A conference of the Catholike and Protestante doctrine with the expresse words of Holie Scripture. Which is the second parte of the prudentiall balance of religion. : VVherein is clearely shewed, that in more than 260 points of controuersie, Catholicks agree with the Holie Scripture, both in words and sense: and Protestants disagree in both, and depraue both the sayings, words, and sense of Scripture. / Written first in Latin, but now augmented and translated into English.

A CONFERENCE OF THE CATHOLIKE AND PROTESTANTE DOCTRINE WITH THE EXPRESSE WORDS OF HOLIE SCRIPTVRE.

WHICH IS THE SECOND PARTE OF THE Prudentiall Balance of Religion.

VVHEREIN IS CLEARELY SHEWED, THAT IN MORE then 260. points of controuerſie, Catholiks agree with the holie Scripture, both in words and ſenſe: and Proteſtants diſagree in both, and depraue both the ſayings, words, and ſenſe of Scripture.

WRITTEN FIRST IN LATIN, BVT NOW AVGmented and tranſlated into English.

ACTS IV. VERSE. XVII.

IF IT BE IVST IN THE SIGHT OF GOD, TO heare you rather then God, iudge yee.

S. Athanaſius Apol. de Fuga.

WHAT MVST WE STICK TO, TO GODS words, or theſe mens Fables?

AT DOWAY, By the widdowe of MARKE WYON, at the ſigne of the Phenix.

M.DC.XXXI.

The argument of the firſt booke.

VVHo in more then 260. points of controuerſie, ſpeake with the holie Scripture, in the very ſelfe ſame or equiualēt words, when it ſpeaketh of thoſe matters expreſſely and of purpoſe, and in that ſenſe alſo, which the words of Scripture of themſelues, without anie expoſition of man do afforde, and in which ſenſe ſuch words vſe to be ſpoken and vnderſtood of men, they, touching thoſe points, agree both in words and meaning with the holie Scripture: And who ſpeake of thoſe points both in ſuch words and ſenſe, as are contrarie to the foreſaied words and ſenſe, they in thoſe points diſagree both in words and ſenſe from the holie Scripture. But Catholiks doe that, and Proteſtants, this. Therefore &c. The Maior ſemeth to be manifeſt by it ſelfe, and is largely proued in the ſecond booke Cap. 1. The Minor is shewed to the eye in all the firſt booke.

The argument of the ſecond Booke.

VVHo not onely in more then 260. points of controuerſie diſagree from the foreſaied words and ſenſe of Scripture, but alſo are forced openly to reiect ſome of the words thereof, to blot out ſome, to call others in queſtion, to change the order of others: to change almoſt all kinds of the Scriptures ſpeaches, to expound her words by quite different and plaine contraries, to reiect the vnanimous expoſition of holie Fathers, to confeſſe that ſome of their opinions were long ſince condemned for hereſies, that ſome are blaſphemous and playne contrarie to Scripture, ſuch contradict not onely the words, but alſo the true ſenſe of Scripture. But Proteſtants doe thus. Therefore &c. The Maior is manifeſt by it ſelfe: and the Minor shewed to the eye in the ſecond Booke.

APPROBATIO.

HOc opus, cui titulus: Collatio doctrinae Catholicorum ac Proteſtantium cum expreſsis ſacrae ſcripturae verbis, duobus libris comprehenſa, Latino ſerm one olim editum, & à duobus S. Theol. Doctoribus Pariſienſibus approbatum: nunc verò auctum & in Anglicum ſermonem fideliter conuerſum, nihil habet fidei Catholicae aduerſum, aut bonis moribus, ſed plurimum valet ad confutationem doctrinae haereticorum praeſentis temporis, & proinde rectè praeli beneficio in lucem edetur. Datum Duaci die 2. Ianuarij 1631.

GEORGIVS COLVENERIVS S. Theol. Doctor & eiuſdem Regius, ordinarius ac primarius Profeſſor, inſignis Eccl • ſiae Collegiatae S. Petri Praepoſitus & Canonicus, Duacen ſis Academiae Cancellarius, & librorum Cenſor.

THE PREFACE TO THE READER, WHEREIN THE SCOPE, MANNER OF PROCEDING, AND PROFIT OF THIS BOOKE IS DECLARED, REQVISITE TO BE READ BEFORE THE BOOKE.

THERE are now diuers years (Gentle Reader) ſince I published the firſt parte of the Prudential Balance of Religion, in which, by the weights of Prudence and Right Reaſon I weighed together the Catholik and Proteſtant religion according to their firſt Founders in our English nation, to wit, S. Auſtin and Martin Luther: which booke hath neuer ſince bene anſwered by anie Proteſtant albeit diuers miniſters, and ſuperintendents haue carped at it both in Pulpits and printed books, shewing thereby that they wanted no will to anſwere it, if they could haue performed it. In the preface thereof I promiſed a ſecond parte, in which I would after the ſame manner weigh the forſaied religions according to their claimes to the holie Scripture, and the expreſſe words thereof, which here now I offer vnto thee. The cauſes why I haue ſo long differred the publishing of this ſecond parte, are well enough knowne to them who know me, and not needfull to be known of them who know me not. And therfore I will not trouble thee with the rehearshall of them, but here propoſe vnto thee the ſcope, manner of Proceding, and Profits of this ſecond parte.

2. As a man conſiſteth eſſentially of a Soule and Bodie, and can neither be, nor be imagined without them both: So the true Church of Chriſt eſſentially conſiſteth Two things wholy neceſſarieto Chriſts Church. of his true Doctrine, which is the forme, and (as it were) the ſoule of his Church, and of lawfull Paſtors and People, who teach and embrace his Doctrine, which Paſtors and People make (as it were) the bodie of Chriſtes Church. And without both theſe partes, to wit, Chriſts true Doctrine, and true Paſtors teaching, and People embracing it, Chriſts true Church can no more be, or imagined to be, then a true man can either be, or imagined to be, without both the true bodie and true ſoule of a man. And albeit the manifeſt need of both theſe partes to the true Church of Chriſt, doth enforce Proteſtants to make ſome clame to them both, and to pretend that they haue alvaies had both true Paſtors who taught, and People who beleiued their Doctrine; yet their pretenſe to this parte of the Church is ſo weake and ſlender, as but ſeldome and vpon mere neceſſitie they inſiſt thereon. But their greateſt pretenſe and claime is to the true Doctrine of Chriſt; and think thereby to proue, that they haue alwaies had true Pastors and People who taught and beleiued their Doctrin, as I haue shewed in a Booke of the Author of the Proteſtant Church and Religion; wherein alſo I haue conuinced by ten Demonſtrations, (all taken out of the open Confeſſions of the beſt learned Proteſtants both of England and other Countries) that they neuer had anie one Paſtor who taught, or man who beleived the very fundamentall and moſt ſubſtantiall points of their religion, before Luther aroſe; but that he was firſt Author, Inuentor, and Father therof, as ſome of them in plaine termes do call him.

3. And although this Booke haue bene now theſe manie years published both in Latin and English, and doth by the open confeſſions of the beſt learned Proteſtants ouerthrow the very foundation of their Church, or rather shew, that it hath no foundation at all beſides their owne imagination; yet hitherto no Proteſtant hath made anie shew of a ſolid anſwere vnto it. I ſaie, no shew of a why D. Prideaux lecture is no anſwer to the Author of Proteſt. religion. ſolid anſwere, becauſe that florish which Doctor Prideaux the Kinges diuinitie Reader in Oxford hath made in a lecture, deſerueth not the name of shew or shadow of an anſwer. Firſt, becauſe he nether mentioneth the lawes of anſwering my ſaied booke, which I ſet downe, and proue by reaſon, teſtimonie of holie Fathers, and confeſſion of Proteſtants, ought to be kept in anſwering ſuch a booke: And which lawes, I tell him before hand, that vnles he ether keepe, or refute, I would accounte his anſwer no ſolid or lawfull anſwere, but the babling of one who could neither ſufficiently anſwere, nor yet hould his peace. Secondly, becauſe he maketh no other anſwere to the manifold and manifeſt depoſitions of the beſt learned Proteſtants, which I haue my ſelf brought, and clearly confuted by the depoſitions or teſtimonies them ſelues, againſt which confutation of myne, he replieth nothing, but ſtandeth mute. Thirdly, becauſe he ſo miſerably mangleth the anſwere which I make to their Sophiſme, wherewith they by pretenſe of true Doctrin, would proue that they haue alwaies had true Paſtors and People who taught and beleiued it, and ſo pittifully replieth to the ſaied anſwere, as he plainly sheweth him ſelf to be a true Heretike, that is, conuicted in his owne iudgement, as I think euerie one, that compareth his lecture with my Booke, will clearly perceiue.

4. But ſith the Proteſtants cheife and almoſt whole pretenſe of the truth and euer being of their Church, is the pretenſe of the truth of their doctrin by the Scripture, I will euidently shew, euen by the light of Reaſon and Prudence, that they haue no reaſonable or colourable pretenſe of Scripture: but that it maketh expreſly, clearly, and directly againſt thē, and for Catholiks, almoſt in all points of cōtrouerſie. 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 Proteſtāts 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 thē 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. cōditiō to • ching the letter, proued. Bible or booke of God, without anie addition, ſubtraction, or tranſpoſition: breefly without anie chopping or changing whatſoeuer. This condition is ſo iuſt and reaſonable, as I think no reaſonable man will denie it; and neuertheles I wil proue it. Firſt, becauſe where God alone is Iugde, there it is reaſon, that all men be ſilent, and onely harken what God ſaieth, nor interrupt or corrupt his words. Let vs heare Lib. 1. peccat. c. 20. De vnit. c. 13 Serm. 27. de verb. Apo. (ſaieth S. Auſtin) our lord, and not gheſſes or ſuſpitions of men. Againe: I beleiue that which I read in holie Scripture, not that which vaine Heretiks ſay. And other where: There is a controuerſie riſen, let is goe to the Iudge, let the Prophet iudge: yea let God iudge by the Prophet, let vs both hold our peace. And yet againe: let vs not heare: This I ſay: This thou ſaieſt, but let vs Lib. 6. cont. Iul. c. 4. In Confutat. Latomito. 2. fol. 234. heare, This our lord ſaieth. Yea Luther writeth: That mans word added vnto Gods word is a couer, nay mans dung, wherwith pure truth is hidden. Moreouer, ſeing Proteſtants impoſe ſilence to the Church, Councells, Fathers, and all Catholiks in deciſion of matters of faith, and therin admit onely the written word of God, it were impudencie for them to requeſt to ſpeake. Agayne, if Proteſtants will mingle their owne words with the words of God, they admit not the onely word of God for iudge of controuerſies, but partely alſo their owne, and make one entire iudge of them both. Finally, Proteſtants are wonte to crie, that the Scriture is the onely, and profeſt rule of faith; that they will heare Beza cont. Heshus. Daneus Cont. 3. 6. 7. Hoſpin part. 2 Caluin cont. verſipel. & cont. Cathalon. nothing beſides Scripture; that nothing is to be taught but the pure written word; nothing to be beleiued but that which is expreſſely conteined in the Scripture. Let them heare therefore in theſe twoe hundred and ſixte points, in which I will compare their doctrine with the Scripture, mere Scripture, onely Scripture, and let them harken to nothing but Scripture; let all their owne words whatſoeuer be ſet aſide: let the Scriptures pure and onely words shew and iudge, whether Catholik or Proteſtant doctrin in theſe 260. points here ſet downe, be agreable or diſagreable vnto it.

6. The ſecond condition touching the ſenſe is: That The 2. condition touching the ſenſe, proued. the pure written word of God may iudge betwixt vs according to the pure ſenſe therof, which (when it is ſpoken clearly or of purpoſe to tell: vs what Gods meaning is) of it ſelf and according to the vſual acception of men it doth afford, and this is euident alſo eſpeciallie, if the Church muſt not be admitted to be the infallible Interpreter of the true ſenſe of Scripture. But neuertheles I proue it. Firſt, becauſe Proteſtants cannot ſet downe anie condition which is ſo reaſonable or indifferent to both partes. Secondly, becauſe ether the Scripture in matters of controuerſie clearly declareth her meaning by her ſelf without any help or expoſition of man, or she doth not. If she clearly declare her meaning by her ſelf, then needeth she no help of man at all. For what need she help of others to declare her meaning, who clearly declareth it her ſelf? And vndoubtedly if in any place she clearly declareth her meaning, she doth it in thoſe places, in which she ſpeaketh both clearly, and of ſet purpoſe, for to expreſſe her meaning. But if by her ſelf she doe not clearly declare her meaning in matters in controuerſie without ſome help of man (eſpecially without the help of one of the oppoſite parties who contend about her meaning) certainly she is A iudge muſt be able by himſelf to declare his mynd. not fitt to be the onely iudge of controuerſies, as Proteſtants would haue her. For who will ſaye, that she alone is fitt to be iudge, who alone and by her ſelf is not able to vtter clearly her mynd? Beſids, if the pure word of God may not iudge according to the pure ſenſe which of it ſelf it clearly yeeldeth, but according to a different, nay quite oppoſite ſenſe, which being conferred, expounded, wreſted by man, it is forced to yeeld, who shall aſſure vs, that Gods ſenſe, and not the ſenſe of man, whoſe (and not Gods) that conference, inference, and wreſting is, is made Serm. 14. de verb. Apoſt. Tractat. 2. de Cant. c. 17. L. 6. cont. Iulian. c. 5. L. 2. de Baptiſmo c. 6. iudge of controuerſies? Let mens gheſses (ſaieth S. Auſtin) giue place for a time, let vs take in hand diuine weapons. Againe: This is humane inference, not dinine authoritie. The arguments which you bring are humane, theſe are diuine munitions. And otherwhere: let vs not bring falſe ſcales, with which we may weigh what we will and how we will, and ſaye as we pleaſe: This is heauie: This is leight; But let vs bring the diuine ſcale of the holie Scripture, and in that let vs weigh which is heauieſt, or rather let not vs wheigh it, but let vs aknowledg it weighed of God. Let vs ſet aſide a while mens gheſſes or imaginations of the conference or expoſition of this or that place of Scripture, let vs not bring deceitfull ſcales of mans conference, inference or expoſition of Scripture, with which we may weigh what we will, and how we will ſaying according as we pleaſe: This is the meaning, That is not the meaning; This followeth, That followeth not; This is true, that is falſe, againe all which we may oppoſe thoſe words of S. Auſtin: This is mans inference, mans conference, mans expoſition, mans gheſse, not diuine authoritie, and let vs bring the diuine and ſure ſcale of the pure meaning of Gods pure word, and in that let vs weigh the doctrin of both partes, or rather let vs acknowledge that which is weighed and allowed by God him ſelf in this his ſcale. Moreouer, if mans help be neceſſarie to Scripture for the conference and expoſitiō of the places therof, or inference of that which is to be inferred out of them, ſo that without mans help it can not ſufficiently decide queſtions of faith, I aske of Proteſtants, what men theſe muſt be; whether we or they, or ſome third, who nether are Catholiks nor Proteſtants? Sure I am, they will nether admit ours nor other mens expoſitions of Scripture for their iudge, and I think they wilbe ashamed to exact of vs that we should admit their interpretatiō, eſpecially ſith they refuſe the conference, inference, and expoſition of the holy Councells, and Fathers. Wherfore vnles they will ſtand to Proteſtants muſt be tried by the natiue, and vſual ſenſe of he words, or thy no ſenſe. that ſenſe of Scripture which is no way partial, to wit, which the Scripture it ſelf, by it ſelf, without any conference or expoſition of man, giueth, they can name no ſenſe of Scripture which both parties may admit for their iudge: and to refuſe all ſenſe of Scripture whervpon both parties may reaſonably agree, is plainly to refuſe all reaſonable triall by ſcripture. For ſeing the ſoule and kernel of the Scripture is the ſenſe therof; and that the letter or words is but the shell or bark of it, as is euident and both holie Fathers and Proteſtants agree, manifeſt it is, that whoſoeuer will not reaſonably agree vpon any ſenſe of the Church, Councells, or Fathers) where it is ſpoken of ſet purpoſe to declare Gods meaning, of it ſelf without any mans expoſition, and according to the vſual vnderſtanding of men, it doth afford, rather then the quite contrarie ſenſe, which by the wreſting of Proteſtants it is compelled to carrie. Let but this right reaſon and true prudence lift vp this Balance, wherein I weigh the Doctrin of Catholiks and Proteſtants according to holie Scripture in more then 260. points, and I nothing doubt, but it will clearly ſee and iudge the Catholik doctrin agreable to Scripture and the Proteſtant, quite oppoſite and contrarie. And this is my purpoſe, Scope, and butte in this 1. The Scope of the firſt booke And of the ſecond. booke, to which I adde a ſecond, wherin I manifeſtly shewe that Proteſtants Doctrin is not onely quite oppoſite in more then 260. points both in words and meaning to the holie Scripture, but alſo, that they are forced to reiect many and great partes of the Scripture; to alter that parte which they admit, to weaken all force of Scripture; to ſay that much of the Scripture was not ſpoken of certaine knowledge, or not according to the meaning of the ſpeaker; to teach, that moſt weightie ſentences of the Scripture were ſpoken ironically, mimetically, and hyperbolically, to change the moſt vniuerſall propoſitions of the Scripture into particulers, to limitate ſpeeches not limited by the Scripture; to alter abſolute ſpeeches into conditionall; to make cauſall propoſitions not cauſall, to expound words in ſome ſorte, which were ſpake ſimply; The contents of the ſecond booke. which were ſpaken of one time, to interprete them of an other, to make one ſaying, of many; to vnderſtand words that ſignifie the doing of a thing, of an endeauour to doe it; which ſignifie working a thing, of the way or meane therto; which ſignifie that a thing is, to expound that it ought to be: words which ſignifie a true thing, to expound them of a shew or apparent thing: to expound the words of Scripture of different, yea wholy diuerſe, & contrarie matters; to deuiſe improprietes and all figures of ſpeeches; to feigne friuolous and neuer before heard of diſtinctions; to reiect the expoſition of the Fathers, Councells, and Church: to confeſſe, that they teach Doctrin damned in ould time for hereſie: to fruſtate the ends of the incarnation and paſſion of Chriſt: to take out of the world all vertue and giue free ſcope to all vice: and finally, to confeſſe, that much of the Proteſtant doctrin is contrarie to holie Scripture. All which clearly shewe, that Proteſtant leaders doe not onely teach doctrin contrarie to the Scripture, but alſo do in very deed mock and contemne it.

8. The manner of my proceeding is this. Firſt I deuide Manner of proceeding in this booke. the matters which are in controuerſie 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 Proteſtāts, 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 Proteſtāts 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 dānation, 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 Catholik • 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 thē 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 Prot • ſtants ſaying • 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 ſpeeches of Proteſtants (as it was to me to write them out) let him runne ouer the Summe which I make of their words, or, by the notes in the margent, chuſe which are fitteſt to his purpoſe. And thus much for the māner of my proceeding in this booke.

11. The profit of this work is manifould. Firſt, becauſe by it a short and eaſie way may be taken to make an end The profits of this worke. of all controuerſies, and that out of Scirpture alone, as Proteſtants deſire: to wit, by mere rehearſall of the expreſſe words of Scripture, of Catholiks, and of famous Proteſtants touching 260. articles of controuerſie: For if it appeare that catholikes in 260. articles agree both in word and ſenſe with the expreſſe words of Scripture and theſe ſpoken of purpoſe to declare her meaning vnto vs: and that Proteſtants in thoſe 260. articles directly contradict the ſaid words and ſenſe of the holie Scripture, no man will doubt, but that all Proteſtant doctrin (for as it is contrarie to the Catholik) is alſo contrarie to the holie Scripture. An other commoditie is, that in this booke are gathered thoſe places of Scripture, and they ranked according to order of their matters, which in 260. articles directly and in their proper and vſual ſenſe do approue the Catholik doctrin, and condemne the Proteſtant. A third commoditie is, that hereby are at hand in euerie kind of controuerſie ſuch ſayings of famous Proteſtants, as not onely directely croſſe the Scripture; but alſo many of them are ſo blaſphemous againſt God, againſt Chriſt, againſt the Saints, the Church, Sacraments, Faith, Good works: ſo oppoſite to pietie, vertue and religion: ſo fauorable to vice, and all licenciouſnes: ſo repugnant to reaſon, as ſome Proteſtants will deny, and others ſcarſe beleeue, that euer any of theirs taught ſuch doctrin. Whome I requeſt The Authors fidelitie in citing Proteteſtants ſayings. to take the paines to looke vpon the bookes and places by me alledged, and then to beleeue their owne eyes. For I not onely gathered their ſayings out of their owne bookes, but alſo, after I had my ſelf gathered them and cauſed them to be faire copied out, I diligently conferred them with their books, and admitted none which he, that read their bookes, did non find to be truly cited out of them. Wherfore I ſay for my ſelf as Caluin ſaid for him ſelf againſt Gentilis: There shalbe no colour for them to cōplaine that they are ſlandered, ſeing I requeſt that iudgmēt be made of their impietie out of their owne mere words. And they, who haue had to deale with Proteſtants ether by word or writing, know well how important a thing it is, to be able to conuince them, that they teach that which in in very deed they teach; which may clearly be done by their ſayinges here rehearſed.

12. The fourth commoditie of this worke is, thar hereby shall appeare, that almoſt in all controuerſies which betwene Catholiks and Proteſtants, Catholiks do ſtick faſt to the very words of Scripture, and religiouſly keepe her letter and forme of ſpeech; and Proteſtants goe fare from the words, at leſt of Scripture and bring in a different, yea quite oppoſit, forme of ſpeech. Nether ought they to think this to be a ſmall fault, both becauſe they boaſting of the pure and expreſſe word of God, ought alſo to keep the very letter thereof, and not to reiect it and to vſe the contrarie: as alſo becauſe the Apoſtle commandeth to auoide profane nouelties of words, and to keepe the 1. Timoth. 6. 2. Timoth. 1. forme of holeſome words which we haue learned of him: which commandment they do not follow, who forſake the Scriptures forme of ſpeech, and embrace the contrarie: and finally, becauſe not onely the ſenſe, but alſo the words and forme of ſpeech vſed by the Scripture, did proceed from the holie Ghoſte, and therefore it is ſacrilegious audacitie to reiect Gods words and Gods forme of ſpeaking, and to bring in mans words and fashion of ſpeaking quite contrarie. As if theſe new Ghoſpelers should teach God how to deliuer his mind, or he ment to ſpeake otherwiſe by them, then he did by his Prophets, Apoſtles, and Euāgeliſts, wherefore their impietie is not to be borne withall who when the Scripture moſt often and moſt plainly calleth the beleefe of wicked men or reprobats, faith, and neuer denieth it to be faith, yet dare ſay, that it Caluin 3. Inſtit. c. 2. §. 10. is vnworthie the name of faith: When the Scripture often times and moſt directly calleth the Euchariſt the bodie of Chriſt, and not once directly denieth it to be his bodie, yet dare ſay, it is not his bodie. And the like they doe in many other matters, wherin if they controll not the meaning of the holie Ghoſte; at leaſt they correct his ſpeech, and reforme it according to the ſquare of their new doctrin. Far otherwiſe proceeded the holie Fathers, who would not ſuffer ſo much as a letter or ſyllable of the holie Scripture to be altered: And as S. Auſtin grauely aduertized. Philoſophers may ſpeake as they pleaſe, but we ſpeake according Lib. 10. de Ciuit. c. 23. to a certaine rule, leſt licencie in words breed impious opinions of the thing which they ſignifie. Yea Proteſtants them ſelues ſome times will ſeeme to be very carefull of the words and phraſes of Scripture. For thus ſpeaketh Luther: If the In Confutat. Latomi. f. 227 Scripture terme any thing ſin, beware thou beeſt not moued by any words of theirs, who (as if they could ſpeake better) deny it to be ſin. And Caluin: There is to be taken out of Scripture a 1. Inſtit. c. 13. §. 3. certaine forme of thinking & ſpeaking, by which all the thoughts of our mynd and words of our mouth are to be examined. Beza Ad defenſ. Caſtell. alſo: I ſee that all godlie and learned Diuines haue euer taught, that the holie Ghoſt gouerned not onely the mynd, but alſo the tongue and pen: in ſo much as concerning the wonders of God, not onely nothing can be ſaied of any mā more truly or more habily, but alſo nether ſo grauely nor ſo properly. Likewiſe Bucer: Prefat. in Math. No wiſdom of the flesh can reach to theſe misteries of the kingdome of God. Therefore, then we ſpeake moſt plainly moſt perſpicuouſly and moſt ſurely of matters of faith, when we ſpeake according to the rule and forme of Scripture. And otherwhere: we In Hoſpin. part. 2. Hiſtor muſt learne of the Scripture and the holie Ghoſte, how to ſpeake and think of euerie matter. Wherefore the holie Ghost his formes of ſpeaking ought not to be corrected according to the iudgment of our reaſon. Thus they, which if they and theires had followed, we should not haue had ſo much ſpeech contrarie to the Scripture.

13. The fift, and that no ſmall, cōmoditie is, that by this worke wilbe taken from miniſters all their falſe pretenſe of Scripture and of the worde of God, wherewith perpetually they crie, that the Catholik faith is grounded onely vpon mens authoritie, and all their doctrin forſouth vpon the expreſſe Scripture and word of God, and In c. 1. Galat. In Aſſert. art 2. thereby draw the ſimple people to follow them. The Pope (faieth Luther) hauing no Scripture wherewith to defēd himſelf, vſeth this onely and perpetuall argument againſt vs. The Church, the Church. Agayne: Our opinion is deliuered by theſe words of God, the contrarie, by the words of men. And otherwhere. All the Scripture ſtandeth an our ſides through all letters and tittles. Caluin: Papiſts find no weapons in Scripture, yea they In Actor. 9. v. 22. In Antid. ſeſſ. 6. c. 8. ſee it wholy againſt them. Agayne. I haue the whole Scripture on my ſide. And Sadeel: Our doctrin doth relie vpon the expreſse worde of God? And in an other place: we profeſsed in the fift article of our French Confeſsion, that our faith is onely and wholie, and expreſsly grounded vpon the word of God as it is contained De vocat. Miniſtr. Ad art. 1. abiurat. in the Scripture. Fulk in Ioan. 5. note 2. Papiſts can not find a iote of Poperie allowed ether by expreſſe wordes of the Scripture, or by neceſſarie cōcluſiō out of the ſame. And the like moſt vaine pretence, this moſt impudent boaſt is moſt Apol. Anglic p. 20. Pareus praefat lib. de Grat. Caluin epiſt. 193. Whitak. praefat. ad Demonſt. manifeſtly refuted in this booke, wherein is clearly shewed, that the Catholik doctrin, in more then 260. points denied by Proteſtants, is in expreſſe termes and moſt directly taught and deliuered, by the Scripture, and in the ſame points the Proteſtants doctrin condemned: and that theſe in very deed do relie vpon their owne inferences out of Scripture, their owne conferences of places of Scripture and oppoſe their owne expoſitions, gloſſes, tropes, and figures, againſt the expreſſe words and thunders of almightie God.

14. The ſixt commoditie is, that though ſome obſtinatly will not confeſſe, that in all theſe 260. points or in moſt of them, the Scripture or word of God doth expreſly approue the Catholik doctrin and condemne the Proteſtant, yet this he can not denie, but in all theſe points the holie Scripture both for word and for ſenſe fauoureth more the Catholik doctrin then the Proteſtant: which if ignorant Proteſtants would mark, they would not be ſo eaſily miſled. For as for words, in all theſe 260. points we Catholiks aduantage ouer Proteſtants. For words of Scripture. vſe the very ſame or equiualent words with the Scripture: what she calleth faith, we call faith: what she calleth the bodie of Chriſt, we call the bodie of Chriſt. And ſo in others: whereas Proteſtants do the quite contrarie, as hath beene touched before, and shall appeare in the whole booke. And as for the forme of ſpeach, where the Scripture For phraſe of Scripture. affirmeth, we affirme; where the Scripture denieth, we deny: And contrarie wiſe the Proteſtants affirme, where the Scripture denieth; and deny, where the Scripture affirmeth: as shalbe moſt euident to him that will read this booke. Beſids no parte or parcell of the Scripture forceth For partes of Scripture. Catholiks to denie it, but they hould all that Proteſtants account for Scripture and ſome what more: whereas Proteſtāts are compelled to reiect manie bookes of thoſe which Catholiks and the holie Church heretofore hath beleeued to be Gods word, and fouly alſo to mangle and corrupt theſe bookes which they admit. Moreouer Catholiks refuſe no authenticall edition or tranſlation of the For tranſlations of Scripture. Scripture: but Proteſtants will ſland to no tranſlation. And thus much touching the words of Scripture. As for For the ſenſe of Scripture. the ſenſe thereof: Catholiks in all theſe 260. points do admit that ſenſe, which the expreſſe words of Scripture, and they ſpoaken of purpoſe to declare Gods mynd doe of them ſelues proporſe: which ſenſe Proteſtants reiect and force the quite contrarie. Agayne, ſcarce in any of theſe 260. articles Catholiks are driuen to any anſwere which hath any shew of a shift or euaſion, becauſe in them (as I ſaied) they embrace the natiue and proper ſenſe of the words of Scripture: but Proteſtants in euerie one of them are driuen to ſundrie and foule shifts, becauſe they refuſe the naturall and plaine ſenſe of Gods word. Beſids, Catholiks in all theſe 260. points dare ſtand to the iudgment of the expreſſe worde of God according to that ſentence which of them ſelues with out all helpe, force or preſſing of Catholiks they doe pronounce: Proteſtants dare not in theſe articles ſtand to the iudgment of Gods expreſſe worde, vnles they may wreſt, wring, and interprete it as they thinke beſt. Finally, Catholiks in none of all theſe queſtions reiect that ſenſe of Scripture, which is deliuered by vnanimous conſent of the holie Fathers, Councells, or Church. Proteſtants refuſe it in manie. Seing therefore Catholiks haue the aduantage ouer Proteſtants, not onely for Fathers, Councells, Church, miracles, the like, but alſo that they haue ſuch and ſo great aduantages ouer them in more then 260. points of controuerſie, both for the expreſſe worde, and plaine ſenſe of the Scripture, it is plaine willfulnes and careleſnes of ſaluation to leaue Catholiks for to follow Proteſtants. I would to God, that Proteſtants would (as they pretend) follow the expreſſe word of God, and embrace that Religion Note. which the expreſſe word of God moſt fauoureth, reiect that which it moſt diſliketh; and enquire diligently whether the Catholik or Proteſtant religion can in more points of controuerſie proue her doctrin by the pure and expreſſe written word of God without the mixture of any word of man, and by the pure ſenſe therof, which of it ſelf it affordeth without any help or expoſition of man, when it is ſpoaken of purpoſe to declare Gods meaning vnto vs. Let that religion florish and be embraced, which in this conflict ouercomet: let that perish and be reiected, which is ouercomen. And what more reaſonable then to preferre Gods pure word before that which is not pure, mixt partely of Gods words, partely of mans. What more reafonable, then to preferre Gods direct ſpeech, before mans inference or collection out of his ſpeech? What more reaſonable, then to follow rather Gods expreſſe words, then mans gloſſes, tropes, and figures? And finally, what more reaſonable, then to follow that religion which in more then 260. points of controuerſie is grounded vpon the pure word, the direct word, the expreſſe word of God, and hath againſt it nothing but mans mixt word, mans inference, mans gloſſes: rather then that which in all thoſe points is condemned by the pure, direct, and expreſſe word of God, and ſupported onely by mans mixt word, mans inference, and mans gloſſes? For example: That the Euchariſt is the bodie of Chriſt, we haue for vs in foure places of Scripture the pure, direct, and expreſſe word of God, ſaying: This is my bodie: and againſt vs there is not ſo much as once any pure word of God, ſaing directly and expreſly: This is not my bodie. But onely mens inference out of a mixt word, to wit: Chriſts bodie is in heauen, and can not be in two places; which word is mixt, partely of Gods word, for the former parte, and of mens word, for the latter. And shall we thinke that in a matter of faith, which we can not know but by Gods teaching, his pure and expreſſe word is not to be preferred before mens inference out of a mixt word, which is in parte mens word? What els can we thinke vnles we will euen in Gods matters preferre men before God.

15. The ſeauenth cōmoditie is that in this word are diſcouered all or the moſt vſuall shifts wherewith Proteſtāts vſe to delude the teſtimonies of holie Scripture. Which ſurely is no leſſe profitable, then to know the deceits of enemies with whom we are to fight. And as Tertullian ſaieth: VVoe be to him, who whiles he is in this life, knoweth not De reſur. c. 19. the ſecrets of Heretiks. And theſe are the eſpeciall profits and commodities which may be reaped by this work; Now let vs remoue certaine ſcruples or hinderances of the reaping of them.

16. The firſt ſcruple may be about the vulgar Latin trāſlation, Obiections or difficulties remoued. which I follow in citing the words of Scripture. But to omit all which Catholiks produce for to proue that tranſlation to be authenticall (becauſe this is no place to treate of that matter) Proteſtants cōfeſſions hereof may ſuffice, which may be ſeene in the Proteſtants Apologie for the Rom. Church Treat. 1. Sect. 10. ſubd. 4. to which I add, that Caſoubon writeth. I acknowledg the Latin tranſlation of the bible to be holie Scripture, and I account an vnperdonable fault to ſo much as doubt thereof: That Iuel. art. 17. ſect. 4. ſaieth: It hath bene euer more generally receaued in the Church: That Beza in Luc. 1. confeſſeth: That the ancient interpreter did most religiouſly tranſlate the Scripture. And in Luc. 8. v. 54. That him ſelf had twoe ancient Greek copies which meruailouſly agreed with the vulgar Latin. And Prefat. in Teſtam. That the vulgar interpreter had a truer Greek copie then theirs now are. Whitaker alſo Cont. 1. q. 2. c. 7. graunteth, that the Latin Fathers commend it and iuſtly. Hounfrey l. 1. de Rat. interpret. affirmeth. That the old Interpretor ſeemeth enough addicted to the proprietie of the word. Moreouer Luther and Proteſtants commonly confeſſe, that Catholiks haue the word of God that the Fathers vſed the Latin tranſlation in their diſputes for maintenance of the Catholik faith and confutation of Hereſies. Beſids Fulk in his preface to the Teſtament, ſaieth, that none of them calleth the vulgar tranſlation of the new teſtament, Papiſticall, as though it were tranſlated by Papists, or els made ſo greatly for Papiſts when it is rightly vnderſtood. Finally the vulgar Latin tranſlation differeth not from the originall Hebrew or Greek text, but in very few of thoſe places which here I cite; and therefore it wilbe but vayne to cauil here about this matter.

17. The ſecōd ſcruple may be, that ſome times the very why Proteſt. can not excuſe them ſelues by the Scripture. Scripture contradicteth it ſelf in shew of words, and neuertheles in ſenſe and meaning is neuer repugnant to it ſelf. And therefore it is not ſo great meruail if Proteſtāts ſome time contradict the words of Scripture, nether can it be thereof inferred that the contradict the ſenſe. To this I anſwer, that the Scripture nether ſo often, nor in ſo many and ſo weightie matters, nor ſo manifeſtly and directly contradicteth it ſelf in words, as Proteſtants doe: Nether need we ſo many and ſo incredible shifts for to reconcile the words of Scripture, as Proteſtants need to reconcile their ſayings with the Scripture. Beſids, God may ſpeak as he pleaſeth, & therefore may for to exerciſe our faith and ſtudie mingle ſome shew of contradiction in his words: but Proteſtants are bound to ſpeak as God ſpeaketh, and not to gaine ſay ſo much as his words, as doubtles they would not, if their meaning were not repugnant to his. Agayne, we may not out of anie ſeeming contradiction in Gods words, infer anie oppoſition in his meaning, becauſe we know, that he can not be contrarie to him ſelf: but we know that Proteſtants can not be contrarie to Gods meaning, as we ſee that they be contrarie to his words: and therefore out of their ſo frequent, ſo manifeſt, ſo direct contradicting of his words, we iuſtly inferre, that they alſo contradict his meaning, as we would inferre the ſame of anie Heretiks whatſoeuer. Moreouer this cauil will no more help Proteſtants, then it will help anie other Heretiks, ſith there were euer ſcarce anie, who ſo often, ſo plainly, ſo directly contradicted the expres word of God, as Proteſtants haue done. And therefore ether we may inferre out of the Proteſtants contradicting the words of God, that they alſo contradict his true meaning, or we can not inferre that of anie Heretiks whatſoeuer. But of this more in the ſecond booke cap. 1.

18. The third ſcruple may be, that perhaps alſo VVhy they can not excuſe them ſelues by Catholiks. ſome Catholik writers haue in shew of words contradicted the Scripture. But to this I anſwere that this is to accuſe others, not to cleare them ſelues: Let them firſt anſwere for them ſelues, before they recriminate others. And if anie of them will goe about to lay the like fault vpon Catholiks, let him keep theſe moſt iuſt and equal conditions. Firſt, let him not medle with other matters then ſuch as are in controuerſie betwixt vs and them, as I touch no other matters. Secondly, let him bring forth in ſo manie controuerſies, ſo manifeſt and ſo direct teſtimonies of holie Scripture agreeing with their doctrin both in wordes and ſenſe, and oppoſite to our doctrin, as I haue brought. Thou muſt proue (ſaieth Tertullian) as euidently as we proue. Giue me a proof which I demand like to Cont. Prax. c. 11. De vnit. c. 6. 24. mine. And S. Auſtin: Produce as cleare teſtimonies as theſe are which we produce to you. We demande ſome manifeſt place which needeth no interpreter. Thirdly, let him shew that the Councell of Trent contradicteth as directly ſo many and ſo expres places of Scripture, and that in ſo weightie matters, as we haue shewed that theire confeſſions of faith, of which (as they ſay) they make almoſt as great account of, as Vorſtius praefat. Antilpraefat. Syntagm. we doe of the Councell of Trent. Fourthly, let him shew, that ſo many and ſo famous Catholik writers haue in ſo many and ſo great controuerſies contradicted the expres propoſitions or aſſertions of the holie Scripture, as we haue shewed of the Proteſtant writers. I ſay Propoſitions, or Aſsertions, becauſe it is a farre greater matter to contradict the proportions of Scripture, in which it pronounceth a thing to be, or not to be; to be ſuch, or not to be ſuch, then to varie onely from ſome of the words wherewith here or there it ſignifieth this or that thing. As for example, it is a farre greater matter to deny the Euchariſt to be the bodie of Chriſt, which the Scripture often times & plainly affirmeth, then not to call it bread as ſome times the Scripture doth, but neuer directly ſaieth that it is bread: Wherevpon Spalatenſis l. 5. de repub. c. 6. writeth thus: It is one thing, for a ſeeming thing to be called by the name of the true thing, which the appearence doth shew; An other, to be ſaid, This is that. The firſt may and is borne withall in all equiuocall termes, but not the latter. Wherefore let him omit theſe kinds of matters. Fiftly, let him shew, that Catholiks haue done thus, not by the way, treating of other matters, but of ſet purpoſe, as Proteſtants haue done, who moſt often then contradict the Scripture in plaine termes, euen then when they anſwere it or comment vpon it. Laſtly, let him shew, that Catholiks haue beene forced for the maintenance of their doctrin to denie ſo many bookes, to corrupt ſo many places of holie Scripture, to deuiſe, ſo many and ſo incredible shifts, as we haue shewed the Proteſtants haue done, or let him be ashamed to ſay, that Catholiks are as faultie in this kind, as Proteſtants be. Moreouer, though they could proue, that ſome Catholiks haue bene as faultie herein, as they are (which they can neuer proue) yet that would nothing preiudice the Chatholik Church, becauſe her faith is not the doctrin of one or of many Catholiks, but the common of them all: But the Proteſtant faith is in many points the doctrin of ſome or of manie of them, euerie one of them making that a point of faith, which him ſelf gathereth out of Scripture, whether his fellows beleeue it, or no. Beſids, the Catholik Church, if she find anie thing in the writinges of her children contrarie to holie Scripture, she nether alloweth nor diſſembleth it, but commandeth it to be blotted out, as is euident by the Expurgatorie Indices; but the Proteſtant ether approueth or diſſembleth the errors of her writers, and ſo maketh them her owne. VVhy all Cōtradictiōs here related may be abiected to the Prot. Church.

19. The fourth ſcruple may be, that all the Cōtradictions againſt holie Scripture, which are here rehearſed out of Proteſtant writers, were not made nor allowed of all Proteſtants, or of their Church, and therefore all of them are not to be imputed to all Proteſtāts or to their Church. I anſwere. Firſt, that very many of the Contradictions againſt holie Scripture here ſet downe are found in their Confeſſions of faith, and in other writings ſet forth in their common name: which Contradictions are moſt iuſtly attributed to their Church, and theſe alone ſuffice to shew, that the very faith and common doctrin of Proteſtants is directly oppoſite both to the word and ſenſe of holie Scripture. Secondly, almoſt all theſe Contradictions are taken out of the writings of the firſt, the chiefeſt, and famouſeſt teachers, guides, and leaders of Proteſtants, and therefore ether Proteſtants muſt acknowledge theſe Contradictions, or reiect the doctrin of their firſt and chefeſt Maiſters as directly contrarie to Gods word. Thirdly, all the Contradictions or Antitheſes here produced, are taken out of famous writers and mainteiners of the Proteſtant faith, whoſe doctrin the Proteſtant Church hath not publikly condemned, nor compelled the Authors thereof to recall it, nor commanded it to be taken out of their writings, and therefore, if not by publike conſent, yet by ſilence and diſſembling approueth it, and ſo (as I ſaied before) maketh it her owne. Fourthly, Proteſtants obiect to the Catholik Church whatſoeuer any Cotholik writer, though neuer ſo obſcure, hath written: why then may not we better obiect vnto their Church what many and the moſt famous of their writers haue published? Finally my intention in this workes not to shew the Contradictions of this or that Proteſtant man or Church againſt the holie Scripture; but of the Proteſtants in generall, eſpecially of the cheefeſt and moſt famous.

But whether the Contradictions of Scripture made by And though they could not yet that would ſuffice. many and famous Proteſtant writers, and not condemned but diſſembled by their Church, be to be obiected to their Church, or no, theſe points enſuing will ſuffice to my purpoſe. Firſt, that the commun fairh of Proteſtants is in many and weightie articles directly contrarie to the expreſſe word and cleare meaning of holie Scripture, as is euident by that which in diuers articles I recite out of their Confeſſions of faith and other their common writings. The ſecond is, that touching many other matters, that ſelf ſame doctrin which I cite out of other Proteſtants, is conteined in their Confeſſions of faith though it be not deliuered there in termes ſo expreſly oppoſite to the words of holie Scripture, as it is by other Proteſtants. The third is, that much of that Proteſtant Doctrin which here if cite as oppoſite to holie Scripture, is in very deed the common beleef of Proteſtants, albeit it be not inſerted in their Confeſſions. The fourth point is, that thoſe Proteſtants whoſe words I alledge, knew the common Apol. Anglic Cont. 2. q. 5. c. 8. L. 3. de Eccleſ. c. 42. doctrin of Proteſtants, as well as anie who now will denie or reiect that doctrin. The fift is, that Iuel, Whitaker, Feild, and diuers other Proteſtants auouch, that there is no materiall difference in doctrin amongſt the cheefe Proteſtāts, which ether they muſt confeſſe to befalſe, or maintaine the doctrin which here I cite out of their cheefeſt writers. The ſixt point is, that houſoeuer the doctrin which I cite, is not in all points the Doctrin of this Proteſtant man or Church, yet it is as I ſaied Proteſtant doctrin, taught and maintained by famous Proteſtants, ſuch as our English Proteſtants hould communion withall, and account them their brethrē in Chriſt, And therefore ether let thē defend their doctrin, or refuſe their cōmunion. The ſeuenth point is, that whether all or moſt of the Proteſtant doctrin, which here I cite as oppoſite to holie Scripture, be the cōmon doctrin or beleefe of Proteſtāts, or no, this alone would ſuffice to my purpoſe, that the doctrin of the firſt, chefeſt, and famouſeſt Proteſtant preachers and leaders, is in more then Note. 260. points of controuerſie quite oppoſite to the expreſſe words of holie Scripture. For thereby euerie one may ſee, that the firſt & cheefeſt Proteſtāt preachers, did not teach the word of God, but the word of the Diuel quite contrarie there • o: were not miniſters of the word of God, but miniſters of the Diuel: not Reformers, but Deformers: not ſent of God, but thruſt on by the Diuel: not lightned from heaune, but blinded from hel: not Apoſtles, but Apoſtatas: not Paſtores but wolues: who vnder a moſt falſe pretence of the word of God, did moſt directly impugne it, drew Criſtians from Gods truth to the Diuels lies, from the lap of the Catholik 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. Thus by their greater antiquitie of their poſſeſſion of the Bible, and alſo by the greater antiquitie of the Bible it ſelf did the ancient Chriſtians proue againſt Heretiks both that their Bibles were the true Bibles, and alſo that they were the true owners of them. But manifeſt it is, that Catholiks are ancienter poſſeſſors of the holie Scripture then Proteſtants be, in ſo much as we shall ſee Proteſtants confeſſe, that they had the Scripture of Catholiks. Therefore Catholiks are the true owners of the Scripture.

The fourth proof is taken from that there can be no 4. title no beginning of poſſeſsion named. place or time named, where or when Catholiks firſt began to take poſſeſſion of the holie Scripture, beſides the very time of Chriſt and his Apoſtles, who alone could giue true and lawfull poſſeſſion of the Scripture. Whereas See Author of the Prot. religion l. 2. c. 13. we can name the place and time when Proteſtants firſt began to Vſurpe poſſeſſion of the holie Scripture. Which is long after the time of Chriſt and his Apoſtles. And all reaſon bindeth, vs to accounte them the true owners of a thing, the beginning of whoſe poſſeſſion can not be found, but at the very time of the firſt giuers thereof, rather then thoſe whoſe poſſeſſion began manie hundreds of years after.

The fift proof I will ground vpon that the Catholiks 5. title the integritie of Scripture. haue conſerued the holie Scripture incorrupt. For theeues and wrong poſſeſſors vſe to disfigure the thing they haue ſtolne as much as they can, that it may not be knowne. Beſides, the Scripture muſt needs be contrarie to the vſurpers, and agreable to the true owners, therefore neceſſitie forceth vſurpers to alter the Scripture, as falſe heires are forced to alter the will or teſtament if they get it into their hands. Wherevpon we ſee, that ſcarce euer there were anie Heretiks, who haue not ſaught to corrupt the Tertul. de preſcript. c. 17 38. Scripture, albeit Catholiks cried out againſt their ſacrilegious impietie. How much more then would Papiſts haue corrupted the Scripture (eſpecially whiles for manie ages there were no viſible Proteſtants to reproue them) if they had not beene the true owners of the Scripture? But Catholiks haue not in all theſe ages, in which Proteſtants were inuiſible, corrupted anie parte of the Scripture, as is euident by that Proteſtants confeſſe, that Scripture which they had of Catholiks, to be pure and incorrupt. Nether do Proteſtants obiect to Catholiks anie corruption made by them in the Hebrew or Greek text, and the vulgar Latin they will haue to be ancienter then Papiſtrie it ſelf. But contrariewiſe, Catholiks haue euer ſince the beginning of Proteſtancie charged Proteſtāts with manie and greiuous corruptions of holie Scripture. Wherefore thus I argue. All reaſon teacheth vs to iudge them to be the true owners of a teſtament, who are the freeſt from corrupting it. But Catholiks are farre more free from corruptinge the teſtament of Chriſt then Proteſtants: Therefore &c.

The ſixt proof I will take from the Proteſtants graunt, Sixt title: graunt of Proteſtants. that they had the Scripture from Catholiks. Luther in 16. Ioan. to. 4. Germ. witenb. fol. 227. There is an argument which can very hardly be wreſted from the Papiſts, and which I my ſelf can very hardly anſwere and refute, eſpecially ſith we are forced to giue and graunt them ſo manie thinges, which are true, to wit, that in Poperie, is the word, the Apoſtleshippe, and that we receaued the holie Scripture, baptiſme, the Sacraments and office of preaching from them, otherwiſe what should we haue knowne of all theſe things? And to. 5. in 1. Gal. fol. 293. we had indeed the Scripture and the Sacraments of the Papiſts. Schuſſelburg to. 8. Catal. Haereſ. p. 439. VVe denie not, that Luther ſaieth, that in Poperie is all Chriſtian good, and from thence came to vs. D. Daue of Recuſancie. p. 13. VVe hould the Creed of the Apoſtles, of Athanaſius, of Nice, of Epheſus, of Conſtantinople, which the Papiſts alſo do hould, and the ſame Bible which we receaued from them. Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 5. c. 14. Papiſts haue the Scripture, Baptiſme, Catechiſme, the articles of faith, the ten commandements, the lords praier, and theſe things come from thē to vs. Iames Andreas li. cont. Haſ. p. 316. VVe denie not, that we receaued the Scriptures from you. The like hath Spalatenſis lib. cont. Suar. c. 1. n. 34. and others. A queſtion propoſed to Proteſtants. Wherefore I aske the Proteſtāts, how they had the Scripture of vs? Did we giue it them? Did we ſell it them? Did we change it with? Did we relinquish it as a forlorne thing. No one of all theſe can they proue or affirme with anie apparence. How then get they the Scripture from vs, but as theeues get the true mens goods, and as Turkes and Iews get the ſame Scripture from vs? If anie ſay as Andrews and Schuſſelb. do intimate, that Proteſtants had the Scripture of Catholiks, as Chriſtians had the ould teſtament of the Iewes, I anſwere, that Chriſtians had not the ould teſtamēt of the Iewes, if by Iewes they meane ſuch as remained Iewes. For Chriſtians had the ould teſtament of the Apoſtles, and they of Chriſt who was lord of the ould and new teſtament, as they had from him the Sacraments, and all other goods of the Church. Beſides, euerie Heretik may pretend this as well as Proteſtants. Wherefore thus I argue: They whome their aduerſaries confeſſe to haue had the Scripture before them ſelues, and can tell no lawfull means by which they had the Scripture from them, are according to all reaſon to be held the true owners of the Scripture, rather then their aduerſaries; But ſuch are Catholiks in reſpect of Proteſtants. Therefore &c.

The ſeuenth proof I will take from the open and manifould Seuenth title: other confeſſions of Proteſtant. confeſſions of Proteſtants. For firſt they confeſſe, that Catholiks are the true Church of Chriſt, as I haue shewed at longe in my foreſaied booke of the Author of the Proteſtant religion lib. 1. c. 2. to which I add theſe few. Spalatenſis lib. 5. de repub. c. 6. n. 236. The Rom. Church is not gone ſo farre from the foundation, as that she is to be put wholy out of the membres of the Churches of Chriſt. lib. cont. Suarem. c. 1. n. 20. I think (as I haue often ſaied) that the Rom. Church with thoſe that follow here, are the true Church of Chriſt. D. Featlie in his Refutation of Fisher p. 82. The Rom. Church we acknowledge to be a member, though a ſicke and weake one, of the Catholik viſible Church. The like hath D. Hall in his booke of ould religion: and his twoe defenders Chalmeley and Batterfeild, whereof the latter in his preface ſaieth he will demonſtrate that the Rom. Church is a true Church. Now certaine it is, that the true Church is the true ower of the Scripture. Secondly, they confeſſe, that Catholik Paſtors are true 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 shalbe 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 shalbe, 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 shalbe 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 order of the matter did require, that to be firſt propoſed, which alone is now to be diſputed? Fourthly whoſe is the faith, whoſe is the Scripture? Fourthly it is euident, that if anie Proteſtant will (notwithſtanding all that hath beene ſaied) iudge, that Proteſtants are the true owners of Scripture, rather then Catholiks, he will giue that iudgment in a matter of ſuch great moment, which he would be ashamed to giue in a queſtion of the leaſt trifle in the world. For who ſeing that one hath nine titles to a peece of ground, of all which titles his aduerſarie hath no pretence, and that he hath as good (if not farre better) shew alſo of the tenth title, as his aduerſarie hath, would not be ashamed to adiudge the land to his aduerſarie, and caſt him out of poſſeſſion, who was actuall poſſeſſor when the matter came firſt in queſtion, was peacable poſſeſſor for manie ages, was the ancienter poſſeſſor, and of whoſe poſſeſſion no Note this. beginning can be found but from the true lord, and from whom his aduerſarie hath whatſoeuer he hath, whoſe lawfull poſſeſſion thereof all kinde of aduerſaries do ſome time confeſſe, and put his aduerſarie in poſſeſſion who can pretend no title but that which alone ſufficeth not, and which alſo for better agreeth to the ancient poſſeſſor? If anie ſay, that in wordly matters reaſon would giue iudgment for the ancient poſſeſſor, but not in heauenlie or deuine matters, as the Scripture is, I demand, what Scripture, what worde of God teacheth vs to checke the light of reaſon concerning the true poſſeſſion of the Scripture? If none, why then doe we not follow reaſon in this matter of fact concerning the true poſſeſſion of Scripture, as well as in others? Beſides, this were to grante that the light of reaſon is in this matter with Catholiks againſt Proteſtants: and conſequently that to be a Proteteſtant, one muſt firſt caſt away reaſon, euen in a matter which is vnder the reach of reaſon, as is, who are the true owners of the Scriptures. Moreouer, the very end of this Balance is no other, then to shew, that if we will follow the light of reaſon and true prudence, we ought to imbrace the Catholik religion and reiect the Proteſtant, and that to doe otherwiſe, is to caſt away reaſon and prudence, and to become vnreaſonable and imprudent men, and to ſay, that Chriſt hath giuen vs a Religion, which is not onely aboue reaſon, but euen contrarie to reaſon, and that alſo in matters ſubiect to reaſon: and that we can not become faithfull men, but we muſt firſt become vnreaſonable men, not receaue his light of faith, before we put out his light of reaſon, wherewith he hath made vs like to him ſelfe and ſuperiours to beaſts. Thus we ſee, how farre, in all reaſon and prudence, Catholiks are aboue Proteſtants, for the right claime, or iuſt poſſeſſion of holie Scripture: Now let vs ſee in the reſt of this booke how farre alſo they are aboue them for the letter or wordes of Scripture: and in the ſecond booke how farre they are aboue them for the true ſenſe thereof.

A SVMME OF THE MORE MANIFEST CONtradictions betwene the expreſſe wordes of the holie Scripture and of Proteſtants, with the Chapter and Article where they may be read more at large: which will much ſerue to vnderſtand and remember better thoſe which follow.

CHAPTER II. OF GOD.

SCRIPTVRE: Thou are not a God that willeth iniquitie. God willeth not iniquitie. He willeth iniquitie.

Proteſtants. God will haue iniquitie to be committed. God willeth iniquitie with a hidden will: He willeth ſin: He willeth ſin to be done: He would haue Adam to ſin, to fall, to reuoult. See more c. 2. article. 1.

Scripture. Our iuſt lord in the middes thereof, will not doe God doth not iniquitie. iniquitie.

Proteſtants. God worketh euill in vs: The euils of ſin are He doth iniquitie. done by the effectuall working of God: Dauids adulterie is properly Gods worke, Iudas his treacherie is his proper worke as the vocation of S. Paul: Pharao his crueltie is attributed to Gods counſell in no other ſenſe then the Egiptians fauoure towards his people: God procureth ſin it ſelfe. Se more c. 2. art. 4.

Scripture: He (God) hath commanded no man to doe impiouſly. God commā deth not to ſin. He commandeth to ſin.

Proteſtants: God biddeth Sathan goe to be a lying ſpirit: By Gods commandment Sathan is a lying ſpirit: God giueth him a plaine commandment to deceaue: Sathan was ſent to deceaue by the expreſſe commandment of God. See art. 6.

Scripture. God is not a tempter of euils, and he tempteth no God tempeteth not to ſin. man.

Proteſtants. God is the author of temptation: God moueth He temp • eth to ſin. the offenders to ſin: pushed the Iewes to kill his Sonne: ſtirreth vp the theefs will to kill: driueth to ſin by tempting: inclineth the wills of wicked men into greeuous ſins. See more art. 7.

Scripture: Thou hateſt all that worke iniquitie.

Proteſtants. God is angrie with the elect when they ſinne, but God hateth all that worke iniquitie. He hateth not all ſuch. God iuſtifieth not the impious. He iuſtifieth the impious. neuer hateth them: He hateth all iniquitie, but not all in whome iniquitie is. See art. 9.

Scripture. He that iuſtifieth the impious, is abhominable before God.

Proteſtants. Seing God forbiddeth to iuſtifie the impious Prou. 17. can he be ſaied to do that rightly, which him ſelf forbiddeth? Rightly: Albeit we be wicked, yet are we accounted of the lord for iuſt. A wicked man may be pronounced iuſt according to the Ghoſpell: Chriſt can iustifie ſuch as are impious and want all good workes. See more art. 10.

Scripture. Againſt Aaron (God) being exceeding angrie, God is angrie with the faithfull whē they ſin. He is not angrie with thē. God is pleaſed with good workes. He is not pleaſed with them. God is ſerued with good workes. He is not ſerued with them. he would haue deſtroied him.

Proteſtants: God alwaies withouldeth his anger from the faithfull: God is not angrie with ſinners. See art. 11.

Scripture. VVe doe theſe thinges which are pleaſing before him: with ſuch hoſtes God is pleaſed.

Proteſtants. God careth not for workes: we foolishly feigne, that God is much delighted with our workes: There is no ſuch God which is delighted with our good workes: To wash dishes and to preach is all one, as for pleaſing God. See more art. 13.

Scripture. By faſtings and praiers ſeruing (God) day and night.

Proteſtants. The true God is not ſerued with workes: There is one only worship pleaſing to God, to wit true faith. God is ſerued by faith only. Faith is the onely true worship of God. See art. 14.

Scripture. Phinees ſtoode & pacified, and the ſlaughter ceaſed. God is pacified by good workes. He is not pacified by thē. God will haue his commādments kept. He will not haue thē kept.

Proteſtants. There is no ſuch God that can be pacified with our good workes: The workes which I do according to Gods law, do not pacifie his wrath but prouoke it. See more art. 16.

Scripture. This is the will of God, your Sanctification that you abſtaine from fornication, &c.

Proteſtants. God teſtifieth that he will not that his commādments be kept: will he haue the promiſes of the law performed of vs? Nothing leſſe. He commandeth ſome thing which he will not haue done: Properly ſpeaking God will not haue his commandments kept of vs. See art. 17.

Scripture. God hath concluded all into incredulitie, that he God hath mercie on all. may haue mercie on all.

Proteſtants God hath concluded all (the reprobats) vnder He hath not mercie on all. ſin, that he might iuſtly deſtroy them: God nether would nor will haue mercie on all. See art. 18.

Scripture. Thou loueſt all thinges that are, and hateſt nothing God loueth all. of that which thou haſt made.

Proteſtants. God cannot be ſaied to loue all: Albeit he created He loueth not all. all in Adam, yet be loueth not all: God loueth only the elect in Chriſt, all the reſt he iuſtly hated from all eternitie and will for euer hate. See more art. 18.

Scripture. God will all men to be ſaued: Not willing that anie God will all to be ſaued. perish.

Proteſtants. God will not haue all ſaued, not euerie one He will not all to be ſaued ſaued: It is not true, that God would haue all ſaued by Chriſt. God will not haue thoſe that are reprobates to be ſaued. See more art. 19.

Scripture. Liue I, ſaieth our lord God, I will not the death of God will not the death of a ſinner. He will the death of a ſinner. the impious, but that he be conuerted and liue.

Proteſtants. God willeth the death of a ſinner with his vnſearchable will: God createth ſome to death, to perish, to deſtruction: God predestinated to death whome he would and becauſe he would. See art. 22.

Scripture. God made not death. God made not death. He made death.

Proteſtants. God is the Author of death: Gods will is the firſt and vnauoidable cauſe of the perdition of them that perish: The hidden will of God worketh death in all. See more art. 22. cit.

