnest that all men should come to him That God will not that all should be saued but that some not for their sinnes but onely for the decree purpose and will of God are destinated to damnation so as by no means they can obtaine saluation The same opinions Herbrand in Compend Theol. loc de Elect. condemneth as blasphemous And Gerlachius to 2. disput 16. saieth Impious blasphemous and pernitious to mens saluation are the doctrines that follow That God willeth not that euerie men be saued That it is false that God hath made all mankinde for no other end then for saluation That God doth not call men to saluation Grauer in absurdis Caluin c. 5. sect 31. This opinion of Caluinists that God hath no will that all men be saued is extremely impious and blasphemous In like manner Iames Andrew in Colloq Montisb p. 421. 422. They teach that God of himselfe willeth the death That he willeth death damnation and damnation of men as appeareth l. 1. cap. 2. art 22. And yet Adamus Francisci in Margarita Theol. loco 17. condemneth as blasphemous these opinions That God hath destinated the greatest number of men to eternall damnation for the mere pleasure of his will That he neuer loued those whome he hath destinated to damnation That our first fathers fell by Gods decree will and ordinance That Christ died for the Elect onely That the merit of his passion pertaineth to the Elect onely That the promises of the Ghospell are not vniuersall That God doth not in earnest call thereprobates by the Ghospell That the reprobate cannot be cōuerted That the elect falling into sinne retaine grace Gerlachius also Disp 16. cit saieth that these are blasphemous positions The reprobate are reprobated without any desert of theirs That God sometime doth by his word signifie that he willeth that which he willeth not and that he will not that which indeed he will That the Ghospell is promulgated to some that they may be indurated Homius disp 60. writeth thus If any should teach that God hath decreed by his absolute will without any respect of sinne to dāne men and to punish thē with euerlasting torments he doubtlesse should blasphemously attribute manifest iniustice to God And Remonstrantes in Collat. Hagae after they had recited this opinion of the Cōtrare monstrantes That God doth reprobate some for his pleasure and not for their sinne so that he
conferred by them and ioyned with some humane principle and brought into sillogisticall forme Whereas a Iudge must be such as by himselfe without anie helpe of ether of the parties he can giue sentence Besides the sentence of the Iudge and especiallie if there can be no appeale from him must be so cleare as no man can doubt for whether partie it is But such is not the sentence of Scripture in manie controuersies Agayne there is controuersie betwene vs about diuers bookes of which the rest of the Scripture saieth nothing Finallie before Moises the Church had no Scripture and for sometime after Christ it had no parte of the new testament and yet she neuer wanted a Iudge And as we saw in the Chapter before Protestants confesse that Scripture of it selfe is not sufficient to determine all controuersies of faith and therefore not to iudge all Wherefore we must needs haue some other Iudge For these and the like causes some Protestants seing how absurd it is that Scripture is the onely Iudge in the Church say that Christ or the holie Ghost speaking in the Scripture is the Iudge Whitaker c. 7. cit We say that this Iudge is the holie Ghost speaking in the Scripture In like sorte Confes Heluet. c. 12. Academia Nemaus loc cit Lutherans in Colloq Ratisb sess 9. and others But seing Christ or the holie Ghost is no otherwise in the Scripture then as in a signe of his will to say that the holie Ghost as he is in Scripture is Iudge is no other thing indeed then to say that the Scripture is iudge And as the King as he is in his written laws is not a sufficient iudge of the common wealth because els eueÌ„ after his death he should be iudge but besides there must be a liuing iudge who both heareth and speaketh who can heare the parties and giue senteÌ„ce So nether is the holie Ghost a sufficient iudge is in the holie Scripture Others therefore acknowledge that there must be in the Church a speaking iudge or man For thus Eliensis loc cit Wherefore we all of long time demand a free and lawfull synod Protest admit a liuing Iudge in words And Lutherans in Colloq cit sess 9. We professe that God hath giuen some power to the Ministers and Doctors