Scripture. Impious men are not neceſſarie for him. God needeth not the impious. He needeth them. God dāneth men for ſin. He damneth not them for ſin. God can de all things. He cannot doe all things

Proteſtants. It is falſe, that God hath not need of a ſinner. See art. 22. cit.

Scripture. Get ye away from me you accurſed into fire euerlaſting; for I was an hungred and you gaue me not to eate.

Proteſtants: God for his mere will damneth men: He damneth them that deſerue not: There is no other cauſe of mans damnation, then Gods mere pleaſure. See art. 23.

Scripture. VVith God all thinges are poſsible.

Proteſtants. That ſaying: All things are poſsible to God, hath ſome exception: God hath no abſolute power. See more art. 24.

CHAPTER III. OF CHRIST.

SCripture. Who (Chriſt) was predestinate the Sonne of God Chriſt, predeſtinate the Sōne of God. Not predeſtinate. Chriſt made lawes. He made none. in power.

Proteſtants. That Chriſt was predeſtinate the Sonne of God: is Arianiſme. See art. 2.

Scripture. Teach them to obſerue all things whatſoeuer I haue commanded you.

Proteſtants. Chriſt is no lawmaker; no lawgiuer who gaue anie new law to the world. See art. 7.

Scripture. Beare ye one an others burdens, and ſo ye shall fulfill Chriſts Ghoſpell a law. the law of Chriſt.

Proteſtants. The Ghoſpell must not be called a new law. Art. No law. 7. cit.

Scripture. And he hath giuen him power to doe iudgment, Chriſt a iudge. becauſe he is the Sonne of man.

Proteſtants. Chriſt is not iudge: He shall not exerciſe the laſt No iudge. iudgment as man. See art. 8.

Scripture. For theſe are the twoe teſtaments. Twoe teſtaments.

Proteſtants. There are not twoe teſtaments. See art. 9. Not twoe. Chriſt learnt nothing.

Scripture. How doth this man know letters, whereas he hath not learned?

Proteſtants. Chriſt was ſo ignorant, as he learnt, and was He laernt. taught as men are. See art. 10.

Scripture: It was ſeemly, that we should haue ſuch a high preiſt, Chriſt no ſinner. holie, innocent, impolluted, ſeparated from ſinners. VVho did not ſin.

Proteſtants. Christ was a ſinner and that truly: we muſt not He was a ſinner. imagin Chriſt to be innocent: He confeſſeth his delicatenes, ouerwhelmed with deſperation he gaue ouer calling vpon God. He needed baptiſme. See art. 11.

Scripture. This is my beloued ſonne, in whome I am well pleaſed. Chriſt beloued of God.

Proteſtants. God made Chriſt by imputation a ſinner, or Hatefull of God. vniust, guiltie, hatefull to God. See art. 11. cit.

Scripture. This commandment (of giuing my life) I receaued Chriſt commanded to die. Not commā ded. He ſufficiently redeemed. Not ſufficiētly. of my Father.

Proteſtants. They ſay: A law was made that Chriſt should die: But this is againſt Scripture. See art. 14.

Scripture: The Sonne of man is come to giue his life a redemtion (in Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) for manie.

Proteſtants. They erre ſaying that Chriſts death was a ſufficiēt redemption ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) for the ſinnes of all: Christ died not ſufficiently for all. See art. 16.

Scripture. He hath reconciled in the bodie of his flesh by He redeemed vs by death. death: Pacifiing by the blood of his croſſe.

Proteſtants. Nothing had beene done, if Chriſt had ſuffered Not by death. only corporall death: Reaſon it ſelfe teacheth, that only corporall death (of Chriſt) was not ſufficient to redeeme them who had deſerued death both of bodie and ſoule. Se more art. 17.

Scripture. Chriſt did die for the impious. They denie him Chriſt died for the impious and damned. Not for them that bought them, the lord, bringing vpon them ſelues ſpeedie perdition.

Proteſtants. Chriſt did not giue him ſelf for the impious and reprobates. He shed not his blood for the ſinnes of the impious & damned. See more art. 18.

Scripture. who is the Sauiour of all men, eſpecially of the Sauiour of all faithfull. VVho gaue him ſelfe a redemption for all.

Proteſtants. It is not Chriſt the Redeemer of all? No. Chriſt Not Sauiour of all. is the Redeemer only of the elect, and of none els. See more art. 18. and 19.

Scripture. He is the propitiation of our ſinnes, and not of our Propitiation for the ſins of the world. Not for the ſins of the world. His ſoule went to hel. Not to hel. Entred the dores being s • ut. Not being shut. ſinnes onely but alſo for the whole worlde.

Proteſtants, They ſpeake amiſſe, who ſay that by Christs death the ſinnes of the whole world were redeemed. See art. 19. cit.

Scripture. Thou shalt not leaue my ſoule in hel.

Proteſtants. Chriſts ſoule neuer went to the places of hel. Christs ſoule did not deſcend to hel. See art. 21.

Scripture. Ieſus cometh, the dores being shut, and ſtood in the midſt.

Proteſtants. Chriſt by his diuine power did open the shut dores. The dores were not shut in the very inſtant of his paſsing. See more art. 23.

Scripture. Hauing a great high preiſt, that hath penetrated Chriſt penetrated the heauen. Not penetrated them. Chriſt praieth for vs. He praieth not for vs. the heauenes, Ieſus the Sonne of God.

Proteſtants. Chriſt aſcended without penetration of quantities. VVe admit no penetration. See art. 14.

Scripture. I will aske the Father. VVho alſo maketh interceſsion for vs.

Proteſtants. VVe may not imagin that Chriſt as a Suppliant praieth for vs. His death and reſurrection are in ſteed of an eternall interceſsion. See more art. 25.

CHAPTER IV. OF ANGELS AND SAINTES.

SCripture. And the Angell of our Lord anſwered and ſaied: O Angels pray for vs. Lord of Hoſtes, how long will thou not haue mercie on Hieruſalem?

Proteſtants. The Scripture teacheth not that Angels pray. They pray not. We denie that the holie Angels do pray in particular for our neceſsities. See art. 4.

Scripture. And he preuailed againſt the Angel, and was Angels to be praied vnto. Not to be praied vnto. strenghtned, and he wept and beſought him.

Proteſtants. The inuocation of Saints and Angels is impious See art. 8.

Scripture. Our lord opened the eyes of Balaam, and he ſaw the Angels to be bowed vnto. Angel ſtanding in the way with a drawne ſword, and he adored him flat to the ground.

Proteſtants. We muſt beware that we nether adore nor worship Not to be bowed vnto. Angels: He could not fall downe to the Angel without diminishing Gods honour. See art. 11.

Scripture. Nether take thou away thy mercie from vs for God to be praied by the names of Saintes. Not ſo to be praied. Abraham thy beloued, and Iſaac thy ſeruant, and Iſrael the holie one.

Proteſtants. In the Prophets there is not found anie ſuch inuocation: Heare me o God for Abraham. God is not to be beſought by the names of Saintes. See more art. 9.

Scripture. For your ſelues know, how you ought to imitate vs. Saintes to be imitated. Not to be imitated. God protecteth vs for the Saintes ſake. Not for their ſakes. Some Saintes bad power to worke miracles. None had ſuch power. Santes receaue men into eternall tabernacles. They do not receaue. Be ye followers of me.

Proteſtants. Theſe trifles ought not to be ſung to the people that they should imitate the Saintes. God requireth that we follow his ſcripture only, and not the examples of Saintes. See art. 12.

Scripture. I will protect this cittie and ſaue it for my ſelf and for Dauid my ſeruant.

Proteſtants. It is not to be borne, that they ſay, through Gods liberalitie and Chriſts grace the merits of Saints do profit vs to protection. See art. 10.

Scripture. And he gaue them power to cure infirmities and to caſt out Diuels.

Proteſtants. God neuer gaue anie man power of working miracles ether mediatly or immediatly. See art. 16.

Scripture. Make vnto you freinds of the mammon of iniquitie, that when you faile, they may receaue you into the eternall tabernacles.

Proteſtants. VVe muſt not vnderſtand, that men shall receaue vs into eternall tabernacles. See art. 13.

Scripture. They shalbe priests of God and Chriſt, and shall Saints reigne with him. reigne with him.

Proteſtants. The Saints do not reigne with Christ. See art. They reigne not with him. 16.

Scripture. And he that shall ouercome and keepe my workes Saintes rule nations. vnto the end, I will giue him power ouer the nations, and he shall rule them with a rodde of yron.

Proteſtants. It is an errour, that Angels or the ſoules of the They rule them not. bleſſed men are appointed of God to rule and gouerne vs. See art. 16. cit.

CHAPTER V. OF THE SCRIPTVRE OR WORD OF GOD.

SCripture. Paule according to the wiſdome giuen him, hath Some things in Scripture. are hard. written, as alſo in all Epiſtles, ſpeaking in them of theſe things in which are certaine hard to be vnderſtood.

Proteſtants. Peter ſaieth not, that Paules Epiſtles are obſcure, No thing hard. no nor that there are ſome obſcure things in Paules Epiſtles. No parte of the Scripture is obſcure: How can the Scripture be called obſcure in anie parte. See more art. 1.

Scripture. Ieſus began to preach and ſay: Doe pennance for The Ghoſpel preacheth pennance. It preacheth it not. the kingdom of heaune is at hand.

Proteſtants. The Ghoſpell properly is not a preaching of pennance. The Ghoſpell preacheth not to vs that this or that is to be done, or exacteth any thing of vs. See more art. 4.

Scripture. If thou will enter into life, keepe the commandments. Promiſeth life conditionally

Proteſtants. The Ghospell promiſeth ſaluation euen to thoſe Not conditionally. that haue no good workes at all. The Ghoſpel requireth not workes to ſaluation. See more art. 6. Ghoſpell not contrarie to the law.

Scripture Doe we then destroie the law by faith? God forbid. But we eſtablish the law.

Proteſtants. The Ghoſpell is truly oppoſite to the law. The law It is contrarie to it. aad the Ghospell of themſelues wholy fight one with the other. See more art. 7.

Scripture. All things muſt needs be fulfilled, which are written Moiſes law commandeth faith in Chriſt. It commandeth it not. Traditions to be kept. Not to be kept. in the law of Moiſes, and the Prophets, and the Pſalmes of me.

Proteſtants. Faith in Chriſt, the law neuer knew. The law of Moiſes commandeth not faith in Chriſt. See more art. 8.

Scripture. Hould the traditions, which you haue learnt, whether it be by word or by our epiſtle.

Proteſtants. VVe care not for vnwritten traditions: we acknowledge no word but that which is written. See more art. 9.

CHAPTER VI. OF S. PETER, AND THE APOSTLES.

SCripture. Thou art Peter, and vpon this rock will I build Church built vpon Peter. my Church.

Proteſtants. Peter is not rock, becauſe Chriſt did not build Not vpon Peter. his Church vpon Peter. See more art. 2.

Scripture. And I ſay to thee: Thou art Peter. And to thee Keyos giuen to Peter. I will giue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen.

Proteſtants. Chriſt called faith the rock, to which rock not to Not giuen to him. Peter, be gaue theſe key • s. See art. 3.

Scripture. I haue praied for thee (Peter) that thy faith faile Peters faith, failed not. It failed. not.

Proteſtants. For a time ſurely Peters ſaith failed whiles he denied Chriſt. It is a blaſphemous ſpeech, that Peter denying Chriſt did not leſe his faith. See more art. 4.

Scripture. And the wall of the cittie hauing twelue foundations: The Apoſtles foundations. and in them twelue names of the twelue Apoſtles of the lambe.

Proteſtants. The Apoſtles were not the foundations. See Not foundations. more art. 5.

Scripture. He that heareth you, heareth me. The Apoſtles ſimply to be heard. Not ſimply to be heard.

Proteſtants. The Apoſtles be not ſimply to be heard, but to be examined according to the rule of Scripture, S. Paules 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 shalbe 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 shalbe 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 shalbe 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 shalbe 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 cō manded 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 dā nation. Not all.

Proteſtants. Paule was not whashed by baptiſme. See artic. 7.

Scripture. We were by nature the children of wrathe, as alſo the reſt. As by the offence of one, vnto all men to condemnation.

Proteſtants. Originall ſinne is not imputed to them: the children of the faithfull are borne Saintes. See art. 9.

Scripture. In what then were ye baptized? who ſaied: in Ihons Some baptized in Saint Ihons Baptiſme. Not in that baptiſme. Some knew not of the Holie Ghoſt. They knew of him. baptiſme.

Proteſtants. It is demonstrated, that they were neuer baptized in Ihons outward baptiſme. See more art. 11.

Scripture. But they ſaied to him: Nay nether haue we heard whither there be a Holie Ghoſt.

Proteſtants. How could it be that Iewes had heard nothing of the Holie Ghoſt. Se more art. 12.

CHAPTER XI. OF THE EVCHARIST.

SCripture. This is my bodie which is giuen for you. This is my The Euchariſt is the bodie of Chriſt. It is not his bodie. bloud of the new teſtament that shalbe shed for manie.

Proteſtants. The Sacramentall bread is called Chriſts bodie, although indeed it be not Chriſts bodie: The Euchariſt is not truely the bodie of Chriſt. Some do vrge that the lords bread is the verie bodie of Chriſt, but we ſay the contrarie. See more art. 1.

Scripture. Vnles ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and Chriſts flesh to be eaten. drinke his blood, ye shall not haue life in you.

Proteſtants. Chriſt did not command his bodie to be eaten, Not to be eaten. but ſymbolicall bread. VVe eate and drinke nothing but bread and wine. Christs corporall flesh can be no way eaten. See more art. 2. His flesh truly meate.

Scripture. My flesh is truely meate.

Proteſtants. It is farre from the bodie of the lord to be truly Not truly meate. eaten. See art. 2. cit.

Scripture. Drinke ye all of this: For this is the blood of the Blood of the new teſtamē to be drunk. Not to be drunk. The Chalice is the new teſtament. There is ſacrifice. new teſtament.

Proteſtants. Chriſt did not giue the blood of the new testament to drink. See art. 3.

Scripture. This chalice is the new teſtament in my blood.

Proteſtants. That Cuppe was not the new teſtament This Cuppe was not the new teſtament it ſelf. See more art. 4.

Scripture. In euerie place there is ſacrificing, and there is offered to my name a cleane oblation.

Proteſtants. There is no more Sacrifice remayning in the There is none Church. See more art. 11.

Scripture. This is the chalice, the new teſtament in my blood, The Chalice shed for vs. which (chalice, as is euident by the Greek text) shalbe shed for you.

Proteſtāts. The chalice was not shedde for vs. See more art. 6. Not shedde for vs. We haue an altar. We haue none.

Scripture. We haue an altar, whereof they haue no power to eate who ſerue the tabernacle.

Proteſtants. Paule maketh no mention of an altar. In the Apoſtolicall writings there is no mention of an altar. Altars haue no place in the time of the Ghoſpell. See more art. 24.

Scripture. And the whole mul •• tude of the children of Iſrael The Paſchall lambe ſacrificed. Not ſacrificed. shall ſacrifice him (the paſchall lambe) at euen.

Proteſtants. The holie Bible no where teacheth that the paſchall lambe was immolated and ſacrificed. The paſchall lambe was no ſacrifice. See more art. 13.

OF THE OTHER SACRAMENTS. CHAPTER XII.

SCripture. Whoſe ſinnes you shall forgiue, they are forgiuen. Men can forgiue ſinnes. They can not

Proteſtants. Men do not forgiue ſinnes who attributeth remiſsion of ſinnes to a creature, robbeth God of his glorie. It is proper to God alone to remit ſinnes, and ſo proper, as he communicateth this glorie to none. See more art. 1.

Scripture. Confeſſe your ſinnes one to an other. Sinnes to be confeſſed to men. Not to be cō feſſed to thē. Grace by impoſition of hands. Not by it.

Proteſtants. God requireth not this confeſsion to manne. Confeſsion of ſinnes is forbidden. Nether Christ nor his Apoſtles would command it. See art. 2.

Scripture. Reſuſcitate the grace of God, which is in thee by the impoſition of my hands.

Proteſtants. Grace was not giuen by the externall ſigne (of impoſition of hands.) Impoſition of hands of it ſelf hath no efficacie, but the effect dependeth of God alone. See more art. 3.

Scripture. Euerie one that diſmiſſeth his wife and marrieth an To marie after diuerce is aduantrie. Not aduantrie. Men dying are to be auoiled. other committeth aduoutrie.

Proteſtants. Who diſmiſſeth his wife for whoredome and marrieth an other, doth not commit aduoutrie, See more art. 6.

Scripture. Is anie man ſick among you? let him bring in the preiſts of the Church, and let them pray ouer him, anoiling him with oile.

Proteſtants. The Preists were commanded, that they should Not to be not anoile thoſe that died. See more art. 7.

CHAPTER XIII. OF FAITHE.

SCripture. This is the worke of God that you beleiue in him Faith is a worke. whom he hath ſent.

Proteſtants. Faith is no worke. It is falſe, that faith is a Not to worke worke. See more art. 1.

Scripture. And now there remaine Faith, Hope, and Charitie, Faith diſtinct from Hope theſe three &c.

Proteſtants. Who wnderſtand not that Faith, Hope, and Not diſtinct. Charitie are the ſelfe ſame thinge, wilbe forced to let paſſe manie knot • es in Scripture vnlooſed. See more art. 7.

Scripture. And now there remaine Faith, Hope, and Charitie, Faith inferior to Charitie. Not inferior. theſe three, but the greater of theſe is Charitie.

Proteſtants. Faith is greater then Charitie. Faith is better, more worthie, more noble then Charitie. See more art. 7.

Scripture. Of the Princes alſo manie beleiued in him, but for Faith without confeſsiō. the Phariſes did not confeſſe.

Proteſtants. True faith can no more be ſeparated from confeſsion Not without confeſsion. Faith of Chriſts Godhead helpeth. of mouth, then fire from heate. See more art. 9.

Scripture. Theſe are written, that you may beleeue that Ieſus is Christ the Sonne of God, and that beleiuing you may haue life in his name.

Proteſtants. To beleiue that Chriſt is one perſon, which is Helpeth not. God and man, would helpe none. See more art. 3.

Scripture: Of the Princes alſo manie beleiued in him, but Faith without charitie. for the Phariſes did not confeſſe. For they loued the glorie of man more then the glorie of God.

Proteſtants. It is impoſsible to beleiue where charitie wanteth. Not without charitie. True faith can no more be without workes then fire without heate. See more art. 8.

Scripture. Faith without workes, is dead. Faith ſome times dead. Neuer dead.

Proteſtants. Who beleiue, that true faith can be dead, beleiue againſt the Confeſsion of our Church. True faith can neuer be ſaied to be dead. See more art. 10.

Scripture. VVithout faith it is impoſsible to pleaſe God. Faith neceſſarie to ſaluation. Not neceſſarie. Faith without workes ſaueth not. It ſaueth. Beliefe doth iuſtifie.

Proteſtants: 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. Simō 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 shalbe 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 cer • 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, becauſe you haue loued me.

Proteſtants. The obedience which the faithfull giue to him, is not ſo much a cauſe why he continueth his loue towards them, as an effect of his loue. See art. 17.

Scripture. When you shall haue done all things that are commanded We ought to doe good workes. you, ſay we are vnprofitable ſeruants, we haue done that which we ought to doe.

Proteſtants. Thou oweſt nothing to God but faith: This phraſe We ought not. of the law: A faithfull man ought to doe good workes, belongeth not to Chriſtians. See more art. 18.

Scripture: I haue inclined my hart to do thy iuſtification for We may doe good for reward. We may not. euer, for reward.

Proteſtants. If thou pray, faſt, &c. Beware thou doeſt it not for that end that thou maieſt reape anie temporall or eternall profit. See more art. 19.

CHAPTER XV. OF GOOD VVORKES IN PARTICVLER.

SCripture. I ſay to the vnmaried and to widous: It is good for It is good not to marrie. them if they ſo abide.

Proteſtants. It is not good for a man to be ſingle, for it is not It is not good. pleaſant, not honeſt, nor profitable. See more art. 1. Single life, counſ • lled. No • counſelled.

Scripture. Art thou looſe from a wife? Seek not a wife.

Proteſtants. Paule will haue vniuerſally all to be married. God pronounceth the ſentence, that he will haue none to be vnmarried. See more art. 4.

Scripture. He that ioyneth his virgin in matrimonie, doth Virginitie is a vertue. well, and he that ioyneth not, doth better.

Proteſtants. Virginitie is no vertue, but a thing indifferent. Not a vertue. We thinke that virginitie is nothing. See more articul. 2.

Scripture. He that ioyneth his virgin in matrimonie doth Virginitie better then marriage. Not better. well, and he that ioyneth not, doth better.

Proteſtants. Single life in it ſelfe is much more baſer then marriage. To beget children, is the cheefeſt worke after preaching. See more art. 3.

Scripture. Who departed not from the temple, by faſtings and Faſting, ſeruice of God. praiers ſeruing night and daye.

Proteſtants. Faſting of it ſelfe is an indifferent thing. It is a No ſeruice of God. naughtie ſuperſtition, to thinke that faſting is a parte of Gods ſeruice. See more art. 5.

Scripture. This kinde (of Diuels) is not caſt out, but by Faſting driveth away Diuels. It driueth thē not. praier and faſting.

Proteſtants. The ridiculous Papiſts make faſting an antidote to driue away Diuels. See art. 6.

Scripture: I Daniell mourned the dayes of three weeks, deſiderable Choice of meats, good bread I did not eate, and flesh and wine entred not into my mouth.

Proteſtants. We hould this diſtinction of meats to be foolish, Not good. and wicked: Choice of meates vpon certaine dayes S. Paule attributeth to the doctrin of Diuels. See more art. 7.

Scripture. I deſire, that praiers be made for all men. Praier, to be made for all. Not for all.

Proteſtants Nether muſt we pray for euerie one. We muſt not make praiers for the ſinnes of the reprobates. See more artic. 8.

Scripture. It is a holie cogitation, to pray for the dead, that Good to pray for the dead. they my be looſed from ſinnes.

Proteſtants. We deteſt praiers for the dead. That forme of Not good. praier: God giue the dead a happie reſurrection, is to be reiected. Praier in an vnknowne language, good. See more art. 9.

Scripture ſaieth of one praying in the Church in an vnknowne tongue: Indeed thou giueſt thankes well.

Proteſtants. We deteſt praiers in an vnknowne tongue. It is Not good. repugnant to Scripture, and contrarie to ſenſe of nature. See more art. 12.

Scripture. Vow ye, and render to our Lord your God. Vowes good. Not good.

Proteſtants. Vowes are againſt the ordinance of God; vowes do not become Chriſtians. See more art. 14.

Scripture. If thou will be perfect, goe ſell all thou hast, Forſaking of riches, counſelled. Not counſelled. and giue to the poore, and thou shalt haue treaſure in heauen.

Proteſtants. The forſaking of goods, hath no commandment nor counſell in Scripture. See more art. 16.

Scripture. Almes deliuereth from all ſinne and from Almes deliuereth from death. Not from death. Penall workes, a parte of pennance. No parte of pennance. death.

Proteſtants. Almes deliuereth not from temporall death nor from eternall death. See more art. 15.

Scripture If in Tyre and Sidon had beene wrought the miracles that haue bene wrought in you, they had done pennance in hairecloth and ashes.

Proteſtants. Ashes, ſackcloth was no parte of pennance. Sackcloth and ashes are only an externall ſigne of pennance. See more art. 18.

Scripture. The child grew, and was ſtrengthned in ſpirit, Eremiticall life, good; and was in the deſerts vntill the daye of his manifeſtation in Iſrael.

Proteſtants. Eremiticall life is clownish, ſauage, and farre Not good. from ciuilitie. See more art. 20.

Scripture. God ſaw their (Niniuites) workes, that they were The Niniuites pēnance, true. Not true. conuerted from their euill way &c.

Proteſtants. The pennance of the Niniuites was not true pennance. See more art. 19.

CHAPTER XVI. OF SINNE.

SCripture. He that committeth ſinne, is of the Diuell. Great ſinners are of the Diuell. Not all.

Proteſtants. Nether the faithfull who ſinne by chance, or of them ſelues by weaknes; but ſuch as giue them ſelues to ſinne, ſerue the Diuell and ought to be called Sonnes of the Diuell. See more art.

Scripture. You are euacuated from Chriſt, that are iuſtified Sinne putteth out of grace. in the law, you are fallen from grace.

Proteſtants. Not anie enormious ſinne obſcureth grace, much It putteth not. leſſe extinguisheth it. The faithfull ſinne, but fall not from grace. See more art. 6. No murderer hath life. Some murderer hath. Iuſtice ſtandeth not with ſinne. It ſtandeth with ſinne. Sinne to be redeemed with almes. Not to be redeemed with almes. Sin purged by workes. Not purged by them. Great ſinne ſeperateth from God. Seperateth not. Sinne cauſe of damnatiō.

Scripture. No murderer hath life euerlaſting abiding in him ſelfe.

Proteſtants. Dauid (a murderer) was not yet quite ſpoiled of ſpirituall life, not yet depriued of iuſtification. See more art. 6. cit.

Scripture. What participation hath iuſtice with iniquitie.

Proteſtants. Sinne dwelleth together with iuſtice in vs. A worke is partly good, partly euill. See more art. 7.

Scripture. Redeeme thou thy ſinnes with almes.

Proteſtants. Should not Chriſt haue died in vaine for ſinnes, if ſinnes could be redeemed with almes? See more art. 8.

Scripture. By mercie and faith ſinnes are purged.

Proteſtants. If purging of ſinnes be giuen to mens workes, then is Christ dead in vaine. See art. 8. cit.

Scripture. Nether fornicatours nor adulterers shall poſſeſſe the kingdome of God.

Proteſtants. Sinne shall not drawe vs from Chriſt, though we commit fornication or murder a thouſand times a daye. See more art. 9.

Scripture. Departe from me ye accurſed into euerlaſting fire: for I was an hungred and you gaue me not to eate.

Proteſtants. Thoſe that are adiudged to eternall punishment, Not cauſe of damnation. are not therefore damned becauſe they ſinned. Onely incredulitie damneth. See more art. 10.

Scripture. Euerie one of vs for him ſelfe shall render account Account is to be giuen of ſinnes. to God. That euerie one may receaue the proper things of the bodie as he hath done ether good or euill.

Proteſtants. If workes come into iudgment, we are all damned. Not to be giuen. Theſe ſinnes shall not come to account before God. See more art. 11.

Scripture reporteth that Dauid ſaied of him ſelfe: I haue Dauid did ill. done ill before thee.

Proteſtants. Dauid neuer committed ſinne: The regenerate He did not ill commit noe ſinne. See more art. 12.

Scripture reporteth theſe words of Dauid: I am he that Dauid him ſelfe ſinned. haue ſinned, I haue done wickedly.

Proteſtants. The elect him ſelfe doth not ſinne, but ſinne that Not him ſelf. dwelleth in him. The true faithfull or regenerate doth not ſinne. See more art. 13.

CHAPTER XVII. OF IVSTIFICATION.

SCripture. Abraham, was he not iuſtified by workes? Abraham iuſtified by workes. Not by workes. Man iuſtified by workes. Not by workes. Sinnes forgiuē for loue. Not for loue.

Proteſtants. Abraham was not iuſtified by his good workes. He was iuſtified by no other thing at all but by faith. See art. 1.

Scripture. Doe you ſee that by workes a man is iuſtified?

Proteſtants. We ſaye, they are not iuſtified by workes, we can not be iuſtified by workes. See art. 1. cit.

Scripture. Manie ſinnes are forgiuen her, becauſe she loued much.

Proteſtants. Not becauſe the woman loued much, therefore her ſinnes were forgiuen her. See art. 1. cit.

Scripture: By workes a man is iuſtified, and not by faith Man not iuſtified by faith onely. By faith onely. Some iuſt before God. None iuſt before God. onely.

Proteſtants. We are iustified by faith onely. By faith onely we receaue remiſsion of ſinnes. See more art. 2.

Scripture. They were both iuſt before God.

Proteſtants. Before God none is iuſt, none can be iust. Where shall anie ſuch (iuſt) be found amongst men? See more artic. 3.

Scripture. You are cleane. The blood of Chriſt cleanſeth vs Some cleane. from all ſinne.

Proteſtants. The beleiuers are iust, and yet vncleane. The None cleane. pious man is in him ſelfe vncleane and filthie. See more art. 4.

Scripture. As farre as the Eaſt is from the weſt, hath he made Sinnes taken from the iuſtified. Not taken frō them. our iniquities farre from vs. There is no iniquitie found in me.

Proteſtants. In the regenerate there are manie ſinnes, and great filth. Innumerable ſinnes euen ſuch as are worthie of death, remaine in the regenerate. See more art. 5.

Scripture Before him (God) iuſtice hath bene found in me. Iuſtice in mē. No iuſtice in them.

Proteſtants. There can be no iuſtice in vs. There is no inherent iuſtice in the iudgment of God. See more. 8.

Scripture. To him, that beleiueth in him who iuſtifieth the Some inherēt thing imputed. No inherent thing, imputed. Men not certaine of grace. Certaine. impious, his faith is reputed to iuſtice.

Proteſtants. What is inherent, is not imputed. See more art. 9.

Scripture. Man knoweth not whether he be worthie of loue or hatred.

Proteſtants. It is lewednes, to ſay, that none can know by certaintie of faith that he hath obtained grace. See more artic. 10.

Scripture. Ye are fallen from grace. Some fall frō grace. None fall frō grace.

Proteſtants: It is impoſsible for thoſe that beleiue to fall from grace. The elect neuer fall from grace. The faithfull neuer fall from the grace of God. See more art. 12.

Scripture. Thou by faith doeſt ſtand: Be not highly wiſe, but VVe muſt feare. feare.

Proteſtants: That is not to be ſuffered, that they exhort vs VVe muſt not feare. to feare. I cannot be damned, vnleſſe Chriſt be damned. See more art. 13.

Scripture. If the iuſt man shall turne away him ſelfe from his Some reprobates, iuſtified. Noreprobates iuſtified. Man prepareth his hart. He prepareth it not. iuſtice and doe iniquitie, in his ſinne which he hath ſinned in them he shall dye.

Proteſtants. No reprobate is iuſtified. The elect only repent and doe good workes. See more art. 14.

Scripture. It perteineth to a man to prepare the harte.

Proteſtants. In our conuerſion to God we haue our ſelues wholy paſsiuely. A man is like a blocke in his conuerſion. See more art. 15.

CHAPTER XVIII. OF EVERLASTING LIFE AND DEATH.

SCripture. Your reward is very great in heauen. You shall receaue Saluation a reward or retribution. No reward or retribution. There is a crowne of iuſtice. No crowne of iuſtice. Faith alone ſaueth not. It ſaueth. Some already ſuffer the paines of hell. None yet ſuffer the paines of hell. Hell a place of torments. No place. the retribution of inheritance.

Proteſtants. That he ſaueth, is mere grace, not a reward or retribution. See more art. 1.

Scripture. There is laied vp for me a crowne of iustice.

Proteſtants. Paule acknowledgeth nothing in the whole courſe of ſaluation, but mere grace. See more art. 2.

Scripture. Shall faith be able to ſaue him?

Proteſtants. Faith alone ſaueth. By faith alone we are ſaued. See more art. 3.

Scripture. As Sodome and Gomorrha and the citties adioyning in like manner hauing fornicated &c. were made an example, ſuſtaining the paine of eternall fire.

Proteſtants. It is a falſe poſition: that the ſoules ſuffer in hell before the bodies. See more art. 6.

Scripture. Leſt they alſo come into this place of torments.

Proteſtants. We muſt not imagin, that hell is anie certaine, definite, and corporall place. A locall hell, is a fiction. See more art. 7.

Scripture. Departe from me ye curſed into fire euerlaſting. Hell fire, true fire.

Proteſtants. They feigne, that the ſoules of men and diuels Not true fire. are tormented in hell with true and corporall fire. See more artic. 8.

CHAPTER XIX. OF GODS LAW.

SCripture. My yoke is ſweet, and my burden light. Gods law poſſible. Not poſsible, Some haue kept Gods law. None haue kept it. Some haue loued God with all their hart. None haue loued him ſo. Gods law in the harts of ſome. In the harts of none. We pray to fulfill Gods will. We pray not ſo. Keeping the cōmandments neceſſarie to life. Not neceſſarie.

Proteſtants. The law is impoſsible to be kept. It is impoſsible to keepe the commandments. See more art. 1.

Scripture. I haue kept thy law. They haue kept thy word.

Proteſtants. No man performeth the law or euer performed it. See more art. 2.

Scripture faieth of Ioſias: He returned to our lord in all his hart, and in all his ſoule, and in all his power, according to all the law of Moiſes.

Proteſtants: There was no Sainte who in this mortall life loued God with all is ſoule, with all his hart, with all his power. See more art. 3.

Scripture. The law of God in his hart.

Proteſtants. Euen after regeneration, the word of the law is not properly ſaied to be in our hart. See more art. 4.

Scripture. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heauen.

Proteſtants. We do not pray, that we may fulfill the law. See more art. 5.

Scripture. If thou wilt enter into life, keepe the commandments.

Proteſtants. Woe be to their Cathecumens, if ſo hard a condition (of keeping the law) be impoſed vpon them. See more art. 6.

Scripture. Do we then destroye the law by faith? God forbid: but we eſtablish the law.

Proteſtants. All the ceremoniall law or the Decalogue is abrogated It is abrogated. from a Chriſtian, becauſe he is dead to it; And to be dead to the law, is not to be bound with the law, but free from it and not to know it. See more art. 7.

CHAPTER XX. OF MANS LAVV.

SCripture. Who, thinkeſt thou, is a faithfull and wiſe ſeruant, Superioritie amōgſt Chriſtians. whome his lord hath appointed ouer his familie.

Proteſtants. Among Chriſtians, there can be no ſuperioritie. Chriſt is my immediate Lord, I know no other. See more art. 1.

Scripture. To the reſt, I ſay, not our Lord: If anie brother None amōgſt them. haue a wife an infidell, and she conſent to dwell with him, let him not put her away.

Proteſtants. They draw to themſelues all the maieſtie of God, Man can command that which God doth not. He cannot. Conſcience ſubiect to mās lawes. Not ſubiect. who chaleng authoritie to make lawes. See more art. 2.

Scripture: Be ſubiect of neceſsitie, not only for wrathe, but alſo for conſcience ſake.

Proteſtants. The lawes of Princes bind not the conſcience: haue no power ouer the conſcience. See more art. 3.

CHAPTER XXI. OF FREE WILL.

SCripture. It shalbe in the arbitrement of her husband, whether There is free will. she shall do it, or not do it.

Proteſtants. Free vill is a title without the thing. See more There is none art. 1.

Scripture. Without thy counſell I would do nothing, that thy Freedome to good. good might not be as it were of neceſsitie, but voluntarie.

Proteſtants. Man after his fall hath no libertie to good. There No freedome to good. is no free will to good. See more art. 2.

Scripture. We are Gods coadiutours. Gods coadiutors.

Proteſtants. Papiſts make God the firſt and cheefeſt cauſe of all goodnes, and vs coadiutours: Which is craftily to withdraw Not his coadiutors. themſelues from God. See more art. 3.

CHAPTER XXII. OF MANS SOVLE.

SCripture. Feare ye not them who kill the bodie, and are not Mans ſoule, immortall. able to kill the ſoule.

Proteſtants. I giue leaue to the Pope to make articles of faith Not immortall. for his followers. Such as are that breade and wine are tranſſubſtantiated in the Sacrament: That he is Emperour of the world, and an earthlie God: That the ſoule is immortall, and all thoſe infinit monſters in the Romish dunghill of decrees.

What Propoſitions, I pray you, shal euer be thought cōtradictions, if theſe be not: ſeing there can ſcarce be deuiſed more formall or more direct oppoſition then is betwixt the moſt of theſe? But becauſe perhaps the vulgar Proteſtante will ſay, that he beleiueth not all or moſt of the Proteſtants propoſitions here ſet downe; albeit this excuſe will not ſuffice him, as I haue shewed in the end of my Preface, yet for his fuller ſatisfaction, I haue gathered twelue principall articles, which commonly all Proteſtants beleiue, quite contrarie to the expreſſe word of God.

THE COMMON PROTESTANTS CREED CONSIsting of twelue Articles quite contrarie to the expreſſe word of God in the Scripture.

1 PROTESTANTS beleiue, that a man is Lib. 1. c. 16. art. 2. iuſtified by only faith quite contrarie to the expreſſe word of God. Ioannes. 2. v. 4. Do you ſee, that a man is iuſtified by workes, and not by faith only?

2 Proteſtants beleiue, that we can not keep Goods commandments, quite contrarie to his expreſſe word. Ezechiel 36. v. 27. I will make Lib. 1. c. 18. art. 1. that you walke in my commandments and keepe my iudgments, and doe them.

3 Proteſtants beleiue, that the keeping of Gods commandments is not neceſſarie to come to life euerlaſting quite contrarie to Gods expreſſe words. Mathew. 19. v. 17. Lib. 1. c. 18. art. 6. If thou wilt enter into life, keepe the commandments.

4 Proteſtants beleiue, that no men can forgiue ſinnes quite contrarie to the expreſſe word of God. Ihon 20. v. Lib. 1. c. 11. art. 1. 22. Receaue ye the holie Ghoſt, whoſe ſinnes ye shall forgiue, they are forgiuen them.

5 Proteſtants beleiue, that we are not bound to confeſſe our ſinnes to men quite contrarie to the expreſſe word of Lib. 1. c. 11. art. 2. God Ioannes 5. v. 16. Confeſſe your ſinnes, one to an other.

6 Proteſtants beleiue, that men when they die are not to be anoiled quite contrarie to the expreſſe word of God. Lib. 1. c. 11. art. 7. Iames 5. v. 14 Is anie man ſicke among you? Let him bring in the preiſts of the Church, and let them pray ouer him auoiling him with oile in the name of our lord.

7 Proteſtants beleiue, that the bleſſed Sacrament is not the true bodie and blood of Chriſt quite contrarie to the Lib. 1. c. 10. art. 1. expreſſe word of God. Luke 22. v. 19. This is my bodie, which is giuen for you: and Mathew 26. v. 28. This is my blood, which shalbe shed for remiſson of ſinnes.

8 Proteſtants beleiue, that the Church of God is not infallible in faith, quite contrarie to Gods expreſſe word. 1. Lib. 1. c. 8. art. 6. Timothie 3. v. 15. Which is the Church of the liuing God, the pillar and ground of trueth.

9 Proteſtants beleiue, that we muſt not beleiue Traditions quite contrarie to the expreſſe word of God. 2. Theſſalon. Lib. 1. c. 5. art. 9. 2. v. 15. Hould the Traditions which you haue learned, whether it be by word or by epiſtle.

10 Proteſtants beleiue it is ill done to pray in the Church in an vnknowne language, quite contrarie to the expreſſe Lib. 1. c. 14. art. 12. word of God. 1. Cor. 14. v. 17. where it is ſaied of ſuch a one. Thou indeed giueſts thankes well.

11 Proteſtants Beleiue, that there is no ſacrifice in the Church quite contrarie to the expreſſe word of God. Malachie Lib. 1. c. 11. art. 11. 1. v. 11. In euerie place there is ſacrificing, and there is offered to my name a cleane oblation.

12 Proteſtants beleiue, that there is no altar in the Church quite contrarie to the expreſſe word of God. Hebrewes Lib. 1. c. 11. art. 12. 13. v. 10. We haue an altar, whereof they haue no power to eate who ſerue the tabernacle.

THE FIRST BOOKE OF THE CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIKE AND PROteſtant doctrine with the expreſſe words of the holie Scripture.

FIRST CHAPTER. OF GOD.

Article 1. Whether God willeth iniquitie or ſinne.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

PSALME 5. verſe. 5. Thou art God will not iniquitie. not a God that wilt iniquitie.

Abacuc. 1. verſe. 13. Thine eyes are cleane from ſeing euill, and thou canst not looke towarde iniquitie.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Saint Thomas parte. 1. Summae. quaeſt. 19. art. 9. God will no waye the euill of ſinne.

D. Stapleton lib. 11. de Iuſtificat. c. 8 It is wholy repugnant to Gods nature, to will ſinne.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Caluin in c. 3. Gen. v. 1. & 3. None of theſe things hinder, but God would haue man to fall. that God would haue man to fall, for ſome certaine cauſe vnknowne to vs. And cont. Franciſcan. libertin. in opuſculis page 441. We ſaye, that the diuell and man both fell by the will of God vnknowne to vs.

Beza in 2. par. reſp. ad acta Colloquij Mōtis Belgartenſis p. 177 ſaieth, that our firſt parents fell indeed with the will and Man fall with the will of God. decree of God. Agayne. I ſaied and do ſaye, that it c • me not to paſſe, but by the decree of God ſo willing, that our firſt parents depriued themſelues of their natiue goodneſſe. And l. de Praedeſt. cōt. Caſtell. volum. 1. Theol. p. 340. hauing obiected to him ſelfe, that if the cauſes of damnation come with God his will, then man were out of all fault, and all the fault were in God: he denieth the ſequele, and admitteth the antecedent, and addeth, that God decreeth, and ordaineth the cauſes of damnation.

Peter Martyr in c. 9. Rom. p. 348. God is ſaied to hate ſinne, God willeth ſinne for ſome other end. He would haue Adam to fall. He would haue Adam to ſinne. becauſe he willeth it not for it ſelfe, but for ſome other end. And in locis claſſe 1. c. 14. p. 116. It cannot be doubted, but that God would haue Adam to fall. Zanchius l. 5. de natura Dei. c. 2. Would not God haue Adam to ſinne, and vs all together with him to fall into this corruption; by which it cometh to paſſe, that we cannot but ſinne, vnleſſe he helpe vs with his grace? He would. Agayne. By this (omnipotent) will he would and ordained the ſinne of Adam, that in him all should ſinne.

Piſcator apud Vorſtiū in Paraſceue c. 3. Sinnes are done with Gods procuremēt and will that they should be done. God will iniquitie God will haue iniquitie to be committed. to be cōmitted, albeit he do not delighte in it; as a ſick man will drinke a bitter potiō, albeit he be not delighted with it. Becauſe God will declare his iuſtice and mercie, therefore alſo he will that ſinnes be cōmitted. And apud eundē in Collat. ſect. 61. God will He will that ſinne be done. not onely that ſinnes may be done, but alſo will that they be done.

The ſame Piſcator in Theſibus l. 2. p. 184 It is falſe and implieth contradiction: that man fell, not with Gods will, but with He will ſinne though he be no del • ghted with it. his permiſsion. For if he permitted, he alſo would, not ſimply and of it ſelfe, as if he were delighted with ſinne, but in ſome ſorte and for ſome other thing. Page 187. God can will ſome thing, with which notwithſtāding he is not delighted; As for exāple: he is not He willeth wickednes for ſome other end. delighted with wickednes, & yet permitteth it and that willingly, and therefore willeth it in ſome ſorte and for ſome other end. And p. 203. It is not ill doctrin to ſaye; That Gods will is done euen by ſinning, that is, euen ſinnes are done by Gods will.

Bucanus in Inſtitut. Theol. loco 14. p. 145. Is God not willing God willeth ſin with a hidden will. iniquitie? If you take it ſimply, that God no way will it, the ſcripture is againſt that. Wherefore we muſt expound it ſo: That God will it not with his allowing or reuealed or ſignified will, but with his hidden or good pleaſing will. And the ſame hath Pareus lib. 2. de Amiſſ. Gratiae c. 16.

Melācthon in cap. 9. Rom. This is a miſterie vnſpeakable, to God willeth ſinne. Would Adās fall. Would Adās reuolt. wit, that God willeth ſinnes, and yet truely hateth them.

Perkins in Expoſit. Symbol. tom. 1. col. 773. God would Adams fall for a good end. Et de praedeſtinat. col. 128. We muſt ſay, that God would haue Adams reuolt to come to paſſe. And p. 129. Albeit God willeth not ſinne ſimply and for it ſelfe, yet he doth decree it, and willeth it to come to paſſe. See more of the like ſayings of Proteſtants if you pleaſe in my Latin booke of this matter Chapter. 1. Art. 1.

THE CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS OF THE HOLIE SCRIPTVRE, OF CATHOLIKS, AND OF PROTESTANTS.

The Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that God will not iniquitie or ſinne; nay that he cannot looke toward it. The ſame ſaye Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that God would haue Adam to ſinne, would haue his fall, his reuolt; that God willeth ſinne, willeth wickednes for ſome other end, will haue iniquitie to be cōmitted though he delighte not in it, as a ſick man will drinke a bitter potiō though he take no delighte in it, that the cauſes of damnation came with Gods will, that he willeth ſinne with a hidden and good pleaſing will. Which are as directly againſt the foreſaied words of Scripture, as any can be. Nether will it auaile Ptoteſtants, to ſaye (as ſome times they doe) that God willeth ſinne, as it is the occaſion of ſome good, to wit, of manifeſting his iuſtice in punishing it, or his mercie in pardoning it. Becauſe, in ſaying that God willeth ſinne, wickedneſſe, iniquitie, mans fall, mans reuolt, the cauſes of damnations (as in plaine termes they doeſaye) they not onely affirme: that God willeth the act in which iniquitie is, but the very iniquitie, malice, or ſinfulnes it ſelf, as is manifeſt both by the foreſaied words, as alſo becauſe they ſome times teach (as we shall ſee hereafter article 5.) that ſinne, as it is ſinne, is preordinated of God. And in ſaying, that God willeth iniquitie or ſinfulnes it ſelfe, they directly contradict the aforecited words of holie Scripture. For therein they meane, that iniquitie or ſinne is one of thoſe things which are willed of God, which the Scripture directly denieth. Nether is this contradiction auoided by adding, that though iniquitie be willed of God, yet it is not willed of him for it ſelfe, or as it is iniquitie, but as it is an occaſion of ſome good, becauſe ſtill it is affirmed that iniquitie it ſelfe is one of the things which are willed of God; as in their owne example; True it is, that a bitter potion is willed of the ſicke, though it be not willed of him for it ſelfe, nor as it is bitter, but as it is a meane to recouer health. Wherefore in this matter, we muſt diſtinguish twoe queſtions. The one is ſimple or abſolute: to wit, Whether God will iniquitie or ſinne it ſelfe: To which queſtion the holie Scripture anſwereth negatiuely, and the Proteſtants affirmatiuely. The other is a redoubling queſtion, namely, Whether God will iniquitie or ſinne, as it is iniquitie or ſinne, and 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 Tertull. exhortat. ad Caſtit. c. 2. Proſper. l. 2. ad Vincent. c. 10 all ſinne and iudgment of God, and is more 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 his idle permiſsion. The like he ſaieth de Praedeſtinat. p. 727. And ibid. p. 726. Moiſes clearly affirmeth, that hardnes (of Pharao) to haue Pharoes hardnes, proper worke of God. beene the worke of God. Nether ſurely is Pharao his crueltie attributed here in any other ſenſe vnto Gods counſell, then otherwhere he is ſaied to giue fauour to his people in the ſight of the. Egyptians. And l. 3. Inſtitut. c. 23. §. 1. Whence it followeth, that the hidden counſell of God was the cauſe of this hardnes of harte.

Beza de Praedeſtinat. cont. Caſtell. p. 400. Induration, is the iuſt worke of God, and the worke of Sathan.

Peter Martyr in lib. Iudic. c. 3. Theſe kind of ſpeeches plainly God worketh euerie way euill. teach, that God not onely by permitting, but alſo by doing, worketh euerie way euill in vs.

Piſcator apud Vorſtium in Paraſceue c. 3. &c. in Amica. Collat. ſect. 130. Becauſe God procureth this manifeſtation of Procureth ſinne it ſelfe. of his iuſtice and mercie, therefore alſo he procureth ſinnes them ſelues. God procured that Abſalon rauished his father wiues.

Zanchius de Excaecat. q. 1. to. 7. col. 204. It is certaine, Author of induration. that God as iuſt iudge, was the chiefe Author of this induration.

See more of their like ſayings in my Latin booke. c. 1. art. 4.

THE CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that God will not doe iniquitie, hath not done iniquitie: that a good tree cannot yeeld euill fruits: that who worketh; who committeth ſinne, is of the diuell. The ſame ſaye Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that God worketh euill in vs and by vs, punisheth his ill deeds in vs: that Dauids adulterie was the proper worke of God, and Iudas his treaſon was Gods worke, as well as Pauls vocation: that the euill of ſinne is done by the effectuall working of God: that God is the Author of Induration or hardnes of hart the cauſe of it: that it is Gods worke: that Pharaos crueltie againſt the Iewes is attributed to Gods counſell in the ſame ſenſe, that the Egyptians fauour towards them; that God euery way worketh euill in vs: that God it the Author of all thoſe things which Catholike Cēſurers thinke to fall out by his permiſſion: that God procureth ſinne it ſelfe. Which ſayings are ſo blaſphemous, as the holie fathers affirme, that they make God to be no God: and ſo Baſil. hom. quod Deus nō ſit cauſa mali. contrarie to holie Scripture, as the ſame Proteſtants confeſſe it. See l. 2. c. 25. & 30.

ART. III. WHETHER GOD OERDAINE SINNE to be done, and predeſtinate men to ſinne?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Hieremie. 19. v. 5. And they haue builtes the excelſes of God ordaineth not ſinne Baalim, which I commanded not, nor haue ſpaken of, nether haue they aſcended into my hart. The ſame teacheth the Scripture, where it denieth that God willeth ſinne.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Councell of Trent Seſſion. 6. Can. 17. condemneth this doctrin. The reprobats are predestinate to euill.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Perkins de Praedeſtinat. to. 1. col. 127. We ſay, that Adams God decreed mans fall. fall came, God not onely foreſeing but alſo willing and decreing it In Serie cauſarum. c. 52. It is wicked to ſay, that God did onely forſee Adams fall, but did not ordaine it by an eternall Ordained it. decree. In Apocal. 1. to. 2. God decreed by a generall will, that men should fall and ſinne.

Willet in Synopſi Contr. 8. q. 3. p. 859. The fall of Adam was both foreſeene of God & decreed to be, not permitted onely. As Adams fall decreed as Chriſts death. Chriſt his death was decreed and determined: ſo was the fall of Adam. For the end of Chriſts death was to reſtore Adams fall: and if the end be decreed, then thoſe things alſo which are neceſſarily referred to that end.

Caluin. 3. Inſtitut. c. 23. §. 8. Adam fell becauſe God iudged it ſo expedient. Man falleth Gods prouidence ordayning ſo. De Prouident. p. 736. I acknowledge this to be my doctrin: that Ordained of God. Adam fell not by Gods permiſsion onely, but alſo by his hidden counſell. Et p. 738. I confeſſe I wrote ſo: Adams fall was ordayned by the ſecret decree of God. De Praedeſtinar. p. 704. Let our faith with ſeemlie ſobernes adore a far of the hidden counſell of God, wherwith the fall of men was preordinated.

Beza de Praedeſtinat. cont. Caſtell. p. 340. How God is not in fault, if he ordayne the cauſes of damnation, we th • nke it a God ordeineth the cauſes of dā nation. queſtion vnexplicable to mans ſenſe. Page. 4▪ 7. We acknowledge it to be true, that God hath predeſtinated whomſoeuer he pleaſed not onely to damnation, but alſo to the cauſes of damnation. In Abſters. calum. Heshuſij p. 319. We ſay, that Adam could not fall but through the decree and ordination of God. We think, that Adams fall was decreed of God.

Zanchius de Praedeſtinat. c. 4. to. 7. As well they which Men predeſtinate to blindnes. are blinded are predeſtinated to blindnes, as they which are deliuered, from ſinne, are predestinated to deliuerie. De Excaecat. q. 5. It is cleare, that God hath predestinated ſome to excecation. Sinne euen conſidered as ſinne, as it ſerueth to the glorie of Sinne euen as ſinne is preordeined of God. God not of it nature but by Gods goodnes, ſo far forth is ſinne and the euill of ſinne preordayned of God. Which words alſo Polanus hath l. 4. Syntax. Theol. c. 10. And the ſame Zanchius l. 5. de natura Dei c. 2. to. 2. This was that which God firſt decreeth dānation, and then ſinne. God firſt decreed of the reprobates from all eternitie: to will the euerlasting ordayning of ſome men to perdition: to this were their ſinnes ordained, and to their ſinnes, forſaking and deniall of grace.

Piſcator apud Vorſtium in Paraſceue. c. 3. All things Sinne done by a ſpeciall decree of God. are done by the decree of God, euen ſinnes themſelues, and that by an abſolute and ſpeciall decree. c 6. God deſtinated all and euerie mā to ſinne. Et in Amica. Collat. ſect. 58. God decreed abſolutely and of him ſelfe, that ſinnes should be done. The ſame Piſcator in theſib. l. 2. loco. 12. Reprobation, deniall of grace followeth, this ſinnes follow; ſinnes, punishment followeth, to all God preordayned the reprobate from all eternitie. See more of their like ſayings in the Latin booke c. 1. art. 5.

THE CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS

Scripture expreſſely denieth, that ſinne aſcendeth to the hart of God, or that God willeth it. The ſame, Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſlely affirme, that God ordayned, decreed, determined Adams fall: that Adam fell by Gods counſell and becauſe he thought it expediēt, through the decree, and ordination of God: that God ordaineth the cauſes of damnation, praedeſtinateth to the cauſes of damnation whom he pleaſeth: praedeſtinateth as well to blindnes or excecation, as to deliuerie from ſinne: preordayneth ſinne as ſin, as it is occaſion of good: firſt predeſtinated men to perditiō, and after to ſinne: deſtinateth euery man to ſinne, decreeth ſinne it ſelfe to be done by an abſolute and ſpeciall decree, and that of him ſelfe. Which doctrin is accurſed of the Councell of Arauſica can. 25. and confeſſed by ſome Proteſtants to be contrarie to Scripture. See l. 2. c. vlt.

ART. VI. WHETHER GOD COMMAND any to ſinne.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Eccleſiaſticus c. 15. v. 21. He (God) hath commanded no God commā deth none to ſinne. man to do impiouſly.

Hieremie 32. v. 35. They haue built the excelſes of Baal &c. Which I commanded them not.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Card. Bellarmin. l. 2. Amiſſ. Grat. c. 8. The Scripture manifeſtly teacheth that God doth not command ſinne.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Caluin de Praedeſtinat. p. 727. You ſee, that by Gods Sathan lieth by Gods commandment. commandment Sathan is not onely a lying ſpirit in the mouth of all the Prophets, but &c. De Prouident. pag. 739. What? Where God ſendeth for Sathan the miniſter of his reuenge, and giueth him a plaine commandment to deceaue, is not this different from bare permiſsion? And p. 746. God calling Sathan, God biddeth Sathan to lie. biddeth him goe to be a lying ſpirit in the mouth of all the Prophets for deceaue Achab.

Beza in Abſters. calum. Heshuſij pag. 324. God being angrie with the wicked, deliuereth them to Sathan, and that with this commandment, that by lying and all manner of deceit Expreſſely commandeth him to deceaue. he deſtroy them miſerably. Pag. 382. Sathan was ſent to deceaue Achab by the expreſſe commandment of God. De Praedeſt. cont. Caſtel. p. 403. Caluin wrote rightly and truly, that by Gods commandment Sathan ſolliciteth to theſe deſires, which in regard of Sathan and the wicked, are euill. See more in the Latin booke c. 1. art. 6.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture ſaieth expreſſely, that God commanded none to doe wickedly: that he commanded not to build the excelſes of Baal. The ſame ſaye Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſaye, that Sathan was a lyer by Gods commandment: that God giueth him a plaine command to deceaue: that God biddeth him be a lying ſpirit for to deceaue: that God commandeth Sathan to deſtroy the wicked by lying and all kind of deceit: that God expreſſely ſent him to deceaue: and commandeth him to ſollicite men to ſuch deſires as in them are euill.

ART. VII. WHETHER GOD TEMPTOR push any to ſinne.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Iames c. 1. v. 13. Let no man when he is tempted, ſay that he God tempteth none to ſinne. is tempted of God: for God is not a tempter of euills, and he tempteh no man.

Eccleſiaſticus c. 15. v. 12. Say not: He hath made me erre, for impious men are not neceſſarie for him.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Cardin. Bellarmin lib. 2. de Amiſſ. Grat. cap. 4. If God did push me to that which is againſt his law, he should denie him ſelfe.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Whitaker l. 8. cont. Dureum. ſect. 7. God pushed the • indes of the Iewes to kill his ſonne. God moueth to ſinne.

Zuinglius de Prouident. c. 6. tom. 1. God euen ſo moueth the iudge to punish the offenders, as he moueth them to ſinne.

Bucer in c. 6. Matth. The Scripture is not afraid to make God the Author of temptation. God the author of temptation, who ſome time bringeth the elect into temptation, and that ſuch as they truly fall and ſinne.

Caluin. 1. Inſtitut. c. 18. §. 4. Man by Gods iuſt driuing doth that which is not lawfull for him. De Praedeſtinat. p. 727. Nether is Sathan the miniſter of Gods wrathe, onely becauſe he ſoliciteth ſoules to naughtie deſires, but alſo becauſe he effectually draweth them.

Beza de Praedeſtinat. cont. Caſtell. p. 401. God ſtirreth vp He ſtirreth the theefe to kill. He tempteth to ſinne. the ill will of the theefe to kill an other.

Peter Martyr in locis claſſe. 1. c. 15. §. 9. It is no maruell that we can not vnderſtand, how it can agree with Gods iuſtice to punish ſinne and yet to driue to it by tempting: for God can do more then we can vnderſtand. ibid. p. 1010. We muſt not denie, that God is the Author of temptations. In Rom. 1. fol 34. Nether muſt God be accuſed of iniuſtice, though he will, incline, Driueth mēs wills into greeuous ſinnes. and driue the wills of wicked men into greeuous ſinnes.

THE CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture expreſſely ſayeth, that God is no tempter of euill, that he tempteth none, maketh none erre. The ſame ſaye Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſaye, that God pushed the Iewes to kill his ſonne, moueth the offender to ſinne, is the author of temptation, driueth man to that which is vnlawfull, ſtirreth vp the theefe to kill, tempteth to ſinne, driueth into greeuous ſinne: that the diuel is Gods miniſter in ſoliciting and drawing men to naughtie deſires. Which are ſo contrarie to Scripture, as ſome times Proteſtants acknowledge it l. 2. c. 30.

ART. VIII. WHETHER GOD MAKE men neceſſarily ſinne.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Geneſis 4. v. 7. If thou doeſt ill, shall not thy ſinne forthwith God impoſeth not neceſsitie to ſinne. be preſent at thy dore? but the luſt thereof shalbe vnder thee and thou shalt haue dominion ouer it.

1. Cor. 10. v. 13. God is faithfull, who will not ſuffer you to be tempted aboue that which you are able.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Councell of Trent Seſſ. 6. Can. 5. defineth that man hath free will in euill.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Whitaker l. 8. cont. Dureum ſect. 1. On whome the holie Some haue neceſsitie to ſinne. Ghoſt is not beſtowed, they haue a miſerable neceſsitie to ſinne.

Willet Controu. 18. q. 2. p. 855. Indeed Adam in reſpect of Gods appointment did ſinne neceſſarily. The ſame hath Perkins de Praedeſtinat. col. 134.

Luther de ſeruo arbit. to. 2. fol. 460. If God did foreſee, that Iudas would be a traitor, Iudas was neceſſarily a traitor, nether Iudas a traitour of neceſſitie. was it in the power of Iudas or of any creature to do otherwiſe, or to change his will. Fol. 434. This is the higheſt degree of faith, to beleeue him to be iuſt, who at his pleaſure maketh men Some neceſſarily damned. neceſſarily to be damned.

Zuinglius de Prouident. c. 6 Nether let any ſay: The theefe is guiltles, becauſe he ſlew, God driuing him; For he ſinned againſt Some compelled to ſinne. the law. But you will ſay: He was compelled to ſinne: I graunt (I ſay) that he was compelled.

Caluin 3. Inſtitut. c. 23. §. 9. The Reprobats would be excuſed in ſinning, becauſe they cannot a void the neceſsitie of ſinning, Reprobates neceſsited to ſinne. eſpecially ſith this neceſsitie is impoſed vpon them by Gods appointment: But we denie, that they can be iuſtly excuſed, becauſe Gods appointment is iust. De Praedeſtinat. p. 704. It ſufficed to mans iuſt damnation, to haue fallen of his accord frō the way of ſaluation in which he was ſet. But it could not be other wiſe. What then? Is he therefore faultles?

Beza de Praedeſtinat. cont. Caſtel. p. 415. That he ſaieth Neceſſarily do ſinne. the reprobats doe neceſſarily ſinne, is moſt true. In 2. parte Reſponſ. ad Acta Colloq. Montisbel. p. 178. With an other neceſsitie Adam is ſaied to haue fallen neceſſarily, to wit, what belongeth to Gods appointement. Gods decree neceſsitateth to ſinne.

Tilenus diſput. 8. de Praedeſtinat. By this decree of God a double neceſsitie falleth vpon the reprobats, the one ſinning, the other of perishing.

Zanchius l. 5. de natura Dei c. 2. We graunt that reprobats by this appointment of God are tyed with the neceſsitie of ſinning, and conſequently of perishing, and ſo tyed, as they cannot but ſinne and perish.

Piſcator l. 2. de the ſibus p. 183. It is falſely ſaied, that it was in mans will not to eate of the fruite of the forbidden tree, that is, Adam neceſſarily ſinned. not to tranſgreſſe the commandment. And pag. 282. Through the decree of God, man could not but tranſgreſſe. Polanus in Diſp. priuat. diſp. 3. Adam ſinned neceſſarily.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the luſt of ſinne is vnder vs, that we haue dominion ouer it, and that God will not ſuffer vs to be tempted aboue our power. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that the wicked do neceſſarily ſinne: that the reprobats are tyed by Gods appointment neceſſarily both to ſinne and perish: that it was not in Adās will not to eate the forbidden aple, that through Gods decree he could not but tranſgreſſe, that he ſinned neceſſarily and could not doe otherwiſe: that Iudas was neceſſarily a traitor and could not change his mind: that God cōpelleth the theefe to ſinne. Which are ſo impious as S. Proſper ſaieth: He is no Catholike, who ſaieth that by Ad c. 16. Gallor. Gods predeſtination, as it were with a fatall neceſsitie, men compelled to ſinne are forced to death: and ſo contrarie to Scripture, as Proteſtants ſome time confeſſe it. lib. 2. cap. 30. And thus much of God touching ſinne: Now of God concerning ſinners.

ART. IX. WHETHER GOD HATE ALL that worke iniquitie.

SCRITVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Pſal. 5. v. 7. Thou hateſt all that worke iniquitie. God hateth all workers of iniquitie.

Eccleſiaſt. c. 12. v. 3. The higheſt hateth ſinners.

Math. 7. v. 23. Departe from me you that worke iniquitie.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D Stapleton l. 3. de Iuſtificat. c. 8. Sinne of it nature, in whomſoeuer it is, ſeparateth from God, and maketh him in whome it is, hatefull to God.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker. l. 8. cont. Dur. ſect. 34. The godlie, though God hateth not all ſuch. they ſinne (grieuouſly) yet are alwaies moſt aſſuredly perſwaded of Chriſts loue and will.

Perkins de Praedeſt. to. 1. God being offended, doth change the effects of grace into the effects of a certaine hatred, not againſt the faithfull themſelues, but againſt their ſinnes. He doth not put away his fatherlie affection, and they are ſtill children concerning the right of eternall life.

Caluin. 3. Inſtit. c. 2. §. 12. We ſee that God wonderfully is angred with his children, which he leaueth to loue, not that in him ſelfe he hateth them, but becauſe he will terrifie them with ſome feeling of his wrathe.

Beza de Praedeſtinat. cont. Caſtel. p. 409. Albeit the lord God neuer hateth the elect. hate all iniquitie, yet hateth he not all in whome iniquitie is.

Zanchius l. 4. de natura Dei. c. 7. q. 2. God neuer hateth the elect. Agayne. It cannot be, that God at anie time hateth them. And in depulſ. calum. to. 7. God is angrie with the elect whem they ſinne, but neuer hateth them.

Pareus l. 1. de Amiſſ. Grat. c. 7. God doth not hate his children when they ſinne.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture expreſſely affirmeth, that God hateth all who worke iniquitie: that he hateth ſinners: that who worke iniquitie shall departe from him. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely denie, that God hateth the faithfull when they ſinne: that euer he hateth the elect: that the faithfull, though they ſinne, are euer aſſured of Gods loue: that God hateth all in whom iniquitie is. Which are ſo oppoſite to Scripture as Proteſtants ſome times confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. X. WHETHER GOD IVSTIFIETH, that is, iudgeth him to be iuſt, who is wicked.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Prouerb. 17. v. 15. He that iuſtifieth the impious, and he that Iuſtifier of the impious, adhominable to God. condemneth the iuſt, both are abhominable before God. Iſaie 5. v. 23. Woe to you, who iuſtifie the impious for giftes. Rom. 2. v. 2. We know, that the iudgment of God is according to veritie.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Card. Bellarmin l. 2. de Iuſtif. c. 9. A wicked man cannot be truly iuſtified, that is, pronounced iuſt, vnles he who pronounceth him iuſt do withall make him iuſt.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Bucanus loco 31. de Iuſtificat. q. 18. p. 313. Seing God God iuſtifieth the wicked. forbiddeth to iustifie the wicked Prouerb. 17. 15. Can he be ſaied to do that rightly which him ſelfe forbiddeth? Rightly, becauſe he it aboue all law.

Caluin l. de Caena p. 2. Let vs be aſſured, that albeit we be God accounteth wicked, for iuſt. wicked and impure, yet we are acknowledged and accepted of the lord and accounted for iust. Et 3. Inſtitut. c. 19. §. 2. It is not inquired there, how we may be iuſt, but how being vniuſt and vnworthie, we may be held for iuſt.

Pareus l. 2. de Iuſtificat. c. 9. What he obiecteth, that a wicked man cannot be truly pronounced iuſt vnles he be made The wicked may be iudged iuſt according to the Ghoſpell. iuſt, is true of inherent iustice and according to the law: but it is falſe, that he cannot be pronounced iuſt with imputed iuſtice and according to the Ghoſpell.

Illyricus Praefat. in epiſt. ad Rom. It is all together contumelious againſt Chriſt, that he cannot by his iuſtice and efficacie iustifie and ſaue ſuch ſinners as are impious and want all good workes.

Scarpius de Iuſtificat. Controu. 9. We are called iuſt by the imputation of Chriſts iuſtice: but we are alſo called vniuſt for iniuſtice which is in vs.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that it is abhominable before God to iuſtifie the wicked, and pronounceth woe to him that doeth it, and addeth that all Gods iudgments are according to veritie, which that iudgment is not, that pronounceth the wicked for iuſt. The ſame ſaye Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſaie, that God doth that which him ſelfe forbiddeth, to wit, that he pronounceth the wicked for iuſt; that though we be vniuſt we are held of the Lord for iuſt; that Chriſt iuſtifieth and ſaueth ſuch ſinners as are impious; that with imputed iuſtice the wicked are pronouncd iuſt.

ART. XI. WHETHER GOD BE ANGRIE with the faithfull when they ſinne.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Exod. 4. verſ. 14. Our Lord being angrie at Moiſes, ſaied &c. God angered at Moiſes and Aaron.

Deuteronom. 9. v. 20. Againſt Aaron alſo being exceeding angrie, he would haue deſtroied him.

Michee 7. v. 9. I will beare the wrath of our lord, becauſe I haue ſinned to him.

Roman. 2. v. 9. Wrath and indignation, tribulation, and Gods wrath on all that doe euill. anguish vpon euerie ſoule of man that worketh euill.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Catechiſmus ad Parochos in orat. Dom. Albeit the act of ſinne be paſt, yet ſinne remaineth by guilt and staine, ouer which Gods anger euer hanging doth follow it as the shadow the bodie.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther in c. 42. Gen. to. 6. fol. 575. Nether muſt we beleiue him, when he is angrie: For in deed Chriſt, that is, God incarnate is not angrie. Doth he not ſeeme to be angrie? No ſurely, he is not angrie. Nor ſuffer thy ſelfe to be ſo perſuaded, for it is not true but God but feignedlie angrie. feigned anger. In c. 3. Galat. to. 5. fol. 336. Follow not the iudgment of reaſon, which ſaieth, that God is angrie with ſinners. Et in argum. Epiſtolae fol. 272. Thou canſt not be ſaued, vnles thou forget the law, and determine certainly in thy hart Not angrie with ſinners. that there is no law or anger of God, but mere mercie and grace for Chriſts ſake.

Caluin. 3. Inſtit. cap. 4. §. 31. God is not ſo rigorous in his iudgmēt of chaſtyzing (the faithfull) as he becometh angrie. §. 32. God alwaies withhouldeth his anger from the faithfull. Item. Neuer angrie with the faithfull. Nether hindreth it, that the lord is often ſaied to be angrie with his Saintes, when he chaſtizeth their ſinnes. For that is not ment of Gods counſell or affection when punisheth, but of the vehement feeling of ſorrow, wherewith they are affected, who ſuſtaine how litle ſoeuer of his ſeueritie.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that God was angrie with Moiſes, exceeding angrie againſt Aaron, had wrath againſt Micheas, and that wrath and indignation is vpon euerie ſoule that worketh euill. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſaye: that God is not angrie with ſinners, is not angrie indeed, his anger is not true but feigned, hath anger but mere grace and mercie, alwaies withhouldeth his anger from the faithfull, that what is ſaied of Gods anger againſt the faithfull is not mēt of his mynd, but of their feeling of his chaſtiſment. Which are ſo oppoſite to the holie Scripture as euen Proteſtants ſome times confeſſe. See. lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. VIII. WHETHER GOD DOTH punish ſinners for ſinnes paſt.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Geneſ. 3. verſ. 17. God ſaieth to Adam. Becauſe thou haſt God punished Adam and Euer for ſinne poſt. heard the voice of thy wife, and haſt eaten of the tree whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldeſt not eate, curſed is the earth in thy worke, with much toiling shalt thou eate thereof all the dayes of thy life.

2. Kings. 12. verſ. 14. Our lord hath taken away thy ſinne, Alſo Dauid. thou • halt not dye. Neuertheleſſe becauſe thou haſt made the enemies of our lord to blaspheme, for this thing, the ſonne that is borne to thee, dying shall dye.

Ihon. c. 5. v. 14. Ieſus ſaied to him: Behould thou art made whole, ſinne no more leſt ſome worſe thing chance to thee.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Card. Bellarmin. l. 2. de Paenitent. c. 2. We ſee that the punishment inflicted vpon Dauid, had reſpecte to that which was paſt, rather then to that which was to come.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Caluin. 3. Inſt. cap. 4. §. 33. Whiles the reprobates are ſcourged of God with whippes, they begin in ſome ſorte to taſte the punishments of his iudgment; But his children are beaten with God punisheth not his children for ſinnes paſt. rods, not for to paye to God the penaltie of their offences, but to increaſe thereby in repentance. Wherefore we gather that they reſpect more the time to come, then the time paſt. Et §. 30. What I pray you had Chriſt done for vs, if yet punishment were exacted for ſinne?

Zanchius de Perſeuerant. q. 1. c. 2. This is moſt certaine, that God neuer imputeth ſinne to the elect. The ſame ſay others as we shall ſee hereafter. c. 16. art. 1.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Adam was punished becauſe he had eaten of the aple; and Dauid, becauſe he had made Gods enemies blaſpheme. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that Gods children are not punished for ſinne paſt, that no ſinne is imputed to the elect. That no punishment is exacted of vs for ſinne. And hitherto we haue ſeene that the Scripture teacheth vs how God carieth him ſelfe towards ſinnes and ſinners plaine contrarie to that which Proteſtants teach: Now we will ſee the like touching good workes.

ART. XIII. WHETHER GOD REGARD good workes, or be delighted with them.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Geneſ. 8. v. 20. Noë built an altar to our lord, and taking of all cattle and foules that were cleane, offered holocauſts vpon Noes ſacrifice a ſweet ſmell to God. the altar, and our lord ſmelled a ſweet ſauour.

4. Kings c. 22. v. 2. And he (Ioſias) did that was liked before our Lord.

Malachie 3. v. 4. And the ſacrifice of Iuda and Hieruſalem Sacrifice pleaſeth God. shall pleaſe our lord.

Actes 10. verſ. 4. And he ſaied to him: Thy praiers and thy almes deeds are aſcended into remembrance in the ſight of God.

Hebrewes 13. ver. 16. And forget not beneficence and communication: for with ſuch hoſtes God is promerited (Or, as the Greek hath) is pleaſed.

1. Ihon. 3. v. 22. We do thoſe things which are pleaſing before him.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Card. Bellarmin. l. 4. de Iuſtificat. c. 15 The ſeuenth testimonie is taken out of thoſe places (of Scripture) which teach that the workes of the iust do pleaſe God. And l. 5. c. 2. He ſaieth that the ſenſe of the forecited words Hebr. 13. is this: With ſuch hostes God is delighted or God is pleaſed with ſuch hoſtes.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther de Captiuit. Babilon. to. 2. fol. 69. Nether can God careth not at all for workes. we any time deale otherwiſe with God, then by faith in the word of his promiſe: He careth nothing at all for works nor needeth them, by which we are to deale rather with men and with our ſelues. Et Poſtilla in Domini. 1. Aduentus fol 8. God careth Reſpecteth not yea loatheth them. not for workes. In feſto S. Stephani fol. 376. God reſpecteth not workes. We foolishly feigne that God is much delighted with our workes, whereas he greatly loatheth them. In feſto Aſſumpt. fol. 435. Truly workes are of no accounte before God. In cap. 1. Ionae to. 4. fol. 411. The Papiſts haue a conceit of God, as if he were a God that is delighted and may be appeaſed with our good No God, that is delighted with workes. workes, whereas there is no ſuch God, no ſuch Godhead, which is delighted with theſe things. And to. 7. Serm. in Hebr. 11. God careth not greatly what kind or what notable workes we doe.

Tindall in Fox his Acts printed 1610. p. 1138. There is no To make water pleaſeth God as much as preaching. work better then an other to pleaſe God. To make water, to wash dishes, to be a ſowter or an Apoſtle, all is one. To wash dishes and to preach all is one, as touching the deed to pleaſe God. Other Proteſtants (as teſtifieth Schuſſelburg. to. 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 551. Melancthon. in Reſponſ. ad artic. Bauar. to. 3. and Manlius in locis tit. de Eccleſ.) ſaye: God careth not for good workes. And the ſame alſo do they thinke, who (as we shall relate hereafter) ſaye, that, before God, good workes are mere iniquities, filth, ſtench and dung. For ſurely God careth not for ſuch things.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that good workes are a ſweet ſauour before God, are liked of God, pleaſe God, are pleaſing before God. The like ſaye Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that God careth not for workes, careth not at all for them, doth not regard or reſpect them, is not delighted with them, careth not what notable workes we doe, maketh no accounte of them, yea greatly loatheth them: that to wash dishes, to make water, to playe the cobler pleaſeth God as well as to be an Apoſtle.

ART. XIV. WHETHER GOD BE WORSHIPED or ſerued with good workes.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Iſaie. 19. v. 21. The Egyptians shall know our Lord in that day, and shall worshippe him in hoſtes and in giftes. God worshiped by workes.

Luke. v. 2. c. 37. Who departed not from the temple, by fastings and praiers ſeruing night and day.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Ioan. 4. v. 23. Therefore God is ſo ſerued inſpirit and trueth, that as this worshippe doth not exclude the outward acts of pietie and workes of charitie towards our neighbour, wherewith we worshippe and ſerue God in iuſtice, ſo &c.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther delibertate Chriſtiana to. 2. fol. 5. For we do not Not glorified by workes. glorifie God by working, but by beleeuing. Ibid. cont. Regem Angliae fol. 334. God is ſerued by faith onely. De bonis operibus Not ſerued by them. to. 5. fol. 580. Onely faith is the true worshippe of God. In c. 1. Ionae. to. 4. fol. 412. The true God is not ſerued with workes. There is one onely worshippe pleaſing to God, to will true faith.

Tindal in Fox before cited: God is honoured on all ſides in Not worshiped by workes. that we count him righteous in all his laws and ordinances, and alſo true in all his promiſes. Other worshippe of God is none, except we make an idoll of him. Confeſſion of Baſil. art. 13. Faith is the onely true worshippe of God. The like ſaye other Proteſtants, who (as we shall ſee hereafter) teach, that good works are ſinne before God. For God is not ſerued or worshipped with ſinne, but diſſerued and dishonored by it.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that God is worshipped and ſerued with good works. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that God is not glorified by working, that God is not ſerued by works, that faith is the onely true worshippe of God, that God is ſerued by onely faith, that onely faith is the worshippe of the true God: that there is no other worshippe of God but to beleiue him right in all his laws and true in all his promiſes.

ART. XV. WHETHER GOD DO ACcount thoſe good workes which are not commanded.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Mark. 14. v. 3. and 6. There came a woman hauing an alabaſter box of ointment of pretious ſpike-nard, and breaking the A worke not commanded, good in Gods ſight. alabaſter box, she powred it out vpon his head.—But Ieſus ſaied: let her alone, why do you moleſt her; She hath wrought a good worke vpon me,

1. Corint. 7. 25. And as concerning virgins, a commandment of our Lord I haue not, but counſell I giue.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Card. Bellarmin. l. 2. de Monachis. c. 16. God is worshipped with euerie act of vertue, though not commanded, yet done for God.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Confeſſio Heluet. c. 16. God liketh not workes and worshippes choſen by vs. And Confeſſio Saxon. c. 17. We teach, that works (as they ſay) not due, are no worshippe of God.

Luther Poſtilla in feſto S. Ioan. fol. 92. Nothing pleaſeth Workes not commanded, not pleaſing to God. God, vhich is done without his commandment.

Melancthon in Diſput. to. 4. p. 602. Works not commanded from heauen, are no worhippe of God.

Caluin 4. Inſtitut. c. 13. §. 2. All voluntarie worships which we deuiſe without his commandment, are abhominable to God. In Rom. 5. v. 19. They dote, who vaunte to God of their works deuiſed by themſelues, who eſteemeth them no more then dung.

Lobechius in Diſput. 9. p. 184. Without Gods commandment, Nor good. a worke though done with neuer ſo good intention nor forbidden, nether, is nor can be good.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely affirmeth, that S. Magdalens anointing of Chriſt, though not commanded, was a good worke & gratefull to him: that virginitie is good, though not commanded. The ſame ſaye Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that God liketh no worke not commanded by him, that no worke not commanded is any worship of God: that no worke whatſoeuer not commanded of God is good, that what we do without Gods commandment is no more reſpected of God then dung, and is abhominable to him.

ART. XVI. WHETHER GOD BE PACIfied with good works.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

〈…〉 11. and. 13. But Moyſes beſought the Lord his God pacified by workes. God, ſaying: why 〈…〉 furie angrie againſt thy people &c. And our lord was pacified 〈…〉 the euill which he had ſpoken againſt his people.

2. Paralipomen. 30. v. 18. and 20. And 〈…〉 for them ſaying &c. Whome our Lord heard, and was pacified to the people.

Pſalme. 105. v. 30. And Phinees ſtood, and pacified, and the ſlaughter ceaſed.

Ezech. 43. v. 27. The preiſts shall make your holocausts vpon the altar, and thoſe which they offer for peace: and I will be pacified toward you, ſaieth our lord God.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Matth. 17. v. 21. Diuers examples in Scripture do teach vs the force and power of faſting ioyned with praier for to pacifie God.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther in c. 1. Ionae to. 4. fol. 411. Papiſts haue an opinion, that God can be pacified with our good workes, whē as there is no No God, that is pacified by workes. where ſuch a God. In Galat. 2. to. 5. fol. 363. The workes which I do according to Gods law, do not pacifie his wrathe, but prouoke it. Workes prouoke Gods wrath.

Caluin 4. Inſt. c. 15. §. 4. It is the doctrin of the Scripture. that our good works are alwaies ſtained with much vncleanes, with which God may be iuſtly offended and angried: ſo farre are they from purchazing vs his good will, or prouoking his liberalitie towards vs.

Confeſſio Saxonica c. de remiſſ. Peccat. It is a dishonor to the Sonne of God, to imagin that any workes are propitiation for ſinne The ſame hath Apologia pro Confeſſ. Auguſt. c. de Implet. legis.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth 〈…〉 pacified with praier, with zele, wi •• 〈…〉 The ſame teach Catholiks▪

•••• ants expreſſely teach contrariwiſe, that God is not pacified with good workes, that good workes pacifie not his wrath but prouoke i • , that our good workes are farre from purchazing Gods fauour. That it is dishonor to Chriſt to imagin that good works are propitiation for ſinne.

ART. XVII. WHETHER GOD WILL haue his commandments kept.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Ezechiel 36. v. 27. And I will make that you walke in my God will haue his commandments kept. precepts and keepe my iudgments, and doe them.

Mathew. 12. ver. 50. For whoſoeuer shall doe the will of my father that is in heauen, he is my brother, and ſiſter, and mother.

Acts. 13. v. 22. I haue found Dauid the ſonne of Ieſſe, a man according to my hart, who shall doe all my willes.

1. Theſſalon. 4. v. 3. For this is the will of God, your ſanctification; that you abſtaine from fornication &c.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Actor. 15. v. 10. Behould and marke Caluins double bla • phemie: He ſaieth, that God teſtifieth, that it shall neuer be that his law be fulfilled: He addeth, that God will 〈◊〉 that it be done, that he will not that his law 〈◊〉 • hen theſe twoe be ſaied any thing more abſurd 〈…〉 paradoxes?

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Caluin in Actor. 15. ver. 10. Nether let vs rashly inquire, God will not haue them kept. whether it can be (that Gods commandments be kept) which him ſelfe teſt • fieth shall neuer be, and that he will that it neuer be. lib. 2. de lib. arbit. p. 148. We denie not, but that God can giue ſo great grace to man, as may be equall to the iuſtice of the law, but becauſe he hath denied that he will do it, we ſay, that it is ſim • ly impoſsible to be done. He will noe haue the law to be kept.

B • za in 2. parte Reſponſ. ad Acta Colloq. Montisbel. p. 226. When we heare the promiſes of the law, will he haue them He commandeth that which he will not haued one to be performed of vs? Nothing leſſe. Therefore he commandeth ſome thing which he will not haue done, and promiſeth alſo ſome thing which he will not performe.

Zanchius l. 3. de natura Dei c. 4. q. 10. Often times Gods commandment is one thing, and his will is an other. For God cō mandeth Gods commandment contrarie to his will. ſome thing, as to Pharao and to other wicked men, which properly he will not, for if he would, it shoud be done.

Piſcator apud Vorſtium in Paraſceue part. 8. If God will (properly ſpeaking) haue his commandments kept of vs, then can it not be but we should keepe them. And l. 2. Theſ. p. 208. God ſome time doth by word ſignifie that he will, which indeed he willeth not: And. p. 201. Whereby we perceaue, that there is a certaine God diſſembleth, holie diſſembling in God, which is lawfull to men, and much more to God who is a most free agent. And loco 12. p. 172. He ſaieth, that there is holie diſſembling, and that Chriſt diſſembled. And Grauerus in Abſurdis Caluin. c. 5. ſect. 34. That is called a good and lawfull diſſembling, whē one in outward ſpeech feigneth himſelfe to will euill thinges, but in inwarde motion and affection of hart or mynd willeth, and at last, doth good. And of ſuch a diſſembling (in God) there is an example Geneſ. 22. Thus they make ſome diſſembling good, and 〈◊〉 diſſembler, and yet crie out againſt all aequiuocation. 〈…〉 Geneſ. 20. to. 6. fol. 244. ſeemeth to make Chriſt an 〈…〉 thus he writeth: That which they terme an officious lye, is 〈…〉 fit of our neighbour. So Chriſt in Luke feigned, that he 〈…〉 Sauls daughter ſaied that Dauid laie in bed.

Beza alſo 2. part. reſponſ. ad Acta Montisb. p. 174. ſaieth: There is ſome good deceit. So God by his will of ſigne, or that which is outwardly declare, not onely willeth but alſo commandeth Iſaac to be killed of his father. And Peter Martyr loco. 13. ſect. 39. It is ſome time lawfull to vſe good deceit.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that God will make vs to walke in his precepts and keepe his commandments, that it is Gods will that we abſtaine from fornication: and that who doth Gods will is Chriſts brother, ſiſter, and mother. The like ſaye Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach the contrarie, that God will not haue his commandments kept: that God will not giue ſufficient grace to keepe them: that God will nothing leſſe then to haue his lawes kept: that God commandeth ſome thing which he will not haue done, and promiſeth ſome thing which he will not performe. And thus much of God touching good works: Now let vs ſpeake of him as he carrieth him ſelf towards men or mankind.

ART. XVIII. WHETHER GOD LOVETH all men, and hath mercie on all.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Wiſdom. c. 11. v. 24. & 25. But thou haſt mercie an all, becauſe God loueth all. thou canſt do all things, and diſſembleſt the ſinnes of men for repentance. For thou loueſt all things that are, and hateſt nothing of thoſe which thou haſt made. And v. 27. But thou ſpareſt all, becauſe they are thine O Lord, which loueſt ſoules.

Ihon. 1. verſ. 16. For ſo God loued the world, that he gaue his onely begotten Sonne, that euerie one that beleiueth in him perish not, but may haue life euerlaſting.

Rom. 11. v. 32. For God hath concluded all into incredulitie, that he may haue mercie an all.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Card. Bellarmin. l. 2. de Grat. & lib. arb. cap. 5. Nether Would haue mercie on all. muſt theſe words (He hath mercie on all, he ſpareth all) be reſtrained to the elect; For the reaſon why God ſpareth all and hath mercie on all is taken in this place out of creation, becauſe God hath created all, and becauſe he loueth ſoules and things which he hath made: but this is common to all abſolutely.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Controu. 2. q. 1. c. 13. p. 449. Chriſt loueth not the reprobate.

Beza de Praedeſtinat. cont. Caſtell. vol. 1. p. 346. God God loueth not all. cannot be ſaied to loue all alike, no not to loue all. P. 345. Albeit he hath created all in Adam, yet he loueth, not all. 343. You will therefore ſaye, he is their father, for ſo much as pertaineth to creation. I confeſſe: Therefore ſay you: He loueth them: But this He loueth the elect onely. I flatly deny. In Colloq. Montisbel. p. God loueth the elect onely in Chriſt, all the reſt he iuſtly hated from all eternitie and will for euer hate. And in 2. parte reſponſ. ad Acta huius Colloq. p. 106. It is true, that God will not haue mercie an thē. P. 194. This I ſay, that there neuer was time, nor is, nor shalbe, when God would, willeth, or will hereafter haue mercie an euerie God would neuer haue mercieon all. one. And de Praedeſtinat. vol. 3. p. 404. God concluded all (reprobats) vnder ſinne, that he might iuſtly destroy them. Which alſo he ſaieth in Explicat. Chriſtianiſmi p. 177.

Zanchius de Praedeſtinat. to. 7. col. 295. God can haue mercie on all, but becauſe he nether would nor will, therefore &c.

Piſcator in Theſibus l. 2. p. 185. I anſwere, that God would not haue mercie on all.

TH • CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that God hath mercie on all, ſpareth all, loueth all, loueth the world, loueth ſoules. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants on the contrarie expreſſely ſay, that God hath not mercie on all, loueth not all, loueth not, nor euer loued the reprobate, concluded the reprobate vnder ſinne for to deſtroy them iuſtly.

ART. XIX. WHETHER GOD WOVLD haue all men ſaued.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Timoth. 2. v. 4. God will all men to be ſaued, and to come God would haue all ſaued to the knowledge of the trueth.

2. Peter. 3. ver. 9. Our Lord doth patiently for you, not willing that any perish, but that all returne to pennance.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Card. Bellarmin. l. 2. de Grat. & lib. arbit. c. 3. It is true, that God will haue all ſaued, with that will which the Diuines rightly call Antecedent.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Cancione vltim. pag. 694. It is a plauſible God would not giue life to all. opinion, that God indeed will all to come to life, but it is neare to Pelagianiſme. Agayne. He would not giue life to all.

Rainoldus in Apologia Theſ. pag. 247. It remaineth, that God will haue ſaued, not euerie one, but the elect of all God hath not, will to ſaue all. kinde of men: not ſimply all, but all giuen to Christ, all the predeſtinate.

Perkins de Praedcſtinat. tom. 1. pag. 139. It ſeemeth, that there is not ſuch a will, or (as they ſay) a Velleitie in God, with which indefinitly and conditionally he will haue all and euerie mā of all ages to be ſaued. That antecedent vniuerſall will of all and euerie ones ſaluation in Chriſt, is feigned. Col. 141. He calleth them outwardly by the word preached, whome he will not Would not in earneſt haue all ſaued. haue ſaued. And col. 144. denieth, that God, would in earneſt haue all ſaued. In Serie cauſarum cap. 52. It is not true, that God would haue all ſaued by Chriſt.

Abbotts orat. 2. deverit. Grat. Chriſti pag. 28. It followeth therefore, not this, that God would haue all to come.

Caluin de Prouident. p. 750. From that reaſon, which is the the mother of all errors, riſeth that God to thee, who without exception will haue all ſaued.

Beza ad calum. Iacobi Andreae vol. 3. p. 125. This we graunt, that God will not haue thoſe that are reprobates to be ſaued, or the death of his ſonne to profite them.

Zanchius in Theſibus to. 7. col 280. It can no waies be ſaied, that God ſimply and properly would or will all men vniuerſally to be ſaued. Et de Praedeſtinat. cap. 4. He will not haue all ſaued.

Piſcator in Theſibus loco 20. par. 313. Their opinion is impious, who affirme, that God will haue ſaued all and euerie man none excepted, and yet doth not ſaue all. Et l. 2. loco 12. p. 143. God will not haue euerie one ſaued.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely affirmeth, that God will all men to be ſaued, willeth not that any perish, but that all returne to pennance. The ſame ſaye Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely denie, that God indeed will all to come to life, that God in earneſt would haue all ſaued, that God would haue euerie one ſaued, that God properly would all to be ſaued; that he would haue the reprobates to be ſaued. Which are ſo plainly contrarie to Scripture, as ſome Proteſtants confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. XX. WHETHER GOD WOVLD haue ſome conuerted who will not conuerte.

SCRITVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Iſaie c. 65. v. 2. I haue ſpred forth my hands all the day to on God would haue ſome cō uerted who will not. incredulous peoples which goeth in a way not good after their owne cogitations.

Prouerb. 1. v. 24. Becauſe I called and you refuſed: I ſtretched out my hand, and there was none that regarded.

Mathew. 23. v. 37. Hieruſalem, Hieruſalem, which killeſt the Prophets, and ſtoneſt them that are ſent to thee, how often would I gather together thy children, as the hen doth gather together her chickins vnder her wings, and thou wouldeſt not.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Math. 23. v. 37. God would recall the Iewes vnto him with a true act of his will, for the hen will not metaphorically, but properly, gather her chickins to her.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins de Praedeſtinat. to. 1. col. 121. God will conuerſion in ſome men, onely in approbation, exhortation, and means.

Caluin in Math. 22. v. 37. p. 293. I anſwere, that the will of God, of which here is ſpoken, is to be conſidered by the effect, to wit, becauſe he indifferently calleth all vnto him by the preaching of his word, he is rightly ſaied to gather all vnto him. And he addeth, that he calleth the reprobates, onely by the outward voice of men. And 3. Inſt. c. 24. §. 17. ſaieth, that God indeed willeth not this, but is ſaied to will it figuratiuely and in humane manner, as he is ſaied to ſtrech out his armes.

Beza in Colloq. Montisbel. p. 418. God will not haue the God will not haue reprobates conuerted. reprobates conuerted and ſaued. And addeth, that they cannot will to be conuerted. And in Reſponſ. ad Acta Colloq. part. 2. p. 208. It is moſt falſe and ridiculous to ſaye, that God will any other to be conuerted but the elect.

Piſcator apud Vorſtium in Paraſceue. ca. 8. God will not Nor them who indeed repent not. the conuerſion of them who in deed repent not.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that God would call the Iewes vnto him as a hē her chickins, that he ſtretched his hands to an incredulous people, that he called them who refuſed. The ſame teach Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that God will not the conuerſion of them who do not repent: that he will not haue the reprobates conuerted: that he will the elect onely to be conuerted: that he calleth others onely outwardly by mans preaching, and willeth their conuerſion, not properly, but figuratiuely onely.

ART. XXI. WHETHER GOD CALL ALL men vnto him.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Matthew. 11. v. 28. Came yee to me all that labour and are God calleth all. burdened, and I well refresh you. And c. 22. v. 9. Goe ye therefore into the highe waies, and whomſoeuer you shall finde, call to the mariage.

Mark. 16. verſ. 15. Going into the whole world, preach the Ghoſpell to all creatures.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Card. Bellarmin. de Amiſſ. Grat. &c. l. 2. 9. The Scripture teacheth that God inuiteth all to him.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins in Caſibus conſcient. cap. 7. It is euident that the promiſe of ſaluation is not to be taken as vniuerſall without exception or restriction. God inuiteth not all.

Beza de Praedeſtinat. cont. Caſtel. p. 417. Chriſt doth not inuite ſimply all vnto him. Et in quaeſt. & Reſponſ. p. 655. See, with how conuincent reaſon that vniuerſall vocation is refuted. Vocation is not vniuerſall. Wherefore not vocation, much leſſe that vniuerſall election, can and muſt be aſsigned, but onely an indefinite vocation.

Zanchius in Supplicat. ad Senatum Argent. to. 7. col. 57. That God in earneſt calleth all, is to be vnderſtood according to his reuealed will, to wit, ſo farre as he calleth all by the outward preaching of the Ghoſpell, not excluding any, but not according to his ſecret will. In depulſ. calum. col. 260. The promiſes Promiſes pertaine not to all. do not pertaine indeed vnto all, but onely to the elect. And col. 261. There is an other reaſon, why God doth not giue them (reprobates) faith, nor euer ſimply promiſed it to them.

Bucanus in Inſtitut. loco 36. Is not the vocation and remiſsion Not remiſsiō. vniuerſall Mathew 11. 28? It is rather indefinite.

Vrſinus in Miſcellan. p. 74. If the vniuerſall promiſe belonged to all men, what a maſſe of abſurditie and impietie would follow?

Pareus in Galat. 3. lect. 43. The promiſes are vniuerſall to the beleiuers, but not vniuerſall to the incredulous, for they belonge not to them. Therefore it ſufficeth not to vrge the vniueruerſall articles, All: Of all.

Stoſſelius apud Zanchium l. 2. epiſtolorum. The Ghoſpell Nor the Ghoſpell. belongeth onely to the elect.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Chriſt called all that are burdered, and commanded to preach to all creatures. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that Gods vocation is not vniuerſall, that God in earneſt calleth not all: that the promiſe of ſaluation is not vniuerſall, parteineth onely to the elect, that the Ghoſpell belongeth onely to the elect. Which are ſo oppoſite to the Scripture, as diuers Proteſtants confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. XXII. WHETHER GOD OF HIM ſelfe will the death and damnation of men.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Ezechielis 33. v. 11. Liue I, ſaieth our Lord God, I will not the death of the impious, but that the impious be conuerted from God willeth not death. his way and liue. c. 18. v. 23. Why, is the death of a ſinner my will, ſaieth our Lord God, and not that he conuert from his wayes and liue? Et ver. 32. Becauſe I vill not the death of him that dieth, ſaieth our Lord. He made not death.

Wiſdome c. 1. v. 13. God made not death, nether doth he reioice in the perdition of the liuing.

Tobie 3. 22. For thou art not delighted in our perditions.

Eccleſiaſt. 15. verſ. 11. Impious men are not neceſſarie for him.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Gard. Bellarmin. l. 2. de Grat. & lib. arb. c. 16. The ſinnes of men, and not the onely will of God, are the cauſe of poſitiue reprobation, that is, of that act wherewith God will adiudge reprotes to euerlasting punishment.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Conc. vlt. p. 693. God predeſtinated to eternall God predeſtinateth to death whome and why he would. Sinne, not the cauſe of damnation. God worketh and willeth death. death whome he would, and becauſe he would. Pag. 694. The onely cauſe of reprobation, whereof we ſpeake, is Gods will, mynd, and decree.

Perkins de Praedeſtinat. to. 1. col. 123. Sinne is not the cauſe of the decree of damnation. See Willet. cont. 18. q. 1. p. 855.

Luther l. de ſeru. arbit. to. 2. fol. 450. The hidden God worketh life, death, and all in all. Agayne. He will not the death of a ſinner, to wit, in word, but he willeth it with his vnſearchable will.

Caluin 3. Inſtitut. c. 22. §. vlt. If we cannot giue a reaſon No reaſon of reprobation but Gods will. Some created todamnation, and to perish. why God vouchſafeth mercie to his elect, but becauſe it ſo pleaſeth him: nether shall we haue any other thing why he reprobateth others, them his will. Cap. 21. §. 5. To ſome eternall life is preordinated, to others eternall damnation; Therefore as euerie one is created to ether end, &c. In Roman. 9. ver 18. Salomon teacheth, shat the wicked were of purpoſe created for to perish.

Beza in Rom. 9. v. 11. Who gather, that God, in thoſe whom from all eternitie he destinated to reprobation and perdition, was moued thereto by their foreſeene incredulitie & ill life, are greatly deceaued. In Explicat. Chriſtianiſmi cap. 5. Reprobates he created to the end that he might be glorified in their iuſt condemnation. In Colloq. Montisbel. p. 447. He created, ordained, and deſtinated the reprobates to eternall damnation for cauſes knowne to him ſelfe alone. And de Praedeſtinat. vol. 3. p. 438. God of his mere will, and therefore not for any reſpect of foreſeene worthines or vnworthines, hath deſtinated to hatred and perdition whome he would, ether particular men or whole nations. And this doctrin, he termeth, the foundation of his faith.

Bucer in Matth. 6. What he ſaieth, that he will not the death of the impious and of him that dieth, but would rather haue him returne and liue, is to be vnderſtood of them onely, whome he hath choſen to be conuerted and liue.

Peter Martyr in Rom. 9. It leſſe deſpleaſeth men, if they be God hateth and reprobateth for his mere will. ſaied to be predeſtinated and choſen, then to be ſaied to be hated and reprobated for Gods mere will without all reſpect of deſerts; and yet there muſt be the ſame reaſon of both. Et libr. de libro arbit. tom. 3. locorum: It ſeemeth at firſt ſight abſurd, that ſome should be created of God for to perish, yet the Scripture Some created to perish. Gods will the only cauſe of reprobation. ſaieth it.

Muſculus in locis tit. de reprobis. The cauſe of reprobation is not to be attributed to the future wickednes of the reprobates, but to the onely will of God.

Piſcator in Theſibus lib. 2. p. 182. God made man to fall. It He made men to fall. is falſe, that God hath not need of a ſinner. Page. 235. Nether is this ſimply true, that God is not the beginning or cauſe of perdition. P. 245. Reprobation is abſolute, that is, depending of the mere pleaſure of God, and not vpon the condition of incredulitie foreſeene.

Marlorat in Rom. 9. v. 22. What inconuenience is it to ſay, Some made to deſtructiō. that theſe were made to deſtruction?

Zanchius de Praedeſtinat. c. 1. to. 7. They take from God his Some created to death, to be deſtroied. right, who ſay that it is falſe, that God created ſome to life, others to death, onely that he might shew his mercie in them, and his power and iuſtice in theſe. cap. 4. He createth ſome to this end to be deſtroied. c. 6.That one is ſaued or damned, we muſt needes confeſſe that Gods will was and is the cheefeſt. Et apud Schuſſelburg. l. 4. Theol. Caluin art. 8. Gods will is the firſt and vnauoidable Gods will the firſt cauſe of perdition. cauſe of the perdition of them that perish. And l. 3. de natura Dei c. 4. q. 4. As for that place of wiſdome: Death entred into the world by the enuie of the Diuel, and if there be any ſuch others, in which death is attributed to the Diuel as to the Author, we anſwere, that it doth not follow, that God willeth God author of death. not death or is not the author of it; For the ſame effect may proceed from diuers cauſes.

Bucanus l. 4. Syntagm. c. 10. The cauſe efficient and mouing, for which the decree of affirmatiue or negatiue reprobation was made of God, is not ſinne.—The true and onely mouing cauſe for which the decree of reprobation was made, is Gods pleaſure or free will. See manie more like ſayings of Proteſtants in my Latin booke l. 1. art. 22.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that God of him ſelfe will not the death of the impious or of him that dieth: yea God ſweareth that he will not his death, and the Scripture addeth, that God made not death, that it entred by the Diuel, that impious men are not neceſſarie for God. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay the contrarie, that God will the death of a ſinner with his vnſearchable will: that he is the Author of death: that he created men to perdition, death, and damnation: that he is the beginning, the firſt & vnauoidable cauſe of the perdition of them that perish: That he predeſtinateth to death whome he would and why he would: that ſinne is not the cauſe of the decree of damnation: That ſinne is nether efficient nor mouing cauſe of negatiue or affirmatiue reprobation, but onely the pleaſure and free will of God.

ART. XXIII. WHETHER GOD DAMNETH men for ſinne.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Matth. 25. v. 41. Then he shall ſaye to them alſo that be at God damneth for ſinne. his left hand: Get ye away frō me you curſed into fire euerlaſting. For I was an hungred and you gaue me not to eate &c.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarmin l. 2. de Grat. & lib. arb. c. 16. The Scriptures euerie where teach, that by the iuſt iudgment of God euerlaſting punishment is rendred vnto ſinne.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther l. de ſeru. arb. tom 2. fol. 461. This moſt of all offendeth God damneth men for his mere will. Reſpecteth not deſerts in thoſe that are to be damned. Damneth thoſe that deſerue not. common ſenſe or naturall reaſon, that God for his mere will doth forſake, harden, and damne men. Fol. 465. Let vs, I pray you, feigne, that God muſt be ſuch a one as reſpecteth deſerts in them who are to be damned: Shall we not in like manner auouch and graunt, that he reſpecteth deſerts in them who are to be ſaued? And fol. 466. It is now incomprehenſible, how it is iust that he damneth them that deſerue not, and yet is beleeued.

Zanchius apud Schuſſelburg. l. 4. Theol. Caluin art. 8. Here we ſaye, that there is no other cauſe of mens damnation, thē Gods mere pleaſure. Rennecber. 16. The cauſe of damnation or reprobation is not to be ſaught in men, but Gods will is the cheefeſt and ſupreme cauſe thereof. Alſo Gryneus. 16. Sinnes are Sinne not the cauſe of damnation. not the cauſe why men are damned. And Spindlerus. 16. Sinne can no way be the cauſe why men are damned.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that men are damned and adiudged to hell fire for ſinne. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay the contrarie, that ſinnes are not the cauſe why men are damned, that can no way be the cauſe why men are damned, that there is no other cauſe of mens damnation then Gods mere pleaſure, that God damneth thoſe who deſerue it not, that he reſpecteth not deſerts in thoſe that he damneth, that he damneth men for his mere will. And thus much of Gods inward and outward acts toward ſinne, good works, and mankinde, let vs now ſee ſomething of his power.

ART. XXIV. WHETHER GOD BE ALmightie and can doe all things.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Geneſ. 17. v. 1. Our Lord appeared vnto him, and ſaied vnto God is almightie. him: I am the God almightie.

Iob. 42. v. 2. I know, thou canſt doe all things.

Mathew 19. v. 26. With God all things are poſsible. The ſame is repeated Marke 10. and 14.

Luke 1. verſ. 36. There shall not be impoſsible with God any word.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Card. Bellarmin. l. 3. de Euchar. c. 2. All diuines write, that Gods power is not abſolute God is ſaied to be almightie, becauſe he can do all that implieth not contradiction.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Caluin in Reſp. ad Nebulon. p. 730. Caluin euerie where earneſtly reiecteth that deuiſe of Gods abſolute power, which the Sophiſters prate of in their ſcholes. Which he repeateth de Praedeſt. 728. de Prouid. 755. 1. Inſt. c. 17. §. 2. & l. 3. c. 23. §. 2. & in c. 25. Iſaiae.

Beza cont. Heshuſium. vol. 1. p. 299. That ſaying of thine: All thinges are poſsible to God, hath ſome exception. P. 300. You forſouth, shall teach vs, that Gods omnipotencie muſt not Gods omnipotencie, limited. Some things, impoſsible to God. be tied to that order, which willingly he hath appointed to him ſelfe. And pag. 302. He ſaieth, that God can no more put Chriſts bodie in two places at once, then he can make new Gods. In Colloq. Montisbel. p. 27. God cannot make, that Chriſts bodie be ſubstantially in many places at one time. Lib. quaeſt. vol. 1. p. 658 God cannot make, that one and the ſame bodie be ſubſtantially in many places, or in any place not coextended to the place. Which alſo he repeateth Reſponſ. ad Acta Torgens. vol. 3. p. 60.

Peter Martyr Reſponſ. ad Gardiner. obiect. 11. We complaine, that you alwaies obiect Gods power, whereas this (Chriſts To which Gods power doth not extend. Gods omnipotencie not without exception. Beareth not ſome things. bodie to be at once in manie places) is of that kinde of things to which Gods power doth not extend. And lib. 1. Epiſtolarum Zanchij pag. 408. We warne the godlie, that Gods omnipotencie, which we beleiue, is not to be beleiued without all exception.

Sadeel ad art. 14. aburat. We haue shewed, that Chriſts bodie cannot be really preſent in many places at once, and that Gods omnipotencie cannot beare this. And yet theſe men ſay, that their faith can make preſent, things that are to come, abſent, and farthest of, as 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 Bez • 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 Some • 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 omnipotēcie 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 cā 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 cā 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 ſufficiēt 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 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. Ar • 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 thē 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 omnipotēt, 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 thē all the Pagās 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 & cōpelleth to ſinne, cōmandeth 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, Omnipotēcie. 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 fidelitie, they giue him infidelitie, wherewith he promiſeth that which he will not performe. And thus much of God: Now of Chriſt, God incarnate.

CHAPTER II. OF CHRIST.

ARTIC. I. WHETHER THE SONNE of God had his life and being of his Father.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

I Hon. 5. ver. 26. For as the Father hath life in him The Sonne hath life of his Father. Is of his Father. ſelfe, ſo he hath giuen to the Sonne alſo to haue life in him ſelfe.

Ihon. c. 6. v. 57. I liue by the Father. Cap. 7. v. 29. I know him, becauſe I am of him.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

S. Thomas 1. parte q. 27. art. 2. That which among the diuine perſons is begotten, taketh his being of the Father.

D. Stapleton in Ioan. 10. ver. 30. This, that impious man (Caluin) doeth for that purpoſe, to eſtablish in ſome ſorte his peculier and new doctrin, wherewith he will haue the Sonne to be God of himſelfe, and not of the Father.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker ad Ration. 8. Campiani p. 34. This ſaying (God Chriſt receaued not to be God of his Father. of God) ſome did afterward ſo vnderſtand, as they affirmed that Chriſt was not God by him ſelfe and of him ſelfe, but receaued that of the Father. Wherein they wholy tooke away the diuinitie of Chriſt.

Willet Controu. 20. q. 1. pag. 1161. The Father gaue not to the Sonne to be God.—If Chriſt receiued life from his Father, Receaued not life of his Father. he could not haue it in him ſelfe.

Caluin Admonit. ad Polonos in Opuſcul. pag. 685.If the Father haue his being of him ſelfe, the Sonne haue his being of Had not his being of his Father. the Father, the holie Ghost of them both, doe there not ariſe three natures?

Beza apud Campian. Ration. 8. The Sonne is not begotten Not begotten of the Eſſence of his Father. of the eſſence of his Father. Which Whitaker in his anſwere maintaineth.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that God the Father gaue life to the Sonne, that the Sonne liueth by the Father, that the Sonne is of the Father. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants teach quite contrarie, that God the Sonne receaued not of the Father to be God, but had that of him ſelfe, that Chriſt receaued not life from his Father, that he had not his being of his Father, that he was not begotten of the ſubſtance of his Father.

ART. II. WHETHER CHRIST WERE predeſtinate the Sonne of God.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Rom. 1. ver. 4. it is ſaied of Chriſt: Who was predeſtinate Chriſt predeſtinate the Sonne of God. the Sonne of God in power.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

S. Thomas 3 part. q. 14. art. 1. Chriſt was predeſtinate the Some of God.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Daneus Controu. 1. q. 14. p. 30. He ſaieth: Chriſt was predeſtinate Not predeſtinate the Sōne of God. the Sonne of God: Which is Arianiſme.

Affelman l. de Praedeſtinat. §. 7. The matter or obiect of predeſtinatiō are not Origens ſoules, nor Chriſt, as thoſe of Baſel, of Herborne, and Maldonat do falſely teach, who are contradicted by thoſe of Heidelberg. The ſame do thoſe Proteſtants inſinuate, who will not haue vs read in the place cited Rom.

1. Predeſtinate, but, Declared the Sonne of God.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Chriſt was predeſtinate the Sonne of God. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay the contrarie; that he was not predeſtinate the Sonne of God, and call it hereſie to ſay ſo. Which is ſo contrarie to Scripture, as Saint Auſtin ſaieth: Who denieth the Sonne of God to haue beene predeſtinated, Tractat. 105. in Ioan. he denieth him to haue beene man.

ART. III. WHETHER CHRIST AS man be to be inuocated or adored.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Philippen. 2. verſ. 10. That in the name of Ieſus euerie knee Chriſt to be worshipped and inuocated as man. bow of the celeſtials, terrestrials, and infernals.

Mark. 10. v. 47. & 48. The blind man crieth: Ieſu Sonne of Dauid haue mercie vpon me. The like Mathew 15. ver. 22. and c. 20. v. 31.

Luke. 23. v. 42. And he ſaied to Ieſus: Lord remember me when thou shalt come into thy kingdome.

Mathew. 2. ver. 11. They found the child with Marie his mother, and falling downe adored him. c. 28. v. 9. They tooke hould of his feete and adored him.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Card. Bellarmin l. 1. de Sanctis. c. 12. The Diuines giues hyperdulie onely to the humanitie of Chriſt and to his Mother.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Zuinglius l. de ver. & falſ. relig. c. de Statuis tom. 2. How Not to be worshipped as man. Not to be inuocated as man. can they be ignorant, that Chriſt, as he was viſible and man, was no way to be worshipped, but as he was God.

Daneus in orat. Domini. pag. 574. Chriſt is not to be inuocated as he is man, but as he is God conſubſtantiall to his Father.

In Exani. Kemnitij. p. 1447. Who directeth his adoration or inuocation to the humanitie of Chriſt, is accurſed by the mouth of God.—Chriſts flesh is not by nature God, albeit it be hypoſtatically truely vnited to God. Therefore who properly directe their inuocation vnto it, are true Idolaters. Agayne. Chriſt, as man, is our fellow ſeruant and one of our brethren, albeit the firſt begotten. Therefore Christ is not to be adored or inuocated as he is man. Likewiſe: The flesh of Chriſt, albeit glorified and abiding vnited in one perſon, is yet a creature. Wherefore who directeth his adoration vnto-it, blaſphemeth God.

Beza in Colloq. Montisbel p. 292. We alſo denie, that Chriſts humanitie not to be worſhipped. the humanitie of Christ is to be worshipped. Which alſo he repeateth pag. 296. 298. 209. 284. and 301. And p. 284. and 292. We adore all Christ, we direct our inuocation to the Sonne of God, that is, to his diuinitie as the onely proper obiect of religious worshippe, and not to his humanitie. Reſponſ. 3. ad Sel: vol. 2. p. 274. I confeſſe, that this ſame man is to be inuocated, but not as man, but as he is God.

Polanus in Sylloge Theſium parte 1. p. 482. Chriſt is not the proper obiect of adoration, but his diuinitie.

D •• ines of Neuſtad, in Schuſſelburg l. 4. Theol Caluin Chriſt heareth not all in his Humanitie. art. 2 • . For Chriſt heareth not all, ſaueth not all, giueth not the holie Chriſt by his humanitie, much leſſe by his hands or feete. Th • ſe things are proper to his diuinitie, and therefore agree to Christ man, not as he is man, but as he is God.

Diuines of Heidelberg (as reporteth Smidelin in Colloq. cit. p. 290.) write, that Chriſt heareth not our praiers in heauen according to his humanitie.

Perkins in Serie Cauſarum cap. 21. tom. 1. col. 32. Nether could inuocation agree to Chriſt, vnleſſe, as he is man, ſo he were alſo God. For adoration is not referred to his humanitie conſidered by it ſelfe, but to the diuinitie, to which his flesh is hypoſtatically vnited.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Chriſt was inuocated as he was Sonne of Dauid, and as in the time of his paſſion he had not yet entred into his kingdome: and that he was adored as he was a child and the ſonne of Marie. The ſame ſaye Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſaye, that Chriſt as man is not to be inuocated, that according to his humanitie he heareth not our praiers in heauen, that as man he is no way to be worshipped, that Godhead is the onely proper obiect of religious worshippe: that who direct their inuocation or adoration to Chriſts humanitie blaſpheme God, are true Idolaters, blaſpheme God, and are accurſed by Gods mouth. Which are ſo oppoſite to Scripture as Some Proteſtants confeſſe it. See l. 2. c. vlt.

ART. IV. WHETHER CHRIST AS MAN, or the humanitie of Chriſt had power to quicken, to remitte ſinnes, to worke miracles?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Mathew 9. v. 6. and 8. But that you may know that the Chriſt as mā had power to forgiue ſinnes. Sonne of man hath power in earth to forgiue ſinnes.—And the multitudes ſeing it, were affraied, & glorified God that gaue ſuch power to men.

Ihon. 6. v. 54. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, To giue life. hath life euerlaſting.

Acts. 4. verſ. 10. In the name of Ieſus Chriſt of Nazareth To worke miracles. whom you did crucifie, whom God hath raiſed from the dead, in this ſame this man ſtandeth before you whole.

Hebrews 9. v. 19. For if the blood of goates and of oxen, and the aſſes, of an heifer being ſprincled ſanctifieth the polluted to the cleanſing of the flesh; how much more shall the blood of Chriſt who by the holie Ghoſt offered him ſelfe vnſpotted vnto God, To pu • ge from ſinne. cleanſe our conſcience from dead workes to ſerue the liuing God?

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

S. Thomas 3. parte 416. art. 11. The power of forgiuing ſinnes conſisteth in Chriſts diuine nature by authoritie, but in his humane nature it is inſtrumentally and by ministerie.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins in Galat. 3. v. 5. Not Chriſt himſelfe as man, could As man he could not worke a miracle. Not profitable as man. worke a true miracle.

Zuinglius l. de ver. & falſa relig. c. de Euchar. to 2. Chriſt is profitable to vs on that parte wherewith he deſcended from heauen, not on that whereby he was borne of the immaculate Virgin. Agayne: He could be profitable onely according to his diuinitie. Which he repeateth in Ioan. 6. to m. 4. and there addeth: Chriſts flesh profiteth nothing, nothing at all. His flesh profiteth nothing at all. Had no power to giue life.

Beza in Colloq. Montisbel. p. 276. In the meane time we deny, that Chriſts flesh is truly viuificall. A gayne: But that there is any power or vertue of quickning in Chriſts flesh, for which power imparted to it it may be ſaied viuificall and to quicken, that we deny. And p. 279. The vertue of quickning is ſo proper to the diuinitie, as it cannot be communicated euen to the flesh of Chriſt nor to any other creature vnleſſe it be turned into the diuinitie. Lib. cont. Brent. col. 1. pag. 527. he denieth that Chriſts humanitie forgiueth ſinnes by vertue of the diuinitie which had giuen this power to it. And p. 545. ſaieth. Note, that the power of ſauing is not attributed to the flesh though aſſumpted, but to the diuinitie of which it is aſſumpted. And in Colloq. cit. p. 228. The raiſing of the dead is the worke of the diuinitie Nor to raiſe the dead. onely, which cannot be attributed to the humanitie of Chriſt.

Daneus Controu. 4. q. 9. p. 195. Chriſt the Sonne of man liuing on earth remitted ſinnes, but not as man, but as God: as in Remitted not ſinnes as mā. the ſame diuine nature he wrought miracles, not as man.

Sadeel reſponſ. ad Art abiurat. 5. Our life firſtly, properly, and preciſely proceedeth from the diuine nature. And the diuines Nor heareth our praiers. of Heidelberg before cited: Chriſt as man heareth not our praiers in heauen.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the Sonne of man had in earth power to forgiue ſinnes, that who eateth his flesh hath life euerlaſting, that in the name of Chriſt crucified miracles were wrought, that his blood clenſeth our conſciences from ſinnes. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach the contrarie, that Chriſt as man was not profitable vnto vs, that his flesh profiteth nothing at all, that it is not viuificall not hath any vertue of quickning, that the diuinitie hath not giuen it any power of forgiuen ſinnes, that our life proceedeth preciſely from the diuinitie, that Chriſt as man did not forgiue ſinnes, did not worke any miracle, could not worke any miracle, that the raiſing of the dead cānot be attributed to his humanitie. Which are ſo contrarie to the Scripture as diuers Proteſtants do acknowledge it. See l. 2. c. 30.

ART. V. WHETHER CHRIST AS MAN, or his humanitie were euerie where.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Mathew. 28. v. 6. I know that you ſeeke Ieſus that was crucified: Chriſts bodie not in the Sepulcher after his reſurrection. He is not here.

Ihon 11. v. 15. Ieſus ſaied to them plainly: Lazarus is dead, and Not where Lazarus died. Not where • e was ſought. I am glad for your ſake, that you may beleiue, becauſe I was not there. And c. 6. v. 24. When therefore the multitude ſaw, that Ieſus was not there not his diſciples, they &c.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Card. Bellarmin l. 3. de Incarnat. c. 11. That Chriſts humanitie is eueriewhere, is againſt Scripture.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Luther in Defenſ. verb. caenae to. 7. fol. 394. Chriſt manifeſtly Chriſts bodie in heauen and earth. teſtifieth, that his bodie is at once in heauen and in earth, or rather preſent euery where. Which he oftentimes repeateth. Wherevpon Zuinglius reſp. ad Confeſ. Lutheri to. 2. fol. 446. ſaieth that Luther affirmeth Chriſt to be in euerie In eueri • place. place, no leſſe according to his humane nature, then his diuine.

Brentius apud Bezam lib. cont. ipſum vol. 1. Theol. p. 516. It is neceſſarie, that whereſoeuer the diuinitie of Chriſt is, Whereſoeuer his godhead is there alſo he haue with him his humane nature.

Gerlachius tom. 2. diſput. 2. p. 25. We put the humane nature of Chriſt almightie and in all places.

Smidelin in Hoſpin. part. 2. Hiſt. fol. 323. The Humanitie of Chriſt is euerie where. Which he and his followers defended openly in the Conference at Mulbrun and Montbelgard.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Chriſt as man was not in the ſepulcher after his reſurrection, that he was not where Lazarus died, that he was not where the Iewes ſought him. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that Chriſts bodie is euery where, that his humanitie is whereſoeuer his diuinitie is, that his humane nature is in all places. Which is ſo oppoſite to Scripture, as manie Proteſtants confeſſe it. See l. 2. c. 30.

ART. VI. WHETHER CHRIST AS MAN be head of the Church?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Corint. 11. v. 3. And I will haue you to know, that the head Chriſt head of the Church as he is man. of euerie man is Chriſt, and the head of the woman is the man, and the head of Chriſt is God.