of the Church to iudge of controuersies of religion Neuerthelesse in trueth they denie the verie nature of the Iudge For ether they will not admit such a Iudge as we are bound to obeyâ— as appeareth by that they denie the vniuersall Church all Pastors or generall Councels to be infallible yea Moulins in the preface of his Bucler saieth that there But not in effect can be no greater temeritie then to desire that men sinners may be infallible iudges of the seÌ„se of the law And the LutheraÌ„s loc cit It is simply and absolutely certaine that the Ministerie may erre But this in trueth is to denie the Iudge whose end is The iudge in the Church admitteth not appeale to make peace and to compose debates which he cannot doe vnlesse men be bound to obey him and all the foresaied authorities reasons which proue that there ought to be a iudge in the Church proue also that he ought to be such from whome we may not appeale Wherevpon Whitaker CoÌ„t 1. q. 5. c. 4. thus writeth I answere that those words Deuteron 17. cit are to be vnderstood of authoritie to define hard contentions and controuersies as Ecclesiasticall by the Minister and politicall by the Magistrate that there might be in both some from whome there should be no appeale els there would be no end of contending But this he meaneth onely in the Nether in outward nor inward Courte externall or outward courte not in the inward courte of conscience For thus he addeth A great weight of iudgement was in the Priest and what he had once determined was good in the externall courte that so controuersies and debates might be ended And Cont. 4. q 1. cap. 2. Controuersies may be brought to the externall Courte and there defined but conscience resteth not in that Courte But this shift is easilie refuted First because the distruction of the externall Courâ—e is without cause deuised in this matter Secondlie because the peace of the Church especially consisteth in the internall courte to wit in faith Wherefore in this Courte we may not appeale from the Iudge of the Church otherwise there would neuer be peace of conscience Thirdly the practise of the Church in the Councell of the Apostles and in other generall Councels sheweth that the Iudge of the Church hath power to end controuersies euen in the inward courte of conscience Finallie if one were bound to obey the iudgement of the Church in the outward Courte and not in the inward it would follow that sometimes he were bound to denie Gods trueth before men to wit if the Church should define against Gods trueth Besides the authoritie of the Church is spirituall and ouer the soule and therefore her power of iudging extendeth it selfe euen to the inwarde Courte of the â—oule Wherefore let this be our 29. argument Whose doctrine in manie and weightie matters doth so contradict the expresse words of Scripture as they dare not admit anie Iudge in the Church they are to be thought to contradict the true sense of the Scripture But such are Protestants Therefore c. CHAPTER XXX THAT PROTESTANTS DOE SOMEtimes confesse that their doctrine doth contradict the holie Scripture THE last proof which we will make to shew that Protestants doe contradict the true sense of Scripture shal be taken from their owne confession wherewith sometimes they confesse it implicitlie sometimes plainelie and expressely Implicitly they confesse it diuers wayes First because they acknowledge that they Protest cannot reconcile their doctrine with the Scripture know not how to reconcile their doctrine with the holie Scripture Luther de seru arbit to 2. fol. 466. How this is iust that he God condemneth those that deserue it not is now incomprehensible yet it is beleiued till the Sonne of man be reuealed Et f. 486. In the light of grace it is vnanswerable how God condemneth him who with all his power can doe nothing but sinne and be guiltie Here both the light of nature and the light of Grace teach that it is not the fault of wretched man but of vniust God Et to 1. f. 390. It is a wonderfull probleme that God rewardeth iustice which himselfe reputeth iniustice Melancthon in Rom. 9. edit 1. This misterie is inexplicable that God both willeth sinnes and yet truelie hateth them Peter Martyr in locis Class 1. c. 16. § 9. It is no meruaile that we cannot vnderstand how it is not contrarie to Gods iustice to punish sinnes and by tempting to enforce them because God can doe more then we can vnderstand Caluin 1. Institut capit 18. § 3. By reason of the weaknesses of our vnderstanding we doe not