Epheſ. 5. v. 23. Becauſe the man is the head of the woman, as Chriſt is the head of the Church, him ſelfe the Sauiour of his bodie.

Philippenſ. 2. verſ. 8. He humbled himſelfe, made obedient vnto death, euen the death of the croſſe. For the which thing God alſo hath exalted him, and hath giuen him a name which is aboue all names, that in the name of Ieſus euerie knee bowe.

Roman. 14. ver. 9. For this end Chriſt died and aroſe againe, that he may haue dominion both of the dead and of the liuing.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton l. 7. de Iuſtificat. c. 4. Chriſt not onely as God, but alſo as man, is head of the Church.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Controu. 2. q. 2. p. 455. I anſwere, that it is abſurd, Not foundation of the Church as he was man. that the foundation of the Church be viſible. The Church was not founded in Christ, as he could be ſeene, but as he could not be ſeene. Pag. 456. Chriſt was not a viſible or ſenſible, but (that I may ſo ſpeake) a credible foundation. And Controu. 4. q. 1. c. 2. q. 525. Chriſt was no viſible monarch in the Church.

Vallada in Apologia cont. Epiſcop. Luzon. c. 5. It is groſſe Not head of the Church, as man. ignorance to make Ieſus Chriſt head of the Church as he is man, which to this day no diuine durſt ſay.

Zuinglius in Coloſſ. 1. tom. 4. It is impoſsible, that a viſible man should be head of the Church, ſeing she is inuiſible.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Chriſt is head of men as he is vnder God, as he is Sauiour of his bodie: that in the name of Ieſus all knees shall know becauſe he humbled himſelfe to death, that he died and roſe againe for to haue dominion ouer all. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that the Church was not founded in Chriſt as he was viſible: that he was no viſible Monarch of the Church: that he is not head of the Church as he is man: that no viſible man can be head of the Church.

ART. VII. WHETHER CHRIST AS man was a law maker, made any lawes?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Iſaie c. 33. v. 22. thus prophetieth of Chriſt: For the Lord Chriſt, lawmaker, as mā. is our iudge, the Lord is our lawmaker, the Lord is our King, he will ſaue vs.

Mathew. 11. v. 30. Chriſt ſaieth: For my yoake is ſweet, and my burden light. And c. vlt. ver. 19. All power is giuen to me in heauen and earth, going therefore teach ye all nations.—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 commaund you.

1. Cor. 7. ver. 10. But to them that be ioyned in matrimonie, not I giue commandment, but our Lord, that the wife departe not from her husband, and if she departe, to remaine vnmaried, or to be reconciled to her husband.

Galat. 6. v. 2. Beare ye one an others burdens, and ſo you shall fulfill the law of Christ.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſion. 6. Canon. 21. If any shall ſay, that Ieſus Chriſt was giuen of God to men as a redeemer to whome they may truſt, not as a lawmaker whome to obey, be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Confeſſion of Witenberg. c. de Euangelio: Nether is Chriſt no law maker. Chriſt to be made a new lawmaker, ſeing he nether hath made a new law, nether &c.

Powel Epiſt. lib. de Adiaphoris. We conſtantly denie, that Chriſt is a lawmaker. Which alſo M. Perkins inſinuateth in Galat. c. 6. ſaying. The Ghoſpell muſt no way be called a new law.

Luther in Galat. 1. tom. 5. fol. 228. Chriſt is no lawmaker. Euerie lawmaker, miniſter of ſinne. Euerie law maker is the minister of ſinne. fol. 292. The Goſpell teacheth, that Chriſt came not to giue a new law and to giue precepts of manners. In cap. 2. fol. 321. he ſaieth, that he laboureth to damne the ould opinion of Chriſt a lawgiuer and iudge. Agayne: Define Chriſt rightly, not as the Sophiſters and Iuſtitiamans do who make him a new lawgiuer, who abrogating the ould law gaue a new; to them Chriſt is an exactor and Tyrant. And in cap. 52. Iſaiae tom. 4. fol. 198. They erre, who thinke Chriſt frameth not mā ners. Chriſt to be a lawmaker who frometh manners.

Illyricus in Matth. c. 5. Chriſt is no law giuer.

Caluin in Antidot. Concil. Seſſ. 6. Con. 21. We denie, He gaue no new lawes. that Chriſt is a lawgiuer, who gaue any new lawes to the world. In Math. 5. v. 21. Nether muſt we imagin Chriſt a new lawmaker, who added any thing to the eternall iuſtice of his Father, but we muſt heare him as a faithfull interpreter. And in v. 43. Chriſt giueth no new laws.

Beza in Math. 19. v. 19. As if Chriſt came to make any new law, and not rather to deliuer vs from the curſe of the law. In 2. He tought vs not what to do or shun. Cor. 3. v. 6. Chriſt is the Miniſter of the Ghoſpell, not teaching vs what we ought to doe what to shun (which is the perpetuall office of the law) but freely offering himſelfe for eternall life to them that beleiue.

Peter Martyr in Roman. 3. But we abſolutely denie, that Chriſt gaue new lawes.

Pareus l. 4. de Inſt. c. 4. Christ indeed as God was the giuer and author of the law with his Father, but in flesh he came not as a lawmaker, but as a redeemer.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Chriſt was a lawmaker, that he hath a law, and commandeth ſome thing, that he impoſeth a yoake and burden. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay the contrarie, that Chriſt was no lawmaker, no lawgiuer, made no new lawes, that he gaue no precepts of manners, framed not manners, tought vs not what to doe or what to shunne, that euerie lawgiuer is the miniſter of ſinne.

ART. VIII. WHETHER CHRIST AS man be a Iudge?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Ihon 5. v. 22. For nether doth the Father iudge any man, but all iudgmēt he hath giuen to the Sonne, that all may honoure the Sonne as they doe honoure the Father. And v. 27. And he hath Chriſt, iudge, as man. giuen him power to doe iudgment alſo becauſe he is the Sonne of man.

Acts. 10. ver. 43. And commanded vs to preach to the people, and to teſtifie that it is he that of God was appointed iudge of the liuing and of the dead.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

• ard. Bellarm. l. 3. de Incarnat. cap. 16. Power of iudging externally and ſenſibly is giuen to Chriſt, becauſe he is the Sonne of man.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther in Galat. 2. to. 5. fol. 321. I was ſo taught from a child, that I waxed paile with feare at the very name of Chriſt, becauſe I was perſwaded that he was a Iudge. Wherefore I haue duble labour to correct this euill. Firſt, to forget that ould inueterate Chriſt is no iudge. opinion of Chriſt a lawmaker and iudge, then to damne and reiect it. And in Galat. 5. tom. 1. Germ. Witenberg: apud Scioppium in ſuo Eccleſiaſt. c. 5. When thou thinkeſt of Chriſt as a Iudge who will command thee to giue an account of thy life paſt, then be aſſured and certaine, that it is not Chriſt, but the very diuell him ſelfe. The ſame doctrin he preacheth Poſtilla in Dom. 3. Aduentus, and in Die Pentecoſtes, where alſo he addeth: If we haue ſuch an imagination of Chriſt, as that I thinke he is a Iudge, ſtreight waies I feare him, thence it followeth that I become ſtrange from him, and fearfull in the ſight of God, ſo that alſo I hate him.

Iacobus Andreae apud Bezam reſponſ. ad calum. vol. 3. pag. 131. Some of them are not afraied to ſay, that Chriſt shall not exerciſe the last iudgment as man but as God. And the like thinke all they; who as we shall rehearſe hereafter chap. 16. ſaye, that Chriſt will not exact any account of our life paſt. For if he be our iudge, doubtleſſe he will exact account of vs.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that Chriſt is appointed iudge of the liuing and the dead, that he hath power to iudge becauſe he is the Sonne of man. Catholiks the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that it is a damnable opinion to thinke Chriſt to be a iudge: that when we thinke of Chriſt as a Iudge, it is not Chriſt, but the Diuel him ſelfe: that if we imagin Chriſt to be a iudge we fall to hate him.

ART. IX. WHETHER CHRIST HATH made a new teſtament or couenant?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Hieremie 31. v. 31. Behould the dayes shall come, ſaieth our Lord, and I will make a new couenant with the houſe of Iſrael Chriſt made a new couenant. and the houſe of Iuda, not according to the couenant which I made with their fathers in the day that I tooke their hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. Which words the Apoſtle citeth Hebr. 8. v. 8. and expoundeth them of the couenant made by Chriſt.

Hebrews 8. v. 6. and 7. But now he hath obtained a better A better teſtament. miniſterie, by ſo much as he is mediator of a better testament which is eſtabliished in better promiſes. For if that former had beene void of fault, there should not certes a place of a ſecond beene sought.

Hebrews 9. v. 15. And therefore he is the mediator of a new A new teſtament. teſtament, that death being a meane, vnto the redemption of thoſe preuarications which were vnder the former teſtament, they that are called may receaue the promiſe of eternall inheritance.

Galat. 4. v. 24. For theſe are the twoe teſtaments. The one Twoe teſtaments. from mount Sina &c.

Mathew 26. ver. 28. This is my blood of the new teſtament. And Luke 22. v. 20. This is the chalice, the new taſtament in my blood.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Miſſa c. 8. Chriſt at his laſt ſupper made his teſtament, and therefore fulfilled the figure of the ould teſtament.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Confeſſions of Swizers cap. 17. Seing there is alwaies one onely God, one mediator of God and men, one teſtament or couenant, There is but one teſtament. it neceſſarily followeth &c.

Whitaker Cont. 2. q 2. c. 3. It is one and the ſame couenant, albeit by reaſon of the times diuerſely made.

Zuinglius in Elencho tom. 2. fol. 31. They are called two Not twoe teſtaments. teſtaments, not that they are twoe different teſtaments. Fol. 33. Wherefore there is one teſtament alone, one onely teſtament. In Serm. 1. Bernen. fol. 532. But ſeing there are not twoe teſtamēts, there must be this one.

Caluin 2. Inſtit. c. 10.§. 2. The conuenant of all the Fathers is ſo litle differēt from oures in deed and in ſubstāce, that it is wholy one and the ſame, yet the adminiſtration varieth.

Beza in Math. 26. v. 28. They cannot nor muſt not be called Not twoe couenants. twoe couenants, as if indeed they were twoe. Cont. Heshuſ. vol. 1. p. 283. The ould and the new couenant is one onely and ſinguler couenant, whether we conſider the author, or the matter, or the end and ſcope of them both.

Peter Martyr in locis claſ. 2. c. 16. §. 27. We muſt needs determin, that the couenant betwixt God and man of the ould and new teſtament is one and the ſame.

Bucanus Inſtit. Theol. loco. 22. The twoe teſtaments are one in ſubſtance, or in reſpect of all cauſes, efficient, materiall, and finall.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Chriſt made a new couenant or teſtament, a ſecond, an other, a latter couenant or teſtament, a new one not according to the ould, a better teſtament eſtablished in better promiſes, and that the former teſtament was not void of fault. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that there is alwaies one teſtament or couenant, one and the ſame couenant, wholy one and the ſame in deed and ſubſtance, one and the ſame according to the Author matter and end, one in reſpect of all cauſes materiall, formall, efficiēt and finall▪ that there are not twoe different teſtaments, that they muſt not be called twoe, as if indeed they were twoe. Which are ſo manifeſtly repugnant to Scripture as diuers Proteſtants confeſſe it. See l. 2. c. 30.

ART. X. WHETHER CHRIST AS MAN were ignorant?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Ihon 16. v. 30. The Apoſtles ſay to Chriſt: Now we know Chriſt knew all things. that thou knoweſt all things, and thou needeſt not that any man aske thee.

Ihon 21. v. 17. Peter ſaied to him: Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I loue thee. And ca. 7. v. 15. And the Knew letters though he had not learnt them. Iewes maruailed, ſaying: How doth this mā know letters, whereas he hath not learned.

Ihon. 2. v. 24. But Ieſus did not commit himſelfe vnto them, for that he knew all, and becauſe it was not needfull for him that Knew what was in man. any should giue teſtimonie of man, for he knew what was in man. And c. 18. ver. 4. Ieſus therefore knowing all things that should come vpon him, went forth &c.

Coloſſ. 2. v. 3. In whome (Ieſus Chriſt) be all the treaſures Had all treaſures of knowledge. of wiſdome and knowledge hidde.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

S. Thomas 3. part. q. 15. art. 3. As in Christ there was no fomite of ſinne, ſo there was no ignorance. Et q. 11. art. 11. He knew all particuler things paſt, preſent, and to come.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker ad Ration. 8. Campiani. Thou ſaieſt, that Proteſtants Chriſt was ignorant. teach that Chriſt was ignorant. And why may they not teach ſo?

Zuinglius in c. 2. Lucae. Chriſts ſoule dayly profited, whereas from the beginning he knew not all things.

Caluin in Math. 21. v. 18. There is no abſurditie, if we ſay that according to his humanitie he knew not what kind of tree Knew not trees. it was. In c. 24. v. 36. It was no inconueniencie, that Chriſt according to mans knowledge was ignorant of ſome thing. In Lucae 2. v. 40. His ſoule was ſubiect to ignorance.

Beza in Colloq. Montisbel. p. 177. We muſt acknowledge, that Chriſt in the time of his humiliation according to his humanitie Was ignorāt of manie things. was for vs ignorant of many things. And p. 250. being asked, Whether Christ according to his ſoule be ſearcher of hearts? he anſwered: No.

Gallaſtus in l. 2. Irenei. cap. 49. Chriſt was ſo ignorat as he He was tought as we be. learnt and was tought as men are.

Daneus Controu. 2. p. 143. Chriſts ſoule was truely ignorant and knew not ſome things.—Chriſt knew not where Lazarus He knew not Lazarus his graue. Nor figges on the tree. Was ſubiect to childish ignorance. his corps was laied.

Pareus l. 5. de Amiſſ. Grat. c 14. Christ knew not figges on the tree.

Serranus Cont. Hayum parte 3. pag. 289. Luke teſtifieth, that he was ſubiect to childish ignorance and forgetfulneſſe.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth that Chriſt knew all things that should come vpon him, that he knew all things, that he knew all men, that he knew whar was in man, that he knew letters though he had not learnt, that in him were all the treaſures of wiſdome and knowledge. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants contrariwiſe teach, that Chriſt as man knew not all things, was ignorant of manie things, was ſubiect to childish ignorance and forgetfulnes, knew not the hearts of men, knew not where Lazarus his bodie was laied, knew not figges on the tree, knew not what kinde of tree it was, and was ſo ignorant as he needed to be tought as men are. And this ignorance of Chriſt Serranus lib. cit. pag. 290. calleth the ground of their ſaluation. Which is ſo oppoſith to Scriptures as ſome Proteſtants confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. XI. WHETHER CHRIST AS MAN were truely a ſinner and hatefull to God?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Hebrews 7. ver. 26. For it was ſeemly that we should haue Chriſt ſeparated from ſinners. ſuch a high preiſt, holie, innocent, impolluted, ſeparated from ſinners &c.

1. Peter 1. v. 19. You are redeemed with pretious blood, as it were of an immaculate and vnſpotted lambe, Chriſt. And c. 2. v. 22. Who did not ſinne, nether was guile found in him.

Mathew 3. c. 17. And be hould a voice from heauen, ſaying. God well pleaſed in Chriſt. This is my beloued Sonne in whome I am well pleaſed.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

D. Stapleton l. 7. de Iuſtific. c. 10. It is not onely new, but alſo a blaſphemous kinde of ſpeech, to call Christ a ſinner ether by imputation or any way at all. In Math. 26. ver. 39. We muſt maintaine, that Chriſt nether had any inconſiderate deſire, nor ſaied any thing that deſerued correcting, nor offered vnmeaſured requeſts, nor wanted a mild moderation.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Perkins in Cathol. reform. Controu. 4. c. 4. We may with Chriſt truely a ſinner. reuerence to his maieſtie in good manner ſay, that Christ was a ſinner, and that truely. And De Serm. Dom in Monte to. 2. col. 212. We may moſt certainly affirme, that Chriſt by and for our ſinnes was made a ſinner, not in but by imputation.

Luther in c. 53. Iſaiae to. 4. fol. 222. He is the greateſt ſinner, Chriſt the greateſt ſinner. ſo that there is none greater then the Sonne of God. And fol. ſeq. addeth that, He is wicked, guiltie of death, and vnder the power of the Diuel and hel. In c. 3. Galat. to. 5. fol. 348. All the Prophets ſaw this in ſpirit, that Chriſt was to be the greateſt theefe, murderer, adulterer, robber, ſacrilegious, ſo that none euer in the world was greater.—If thou denie him to haue beene a ſinner and accurſed, denie that he ſuffered and died. And fol. 350. he calleth it moſt ſweet doctrin and moſt full of comforte, that Chriſt for vs was made a curſe, that is, a ſinner obnoxious Chriſt not innocent. to the wrath of God. And 351. We muſt not imagin Chriſt to be innocent, as the Sophiſters and almoſt all the Fathers, Hierome, and others haue done. In Pſal. 22. to. 3. He ſeemeth in him ſelfe to ſwallow the temptation of blaſphemie, which was almoſt breacking out, as it were floting betwene praiſe and blaſphemie. Poſtilla in Domin. 2. poſt Epiphan. He vnciuilly reiected the Vnciuilly reiected his mother. moſt modeſt admonition of his Mother. And maketh our B. Ladie thus complaining of him: He rudely reiecting hath diſhonored me, and with ſo vnciuill an anſwere hath shamed me before ſo many gueſts.

Illyricus in Confeſſ. Antuerpien. cap. 6. He may be moſt truely called a ſinner, by the moſt mightie imputation of his Father. Et in Claue Scripturae part. 5. col. 858. God made Chriſt Hatefull to God. by imputation a ſinner, or iniuſt, guiltie, hatefull to God. The like he hath part. 2. col. 534. and in 2. Corint. 5. ver. 21 In Math. 3. v. 15. he ſaieth, that Chriſt by imputation was the Had need to be clenſed. vncleaneſt of all, and had need to be clenſed by baptiſmes and iustices.

Caluin in 2. Corint. 5. v. 21. How are we iuſt before God? As Chriſt was a ſinner. In Math. 26. v. 39. he writeth: I confeſſe, that Chriſt had an abrupt deſire. Betwixt violent fluddes of tēptations, he (as it were) wauered with deſires, now on one ſide, now on the other. He correcteth and recalleth a requeſt which ſodainly eſcaped him. This praier of Chriſt was not thought of, but the force and vehemēcie of ſorrow did wreſt frō him a ſpeech which by and by was corrected. The ſame Violence made him for the preſent forget the heauenlie decree, that for that moment he did not thinke himſelfe to haue beene ſent on this condition to be the redeemer of mankind. In c. 27. v. 46. But it ſeemeth abſurd, that a ſpeech of deſperation should proceed from Chriſt. The anſwere is at hand. For albeit the ſenſe of the flesh did apprehend destruction, yet faith abode fast in his harte. In ver. 47. So we ſee, Ouerwelmed with deſperation. that he was vexed on euerie ſide, that being ouerwhelmed with deſperation, he gaue ouer calling vpon God. Which was to renounce his ſaluation. In Ioan. 12. v. 27. By flying death, he confeſſeth his delicatenes.

Beza in 2. Corint. 5. ver. 21. Chriſt was for vs made ſinne, that is, a ſinner, not in him ſelfe, but by the guilt of all our ſinnes Properly accurſed. imputed to him. In Galat. 3. v. 13. In that conſiſteth our ſaluation, that God properly and without any figure powred all his wrathe vpon his Sonne, properly and not figuratiuely accurſed him, •• in his humanitie he was our pledge, for to receaue vs into grace.

Pareus in Galat. 3. lection. 35. He was made a curſe, that is, accurſed.

Daneus Controu. de baptiſmo c. 23. That which he obiecteth, He had need of baptiſme. that it is mere blaſpemie, to ſay that Chriſt was a ſinner, and had need of baptiſme, is it ſelfe moſt blaſphemous.—Chriſt him hath tought, that as he was made man for our ſake he needed this baptiſme.

Piſcator in Theſib. lib. 2. p. 125. Chriſt by imputation was Accurſed as the damned. truely a ſinner, becauſe for ſinnes he was a curſe, that is, accurſed. But none is accurſed before God, but for ſinne, that is, as he is, or as he is held for a ſinner. And p. 619. To be accurſed, was common to Chriſt with all thoſe to whome in the day of iudgment he shall ſay: God ye accurſed into euerlaſting fire. Moulins in his Bucler of faith art. 17. ſection. 31. Chriſt made himſelfe culpable for to make vs aſſoiled. See more of their like ſpeeches in the Latin booke c. 1. art. 11.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that Chriſt was ſeparated from ſinners, was innocent, holie, vnpolluted, immaculate, vnſpotted: that he was his Fathers well beloued, Sonne, in whome he was well pleaſed. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants ſaye, that Chriſt was a ſinner, the greateſt ſinner that euer was, truely a ſinner, moſt truely a ſinner, not innocent, vniuſt, vncleane, had need of baptiſme, had need to be clenſed: was hatefull to God, accurſed of God, accurſed as the damned shalbe at the day of iudgment, was culpable, confeſſed his delicatenes, had deſires not premeditated that deſerued correction and recalling, floted betweene praiſe and blaſphemie, reeled betweene temptations, vnciuily reiected, dishonored, and shamed his mother, was ſo ouerwhelmed with deſperation, that he gaue ouer calling vpon God, which was to renounce his ſaluation.

ART. XII. WHETHER CHRIST REEVſed to doe the office of a Redeemer?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Luke 12. v. 51. But I haue to be baptized with a baptiſme and Chriſt deſired to die for mā kind. how am I ſtrained vntill it be diſpatched?

Math. 16. v. 23. Where S. Peter dehorted him from ſuffering: Turning ſaied to Peter: Goe after me Sathan: Thou art a ſcandall vnto me, becauſe thou ſauoureſt not the things that are of God. And c. 26. v. 53. When S. Peter would haue defended him: Ieſus ſaieth to him: Returne thy ſworde into his place,—Thinkeſt thou, that I cannot aske my Father, and he will giue me preſently more then twelue legions of Angels.

Ihon 4. verſ. 34. Chriſt ſaieth: My meate is to doe the will of him that ſent me, to perfit his worke. And c. 18. v. 11. The chalice which my Father hath giuen me, shall not I drinke it.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

D. Stapleton in Math. 26. ver. 39. Caluin affirmeth, that Chriſt, as much as lay in him, refuſed, and drew back from doing the office a Redeemer: then the which no more greeuous accuſation could be laied vpon Chriſt by any Pagan or Iew.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Perkins in Serie Cauſarum c. 15. Chriſt was ſubiect to this Chriſt forget his office. weaknes, not to remember the office impoſed vpon him by reaſon of the agonie shaking his ſenſe. And c. 18. A litle before Chriſts death, ſorrow did ſo trouble his ſpirit, as for a time it ſtroake inwardly a marueilous amazement and forgetfulnes of the office impoſed vpon him.

Caluin in Ioan. 12. v. 27. By flying death, he confeſſeth his Had a deſtre contrarie to his vocation. delicateneſſe. Againe. He recalleth the deſire which he acknowledgeth to be contrarie to his vocation. In Math. 26. v. 36. Yet is not the queſtion quite anſwered. For ſith we lately ſaied that all Chriſts affections were rightly compoſed, how doth he now correct himſelfe? For he doth ſo ſubmit his affection to Gods will, as if he had exceeded meaſure. Surely in the firſt requeſt there appeareth As much as was in him he refuſed to doe the office of a Mediatour. not that milde moderation whereof I ſpoke, becauſe, as much as lay in him, he refuſed & forbare to do the office of a Mediatour. I anſwere, there was no fault in that whiles the terrour of death was before his eyes there fell vpon him ſuch a darknes, as leauing all others, he laied hould vpon ſuch a deſire. Nether is it needfull to diſpute here ſubtilly whether he could forget our ſaluation. Agayne In that moment he did not thinke, that he was ſent vpon condition to be the redeemer of man kinde.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that Chriſt ſo deſired to accomplish our redemption, as he was ſtrained vntill he had perfected it, that his meate was to do the will of his Father, that he sharply rebuked S. Peter when he dehorted him from ſuffering, and forbadde him to defend him from it. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that Chriſt was ſo weake as to forget the office of our redemption, that for a time he forgotte it: that he fledde death, had a deſire cōtrarie to his vocation, refuſed and forbore to do the office of a Mediatour, for a time did not thinke that he was ſent vpon condition to be the redeemer of mankinde.

ART. XIII. WHETHER CHRIST WAS aſſured of his ſaluation?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Ihon n. v. 41. And Ieſus lifting his eyes vpward, ſaied, Father Chriſt knew knew that God did alwaies heare him. That the abode in his fafathers loue. I giue the thanks that thou hast heard me, and I did know that thou doeſt alwaies heare me. Chap. 15. v. 10. If you keep my precepts, you shall abide in my loue, as I alſo haue kept my Fathers precepts and do abide in his loue. C. 16. ver. 28. I leaue the world and goe to the Father. cap. 17. verſ. 10. And now I am not in the world, and theſe are in the world, and I come to thee.

Luke 22. verſ. 69. But from hence forth the Sonne of man shalbe ſitting on the right hand of the power of God. c. 23. v. 43. And Ieſus ſaied vnto him: Amen I ſay to thee: this day thou shalt be with me in paradiſe.

Acts 2. v. 25. For Dauid ſaieth concerning him: I foreſaw the Lord in my ſigth alwaies, becauſe he is at my right hand that I be not mooued.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Promptuar. Quadrageſ. fer. 4. hebdom, ſanct. Chriſt, touching the ſtate of his ſoule, feareth not the leaſt forſaking of God.—How can any beleiue, that Chriſt could haue the leaſt ſuſpition of Gods malediction or forſaking.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther in pſalm. 22. to. 3. fol. 330. It followeth, that Chriſt himſelfe ſuffered the dread and horrour of a conſcience troubled, and taſting the euerlaſting wrath. fol. 331. Chriſt was no leſſe Chriſt freighted as the damned are. freighted in ſoule, then we, or the damned are, whiles they dread and flie God. fol. 333. He was moſt troubled with wandring fears and moſt vnquiet affections. And addeth fol. 330. cit. that, In exceeding deſpaire. Chriſt was at once both excedingly glorying, and deſpairing.

Melancthon in c. 26. Matthaei apud Hofmeiſter in Art. 3. Floted betwixt hell and life. Auguſtan. The third, & that the greateſt cauſe of Chriſts dread, was a feeling of Gods forſaking and wrath, whereby Chriſt floted betwixt hell and life.

Caluin in Catechiſmo c. de fide. Becauſe he preſēted himſelfe Chriſts conſciēce anxious before the tribunall ſeate of God, for to ſatisfie for ſinners, it was needfull that his conſcience should be tortured with this anxietie, as if he had beene forſakē of God, yea as if he had God his mortall enemie. In Math. 26. ver. 37. The depth of horrible destruction did greeuously vexe him to feare & anxietie. In v. 39. It was needfull Feared profound death. for him to feare the profound depth of deathe.—Chriſt was ſtroaken with the dread of Gods malediction. In Hebrae. 5. v. 7. I doubt not but the Apoſtle meaneth, that Christ was deliuered Feared to be ſwalowed of death. Almoſt perſwaded that he was caſt away. from that which he feared, to wit, leſt ouercome with euills he should yeeld, or be ſwallowed with death. And the ſame repeateth Beza vpon the ſame place, and addeth: He was almoſt perſuaded, that he was caſt away. And in Luc. 22. v. 44. Nether did Chriſt wraſle onely with the fears of death as other men d • e, but with the dreadfull iudgment of his angrie Father, then the which nothing can be thought more dreadfull. And in this deiection of Chriſt conſiſteth the ſumme of our comforte.

Pareus l. 3. de Iuſtificat. c. 12. When Bellarmin had ſaied: He cannot feare, who by faith is aſſured of his ſaluatiō: Anſwereth: The propoſition, vnleſſe it be limited, is vniuerſally falſe. Who more ſure of his ſaluation and predeſtination, that our Sauiour, and yet did he not crie vpon the Croſſe and not without feare: My God &c. See more of their like ſayings in my Latin booke c. 2. art. 13.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Chriſt knew that his Father did alwaies heare him, that he did abide in his loue, that he went to his father, that he should ſitt on the right hand of the power of God, that he should be in paradiſe, that God was at his right hand, that he be not mooued. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that Chriſt ſuffered the dread of a conſcience taſting euerlaſting wrath, was freighted in his ſoule like to the damned, was exceedingly deſpairing, did flote betweene hell and life, was tormented with anxietie as if God were his mortall enemie, was grieuouſly vexed with the dread of horrible deſtruction, did feare the profound depth of death and Gods malediction, feared leſt he should be ouercomen with euills and ſwallowed with death, was almoſt perſwaded that the was caſt away, was afraied of his ſaluantion. And yet theſe men (as we shall ſee c. 17. art. 10.) auouch, that euerie one of them is aſſured of his ſaluation, and account him no Chriſtian or faithfull man, who is not ſo aſſured: yea they make aſſurance of ſaluation an eſſentiall point of faith. So that they make thēſelues farre more aſſured of their Saluation then they make Chriſt: and condemne vs for doubting of our Saluation, who make Chriſt to doubt, feare, and deſpaire of his.

ART. XIV. WHETHER CHRIST HAD a commandment of his Father to giue his life, or to die for vs?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Ihon 10. verſ. 18. I yeeld my life, that I may take it againe, No man taketh it away from me, but I yeeld it of my ſelfe, and Chriſt commanded to giue his life. I haue power to yeeld it, and I haue power to take it againe. This commandment I receaued of my Father. cap. 18. verſ. 11. The chalice which my Father hath giuen me, shall not I drinke it.

Roman. 5. v. 19. For as by the diſobedience of one man manie were made ſinners: ſo alſo by the obedience of one, manie shalbe made iuſt.

Philippen. 2. v. 8. He humbled himſelfe, made obedient vnto death euen the death of the croſſe.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

S. Thomas 3. parte quaeſt. 47. art. 2. Chriſt receaued a commandment of his Father to ſuffer.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Polanus in Diſput. priuat. periodo 1. diſput. 36. They ſay: Not commaded to die. A law was made, that Chriſt should die. But this is againſt Scripture. For ſo his merit should not haue beene voluntarie. The ſame alſo do other Proteſtants meane, who ether ſay, that in euerie proper merit the oblation muſt needs be not commanded, as Hutterus in Analyſi Confeſſ. Auguſtan. artic. 4. or that it must not be due or of obligation, as Whitaker ſaieth lib. 9. cont. Dureum ſect. 34. Perkins in Cathol. reform. Contr. 5. c. 2. Vorſtius in Antibellarm. p. 638. and others.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Chriſt receaued this cō mandment of his Father to yeeld his life, that his Father gaue him the chalice of his paſſion, that he was obediēt to death, and that by his obedience manie are made iuſt. But (as Polanus himſelfe confeſſeth part. 2. theſ. p. 219.) obediēce cannot be ſo much as imagined, but in regard of the law to which it is afforded. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that there was no law made of Chriſts death, that if it had beene commanded, his death had not beene meritorious.

ART. XV. WHETHER CHRIST MERITED any thing for himſelfe, or had any thing for merit?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Chriſt exalted for his humiliation.

Philippen. 2. v. 8. & 9. He humbled himſelfe, made obedient vnto death, euen the death of the croſſe. For the which thing God alſo hath exalted him, & hath giuen him a name which is aboue all names &c.

Hebrews 2. v. 9. But him that was a litle leſſened vnder the Angels, we ſee Ieſus becauſe of the paſsion of death crowned with glorie and honour.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

S. Thomas 3. part. q. 19. art. 3. Chriſt had by merit the glorie of his bodie, and thoſe things which pertaine to his outward excellencie, as aſcenſion, whorshippe, and ſuch others.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Caluin in Philippen. 2. ver. 9. Nether Chriſt got nor ſought Chriſt got nothing for him ſelfe. any thing for himſelfe. In 2. Inſtitut. c. 17. §. 6. To enquire whether Chriſt merited any thing to himſelfe (as the Scholaſtiks doe) is no leſſe foolish curioſitie, then temerarious reſolution whē they affirme it. With what merits could man obtaine to be iudge of the world, head of Angels?

Daneus Controu. 2. p. 27. The Sententiarians do ſay, that Chriſt merited alſo to him ſelfe: but we denie it. He merited nothing for for himſelfe.

Pareus l. 5. de Iuſtif. c. 3. It is falſe, that Chriſt merited to him ſelfe exaltation.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Chriſt was exalted and had a name giuen him aboue all names becauſe he humbled him ſelfe, that he was crowned with glorie becauſe of his paſſion. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that Chriſt did not merit his exaltation, did not merit any thing to him ſelfe, could not merit to be iudge of the world and head of Angels.

ART. XVI. WHETHER CHRIST REDEEmed vs with a ſufficient price, or truely merited our redemption?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Cor. 6. v. 20. You are bought with a great price. Chriſt bought vs with a great price.

1. Timoth. 2. v. 6. For there is one God: one alſo mediatour of God and men, man Chriſt Ieſus who gaue him ſelfe a redemption (in Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) for all.

1. Peter 2. ver. 18. Knowing, that not with corruptible things gould or ſiluer, you are redeemed from your vaine conuerſation With his pretious blood. of your fathers tradition, but with the pretious blood, as it were of an immaculate and vnſpotted lambe, Chriſt.

1. Ihon 3. v. 16. In this we haue knowne the charitie of God, becauſe he hath yeelded his life for vs. c. 4. v. 10. He hath loued vs and ſent his ſonne a propitiation for our ſinnes.

Mathew 20. ver. 28. The Sonne of man is come to giue his life a redemption (in Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) for manie.

Rom. 3. v. 24. Iuſtified gratis by his grace by the redemption (in Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) that is in Chriſt Ieſus.

Pſalm. 129. v. 7. Becauſe with our Lord is mercie, and with him plenteous redemption.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

S. Thomas 3. part. artic. 2. Christ ſuffering of charitie and obedience did giue God ſome thing more then the recompence of the offence of all mankinde did exact.—The paſsion of Chriſt was not onely a ſufficient, obut alſo a ſuperaboundant ſatisfaction for the ſinnes of mankinde.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Tindal in Fox his Acts printed An. 1610. pag. 1136. Chriſt Chriſt merited not heauē. with all his works did not merite heauen.

Daneus Controu. 2. lib. 5. p. 210. Three neceſſarie conditiōs of merite do faile in the workes of a creature and of Chriſt man towards God.—For by the vnion hypoſtaticall, Chriſt doth not He did not merit. merite. Page. 200. Chriſt as man properly merited nothing with God. P. 202. Yea not in this forme of a ſeruant could Christ merite any thing to himſelfe, becauſe in this forme he was a credture. But a creature can merite nothing of his Creator.

Caluin 2. Inſtit. c. 17 §. 1. Truely I confeſſe, that if any would ſimply and by himſelfe oppoſe Chriſt vnto the iudgment of God, there were no place for merite; becauſe there will not be found in man any worth which may merite before God. §. vlt. With what merits could man obtaine to be iudge of the world, and head of Angels? 3. Inſtit. c. 11. §. 12. It is fondly obiected of him: that the power of iuſtifying farre ſupaſſeth both men and Angels, ſeing this dependeth not vpon the worth of any creature, but of Gods ordination. If the Angels would ſatisfie God, they would auaile nothing, becauſe they were not deſtinated to this end; but this was proper to Chriſt man, who was ſubiect to the law for to redceme vs from the curſe of the law. And Reſponſ. ad quaeſt. Sozin: Chriſt could merit nothing but through the pleaſure of God. Et in Ioan. 4. v. 10. When Chriſt is ſated to haue appeaſed the Father towards vs, this is referred to our ſenſe. For as we are guiltie to our ſelues, we cannot conceaue God but as angrie and offended till Chriſt abſolue vs from the guilt.—Wherefore touching the feeling of our faith God beginneth to loue vs in Chriſt.

Spindlerus apud Scuſſelburg. l. 4. Theol. Caluin. c. 5. The His death no ſufficient redemption for all ſinnes. Lutherans erre in ſaying that Chriſts death was a ſufficient redemption ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) for the ſinnes of all and euerie man.

Piſcator apud Vorſtium in Paraſceue c. 6. Chriſt died not ſufficiently, much leſſe effectually for all.

Welſingius apud Homium in Specim. Controuer. Belgic. His blood ſatisfied not Gods iuſtice. art. 21. That Chriſts blood ſatisfied Gods iuſtice for our ſinnes, is no where extant, and it is plainly contrarie to the free and iuſt remiſsion of ſinnes, which God hath offered to vs by Chriſt. And the ſame ſay other Proteſtants, as Caluin reporteth 2. Inſtit. c. 17. §. 1. and Beza in Abſters. calumn. Heſhuſij p. 324.

Slatius apud Homium loc. cit. There is queſtion, whether Chriſt properly ſatisfied not. Chriſt properly ſatisfied for vs. We denie it. And the ſame hath Vorſtius ib. Who alſo addeth: That Chriſt ſatisfied by a certaine acceptation, not by exact identitie.

Pareus l. 5 de Iuſtific. c. 3. To merit, is the parte of ſeruants, To merite, is ſerutle and ſordid. ſerutle, and ſordid.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Chriſt bought vs with a great price, that he gaue 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , that is, a ranſom or price of redemption for vs, that he redeemed vs with his pretious blood: that God gaue his life for vs, ſent his ſonne a propitiation for our ſinnes: that with God there is plentuous redemption. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay the contrarie: that Chriſt could not merite heauen, had no place for merit if we reſpect the iudgment of God, did not merite, three conditions neceſſatie to merite wanted in his works, that power of meriting in him depended of Gods pleaſure and ordination: That properly he did not ſatisfie for vs, that his blood did not ſatisfie Gods iuſtice, that his death was not a ſufficient 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or ranſom for all, that to merite is ſeruile and ſordid.

ART. XVII. WHETHER CHRIST REDEEmed vs by his blood or corporall death?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Coloſſ. 1. ver. 22. And you, whereas ſome time alienated and Chriſt redeemed vs by his death. By his blood, By he oblacion of his bodie. enemies in ſenſe, in euill works, yet now he hath reconciled in the bodie of his flesh by death. verſ. 20. Pacifying by the blood of his croſſe whether the things in earth or the things that are in heauen.

Hebrews. 10. v. 10. In the which will we are ſanctified by the oblation of the bodie of Ieſus Chriſt once. c. 9. verſ. 12. By his owne blood entred once into the Holies eternall redemption being found.

Epheſ. 1. v. 6. In whome we haue redemption by his blood the remiſs • on of ſinnes.

1. Peter v. 19. You are redeemed with the pretious blood as it were of an immaculate and vnſported lambe, Chriſt.

Acts 20. v. 28. The holie Ghoſt hath placed you Bishops to rule the Church of God, which he hath purchaſed with his owne blood.

Apocalips. 5. v. 9. Thou hast redeemed vs to God in thy blood.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

S. Thomas 3. part. q. 48. art. 5. The price of our redemption is the blood of Chriſt, or his corporall life which conſiſteth in blood.

Stapleton in Prompt. Quadrageſ. fer. 4. Hebdom. Sanct. Caluin putteth not onely an other price beſide the corporall death of Chriſt, but alſo an other greater and more excellent: Can Chriſtian ears ſuffer this?

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker lib. 8. cont. Dur. ſect. 18. Caluin wrote moſt truely: Chriſts death had done nothing. That nothing had beene done, if Chriſt had ſuffered onely corporall death.

Perkins de Serm. Dom. to. 2. col. 576. Reaſon it ſelfe teacheth, Was not ſufficient. that onely corporall death (of Chriſt) was not ſufficient to redeeme them who had deſerued death of bodie and ſoule.

Willet Cont. 20. q. 3. p. 1088. The bodilie death of Chriſt was Was not the full price. not in reſpect of Gods iuſtice the whole and full price of our redemption.

Caluin 2. Inſtit. c. 16. §. 10. Nothing had beene done, if Chriſt There needed a greater price. had ſuffered onely bodilie death—There was an other greater & more excellent price, that he ſuffered in his ſoule the horrible torments of a damned and lost man.

Bezalib. quaeſt. vol. 1. Theol. Chriſt was in the midſt of the torments of hell, for to deliuer vs fully from both deathes &c.

Scarpe de Iuſtif. Cont. 16. Writeth that diuers Proteſtāts ſay, that thoſe places of Scripture, in which is ſaied, that Chriſt dyed for vs, are to be vnderſtood onely of his feeling of the wrath of God, and not of his bodilie death: and that his bodilie death auailed nothing to our redemption nor was a parte of the ſatisfaction for ſinnes.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that Chriſt hath reconciled vs in the bodie of his flesh by death, hath pacified all things by the blood of his croſſe, hath ſanctifieth vs by the oblation of his bodie, hath found an eternall redemption by his blood, hath redeemed vs by his blood, with his blood, in his blood, hath purchaſed the Church with his blood. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that nothing had beene done if Chriſt had ſuffered onely corporall or bodilie death, that his corporall death was not ſufficient to redeeme vs, that there was need of a greater and excellenter price, that his corporall death auailed nothing to our redemption nor was any parte of the ſatisfaction for ſinnes. Which are ſo manifeſtly oppoſite to Scripture as ſome Proteſtants confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. XVIII. WHETHER CHRIST DIED for the impious and reprobats?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. Chriſt died for the impious. For him that perisheth. For the vniuſt.

Rom. 5. ver. 6. For why did Chriſt, when we as yet were weake, according to the time die for the impious?

1. Cor. 18. ver. 11. And through thy knowledge shall thy weak brother perish, for whome Chriſt hath died.

1. Peter. 3. v. 18. Becauſe Chriſt alſo died once for our ſinnes, the iuſt for vniuſt.

2. Peter 2. v. 1. & ſeq. But there were alſo falſe Prophets in the people, as alſo in you there shalbe lying maiſters, which shall bring in ſects of perdition, and denie him that hath bought them, the For thoſe that goe to perdition. Lord, bringing vpon themſelues ſpeedie perdition—vnto whome the iudgment, now long ſince ceaſeth not, and their perd • tion ſl • mbereth not.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarmin l. 4. de Amiſſ. Gratiae c. 7. Our Lord ſuffered and died for the vniuſt.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Controu. 2. q. 1. c. 9. p. 437. Chriſt did not giue Chriſt died not for the impious. The wicked not redremed by Chriſt. himſelfe for the impious and reprobates. Which he repeateth cap. 13.

Rainolds theſi 4. q. 22. The wicked, albeit they be termed faithfull for their profeſsion of faith, or for temporall faith, yet are they not redeemed or founded in Christ. In Apologia theſium p. 246. Chriſt offered himſelfe for the elect onely. 247. Redeemed only the elect. The elect onely were redeemed of Chriſt.

Perkins de Praedeſtinat. tom. 1. col. 135. Whome at anie time he acknowledged not, he neuer bought or redeemed with the price of his blood. col. 137. Of theſe, Chriſt is onely a half-redeemer, and therefore no redeemer. And de Deſertion. col. 1023. Chriſt is the redeemer onely of the elect, and of none elſe. So alſo D. Willet Contr. 9. q. 2. p. 893.

Caluin l. cont. Heshuſ. p. 849. I would know how the impious Not crucified for the impious. eate Chriſts flesh for which it was not crucified: and how they drinke his blood, which was not shed to redeeme their ſinnes.

Beza in Colloq. Montisbel. p. 447. Chriſt died not for the ſinnes of them that are damned—He shed not his blood for the remiſsion of the ſinnes of the impious and damned. Epiſt 28. It is falſe that Chriſt is the mediatour of the infidels alſo.

Zanchius in Summa Praelection. to. 7. col. 272. Chriſt, according to the purpoſe of his Father, was borne praied, ſuffered and died onely for the elect. In Depulſion. Calum. col. 253. The Reprobats not redeemed. reprobats were not redeemed by Chriſt.

Piſcator apud Gerlachium Diſput. 9. Christ no waye died for the reprobats, other ſufficiently or effectually.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that Chriſt died for the impious, for the vniuſt, for thoſe that perish: that he bought lying monſters who bring in ſects of perdition, and bring vpon themſelues ſpeedie perdition, and whoſe perdition ſlumbereth not. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach the contrarie, that Chriſt gaue not himſelfe for the impious or reprobats, that the wicked were not redeemed in Chriſt, that Chriſts flesh was not crucified for the impious nor his blood shed for their ſinnes: that Chriſt offered himſelfe onely for the elect, that they onely were redeemed by Chriſt: that Chriſt is redeemer of the elect and of none els, no mediatour of Infidels, was borne, ſuffered and dyed for the elect onely, that nether ſufficiently nor effectually he died for the reprobats. Which are ſo contrarie to Scripture as manie Proteſtants acknowledge it. See l. 2. c. 30.

ART. XIX. WHETHER CHRIST DIED for all?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

2. Corint. 5. v. 14. For the charitie of Christ vrgeth vs, iudging Chriſt died for all. this: That if one died for all, then all were dead, and Chriſt died for all.

1. Timoth. 2. v 6. Chriſt Ieſus, who gaue himſelfe a redemption for all. Chap. 4. v. 10. Who is the Sauiour of all men, eſpecially of the faithfull.

Hebrews 2. v. 9. We ſee Ieſus becauſe of the paſsion of death crowned wi • h glorie and honour, that through the grace of God he might taſte death for all.

1. Ioan. 2. v. 2. We haue an aduocate with the Father, Ieſus Chriſt the iuſt, and he is the propitiation of our ſinnes, and not of ours onely, but alſo for the whole worlds. Ca. ver. 14. The Father hath ſent his Sonne the Sauiour of the world.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent. Seſſ. 6. c. 9. Howbeit Chriſt died for all, yet notwithſtanding all receaue not the benefit of his death.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins de Praedeſt. to. 1. col. 144. It is maruailous abſurd, Redeemed not all. that Chriſt on his parte should haue redeemed and reconciled to God all and euerie one, and yet that in the ende manie of theſe should be damned. De Serm. Dom. to. 2. col. 341. The opinion of vniuerſall redemption, is an inuention of mans braine.

Caluin in 1. Ioan. 2. v. 2. cit. Vnder all, he doth not comprehend the reprobats. In 1. Tim. 2. v. 5. The vniuerſall particle muſt be referred to all kind of men, not to all perſons.

Sadeel ad Art. abiur. 7. They ſpeake amiſſe, who ſay that by Redeemed not the ſinnes of the whole world. Chriſts death the ſinnes of the whole world were redeemed.

Piſcator l. 2. Theſ. p. 371. Chriſt died not vniuerſally for all men, but for the elect onely—We denie, that Chriſt died ſufficiently for all, but not effectually. P. 177. Chriſt died nor for all, but for ſome.

Bucanus Inſtit. Theol. loco 36. Is not Christ the redeemer of all? No. More of their like ſayings may be ſeene in my Latin booke c. 1. art. 19.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that Chriſt died for all that are dead, that he gaue himſelfe a redemption for all that he taſted death for all; that he is the Sauiour of all men, the Sauiour of the world, the propitiation not onely of our ſinnes but of all the whole world. Catholiks teach the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach the contrarie, that Chriſt on his parte redeemed not all and euerie one, that vniuerſall redemption is an inuention of mans braine: that Chriſt died not vniuerſally for all, redeemed not the ſinnes of the whole world, nether ſufficiently nor effectually died for all, died but for ſome, is not redeemer of all. Which diuers Proteſtants confeſſe to be contrarie to Scripture. See l. 2. c. 30.

ART. XX. WHETHER THE BLOOD wherewith Chriſt redeemed vs was putrefied and corrupted?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Acts 2. v. 27. Becauſe thou wilt not leaue my ſoule in hell, nor Gods holie did not ſee corruption. giue thy Holie to ſee corruption.

1. Peter. 1. v. 19. Knowing, that not with corruptible things, gould or ſiluer, you are redeemed from your vaine conuerſation of your fathers traditions, but with the pretious blood, as it were of an immaculate and vnſpotted lambe, Christ.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

S. Thomas 3. par q. 34. art. • All the blood that flowed out of the bodie of Chriſt, did riſe in Chriſts bodie, ſith it belonged to the truth of his humane nature.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Perkins in Apoc. 1. to. 2. col. 41. The ſubſtance of that blood The ſubſtāce of Chriſt blood perished. (of Chriſt) which was shed, did perish, whatſoeuer the Papiſts do prate. In Cathol. reform. Cōtr. 10. c. 3. That blood which ranne out the feet and hands and ſi • e of Chriſt vpon the croſſe, was not gathered vp againe and put into the v • i •• es: N •• the collection was needls, and none knowes what is become of this blood. The ſame inſinuateth Whitaker Contr. 2 q. 1 c. 9. p. 437.

Beza in 2. part. Reſp. ad Acta Colloq Montisbel. p. 108. It were curious and profane to enquire what became of that ſelfe ſame blood which ranne out of the wounds of Chriſt, and whether it were taken againe of him when he aroſe.

Muſculus in locis Tit. de Caena: We need not diſpute of the blood of Christ, what became of it after it was ſpilt on the groūd, whether it were taken againe into his glorified bodie, or no.

Schuſſelbur lib. 1. Theol. Caluin. art. 20. reporteth Curaeus ſaying: Chriſts blood shed for vs on the croſſe was long Long ſince conſumed. Putrified. ſince conſumed. And Eraſtus his companians teaching: That Chriſts blood which he shed for our ſi • nes, is putrified and no more in being. Germanus Bauarus in Feua • dent l. 4. Theomach. Caluin. c. 16. The ſubſtantiall blood of Chriſt is not giuen in the Supper, becauſe it was corrupted on the ground. Corrupted.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that we were not redeemed with corruptible things, but with the pretious blood of Chriſt, that God ſuffered not his Holie to ſee corruption. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that it is profane to enquire what is become of Chriſts blood, that long ſince it is conſumed, corrupted, not gathered againe, perished, and is no more in being.

ART. XXI. WHETHER CHRISTS SOVLE deſcended to Hell?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Actes. 2. v. 27. Thou wilt not leaue my ſoule in Hell. Et v. Was in Hell. 31. Foreſeing he ſpake of the reſurrection of Christ, for nether was he left in Hell, nether did his flesh ſee corruption.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Actor. 2. v. 27. This place doth plainly proue the deſcent of Chriſt into Hell in ſoule, according to the article of Chriſtian beleefe.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker. l. 8. cont. Dur. ſect. 23. Caluin defendeth, that Neuer went to Hell. Deſcended not to Hell. Chriſts ſoule neuer went to the places of Hell. And l. 9. ſect 27. I beleiue that Chriſts ſoule ſeperated from the bodie not onely did not deſcend to Hell, but streight mounted to Heauen.

Rogers vpon the 3. Article of Proteſtants Confeſſion: ſaieth, that Carlile againſt D. Smithe pa. 28. 77. calleth this article (of Chriſt deſcent into hell) an error and a fable. A fable.

Perkins in Explicat. Symboli to 1. col. 678. If we ſay that Chriſt in ſoule deſcended into Hell, we plainly take away that manifeſt oppoſition betweene the firſt and the ſecond Adam.

Beza in Actor. 2. v. 27. Who by Hell vnderſtand the place which is commōly called Hell, as if the ſoule of Chriſt had indeed deſcended thither, ſurely are much deceaued.

Serranus cont. Hayum part. 3. pag. 722. Beza deſirous to Deſcent to Hell, a fable. ſtoppe the way to that Popish fable of the deſcent of Chriſts ſoule into hell &c.

Hemingius in Enchir. Theolog. claſſ. 3. pag. 263. It skilleth not greatly, to know how Chriſt deſcended into Hell, ſo that with true faith we hould that he deliuered vs from the power of Hell.

Aretius in locis part. 1. fol. 72. Other (Proteſtants) denie To be taken out of the Creed. all deſcent of Chriſt into Hell. Some of them eagerly impugne this deſcent; for they ſay, that this ſentence is to be taken out of the Creede.

Miniſters of Anhalt apud Hoſpin. in Concordia diſcordi. fol. 87. The Diuines of Berge haue done well, that through ours and other mens admonitions they haue put out the article of the deſcent into Hell.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely affirmeth, that Chriſts ſoule was in Hell: and our Creed ſaieth that he deſcended into Hell: The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely denie, that Chriſts ſoule deſcended to Hell, went to the places of Hell: and ſay that the deſcent of Chriſt into Hell, is a Popish fable: that it skilleth not greatly to know how he deſcended into Hell: that ſome of them eagerly impugne this article of the Creed, and would haue it put out of the Creed, and that ſome haue put it out. Which is ſo plaine a contradiction of Scripture as diuers Proteſtants confeſſe it. See l. 2. c. 30.

ART. XXII. WHETHER CHRIST SVFfered the paines of Hell, of the damned, and the ſecond death of the ſoule?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Acts 2. v. 24. Whome God hath raiſed vp, looſing the ſorrows of Chriſt looſed the paines of Hell. Free among the dead. Hell, according as it was impoſsible that he should be houldē of it.

Pſal. 87. v. 6. I am become as a man without helpe, free among the dead.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

D. Stapleton in Promptuar. Quadrageſ. feria 4. Hebdom. Sanctae: It is a very diuelish ſpeech and execrable blaſphemie of Caluin, that Chriſt in ſoule ſuffered the horrible torments of damned and loſt man.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Whitaker l. 8. cont. Dur. ſect. 20. Chriſt ſuffered the paines of Hell for a time.

Perkins in Explicat. Symboli col. 679. Others ſo expound: Suffered the paines of Hell. He felt and bore the torments and anguishes of Hell. This is a good and true expoſition. Col. 680. Thoſe words: Crucified, dead, and buried, are not to be vnderſtood of a common and ordinarie, death, but of an execrable and curſed death, by which Chriſt ſuſtained the full wrath of God, yea the anguishes of Hell both in bodie and mynd. De Serm. Dom. col. 575. Christ bore the ſinnes The anguiſhes of Hell in mynd and bodie. Suffered the ſecond death. of the elect, together with the punishment due to them, ſo much as appertaineth to the ſubſtance thereof, to wit, the firſt and ſecond death.

Parkes cont. Willet. p. 114. Luther, Illyricus, Latimer tought that Chriſt deſcended into Hell bodie and ſoule, and there ſuſtained torments after death.

Willet Cōtr. 20. q. 3. p. 1083. I will shew in what tolerable ſenſe Died in ſoule. Chriſt is affirmed to die in the ſoule. Et pa. 1112. That Hell flames are not eternall in Chriſt, the worthines of his perſon obtained.

Luther in Pſal. 22. to. 3. fol. 330. Chriſt ſuffered that which we should haue ſuffered for ſinne, and which the dāned now ſuffer. In Gen. 42. to. 6. f 586. I thinke that Chriſt ſuſtained the ſorrows of Hell.—Let vs know, that Chriſt muſt haue borne the paine of Hell.

Hutterus in Analyſi Confeſſ. Auguſtan. art. 3. Chriſt ſuffered the true ſorrows of hell.

Lobechius diſp. 6. p. 136. Chriſt ſuffered the punishment of Suffered the paines of the damned. the deſperate and damned, and euerlasting paines.

Caluin 1. Inſtit. c. 16. §. 10. He ſuffered that death which God in anger inflicteth vpon the wicked.—He ſuffered in ſoule the horrible torments of a deſperate and loſt man.

In Catechiſmo c. de fide he asketh: How can it come to paſſe, that Christ who is the ſaluation of the world, should be ſubiect to this damnation? and Anſwereth: He was not ſo vnder Was ſubiect to damnation it, as he remained vnder it. In Rom. 10. v. 6. He ſuffered the horrors of hell, for to deliuer vs from them.

Beza lib. Quaeſt. vol. 1. p. 672. He was in the middeſt of the torments of hell.

Daneus Cont. 2. p. 165. Bellarmin ſaieth, that the onely death which Christ ſuffered in bodie, ſatisfied God for our ſinnes. This is falſe. For the reward of ſinne is death, and that is twoe fould. The Suffered the ſeparation of God from his ſoule. firſt is the ſeparation of the ſoule from the bodie; the ſecond is the ſeparation of God from the ſoule. Both which Chriſt ſuffered, & therefore both death of ſoule and bodie, and that wholie for vs, and not onely the death of the bodie.

Vrſinus in Catechiſmo pag. 278. To beleiue in Chriſt who deſcended into hell, is to beleiue that Chriſt ſuffered in his ſoule the hellish torments and ſorrows.

Polanus in Sylloge theſ. par. 3. p. 450. Chriſt died the eternall death. And Pareus Colloq. Theol. 2. diſput. 5. citeth Brentius ſaying. Chriſt burnt in the flames of hell. More like hellish Was burnt in the flames of hell. ſpeeches of theirs are in my Latin booke ca. 1. art. 22. See Rogers vpon the 3. Article of English Confeſſion.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture ſaieth, that Chriſt was free among the dead, that he louſed the ſorrows of hell and could not be held of it. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants ſay, that Chriſt ſuffered the paines, the ſorrows, the anguishes of hell, the true ſorrowes of hell, hellish torments, that which the damned now ſuffer, the torments of a deſperate and loſt man, that he burnt in the flames of hell, was in the middeſt of the torments of hell, ſuſtained the anguishes of hell both in bodie and mynd: ſuffered the torments of hell both in bodie and ſoule: that he ſuffered the execrable death, the firſt and ſecōd death, that death which God in his wrath inflicteth vpon the wicked, the ſecond death of the ſoule which is ſeperation from God, that he died the eternall death: that he was vnder damnation.

ART. XXIII. WHETHER CHRIST ENTRED vnto his diſciples the doores being shut?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Ihon. 20. v. 19. When it was late that day the firſt of the Sabboths, Chriſt entred the doores being shut. and the doores were shut, where the diſciples were gathered together for feare of the Iews, Ieſus came and ſtood in the middeſt. Et v. 26. After eight daies, againe the diſciples were within and Thomas with them, Ieſus cometh the doores being shut, and ſtood in the middeſt, and ſaied &c.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Ioan. 20. v. 19. The Euangelist ſaieth that Chriſt entred the doores being shut, which words exclude all opening of any entrance.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Willet Controu. 20. q. 2. p. 1079. We graunt that Chriſts coming in the doores being shut, was miraculous, becauſe one ſubſtance gaue place to an other for a time: and after the paſsing of his bodie, the place remained whole and shut as before, but not in the very inſtant of paſsing.

Spalatenſis lib. 5. Repub. cap. 6. num. 180. Chriſt could He opened the dores. truely open himſelfe the doores, and ſtreight waies shut them, and in the meane time hould the eyes of his diſciples, that they should not ſee ether the doores open or himſelfe enter vntill he was in the middeſt.

Peter Martyr in dialogo. col. 97. When our Lord would The doores gaue place. enter, the doores of themſelues gaue place.

Caluin Admonit. vlt. ad Weſtphal. p. 805. But if Chriſt by his diuine power did miraculouſly open the shut doores, doth it therefore follow that his bodie was infinit?

Beza cont. Weſtphal. vol. 1. Theol. p. 231. Caluin thinketh He opened the doores. rather that the Euangeliſt ſpake of the doores shut, to giue to vnderstand that of themſelues they opened to Chriſts entrance. In Ioan. 20. v. 19. 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 from infernall paines, entred to his diſciples the doores being shut, penetrated heauen, and there praieth for vs. None of which things agree to the Proteſtants Chriſt, and conſequently he is a farre different yea oppoſite vnto the true Chriſt deſcribed to vs by the holie Scripture.

Manifeſt alſo it is, that Proteſtants like true theues Proteſtants take from Chriſt. ſteale from Chriſt his due honour, becauſe the denie that as he is man, he is to be worshipped, to be praied vnto, that he is head of the Church, lawmaker, or Honor. iudge. They robbe him of his power, in denying that as Power. he is man, he can giue life, forgiue ſinnes, raiſe the dead, enter the doores being shut, penetrate the heauens, or worke any true miracle. They bereaue him of his knowledge, Knowledge. for they denie, that as he is man he knoweth all things, knoweth the ſecrets of hearts, can heare our ptaiers, knew the kinde of tree, but had need to be tought as men are. They ſteale away his iuſtice or Vertue: Vertue. for they teach that he was truely and moſt truely a ſinner, that as much as lay in him he refuſed to doe the office of a Mediatour, that he had vnconſiderate deſires and contrarie to his vocation, that he behaued himſelfe vnciuilly towards his mother, confeſſed his delicateneſſe, let ſlippe a ſpeech of deſperation, nay was ouerwhelmed with deſperation and exceedingly deſpairing. They take from him certaintie of ſaluation, becauſe Certaintie of ſaluation. they ſay, that he was afraied of his ſaluation, and was almoſt perſwaded that he was vndone. They take Worthe. away worthines, in ſaying that nothing had beene done by his corporall death, but that there needed a greater price, that he could not merite to be iudge of the world, that with all his workes he merited not heauen, that he could not merite our redemption by a worthie price but by acceptation of his Father. Finally they ſpoile him of his goodnes and merite, becauſe they ſay that he died not for the wicked, for the reprobate, Mercie, for all, but onely for ſome few elect, and that now he praieth not for vs in heauen. And if you take away from Chriſt as man his honour, his power, his knowledge, his iuſtice, his worthines, his certaintie of ſaluation, his goodnes, what remaineth of Chriſt as man, but the bare name of a Sauiour. Whereupon rightly ſaied Saint Auſtin: If we diligently conſider thoſe things which belonge to Chriſt, he is onely in name found amongſt any Heretiks whatſoeuer. But hitherto hauing treated of God and Chriſt, now let vs treate of Angels and Saints who happily raigne with him in heauen.

CHAPTER III. OF ANGELS AND SAINTS IN HEAVEN.

ART. I. WHETHER ANGELS AND Saints in heauen do the will of God?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

PSALME 102. ver. 20. Bleſſe our Lord all ye Angels doe Gods word. his Angels, mightie in power, doing his word. And v. 21. Bleſſe our Lord all ye his hoaſtes, you his miniſters that do his will. Doe his will.

Mathew 6. ver. 10. Thy will be done, as in heauen, in earth alſo.

Apocal. 21. v. 27. There shall not enter into it (Heauen) any polluted thing, nor that doeth abhomination and maketh lie.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Card. Bellarmin. lib. 1. de bonis operibus in particul. cap. 6. In heauen the holie Angels obey God readily perfectly and in all things.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Caluin in Coloſſ. 1. v. 20. In this ſelfe ſame obedience, which Angels obeobedience ſatisfieth not. (the Angels) giue to God, there is not ſuch exquiſite perfection, as it ſatisfieth God in euerie point and without pardon. And 3. Inſtit. c. 14. §. 16. Nether the Angels themſelues are anſwerable to that exceeding iustice of God. And c. 17. §. 9. In the ſight of God nether the Angels are iust enough.

The ſame Caluin Concion. 16. in Iob. There is in the Angels There is fault in the Angels. follie and vanitie, that is fault.—God found in his Angels that which he may iustly reprehend.—Nether are the Angels of that perfection, in which if it be rigorouſly examined, nothing may be found worthie of blame.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that the Angels doe Gods word, doe his will, that Gods will is done in heauē, that into heauen entreth nothing that doth abhominatiō or is polluted. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants Expreſſely teach, that the obedience of Angels ſatisfieth not God in euerie point and without pardō: that the Angels anſwere not to Gods iuſtice: that they are not iuſt enough in Gods ſight: that in them is follie, vanitie, and fault, that which God may iuſtly reprehend, that which is worthie of blame.

ART. II. WHETHER THE SAINTS DO alreadie enioye their heauenly felicitie.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Apocal. 7. v. 14. Theſe are they which are came out of great Saints are before the throne of God tribulation, and haue washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the lambe: therefore they are before the throne of God, and they ſerue him day and night in his temple.

Luke 23. v. 43. And Ieſus ſaied to him: Amen I ſay to thee, this day thou shalt be with me in paradiſe.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſion, 25. ſaieth. That Saints enioye euerlaſting felicitie in heauen, and do reigne with Christ.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther Poſtilla in Dom. 2. poſt Trinit. fol. 286. All the The Saints ſleepe. Fathers before Chriſts incarnation went into Abrahams boſome, that is, in death abode with firme faith in this word and ſlept in it, and therein ſleepe euen now vntill the laſt daye, excepting thē who roſe with Chriſt. And to. 6. in c. 25. Gen. ſaieth that Saints ſleepe and know not what is done. Which otherwhere he often times repeateth.

Caluin in 2. Petri 2. v. 4. Hence we may gather, not onely what paine the reprobate ſuſtaine after death, but alſo what is the Enioy not yet felicitie. state of the children of God. For they quietly reſt in hope of aſſured felicitie, howbeit as yet they enioy it not. In Math. 22. v. 23. For nether God doth affirme, that the ſoules remaine after death, as if now they enioyned their preſent glorie and happines, but he differreth their hoppe vntill the laſt daye. Which he eftſones, repeateth in Pſychopannychia p. 405. and otherwere. Wherevpon Spalatenſis l. 5. de Rep. c. 8. n. 113. 115. and 119. confeſſeth that Caluin teacheth, that the bleſſed ſoules departed Nor their eſſentiall reward. out of this world, dot not enioye their eſſentiall reward, felicitie, and glorie, vntill the laſt daye. And himſelfe n. 103. affirmeth, that that opinion which attributeth perfect felicitie vnto bleſſed ſoules before the reſurrection, hath difficulties which cannot be anſwered: and n. 120. cōmendeth Caluins opinion in this matter, as pious and learned. And the reaſon, why he incline • h vnto him, he giueth n. 102. in theſe words: For if bleſſed If Saints wereinglorie, they could heauen vs. Soules be already fully happie, they may eaſily harken to vs, and requeſt helpe of God. So, that for to bereaue vs of the praiers of Saints, they bereaue them of their heauenlie felicitie.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely affirmeth, that the Saints are now before the throne of God, and in his temple, and that the good theefe was in paradiſe with Chriſt. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely denie, that Saints enioy their aſſured felicitie, their preſent glorie and happines, and ſay that their hope is differred vnto the laſt daye: that all the Saints ſleepe vnto the laſt day, and know not what is done: that they as yet enioye not their eſſentiall glorie and felicitie.

ART. III. WHETHER THE GLORIE OF all the Saints be equall?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

1. Corina. 15. ver. 41. One indeed glorie of the ſunne, an other Saints differ in glorie. glorie of the moone, and other glorie of the ſtarres. For ſtarre differeth from ſtarre in glorie: ſo alſo the reſurrection of the dead.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

C. Bellarm. l. 3. de Iuſtif. c. 16. The teſtimonies of the Scripture do teach, that the rewards in heauen are not equall.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Peter Martyr in 1. Cor. 15. v. 32. But if God, in giuing euerlaſting No degrees of reward. life, do not reſpect the worth of our workes, whence shall we gather theſe degrees of rewards. Againe: our aduerſaries haue deuiſed this diſtinction of ſubſtantiall and accidentall reward: They shall haue the brightnes of the ſunne, that is, equally Equall glorie. the greateſt glorie.

Pareus l. 5. de Iuſtif. c. 20. The Papiſts do feigne diuers degrees of eternall life. But whence haue they the degrees which they make?

Perkins in Galat. 1. tom. 2. All the elect enjoy equall eſſentiall Equall eſſentiall glorie. glorie.

Caluin in Matth. 20. Some (Proteſtant) interpreters do gather this ſumme: Becauſe the heauenlie inheritance is not gotten by merite of workes but is giuen freely, that the glorie of all shalbe equall.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that the dead shall riſe as differēt in glorie, as one ſtarre differeth from an other. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that there is no diſtinction of ſubſtantiall or accidentall glorie, that the ſubſtantiall glorie of all the elect shalbe equall: that there are no degrees of euerlaſting life, no degrees of reward in heauen, that all shall equally enioy the greateſt glorie. Which ſome Proteſtants confeſſe to be repugnant to Scripture. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. XX. WHETHER ANGELS AND Saints in heauen pray for vs?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Zacharie 1. v. 12. And the Angel of our Lord anſwered and Angels pray for vs. ſaied: O Lord of hoſts, how long wilt thou not haue mercie on Hieruſalem and on the citties of Iuda with which thou haſt beene angrie.

2. Machabees 15. v. 12. And the viſion was in this manner: And Saints. Onias who had beene the high preiſt, a good and benigne man ſtretching forth his hands praied for all the people of the Iewes. v. 14. This is a louer of his brethren and of the people of Iſrael: this is he that praieth much for the people and for the whole cittie, Hieremie the Prophet of God.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent ſeſſ. 25. cap. de Inuocat. ſaieth, that their opinion is impious who ſay that the Saints pray not for vs.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Confeſſion of France art. 24. We beleiue that whatſoeuer Saints pray not for vs. men haue feigned of the praier of Saints, is nothing elſe but the frauds and deceit of Sathan. The like hath Confeſ. Heluet. c. 5. and Apol. Confeſ. Auguſt. c. de inuocat.

Willet Controu. 9. quaeſt. 3. pag. 440. Saints do not pray for vs.

Whitaker ad Rat. 4. Compiani: Whether the Martyrs and Saints in heauen do pray to Chriſt for vs, we know not.

Zuinglius in Explanat. art. 20. There cannot be alledged out of the Bible any doctrin or exāple, that proueth Saints in heauen to pray for vs.—If as you feigne, they pray for vs, they will moue God nothing. For it is not done from the heart.

Bullinger Decade 4. Serm. 5. The Scripture teacheth not, Angels pray not for vs. that Angels pray. De Origin. cultus Diuorum. cap. 15. It becometh not the Saints, taking to themſelues the office of Chriſt, to pray for vs.

Caluin 3. Inſtit. c. 20. §. 21. What Angel or Diuel euer tould any man any ſillable of this praier of Saints which they feigne. In 1. Tim. 2. v. 5. It is a mere fiction bred in the braines, that the dead pray for vs.

Daneus Controu. 7. p. 1311. They requeſt nothing of God, Nether in generall nor in particuler. ether in generall or in particular, for the neceſsities of thoſe that liue on earth.

Polanus in Diſp. priuat. diſp. 25. The Saints departed pray not God for the liuing, ether in generall or in particular.

Vorſtius in Antibellarm. pa. 281. We denie, that the holie Angels, and eſpecially the ſoules of the Iust departed hence, do pray in particular for our neceſsities.

Pareus in Colloq. Swal. 3. They should ſinne, if they They should ſinne if they praied for vs. praied for vs. Becauſe they should both accuſe God of vnmercifulnes, as if he heard not ſufficiently Chriſts praiers; and alſo should reproue Chriſt of weaknes and fluggishnes.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that an Angel, and Onias, and Hieremie after their death did pray for the people. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that nether Angels nor Saints pray for vs, that it becometh not them to pray for vs, that they should ſinne if they praied for vs, that they do it not frō their heart: that they pray nether in generall nor in particular for vs: that the praier of Saints is a fiction fraude and deceit of the diuell. Which is ſo oppoſite to Scripture as ſome Proteſtants acknowledge it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. V. WHETHER SAINTS IN heauen care for our matters?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

2. Machabees 15. ver. 12. and 15. And the viſion was in this Saints haue care for vs. manner—And that Hieremie put forth his right hand and gaue vnto Iudas a ſword of gould, ſaying: Take the holie ſword a gift from God wherewith thou shalt ouerthrow the aduerſaries of my people Iſrael.

1. Cor. 13. v. 8. Charitie neuer falleth away.

2. Peter 1. verſ. 15. And I will do my diligence, you to haue often after my deceaſe alſo, that you may keepe a memorie of theſe things.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Card. Bellarm. l. 1. de Sanctis c. 18. The Angels pray for vs and haue care of vs in particuler, therefore much more the ſpirits of holie men.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Tindal in Fox Acts p. 1137. What buildeſt thou Churches, Saints be not our freinds. foūdeſt Abbies, Chauntries and Colleges in the honour of Saints, to my Mother, S. Peter, Paul and Saints that be dead, to make of them thy freinds? They need it not, yea they be not thy freinds.

Luther Poſtilla in Dom. 9. poſt Trinit. Nether are they thy freinds, but theirs, of whome in their life time they receiued benefit.

Caluin 3. Inſtit. c. 20 §. 23. For what Saint is to be thought Take no care of vs. to take care of the ſafetie of the people, Moiſes giuing it ouer, who whiles he liued farre ſurpaſſed all others in this point? In Luc. 16. verſ. 19. Here the Papists are fondly ſubtill, whiles they will proue, that the dead haue care of the liuing, which is a ſtincking cauill. In Zachar. ver. 12. We know, that the offices of charitie Charitie onely for this life. are reſtrained to the courſe of this life. Which alſo hath Zuinglius reſpons. ad Luther. to. 2. fol. 379.

Beza in Lucae 15. v. 10. Who can therefore rightly perſwade himſelfe or others, that the Soules of Saints in heauen haue care of thoſe things, which are done on earth, or that they know thē, and much leſſe, that they ought to be praied vnto?

Pareus in Colloq. Swal. 3. The Scripture denieth, that the Care not for our neceſsities Saints in heauen know and care for our neceſsities.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that charitie neuer falleth away, that Hieremie had care of the people after his death. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that the offices of charitie are reſtrained to this preſent l • fe, that Saints in heauen are not our freinds, that they haue no care of vs, or of our neceſſities.

ART. VI. WHETHER ANGELS AND Saints heare our praiers and know our affaires?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Tobie 12. verſ. 12. the Angel ſaieth: When thou didſt pray Angels heare our praiers. with teares, and didſt burte the dead and left thy dinner, and didst hide the dead by day in thy houſe, and by night didſt burie them, I offered thy praier to our Lord.

Luke 15. verſ. 10. So I ſay to you, there shalbe ioy before the Know our repentance. Angels of God vpon one ſinner that doth pennance. And cap. 16. verſ. 19. Abraham being dead ſaieth: They haue Moyſes and the Prophets.

Apocal. 4. verſ. 1. After theſe things I looked, and behould a doore open in heanen, and the firſt voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet ſpeaking to me, ſaying: Come vp hither, and I Know things to come. will shew thee the things which muſt be done quickly after theſe. And c. 19. v. 1. and 2. After theſe things I heard as it is were the voice of many multitudes in heauen ſaying Alleluia, praiſe, and And punishments of the wicked. glorie, and power is to our God: Becauſe true and iuſt are his iudgements which hath iudged of the great harlot, that hath corrupted the eorth in her whordome, and hath reuenged the blood of his ſeruants of her hands.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Sanctis c. 20. It is not true, that Saints do not know what we aske of them.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker ad Ration. 4. Campiani. It is certaine, that the Saints know not what we doe. Heare not our praiers. Saints do not know what we doe.

Apologia Confeſſ. Auguſtan. c. de Inuocat. It cannot be ſaied, that Saints do heare our praier.

Caluin 3. Inſtit. cap. 20. §. 24. Who tould, that they haue ſo long eares, that they can ſtretch them vnto our praiers; ſo quicke eyes, that they can perceaue our neceſsities? And in 1. Cor. 13. v. 8. The Saints do not know our eſtate.

Beza in 1. Ioan. 2. verſ. 1. The bleſſed ſpirits haue no knowledge of things done here below. And l. quaeſtion. & reſponſ. vol. 1. It is eaſie to refute as a foolish and groſſe fiction, that they ſay, that God reuealeth our praiers to the bleſſed ſpirits.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the Angel heard the praier and knew the good deeds of Tobias: that the Angels know and reioyce of the pennance of a ſinner, that Abraham knew of Moiſes and the Prophets, that Saints knew the wickednes of the great harlot and Gods punishment vpon her. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that Saints know not what we doe, that they heare not our praiers, perceaue not our neceſſities, know not our eſtate, that to ſay that God reuealeth to them our praiers is a foolish and groſſe fiction.

ART. XVII. WHETHER ANGELS OR Saints in heauen do offer our praiers to God?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Tobie 12. verſ. 12. cit. the Angel ſaieth: When thou dideſt Angels off • r our praiers to God. pray with tears, I offered thy praier to our Lord. Apocal. 5. v. 8. And when he had opened the booke, the foure beaſts and the ſoure and twentie Seniours fell before the lambe, hauing euerie one harpes and goulden vials full of odours which are the praiers of ſaints. And c. 8. v. 3. And an other Angel came and ſtood before the altar, hauing a goulden cenſar, and there were giuen to him manie incenſes, that he should giue of the praiers of all Saints vpon the altar of gould which is before the throne of God.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Cardin. Bellarmin. lib. 1. de Sanctis cap. 16. Caluin intimateth, that not onely the Saints but nether the Angels can offer our prayers to God, which is againſt moſt plaine Scripture.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Willet Controuerſ. 9. quaeſtion. 3. pag. 440. That Saints They offer not vp our praiers. should offer vp our ſpeciall praiers, and make particuler requeſt for vs to God, is no where found in the Scripture, but rather the contrarie.

Reineccius tom. 4. Armaturae c. 7. The words of the Angel: Tobiae loc. cit. are ſpoken after our fashion. For there is no need, that Angels should offer our praiers to the Lord, becauſe God is not farre of.

Caluin 3. Inſtitut. cap. 20. §. 20. Chriſt hauing entred into the Sanctuarie of heauen till the end of the world, alone doth offer to God requeſts of the people, which ſitteth a farre of in the entrie.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that the Angel offered Tobies praier to God: that the foure and twentie ſeniors did offer the praiers of holie men before the lambe: that an Angel did offer the praiers of all Saints before the throne of God. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that Angels do not offer our praiers to the Lord: that Saints do not offer our ſpeciall praiers to God: that Chriſt onely offereth to God the praiers of the people.

ART. VIII. WHETHER ANGELS OR Saints be to be praied vnto?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Geneſ. 48. verſ. 16. Iacob thus praierh: The Angel that Angels praied vnto. deliuereth me from all euils, bleſſe theſe children, and be my name called vpon them, the names alſo of my fathers Abraham and Iſaac.

Oſee 12. v. 4. And he (Iacob) preuailed againſt the Angel Iacob praied an Angel. and was ſtrenghned, and he wept and beſought him.

Tobie 5. verſ. 21. And Tobias anſwering, ſaied: well may you walke, and God be in your iourney, and his Angel accompanie you.

Luke 16. ve. 24. Chriſt ether in a hiſtorie or in a parable maketh the rich man thus praying: Father Abraham haue mercie on me. And v. 27. Then Father I beſeech the, that thou wouldeſt ſend &c. And nether he, nor Abraham condemneth this praier as impious or idolatrous, but onely reiecteth it as two late.

Apocalypſ. 1. v. 4. 5. S. Ihon thus praieth: Grace to you and peace from him that is, and that was, and shall come, and from the ſeuen ſpirits which are in the ſight of his throne, and from Ieſus Chriſt who is the faithfull witneſſe.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent. Seſſ. 25. c. de Inuocat. It is good and profitable humbly to call vpon the Saints that reigne together with Chriſt.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

The English Articles art. 22. The doctrin of the Romaniſts Saints not to be praied vnto. touching inuocation of Saints, is a fonde thing vainly deuiſed. In like ſorte writeth Confeſ. Heluet, cap. 5. Wirtenbergica c. de Inuocat. Auguſtana c. 21. Saxonica c. 22. and Articuli Smalcaldici c. de Inuocat.

Perkins in Serie cauſarum cap. 21. The inuocation of the Nor Angels. Saints and Angels is much more impious. So in reform. Cath. pag. 251.

Rainolds in his Conference c. 1. ſect. 2. calleth it, a moſt peſtilent baſiliske.

Melancthon in Diſput. to. 4. pa. 531. The inuocation of the dead, is manifeſt idolatrie.

Beza in 1. Ioan. 2. ver. 1. The Soules in heauen of Saints departed this life, cannot be inuocated without impietie. And lib. quaeſt. & reſp. vol. 1. affirmeth, that the inuocation of Angels and dead Saints, is impious idolatrie. The Like ſay Proteſtants commonly.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that Iacob made praier to any Angel, beſought an Angel with teares, that Tobie praied an Angel, that the rich man inuocated Abraham, that S. Ihon praied vnto the ſeuen ſpirits which are before the throne of God. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that the inuocation of Angels or Saints is a found thing vainly deuiſed, impious, idolatrous, and moſt peſtilent.

ART. IX. WHETHER GOD BE TO BE praied vnto by the names of Saints?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Exod. 32. ver. 11. and 13. But Moiſes beſought the Lord his God praied by names of Saints. God, ſaying—Remember Abraham, Iſaac and Iſrael thy ſeruants, to whome thou ſwareſt by thine owne ſelfe, ſaying: I will multiplie your ſeed as the ſtarres of heauen.

Pſal. 131. v. 10. For Dauid thy ſeruants ſake, turne not away the face of thy Chriſt.

2. Paralipomen. 6. v. vlt. Remember the mercies of Dauid thy ſeruant.

Daniel. 6. ver. 35. Nether take thou away thy mercie from vs for Abraham thy beloued, and Iſaac thy ſeruant, and Iſrael thy holie one.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Sanctis cap. 19. In the ould teſtament men prayed God and alledged the merits of Saincts which were departed, that their praiers might be holpen by them.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Confeſſion of Saxonie c. 22. ſaieth, that in the Prophets, Not to be ſo praied. there is not found any ſuch inuocation: Heare me O God for Abraham.

Confeſſion of Bohemia art. 2. They teach, that God is to be praied and inuocated by the name of Christ onely.

Caluin 3. Inſtit. c. 20. §. 21. In Papiſtrie, God is beſought by the names of Saints. Ibid. Their merits are obtruded for to purchaſe Gods good will. The like teach commonly all Proteſtants. So Perkins reform. Catholik Contr. 14. p. 257.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that Moiſes praied God by the names of Abraham, Iſaac and Iacob: that Azarias in Daniel did the ſame: that Salomon praied God for Dauids ſake and for his mercies. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that there is no ſuch kinde of praier in the Prophets: Heare me ô God for Abrahams ſake: that God is to be praied vnto onely by Chriſts name: that to pray God by the names or merits of Saints is vnlawfull.

ART. X. WHETHER GOD TAKE MERcie on men for the merits of Saints?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMITH.

3. Reg. v. 4. But for Dauids ſake our Lord his God gaue him a God hath mercie for the Saints ſake. lampe in Hieruſalem, that he might raiſe vp his ſonne after him and establish Hieruſalem, becauſe Dauid had done right in the eies of our Lord.

4. Reg. 19. ver. 34. And I will protect this cittie, and I will ſaue it for my ſelfe and for Dauid my ſeruant.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Prompt. Cathol. in Feſto Om. Sanctorū: The Scripture by manie exāples doth shew the merits of Saints, by which the godlie are holpen.

C. Bellarm. l. 2. de Miſſa c. 8. We aske mercie of God by the merits and praiers of Saints, through the mediation of Chriſt.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Apologia Confeſſ. Auguſtan. c. de Inuoc. We thinke, that we ought not to truſt that the merits of Saints are applied vnto vs, that for them God is reconciled to vs.

Whitaker l. 9. cont. Dur. ſect. 38. We know, that you are God hath not mercie for the Saints ſake. blaſphemous and iniurious to Chriſt, who pray to Saints that their merits may helpe you.

Caluin 3. Inſtit. c. 20. §. 21. In Papiſtrie; Now and then the merits of Saints are obtruded for to get Gods good will.

De vera reform. p. 339. It is not to be borne, that which they ſay, that through Gods liberalitie and Chriſts grace, merits of Saints do profit vs for protection and obtayning of fauour.

Perkins ref. Cathol. Cōtr. 14. p. 266. We vtterlie denie that we are helped by merits of Saints ether liuing or departed.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that God did good to Abias Dauids great graundchild for Dauids ſake, and becauſe Dauid had done right in Gods ſight, that is, for the good deeds or merits of Dauid: that he protected Hieruſalem for himſelfe and for Dauid. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that God is not reconciled vnto vs for the merits of Saints: that it is blaſphemous to ſay, that the merits of Saints do helpe vs: that they profit vs not ether for protection, or obtayning of fauour.

ART. XI. WHETHER ANGELS OR SAINTS are to be worshipped with the bowing of our bodie?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Gen. 19. v. 1. And the twoe Angels came to Sodom at euen, and Lot ſitting in the gates of the cittie: who when he had ſeene Angels Worshipped. them, roſe vp and went to meete them, and adored prostrate on the ground, and ſaied: I beſeech you my Lords turne into the houſe of your ſeruant.

Numbers 22. v. 31. Forewith our Lord opened the eyes of Balaam, and he ſaw the Angel ſtanding in the way with a drawne ſword, and he adored him flat to the ground.

Ioſue 5. v. 13. When Ioſue had ſeene an Angel and asked him who he was, and the Angel had anſwered: I am a Prince of the hoaſte of our Lord: Ioſue fell flat to the ground and adoring, ſaied &c.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent. Seſſ. 25. By the Images which we kiſſe, and to which we put of our hatts, we worshippe the Saints whoſe images they are.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Confeſſio Mulhuſnia art. 10. We diſlike the veneration Not to be worshipped. of Saints. And Heluet. c. 5. We nether adore, nor worshippe, nor inuocate the Saints in heauen.

Perkins reform. Cathol. Controu. 14. c. 2. p. 249. Becauſe No not with ciuill worſhippe. Angels appeare not now as in former times, not ſo much as ciuill adoratiō in anie bodilie geſture is to be done vnto them. We denie that anie ciuill worshippe in bending of the knee or proſtrating of the bodie is to be giuen to the Saints.

Humfrey ad Ration. 3. Campiani pag. 263. Vigilantius tought that Saints are not to be reuerenced, nor that we ought Not to be reuerenced. ſuperſtitiouſly to runne to their monuments. We ſay the ſame.

Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 6. c. 3. Papiſts worshippe Angels and the Saints.

Luther poſtilla in Domin. 23. poſt Trinit. For what other was the worshippe and reuerence of Saints, but a diuelish thing?

Caluin 1. Inſtit. c. 12. §. 3. He could not fall downe to the Angel, without diminishing of Gods glorie.

Bullinger Decad. 4. form. 9. We muſt be ware, that we nether adore, inuocate, or worshippe Angels. The ſame ſay Proteſtants commonly.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that Lot ſeing Angels adored proſtrate on the ground: that Ioſue hearing of an Angel that he was a Prince of Gods hoaſte fell flat on the groūd and adored: that Balaam adored flat to the ground an Angel, and yet was not reprehended therefore ether of the Angel or of the Scripture. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that it is not lawfull to reuerence, venerate, adore, worshippe or bow to the Angels or Saints, but it is a diuelish thing. And yet Luther himſelfe thus writeth epiſt. ad Erphurdienſes tom. 7. fol. 500. I do not thinke, that they are to be reiected or condemned, who whorshippe Saints without preſuming truſt. For whatſoeuer they doe to Saints, they do to Christ. Nether can it be but Chriſt is partaker of the honour which is giuen to Saints.

ART. XII. WHETHER SAINTS BE TO be imitated of vs?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Cor. 11. v. 1. Be ye followers of me, as I alſo of Chriſt.

Philippen. 3. ver. 17. Be followers of me brethren and obſerue Saints to be imitated and followed. them that walke ſo as you haue our forme.

2. Theſſalon. 3. v. 7. For your ſelues know, how you ought to imitate vs.

Hebr. 13. v. 7. Remember your Prelats, who haue ſpoaken the word of God to you: the end of whoſe conuerſation beholding, imitate their faith.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Lucae. 9. v. 54. The faithfull Chriſtians piouſly and carefully imitate the examples of the holie Fathers.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther Poſtilla in Feſto S. Ioann. fol. 378. Theſe trifles Saints not to be imitated or followed. ought not be ſung vnto the people out of the pulpits in preaching, that they should imitate the Saints and follow their footeſteppes. And in ferijs eiuſdem fol. 91. An ould error hath gotten poſſeſsion and force, that we all looke vpon the deeds and liues of Saints, and endeauour to follow them, thinking (like fooles) that this is a great pietie—The way of the Lord admitteth not examples of Saints, but in all things expecteth the commandments of the Lord onely. In die Epiphaniae fol. 130. God Nor their examples. requireth, that we follow his onely Scripture, and not the examples of Saints.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that we muſt follow Saints and imitate them. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that Saints are not to be imitated or followed, their examples not to be admitted, that it is an errour to looke vpon the liues of Saints and follow them.

ART. XIII. WHETHER HOLIE MEN receaue vs into euerlaſting tabernacles?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Luc. 16. v. 9. And I ſay vnto you. Make vnto you friends of Holie men receaue vs into Heauen. the mammon of iniquitie, that when you faile, they may receaue you into the eternall tabernacles.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Lucae 16. ver. 9. Chriſt teacheth, that they to whome we haue done good do receaue vs into eternall tabernacles, that is, Chriſt for thē not onely by reaſon of the good worke, but alſo for their praiers, giueth vs life euerlaſting.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther poſtilla in Dom. 9. poſt Trinit. fol. 107. We muſt They receaue vs not into Heauen. not vnderſtand, that men shall receaue vs into eternall tabernacles.

Illyricus in Claue part. 2. tractar. 6. Pore men are ſaied to receaue their benefactours into eternall tabernacles, whereas this is the deed of the Father alone for the merit of his Sonne.

Caluin in Lucae 16. verſ. 9. citat. He meaneth not, that we muſt get patrons and intreatours, who by their protection may sheild and defend vs.—But they do fondely and abſurdly, who hereupon gather that we are holpen by the praiers or ſuffrages of the dead.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that holie men to whome we haue done good, do receaue vs into eternall tabernacles. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that no men receaue vs into eternall tabernacles, that that is the deed of the Father alone, that we are not to get patrons or intreatours for vs.

ART. XIV. WHETHER ANIE SAINT may be called our hope?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Theſſalon. 2. v. 18. For what is our hope, or ioy, or crowne Saints called our hope. of glorie? Are not you before our Lord Ieſus in his coming? For you are our glorie and ioy.

Ihon 5. v. 45. Thinke not, that I will accuſe you to the Father, there is that accuſeth you, Moiſes, in whome you truſt.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 1. de bonis oper. in part. c. 15. The B. Virgin is called our hope, becauſe, after God, we truſt eſpecially in her interceſsion.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Caluin in Cōfeſ. p. 109. Many kinds of praiers were brought Not to be ſo called. in, which had horrible blaſphemies, as when the Virgin is termed of infidels the gate of ſaluation, our hope.

Beza in Ioan. 2. v. 5. Idolatrie hath ſo farre preuailed, that they are not ashamed to call Marie, the Queene of heauen, their hope, and ſaluation.

P. Martyr in 1. Cor. c. 3. They call the B. Virgin their hope, as if they would put their hope in a creature.

Pareus in Colloq. 3. Swal. You ſalute Marie by the Title of your hope: Which ſalutation tendeth to the dishonour of God.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the Theſſalonians were the hope, ioy and crowne of glorie of the Apoſtle before our Lord: that the Iews did truſt in Moiſes, and yet were not reprehended therefore. Catholiks ſay the like.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that it tendeth to the dishonour of God, is idolatrie and horrible blaſphemie to call our beſſed Ladie our hope.

ART. XV. WHETHER SAINTS HAD power to worke miracles?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Matth. 10. ver. 1. And hauing called his twelue diſciples together, Some Saints had power to doe miracles. he gaue them power ouer vncleane ſpirits that they should cast them out, and should cure all manner of diſeaſe and all manner of infirmitie.

Marke. 3. ver. 15. And he gaue them power to cure infirmities, and to caſt out diuels.

1. Corin. 12. v. 9. To one certes by the ſpirit is giuen the word of wiſdome—to an other the grace of doing cures in one ſpirit, to an other, the working of miracles.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 4. de Eccleſ. c. 14. How could God more plainly expreſſe his mynd, then by giuing to one the ſingular guift of miracles?

〈1… pages missing〉

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins in Gal. 3. v. 3. God neuer gaue any man the power of Neuer man had power to worke miracles. working miracles, ether mediatly or immediatly.

Vrſinus in Catechiſmo q. 99. The power of working miracles is not transfuſed into Saints, therefore metaphorically they are ſaied to worke them.

Beza in 1. Cor. 12. v. 6. But in doing of miracles, if we conſider the worke it ſelfe, Gods power doth worke without any communication at all, which he imparteth not euen to the Angels themſelues. What then will ſome ſay? Were the ſaints of God like ſtocks & blocks in the working of miracles? No. For ether by their praiers they obtained the miracles of God, or vnderſtāding Gods will by inward grace or peculiar reuelation, they declared it: but ſo, that no power of theirs did in any ſorte concurre as efficient cauſe to the working of the miracles.

Piſcator in Theſ. l. 2. p. 373. Doth God imparte to any creature the power of working miracles? We denie it: becauſe the power of working miracles is omnipotencie it ſelfe.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that Chriſt gaue the Apoſtles power to cure all manner of diſeaſes & infirmities: that to ſome is giuen the grace of working miracles. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that God neuer gaue to any creature the power of working miracles ether mediatly or immediatly: that he imparteth not to Saints the power of working miracles: that no power in them concurreth as efficient cauſe to the working of miracles but onely the power that is in God: that all power of working miracles is omnipotencie it ſelfe, and neuer imparted to any creature.

ART. XVI. WHETHER SAINTS DO reigne with Chriſt?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Apocal. 5. v. 10. Thou haſt made vs to our God a kingdome and preiſts, and we shall reigne vpon the earth.

Apocal. 20. ver. 6. They shalbe preiſts of God and of Chriſt, Saints reigne with Chriſt. and shall reigne with him a thouſand years. c. 22. v. 5. Our Lord God doth illuminate them, and they, shall reigne for euer and euer.

Apocal. 2. v. 26. And he that shall ouercome and keepe my Haue power ouer nations. workes vnto the end, I will giue him power ouer the nations, and he shall rule them with a rodde of yron. Cap. 3. verſ. 21. He that shall ouercome, I will giue vnto him to ſitte with me in my throne, as I alſo haue ouercome, and haue ſitten with my Father in his throne.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Card. Bellarm. lib. 1. de Sanctis cap. 18. We learne, that the ſoules of holie men after their death before the reſurrection do receaue power ouer nations, and do rule them, and ſitte in the throne of Chriſt, that is, do with him gouerne the whole worlde.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Reineccius tom. 4. Armaturae c. 7. The Saints do not reigne Saints reigne not with Chriſt. Doe not rule nations. with Chriſt. The like hath Vorſtius in Antibel. p. 298.

Pareus in Collegio Theol. 9. diſput. 18. ſaieth, that it is an errour to ſay: That as Angels, ſo the ſoules of bleſſed men are appointed of God to rule and gouerne vs. Of the ſame opinion are all other Proteſtants, who ſay, that the Saints in heauē nether know nor care what is done on earth.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Saints reigne with Chriſt, gouerne nations, ſit in Chriſts throne. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that Saints reigne not with Chriſt, are not appointed of God to rule and gouerne vs, know not, nor care not what is done on earth.

ART. XVII. WHETHER ANIE SAINT were full of grace?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Luc. 1. v. 28. the Angel ſaieth to our B. Ladie. Haile full of grace.

Act. 36. ver. 28. Conſider therefore brethren ſeuen men of you Some Saints full of grace. of good testimonie, full of the holie Ghoſt and wiſdome, whome we may appoint ouer this buſineſſe. And v. 8. And Stephen full of grace and fortitude did great wonders.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

S. Thomas 3. part. q. 27. art. 5. The B. Virgin Marie obtained ſuch fulneſſe of grace, that she was nigheſt to the authour of grace.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Illyricus in Lucae 1. v. 28. cit. It is ill tranſlated: Ful of grace: None full of grace. For Chriſt alone is full of grace and trueth.

Caluin in Lucae. 1. v. 15. expoundeth, Full of grace, Aboue the ordinarie courſe. Of the ſame mynd alſo are other Proteſtants, who ether denie that the Angel ſaluted our B. Ladie, Full of grace; or denie, that we haue anie inherent iuſtice or grace in vs, as we shall ſee hereafter.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that our ladie and S. Stephen was full of grace, and that others were full of the holie Ghoſt. And Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants ſaye, that Chriſt alone was full of grace, and that others haue no grace or iuſtice in them.

A SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF ANGELS or Saints.

It appeareth out of that which hath beene rehearſed in this chapter, that Proteſtants do farre otherwiſe deſcribe vnto vs Angels and Saints, then the holie Scripture and Catholiks doe. For according to the Scripture and Catholiks they are perfectly iuſt and perfectly doe the will of God, but not according to Proteſtants. In the verdict of the Scripture and Catholiks, they pray for vs, haue care of our matters, heare our praiers: In the opinion of Proteſtants they do none of theſe. According to the Scripture and Catholiks, they are to be praied vnto, to be worshipped, to be imitated of vs, and God is to be inuocated by their names, who alſo for their good deeds, their ſake doth good vnto vs: but according to Proteſtants none of all theſe things belong vnto them. In the doctrin of the Scripture and Catholiks, they enioy their heauenlie felicitie, reigne with Chriſt, and ſome of them had power to doe miracles: but in the Proteſtants Doctrin they nether enioy their heauenly happines, nor reigne with Chriſt, nor anie of them had or can haue power to worke miracles.

Proteſtants therefore ſteale from Angels and Saints Proteſt. ſteale from Saints. Power. Virtue. their power, whiles they denie, that they are capable of power to worke miracles: ſteale away their perfect iuſtice, in denying that they are perfectly iuſt or perfectly do the will of God. Robbe them of their honour, becauſe they Honor. denie that we may honour them, imitate them, pray to them, or pray to God in their names. They ſpoile them Dignitie. of their dignitie, in ſaying that God doth not any good vnto vs for their merits or good deeds. They bereaue Knowledge. them of their knowledge, in ſaying that they know not any thing that is done on earth. They robbe them of Charitie. their charitie, becauſe they ſay, that they pray not for vs ether in generall or in particular, haue no care of vs, not exerciſe any offices of charitie towards vs. Finally they Happines. take from them their heauenly felicitie, becauſe they teach, that they enioy not that vntill the day of iudgment. And hitherto we haue ſpoaken of thoſe who are in heauē: now let vs ſpeake of theſe things which are on earth, and firſt of the word of God.

CHAPTER IV. OF THE VVORD OF GOD OR SCRIPTVRE.

ART. I. WHETHER ANIE PLACES OF Scripture be hard to be vnderſtood.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

PETER 3. verſ. 16. As our moſt deere Some places of Scripture hard to be vnderſtood. brother Paul, according to the wiſdome giuen him, hath written to you, as alſo in all his epiſtles ſpeaking in them of theſe things, in the which are certaine things hard to be vnderſtood, which the vnlearned and vnſtable depraue.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

D. Stapleton in Ioan. 17. v. 20. Catholiks denie, that all the Scripture is plaine and cleare.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Whitaker Controu. 1. q. 4. c. 3. p. 337. Peter ſaieth not, that Paules epiſtles are obſcure, no nor that there are ſome obſcure things in Paules epiſtles. And c. 4. p. 340. It is manifeſt, that the Scriptures are eaſie to be vnderſtood. And he addeth, that the whole will of God which is declared in his whole word and Scriptures, and the whole Scripture, is eaſie. The ſame he ſaieth p. 341. Of the whole Scripture, of the vniuerſall Scripture, and whole word of God.

Luther l. de ſeru. arbit. to. 2. fol. 426. It is ſpred abrode by No place of Scripture hard. the impious Sophiſters, that there are ſome things obſcure in the Scripture, and that all things are not laied open. Fol. 427. There is nothing at all left obſcure or ambiguous, but all things are brought into moſt cleare light by the word, and declared to the whole world whatſoeuer is in Scripture. And fol. 440. I ſpeake of the whole Sripture: I will not haue anie parte of it to be ſaied to be obſcure. The like he hath Poſtilla in feſto S. Iacobi fol. 430. and Cont. Cocleum to. 2. fol. 410. Neuer any thing was vttered more ſimply, more purely, more clearely, more eaſily, then the word of God. Praefat. Aſſert. art. The Scripture is by it ſelfe No booke more cleare then the Scriture. the moſt certaine, the moſt eaſie, the moſt cleare interpreter of it ſelfe, prouing, iudging, and lightning all things. And in pſalm. 37. to. 3. fol. 10. If anie of them ſay, that we need the Fathers interpretation, the Scriptures are obſcure: Thou shalt anſwere: That is falſe. No booke in the whole world is moſt clearely writtē then the holie Scripture, which compared to all other bookes, is like the Sunne before all other lights.

Gerlachius diſputat. 1. tom. 1. pag. 9. We ſay, that the whole Scripture is ſo cleare, as it needeth no interpretation at all.

Zanchius de Scriptura tom. 8. col. 408. How then can the Scripture be ſaied obſcure in anie parte thereof? col. 409. If the Scripture be obſcure in no parte (as before we haue shewed) much leſſe in thoſe things which are neceſſarie to ſaluation. And l. 1. Epiſtol. pag. 98. The places of holie Scripture, from whence the decrees of Chriſtian religion are drawne, are ſo plaine and manifeſt, as they need no more diligent or clearer expoſition.

Serranus cont Hayum part. 3. p. 267. ſaieth, that there is not anie ambiguitie or obſcuritie in the matter or words of the Scripture. And p. 269. that the Lord hath plainly laied open in the Scripture all the miſteries of our ſaluation. Manie more of their like ſayings may be ſeene in my Latin booke cap. 4. art. 1.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that in S. Paules epiſtles there be ſome things hard to be vnderſtood. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that the Scripture ſaieth not that there are ſome obſcure things in S. Pauls epiſtles: that the Scripture, the whole ſcripture is eaſie: that the whole ſcripture is ſo cleare as it needeth no interpretation at all: that no parte of it is obſcure, that all things are cleare whatſoeuer is in the word and declared to the whole world: that the Scripture is the eaſieſt and cleareſt interpreter of it ſelfe: that no booke in the whole world is ſo cleare as the Scripture, and that being compared to them, it is like the Sunne to other lights. Which are ſo manifeſtly contrarie to Scripture as Proteſtants thēſelues ſometimes confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. II. WHETHER SCRIPTVRE CAN BE vnderſtood without the light of the holie Ghoſt?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

2. Peter 1. v. 20. Vnderſtanding this firſt, that no prophetie Scripture not vnderſtood of our ſelues. (or expoſition) of Scripture is made by priuat interpretation.

Matth. 13. v. 11. To you it is giuen to know the miſteries of the kingdome of heauen, but to them it is not giuen.

Luc. 24. v. 45. Then he opened their vnderſtanding, that they might vnderſtand the Scriptures.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

D. Stapleton l. 11. de Principijs c. 2. The ſpirit of God, of whome the vnderſtanding of the Scriptures is to be asked and giuen, is not to be ſought in the Scriptures themſelues.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Whitaker l. 1. de Scriptura c. 12. ſect. 8. The Scriptures may Scripture not vnderſtood by onely reading. without the holie Ghoſt. be known by onely reading. l. 2. c. 8. ſect. 16. I ſay, that the Scriptures may be vnderſtood before faith and without faith. Againe, But if thou thinkeſt, that the Scriptures cannot be vnderſtood at all without peculiar lightning of the holie Ghoſt, thou art in a great errour. And Controu. 1. q. 6. c. 13. For ſo much as appertaineth to the knowledge of the letter, the Church hath no priuiledge.

Morton. in Apol. part. 2. l. 5. c. 10. Anie one though neuer ſo Anie may vnderſtand the Scripture: ſo impious, may ſearch the Scriptures to knowledge, though not to wiſdome: that is, to the knowledge of truth, though not to the attayning of ſaluation.

Beza l. de notis Eccleſ. vol. 3. p. 137. But for to vnderstand what the Prophets and Apoſtles haue in ſumme thought and thought of euerie article of our religion, there needeth onely a wit not wholy dull, 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 shalbe 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 shalbe 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 shalbe 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 a preaching of the grace of God. The like hath Geſnerus in Compendio loco 15.

Gerlachius to. 2. diſp. 13. The law requiring workes properly belongeth not to the Ghoſpell. Againe. It is truely ſaied, that not the Ghoſpell but the law requireth workes.

Lobechius Diſput. 9. The word of the Ghospell sheweth not, what is to be done by working, but what we must beleiue.

Caluin in Rom. 10. ver. 8. As the law exacted workes, the Ghoſpell, requireth nothing elſe, but that men bring faith to receaue Gods grace. The like hath Beza in Catechiſmo compend. and others.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that Ihon Baptiſt, Chriſt, and the Apoſtles begā the preaching of Ghoſpell by preaching pennance: that Chriſt came to call ſinners to pennance, that pennance and remiſſion of ſinnes are to be preached in his name: that God in the Ghoſpell denounceth to all mē that they doe pennance. And the Ghoſpell euery where preacheth good workes. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that the Ghoſpell properly taken doth not preach pennance: that the Ghoſpell commandeth onely to beleiue in Chriſt; requireth nothing but faith: sheweth not what is to be done or vndone, but what is to be beleiued: that it requireth not workes, cānot abide that workes be preached whatſoeuer they be: preacheth not that this or that thing is to be done, preacheth not newneſſe of life or good workes, containeth not doctrin of Good workes. Which are ſo contrarie to Scripture as ſome Proteſtants confeſſe it. See l. 2. c. 30.

ART. V. WHETHER THE GHOSPELL do reproue ſinne.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Rom. 1. v. 17. For the iuſtice of God is reuealed in it (Goſpell) The Ghoſpell reproueth ſinne. by faith into faith. v. 18. For the wrath of God from heauen is reuealed vpon all impietie and iniuſtice &c.

Ihon. 16. v. 8. And when he (the Paraclet) is come, he shall argue the world of ſinne and of iniuſtice. The ſame teach the places cited in the former article, and others wherein the Ghoſpell commandeth men to abſtaine from ſinne and threatneth punishment thereto.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton Roman. 1. verſ. 18. Abſurdly and impiouſly is ſaied: that it belongeth not to the ministerie of the Ghoſpell to reproue ſinne.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther Concordiae cap. 5. pag. 593. When the law and The Ghospell reproueth not ſinne. the Ghoſpell are compared together, we beleiue each, and confeſſe, that the Ghoſpell is not a preaching of pennance reprouing ſinne: but that properly it is nothing els but a moſt ioyfull meſſage, and a preaching full of comfort not reprouing or terrifying.

Luther Poſtilla in die Om. Sanct. fol. 441. The law commandeth, Dot not threaten. threatneth, and vrgeth: the Ghoſpell maketh no threats nor pusheth on.

Schuſſelb. to. 4. Catal. Haeret. p. 209. The Ghoſpell properly ſpeaking doth reproue no ſinne: but this is the proper and moſt proper office of the law.

Caluin 2. Inſtit. c. 10. §. 4. The Ghoſpells preaching pronounceth nothing els, but that ſinners through the fatherly goodnes of God are iuſtified without their merit.

Beza in Rom. 1. v. 18. To reproue ſinne, rather belongeth to the miniſterie of the law, then of the Ghoſpell.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that in the Gholpell Gods anger is reuealed vpon all iniuſtice: that the ſpirit of the Ghoſpell reproueth ſinne. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that to reproue ſinne rather belongeth to the miniſterie of the law then of the Ghoſpell: that the Ghoſpell properly taken reproueth not ſinne, but is nothing els but a meſſage of ioy and comfort: that to reproue ſinne is the proper office of the law. Which is ſo oppoſite to the Scripture, as ſome times Proteſtants confeſſe it. See l. 2. c. 30.

ART. VI. WHETHER THE GHOSPELL promiſeth ſaluation with condition of good workes?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Mathew. 19. verſ. 17. If thou wilt enter into life, keepe the The Ghoſpell promiſeth ſaluation vpon condition of Workes. commandments.

Luke. 13. verſ. 3. Vnleſſe you haue pennance, you shall all likewiſe perish.

Roman. 8. verſ. 13. If you liue according to the flesh, you shall die.

Hebrews 10. v. 36 For patience is neceſſarie for you, that doing the will of God, you may receaue the promiſe. C. 12. v. 14. Follow peace with all men and holines, without which no man shall ſee God.

Ihon 3. v. 5. Vnleſſe a man be borne againe of water and the ſpirit, he cannot enter into the kingdome of God. c. 6. v. 53. Vnleſſe ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood, ye shall not haue life in you. c. 15. v. 10. If you keepe my precepts, you shall abide in my loue.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 6. Can. 20. If anie shall ſay, that a man iuſtified and neuer ſo perfect, is not bound to keepe the commandments of God and the Church, but onely to beleiue: as if the Ghoſpell were an abſolute and bare promiſe without condition of keeping Gods commandments, be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Apol. Conf. Auguſtan. fol. 60. Doth not the Ghoſpell promiſe remiſsion of ſinnes and ſaluation euen to thoſe that haue no good workes at all? ib. in reſp. ad arg. If remiſsion of ſinnes do depend of the cōdition of our workes, it wilbe altogether vncertaine.

Luther in Colloq. Menſal. apud Vlemberg. cauſa. 5. The Ghoſpell promiſeth ſaluation without condition of workes. Whoſoeuer ſaieth, that the Ghoſpell requireth workes to ſaluation, is a lyer.

Perkins in Gal. 3. to. 2. The Ghoſpell offereth and giueth life freely without condition of anie worke, and requireth nothing but the acceptance of the thing offered.

Willet Controu. 19. quaeſt. 1. pa. 1012. The Ghoſpell and the law are twoe diſtinct things. The law ſaieth: Doe this and thou shalt be ſaued: The Ghoſpell: Beleiue onely, and it ſufficeth vnto life.

Adamus Franciſci in Margarita Theol. loco 8. The promiſſe of the Ghoſpell is not conditionall.

Gerlachius to. 2. diſput. 13. The promiſſes of the Ghoſpell are not conditionall, but abſolute in reſpect of workes.

The Diuines of Saxonie in Colloq. Aldeburg. Scripto. 6. p. 134. The promiſes of the law are conditionall, becauſe they propoſe reward with condition of obedience: But the promiſes of the Ghoſpell are not conditionall, but free.

Caluin in Antidot. Concil. Seſſ. 6. Con. 20. In that the Ghoſpell differeth frō the law, becauſe it promiſeth life by faith, and not vnder the condition of workes as the law doth. And 3. Inſtit. c. 11. §. 17. The promiſes of the Ghoſpell are free and relie vpon the onely mercie of God, whereas the promiſes of the law depend of the condition of workes.

Peter Martyr in Rom. 11. We denie, that Gods teſtament of remiſsion of ſinnes in Chriſt hath anie condition adioyned.

Pareus l. 4. de Iuſtif. c. 1. The Ghoſpell, properly is the doctrine of grace, ſo it requireth onely the condition of faith. And c. 2. The Ghoſpell ſtrictly and properly hath promiſes of ſaluation vnder the onely condition of faith, and threats of death vnder the onely condition of incredulitie. Thoſe promiſes and threats alone are proper to the Ghoſpell and Euangelicall, all others are mixt, partely euangelicall, partely legall.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that if we will enter into life we muſt keepe the commandements; that patience is neceſſarie for to receaue the promiſe: that without holines no man shall ſee God: that to be baptized and to eate the flesh of Chriſt is neceſſarie to life: that vnleſſe we haue pennance we shall perish, that if we liue according to the flesh we shall die. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that the Ghoſpell promiſeth ſaluation euen to thoſe that haue no good works at all: that it requireth no good workes to ſaluation, offereth life without condition of anie worke: that the promiſes of the Ghoſpell are abſolute in reſpect of workes, are not conditionall: that the Ghoſdell requireth onely the acceptance of the thing offered, requireth onely beleife to life, onely the condition of faith. Which are ſo contrarie to Scripture as ſome times the Proteſtants themſelues confeſſe it See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. VII. WHETHER THE GHOSPELL be contrarie to the law?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Rom. 3. v. 31. Do we then deſtroie the law by faith? God forbidde: The Ghoſpell not contrarie to the law. but we do eſtablish the law.

Gal. 3. v. 21. Was the law then againſt the promiſes of God? God forbidde.

Mathew 5. verſ. 18. Do not thinke that I am come to break the law or the Prophet. I am not come to breake, but to fulfill.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

S. Thomas 1. 2. quaeſt. 17. art. 3. Something is contained in an other by power, as the whole tree is contained in the ſeed: and after this manner the new law is contained in the ould.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Confeſſio Heluet. c. 13. The Ghoſpell truely is oppoſite to It is cōtrarie to the law the law: For the law worketh wrath and denounceth maledictiō; the Ghoſpell preacheth grace and benediction.

Illyricus in Sacrae Scripturae part. 2. tract. 1. eol. 10. There are twoe kinds of doctrins, the law and the Ghoſpell, and they of themſelues and of their nature truely contrarie. Col. 11. This ſurely is the key of all the Scripture and Diuinitie, to know that in Twoe maie • to heauen & thoſe contrarie. it is cōtained a twofould kind of doctrine, and a double way of ſaluation, which are of themſelues plainly contrarie the one to the other. Col. 39. The law and the Ghoſpell of themſelues wholy fight one with the other: Theſe doctrins fight, but the law being the inferiour yeeldeth to the Ghoſpell the ſuperiour; and ſo the one contradictorie falling, the other obideth true. And Tract. 6. col. 547. 551. he ſaieth, that the Ghoſpell correcteth the law.

Luther in Gal 4. f. 373. Let the godlie learne, that Chriſt and the law are twoe contrarie, all together incompatible.

Scuſſelburg tom. 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 446. True it is: Entire and perfect obedience is neceſſarie to ſaluation, for the Lord himſelfe hath ſaied: If thou wilt enter into life, keepe the commandments. But contrariwiſe, there is full power giuen to me to Proteſtants mittigate the rigour of the law. interprete or mitigate this rigour. Wherefore I interprete and mitigate it thus. Perfect obedience is neceſſarie to one that is to be ſaued; to wit, ether his owne or an other mans. And p. 446. ſaieth, that the Ghoſpell correcteth and amendeth the ſayings of the law.

Caluin 2. Inſtit. c. 9. §. 4. Paul maketh the iuſtice of the law and the Ghoſpell contrarie one to the other.

Vallada in Apolog. cont. Epiſcop. Luzon. c. 30. Luther ſpeaketh not ſimply of Moiſes, but of Moiſes oppoſite to Ieſus Chriſt, that is, of the law oppoſite to the Ghoſpel. And ſeing al Proteſtants thinke, that the doctrin of the law is this: Our keeping of the law is neceſſarie to ſaluation, and the doctrine of the Ghoſpell, this: Our keeping of the law is not neceſſarie to ſaluation, they muſt needs all ſay, that the doctrine of the Ghoſpell is quite contrarie or contradictorie to the doctrine of the law. Whereupon Beza de Praedeſt. cont. Caſtel. vol. 1. p. 393. writeth in this ſorte: Theſe are contrarie: vnleſſe you doe all theſe things you shall die, and, Albeit you do them not, yet if you beleiue, you shall liue. Whereof the firſt, they ſay, is the doctrine of the law; the ſecond, of the Ghoſpell.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the faith of the Ghoſpell doth not deſtroie, but eſtablish the law; that Gods promiſes are not againſt the law: that Chriſt came not to breake the law. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that the Ghoſpell is truely oppoſite to the law: that the law and Ghoſpell are twoe doctrins of their nature truely contrarie, plainly contrarie, and fight one with the other: that the Ghoſpell correcteth the law: that the iuſtice of the law and of the Ghoſpell is contrarie one to the other, and that this is the key of all Proteſtant diuinitie: and that Proteſtants haue full power to mittigate the rigour of Gods law. Which are ſo contrarie to Scripture, as Proteſtants ſome times confeſſe it. See l. 2. c. 30.

ART. VIII. WHETHER THE LAW OF Moyſes did command faith in Chriſt?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Ihon 1. v. 45. Him, whome Moiſes in the law and the Prophets Moiſes in the law wrote of Chriſt. wrote of, we haue found Ieſus the ſonne of Ioſeph of Nazareth. c. 5. v. 45. For if you did beleiue Moiſes, you would perhaps beleiue me alſo. For of me he hath written.

Luc. 24. v. 27. And beginning from Moyſes and all the Prophets Written of Chriſt in the law. he did interprete to them in all the Scriptures the things that were concerning him. And v. 44. All things muſt needs be fulfilled, which are written in the law of Moiſes, and the Prophets, and the Pſalmes, of me.

Act. 3. v. 22. Moiſes indeed ſaied, That a Prophet, shall the Lord your God raiſe vp to you of your brethren as my ſelfe: Him Moiſes commanded to beare Chriſt. you shall heare according to all things whatſoeuer he shall ſpeake to you. c. 26. v. 23. Saying nothing beſides thoſe things, which the Prophets did ſpeake should come to paſse, and Moiſes, if Chriſt were paſsible &c. See c. 28. v. 23.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. lib. 4. Iuſtif. c. 4. Euerie where in the Ghoſpell we read, that diuers miſteries were fulfilled in Chriſt, becauſe it was ſo written in the law and Prophets.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins in Gal. 3. to. 2. The Ghoſpell requireth faith in Chriſt The law knew not Chriſt. The law of Moiſes commanded not faith in Chriſt. The law teacheth not faith in Chriſt the Mediatour, God and man, which faith the law neuer knew.

Pareus l. 1. de Iuſtif. c. 16. Faith is no worke of the law: for the law of Moiſes commandeth not faith in Chriſt. And l. 2. c. 4. The law knoweth nothing of faith in Chriſt, of iuſtifying faith, of faith of remiſsion of ſinnes. The like hath Ambing. apud Hoſpin. in Concord. diſcordi fol. 140.

Beza de Praedeſt. cont. Caſte l. vol. 1. p. 393. There is no mē tion in the law of this benefit (of free redemption by Chriſt) For the declaratiō of this will belongeth to an other parte of Gods word, which is called the Ghoſpell.

Apol. Cōf. Auguſtan. c. de Iuſtific. The Ghoſpell preacheth iuſtice of faith in Chriſt, which the law doth not teach.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Moiſes wrote in the law, of Chriſt, that Moiſes wrote things concerning Chriſt: That Moiſe commanded the people to heare Chriſt in all things. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that the law neuer knew faith in Chriſt, that Moiſes cōmandeth not faith in Chriſt: that the law knoweth nothing of faith in Chriſt: that in the law there is no mention of free redemption in Chriſt: that the law teacheth nothing of faith in Chriſt.

ART. IX. WHETHER ANY VNWRITTEN word or Traditions be to be kept?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

2. Theſſal. 2. v. 15. Therefore brethren stand, and hould the traditions Traditions not written to be helde. which you haue learned: whether it be by word or by our epiſtle.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Coūcell of Trent. Seſſ. 4. The holie Coūcell doth with equall pious affection reuerently receaue and honour traditions belonging to faith or manners, as ether deliuered by Chriſts mouth or the holie Ghoſt, and by continuall ſucceſsion conſerued in the Catholik Church.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 3. cap. 10. We care not for vnwritten Not to be helde. traditions. And Contro. 2. q. 5. c. 18. We acknowledge no other word then that which is written. And what doctrine ſoeuer is not written we hould for baſtard doctrine.

Perkins in Cathol. ref. Contr. 20. c. 2. We acknowledge the onely written word of God.

Luther Poſtil. in ferias S. Stephani. Nothing is to be affirmed Nothing but that which is expreſſed in Scripture. which is not expreſſed in Scripture.

Iacobus Andreae l. cont. Hoſium. p. 169. That faith is no faith, but an vncertain opinion, which is not grounded vpon an expreſſe teſtimonie of Scripture.

Wigand apud Scuſſelb. to. 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 681. Onely thoſe doctrines, whoſe very words or equiualent for ſenſe are extant in the Scripture, are to be tought and deliuered in the Church.

Caluin in Gratulat. ad Praecentorem pag. 377. Nothing is to be beleiued, which is not expreſſed in Scripture. And cont. verſipellem. pagin. 353. There is no mention of vnwritten traditions.

Beza in Rom. 1. v. 17. Chriſtians acknowledge no other object of this faith, then the written word of God. Etad Reprehenſ. Caſtell. p. 503. Whoſoeuer beleiueth in doctrine of religion that which is not written, I ſay he embraceth opinion for faith, and an idol for God.

Vallada in Apol. cont. Epiſc. Luzon. c. 13. In all the holie No ſpeech of an vnwritten word. Scripture there is no speech of an vnwritten word.

Daneus Controu. 7. pag. 1350. The foundation of Chriſtian faith is one onely, to wit, the word of God, and that onely written.

Hoſpinian part. 2. Hiſtor. Sacram. fol. 23. The Magiſtrates of Zurich commāded, that hereafter nothing should be propoſed or preached in their Church but the pure fined word of God contained in the bookes of the Prophets and Apoſtles.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that traditions, as well they which are learned by word, as they which are learned by writing, are to be obſerued. Catholiks teach the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that onely written doctrin is to be tought, nothing to be beleiued but what is written, onely the pure fined written word to be tought; no obiect of faith but what is written: nothing to be beleiued but what is expreſſed in Scripture, and that in verie words or in equiualent ſenſe, that there is no mention of vnwritten traditions, no ſpeech of vnwritten word: that they care not for vnwritten traditions.

A SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF THE WORD of God or Scripture.

What we haue rehearſed in this chapter doth clearly shew, that Proteſtants do farre otherwiſe iudge of Scripture then the Scripture it ſelfe and Catholiks doe. For the holie Scripture together with Catholiks teacheth that in it are ſome things hard to be vnderſtood, that it cannot be vnderſtood without the light of the holie Ghoſt: that the Ghoſpell is or containeth a law: that it doth preach pennance and good workes, reproueth ſinne, promiſeth ſaluation vnder condition of good workes, and is not contrarie vnto the law of God: that the law of Moiſes commandeth faith in Chriſt: and that vnwritten traditions are to be obſerued: And Proteſtants defend all the contrarie.

They shew alſo, that Proteſtants ſteale from the Scripture Proteſtants ſteale from Scripture. her excellencie wherewith she ſurpaſſeth the capacitie of mans wit: and from the Ghoſpell, that it containeth any law, preacheth pennance or good workes, reproueth ſinne, promiſeth ſaluation vpon condition of well doing, and agreement with Gods law: whereby we ſee what a libertin Ghoſpell they bring in, to wit, ſuch as containeth Libertin Ghoſpell of Proteſtants. no law, preacheth no pennance or good workes, reproueth no ſinne, promiſeth ſaluation without all condition of well doing, and is quite contrarie to the law of God: And that they ſteall from the law of Moiſes that it commandeth faith in Chriſt; and finally they take away all the vnwritten word of God.

CHAPTER V. OF SAINT PETER AND THE APOSTLES.

ART. I. WHETHER S. PETER WERE firſt of the Apoſtles?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

MATHEW 10. v. 2. And the names of the twelue S. Peter firſt of the Apoſtles. Apostles be theſe: The firſt Simon, who is called Peter.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Pontif. c. 18. Peter was put firſt, by reaſon his dignitie.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Contr. 3. q. 5. c. 3. Whereſoeuer mention is made Not firſt. of Peter, if we looke well into the place, we shall find that nothing is giuen to him, which agreeth not to the other Apoſtles. And Controu 4. quaeſt. 2. c. Paul maketh himſelfe equall to Peter in all points.

Tindal in Fox his Acts p. 1139. S. Paul is greater then Peter by the teſtimonie of Chriſt.

Articuli Smalcaldici pag. 345. We giue no prerogatiue to Peter.

Luther in Gal. 2. to. 5. This place clearely sheweth, that all the Apoſtles had equall vocation and commiſsion. There was altogether equalitie amongst them: no Apoſtle was greater then an other.

Illyricus in Praefat. lib. de Sectis. It appeareth, that Chriſt gaue no primacie at all in his Church to any man.

Caluinus in Matth. 20. v. 25. Chriſt shewed, that in his kingdome No primacie or firſtneſſe. there was no primacie, for which they contended.

Beza in Matth. 10. v. 2. What if this word (Firſt) were added of ſome who would eſtablish Peters primacie?

Feſtus Homius diſput. 12. All the Apoſtles were equall in dignitie, authoritie, title, and power. Againe. Peter had no primacie amongst the Apoſtles.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that S. Peter was the firſt of the Apoſtles. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that S. Peter had no primacie at all; and ſuſpect that the word, Firſt, is added to the Scripture: they ſay alſo, that Saint Peter had nothing which was not common to the other Apoſtles: that all the Apoſtles were equall in dignitie, authotitie, title, and power: that there was altogether equalitie amongſt thē, and none greater then an other: that S. Paul was equall to S. Peter in all points, nay greater then he by the teſtimonie of Chriſt.

ART. II. WHETHER THE CHVRCH was built vpon S. Peter himſelfe?

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Math. 16. v. 18. And I ſay to thee: That thou art Peter, and vpon The Church built vpon S. Peter. this rock will I build my Church—And I will giue thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Promptuar. Cath. in Feſto Petri & Pauli S. Chriſoſtome doth diligently teach, that twoe things were here giuen to Peter: The one, the guift of the Father; to wit the reuelalation of the word incarnate: The other, the proper guift of the Sonne, to be the rock of the Church.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Controu. 4. q. 2 c. 2. Peter is not the rock, becauſe Not vpon S. Peter. Chriſt doth not build his Church vpon Peter.

Luther in Matth. 16. to. 5. vpon this, that is, vpon me, not vpō thee. Item. He cannot be vnderſtood to build vpon Peter.

Zuinglius l. de vera & falſa relig. cap. de Clauibus. I will build my Church vpon this rock: not vpon thee, for thou art not the rock. Againe: Onely Chriſt, not Peter, is the rock vpon the which the Church ſtandeth.

Bucer in Matth. 16. Faith in Chriſt is that rock vpon which the Church is ſaied to be built, not that man Peter.

Caluin in Math. 16. v. 19. He faigneth, that Peter is called the foūdation of the Church. But who ſeeth not, that he giueth that to the perſon of a man, vhich was ſpoaken of Peters faith?

Beza in Matth. 16. v. 18. But Mathew, or whoſoeuer was his interpretour ſeemeth by this difference of words to distinguish Peter from that rock on which the building relieth.

Zanchius l. de Eccleſ. c. 9. The oppoſition of the Fathers is not admitted in this place: vpon this rock, that is, vpon Peter.

Vorſtius in Antibell. p. 64. Our men vſe to anſwere, that by the name of Rock, not the perſon, but the faith or confeſsion of Peter, or Chriſt himſelfe, is to be vnderſtood. More of their like ſayings may be ſeene in my Latin booke c. 5. art. 2.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that Chriſt ſpeaking to Peter himſelfe, hath in the words which immediatly goe before that clauſe: vpon this rock &c, as alſo in the which immediatly follow it, and deſigning S. Peters perſon both by his Father, and by his proper name Peter, which he had giuen to him. (Which both in the Syriack tongue in which Chriſt ſpoake, and in the Hebrew tongue in which Saint Mathew wrote his Ghoſpell, is wholy one and the ſelfe ſame word that Rock is, and alſo in the Greek language is equiualent or ſynonimall with it, as Proteſtants confeſſe, and finally deſigning him by that pronoune This, ſaied: vpon this Rock, (which is as much, as is he had ſaied vpon this Peter) I will build my Church. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that S. Peter is not the Rock of the Church, not the foundation, not he vpon whome the Church is built. Which is ſo manifeſt a contradiction of Scripture, as manie Proteſtants confeſſe it. See libr. 2. cap. 30.

ART. III. WHETHER THE KEYES OF the kingdome of heauen were giuen to S. Peter himſelfe?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Mathew 16. verſ. 18. & 19. And I ſay to thee. That thou The keyes giuen to S. Peter. art Peter—And I will giue to thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Prompt. Cathol. in Feſto Petri & Pauli. The power of the keyes was promiſed by Chriſt to Peter alone, and therefore it was truely giuen.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Controu. 9. quaeſt. 5. c. 3. Surely the keyes of the Not to any one men. Church were not giuen to any one ſingular man, but to the Church it ſelfe.

Bucher in Matth. 16. This power (of the keyes) is in the whole Church, but the authoritie of adminiſtring it, is in the Preiſts and Bishops: as in ould time in Rome, the power was in the people; the authoritie, in the Senate.

Articuli Smalcaldici. We must needs confeſſe, that the keyes belong not to the perſon of any one man, hut to the Church.

Daneus Contr. 3. c. 10. p. 244. Chriſt called faith the rock: Not to Saint Peter. to which rock, not to Peter, he gaue theſe keyes and the ſtrength againſt the power and gates of Hell.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that Chriſt promiſed, and conſequently gaue, the keyes of Heauen vnto S. Peter. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that the power of the keyes is not in the prieſts and Bishops: that they were not giuen to Peter, nor to any one ſingular man. Which contradiction of the Scripture is ſo plaine, as ſome Proteſtants acknowledge it. See l. 2. c. 30

ART. IV. WHETHER S. PETERS faith failed?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Luc. 22. v. 31. And our Lord ſaied: Simon, Simon, behould Saint Peters faith failed not. Sathan hath required to haue you for to ſift as wheat. But I haue praied for thee, that thy faith faile not.

〈1… pages missing〉

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Lucae 22. v. 32. Christ doth in thoſe words manifeſtly teach, that S. Peters faith should not faile.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Cont. 4. q. 2. c. 2. Whē Bellarmin had ſaied: Peter loſt charitie, but not faith when he denied Chriſt: anſwereth: It ſeemeth, that a greater wound was giuen to his faith then to his Saints Peters faith failed. charitie. Againe: That was ſurely a short apoſtaſie.

Hutterus in Analyſi Cōfeſſ. Auguſtan. art. 12. It is a blaſphemous ſpeech of Beza, when he writeth: That Peter denying Chriſt did not looſe his faith.

Reineccius to. 1. Armat. c. 22. Peter retained not faith. And to. 3. c. 4. For a time Peters faith ſurely failed whiles he denyed Chriſt.

Daneus Contr. 3. c. 10. Bellarmin dreameth, when he ſaieth, that Peters faith could not faile: For by the deniall which afterward he made, it appeareth to be falſe which he impudently affirmeth of the indefectibilitie of Peters faith. The ſame he hath ibid. lib. 4. cap. 3.

Lambertus and Schuſſelb. l. 1. Theol. Caluin. art. 14. ſaieth that Peter, when he fell, had not that true faith wherewith we trust in God alone, and the infidelitie preuailed againſt Peter.

Iunius Contro. 3. l. 1. c. 10. Certainly Peter erred from faith.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely 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 shalbe 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. 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 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 shalbe Paſtours as long as there shalbe 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 he commandeth them to be heard as legats, not as maiſters.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the power of keyes was giuen to S. Peter: that the Holie Ghoſt placed Bishops to gouerne the Church: that S. Paul had a rodde and power ouer the faithfull, could deale hardly and punish all diſobedience, was Maiſter of the Gentils, and that we ought to be ſubiect to our Prelats. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that there is no authoritie in the Prelats themſelues: that the Church hath no rule but mere miniſterie: that Paſtours haue no more iuriſdiction ouer the faithfull then Phiſicians ouer the ſick: that they haue no power ouer the conſciences, but that all authoritie or right of commanding is in God onely and in his worde.

ART. III. WHETHER ANIE ONE PAStour haue authoritie to excommunicate?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Math. 16. v. 19. Thou arte Peter—And whatſoeuer thou shalt S. Peter had authoritie to excommunicate. And S. Paul. binde vpon earth, it shalbe bound alſo in heauen.

1. Timoth. 16. v. vlt. Of whome is Hymenaeus and Alexander whome I haue deliuered to Sathan, that they may learne not to blaſpheme.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton Cont. 2. q. 1. art. vn. The Eccleſiaſticall power firſt, principally, of it ſelfe, and immediatly, is in particular perſons.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Beza in Conf. c. 5. ſect. 43. We muſt remēber, that this power No one man can excommunicate. (of excommunicating) is giuen to no one man, but to the whole companie of the Presbyterie.

Caluin 4. Inſtit. c. 11. §. 5. The ſpirituall power (of excommunicating) muſt not be exerciſed at the pleaſure of one man, but by the lawfull aſſemblie. §. 6. This kinde of power was not in one, but in the aſſemble of the Elders.

Peter Martyr in 1. Cor. 5. v. 4. So great an Apoſtle doth not not take vpon him to excōmunicate of himſelfe and alone: which yet the Pope and manie Bishops dare.

Bucanus in Inſtitut. loco 44. In whome must the power of excommunicating be? not in anie one ether Bishop, or ordained of the Bishop.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that power of binding was giuen to S. Peter: that S. Paul excommunicated or deliuered ſome to Sathan. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that power of excommunicating is in no one mā, Bishop or other: that S. Paul tooke not vpon to excommunicate of himſelfe.

ART. IV. WHETHER PASTOVRS OF the Church haue power to command or make lawes?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Actes 15. v. 28. It hath ſeemed good to the Holie Ghoſt and Paſtours can command. to vs, to lay no further burden vpon you, then theſe neceſſarie things: That you abstaine from the things imolated to idols, and blood, and that which is ſtrangled. And ver. 41. And he (Paul) walked through Syria and Cilicia confirming the Churches, and commanding them to keepe the precepts of the Apoſtles and the Ancients.

1. Theſſalon. 4. v. 11. We deſire you brethren, that you worke with your owne hands, as we haue commanded you. And Epiſtol. 2. cap. 3. verſ. 4. And we haue confidence of you in our Lord, that the things which we command, you both doe and will doe.

1. Cor. 7. v. 12. For to the reſt, I ſay, not our Lord: If any brother haue a wife an infidell, and she conſent to Diuel with him, let him not put her away.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 4. de Pontif. c. 17. The Pope and other Bishops can iudge and make lawes.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Caluin in Antidoto Concilij Seſſ. 6. con. 20. As for laws of They cannot command. the Church, let them looke to them: we acknowledge one lawmaker, who can giue rules of life, as we haue our life from him. In actor. 15. v. 28. The ſottish Papiſts, who out of theſe words would The Church hath no authoritie. No power to make lawes. proue that the Church hath ſome authoritie.

Muſculus in locis c. de Magiſtrat. The Church hath no power to make lawes, but she is commanded to heare and obey.

Luther de Captiuit. to. 2. fol. 76. Nether Pope, nor Bishop, nor any man hath any right to put a tittle vpon a Chriſtian man, vnleſſe it be done by his owne conſent.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely affirmeth, that the Apoſtles put precepts and burdens vpon the faithfull, that S. Paul commanded Chriſtians to keepe them, and that himſelfe commanded diuers things. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that the Church hath no authoritie of lawmaking, hath no power to make laws, that no Bishop or other can command a Chriſtian man any thing but what he will himſelfe.

ART. VIII. WHETHER BISHOPS BE rulers of the Church?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Act. 28. v. 28. The Holie Ghoſt hath placed you Bishops to Bishops rulers of the Church. rule the Church of God.

2. Tim. 1. ver. 11. I am appointed a preacher and Apostle and Maiſter of the Gentils. 7. c. 5. v. 19. Againſt a Preiſts receaue not accuſation, but vnder twoe or three witneſſes.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent ſeſſ. 23. c. 4. Bishops are put of the Holie Ghoſt for to rule the Church of God.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Spalatenſis or Lohetus Reſponſ. ad Marium. cap. 1. The true nature of a head, and the true nature of a ruler, is in no pure No mā ruler of the Church man, one or manie, nether Monarchically nor Ariſtocratically. Of the ſame opinion are others as appeareth by what hath beene ſaied before art. 2. and 4.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Bishops are rulers of the Church, that S. Paul was maiſter of the Gentils, that S. Timothe was iudge of Preiſts. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that no pure man one or manie, can be head or true ruler of the Church.

ART. VI. WHETHER DO RVLE THE true Church of God?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Act. 20. v. 28. The holie Ghoſt hath placed you Bishops to Bishops rule the true Church rule the Church of God which he hath purchaſed with his owne blood.

Epheſ. 4. v. 11. And he gaue other ſome Paſtors and Doctors to the conſummation of the Saints, vnto the worke of the miniſterie, vnto the edifying of the bodie of Chriſt.

Iſaie 62. v. 6. Vpon thy walls, Hieruſalem, I haue appointed watch men.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Ttent Seſſ. 6. c. 1. The Holie Ghoſt hath put all Bishops of Patriarchall, Primatiall, Metropolitan and Cathedrall Churches to rule the Church of God which he hath purchaſed with his blood.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Controu. 2. quaeſt. 2. c. 2. The rule of the Catholik Not the true Church. Church could yet neuer be ſeene. Againe: The Catholik Curch, which containeth onely good men, can nether be ſeene, nor comen vnto, nor ſaluted. And q. 1. c. 10. There are ſome Prelats, who ſay and do not, but theſe are not of the Catholik Church—Bellarmin should remember, that Bishops are Pastors of particular Churches, not of the Catholik Church. Of the ſame opinion are other Proteſtants, who ſay, that the true Church of God is inuiſible to men, for ſuch a Church cannot be ruled of mē: or denie, that anie reprobates, though they be Paſtors, are members of the true Church. For if they were Paſtors of the true Church, certainly they should be alſo members of the ſame and thoſe principall. And if no reprobates be Paſtors of the true Church, nether be any elect: becauſe thoſe Paſtors, which are elect, rule no other Church then that, which thoſe which are reprobate, do. As Saint Peter ruled no other kinde of Church, then Iudas did.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that Bishops rule that Church which Chriſt purchaſed with his blood: that they edifie the bodie of Chriſt: and that there are watch men vpon the walls of Hieruſalem: But Hieruſalem, the bodie of Chriſt, the Church purchaſed with Chriſts blood, is the true Church. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that the rule of the Catholik or true Church is inuiſible, that she cannot be ſeene: that noughtie prelats are not of the Catholik Church: that Bishops are not paſtors of the Catholik Church.

ART. VII. WHETHER PASTOVRS OF the Church be to be called Preiſts?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Iſaie 61. ver. 6. ſpeaking of the time of Ghoſpell, ſaieth: Paſtours of the Church are to be called Preiſts. And you shalbe called the Preiſts of the Lord. To you it shalbe ſaied: The Miniſters of our God. And c. 66. v. 20. 21. And they shall shew forth my glorie to the Gentils—And I will take of thē to be preiſts and leuits, ſaieth our Lord.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Miſſa c. 17. S. Austin ſaieth, that Bishops and Presbyters are properly called Preiſts.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther de Inſtit. Miniſtr. to. 2. fol. 371. Who adminiſter the Not to be called Preiſts. word and Sacraments amongest people, nether may nor ought to be called preiſts.

Caluin 4. Inſtitut. cap. 18. §. 14. With what truſt dare theſe ſacrilegious follows call themſelues preiſts of the liuing God?

Rainalds in his Conference c. 8. diuiſ. 4. They who charge vs with falshood and corruption in that we call the Miniſters of the Ghospell, Elders; are guiltie themſelues of hereſie and blaſphemie, in that they call them Preiſts.

Whitaker l. 9. cont. Dur. ſect. 47. The names of Preiſts or Sacrificers, do no way agree to the Miniſters of the new teſtamēt, but abuſiuely and metonymically.

P. Martyr l. cont. Gardiner col. 1075. We call not our Miniſters, Preists.

Confeſſio Heluet. c. 18. We giue none of our Miniſters the name of Preiſts.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the Paſtors of the Church shalbe called Preiſts: and that ſome of the Gentils shal of God be taken to be Preiſts. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that Paſtors of the Church may not be called Preiſts, that they call none of them Preiſts: that it is ſacrilege, hereſie, and blaſphemie to call them preiſts.

ART. VIII. WHETHER ANY CAN BE a Paſtour and preach without miſſion or calling?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Roman. 10. verſ. 15. But how shall they preach vnleſſe they None can preach without miſsion. be ſent?

Hebr. 5. ver. 5. So Chriſt alſo did not glorifie himſelfe that he might be made a highe preiſt.

Ihon 3. v. 28. A man cannot receaue any thing, vnleſſe it be giuen him from heauen.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

D. Stapleton in Rom. 10. v. 15. The roote of lawfull preaching, is miſsion: nether is there any lawfull power of preaching Gods worde, where lawfull miſsion went not before.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Art. Smalcaldici pag. 353. In caſe of neceſsitie, a lay man abſolueth, In neceſsitie a lay man abſolueth. Some may preach with out miſsion. and becometh Paſtor and Minister to an other.

Luther tom. 2. German. fol. 256. A Chriſtian man hath ſo much power, that not called, he ought to come forth and teach in middeſt of Chriſtians, when he ſeeth the teacher there to erre.

Id. l. de Inſtit. miniſtr. f. 372. We haue shewed euidently, that euerie one hath authoritie to miniſter the worde, yea commandment, if he ſee that there is none to teach, or that they teach not aright, who are. The like ib. l. de Iudic. Eccleſ. 376. & de Captiuit. f. 80. And Poſtilla in die S. Stephani f. 84. Stephen by his example giueth authoritie to euerie Chriſtian to preach Chriſt in what place ſoeuer, where they are deſirous to heare.

Herbrand in Diſp. 11. Euen they who are not lawfully called may preach the word fruitfully.

Melancthon in diſput. to. 4. p. 507. A lay man can abſolue, not onely in caſe of neceſsitie, but otherwhere.

Iacobus Andreae in Colloq. Montisbel. p. 410. In caſe of neceſsitie when Miniſters or other men are abſent, it is lawfull for a woman to comfort a ſick man by preaching, and abſolue him of his ſinnes. Kemnitius alſo 2. port. Exam. tit. de Miniſtris p. 49. ſaieth that it is lawfull in caſe of neceſſitie to preach without lawfull vocation.

Peter Martyr in locis claſ. 4. c. 1. §. 15. When a Church is not yet built and men are ignorant of Chriſtian religion, whoſoeuer shalbe there by chance who know Chriſt, they are bound to preach him: nether is ordination to be expected, ſeing it cannot be had.

Beza de Notis Eccleſ. vol. 3. Then, wilt thou ſay, shall it be lawfull for euerie one in the Church to teach? No truely—But where a generall diſorder rageth vnder colour of order, nether remedie can be expected from the authours of this euill, then ſurely, as when the cittie is on fire, it is the parte of euerie good citizen out of order to bring water and caſt vpon the fire: ſo in this fire of the Church, it is the duetie of euerie pious man according to his power to oppoſe himſelfe to this euill.

Pleſſie de Eccleſ. c. 11. We know, that it is ſaied: How shall they preach vnleſſe they be ſent: But becauſe when all things are done confuſely and out of order, we muſt not looke that all things may be done rightly, and according to ſet order and forme. For ether that the Church be admonished that there need reformation, or that anie particular man take care of his ſaluation, euerie Chriſtian ought to know that he is called to that function by a generall vocation, ſo that he burne with zeale of the glorie of God and charitie to his neighbour.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that none can preach vnleſſe he be ſent, none can take any honour vnleſſe it be giuen to him: that Chriſt made not himſelfe Preiſt or Paſtour. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that one that is not called may fruitfully preach, that any man may preach in caſe of neceſſitie, or when there wanteth a Paſtour, or he erreth, or when there is a generall diſorder, or men are deſirous to heare: that a lay man may abſolue in caſe of neceſſitie and otherwiſe alſo: that in caſe of neceſſitie a lay man becometh a Miniſter and Paſtour: yea that where men want, a woman may preach and abſolue from ſinnes. Which are ſo plainly againſt Scripture as ſome Proteſtants confeſſe it. See l. 2. c. 30.

ART. IX. WHETHER A PASTOVR OF the Church may haue alſo temporall iuriſdiction?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Gen. 14. v. 18. and Hebr. 7. v. 3. Melchiſedech is ſaied to A Paſtour of the Church may haue temporall iuriſdiction. haue beene both a Preiſt and King.

Exod. 18. ver. 13. Moiſes did ſit to iudge the people: And yet withall was a preiſt as we shall shew in the next article. 1. Reg. 1. & 4. Heli is ſaied to haue beene high Preiſt and iudge of the people. The ſame is euidtē of the Machabees.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 5. de Rom. Pont. c. 9. It doth not repugne, that the Pope should be both a ſpirituall Prince, and alſo a temporall Prince of ſome prouince.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Zuinglius Art. 36. to. 1. Iuriſdiction or adminiſtration of He cannot. law which the ſaied Church men do chalenge, belongeth wholy to the ſecular Magiſtrate if he wilbe a Christian. And in explan. art. 36. All adminiſtration of law is forbidden to Church men.

Caluin in Luc. 12. v. 13. So is the robberie of the Pope and his men condemned, who though they pretend to be Paſtours of the Church, notwithſtanding dare take vpon them terrene and profane iuriſdiction, which is contrarie to their function. The ſame he hath 4. Iuſtit. c. 11. §. 8.

Daneus Controu. 4. pag. 560. Let vs shew, that vnder the Goſpell it is not lawfull for Bishops to haue, execute, practiſe, both eccleſiaſticall and politicall iuriſdiction.

Polanus in Diſput priuat. diſput. 13. No man can be at once both a Bishop and a politicall Prince.

Hutterus in Analyſi Confeſ. Auguſtan. p. 622. It is manifeſt, that both powers cannot agree to one and the ſame man at one time.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Melchiſedech was at once both King and Preiſt: that Moiſes was both iudge and preiſt: the ſame of Heli and the Machabees Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that all temporall iuriſdictiō belongeth to the ciuill Magiſtrate: all temporall adminiſtration of law is forbidden to Church men, that the ſame man cannot haue eccleſiaſticall and temporall iuriſdictiō, the ſame man cannot be both Bishop and Prince.

ART. X. WHETHER MOISES WERE a Preiſt?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Pſal. 98. v. 6. Moiſes and Aaron in his Preiſts, and Samuel Moiſes was a Preiſt. among them that inuocate his name.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 5. de Rom. Pont. c. 9. Moiſes was both a ſoueraigne temporall Prince and a high preist, as is euident it out of the Scripture.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 5. c. 4. Nether did Moiſes exerciſe at all He was no Preiſt. the preiſthood, but was onely a Prophet.

Iuel in defenſ. Apol. Part. 6. c. 11. diuiſ. 4. Whether Moiſes were a Preiſt or no, we are not certaine.

Daneus Cont. 4. p. 561. I anſwere that Moiſes had not nor, exerciſed both the functions of Preihſtood and Magiſtrate; but onely the functions of a Magiſtrate and Prophet. The ſame ſaied Hunnius in Colloq. Ratisbon. ſect. 2. Where he addeth, that he ſacrified as a Prophet, not as a Preiſt.

Chamier l. 1. de Pontif. p. 71. I graunt, that Moiſes as ſuperiour to Aaron, but as Magistrat, not as Preiſt.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture ſaieth plainly, that Moiſes was a Preiſt as it ſaieth that Aaron was one. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainly ſay, that Moiſes was no preiſte; exerciſed no preiſthood.

THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF PASTOVRS.

What we haue rehearſed in this Chapter doth shew, that Proteſtants do propoſe farre other kinde of Paſtours to vs then the holie Scripture and Catholiks do: For the Scripture together with Catholiks teacheth vs, that Paſtours are perpetuall, haue in themſelues authoritie to rule the Church, that one ſingle Paſtour hath power to excommunicate, that they haue authoritie to command and make lawes, be true rulers of the Church, do rule the true Church, be to be called Preiſts, cānot be made nor preach without lawfull calling, may haue alſo temporall iuriſdiction, and finally that Moiſes was a Preiſt: All which Proteſtants denie.

They alſo shew that Proteſtants ſteale from the Paſtors of the Church their perpetuitie, their authoritie, their power to excommunicate in particular, their authoritie to command and make lawes, their true power of ruling, or ruling the true Church, their name of Preiſts and temporall iuriſdictiō: and finally from Moiſes, his Preiſthood. And thus much of Paſtours: now of the Church.

CHAPTER VII. OF THE CHVRCH.

ART. I. WHETHER THE CHVRCH be one?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

I HON 10. v. 16. There shalbe made one fould and One Church. one Paſtor.

Rom. 12. v. 5. So we being manie, are one bodie in Chriſt.

Epheſ. 2. v. 16. That he may reconcile both in one bodie to God by the croſſe.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton Controu. 1. quaeſtion. 2. artic. 1. The Catholik doctrine is, that there is one onely Church which we profeſſe in the Creed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Controu. 2. quaeſt. 1. cap. 7. pag 432. There Twoe Churches. muſt needs be one Church of the wicked, an other of the good. And cap. 14. pag. 453. Where (Auſtin) ſaieth, that which we ſay, that there are twoe ſocieties of men in the world, that is, twoe Churches. To the one, belonge the predeſtinate; to the other, the reprobate.

Humfrey ad Ration 3. Campiani. We haue shewed, that This, and that. Caluin and our Churches put not onely that inuiſible Church, but alſo this which is viſible and apparent by her notes.

Morton in Apol. part. 1. l. c. 1. The queſtion is, whether that Church which in our Creed we beleiue and profeſſe to be one holie and catholik be inuiſible, and neceſſarily diſtinct frō any viſible Church. Protestants affirme: Papiſts denie. And cap. 3. Manie are in the viſible Church who haue nothing to doe with the inuiſible. Therefore there muſt be admitted ſome inuiſible Church, out of which they are, diſtinct from that, in which they are.

Magdeburgenſes Centuria 1. l. 2. c. 4. col. 171. Chriſt and Twoe Churches. the things themſelues teach vs, that there are twoe Churches

Geſnerus in Compendio doctrinae loco 24. Thē will there be twoe Churches, one viſible, the other inuiſible? We muſt needs diſtinguish betwene the viſible congregation of them that are called, embrace the Sacraments, and profeſſe the pure word of God, and betwene the true faithfull and elect.

Vrſinus in Catechiſmo p. 343. The militant Church is twoefould, viſible, and inuiſible. The viſible is the companie of thoſe that agree in doctrine, hauing manie members dead or not regenerate: The inuiſihle, is the companie of the elect and regenerate.

Daneus Cont. 4. p. 707. But if this man be of that opinion, Twoe Churches. that Auſtin doth not acknowledge twoe Churches, the one viſible in which euen the reprobate are, an other inuiſible in which onely, thoſe are who are predeſtinated of God to ſaluation, he is much deceaued.

Vorſtius in Antibellarm. p. 124. One diſtinction ſeparateth the true and internall Church of Chriſt, which wholy conſiſteth of the elect and true beleiuers, from the extern • ll companie of profeſſors, which often times hath manie reprobates: albeit alſo it may be not without cauſe called the true Church of Chriſt, by reaſon of profeſsing true doctrine.

And ſeing all Proteſtants deuide the Church into viſible and inuiſible, and do not onely profeſſe, that the inuiſible Church is a true Church, but alſo ſometimes call the viſible, a true Church, properly ſo termed, and the ſp • uſe and bodie of Chriſt, as I shewed l. de Authore Proteſtant. Eccleſ. 2. cap. 6. they muſt needs confeſſe, that they make Viſible and inuiſible Church diſtinct. In partes. twoe true Churches militant, which in their opinion differ in partes or members, in definition, and in manie proprieties. For according to them, the partes or mēbers of the inuiſible Church, are onely iuſt and predeſtinate men: partes or members of the viſible Church, are both iuſt and vniuſt, predeſtinate and reprobate. The definition of the inuiſible Church, is this: A Societie in iuſtifying faith and predeſtination: The definition of the viſible, this: In Definitiō. A Societie in profeſſion of true faith and lawfull vſe of Sacraments. The inuiſible, is knowne onely to God: The viſible, to God and mē alſo. Againſt the inuiſible, the gates In Proprieties. of hell cannot preuaile: againſt the viſible, they may. She cannot be led into error, at leſt not into fundamentall error: This may. She cannot wholy perish, this may. She is beleiued of Proteſtants in the Creed, not this. She hath no viſible notes whereby she may be diſtinguished from other Societies, this hath. If therefore both theſe Societies be true Churches before God, there muſt needs be twoe true militante Churches. For one cannot differ from it ſelfe, in partes, definition, and in ſo manie and ſo great proprieties.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainly ſaieth, that Chriſts fould is one, that Chriſtians are one miſticall bodie. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants plainly ſay, that there are twoe Churches, a twoefould Church, one of the wicked an other of good: or one of the predeſtinate an other of the reprobate: that there is this and that Church, viſible and inuiſible.

ART. VII. WHETHER BAD MEN MAY be in the true Church?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Math. 13. ver. 47. The kingdome of heauen is like to a net caſt B • d men in the Church. into the ſea, and gathering together of all kinde of fishes. Which when it was filled, drawing it forth and ſitting by the shore▪ they choſe out the good into veſſels, but the badde they caſt out. So shall it be in the conſummation of the world.

Matth. 3. v. 12. Whoſe fanne is in his hand, and he shall cleane Chaffe in Gods flore. purge his flore; and will gather his wheat into the barne, but the chaffe he will burne with vnquenchable fire.

1. Cor. 6. v. 15. Know you not that your bodies are the members of Chriſt? Taking therefore the members of Chriſt, shall I make them the mēbers of an harlot? God forbidde. c. 10. v. 17. For All Communicants, one bodie. being manie, we are one bread, one bodie all that participate of one bread. The ſame is euident by what hath beene ſaied before of Iudas.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton Controu. 1. q. 2. art. 5. The orthodoxall ſentence is, that the true Church which we beleiue in our Creed, conſiſteth of good and badde.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 1. cap. 7. The Church conſisteth of the The bad no members of the Church. good onely. The bad are not members of the true Church. c. 11. The godlie are no more ioyned in one bodie with the wicked, then light with darkneſſe, Chriſt with Belial. c. 13. In the triumphāt Church are onely good, ſo likewiſe in the militant. Et q. 5. c. 3. The wicked Belonge to the Church. belong not to the Church of God.

Rainalds theſ. 4. The wicked are no parte of the bodie of Chriſt, therefore nether of the Church. And in Apologia theſ. pag. 244. The Church propoſed in the Creed, containeth onely Saintes.

Apologia Conf. Auguſtan. de Eccleſ. The wicked cannot be the Church.

Luther in Pſal. 118. tom. 7. Who hath not true faith, is not a Pertaine not to the Church. Saint and iuſt, pertaineth not to the holie Church.

Caluin 4. Inſtit. c. 1. § 7. None are admitted into that which is indeed the Church before God, but they who by grace of adoption are the Sonnes of God.

Peter Martyr in locis claſ. 4. c. 1. §. 1. We auouch, that ſuch Not partes of the Church. men (wicked) are not indeed and before God partes of the Church. In 1. Cor. 1. Onely Saintes are truely and before God of the Church, the wicked in onely shew and not indeed belonge to the Church.

Daneus Cont. 4. p. 706. That which is the true Church, conſiſteth of Saintes alone.

Volanus l. 3. cont. Scargam. Confeſſe, that in name onely, In name onely members of the Church. and not indeed (as thou falſely thinkeſt) they are reputed amongst the members of the Church of God, who being by nature goates are hidden vnder the name of Chriſts sheepe in his flock. And he addeth, that ſuch are worthily, iudged to couer themſelues with the vaine and vnprofitable maske of the Church.

Muſculus in locis tit. de Eccleſ. Not ſo much as the name of the Church is to be giuen to the wicked and reprobate.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that badde men are in the Church as badde fishes in the net, and as chaffe in the flore: that the bodies of thoſe Chriſtians who commit fornicatiō, are members of Chriſt: that all who eate of one Euchariſticall bread, are one bodie. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that badde mē are not members of the true Church, pertaine not to the holie Church, are not indeed & before God partes of the Church, onely in shew, and not indeed belonge to the Church, in name onely and not indeed are reputed among the members of the Church, couer thēſelues with the vaine maske of the Church, deſerue not ſo much as the name of the Church: that they are not ioyned in one bodie with the godlie, are no parte of the bodie of Chriſt: That the Church, the Church propoſed in the Creed, the Church indeed and before God, the true Church, conſiſteth onely of good men and Saints.

ART. III. WHETHER REPROBATES may be in true Church?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

The parables cited in the former article of the net and Reprobates in Gods net, in his flore, and his diſciples. the flore, and the example of Iudas shew manifeſtly, that reprobates may be in the true Church.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton Cont. 1. q. 2. art. 1. The Catholik doctrine is, that there is but one Church which we profeſſe in our Creed, and that she conſiſteth of the elect and reprobate.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 1. c. 7. We ſay, that the Church conſiſteth Reprobates not of the Church indeed. not of reprobates, but of onely predestinate. Agayne. A reprobate may ſeeme to be of the Church, but he cannot be indeed of the Church. And q. 5. c. 3. That is a falſe Church, which conſiſteth of reprobates.

Rainalds in Apol. Theſ. p. 170. I determine, that the elect alone are contained in the Church of the Creed.

M. Perkins. de praedeſt. tom. 1. col. 154. A reprobate is but in Onely in shew members of the Church. shew onely a member of Chriſt.

Abbats in Diatribam Thomſoni c. 8. Reprobates are not reputed in the Church.

Caluin in 1. Ioan. 2. v. 19. Ihon plainly pronounceth, that they Neuer members of the Church. who falle away, were neuer members of the Church.

Beza in Confeſ. cap. 5. ſect. 8. As for the rest (Beſide the elect) they are not be numbred among the members of the Church, albeit they were Apoſtles.

Daneus Cont. 4. p. 689. The true Church of God containeth onely his elect.

Pareus Colloq. Theol. 1. diſput. 12. The reprobate are not truely and indeed of the Church, nor belonge vnto it before God. Not truely of the Church.

Sadeel in Refutat. Poſnan. c. 4. Reprobates pertaine not to the true Church. And Muſculus in the former article, will not ſo much as the name of the Church to be beſtowed vpon the reprobates.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that thoſe who are to be be caſt out and to be burnt with vnquenchable fire, that is, reprobates, are in the kingdome of heauen and in the flore of God, that is, in his Church. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that reprobates are not in the Church, not in the true Church, not in the Church of the Creed, not indeed, not before Good: that the Church, the true Church containeth onely the elect: that the re-reprobates onely in shew and apparence can be of the Church, that they deſerue not the name of the Church that she is a falſe Church which conſiſteth of the reprobates.

ART. IV. WHETHER THE CHVRCH continueth euer?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Mathew 16. verſ. 18. Thou art Peter, and vpon this rock Church, inuincible. will I build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not preuaile againſt it.

Luke 1. v. 33. And he shall reigne in the houſe of Iacob for Shall haue no end. euer, and of his kingdome there shalbe no end.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton Cont. 1. q. 3. art. 2. The Church of Chriſt continueth to the end of the world.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Apologie of the Church of England. Longe agoe hath The whole Church cleane fallen downe. the Bishop of Rome willed to haue the whole Church depend vpō himſelfe alone: wherefore it is no meruaile though it be cleane fallen downe longe agoe. Agayne. When we likewiſe ſaw, that all thinges were quite troden vnderfoote by theſe men, and that nothing remained in the temple of God but pittifull ſpoiles and decaies, we reckoned &c.

Cartwright in Whitgifts Defenſe p. 217. When Antichriſt Rooted out from the ground. had rooted out the Church euen from the ground &c.

Luther in c. 49. Geneſ. tom. 6 The Pope hath extinguished the Church.

Caluin cont. Sadolet. p. 132. The matter came to that paſſe, that it was cleare and manifeſt both to the learned and vnlearned, Chriſt kingdome flat downe. that the true order of the Church thē perished, Chriſts kingdome was cast flat downe, when this principalitie (of the Pope) was erected.

Beza in Conf. c. 5. ſect. 29. But for that horrible tyranie (of the Popedome) which ouerthrew the whole Church and whicb almoſt alone doth ſtay her renewing we &c.

Daneus in l. Auguſtini de Haereſ. c. 95. About the yeare of our lord 574. aroſe this deſtruction, plague, and tyranie of the Rooted out from the foundation. whole Church, which after rooted out the kingdome of Chriſt from the foundation.

Chaſſanio l. 2. de Eccleſia p. 151. It is falſe: That the Church shall neuer be broken of. More of ther like ſayings may be ſeene in my 2. booke of the Author of the Proteſtant religion c. 1. Where alſo c. 2. I haue refuted their euaſions.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the gates of hell shall not pre • aile againſt the Church. that there shalbe no end of the kingdome of Chriſt. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that the whole Church was cleane fallen downe long agoe: that nothing remained in the temple of God but pittifull ſpoiles & decaies: that the Church was rooted out from the ground: the Church extinct, the whole Church ouerthrowne, the whole Church deſtroied: that the kingdome of Chriſt was caſt flat downe and rooted out from the foundation: which are ſo contrarie to the Scripture as ſometimes Proteſtants confeſſe no leſſe. See lib. 2. cap. 30.

ART. V. WHETHER THE CHVRCH BE alwaies viſible.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Matth. 5. verſ. 15. Chriſt thus ſpeaketh to his diſciples or Church cannot be hiddē. Church: You are the light of the world. A cittie cannot be hidde ſituated vpon a mountaine.

And c. 18. v. 17. And if he will not heare them, tell the Church, And if he will not heare the Church, let him be to thee as the Heathen and the Publican.

Iſaie 62. v. 6. Vpon thy walles, Hieruſalem, I haue appointed Wacth mē for euer in the Church. wachmen, all the day and all the night for euer they shall not hould their peace.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton Cont. 1. q. 3. art. 1. The Church which we are to beleiue, muſt neceſſarily alwaies be viſible. There muſt alwaies be a viſible Church.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 2. c. 1. Their (Papiſts) opinion is, that Militant Church inuiſible. the militant Church is alwaies viſible. But we teach, that the whole Church, that is, the Catholik, is inuiſible, not onely the triumphant parte, but alſo the militant. Et q. 4. c. 1. We confeſſe, that there is alwaies on earth ſome number of them who piouſly worshippe Chriſt, and hould the true faith and religion: but we ſay, that this member is not alwaies viſible. Their (Papiſts) opinion is that there is perpetually ſome viſible Church on earth.

Caluin in Praefat. Inſtit. Papiſts will haue the forme of the Church not apparent. Church to be alwaies apparent and viſible: we on the contrarie affirme, that the Church may conſiſt of no apparent forme. Et in Catechiſmo c. de fide. She is not alwaies ſeene with eyes, diſcerned by markes.

Daneus Cont. 4. l. 3. c. 12. Oftentimes God will haue ſome viſible Oftentimes no viſible Church. Church on earth, oftentimes none. And l. 4. c. 8. The 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 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 ſtrāger, 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 shalbe 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 d • 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 templorū. The errour Not to be adorned. (of adorning temples) began to be ſtrange in Conſtantins time: and the Fathers thē 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.

Proteſtāts 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 shalbe vpon the arke of teſtimonie, all things which I will cōmand 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 are to be had and kept, eſpecially in Churches.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Iuel. art. 14. ſect. 2. The Iewes had no manner of Image, nether painted nor grauen in their temples.

Luther in Deuteron. 7. to. 3. I do not much loue images, and would they were not in Churches.

Zuinglius l. de ver. & falſ. relig. c. de Statuis. Images muſt Not in tēples be taken out of Churches.

Sadeel ad Art. 59. Abiurat. God abhorreth images.

Peter Martyr in locis tit. de Cult. Imaginum §. 22. We muſt not ſuffer, that Images be had in Churches.

And in this point the Proteſtants doctrine is well enough knowne by their deeds: yea ſome of them goe ſo farre as they denie that we may paint any Images of Chriſt or the Saints. For thus ſaieth Leo Iudae in Zuinglius to. 2. f. 627. If Christ and his Saints be in heauen, it is wickednes euen to make their images. With whome agreeth Zuinglius ib. 630. Hoffman alſo ib. f. 631. ſaieth: That good man thinketh, that images may be kept and ſuffered, ſo that none do adore or worshippe thē. But this opinion is contrarie to the teſtimonies of Scripture, wherein the Lord commandeth that we shall not make them. The ſame intimateth Confeſſio Heluet. c. 4.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that God commanded twoe Images of Angels to be made and put in the Oracle: that Salomon made twoe others, and put them in the middeſt of the inner temple. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that God abhorreth images, that they are not to be ſuffered in Churches, no that the Images of Chriſt and his Saintes are to be made: that the Iewes had no manner of Images in their temple.

ART. IV. WHETHER THE HEATHENS or Idolaters did thinke their Idols to be Gods.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Exod 32. v. 8. God himſelfe thus ſpeaketh vnto Moiſes: They haue made to themſelues a molten calfe, and haue adored, and immolating hoſtes vnto it, haue ſaied: Theſe are thy Gods, Iſrael, that haue brought thee out of the land of Egypt.

Actes 19. v. 26. Demetrius a Heathen hath theſe words: Heathens thought theirs Idols to be Gods. Sirs you ſee and heare, that this ſame Paul by perſuaſion hath auerted a great multitude, not onely of Epheſus, but almoſt of all Aſia, ſaying: That they are no Gods which be made by hands.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 2. de Imagin. c. 13. It is falſe, that the Heathens did not thinke the idols to be Gods.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Caluin 1. Inſtit. c. 11. §. 9. Nether are the Heathēs to be thought They thought not ſo. to haue beene ſo blockish, as that they knew not, that God was an other thing then ſtones and ſtockes.

Daneus Controuer. 7. p. 1394. It is a lie, that the Heathens did beleiue the Images of their Gods to haue beene their Gods themſelues.

Zuinglius in Reſp. ad Valentin. to. 1. f. 247. The Heathens did no more account their Idols to be Gods, then now we vſe to account of our Images. The like ſay Peter Martyr Controu. Gardiner. col. 396. and Sadeel ad art. 59. abiurat.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely teacheth, that the idolaters did ſay, that their molten calfe was their God, that Demetrius a Heathen reprehēded S. Paul, becauſe he tought, that they were no Gods which were made by mens hands. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that the Heathēs did not thinke ſtocks or ſtones to be their Gods: that it is a lie, that they thought the images of their Gods to be Gods themſelues. And yet theſe men, who againſt the plaine teſtimonie of Scripture do defend the Heathens, do accuſe the Catholiks that they make Images their God.

THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF TEMPLES or materiall Churches.

Out of that which we haue rehearſed in this Chapter, it appeareth, that Proteſtants haue other kind of temples, then the Scripture and Catholiks haue. For the Scripture and Catholiks teach, that temples or Churches are alſo for priuat praier, that they are to be adorned, and that images of Angels or Saintes are to be put in them: all which Proteſtants denie: and conſequently they robe the Churches of one of their ends for which they are inſtituted, and of their ornaments and holie Images.

CHAPTER IX. OF BAPTISME.

ART. I. WHETHER WATER BE neceſſarie to Baptiſme?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

I HON 3. v. 5. Vnleſſe a man be borne againe of Water neceſſarie to baptiſme. water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdome of God.

Epheſ. 5. v. 26. As Chriſt alſo loued the Church & deliuered himſelfe for it, that he might ſanctifie it, cleanſing it by the lauer of water in the word.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent ſeſſ. 7. com. 2. If anie ſay, that true and naturall water is not neceſſarie to baptiſme, be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Beza Epiſtola 2. vol. 3. Theol. Though water be wanting, if Not neceſſarie. the baptiſme of one cannot nor ought to be differred with edification, ſurely I would as well baptize with any other liquor as with water.

Polanus in Sylloge Theſ. part. 2. p. 556. The externall and ſenſible matter of baptiſme, is water, and that wanting an other liquor proportionable.

Feſtus Homius in Diſput. 45. We do not greatly denie, but where no water can be had, there ſome other liquor which hath the ſome vſe that water hath, and is very proportionable thereto, may be vſed in the place thereof.

Vorſtius in Antibellarm. p. 367. Bellarmin and his do more reſtraine this eſſence of baptiſme, then our men are wonte to doe; Whiles he auoucheth, that pure water and that ſolemne forme: In the name of the Father &c. is ſimply in all places and times preciſely neceſſarie. Agayne. Extraordinarily and in ſome moſt rare and vnuſuall caſes, we do not deny, but that ſome other kind of liquor, which hath the ſame vſe that water hath, may be vſed. The ſame teacheth Luther in Colloq. Menſal. cap. 15. and Riuet iudgeth it probable tractat. 3. ſect. 3. Nether is it diſliked by Saddel ad Artic. abiurat. 11.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that vnleſſe one be borne againe of water, he cannot enter into the kingdome of heauen: that Chriſt cleanſeth his Church with the lauer of water. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that water is not ſimply neceſſarie: that extraordinarily and in caſe of neceſſitie one may baptize in other liquor as well as in water: that where water wanteth, an other liquor proportionable may ſuffice. Which is ſo euident a contradiction of Scripture, as Proteſtants themſelues ſometimes confeſſe it. See lib. 2. cap. 30.

ART. II. WHETHER INVOCATION of the holie Trinitie, be neceſſarie in baptiſme?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Matthew 28. ver. 19. Going teach ye all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Sonne, and of the Holie Ghoſt.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Catechiſmus ad Parochos cap. de baptiſmo. Paſtors shall teach, that this is the perfect and abſolute forme of baptiſme: I baptize the in the name of the Father &c. and afterward addeth, that this forme doth eſpecially pertaine to the ſubſtance of baptiſme.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther l. de Captiuit. Babil. tom. 2. fol. 75. Howſoeuer baptiſme •• s Not neceſſarie. giuen, ſo that it be not giuen in the name of a man but in the name of God, it truely ſaueth: Nay I doubt not, but if one take it in the name of the Lord, albeit a wicked Miniſter do not giue it in the name of the Lord, that he is truely baptized in the name of the Lord.

Zuinglius ad Struthionem to. 2. f. 312. Nether am I ignorant, that the Apoſtles did not acknowledge theſe words (In the name of the Father &c.) for ſuch, as without them baptiſme could not ſtand. De baptiſmo ib. fol. 65. It is euident, that theſe words of Chriſt, which he vſeth Mathew c. 28. are not ſo to be taken, as if they were a certaine forme of baptiſme. And fol. 77. It shall appeare, that Chriſt would not, that in baptizing we should vſe this forme of words: I baptize thee in the name of the Father &c.

Caluin de ver. reform. p. 235. Papiſts diſputing about the forme of baptiſme, ſtand vpon the bare pronunciation of the words, as if Chriſt, when he commanded the Apoſtles to baptize in the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the Holie Ghoſt, had preſcribed them I know not what magicall charme.

Vorſtius in Antibellarm. pag. 366. According to our mens opinion nothing els is required to the eſſence a baptiſme, but the plunging of that man into the water, who is mynded publikely to profeſſe Chriſt. p. 367. About the forme (of baptiſme) if that muſt be eſſentiall, here we plainly diſagree. For indeed it no way conſiſteth in that pronuntiation of words, but in the immerſion of the man or the ſprinckling of him with water done in the name of Christ or of the holie Trinitie.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely teacheth, that Chriſt commanded to baptize in the name of the holie Trinitie. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants plainly teach, that inuocation of the holie Trinitie is not eſſentiall to baptiſme: that baptiſme howſoeuer giuen in the name of God, nay though it be not giuen in Gods name, ſo it be taken in Gods name, is true baptiſme: that baptiſme may conſiſt without inuocation of the holie Trinitie: that Chtiſt preſcribed no certaine forme of words, nor would that we should vſe the foreſaied words whiles we baptize: that to ſtand vpon it, is to make it a magicall charme. Which contradiction of Scripture is ſo cleare, as ſome Proteſtants confeſſe it: As you may ſee infra l. 2. c. 30.

ART. III. WHETHER BAPTISME BE neceſſarie by neceſſitie of precept?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Math. 28. v. 19. Going teach ye all nations, baptizing them Baptiſme neceſſarie by cōmandment. in the name of the Father &c.

Act. 2. verſ. 38. Be euerie one of you baptized in the name of Ieſus Chriſt for remiſsion of your ſinnes.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſion. 7. Can. 5. If anie shall ſay, that baptiſme is free, that is, not neceſſarie to ſaluation be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Cont. q. 47. c. 2. It is lawfull to abſtaine from baptiſme, Not neceſſarie by commandment. ſo there be no contempt or ſcandall in the fact.

Caſaubon Epiſtola ad Card. Perron. Manie (Proteſtants) put baptiſme amongſt thoſe things, which whether they be abſent or preſent it skilleth not much.

Bucer in Math. 9. I anſwere, that baptiſme as an externall thing is of leſſe importance, then that the Lord should haue greatly commanded anie thing about it.

Zuinglius de Baptiſmo tom. 2. fol. 96. Baptiſme is a ceremoniall thing, which the Church may well omit or take away.

OEcalampadius l. 2. Epiſt. pag. 363. It is an externall thing, which the law of Charitie may diſpenſe with.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely teacheth: that Chriſt and the Apoſtles commanded baptiſme. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants plainely teach, that Chriſt did not greatly commande any thing about baptiſme: that the Church may well take it away: that we may abſtaine from it, ſo there be no contempt or ſcandall: and that it skilleth not much whether we haue it or want it.

ART. IV. WHETHER BAPTISME be neceſſarie to ſaluation in neceſſitie of means?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Ihon 3. verſ. 5. Amen, Amen, I ſay to thee: Vnleſſe a man Baptiſme a neceſſa • ie meane to ſaluation. be borne againe of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdome of God.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent. Seſſ. 6. c. 4. Which transferring (from iniuſtice to iuſtice) after the promulgation of the Ghoſpell, cannot be done without the lauer of regeneratiō, or deſire thereof.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 6. cap. 8. The ſaluation of infants doth Not a neceſſarie meane. not depend of the Sacraments. And l. 8. cont. Dureum. ſect. 73. Who now exclude infantes dying before baptiſme from life, ſpeake againſt Scriptures, againſt Gods mercie, and againſt the ancient cuſtome. And he ſaieth that Proteſtants reiect the Catholik doctrine of neceſſitie of baptiſme, as impious and inhumane.

Confeſſion of Scotland. pag. 159. We deteſt and reiect his (Popes) cruell iudgment againſt infants dying without baptiſme: and the abſolute neceſsitie of baptiſme which he putteth.

Caluin in Marci 16. v. 16. We ſay that baptiſme is not ſimply neceſſarie, but in regard of our obedience. And 4. Inſtit. cap. 15. §. 12. Children, who dye before they be chriſtened, are not shut out Childrē ſaued without baptiſme. of the kingdome of God.

Beza cont. Weſtphal. vol. 1. p. 256. If anie mans childe die before he be chriſtened, we doubt not of his ſaluation. And in 2. part. reſp. ad Acta Colloq. Montisbel. p. 128. The question is, whether baptiſme be ſimply and abſolutely neceſſarie to ſaluation, which I, with all right beleiuers do denie.

Peter Martyr in Theſ. pag. 1008. Christians children are ſaued, howbeit they dye before they be baptized.

Daneus Cont. de baptiſmo cap. 4. We accurſe them, who bring in abſolute neceſsitie of baptiſme. Et c. 8. It is blaſphemie, that baptiſme is preciſely neceſſarie to ſaluation.

Vorſtius in Antibellarm. p. 368. Our men openly diſclaime from Papiſts that vrge the abſolute neceſsitie of baptiſme.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely teacheth, that the water of baptiſme in neceſſarie for one to enter into the kingdome of God. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtāts plainely teach, that Baptiſme is not neceſſaire to ſaluation; not ſimply not abſolutely, not preciſely neceſſarie: that infants are ſaued without baptiſme: and that the contrarie doctrine is againſt Scripture, impious, inhumane, and to be deteſted.

ART. V. WHETHER SIMON MAGVS receaued, or reprobates receaue whole and intire baptiſme.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Act. 8. ver. 13. Then Simon alſo himſelfe beleiued, and being baptized, he cleaued to Philippe. Simon Magus was baptized.

Actes 2. verſ. 38. S. Peter ſpeaketh without diſtinction of elect or reprobates. Be euerie one of you baptized in the name of Ieſus Chriſt: And verſ. 41. They therefore that receaued his word were baptized. So cap. 8. verſ. 12. They were baptized men and weomen.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Card. Bellarm. lib. 3. de Iuſtificat. cap. 14. Simon Magus conuerted by Philippe and bapsized, did follow Philippe, as Luke writeth.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Beza cont. Illyric. vol. 2. Theol. p. 144. What thou writeſt, that Simon Peter and Simon Magus receaued the ſame whole Not fully baptized. baptiſme, is moſt falſe. And p. 131. We do not acknowledge, that the Sacraments are intirely receaued of the incredulous. In Colloq. Montisbel. p. 118. I graunt, that the intire ſacraments are offered not onely to the godlie but alſo to the vngodlie, but not receaued intirely of the vngodlie. And in 2. part. Reſp. ad acta Colloq. Montisbel. p. 91. The whole ſacrament is not receaued of the vnworthie. Beſides ib. p. 110. he ſayeth, that the inwarde ablution of the Holie Ghoſt is an eſſentiall parte of baptiſme: And p. 41. & ſeqq. & in Colloq pag. 355. & ſeqq. oftentimes repeateth, that the blood of Chriſt is the principall and moſt eſſentiall parte of baptiſme: And will not that the reprobates receaue ether inward ablutiō or the blood of Chriſt: And therefore will not that reprobates receaue the whole eſſence of baptiſme. Moreouer in 2. parte cit. p. 76. he writeth thus: We ſay, that Baptiſme is the ſeale of remiſsion and generation, but not in euerie one, nor alwaies. And in his opinion, it is eſſentiall to baptiſme to be this kinde of ſeale and conſequently baptiſme is not true eſſentiall baptiſme in euerie one.

Peter Martyr cont. Gardiner. col. 970. writeth, that Baptiſme conſiſteth of water and remiſſion of ſinnes: Which remiſſion he will not haue to be giuen to reprobats. And therefore col. 853. ſaieth: If one would ſpeake exactly, he should ſay, that the impious do not receaue the whole ſacrament but onely one parte thereof.

Piſcator in Reſponſ. ad Buſcherum c. 10. The faith of the receauer pertaineth to the ſubſtance of the Sacrament But they will not admit that reprobates haue faith, and therefore haue not the whole ſubſtance of the Sacrament.

Beſides, Sacramentaries commonly teach, that Chriſt is the matter and ſubſtance of the Sacraments, and namely of the Euchariſt: So expreſſely teacheth Caluin l. de Caena p. 2. and 4. Inſtit. c. 17. § 11. Peter Martyr cont. Gardiner. col. 655. 755. Confeſſio Heluet. c. 19. and Conſeſsio Baſileenſis art. 20. But they denie, that the impious or reprobates receaue Chriſt, and conſequently muſt ſay, that nether the impious nor the reprobates receaue intire baptiſme or Euchariſt. Whereupon Bucer apud Hoſpin. part. 2. Hiſtor. fol. 147. ſaied; That ſuch impious as are quite impious, receaue nothing but bread and wine. And the like they muſt ſay of baptiſme, and conſequently they should rebaptize ſuch as were quite impious when they were baptized, as not receauing the whole ſubſtance of baptiſme; without which baptiſme is no true baptiſme. Which may be alſo confirmed by that which Pareus ſaieth: Colloq. Theol. 1. diſput. 15. That Sacraments nether ſignifie nor ſeale, and much leſſe do giue, any thinge to the incredulous. Such therefore as were incredulous when they were baptized, ought to be baptized againe, as not hauing receaued ether the ſigne or ſeale of baptiſme.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the reprobate Simon Magus was baptized, and that diuers others were baptized without making any diſtinction betweene the elect or reprobates amongſt them. The ſame ſay Catholiks. Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that Simon Magus had not whole baptiſme: that the impious or reprobats do not receaue the whole ſacraments: that if we will ſpeak exactly we muſt ſay, that the impious receaue but a parte of the Sacrament.

ART. VI. WHETHER BAPTISME BE effectuall in the reprobates, or profit them anything.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Gal. 3. v. 27. For as manie of you as are baptized in Chriſt, haue Baptiſme effectuall in euerie one. put on Chriſt.

Act. 2. v. 38. S. Peter ſpeaketh thus without anie diſtinction of elect. or reprobate. Be euerie one of you baptized in the name of Ieſus Christ for remiſsion of your ſinnes, and you shall receaue the guift of the Holie Ghoſt.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Card. Bellarm. lib. 3. de Iuſtificat. cap. 14. All infants are truely iuſtified by baptiſme. And lib. 2. de Grat. cap. 16. Originall ſinne is truely remitted to many reprobates by the grace of baptiſme.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Caluin de Rat. Concordiae p. 664. The Sacraments to the elect are helpsto ſaluatiō, others they profit nothing. De Cōſenſ. Profiteth nothing to reprobates. Sacramentor. p. 754. Wediligently teach, that God doth not indifferentlie put forth his power in all that receaue the Sacraments, but onely in the elect. And p. 761. The Sacraments profit not indifferently all, but onely the elect of God. Devera reform. p. 325. Who admit others (beſide the elect) to baptiſme, do profane it. And addeth pag. 349. that baptiſme, was not appointed for the reprobate.

Beza in Colloq. Motisbel. pag. 385. Whome God hath not elected, albeit they were baptized a thouſand times with the externall baptiſme of water, yet faith and the Holie Ghoſt would Baptiſme effectuall onely in the elect. neuer be giuen to them. And ib. and other where often: The power of baptiſme sheweth it ſelfe onely in the elect. And in 2. part. reſp. ad acta Colloq. Montisbel. p. 89. Faith and grace of baptiſme is not giuen to all infants that are lawfully baptized. Manie thouſand infants baptized and not regenerated. Which he repeateth p. 90. and 97. And in Colloq. cit. pa. 393. Manie thouſande of infants receaue baptiſme, who yet are neuer regenerated. Whereupon ib. p. 377. he writeth thus: We can onely probably affirme, that infants who are baptized, receaue the fruite of adoption.

Zanchius de Praedeſt. c. 6. to. 7. maketh this concluſion. To thoſe, who are not elect baptiſme bringeth no cōmoditte, nor the praiers made for them of the Church. And in Confeſſ. c. 15. to. 8. We beleiue, that all are baptized with water; but the elect onely with the ſpirit.

Muſculus in locis tit. de Baptiſme. None, I thinke, is ſo madde, as to ſay, that the Holie Ghoſt doth, euē in the reprobates whiles they are baptized, worke the effect of his grace which is appointed for the elect and faithfull.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that whoſoeuer are baptized in Chriſt, do put on Chriſt: that euerie one (without diſtinction of elect or reprobate) may be baptized for remiſſion of ſinnes. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that Sacraments profit onely the elect and giue nothing to others: that baptiſme is appointed for the elect alone: that the reprobate though they were baptized a thouſand times should not receaue grace: that manie thouſands of infantes are baptized and not regenerated: that onely the elect are baptized with the Spirit and that the cōtrarie is madneſſe. Which is ſo oppoſite to Scripture as the holie Fathers pronounce that he is no Catholik who ſaieth, that baptiſme doth not take Proſper ad c. vlt. Gallor. away ſinne in the baptized reprobats: and manie Proteſtants confeſſe it to be cōtrarie to Scripture. See l. 2. c. 30.

ART. VII. WHETHER BAPTISME CLEANSETH or washeth away ſinnes?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Epheſ. 5. v. 26. Chriſt loued the Church, and deliuered himſelfe Baptiſme cleanſeth. for it, that he might ſanctifie it, cleanſing it by the lauer of water in the word.

Tit, 3. v. 5. According to his mercie he hath ſaued vs by the Saueth. lauer of regeneration, and renouation of the Holie Ghoſt.

1. Peter 3. verſ. 21. Whereunto baptiſme being of the like ſorte Remitteth ſinnes. now ſaueth you alſo.

Act. 2. v. 38. Be euerie one of you baptized in the name of Ieſus Washeth ſinnes. Chriſt for remiſsion of your ſinnes. c. 22. v. 17. Riſe vp; and be baptized, and wash away thy ſinnes.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Catechiſmus ad Parochos. c. de baptiſmo: This muſt be firſt deliuered: that ſinne, whether it be originally contracted frō our firſt parēts, or committed of vs, though it were ſo haynous as ſcarce could be imagined, is remitted and forgiuen by the admirable vertue of this Sacrament of baptiſme.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 1. c. 9. We do not get health by the outward baptiſme. Etib. c. 9. God forbidde, that any attribute that Baptiſme auaileth not. to the outward Sacrament, which belongeth to ſpirituall grace. Etib. q. 6. c. 3. Baptiſme of it ſelfe auaileth infants nothing to ſaluation, nor infuſeth faith or any grace into them.

Perkins in Gal. 3. to. 2. col. 171. Baptiſme indeed ſaueth, but Saueth not. not baptiſme of water.

Willet Cont. 12. q. 3. p. 567. Baptiſme is not a remedie againſt Giueth not grace. originall ſinne. 569. Baptiſme doth not conferre grace.

Luther de Captiuit. Babil. c. de baptiſmo. Baptiſme iuſtifieth Profiteth not. none, nor profiteth anie. ib. cōt. Cocleum f 408. No parte of Iuſtification can be attributed to baptiſme.

Melancthon in locis edit. 1522. Sacraments do not iuſtifie. Which he repeateth l. cont. Anabaptiſtas.

Zuinglius de baptiſmo to. 2. fol. 62. Baptiſme is giuen and receaued for their ſakes who hould the ſame faith with vs, not for his ſake who is baptized: for in him, that outward ſigne can worke nothing. Fol. 70. Externall baptiſme which is done by water, Helpeth not. helpeth nothing to ablution of ſinnes. Etf. 56. Some cried, that externall things are wholy vnprofitable to ſaluation, and that no truſt is to be put in them, ſcing they are vaine and altogether vnprofitable. And ſurely they ſaied well, if they had not paſſed the bounds of charitie and modeſtie. Fol. 97. Baptiſme cannot Washeth not ſinnes. wash away the filth of ſinne, nor washeth away ſinne: It is nothing but a ſacramentall ſigne whereby Gods people is bound to one faith and religion. 98. Baptiſme maketh vs no whit the Maketh no vs better. better. And l. de ver. & fal. relig. fol. 91. Some thinke that baptiſme ether wipeth away ſinnes, or is a ſigne and certification of their wiping away: both which ſay what they pleaſe, not what the word of God hath tought. And in Rom. 4. tom. 4. The ſigne of baptiſme is not receaued for to confirme faith, for to purge ſinnes. Confirmeth not faith. And apud Hoſpin. part. 2. Hiſtor. fol. 31. Sacraments are onely badges of Chriſtian ſocietie, and helpe nothing to ſaluation. Finally l. de Peccato originall. to. 2. f. 122. he ſaieth: How foolish then should he ſeeme, who for the words (of Scripture) would auouch that by baptiſmall water we are washed from ſinnes?

Caluin 4. Inſtit. c. 15. §. 10. Now it is cleare, how falſe it is, that by baptiſme we are looſed and exēpted from originall • inne. §. 2. Who will ſay, that we are cleanſed by this water? In Catechiſmo Is no lauer of the ſoule. Washeth not. pag. 36. Doeſt thou thinke, that water is a lauer of the ſoule? No. In Admonit. vlt. ad Weſtphal. p. 812. What if baptiſme wash vs, how is the onely blood of Chriſt otherwhere called our ablution? p. 855. If they inferre, that the filth of the ſoule is purged by the corruptible element of water, the ſunne of iuſtice it ſelfe wilbe darkened. In Actor. 22. v. 16. Paule was not washed by baptiſme, but recedued a new confirmation of the grace which he had obtained. In Rom. 4. v. 12. We denie, that men are iuſtified by baptiſme. In Epheſ. 5. v. 26. We muſt beware, to thinke, that water purgeth the filth of the ſoule.

Beza in Catechiſmo vol. 1. Theol. pag. 693. Doth water wipe away ſinne? No. In Colloq. Montisbel. p. 366. The ſoule is not washed with water, but the bodie onely. p. 377. The baptiſme Infants not renouated when they are baptized. of water is not the lauer of regeneratiō and renouation, but onely ſignifieth and repreſenteth it. Et 357. We thinke it abſurd, that infants are renouated ether at that verie time when they are baptized, or befoee they be of diſcretion and haue knowne and apprehended Chriſt by faith. Which alſo he hath in 2. part. reſp. ad Acta p. 322. Where alſo he ſaieth. p. 91. I ſaied and do yet ſay, that the renouation of infants who come to be men, is not to be reſtrained to the time of their baptiſme giuen to them ether in their infancie or their youth, but that it beginneth frō that time when by actuall faith they apprehend Chriſt. Which he repeateth p. 106. And apud Grauerum in Abſurdis Caluin. c. 4. ſect. 20. I nether ſaied that all, or anie children are regenerated at the time of baptiſme. Which alſo teacheth Muſculus in locis tit. de baptiſmo. So that they will not haue children to be regenerated ether by baptiſme, or whē they are baptized.

Zanchius l. 4. de tribus Elohim c. 5. Water is onely a ſigne of regeneration.

Piſcator in Theſ. loco. 25. Ananias ſaied to Paul: Riſe, and be baptized and washe away thy ſinnes, not that his ſinnes were to be washed away by baptiſme, which cannot be washed away but by the blood of Chriſt.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that the Church is ſanctified and cleanſed by the lauer of water: that we are ſaued by the lauer of regeneration: that baptiſme ſaueth vs: that we are baptized for remiſſion of ſinnes: that by baptiſme ſinnes are washed away. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proreſtants plainely ſay, that baptiſme iuſtifieth not, ſaueth not, auaileth nothing to ſaluation, infuſeth not faith or anie grace: that it worketh nothing in him who receaueth it: maketh vs no whit better, cleanſeth not ſinne, purgeth not ſinne, washeth not ſinne, wipeth not ſinne away: confirmeth not faith, certifieth vs not of remiſſion of ſinne; is onely a badge of Chriſtian ſocietie, a ſigne whereby men are bound to on faith and religion; that children are not regenerated ether by baptiſme or at the time when they are baptized: finally that baptiſme profiteth none, but is a vanie and vnprofittable thing. What Chriſtians, I pray the, are theſe, who make this account of their Chriſtendome: And theſe ſayings are ſo repugnant to Scripture as ſometimes Proteſtants confeſſe it. See l. 2. cap. 30.

ART. VIII. WHETHER IN BAPTISME euen ſinnes to come be pardoned?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Act. 8. v. 21. S. Peter ſpeaketh thus to Simon Magus already Sinnes to come not forgiuen in baptiſme. baptized: Doe pennāce therefore frō this thy wickedneſſe, and pray to God if perhaps this cogitation of thy hart may be remitted thee.

1. Cor. 5. v. 5. S. Paul commandeth a Corinthian baptized, for inceſt, to be deliuered to Sathan, that his ſpirit may be ſaued in the day of our Lord.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

C. Bellarm. l. 1. de baptiſmo. c. 18. Catholiks gather that the efficacie of baptiſme doth not extend it ſelfe vnto the time to come, but onely to the time paſt: for it pardoneth ſinnes committed and not yet remitted.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Perkins in Serie Cauſarum c. 33. In baptiſme once administred, Sinnes prē ſent and to come forgiuen in baptiſme. is giuen remiſsion of ſinnes not onely paſt and preſent, but alſo of thoſe that are to come all your life time. The like he hath in Galat. 3. to. 2.

Whitaker lib. 8. cont. Dur. ſect. 101. Who are baptized, are baptized in Chriſts death: but Chriſts death auaileth to wash away, not onely thoſe ſinnes which goe before baptiſme, but alſo thoſe which follow in all the life time. The like he hath Cont. 2. q. 5. 7. p. 515.

Willet Cont. 12. q. 6. p. 579. Baptiſme is a ſeale of remiſsion of ſinnes for the confirmation of our faith, euen of thoſe which are committed after baptiſme, as well as of ſinnes done before—Therefore baptiſme ſealeth vnto vs the remiſsion of all our ſinnes, going before or following after.

Bezal. Quaeſt. & reſp. vol. 3. p. 344. Baptiſme therefore doth not abolish onely ſinnes paſt? Yea the fruite thereof ſtretcheth through the whole life of the faithfull. And in Hebr. 10. v. 11. Whoſoeuer is ſprinkled with blood of Chriſt, is deliuered for euer from ſinnes paſt and to come. Et Epiſt. 5. The fruit of baptiſme, is the ſealing of adoption, the ablution from ſinnes both paſt and to come.

Daneus de baptiſmo cap. 18. tom. 2. Howſoeuer that grace and remiſsion of ſinnes be ſealed vnto vs, it pertaineth as is referred in all Chriſts ſacramēts to blot out all our ſinnes paſt, preſent, and to come.

Zanchius in ſua Confeſſione cap. 18. to. 8. For baptiſme is not giuen in remiſsion onely of originall or ſinnes paſt, but of all for all the life time.

Feſtus Homius in Diſp. 44 Remiſsion of ſinnes, not onely of thoſe which were committed before baptiſme, but alſo of thoſe which are to be committed all the life, is ſealed in baptiſme vnto the faithfull. More of their like ſayings may be ſeene in my Latin booke c. 9. art. 8.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely teacheth, that a baptized man muſt doe pennance for remiſſion of ſuch ſinnes as he committeth after baptiſme: that a baptized man was deliuered to Sathan, that his ſoule might be ſaued. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely teach, that in baptiſme is giuen remiſsion of ſinnes paſt, preſent, and to come: that baptiſme auaileth for ſinnes that follow all the life time: that baptiſme is a ſeale of remiſsion of ſinnes as well committed after as before: that whoſoeuer is once ſprinkled with Chriſts blood, is deliuered for euer of all ſinnes paſt and to come: that in baptiſme is giuen and ſealed to the faithfull remiſsion of all ſinnes to be committed all their life time. Which is to oppen a brode way to all wickedneſſe. And whereas Proteſtants haue falſely ſaied that, the Pope giueth pardons for ſinnes to be done: we ſee, that they Proteſtants pardon, to ſinne. manifeſtly giue ſuch pardon to all and euerie one that is baptized or iuſtified with them.

ART. IX. WHETHER THE CHILDREN of the Faithfull be borne and abide in ſtate of damnation vntill they be baptized?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Epheſ. 2. v. 3. And we were by nature the children of wrath, Children of faithfull borne in ſtate of damnation. as alſo the reſt.

Rom. 5. v. 12. As by one man ſinne entred into this world, and by ſinne death, and ſo vnto all men death did paſſe. v. 15. For if by the offence of one manie died. v. 18. Therefore as by the offence of one, vnto all men to condemnation: ſo alſo by the iuſtice of one vnto all men to iuſtification of life. The ſame alſo is cleare by the places before cited for the neceſsitie of baptiſme.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton. in 1. Cor. 7. v. 14. It is a new and profane paradoxe of Caluin: that the children of Chriſtian parents are borne the ſonnes of God.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins de baptiſmo tom. 1. col. 842. Baptiſme doth not Not in ſote of damnation. make the children of Chriſtian parents the ſonnes of God, but onely doth ſeale vnto them the couenant of grace, and certifieth them that they are comprehended in it. In Gal. 2. v. 15. Originall ſinne, which is hidden from beginning in them, is not imputed to them. The children of the faithfull are borne Saints.

Willet Cont. 12. q. 3. p. 565. The children of the faithfull are Are holie. holie already euen before they be baptized.

Zuinglius in 1. Co. r 12. tom. 4. The children of Chriſtians are In the Church with in the Church and bodie of Chriſt, euen before they be Chriſtened.

Caluin 4. Inſtit. cap. 16. §. 31. Who are borne of faithfull parents, Are Saints. are by ſupernaturall grace Saints. §. 32. Streight after they are borne, they are had and acknowledged of God for children. In Actor. 8. v. 37. I ſay that the children of the godlie, are borne Members of Chriſt. children of the Church, and from the wombe reputed members of Chriſt. And de ve • . reform. pag. 349. he ſtretcheth this fauour not onely to the immediat children of faithfull parents, but alſo manie generations after, and as he ſaieth 4. Inſtit. c. 16. §. 9. to the thouſand generation. And ſeing, that there is no man in the world, who is a thouſand generations from Noe, he muſt ſay, that all children whoſoeuer, at leſt all the elect, are borne ſaints and in ſtate of grace & ſaluation.

Beza l. cont. Heshus. vol. 1. Theol. p. 307, The children of Are Saints. the faithfull are ſaints before God euen from the wombe. The like hath Confeſsio Heluet. cap. 20. Gallica artic. 35. Peter Martyr in locis Claſſ. 2. c. 8. and others commonly, as alſo may appeare by what hath beene ſaied before art. 4.

Nay ſometimes they ſay, that euen the children of Infidels are borne in ſtate of grace and ſaluation.

Zuinglius de baptiſmo to 2. f. 91. Infants which are borne Infidels Children in ſtate of ſaluation. of infidels I leaue to the iudgment of the almightie and iuſt, albeit I can finde no cauſe of damnation in them. De Peccato orig. f. 119. Of Chriſtians children, we are ſure that they are not dāned for originall ſinne, albeit to cōfeſſe plainely, that opinion ſeemeth more probable to vs which we taught, to wit, that we muſt not rashly condemne the children of Heathens. In Elencho fol. 36. We impiouſly condemne not onely children of Heathens, but alſo of Christians. And de Ratione fidei fol. 540. We rashly condemne the children of Chriſtiā parents, yea of Heathen parentes.

Vorſtius in Antibellarm. p. 542. In this point the Proteſtāts do not wholy agree, but ether ſay that all children whatſoeuer are through Chriſts grace ſaued, as Zuinglius and manie more: or at leaſt all elect children whether they be borne of faithfull or other parents though not baptized, are ſaued, as the moſt Proteſtants ſay. And he addeth: Theſe mens opinion is much more ſecure; but the ſentence of the former is more gentle and probable enough, and therefore not roshly to be condemned.

Hermingius in Enchiridio claſſ. 3. p. 322. If the children of Infidels die without baptiſme, we must leaue them to Gods iudgment. The ſame alſo followeth out of that which Caluin loco cit. Beza ad reprehens. Caſtel. vol. 1. p. 502. and others ſay, that childrē of faithfull parents are ſanctified and comprehended in the couenant of life vnto the thouſand generation.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the children of the faithfull are by nature or natiuitie the children of wrath as others are: that death paſſed vnto all: that condemnation paſſed vnto all. The like ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that Chriſtian children are ſonnes of God before they be chriſtened: that they are borne Saints: that originall ſinne is not imputed to them: that they are holie, within the Church, and bodie of Chriſt before they be baptized: Saints by ſupernaturall grace, members of Chriſte from the wombe, borne children of the Church, and from the wombe Saints before God. Likewiſe they ſay of Infidels children, that they finde no cauſe of condemnation in them, that they are rashly and impiouſly condemned: that all children whoſoeuer, or at leaſt all elect children, though not baptized, are ſaued: that ſuch as come of faithfull, though after a thouſand generations are ſanctified and comprehended within the couenant of life. Which are ſo contrarie to Scripture as ſometimes Proteſtants confeſſe it. l. 2. c. 30. and S. Auſtin ſaieth: L. 3. de Anima. c. 9. Do not beleiue, do not ſay, do not teach, that infants dying before they be baptized, may attaine remiſsion of originall ſinne, if thou wilt be a Catholik.

ART. X. WHETHER THE BAPTISME of S. Ihon and of Chriſt were the ſame?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Marc. 1. v. 8. S. Ihon ſaieth: I haue baptized you with water, S. Ihons baptiſme differēt from Chriſts. but he shall baptize you with the Holie Ghoſt.

Act. 19. ver. 2. (S. Paul) ſaied to them: Haue ye receaued the Holie Ghoſt, beleiuing? But they ſaied to him: Nay, nether haue we heard, whether there be a Holie Ghost. But he ſaied: In what then were you baptized? Who ſaied: In Ihons baptiſme. verſ. 5. Hearing theſe things they were baptized in the name of our Lord Ieſus.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 7. Can. 1. de baptiſmo: Iſanie shall ſay, that Ihons baptiſme had the ſame vertue that the baptiſme of Chriſt, be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Whitaker ad Ration. 8. Campiani: ſaieth of the baptiſme of S. Ihon and Chriſt. It was the ſame ceremonie, the ſame doctrin, Not different▪ the ſame grace.

Willet Cont. 12. q. 7. p. 585. Ihons baptiſme was not diuers frō Christs baptiſme, but was all one with it in propertie and effect.

Zuinglius de ver. & falſa relig. c. de baptiſmo. It is altogether one baptiſme, whether you call it Ihons, or Chriſts. Et de Baptiſmo to. 2. f. 75. It will appeare, that that outward baptiſme of water which Iohn vſed agreeth with the externall baptiſme of Chriſt and the Apoſtles, and that there is no difference at all betweene them.

Caluin in Luc. 3. v. 3. It is falſe, that the baptiſmes of Ihon and Chriſt were diuers.

Beza lib. quaeſt. & reſponſ. pag. 344. I ſay, that indeed it was one onely and the ſame baptiſme, adminiſtred first of Ihon, and after by Chriſts commandment.

Bucanus in Inſt. Theol. loco. 47. What differ the Baptiſme of Ihon Baptiſt and of Chriſt? Not in Author, not in ſubſtance, not in doctrine, not in ſigne or ceremonie, not alſo in effector or ſignification. More of their like ſayings in my Latin booke c. 9. art. 10.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that S. Ihons Baptiſme was giuen in water, Chriſts baptiſme in the Holie Ghoſt: that S. Ihons baptiſme was not giuen in the name of the Holie Ghoſt, in ſo much as they who had beene Baptized with it, knew not that there was a Holie Ghoſt: that they who had beene baptized with S. Ihons baptiſme were baptized againe with Chriſts baptiſme. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that S. Ihons and Chriſts baptiſme was all one ceremonie, one doctrine, one grace: was not diuers, but all one in propertie and effect, altogether one: that there was no difference at all betweene them, not diuers, one onely and the ſame, not different in Author, ſubſtance, doctrine, ſigne, ceremonie, effect or ſignification.

ART. XI. WHETHER THOSE EPHESIANS, whereof is ſpoaken Actor. 19. had beene baptized with S. Ihons baptiſme?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Act. 19. v. 3. But he (S. Paul) ſaied: In what thē were ye baptized? The Epheſiās baptized with S. Ihons baptiſme. Who ſaied: In Ihons baptiſme. v. 5. Hearing theſe, they were baptized in the name of our Lord Ieſus.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Actor. 19. v. 5. We muſt beleiue and ſtedfaſtly beleiue, that thoſe twelue Epheſians had beene before baptized of Ihon.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker lib. 8. cont. Dur. ſect. 70. I denie, that thoſe men They were not baptized with S. Ihone baptiſme. whereof Luke maketh mention in the Actes, were baptized againe.

Caluin 4. Inſtitut. c. 15. §. 18. I denie, that they were baptized againe.

Zuinglius de Baptiſmo to. 2. f. 80. Behould an other argument, whereby it is demonſtrated, that thoſe (Epheſians) were neuer baptized in Ihons outward baptiſme. Reſp. ad Hueber. f. 104. If thou hadst had any conſideration of thoſe things, thou wouldſt neuer haue come to that madneſſe, to ſay that theſe diſciples had beene baptized of Ihon.

Beza in Actor. 19. v. 2. We muſt needs ſay, that there is not treated of any peculiar historie of twelue men, who were ether baptized or rebaptized of the Apoſtle, or of baptiſme.

Sadeel ad Art. 10. Abiurat. We no where read, that Ihons diſciples, after his death following Chriſt, were rebaptized of the Apoſtles.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the ſaied Epheſians were firſt baptized with the baptiſme of S. Ihon, and after with the baptiſme of Chriſt. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that they were not baptized againe, were not baptized with Ihons baptiſme, and that it is madneſſe to ſay it: that in the foreſaied place of the Acts, there is no ſpeech of baptiſme or baptizing. Which are ſo contrarie to Scripture, as Proteſtants ſometime confeſſe it. See lib. 2. cap. 30.

ART. XII. WHETHER THE FORESAIED Epheſians had heard of the Holie Ghoſt.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Act. 19. v. 2. And he (S. Paul) ſaied to them: Haue ye receaued The Epheſiās had not heard of the holie Ghoſt. the Holie Ghoſt, beleiuing? But they ſaied to him: Nay: nether haue we heard whether there be a Holie Ghoſt.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

D. Stapleton in Actor. 19. v. 5. S. Paul ſaied to theſe Epheſians, becauſe they had anſwered, that they had heard nothing of the Holie Ghoſt; In what then were you baptized?

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Caluin in Actor. 19. v. 2. How could it be, that Iewes had heard They had heard of the holie Ghoſt. nothing the Holie Ghoſt? Surely hence we gather, that Paul ſpoake not ſo much as in generall of the Holie Ghoſt, and therefore there is a figure in the word Ghost.

Beza in Actor. 19. v. 2. It were moſt abſurd to beleiue, that they who had beene baptized of Ihon, and profeſſed themſelues diſciples of Chriſt, were ignorant that there was anie holie Ghoſt.

Bucanus in Inſtit. loco. 47. What thoſe twelue men denie, that they had heard that there was a Holie Ghost, is not to be vnderſtood of the being or perſon of the Holie Ghoſt, but figuratiuely of the viſible manner of powring downe his guifts.

Reineccius to. 4. Armaturae c. 18. If demaund and anſwere had beene ſimply made of the Holie Ghoſt in reſpect of his perſon and grace, it would follow, that they had had no knowledge of the perſon of the Holie Ghoſt: But the conſequent is abſurd.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that the ſaied Epheſians had not ſo much as heard that there was a Holie Ghoſt. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that it could not be that they had not heard of the Holie Ghoſt: that it is abſurd, moſt abſurd to thinke that they were ignorant of the Holie Ghoſt.

THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF BAPTISME.

The things which we haue in this Chapter rehearſed, do clearly shew, how differently Proteſtants beleiue of baptiſme from the Scripture. For the Scripture together withe Catholiks teacheth, that water and the inuocatiō of the holie Trinitie be neceſſarie to baptiſme: that baptiſme is neceſſarie by neceſſitie both of precept and of meane to ſaluation: that Simon Magus and reprobats receaue whole baptiſme: that baptiſme is effectuall in the reprobates: that baptiſme cleanſeth ſinnes, but pardoneth not ſinnes that are to be done: that children of the faithfull are in ſtate of damnatiō before they be baptized: that Chriſts baptiſme is different from S. Ihons baptiſme: All which Proteſtats denie.

They shew alſo, that Proteſtants play the theiues with baptiſme, and ſteale from it the neceſſitie of water and of the inuocation of the holie Trinitie: the neceſſitie of precept and meane to ſaluation: the integritie and efficacie thereof in the reprobates; the vertue of cleanſing ſinnes in anie whomſoeuer; the difference and excellencie aboue the baptiſme of S. Ihon: which being taken away, Chriſts baptiſme remaineth onely in name; and they likewiſe Chriſtians in name onely. Thus much of Baptiſme: Now of the Euchariſt.

CHAPTER X. OF THE EVCHARISTE.

ART. I. WHETHER THE EVCHARIST, or that which Chriſt after his laſt ſupper gaue with his hands vnto his Apoſtles, was his bodie and blood?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

MATHEW 26. v. 26. Chriſt ſaied of that which with his hands he gaue to his Apoſtles to eate: This is my bodie. The ſame is Marc. 14. v. The Euchariſt is the bodie of Chriſt. 14. And Luc. 22. ver. 19. This is my bodie which is giuen for you. And 1. Cor. 11. v. 24. This is my bodie which shalbe deliuered for you. Moreouer Ihon. 6. ver. 15. he ſaieth: The bread which I will giue, is my flesh for the life of the world.

Mathew 26. v. 28. Chriſt ſaieth of that which he gaue The blood of Chriſt. his Apoſtles to drinke: This is my blood of the new teſtament, which shalbe shed for manie vnto remiſsion of ſinnes. Marc. 14. v. 24. This is my blood of the new testament that shalbe shed for manie. Luc. 22. v. 20. This is the Chalice, the new teſtament in my blood, which shalbe shed for you. 1. Cor. 11. v. 25. This chalice is the new teſtament in my blood.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent ſeſſ. 13. c. 3. The Apoſtles had not yet receaued the Euchariſt of the hands of our Lord, and yet he truely affirmed that to be his bodie which he gaue. And cap. 4. Becauſe Chriſt truely ſaied, that that was his bodie which he offered vnder forme of bread, therefore &c.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Iuel in Denfenſe of the Apologie part. 2. c. 10. diuiſ. 1. p. Not the flesh of Chriſt. 209. The bread of the Sacrament is one thing, and the flesh of Chriſt is an other—There is great difference betweene the bread of the Sacramēt and the flesh of Chriſt. Art. 8. ſect. 5. The ſacramentall bread is called Chriſts bodie, although indeed it be not Not indeed his bodie. Chriſts bodie. So alſo art. 21. ſect. 1.

Bel in his Ieſuits Antepaſt. p. 44. The meaning of Christ is Not his reall blood. not: This is my naturall bodie, and my reall blood.

Spalatenſis l. 5. de Repub. c. 6. n. 108. The holie bread, is not Not the bodie of Chriſt. the bodie of Chriſt. n. 112. The bread is called the bodie of Chriſt, not that it is the bodie of Chriſt.—The Euchariſt, though it be Not truely. called the bodie of Chriſt; Yet it is not truely and really the bodie of Chriſt. ibid. pag. 165. It is falſe to ſay: The bread is the bodie of Chriſt.

Melancthon epiſt. ad Com Palatin. apud Hoſpin part. 2. Not the true bodie of Chriſt Hiſtor. f. 260. Paul doth not ſay, as they of Breme do; Bread is the ſubſtantiall bodie of Christ: nor as Hes huſius doth: Bread is the true bodie of Chriſt.

Hoſpinian himſelfe lib. cit. f. 261. The bread of the Supper Not his ſubſtantiall bodie is not the ſubstantiall bodie of Chriſt. Which he repeateth fol. 254. The verie like words of the Heluetians her rehearſeth f. 161. & 153. of the Tigurins 161. of the Strasburgians f. 100. of the Witenbergians fol. 292. of Hardenberg. 297. and of Engelhard fol. 25.

Zuinglius l. de Caena to. 2. f. 283. Theſe words of Christ: This Not corporall flesh. is my bodie, can no way be vnderſtood of ſubſtātiall and corporall flesh. Which he hath againe l. de relig. c. de Euchar. and in Subſidio to. 2. fol. 247. And Sermon. 1. Bernen. f. 532. As if (the Apoſtle) should ſay, this is the meaning of thoſe things which we haue tould. It is not flesh which is ſet afore vs, albeit now I haue vouchſafed it that name, nor likewiſe blood, but bread and drinke.

OEcalampadius in Hoſpin. lib. cit. f. 41. Not without follie Not the ſelfe ſame bodie. would we binde men to confeſſe, that this ſelfe ſame bread is the bodie of Christ. And f. 118. Some do vrge that the Lords bread is the very bodie of Chriſt: But we ſay the contrarie. Not his verie bodie.

Bucer in Hoſpin. l. cit. fol. 191. Nether is bread the very bodie of Chriſt, but a Symboll of it. And 192. All acknowledge that bread and wine are ſymbols, and not the very things themſelues of this great miſterie.

Peter Martyr cont. Gardiner. col. 147. The Sacrament of Not lawfull to ſay: This is &c. the Euchariſt being shewne, it is not lawfull for them to ſay of it all: This is my bodie. Col. 359. Manifeſt it is, that the Euchariſticall bread is not properly the bodie of Chriſt. And in Dialog. col. 137. This is my bodie, is thus to be expoūded: This, to wit that which was shewed, ſignifieth my bodie.

Caluin in Math. 3. ver. 16. The bread of the holie Supper, is Not Chriſts bodie. called the bodie of Chriſt, not that it is it, but becauſe it teſtifieth to vs, that it is truely giuen to vs for meate.

Beza in Catechiſmo ſect. 9. This bread and this wine are Not our ſpirituall food. they not our ſpirituall food? No: but they ſignifie to vs that, from which life euerlaſting proceedeth. And lib. quaeſt. quaeſt. 207. pag. 356. So if you properly vnderſtand this ſaying it wilbe no leſſe falſe, that bread is the bodie of Chriſt, then that a gourd As falſe that it is his bodie as that a gourd is a man. Not Chriſts true bodie is a man.

Daneus Cont. de Euchar. c. 10. That Sacramentall bread is not the true and reall bodie of Chriſt. The bread which Chriſt reached to the Apoſtles, was not the true bodie of Chriſt. And c. 1. Whēce it followeth, that the ſignes remaine ſignes and ſeales, and neuer become the thing it ſelfe which is ſignified, to wit, the true flesh and true blood of Chriſt.

Volanus l. 1. cont. Scargam. p. 793. Surely bread is not that Not the naturall bodie. true and naturall bodie of Chriſt, albeit it be called, but ſacramē tally his bodie.

Muſculus in locis tit. de Signis. The bread of the lords Not the verie bodie. Supper is not the verie bodie of Chriſt.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the Euchariſt or that which our Sauiour after his laſt ſupper gaue with his hands to his Apoſtles to eate and drinke; was his bodie & blood; and to put vs out of doubt, what bodie and blood, he added: His bodie giuen for vs, deliuered for vs: His blood of the new teſtament, and shed for remiſsion of ſinnes: And otherwhere that the bread which he would giue vs, was his flesh which he would giue for the life of the world. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that the bread, the holie bread, the bread of the Sacrament, the Sacramētall bread, the lords bread, the bread of the ſupper, the bread of the holie ſupper, the bread of the lords ſupper, the bread which Chriſt reached to his Apoſtles: the Symbols, the Signes: the Euchariſt, the ſacrament of the Euchariſt, the Euchariſticall bread, is not the bodie of Chriſt, not his very bodie, not his bodie it ſelfe, not his true bodie, not his ſubſtantiall bodie: not flesh, not Chriſts true flesh, an other thing and much different from Chriſts flesh; not the thing it ſelfe of this miſterie, not our ſpirituall food: that Chriſts words can no way be vnderſtood of Chriſts ſubſtantiall flesh, that his meaning is not; This my naturall bodie: That the Euchariſt being shewed we may not ſay if it: This is my bodie: that though it be called Chriſts bodie, yet it is not his bodie. Which are ſo directly contrarie to the Scripture as many of theſe men ſometimes confeſſe it as shalbe ſeene cap 30. of the 2. booke. But becauſe they do not onely contradict the Scripture in denying the Euchariſt to be the bodie of Chriſt, which the Scripture ſo often and clearly affirmeth, but diuers other waies alſo, I will likewiſe ſet them downe.

Secondly therefore, they contradict the Scripture, in ſaying that the Euchariſt is nothing but a ſimple ceremonie, onely bread, onely a type or figure, onely a ſeale or ſigne of the bodie and blood of Chriſt, which the Scripture ſo oftentimes ſaieth, is his true bodie and blood.

Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 5. c. 19. Sacraments are onely ſeales of Onely aſeale. thoſe goods which are propoſed to vs in the word.

Cartwright in diſput. Oxonien. apud Martyrem p. 134. Onely a ſigne. The Euchariſt is onely a ſigne.

Spalatenſis l. 5. de Rep. c. 6. n. 113. The bread is not the bodie of Chriſt indeed, but onely a ſigne of it.

Perkins de Caena to. 1. col. 858. The bread is called the bodie, Onely a ſigne and ſeale. whereas it is onely a ſigne and ſeale of the bodie.

Melancthon as Luther reporteth in Hoſpin. part. 2. Hiſtor. A ſimple ceremonie. fol. 194. Accounted the Euchariſt no better then a ſimple ceremonie.

Confeſſio Czinge. in Syntagmate pag. 196. The (Euchariſticall) Hath onely the name. ſignes, haue not the ſubſtance of the things ſignified, but onely their names.

Helueti in Hoſpin libr. cit. fol. 153. The bread, is not the Onely a ſigne. verie bodie of Chriſt, but onely a ſigne and Sacrament of it.

Iuel art. 10. ſect. 1. p. 313. The bread in it ſelfe, is very naturall Very naturall bread. bread. art. 21. ſect. 1. p. 443. The miſticall bread is not Chriſt himſelfe, but onely a ſacrament of Chriſt.

Zuinglius de Caena to. 2. f. 286. The bread is onely a figure, Onely a figure wherewith is ſignified that bodie which we ought to remember. f. 291. This drinke was nothing elſe indeed but wine. 293. Nothing Nothing els but a ſigne. Nothing but bread and wine. elſe but a ſigne and figure. And. 296. The Apoſtles themſelues neuer called this bread the bodie of Chriſt, but onely bread. And in Reſponſ. ad Lutherum fol. 431. It is nought els but bread.

OEcolampadius apud Zuinglium to. 2. fol. 503. Theſe particles (This, that) we denie not to be certaine & infallible tokens, No hing but commō bread. but ſuch they are, as teach that here is nothing els but common bread. And ibid. 510. The drinke is a pure and bare creature, and nought els beſide.

Caluin de adminiſtr. Caenae. p. 41. Let vs account it enough, Nothing but a note and ſigne. if bread and wine be giuen vs for a note and ſigne.

In admonit. vlt. ad Weſphal. p. 826. What other is the bread As the Doue was the Holie Ghoſt. and wine of the Supper, then a viſible word? Cont. Heshus. pag. 861. The bread of the Euchariſt in the ſame maner is called the bodie of Christ, as the doue is called the holie Ghoſt. And 4. Inſtit. c. 17. §. 14. The Supper is nothing els, but a viſible teſtificatiō of that promiſe which is Ioan. 6. to wit, that Chriſt is the bread of life which came from heauen.

Beza in Colloq. Montisbel. p. 42. The diſciples ſaw, that Mere bread and wine. Chriſt held bread, and that it was mere bread and wine which he gaue with his hands. Cont. Illy ric. col. 2. Theol. p. 149. I ſay, No better then water of baptiſme. that the water of baptiſme is as well the blood of the Lord, as that bread is his bodie. Cont. Heshus. vol. 1. p. 308. The bread is no otherwiſe the bodie, and wine, no otherwiſe the blood, then the water of baptiſme is blood. And in 1. Corint. 5. verſ. 7. The No otherwiſe then the paſcall lambe. Paſcall lambe is called Chriſt in the ſelfe ſame manner, that that bread is ſaied to be the bodie of Chriſt, which was giuen for vs.

Daneus Cont. de Euchar. cap. 13. The Fathers will haue the Onely ſymbol and ſigne. bread and wine to be onely ſymbols and ſignes of the true and eſſentiall bodie and blood of Chriſt.

Peter Martyr apud Coccium to. 2 l. 6. art. 1. The bread and Onely type and ſigne. wine, are onely types and ſignes of the bodie and blood of Chriſt. And hereupon, albeit, as Zanchius confeſſeth in Reſp. ad Arian. col. 876. the Roman Church doth keepe baptiſme and the Supper, or as Caluin ſpeaketh, the halfe parte of the Supper is remaining in Poperie, yet neuertheleſſe they ſometime terme our Euchariſt, a Cruſt of bread, as doth Whitaker Contr. 1. q. 2. c. 16. and Perkins de Sermon. Dom. col. 554. Sometimes, a ſmall cruſt of bread, as Caluin Admonit. vlt. p. 800. cont. Verſipel. p. 358. in Math. 19. v. 13. Sometimes, a Cruſt, as Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 6. c. 3. Beza in Confeſſ. c. 7. ſect. 11. Sometimes, a gobbet of bread, as Whitaker in place laſt cited: Sometime, a moſt profane cruſt, as Beza li. quaeſt. vol. 3 p. 355. Sometime, a cake and cruſt, as Peter Martyr orat. 1. Tigurin. Sometime, a wafer of paſtie, as the ſame Martyr cont. Gardiner. col. 422.Thus reproachfully they terme that, which in their owne opinion is the lords Supper, or at leaſt the halfe parte thereof; but no meruaile if they ſo ſpeake ſo of our Euchariſt, who ſay, that theirs, is nothing els but bread, nothing but common bread, nothing but a bare creature, nothing but a bare ſigne or figure, nothing but mere bread and wine. But farre otherwiſe ſaied Chriſt, that his Euchariſt was his bodie giuen for vs, his blood shedde for remiſſion of ſinnes, and not as Proteſtāts ſay onely a ſigne, onely a ſeale, onely a figure, onely a tokē, onely a teſtificatiō, onely a ſymbol, onely a type of Chriſts bodie, which onely hath the name of Chriſts bodie, onely a ſimple ceremonie; and no otherwiſe the bodie of Chriſt, Then the Paſcal lambe was Chriſt; the doue, the Holie Ghoſt; or the water of baptiſme, the blood of Chriſt.

Thirdly they contradict the Sripture, in ſaying, that the Euchariſt is onely figuratiuely and in ſome ſorte the bodie and blood of Chriſt, which the Scripture in the places cited ſimply and abſolutely ſaieth to be his bodie and blood, and addeth Ihon 6. v. 55. My flesh is truely meate, and my blood truely drinke. Which is moſt clearly oppoſite, to mere figuratiuely.

Spalatenſis l. 5. de Repub. c. 6. n. 45. The wine in the Chalice is the blood of the lord onely oſtenſiuely or in shew, that is, figuratiuely Onely figuratiuely. and typically. And num. 115. The Euchariſt, is not Chriſt ſubſtantially, but onely ſignificantly and figuratiuely. And 118. It is but figuratiuely and typically called the bodie of Chriſt.

Perkins in Cathol. ref. Cont. 11. c. 2. We take the bread to By reſemblance and no otherwiſe. be the bodie of Chriſt ſacramentally by reſemblance, and no otherwiſe. And Cont. 10. cap. 4. Theſe words muſt not be vnderstood properly, but by a figure.

Rogers on the 28. Article of Proteſt. Confeſſ. pag. 174. Abhominable be the Popish errours, that ſubstātially and really the bodie and blood of Chriſt is contained in the Sacrament Euchariſticall.

Iuel art. 5. ſect. 10. p. 255. As Chriſt is herbes or milke, euen ſo, As he is herbs or milke. As manna. and none otherwiſe, he is bread or flesh. Art. 8. ſect. 25. p. 303. As the bread is Christs bodie, euen ſo was manna Chriſts bodie.

Vsher in his Anſwere to a Chalenge p. 58. Nothing in this Not ſubſtantially. world is more plaine, then when our Sauiour ſaied: It was his blood, he could not meane it to be ſubſtantially. And ib. pag. 60. Not really. The things which he honoured with thoſe names, cannot be really his bodie and blood, but figuratiuely.

Whitaker l. 2. cont. Du. ſect. 10. The bread is the true bodie Metonimycally. of Chriſt, and the wine the true blood of Chriſt, but miſtically, metonymicall, Sacramentally.

Melancthon apud Hoſpin. lib. cit. fol. 69. This is my blood, is a metonimie, as if you should ſay: The enſigne or Maze is the Roman Empire.

Caluin cont. Heshus. p. 844. Bread may truely be ſaied, to Symbolically. be ſymbolically the true bodie of Chriſt. Which alſo he hath Admonit. vlt. ad Weſtphal. pag. 836. Where alſo pag. 821. he ſaieth: It appeareth, that to them bread was ſymbolically the bodie. and p. 830. In ſome ſorte it is the bodie. And 4. Inſtit. c. In ſome ſorte. 17. §. 23. The bread is figuratiuely the bodie. And cont. Heshus. Improperly. l. cit. p. 847. Could he more clearly teſtifie, that bread is improperly called the bodie of Chriſt, in reſpect of likenes?

Beza reſponſ. ad Selneccer. vol. 2. pag. 270. The names But metonymically. of the bodie and blood, are but metonymically giuen to the bread and wine.

Daneus Cont. de Euchar. c. 10. The bread is tropically called Tropically. the bodie of Chriſt.

Peter Martyr l. cont. Gardin. col. 293. We ſay, that ſpeach: Not properly. This is my bodie, is not proper, but metaphoricall and tropicall. And in Hoſpin l. cit. f. 259. The words: This is &c. cannot be taken ſimply and without a figure.

Peucer apud Hoſpin. in Concordia diſcordi fol. 206. The Not ſimply. conſecratea bread and chalice are the bodie and blood of Chriſt Relatiuely. relatiuely, as figures and ſignes.

Wolfius in Schuſſelburg. l. 1. Theol. Caluin. art. 22. The Significantly. bread is the bodie, and the wine the blood of Chriſt, ſignificātly, no other waies then a keye deliuered is a houſe. More of their mere figuratiue expoſitiōs of theſe words may be ſeene in my Latin booke l. 2. c. 20. But by that which here we haue rehearſed, it clearly appeareth, that what the Scripture ſimply ſaieth is the bodie and blood of Chriſt, Proteſtāts ſay, is onely oſtenſiuely or in shew, onely figuraſiuely, by reſemblance and no otherwaies, but metonymically, not properly no otherwiſe then a keye is a houſe, is the bodie and blood of Chriſt.

Fourthly, they cōtradict the holie Scripture, in that they denie, that Chriſts bodie is preſent in the Supper, in the Euchariſt, in the Euchariſticall bread, or in the Sacrament: in which according to Chriſts words it was ſo preſent, as he badde his Apoſtles take it with their hands and eate it.

The Pſeudoſynod of London in Hoſpin. part. 2. Hiſtor. d. 220. No faithfull man ought to beleiue or profeſſe the reall Reall preſence not to be beleiued. Chriſts bodie not in the Sacrament. Not preſent in ſubſtance. and ſubſtantiall preſence of Chriſts flesh in the Euchariſt.

Whitaker in Reſponſ. ad Demonſtr. Sanderi pag. 741. Chriſts bodie is not in the Sacrament; nor in infinite Sacraments.

Iuel Defenſ. Apol. p. 221. Thus is Chriſts bodie preſent, not really, nor in ſuhſtance, but onely in miſterie. Agayne. As Chriſt is preſent in the one Sacrament (of Baptiſme) euen ſo and none otherwiſe, is he preſent in the other (of the Euchariſt) which Abſent in bodie. he repeateth p. 264. And p. 234. Chriſt is preſent in maieſtie, abſent in bodie. 272. By abuſe of ſpeech, they ſay the bodie of As the people in the Cuppe. Chriſt is laied vpon the table. 273. As people is in the Cuppe: ſo is Chriſts blood in the Cuppe. The like he hath. artic. 8. diuiſ. As he dieth in the Sacrament. 1 And art. 12. diuiſ. 14. As Chriſt dyeth in the Sacrament: ſo is his bodie preſent in the Sacrament.

Perkins in his Ref. Cathol. Contr. 10 ca. 1. We hould and Preſent as a thing to the name. teach, that Chriſts bodie and blood are not preſent with the bread and wine in reſpect of place of coexiſtence, but by Sacramentall relation or this manner: When a word is vttered, the ſame comes to the eare, and at the ſame inſtāt the thing ſignified comes to the mynde, and thus by relation the word and the thing ſpoaken of, are both preſent together.

Zuinglius in Reſponſ. ad Propoſ. Eckij to 2. fol. 576. of this propoſition: The true and liuelie bodie of Chriſt and his blood are preſent in the Sacrament if the Altar: Maketh this Not preſent in the Sacrament. cenſure: This propoſition is nether pious nor Chriſtian. Serm. 1. Bernae fol. 527. Three articles of Chriſtian faith directly fight against the preſence of the bodie and blood of Christ in the Supper. Not in the Supper. Preſent by cō templation. In Reſponſ. ad Lutherum fol. 363. By contemplation Chriſt is in the Euchariſt. 420. As for ſubſtance, there is nothing preſent beſides bread and wine. 456. We willingly graunt and confeſſe, that Christs bodie is in the Supper in the ſame manner As our bodies are in heauen. that our bodies are now in heauen. And in epiſt. ad Principes fol. 546. Seing all this preſence is nothing without the ſpeculation Preſent by ſpeculation. of faith, it belongeth to faith, that theſe things are, or be made preſent. And apud Hoſpin. part. 2. Hiſtor. fol. 102. I By contemplation. beleiue, that in the Supper of the Euchariſt, Christs true bodie is preſent by contemplation of faith, that is, that they who giue thāks to the Lord for the guifts giuen vs in his Sonne, do acknowledge him to haue taken true flesh, truely to haue ſuffered in it, truely to haue wiped away our ſinnes with his blood: and ſo that all the matter done by Christ is made as it were preſent by contemplation of faith. But that Chriſts bodie should be really and in ſubſtance preſent, we do not onely denie, but auouch to be an error.

Tigurini in Hoſpin. part. 2. fol. 161. The ſacramentall vnion By ſignification. wholy conſiſteth in ſignificatiō. And in Scuſſelburg. l. 1. Theol. Caluin. art. 21. The bodie and blood of Chriſt are by mere imagination By mere imagination. in the Sacrament of the Supper. And Carolſtadius ib. art. 20. The bodie of Chriſt is not in the Supper. Chriſt is not in Not in the Supper. the Sacrament nether can be in it.

Caluin 4. Inſtit. c. 17. §. 30. Whereas our Mediatour is euerie where whole, he is alwaies preſent to his ſeruants, and in the Supper affor deth himſelfe preſent in a ſpeciall manner: but ſo as he is whole there, not wholy, Totus nō totum. becauſe in his flesh he is contained in heauen, vntill he come to iudgment. In Defenſ. 2. cont. Weſtphal p. 774. I ſaied, that Chriſts bodie is exhibited Not preſent in ſubſtance. effectually in the Supper, not naturally: according to vertue, not according to ſubſtance. Se more ib. p. 778. 779 In Conſenſ. de re Sacrament. art. 25. It muſt needs be, that Christs bodie be As farre frō vs, as heauen from carth. as farre diſtant from vs, as heauen is from earth. Which Beza often times repeateth, as cont. Brent. vol. 1. pag. 574. De hypoſtat. vnione pag. 638. lib. quaeſt. & reſp. pag. 673. Reſp. ad Andream pag. 130. Apol. 1. cont. Sainctem. p. 302. Reſp. ad Repetit. eiuſdem. c. 10. p. 50. alſo Daneus cont Kemnit. c. 30. and others.

Beza cont. Heshus. vol. 1. p. 278. We ſay not, that Chriſts Not preſent in the bread. bodie is preſent in the bread. Reſponſ. ad Acta Torgenſia vol. 368. We may eaſily vnderſtand and declare out of the word the ſacramentall manner of preſence, to wit, ſuch as the thing ſignified Preſent as the abiect is the thought. is offered to the vnderſtanding to be knowne and approued; and by faith to be embraced and applied to the beleiuer. And epiſt. 76. What this preſence is, we clearly vnderſtand and perceaue out of the word of God: to wit, ſuch as the thing thought vpon is preſent to our thought; and the thing beleiued, is preſent to faith. And as Grauerus in Abſurdis Caluin. cap. 3. §. 43. ſaieth. This preſence he plainely putteth in imagination. Preſent in imagination.

Zanchius in Hoſpin l. cit. f. 316. Touching the preſence of Chriſts bodie in the Supper, I proteſt, that I do not willingly diſpute No ward of preſence in the Scripture. of it, becauſe I read no word of it in Scripture. The like he hath l. 2. Epiſt. p. 69. and 89.

Peter Martyr in Schuſſelburg. l. 3. Theol. Caluin. art. 8. I remoue the preſence of Chriſts bodie from the Euchariſt. And l. Preſence remoued from the Euchariſt. cont. Gardiner. col. 815. The preſence of Chriſts bodie in heauen directly feighteth with the preſence thereof in the Sacrament. col. 994. If beſides ſignification he will that there is a reall preſence; No preſence beſides ſignification. that we altogether denie. More of their like ſpeaches may be ſeene in my Latin booke. c. 10. art. 1. But by theſe it is cleare, that they ſay that Chriſts bodie is not in the ſacrament, is not preſent in the Sacrament, is not in ſubſtance preſent, is abſent in bodie, is not in the Sacrament nor can be in it: is not in the Supper according to ſubſtāce, is not preſent in the bread, is remoued from the Euchariſt: that there is no word in the ſcripture of the preſence of Chriſts bodie in the Supper: that his blood is in the chalice as the people are there, that he is no otherwiſe in the Euchariſt then in baptiſme: that he is not there otherwiſe then a thing is preſent to our cogitation, or a thing to the name thereof, or our bodies are now preſent in heauen, finally onely preſent by ſpeculation and mere imagination.

Fiftly they contradict the Scripture, by ſaying that no other thing is receaued in the Euchariſt or Supper, then in baptiſme, or in the ſimple word.

Caluin cont. Heshus. p. 860. There is no cauſe, why Chriſt No more preſent in the Supper then in baptiſme. Then in the word. should be ſaied to be more preſent in the Supper, then in baptiſme. p. 847. Surely there is a plaine ſolution: That God giueth not more to the viſible ſymbols, then to the word. Therefore communication is no leſſe truely giuen vs by the Ghoſpell, then by the Supper. 4. Inſtit. c. 14. §. 14. He is deceaued, who thinketh, that any thing more is giuen him by the Sacraments, then which offered by the word of God he receaueth by true faith. §. 17 There is no other function of the Sacraments, then of the word of God. And c. 16. §. 5. he ſaieth, that the Sacrament is inferiour to the word.

Beza in Colloq. Montisbel. p. 136. There is the ſame receauing of Chriſt in the Sacrament, which is in the ſimple word. In 2. part. reſponſ. ad Acta Colloq. p. 109. Nothing more is to be ſought in the Sacraments, then in ſimple word. l. cont. Heshus. p. 287. Nothing more is giuen in the Supper, then in baptiſme, or in the preaching of the word.

Bucer in Hoſpin. l. cit. p. 161. The memorie of this bodie may More in the word then in the Sacramēt. be refreshed by the bread, but more fully by the word.

Peter Martyr in 1. Cor. 11. This is the ſumme: that we vnderſtand the bodie and blood of Chriſt to be offered to vs no leſſe by the words of God then by Sacraments. In Diſput. Oxonien. pag. 225. We receaue no leſſe the bodie and blood of Chriſt in the word of God, then in this Sacrament. And cont. Gardiner. col. 1041. I denie not that that is our ſpeach: Chriſts bodie is receaued no leſſe in words then in the Sacraments. Nether am I afraied to ſay, that we come much better to them by words, then by Sacraments.

Willet Cont. 11. q. 3. c. 557. There is the ſame ſubſtance of both Sacraments.

Iuel art. 5. diuiſ. 5. The word of God is the bodie and blood of Chriſt, and that more truely then is the Sacrament. Art. 21. diu. 1. As Chriſt entreth into vs by a miniſter, by his word, euen ſo he entreth into vs by the Sacrament of his bodie, and no otherwiſe. Defenſe of the Apol. p. 221. As Christ is preſent in the one Sacramēt, euen ſo and no otherwiſe, is he preſent in the other.

Hereupon Apologia Confeſſ. Auguſtanae. cap. de vſu Sacrament ſaieth, that the Sacrament is as it were a picture of the word. Melancthon in Diſputat. tom. 4. pag. 513. The Sacrament is like a picture of the promiſe. And lib. contr. Anabaptiſtas: As the will of God is shewed in the worde or promiſe, ſo alſo it is shewed in the Sacrament as in a picture. And oftentimes they ſay that there is no other preſence of Chriſts bodie in the Euchariſt, then there is in the ſimple word, as you may ſee in Beza Apol. 1. cont. Sanctem p. 297. in Hoſpin l. cit. fol. 36. 39. and in Concordia diſcordi f. 205. So that they plainly ſay, that Chriſt is no more preſent in the Supper then in baptiſme, no more cōmunicated in the Supper thē in the Ghoſpell: no more receaued in the Sacramēt them in the word: that there is the ſame receauing of Chriſt in the Sacrament and in the ſimple word, nothing more giuē in the Supper them in preaching, no more offered by the ſacrament then by the word: yea that the Sacrament is inferiour to the word, the memorie of Chriſts bodie more fully refreshed by the word, then by this Sacrament: that we may better come to Chriſts bodie by words, then by this Sacrament. Which are ſo contrarie to Scripture, as ſometimes themſelues confeſſe it. See lib. 2. cap. 30.

Sixtly they contradict the holie Scripture, whiles they ſay, that they Iewes receaued Chriſts bodie before it was borne, as truely as we receaue it in the Euchariſt.

Willet Cont. 11. q. 2. p. 544. We do hould, and conſtantly affirme The Fathers no leſſe receaued the bodie of Chriſt thou we. and teach, that the Fathers in the law receaued no leſſe the ſubſtance of Christ by faith in their Sacraments, then we do in ours.—Chriſt was as well exhibited to them in their Sacraments, as he is in ours.

Beza in Colloq. Montisbel. p. 96. He was as preſent in their Sacraments, as he is to vs in ours. p. 69. The Fathers were no leſſe partakers of the bodie and blood of Christ, then we are in the Lords Supper. Reſponſ. ad Acta, Colloq. p. 119. The Fathers as truely receaued Chriſts true bodie and true blood, in the word and in their Sacraments, as we by the inſtrument of the ſame faith now receaue them.

Peter Martyr cont. Gardiner. col. 150. The Fathers in the ould testament did no leſſe then we eate and drinke the bodie and blood of Christ, for ſo much as pertaineth to the thing it ſelfe.

Seuenthly they contradict the holie Scripture, in ſaying that the Euchariſt is a ſymbolicall, myſticall, and Sacramentall bodie of Chriſt, which the Scripture plainely ſaieth to be his true bodie.

Zuinglius de ver. & falſa relig. c. de Euchar. to. 2. f. 208. We are here compelled plainely to confeſſe, that this ſelfe ſame which Chriſt gaue with ſo great diligence and maiestie, is his ſymbolicall Chriſts ſymbolicall bodie Sacramentall bodie. bodie. Reſponſ. ad Luther. ib. fol. 514. It is eaſie to vnderſtand, that this bread which Chriſt giueth vs, is Chriſts ſacramentall bodie, that is, the ſigne of his bodie, in that manner and forme of ſpeach wherewith shewing the ſtatue of Cocles, we ſay: Behould Cocles that ſtout champion of his countrie. Epiſtola ad Principes fol. 548. The bread is made the ſacramentall bodie of Chriſt. Againe: Our aduerſaries ſay that Christs naturall and ſubſtantiall bodie is giuen; we ſay, his ſacramentall. Hereupon the contention. And in Hoſpin. l. cit. fol. 143. We are forced, will we nill we, to confeſſe, that theſe words: This is Miſticall bodie. my bodie, are thus to be vnderſtood: that is: A ſacrament of my bodie: or, This is my ſacramentall or myſticall bodie.

Oecalampadius in Beza Reſp. ad Repet. Sanctis. pag. 48. That bread is a ſymbolicall bodie.

Zanchius lib. 1. Epiſtolarum pag. 280. Theſe three bodies Miſticall bodie. of Christ we reade in the holie Scriptures, His true and naturall, his Misticall, which is the Church, and ſacramentall, which is bread.

Daneus Cont. de Euchar. c. 10. Auſtin confeſſeth, that the Onely Sacramentall bodie. bread is onely the ſacramentall bodie of Chriſt, but not his naturall bodie. Againe: The bread which Chriſt gaue to his Apoſtles, was his ſacramentall bodie.

Vrſinus in Miſcellaneis. p. 172. There is a bodie of Chriſt properly ſo called, and a ſacramentall, which is the Euchariſticall bread. Thus we ſee, how plainly they ſay, that the Euchariſt is Chriſts ſymbolicall bodie, his ſacramentall bodie, his myſticall bodie, and not his true bodie. Which himſelfe ſaieth moſt plainly to be his true bodie, that very bodie which was giuen and deliuered for vs.

Finally we ſee, how manie wayes the Caluiniſts do contradict the expreſſe word of God in this one matter. Firſt, in expreſſely denying the Euchariſt to be the bodie of Chriſt, which the Scripture ſo often and ſo plainely affirmeth: Secondly, in ſaying that it is onely a ſigne or figure of Chriſts bodie, which the Scripture plainely and often ſaieth is his true bodie. Thirdly, in ſaying that it is but onely figuratiuely his bodie, which the Scripture ſimply and abſolutely ſaieth is his bodie. Fourthly, in ſaying, that Chriſts bodie is but figuratiuely, or by faith and imagination in the Euchariſt: Which the Scripture directly affirmeth to be the ſubſtance of the Euchariſt. Fiftly, in ſaying that Chriſts bodie is no more receaued in the Euchariſt, then in the ſimple word; whereas Chriſt, bidde vs take and eate his bodie in the Euchariſt, but not in his word. Sixtly, by ſaying that the Fathers in the ould law receaued Chriſts bodie in their Sacraments, as truely as we do in the Euchariſt: when as they were neuer bidden to take and eate Chriſts flesh in their Sacraments, as we are in the Euchariſt. Finally, in ſaying that the Euchariſt is Chriſts ſymbolicall, ſacramentall, and myſticall bodie; which the holie Scripture ſaieth is his bodie, which was giuen and deliuered for vs.

ART. II. WHETHER CHRISTS FLESH be to be eaten, and his blood to be drunke?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Math. 26. ver. 26. Take ye and eate: This is my bodie. ver 28. Chriſts bodie and blood to be eaten and drunck. Drinke ye all of this: For this is my blood &c.

Ihon 6. v. 53. Vnleſſe you eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, Truely. and drinke his blood, you shall not haue life in you. Et 56. My flesh is truely meate, and my blood is truely drinke.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Math. 26. v. 28. For to perfect the new teſtament and couenant, of which Chriſt ſpeaketh, betwixt vs and him, no ſpirituall eating or drinking of the bodie and blood of Chriſt ſufficeth, but there is plainely required an externall, reall, and corporall receauing of them both.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Zuinglius l. de Relig. c. de Euchar. to. 2. Chriſts flesh eaten, Chriſt flesh eaten profiteth not. profiteth nothing at all. Which he often repeateth in Exegeſi fol. 333. 334. 336. 346. and in Ioan. 6. to. 4. in ſo much as Hoſpin. part. 2. Hiſtor. fol. 181. writeth, that Zuinglius euerie where inculcateth, that Chriſts flesh eaten profiteth nothing. And c. cit. de Euchar. Nether do we thinke, that they are to be Not be eaten ſpiritually. heard, who determin thus: we eate the true and corporall flesh of Chriſt, but ſpiritually: for they do not ſee, that it can not ſtand together, to be a bodie and to be ſpiritually eaten. Againe: What is giuen to be eaten, is Chriſts bodie, but ſymbolicall. In Exegeſi fol. 329. Chriſt did not command his bodie to be eaten, but ſymbolicall bread. Reſponſ. ad Luther. fol 435. We eate and drinke We eate and drinke nothing but bread and wine. nothing but bread and wine. In Apol. f. 370. We teach, that the onely ſigne of Chriſts bodie is eaten in this Eucharisticall Supper. Reſponſ. ad Billican: fol. 264. We are taught, that Chriſts corporall flesh can be no way eaten. And as Hoſpin. lib. cit. fol. 181. ſaieth: Zuinglius euerie where inculcateth, that the true and reall flesh of Chriſt cannot be eaten ſo much as ſpiritually: and that to eate Chriſts flesh is nothing els but to beleiue.

Oecolampadius in Hoſpin. l. cit. f. 75. Flesh eaten profiteth nothing, but the ſpirit. And in Schuſſelburg. lib. 1. Theol. Caluin Miſtica artic. 22. I do not read in the Euangeliſts, that they bidde receaue and eate Chriſts bodie.

Carolſtadius in Scuſſelburg l. cit. art. 28. This I know, that Chriſt neuer gaue his bodie that we should receaue it: For he ſaieth: My flesh profiteth you not.

Tigurins in Schuſſelburg lib. cit. artic. 23. His flesh on earth profited for to accomplish our ſaluation, now it profiteth no more.

Peter Martyr cont. Gardiner. col. 146. It is farre from the Chriſts bodie not to be truely eaten. He gaue not his bodie but bread. He exhibited not his bodie in ſubſtance. bodie of the Lord, to be truely eaten.

Confeſſio Czengerina c. de Caena p. 193. Yea after the pronouncing of Chriſts words, Chriſt gaue bread to the Apoſtles, and not his bodie.

Caluin defenſ. 2. cont. Weſtphal. pag. 774. I ſaied, that Chriſts bodie was exhibited effectually in the Supper, not naturally: according to vertue, not according to ſubſtance.

Beza Reſp. ad Acta Torgenſ. vol. 3. p. 68. What is eaten with the mouth, auaileth nothing to eternall and ſpirituall life.

Perkins in Cathol. reform. Cont. 10. c. 3. Though the bodie may be bettered with ſpirituall food of the ſoule, yet cannot the ſoule be fedde with bodily food.

Polanus in Grauer in Abſurdis Caluin. cap. 3. Thoſe words of Chriſt: Take, eate, are not ſpoaken of Chriſts bodie for nether The words not ment of his bodie. tooke he that into his hands, nether brake, nor gaue it to his diſciples. And albeit ſometimes they ſay in words, that they eate the bodie of Chriſt: yet they adde, that to eate is nothing but to beleiue, as we haue already repeated out of Zuinglius, and haue cited more places of their like ſayings in my Latin booke c. 10. art. 2. or by word Body, or Flesh, they vnderſtand not Chriſts true body or flesh, but ſome other thing, as the ſame Zuinglius doth Reſponſ. ad Luther. tom. 2. fol. 390. In Exegeſi fol. 350. and 333. and in Explicat. art. 18. tom. 1. fol. 37. In like ſorte, how beit ſometimes in words they ſay, they eate the ſubſtance of Chriſts bodie, yet Beza confeſſeth Apolog. 1. cont. Sainctem pag. 294. that vnwillingly they vſe the name Subſtance, and as he addeth Reſponſ. 3. ad Selneccer pag. 271. Manie of them refuſe it, and not without cauſe, and that is euident by the words now cited out of Caluin, and more by Bullinger in Hoſpin. part. 2. fol. 344. Where he ſaieth: Who knoweth not, that we are of their number, who do not admit this (word Subſtance) nor euer would admit it.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Chriſt gaue to his Apoſtles his bodie to be eaten, and his blood to be drunke: that vnleſſe we eate his flesh, we shall not haue life: that his flesh is truely meate. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that Chriſts flesh eaten profiteth nothing, nothing at all: that Chriſts true flesh, cannot be eaten ſpiritually, can be no way eaten; that it is farre from Chriſts bodie to be truely eaten: that Chriſts bodie is not exhibited in the Supper according to the ſubſtance thereof: that thoſe words: Take, eate, are not ſpoaken of Chriſts bodie: that Chriſts neuer gaue his bodie to be receaued, the Euangeliſts neuer commanded vs to receaue and eate it: that what is giuen to be eaten, is Chriſts ſymbolicall bodie, is but ſymbolicall bread, is nothing but bread and wine, onely a ſigne of Chriſts bodie: that Chriſt gaue bread to the Apoſtles, and not his bodie. Which are ſo cōtrarie to the holie Scripture, as themſelues ſometimes confeſſe it. See l. 2. c. 30.

ART. III. WHETHER CHRIST GAVE the blood of the new teſtament to be drunke?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Mathew 26. v. 28. Drinke ye all of this: For this is my blood The blood of the new teſtament to be drun • k. of the new teſtament.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Mathew 26. verſ. 28. Chriſt profeſſeth, that what we drinke in the chalice, is the blood of the new teſtament.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Zuinglius in Subſidio to. 2. fol. 245. Chriſt did not giue the Not the blood of the new teſtament. blood of the teſtament to drinke. Which he repeateth againe. And of the ſame opinion all the reſt are, who ether denie that Chriſt gaue his true blood to drinke, as we haue ſeene in the former chapter, for Chriſts true blood, is the blood of the new teſtament: or denie, that the Euchariſt is the teſtament, as we shall heare art. ſeq.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Chriſt gaue the blood of the new teſtament to be drunke. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely denie it.

ART. IV. WHETHER THE EVCHARISticall Chalice be the teſtament of Chriſt?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH. The Chalice was the new teſtament.

Luc. 22. v. 20. Chriſt ſaieth: This is the chalice, the new teſtament in my blood.

1. Corinth. 11. verſ. 25. This chalice is the new teſtament in my blood.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Card. Bellarm. l. 1. de Euchar. c. 11. As for the figure which they put in the word, Teſtament, I ſay there is none there: and he auoucheth, that the Euchariſt is properly the teſtament of Chriſt.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Iuel art. 10. ſect. 1. Nether was that cuppe in deed and really the It was not ths new teſtament. new teſtament. So alſo art. 12.ſect. 16.

Willet Cont. 13. q. 1. p. 595. The wine in the cuppe was not the new teſtament. 596. The blood is not the teſtament.

Peter Martyr in Hoſpin. part. 2. Hiſtor. fol. 257. Nether the cuppe it ſelfe, nor the liquor contained in it, is indeed the teſtament.

Zuinglius in Subſidio to. 2. fol. 245. This cuppe was not the blood of the teſtament, nor the teſtament itſelfe. De Caena fol. 291. The blood of Chriſt, is not the new teſtament, and much leſſe can we ſay, that this drinke is the new teſtament, howbeit it be called by this name. And the reaſon, why againſt the expreſſe word of God, he denieth the chalice to be the teſtament of Chriſt, he giueth l. de Relig. c. de Euchariſt. in theſe words: If the cuppe be the teſtament, it followeth, that it is the true and ſenſible blood of Chriſt.

Oecolampadius apud Zuinglium to. 2. fol. 499. It muſt needs be, that this chalice or cuppe be the ſigne of the couenant or new teſtament, not the new testament itſelfe indeed.

Beza in Lucae 22. v. 20. edit. An. 1565. Wine is called the couenant it ſelfe, whereas it is onely a ſymbol or badge of the couenant, or rather of that wherewith the couenant is made, to wit, of the blood of the Lord. In Colloq. Montisbel. pag. 38. I maruail, that you call the Supper of the Lord, a teſtament, which ſeemes very ſtrange to me. The Supper of the Lord is not the teſtament itſelfe, but onely a parte of the teſtament, that is, the ſeale thereof. The Cuppe cannot be the teſtament.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the chalice of the Euchariſt is the new teſtament. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that nether the chalice nor the liquor therein contained is the new teſtament: that nether the wine nor the blood of Chriſt is the new teſtament: that the Cuppe cannot be the new teſtament, but is onely a ſymbol or badge thereof or rather of the blood wherewith the teſtament was made: That the Lords Supper is not the teſtament, and that it were ſtrange to call it ſo. Which contradictiō of Scripture is ſo euident as diuers Proteſtants confeſſe it. See l. 2. c. 30.

ART. V. WHETHER AT THE VERIE time of Chriſts celebration of the Euchariſt, his bodie was giuen and deliuered and his blood shedde for vs?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Luc. 22. v. 19. And taking bread he gaue thanks, and brake, Chriſts bodie was giuē and his blood shed at Supper. and gaue to them ſaying: This is my bodie which is giuen for you. And S. Paul 1. Corinth. 11. verſ. 24. in Greek hath, which is broken: as alſo S. Mathew 26. verſ. 28. S. Mark. 14. v. 24. S. Luke c. 22. v. 20. ſpeake of the blood, or of the Chalice, in the preſent tenſe: Which is shedde.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Math. 26. v. 28. Thoſe words: Which shalbe shedde for you, are to be redde in the preſent tenſe according to all the Euangeliſts in the Greek text, and the ſenſe is: which is now diſtributed for you, and is by reall participatiō ſprinkled and inwardely powred into euerie one of you.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Iuel art. 17. ſect. 4. Chriſt gaue his bodie to be broken, and his blood to be shedde not at his laſt ſupper, but onely vpon his croſſe, and not where elſe.

Spalatenſis l. 5. cap. 6. ſect. 229. ſaieth, that the forecited words, can be no way true of the preſent time.

Peter Martyr cont. Gardiner. col. 354. But I pray you, tell vs once, what that is which remaineth and is broken? If you ſay, Not giuen or shedde at the Supper. Accidents; you wilbe laughed at by children: If you ſay. The bodie of Chriſt: you wilbe blaſphemous. Col. 812. But who will ſay, that Chriſt himſelfe or his bodie is broken in the Supper.

Moulins in his Bucler part. 2. pag. 91. Chriſt did not ſay, that his blood was shedde in the Euchariſt. Pag. 87. He ſpeaketh of a shedding which was not yet made, but to be made at his death.

Bucanus in Inſtitution. loco 48. Which is giuen: is not ſaied but by change of time preſent for that which is ſtreight to come, for, Which shalbe giuen, to wit, on the croſſe, not in the Euchariſt.

Reineccius to. 4. Armaturae c. 19. Chriſt vſed the time preſent for the future. The ſame ſaieth Caluin Admonit. vlt. p. 836. Beza in Math. 26. v. 28. Tilenus in Syntagm. c. 61.Micronius in Hoſpin. part. 2. f. 236.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that at the verie preſent time of the celebration of the Euchariſt, Chriſts bodie is giuen, Chryſoſtom, Theophilact, Oecum. in 1. Cor. 10. is deliuered, is broken, and his blood is shedde for vs. And the holie Fathers declare how it is moſt true. The Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that it is blaſphemie to ſay, that Chriſts bodie is broken in the Euchariſt: that his bodie is not brokē in the Supper: that his blood is not shedde in the Euchariſt: that Chriſt ſaied, which is giuen, for, which shalbe giuen, and tooke the preſent time for the future. Which are ſo cōtrarie to the Scripture, as diuers Proteſtāts confeſſe it. See l. 2. c. 30.

ART. VI. WHETHER THE CHALICE of the Euchariſt was shedde for vs?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Luc. 22. verſ. 20. This is the Chalice, the new teſtament in my blood, which (Chalice, as is euident in the Greek text) shalbe The Chalice shedde for vs. shedde for you.

CATHOLIKS EXPR • SSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Math. 26. v. 28 Keeping the grammaticall and right ſenſe of the words of S. Luke, as they are in Greek, where the Chalice it ſelfe is ſaied to be shedde in remiſsion of ſinnes, by the name of the Chalice we muſt needs vnderſtand not wine, but blood in the chalice.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker ad Ration. 1. Campiani. The Chalice was not Not shedde for vs. shedde for vs: And yet he confeſſeth; that if we ſtick to the words (of the Euangeliſt) we muſt ether ſay, that the Chalice was shedde for vs, or we muſt make falſe Greek.

Beza in Lucae. 22. v. 20. Theſe words cannot be vnderſtood of the wine, much leſſe of the Cuppe.

Muſculus in locis titul. de Caena: But if in Luke we reade: Which is shedde for you, that is not referred to the Cuppe, but to the blood. Againe: I thinke, that the word of Shedding in Saint Luke, is not to be referred to th • Cuppe of the Sacrament, but to the blood.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that the Chalice was shedde for vs, as is manifeſt by the Greek text, which alone Proteſtants account authenticall: in ſo much as not onely Lutheran Proteſtants confeſſe it, but alſo D. Willet though a a Caluiniſt. For thus he writeth Controu. 13. quaeſt. 1. pag. 595. The Paticiple shedde, agreeth with the Cuppe, not with my blood: as the Euangeliſt ſaieth: The Cuppe was shedde. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that the chalice was not shedde for vs; that theſe words cannot be vnderſtood of the Cuppe: that the word Shedde in S. Luke is not referred to the Cuppe: Which contradiction of Scripture is ſo plaine, as manie Proteſtants confeſſe it, nor can it he auoided by any better colour then by changing the Greek text, or by ſaying that Saint Luke wrote falſe Greek, who yet was an excellent Grecian as is euident by all his writings.

ART. VII. WHETHER BREAD BE NEceſſarie to make the Euchariſt?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Math. 26. v. 26. And whiles they were at ſupper, Ieſus tooke bread, and bleſſed and brake, and he gaue to his diſciples and ſaied: Bread neceſſarie to the Euchariſt. Take ye ad eate: This is my bodie.

Ioan. 6. verſ. 51. If anie man eate of this bread, he shall liue for euer: and the bread which I will giue is my f •• h for the life of the world.

1. Cor. 10. v. 16. The bread which we breake, is it not the participation of the bodie of our Lord?

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

S. Thomas 3. part. q. 74. art. 4. There muſt needs be bread of wheate, without which the Sacrament is not made.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Beza Epiſt. 2. vol. 3. Where there is no vſe of bread or wine, or no plentie at ſometime, may no Supper of the Lord be celebrated? yes it may be well celebrated, if that which is in ſteed of Bread not neceſſarie. bread and wine, ether by common, vſe or by occaſion of the time, be taken in place of bread and wine. Which very words are repeated by Hoſpin. part. 1, Hiſtor. c. 2.

Tilenus in Syntagmate c. 61. In theſe countries in which there is no plentie, no vſe of wheaten bread or wine preſſed out of of grapes, we doubt not but the Sacrament may be well celebrated, if that be vſed for this Symbol, which there is in ſteed of bread and wine.

Bucanus in Inſtitut. Theol. loco 48. What if bread, ſuch as we haue, and wine wante in any countrie, with what ſignes is the Supper to be celebrated? With thoſe earthlie elements and corporall meats, which all men in that countrie vſe for bread and wine, meate and drinke. So alſo teacheth Homius Diſput. 47. nether is it diſliked of Peter Martyr in 1. Cor. 10. Caluin alſo apud Bezam epiſt. 25. alloweth other drinke in ſteed of wine in places where wine wanteth.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that the Euchariſt is to be made of bread. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that bread is not neceſſarie: That where bread wanteth, there it may be made of other meats.

ART. VIII. WHETHER THE EVCHARIST may be made of azime or vnleauened bread?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Math. 2. ver. 17. is ſaied, that Chriſt celebrated the Euchariſt the firſt day of the Azimes: Et Marc. 14. v. 12. The firſt Chriſt vſed azime bread. day of the Azimes when they ſacrificed the Paſche: & Luc. 22. v 7. the day of the Azimes wherein it was neceſſarie that the Paſche should be killed. Now in the dayes of the Azimes it was forbidden Exod. 12. and 13. that there should be anie leauen bread amongſt the Iewes, and commanded, that he should die, who in that time had eaten leauen bread.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

S. Thomas 3. part. q. 74. art. 4. The cuſtome of celebrating in azime bread, is more agreable to reaſon.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Beza l. quaeſt. & reſponſ. vol. 3. I ſay freely, that there is a To vſe azime is a blemish: ſauoureth Iudaiſme. duble blemish in thoſe Churches, which rather vſe azime then leauen bread. For that ſauoureth Iudaiſme, and is leſſe agreable to our daily meat.

Lobechius Diſput. 12. thus writeth. The Zuinglian Caluiniſts Leauē bread, neceſſarie. deſpiſing azime bread with a Phariſaicall pride, yea curſing it, do thruſt leauen bread vpon the Church vnder opinion of neceſsitie.

Pareus Colleg. Theol. 9. diſput. 26. It muſt be houshould bread, for analogies ſake.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that Chriſt inſtituted the Euchariſt, the firſt day of the Azimes, when there was no leauen bread to be found amongſt the Iewes but onely azime: And Beza himſelfe loc. cit. confeſſeth, that Chriſt celebrated the Euchariſt in azime bread. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that we ought to make the Euchariſt rather of leauen bread then of azime, that to make it of azime, is a blemish, ſauoureth Iudaiſme, and is to be accurſed.

ART. IX. WHETHER THE BREAD and wine of which the Euchariſt is made, be to be bleſſed?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Mathew 26. verſ. 26. Ieſus tooke bread, and bleſſed and Bread and wine, bleſſed. brake; and he gaue to his diſciples, and ſaied: Take ye and eate: This is my bodie.

1. Cor. 10. v. 16. The chalice of benediction which we do bleſſe, is it not the communication of the blood of Chriſt?

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Math. 26. v. 26. An other circumſtance is, that he bleſſed the bread and chalice.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Zuinglius l. de Caena to. 2. f. 294. They should not vſe the The word of Bleſsing not to be vſed. words of Benediction and Bleſsing in this place. (1. Cor. 10. cit.) For commonly the vſe to be taken for the word of Conſecrating.

Caluin in Math. 26. v. 26. Mathew and Marke vſe the word of Bleſsing; but ſeing in place thereof we read in Luke the word Bleſsing, for Thanks giuing. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , there is no doubt of the ſenſe; and ſeing alſo, that in the Chalice they adde the word of thankes giuing, they clearly interprete their former ſpeach. Whereby the ignorance of Papiſts is more ridiculous, who expreſſe their bleſsing with the ſigne of the croſſe, as if Chriſt had vſed an exorciſme.

Muſculus in loc. tit. de Miſſa. To bleſſe, is not to conſecrate, but to giue thanks, and to ſpeake well of one; that I may not ſay, that nether Mathew, nor Marke, nor Paul haue vſed the word of Nether Mathew nor Paule vſed the word Bleſsing. Bleſsing in this matter. Of the ſame opinion are others, who will haue the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in S. Mathew, to ſignifie nothing but thanks giuing. And ſo haue the Bibles of K. Edward and of Q. Elizabeth 1562. tranſlated it.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Chriſt bleſſed the bread, and that we bleſſe the Chalice. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that bleſſing of bread is an exorciſme, that by, bleſſing, nothing is ment but thankes giuing, that we should not vſe it here, that nether Mathew nor Paul vſed it in this matter. Which contradiction of the Scripture is ſo cleare, as ſome Proteſtants confeſſe it. See l 2. c. 30.

ART. X. WHETHER THERE OVGHT to be made any preparation to the receauing of the Euchariſt?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Cor. 11. v. 28. But let a man proue himſelfe, and ſo let him eate of that bread, and drinke of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh vnworthily, eateth and drinketh iudgment to himſelfe.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Card. Bellarm. lib. 4. de Euchariſt. cap. 17. The Catholik Church teacheth, that preparation to the Euchariſt is not faith alone, but true pennance and confeſsion of ſinnes, if a man after baptiſme be fallen into mortall ſinne.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther Poſtilla in die Paſcae fol. 241. We taught, that it Preparation of no moment is of no moment and of no valew at all, whatſoeuer we prepare of our ſelues to receaue the Sacrament, as they did who by their confeſsion and by other workes would make themſelues worthie to receaue the Sacrament. Which is a horrible error and abuſe. Et. f. 242. We haue condemned them, and not without cauſe, who endeauour by their workes to come worthily.

The ſame Luther lib. de Captiuitat. Babilon. tom. 2. Onely erroneous conſciences worthily communicate. cap. de Euchariſt. Out of theſe things we conclude, who do worhily communicate: to wit onely they who haue ſadde, afflicted, troubled, confounded, and erroneous conſciences. Which doctrine Whitaker defendeth ad Ration. 8. Campiani pag. 41. Againe: By which thou ſeeſt, that to haue Maſſe worthily The more wicked, the nearer to grace. no other thing is required but faith. And apud Fabritium in artic. 20. Auguſtan. By how much the wickeder thou art, by ſo much the ſooner God giueth thee grace. And in pſalm. 5. tom. 3. fol. 172. I will ſay one thing rashly and bouldly: In this Blaſphemers, moſt gratefull to God. life, there are none nearer to God, then theſe haters and blaſphemers of God, nor anie more gratefull or louing children. Which alſo Whitaker mantaineth loco citat. And Concione de Praeparat. ad Euchar. An. 1518. The beſt diſpoſition Worſt diſpoſed, beſt diſpoſed. is no other, then that wherewith thou art worſt diſpoſed: and on the contrarie, then thou art worſt diſpoſed, when thou art beſt diſpoſed.

Schuſſelburg Catal. Haeret. tom. 8. pag. 216. Papiſts do Faith ſufficeth. impudently denie, that faith is a ſufficient preparation to receaue the Sacrament of the Euchariſt. Kemnice. 2. part Exam. tit. De preparat. p. 178. Faith alone is a ſufficient Praeparation. The like hath Caluin 4. Inſtit. c. 14. §. 26.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainly ſaieth, that a man muſt proue or prepare himſelfe to receaue the Euchariſt: that who receaueth it vnworthily, receaueth his iudgment. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that we muſt not make our ſelues worthie by workes; not endeauour by workes to come worthily: that they onely communicate worthily who bring troubled and erroneous conſciences: that we need nothing but faith: that the beſt diſpoſition is to be ill diſpoſed: that haters and blaſphemers of God are neareſt vnto him and moſt gratefull: that the more wicked one is, the ſooner God giueth him grace: that faith is a ſufficient preparation to the Euchariſt.

ART. XI. WHETHER THERE BE ANIE Sacrifice in the Church?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Malachie 1. v. 11. From the riſing of the ſunne to the going Sacrifice in the Church. downe great is my name among the Gentils, and in euerie place there is ſacrificing, and there is offered to my name a cleane oblation. cap. 3. verſ. 3. He shall purge the Sonnes of Leui, and will ſtreyne them as gould and ſiluer, and they shalbe offering ſacrifices to our Lord in iuſtice.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent. Seſſ. 24. c. 1. Chriſt in his laſt ſupper, that he might leaue a viſible ſacrifice to his beloued Church, as the nature of man requireth, offered his bodie and blood to God the Father vnder the formes of bread and wine.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Cont. 4. q. 1. c. 2. There is now no more Sacrifice No Sacrifice in the Church remaining in the Church.

Caluin in 1 Cor. 9. v. 19. The Lord inſtituted no Sacrifices in which holie Miniſters should be occupied. And becauſe the Proteſtants opinion in this matter is well enough knowne, I will rehearſe no more of their ſayings.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that in the Church there is Sacrifice and offering of a cleane oblation, and Sacrifice in iuſtice. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that there is no more Sacrifice in the Church. And yet Whitaker Controu. 3. quaeſt. 6. pag. 2. 615. writeth thus: Without Preiſthood there is no Church. And Vallada Apologia cont. Epiſcop. Luzon. c. 26. No man denieth, but the celebration of the Eucharist is a true Sacrifice.

ART. XII. WHETHER THERE BE AN altar in the Church?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Hebrew • 13. v. 10. We haue an altar, whereof they haue no Chriſtians haue an altar. power to eate which ſerue the tabernacle.

Iſaie 19. ver. 10. In that day there shalbe an altar of our Lord in the middeſt of the land of Egypte, and a title of our Lord to the border thereof.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 24. c. 1. The Apostle Paul writing to the Corinthians, when he ſaieth, that they who are polluted with participation of the table of Diuels, cannot be made partakers of the Table of our Lord, by a table in both places vnderſtandeth an altar.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Caluin in 1. Corinth. 9. verſ. 19. There are no altars to They haue nō •• tar. ſacrifice.

Beza in Colloq. Montisbel. p. 350. Paul maketh mention Paul ſpeaketh not of an altar. of a table of the Lord, and not of an altar. Ad Repetit. Sanctis c. 4. I confeſſe, there is no altar in the Chriſtian Church. And l. Quaeſt. & Reſp. vol. 3. In the Apoſtolicall writings there is no mention of an altar, but onely of a table of the Lord.

Peter Martyr in Rom. 11. Altars haue no place in the time of the Ghoſpel. Herein alſo the Proteſtants doctrine is well knowne.

THE CONFERENCE

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that we haue an altar. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay that we haue no altar, that Paul maketh no mention of an altar, that there is no mention of an altar in the writings of the Apoſtles.

ART. XIII. WHETHER THE PASCHAL lambe was ſacrificed?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Marc. 14. v. 12. And the firſt day of the Azimes, when they Paſcal lambe ſacrificed. ſacrificed the Paſche.

Exod. 12. ver. 6. And the whole multitude of the children of Iſrael shall ſacrifice him (Paſcal lambe) at euen.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent. Seſſ. 24. c. 1. The multitude of the children of Iſrael did ſacrifice the ould Paſche in remembrance of their going out of Egypt.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins in Cathol. reform. Controu. 11. c. 5. The Paſchal No ſacrifice. lambe was a ſacrament, but no ſacrifice. The ſame hath Pleſſie l. 2. de Miſſa c. 2.

Reineccius to. 4. Armaturae c. 19. The holie Bible no where Not ſacrificed. teacheth, that the Paſchal lambe was immolated and ſacrificed.

Tilenus in Syntagmate c. 64. We do not graunt, that the Paſchal lambe was a ſacrifice properly called: yea Moiſes expreſſely denieth, that it was a ſacrifice.

Pareus in Colloq. Theol. 9. diſput. 27. The Minor is falſe: That the Paſchal lambe was a ſacrifice properly called.

Beza in Marci. 14. v. 12. I vſed the word of Killing, rather then of Sacrificing, that the domeſticall bankets of the Paſche might be diſtinguished from thoſe Sacrifices which in the temple were done of the Preiſts.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the Paſchal lambe was ſacrificed. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that it was not ſacrificed, that it was no proper ſacrifice, that it was a domeſticall banket: that Moiſes expreſſely denieth, it to be a Sacrifice. Which is ſo repugnant to Scripture, as ſame Proteſtants confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF the Euchariſt.

Out of all which hath beene rehearſed in this chapter, it is cleare, how different an Euchariſt Proteſtants haue from that which the holie Scripture propoſeth. For the Scripture, and Catholiks with it, teacheth, that the holie Euchariſt is the true bodie and blood of Chriſt, that it is his teſtament: that Chriſts flesh is to be eaten, that whileſt the Euchariſt was inſtituted Chriſts bodie was giuen and his blood shedde for vs: that the chalice was shedde in remiſſion of ſinnes; that bread is a neceſſarie matter of the Euchariſt: that vnleauened bread is a couenient matter, and that we muſt prepare our ſelues to receaue the Euchariſt. Moreouer the Scripture teacheth, that there is a Sacrifice and altar in the Church, and that the Paſchal lambe (which was a figure of the Euchariſt) was ſacrificed: all which Proteſtants do denie.

It is cleare alſo, that Proteſtants do ſteale from the What Proteſt. ſteale from the Euchariſt. Euchariſt the trueth of the bodie and blood of Chriſt, the nature of his teſtament, the neceſſitie of bread, the conueniencie of vnleauened bread to make it of, and neceſſitie of our preparation to receaue it. They ſteale alſo eating and drinking from the flesh and blood of Chriſt, & oblation and shedding of them when the Euchariſt was inſtituted. And from the Church they ſteale both Sacrifice and altar, and ſacrificing frō the Paſchal lambe. And thus much of the Euchariſt: Now of the other Sacraments.

CHAPTER XI. OF THE OTHER SACRAMENTS.

ART. I. WHETHER PREISTS CAN forgiue ſinnes?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

MATHEW 16. v. 19. And I will giue to the the keyes Preiſts can forgiue ſinnes. of the kingdome of heauen—And whatſoeuer thou shalt looſe on earth, it shalbe looſed in heauen.

Math. 16. v. 19. Amen, I ſay vnto you, whatſoeuer you shall binde vpō earth, shalbe bound alſo in heauen: and whatſoeuer you shall looſe vpon earth, shalbe looſed alſo in heauen.

Ihon. 20. v. 24. And he ſaied to them: receaue ye the Holie Ghoſt: Whoſe ſinnes you shall forgiue, they are forgiuen them, and whoſe you shall retaine, they are retained.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent. Seſſ. 14. Can. 9. If anie shall ſay, that the Sacramentall abſolution of the Preiſt is not a iudiciall act, but a bare miniſterie of pronouncing or declaring that ſinnes are forgiuen, be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins Galath. 4. tom. 2. The Pope challengeth to They cannot. himſelfe proper and iudiciall power of forgiuing and reteining ſinnes.

Zuinglius in Art. 51. to. 1. Who attributeth remiſsiō of ſinnes to a creature, robbeth God of his glorie, and is an idolater.

In reſp. ad Luther. to. 2. f. 430. Theſe words: whoſe ſinnes you shall forgiue &c. haue not that ſenſe, as if Chriſt in ſpeaking thē would giue his diſciples power to forgiue ſinnes. In Expoſit. fidei They cannot certifie a man of forgiuenes of his ſinnes. ib. f. 557. Wherefore all theſe things ſeeme friuolous: I abſoluethee, I certifie thee, that thy ſinnes are forgiuen. This is deceit and mere trifles. Et in Hebr. 6. to. 4. he ſaieth, that Chriſt ſpooke the words cited out of Math. 18. by hyperoche, or ouerlashing.

Bullinger in Marci. 2. Men do not forgiue ſinnes, but teach that they are or haue beene forgiuen in Chriſt by faith.

Caluin in Ioan. 20. v. 22. He made the Apoſtles onely witneſſes or preachers of this benefit (of remiſſion of ſinnes) And 4. Inſtit. c. 11. §. 1. For Chriſt gaue not this power properly to men, but to his word, whereof he madde men miniſters.

Beza in Confeſſ c. 5. ſect. 27. We muſt beleiue, that nether They cannot properly binde or looſe. Paſtors, nor Doctors can properly binde, or looſe anie, or open the kingdome of heauen to anie. For it is proper to God alone to remit or retaine ſinnes, and indeed ſo proper, as he communicateth this glorie with none at all.

Zanchius de Eccleſ. c. 9. to. 8. Power of forgiuing ſinnes is not giuen properly to the Apoſtles themſelues or to others, but to their Miniſterie or to the Ghoſpell. For they do not properly forgiue ſinnes, but the Ghoſpell bringeth remiſsion of ſinnes to thoſe that beleiue.

Daneus Cont. 4. c. 9. Chriſt gaue power of forgiuing ſinnes to his Apoſtles, as to Miniſters that do onely declare his benefit towards faithfull men, not as ſuch that worke and effect the forgiueneſſe of ſinnes.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the keyes of the kingdome of heauen are giuen to paſtours of the Church: that what they looſe or forgiue on earth, is looſed or forgiuen in heauen: that the Holie Ghoſt was giuen them that by vertue of him they might forgiue ſinnes. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay: that God communicateth power of forgiuing ſinnes to none at all; that it is idolatrie to attribute this power to anie creature: that Miniſters of the Ghoſpell do not properly looſe any, that they forgiue not ſinnes, but onely declare it; that they are onely witneſſes & declarers of this benefit: that vertue of forgiuing ſinnes is giuen to the Goſpell, not to men. Which is ſo plainly againſt the Holie Scripture, as ſome Proteſtants confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. II. WHETHER WE MVST CONfeſſe our ſinnes to men?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Iames 5. v. 16. Confeſſe your ſinnes one to an other. Sinnes are to be confeſſed to men.

Actes 19. v. 18. And manie of them that beleiued came confeſsing and declaring their deeds.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 14. Can. 6. If anie shall denie that Sacramentall Confeſsion was inſtituted, or is neceſſarie by Gods law, be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

French Confeſſion art. 14. Auricular Confeſsion was forged Not to be conf • ſſed to men. in Sath • ns shoppe: It is a deuiſe of men.

Willet Controu. 14. q. 6. p. 736. It is not neceſſarie to make confeſsion at all to men.

Confeſſio Argentinenſis c. 20. Nether Chriſt nor the Apostles would commana it.

Luther in Poſtilla Epiphaniae. God requireth not this confeſsion to men. Serm. de 10. Leproſis tom. 7. Confeſsion of ſinnes is forbidden.

Caluin in Refutat. Cathalani. The lawmade of auricular Law of confeſsion, diuelish. confeſsion, is diuelish: It is an intolerable corruption, if you ſearch into it from the beginning and foundation.

Iuel defenſ. Apologie part. 2. c. 6. diuiſ. 1. Thus much onely we ſay: That priuat confeſsion to be made vnto the Miniſter, is nether commanded by Chriſt, nor neceſſarie to ſaluation.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely commandeth, that we confeſſe our ſinnes to men, and telleth that the firſt Chriſtians did confeſſe their ſinnes. That ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that it is not neceſſarie to confeſſe to men, that nether Chriſt nor his Apoſtles commanded it, that God requireth it not: that it is forbidden, is a diuelish law and deuiſe of man and of Sathan.

ART. III. WHETHER GRACE BE GIVEN by Impoſition of hands?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

2. Tim. 1. v. 6. I admonish thee, that thou reſuſcitate the grace Grace giuen by impoſition of hands. of God, which is in thee by the impoſition of my hands.

Actes 8. verſ. 18. And when Simon had ſeene, that by the impoſition of the handes of the Apoſtles the Holie Ghoſt was giuen, he offered &c.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 23. Can. 4. If anie shall ſay, that by holie ordination the Holie Ghost is not giuen: be he accurſed. Et ib. c. 3. ſaieth, that by holie orders grace is giuen.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Caluin in 2. Tim. 1. ver. 6. cit. The queſtion is, whether grace Not giuen by impoſition of hands. were giuen by the externall ſigne (of impoſition of hands.) To which queſtiō I anſwere: As often as Ministers were ordered, they were commended to God by the praiers of the whole Church, and by this means grace was obtained of God for them, but not giuen them by vertue of that ſigne. The ſame Caluin in Actor. 8. v. 15. Luke here ſpeaketh not of the common grace of the Spirit, wherewith God doth regenerate vs for ſonnes to himſelfe, but of eſpeciall guifts. In c. 6. v. 6. Hence we gather, that impoſition of hands, ſith it was vſed of the Apoſtles, is a comelie and ſeemlie rite, but yet hath not of it ſelfe any efficacie or vertue, but the force and effect dependeth of God alone.

Beza Apologia altera cont. Sainctem vol. 2. p. 325. In the Miniſterie, the ceremonie of impoſition of hands, doth not make a Miniſter, as you verie ignorantly vſe to vrge, but teſtifieth to the Church, that he is already made. And l. quaeſt. & reſponſ. vol. 3. pag. 347. We must hould, that there were neuer any Miniſters of the Church made by impoſition of hands: but who had beene lawfully called to the Miniſterie, were ſo put as it were in poſſeſsion of their function. Of the ſame opinion are they, who thinke that Impoſition of hands is not neceſſarie to Miniſters, as Brentius in Apol. pro Confeſ. Writemberg c. de ordine. Herbrandus Diſput. 11. Beurlinus in Refutat. Soti c. 67. Conciliabulum Pariſienſ. An. 1565. artic. 7. and much more they, who forbidde impoſition of hands, as Pſeudoſynodus Dordracenſis An. 1574. art. 23. in theſe words: The brethren concluded, that Impoſition of hands is to Impoſition of hands, forbidden. be omitted.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the grace of God and the Holie Ghoſt are giuen by Impoſition of hands. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that grace is not giuen by impoſition of hands: that it hath no efficacie or vertue, but that the effect is of God alone: that by it paſtours are not made, yea that it is not neceſſarie to them, but to be omitted.

ART. IV. WHETHER HANDS BE TO BE impoſed vpon them that haue beene baptized?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Act. 8. v. 16. and 17. For he (Holie Ghoſt) was not yet come Hands impoſed vpon the baptized. vpon anie of them: but they were onely baptized in the name of our Lord Ieſus. Then did they impoſe their hands vpon them and they receaued the Holie Ghoſt.

Act. 19. v. 5. and 6. Hearing theſe things, they were baptized in the name of our Lord Ieſus: and when Paul had impoſed his hands on them, the holie Ghoſt came vpon them.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Actor. 8. v. 17. In theſe words is deſcricbed an other Sacrament of the Church different from the baptiſme; which is called Impoſition of hands by reaſon of the forme which Luke here telleth that the Apoſtles vſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Caluin in Actor. 8. v. 17. cit. Let vs remember, that Impoſition Impoſition of hands is now a vaine fanſie. of hands was the instrument of God, at what time he beſtowed the viſible graces of his Spirit vpon his ſeruants: but ſince the Church hath wanted ſuch riches, it is onely a vaine fanſie. And 4. Inſtitut. c. 19. §. 6. he calleth Catholiks, Stage players, becauſe they ſay they imitate the Apoſtles in impoſing hands vpon thoſe that are baptized.

Gualterus in Actor 8. homilia 58. We know, that out of this place, Papiſts haue brought in the Sacrament of Confirmation, but it is ſo ridiculous, as &c.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the Apoſtles impoſed their hands vpon thoſe that were baptized. The ſame Catholiks ſay.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that it is a vaine fanſie and ridiculous to impoſe hands vpon thoſe that are baptized.

ART. V. WHETHER MATRIMONIE be a Sacrament?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Epheſians 5. v. 31. For this cauſe shall man leaue his father Matrimonie a Sacrament. and mother, and shall cleaue to his wife, and shalbe twoe in one flesh. This is a great Sacrament; but I ſpeake in Chriſt and in the Church.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councell of Trent Seſſ. 24. can. If anie shall ſay, that Matrimonie is not truely and properly one of the ſeauen Sacraments of the Euangelicall law inſtituted by Chriſt our Lord, but inuēted of men in the Church, nor giueth grace; be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Confeſſio Heluet. c. 19. We confeſſe, that Matrimonie is a No Sacramēt. profitable inſtitution of God, but not a Sacrament. In like ſorte the English Confeſſion art. 25.

Iewel defenſ. Apolog. p. 185. Marriage of it ſelfe is nether Of itſelfe, not good. good nor ill.

Whitaker l. 8. cont. Dur. ſect. 64. What more foolish, then to make a Sacrament of Matrimonie?

Caluin 4. Inſtit. c. 19. §. 34. What ſober man would euer haue thought, that Matrimonie was giuen for a Srcrament. And others, as we shall ſee hereafter c. 15. art. 2. ſay, that Matrimonie is nothing, nor maketh a man any whit the better.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that Matrimonie in Chriſt & the Church, that is, among Chriſtians, is a great Sacrament. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that Matrimonie is no ſacrament, that it is follie and madneſſe to make it a ſacrament: that of it ſelfe it is not good, is nothing, nor maketh a man better. Which contradiction of Scripture is ſo manifeſt, as ſame Proteſtants confeſſe it. See l. 2. c. 30.

ART. VI. WHETHER ONE WIFE BEING diuorced one may marrie an other?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Luke. 16. verſ. 18. Euerie one that dimiſſeth his wife, and No marriage after diuorce. marrieth an other, committeth aduoutrie: and he that marrieth her that is dimiſſed from her husband, committeth aduoutrie.

Marc. 10. v. 11. Whoſoeuer dimiſſeth his wife, and marieth an other, committeth aduouttie vpon her. And if the wife dimiſſe her husband, and marrie an other, he committeth aduoutrie. v. 6. Which God hath ioyned together let no man ſeparate.

1. Cor. 7. v. 10. But to them that be ioyned in matrimonie, not I giue commandment, but our Lord, that the wife departe not from her husband, and if she departe, to remaine vnmarried, or to be reconciled to her husband. And. v. 39. A woman is bound to the law ſo long time as her husband li • eth: but if her husband ſleepe, she is at libertie, let her marrie to whome she will, onely in our Lord.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Councel of Trent. Seſſ. 24. Can. 7. If anie shall ſay, that the Church doth erre, when it taught and doth teach according to the Euangelicall and Apoſtolicall doctrine, that the bande of Matrimonie cānot be broken for the adulterie of one of the married parties: and that nether, no not the innocent partie which gaue no cauſe of the adulterie, can marie againe whiles the other partie liueth: be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRMI.

Willet Controu. 15. quaeſt. 2. pag. 782. For fornication, our New marriage after fornication. Sauiour hath granted libertie both to diſſolue matrimonie, and to marrie againe.

Confeſſio Saxonica. cap. 18. Marriage is not forbidden to the innocent partie, when the cauſe being knowne, she is pronounced free.

Confeſſio Scotica. We deteſt his (Popes) crueltie againſt the innocent reiected by diuorce.

Pſeudoſynod of Midelburg An. 1581. art. 57. If anie for adulterie haue ſeparated himſelfe from his wife, and will not be reconciled againe with her, and deſire leaue of a new marriage, the Presbyterie (the adulterie being firſt proued) shall declare, that it is lawfull by the word of God.

Luther in 1. Cor. 7. to. 5. What if the one partie will not be recōciled to the other, but will abide ſeparated, and the other, not able to containe, should be enforced to marrie, what should be doe, may he marrie with an other? I anſwere, that without doubt And other offences. he may. Againe: If the husband would teach or force his wife to ſteale, to adulterate, or committe any other crime againſt God, it is the ſame reaſon of diuorce with the other, that vnleſſe they be reconciled, a new marriage may be made. Furthermore. What if the ſecond marriage did not fall out right, that the one partie should vrge the other, the husband the wife, or contrariewiſe, to liue wickedly like Pagans, or if the one would flie from the other vntill the third or fourth marriage were made, may he marrie of wife as often as she is ſuch as we haue ſpoaken of, ſo that he haue at once ten or more fugitiue wiues? And againe shall it be lawfull A woman may haue ten husbands liuings. for the wife to haue ten or more husbands who all are fled from her? I anſwere, that we cannot ſtoppe S. Pauls mouth, who, as often as it is needfull, will vſe his doctrine: his words are cleare. The like he hath ib. Sermon de matrimonio, where alſo fo. 123. he addeth: If the Miſtreſſe will not, let the Maide come.

Bidembachius in Conſenſu Ieſuitarum & Chriſtian. p. 1588. Who reiecting his wife for whordome, marieth an other, doth not commit adulterie.

Beza in Confeſſ. c. 5. ſect. 39. To whome diuorce is lawfully Mariage lawfull after diuorce. graunted, if reconcilement cannot be procured within the time appointed, to them we giue leaue to marrie a new. And epiſt. 10. he writeth, that Bucer and moſt of the Proteſtāt Churches in Germanie giue leaue to marrie a new for leproſie: to whome (ſaieth he) we leaue their iudgment free, as is reaſon.

Perkins de Serm. Dom. to. 2. col. 261. By reaſon of whordome Whordome diſſolueth mariage. marriage is diſſolued. The ſame is the common doctrine of Proteſtants, as you may ſee more in my Latin booke art. 6.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that euerie one and whoſoeuer dimiſſeth his wife and marrieth an other committeth aduoutrie: that a woman parted from husband muſt be reconciled to her husband or remaine vnmarried: that she is bound to the law of marriage ſo longe as her husbād liueth: that man cannot ſeparate thoſe whome God hath ioyned. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that who hauing put away his wife for adulterie, marrieth an other, doth not commit aduoutrie; that one may marrie againe for aduoutrie, for malitious forſaking, for deniall of coningall dutie, for incitation to wickedneſſe, for leproſie; that whordome diſſolueth marriage, that one may haue ten or more fugitiue wiues at once: that if the Miſtreſſe will not, the Maide may be called.

ART. VII. WHETHER THEY WHO lie a dying are to be anointed with oile?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Iames 5. v. 14. Is anie man ſick among you? Let him bring in the preistes of the Church, and let them pray ouer him, anoiling The ſick are to be anointed with oile. him with oile in the name of our Lord, praier of faith shall ſaue the ſicke, and our Lord shall lift him vp, and if he be in ſinnes, they shalbe remitted.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 14. Can. 2. If anie shall ſay, that the holie anoiling of the ſicke giueth not grace, nor remitteth ſinnes, nor lightneth the ſicke, but that is now ceaſed, as if in ould time is had beene onely the grace of curing: be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Confeſſio Saxonica art. 19. That which is now called extreme Not to be anointed with oile. vnction, is now a ſpectacle full of ſuperſtition. Confeſſ. Heluet. c. 19. calleth it a deuiſe of man. Et Confeſſ. Writemberg. An vnprofitable and idle ceremonie.

Caluin 4. Inſtitut. c. 19. §. 18. Of the ſame nature is the anoiling of the ſick, to wit, an hiſtrionicall hipocriſie; It pertaineth not now to vs.

Beza in Confeſſ. c. 7. ſect. 11. The ſacrament of anoiling, is idle and vaine, and now altogether ſuperſtitious.

Hoſpinian part. 2. Hiſtor. f. 23. The preiſts were commanded, that they should not anoile thoſe that dyed, for that was ſuperſtitious and contrarie to the expreſſe word of God.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that thoſe thall lie a dying, are to be anoiled with oile, and it promiſeth remiſſion of ſinnes to them. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that this anoiling pertaineth not to vs, that it is hypocriſie, an idle, and vaine ceremonie, and contrarie to the expreſſe word of God.

ART. VIII. WHETHER THE SACRAments of the ould law were of equall vertue with oures.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Hebr. 10. v. 1. For the law hauing a shaddow of good things to Sacraments of the ould law shadows of the new. come, not the very image of the things &c.

Coloſſ. 2. verſ. 17. Let no man therefore iudge you in meate or in drinke, or in parte of a feſtiuall day, or of the new moone, or of the Sabboths, which are a shaddow of things to come, but the bodie Chriſts.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 7. cap. 2. If anie shall ſay, that the very ſacraments of the new law, do not differ from the Sacraments of the ould law, but becauſe they be other ceremonies and ether rites, be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Whitaker l. 8. cont. Dureum. ſect. 39. Paul expreſſely teacheth, Equall to the Sacraments of the new law. that the Iſraelites had the ſame ſacraments in ſubſtance which Chriſt deliuered vnto vs.

Confeſſio Heluet. c. 19. For ſo much as belongeth to that which is the cheefe and the ſubſtance in the ſacraments, the ſacraments of both people were equall.

Lutherus l. de Captiuit. to. 2. fol. 75. It cannot be, that the new ſacraments do differ from the ould ſacraments.

Caluin 4. Inſtitut. cap. 14. §. 23. The Apoſtle ſpeaketh not more honorably of them, then of theſe. In the ſacraments he maketh them equall to vs. Whatſoeuer he gaue vs in the Sacraments, the ſame the Iewes in ould time receaued in theirs, what vertue ours haue, the ſame alſo they felt in theirs.

Beza ad Repetit. Sanctis c. 8. p. 30. Vnleſſe with the Apoſtle, you make the ould ſacraments the ſame indeed, there wilbe litle or no difference at all betweene the true God, and the falſe God of Marcion.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that the Sacraments of the ould law differed from the ſacraments of the new, as much as a shaddow differeth from the image or from the bodie it ſelfe. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that in ſubſtance they were the ſame, were equall, did not differ, that what vertue we receaue in our Sacraments the Iewes felt the ſame in theirs.

THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF the other Sacraments.

The things which haue be declared in this chapter do euidently demonſtrate, how differently Proteſtāts thinke of the other Sacraments from the holie Scripture. For the Scripture together with Catholiks teacheth, that Preiſts forgiue ſinnes, that ſinnes are to be confeſſed to men: that grace is giuen by Impoſition of hands, that hands are to be impoſed vpon thoſe that are baptized: that Matrimonie is a Sacrament, that one wife being put away it is not lawfull to marrie an other: that thoſe who lie a dying are to be anointed with oile: that our Sacraments are more excellent then thoſe of the ould law. All which are denied of Proteſtants.

They alſo shew, that Proteſtants in this matter alſo keepe their ould cuſtome, and ſteale from Preiſts power to forgiue ſinnes; ſteale away the neceſſitie of confeſſing ſinnes to men: from the baptized they ſteale impoſition of hands, and from the impoſition of hands, vertue to giue grace: from Matrimonie alſo they ſteale the nature of a Sacrament, and the indiſſolubilitie thereof, from thoſe that die, their anoiling, and from all our Sacraments their excellencie and vertue aboue the Sacraments of the ould law. And thus farre of the Sacraments: Now touching Faith.

CHAPTER XII. OF FAITH.

ART. I. WHETHER FAITH BE A WORKE, or to beleiue, be to doe?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

I HON. 6. v. 28. 29. They ſaied therefore to him: Faith is a worke. what shall we doe that we may worke the workes of God? Ieſus anſwered and ſaied to them: This is the worke of God that you beleiue in him whome he hath ſent.

Act. 16. verſ. 30. The Gailer ſaied to S. Paul and Hilas: Maiſters, what muſt I doe that I may be ſaued: But they ſaied: To beleiue, is to doe. Beleiue in our Lord Ieſus, and thou shalt be ſaued and thy houſe.

Iames 2. v. 19. Thou beleiueſt, that there is one God. Thou doeſt well.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Ioan. 6. v. 30. The worke of faith, becauſe it is a worke of man wherewith he beleiueth and giueth glorie to God, is an actiue and free worke.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther de Captiuit. Babilon. to. 2. fol. 71. Faith is no worke. Faith is no worke.

Caluin in Ioan. 6. v. 29. It is euident enough, that Chriſt ſpeake improperly, when he called faith a worke.

Beza ib. They are very ridiculous, who out of this place do inferre, that faith is a worke.

Pareus l. 4. de Iuſtif. c. 17. It is falſe, that we are iuſtified by the worke of faith, or that faith is a worke.

Tilenus in Syntagmate c. 40. But nether (if we will ſpeake) properly) can faith be called a worke.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that faith is a worke of God or a diuine worke: that to beleiue, is to doe. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that faith is no worke: that they are ridiculous who ſay faith is a worke: that it is falſe that faith is a worke.

ART. II. WHETHER FAITH BELEIVETH any thing beſides Gods promiſes?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Ioan. 17. v. 3. And this is life euerlaſting, that we know thee, Faith knoweth God and Chriſt. Beleiueth the reſurrection of Chriſt. Vnderſtandeth the creation. Beleiueth Ieſus the Sonne of God. the onely true to God, and whome thou haſt ſent Ieſus Chriſt.

Rom. 10. verſ. 9. For if thou confeſſe with thy mouth our Lord Ieſus, and in thy hart beleiue that God hath raiſed him vp from the dead, thou shalt be ſaued.

Hebr. 11. v. 3. By faith, we vnderſtand that the worlds were framed by the word of God.

1. Ioan. 5. v. 5. Who is he that ouercometh the world, but he that beleiueth that Ieſus is the Sonne of God?

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 6. Can. 12. If anie shall ſay, that iuſtifying is nothing els but a truſt of the mercie of God forgiuing ſinnes for Chriſt; be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther in Geneſ. 15. to. 6. f. 178. Surely faith, is nothing els, Faith, nothing but an aſſent to the promiſes. nor can do any thing els, but aſſent to the promiſes. Poſtilla in Epiſt. Dom. 3. Aduentus fol. 31. Faith is nothing els, then a firme, conſtant, perſeuerant truſt farre from all doubt and wauering, of Gods grace and good will to endure for euer. A truſt of Gods grace.

Melancthon in Coloſſ. 1. Faith ſignifieth not knowledge of the hiſtorie, for ſuch is in the Diuels, but an aſſent wherewith we embrace the promiſe.

Hutterus in Analyſi Confeſſ. Auguſtan. art. 4. To beleiue Nothing but a full truſt. in Chriſt, is nothing els, but with full truſt of mynd to relie vpon the Euangelicall promiſes of free pardon of ſinnes, and out of them to promiſe vndoubtedly to himſelfe Gods grace, ſaluation, and euerlaſting life, for the merit and redemption wrought by Christ. Againe: There is one onely and the ſame obiect (of faith) in reſpect whereof it is ſaied to ſaue, to wit, the onely promiſe of Gods mercie of free pardon of ſinnes, by and for Chriſt.

Gerlachius Diſput. 17. to. 2. There is no other obiect of iuſtifying faith properly and ſpecially ſo termed, then the word of the Ghospell of the grace and mercie of God and merit of Chriſt.

Lobechius Diſput. 22. Others do erre in the obiect of faith Gods whole word not the obiect of faith. which they make the whole Scripture for the obiect of iuſtifying faith.

Bucer in 1. Timoth. 4. v. 15. Faith is nothing els, but a firme perſuaſion of ſaluation gotten by Chriſt.

Beza in 1. Tim. 4. v. 15. Faith is nothing els, but a firme perſuaſion of our election in Chriſt. In Confeſſ. 4. ſect. 5. Faith is not that, wherewith onely we beleiue God to be God, and his word to be true, for the Diuels haue this faith. c. 7. ſect. 8. Faith is not an hiſtoricall knowledge of things reuealed by God, but a certaine testimonie which the Spirit giueth to the harts of all the elect, that they are choſen of God. And in breui Confeſſ. p. 82. That indeed is it which we call faith ſo much commended in the Scripture, to wit, when a man certainly perſwadeth himſelfe that the promiſes of ſaluation and life euerlaſting do peculiarly belong to himſelfe.

Zanchius de Perſeuerant to. 7. col. 172. What other thing is faith, then a certaine perſuaſion conceaued of the free good will of God towards vs in Chriſt?

Serranus cont. Hayum part. 3. p. 211. Faith is wholy about the promiſes. The like hath Caluin 3. Inſtit. c. 2. §. 8. and de vera reform. p. 318. and others.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that that is iuſtifying faith wherewith we beleiue the true God and Chriſt Ieſus: Wherewith we beleiue the reſurrection of Chriſt, the creation of the world, and Chriſt to be the Sonne of God. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſaye, that iuſtifying faith is not that wherewith we beleiue the ſacred hiſtorie of Chriſt, wherewith we beleiue things reuealed of God, wherewith we beleiue Gods word to be true: but that it is all about the promiſes, hath no other obiect then the promiſes, is nothing but an aſſent to the promiſes, is nothing but a truſt of grace, nothing but a perſuaſion of ſaluation.

ART. III. WHETHER BELEIVE THAT Chriſt is God, be iuſtifying faith, or profiteth anie man?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Ioan. 20. verſ. 31. And theſe are written that you may beleiue To beleiue Chriſt to be the Sonne of God, ſaueth. that Ieſus is Chriſt the Sonne of God, and that beleiuing, you may haue life in his name.

1. Ioan. 4. ver. 15. Whoſoeuer shall confeſſe, that Ieſus is the Sonne of God, God abideth in him and he in God. The like is 1. Ioan. 5. v. 5. and Rom. 10. v. 9. cit. in the former article.

Math. 16. v. 17. When S. Peter had ſaied: Thou art the Sonne of the liuing God, Ieſus anſwering ſaied vnto him: Bleſſed art thou Simon Bariona.

Act. 8. v. 37. When S. Philip had ſaied to the Eunuch: If thou beleiue with all thy hart, thou maieſt: he anſwering, ſaied: I beleiue that Ieſus Chriſt is the Sonne of God.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Card. Bellarm. l. 1. de Iuſtificat. cap. 8. This faith which regardeth Chriſts diuinitie, is that which giueth iuſtice and life euerlaſting.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther Poſtilla in Dom. 5 poſt. Paſca fol. 263. Here we To beleiue that Chriſt is God and Mā helpeth none. ſee, that to beleiue in Chriſt is not to beleiue that Chriſt is one perſon which is God and man, for that would helpe none. F. 260. What is it then, to beleiue in Chriſt? It is not to beleiue that he is God, or that he ruleth in heauen equally with God, for this manie others beleiue. In Gal. 3. to. 5. f. 346. It is a feigned faith, which Beleefe of all the Miſteries of our redēption is a feigned faith. heareth of God, of Chriſt, and of all the miſteries of the incarnation and redemption, and apprehendeth theſe things heard.

Hutterus in Analyſi Confeſſ. Auguſt. art. 4. Iuſtifying faith, is not anie whatſoeuer, but a faith of Ieſus Chriſt, not wherewith we beleiue Chriſt or that there is a Chriſt—The Epiſtle to the Hebrews in he whole eleuenth chapter putteth the obiect of it diuers and manifould, but faith cannot, nor must not be ſaied to iuſtifie in regard of them all.

Zuinglius in Ioan. 2. to. 4. Manie beleiue Chriſt to be the Sonne of God, that he was borne, ſuffered, and raiſed from death: but this faith iuſtifieth not.

Sadeel in Reſp. ad Artic. abiurat. 33. It is not ſufficient, if I beleiue that Ieſus Chriſt came into the world, ſuffered death, roſe againe, and aſcended into heauen: For this hiſtoricall faith will not ſaue me. Of the ſame opinion are other Proteſtants, as appeareth by their words cited in the former article, as alſo becauſe they denie that the Catholik or (as they ſpeake) hiſtoricall faith wherewith we beleiue what God hath reuealed generally to all, is iuſtifying faith, and likewiſe becauſe they will haue iuſtifying faith to be onely a ſpeciall truſt, which euerie elect man hath of Gods fauour towards himſelfe.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the faith of the diuinitie of Chriſt, maketh God to abide in vs, and vs in God, that it maketh men bleſſed, is that which ſufficieth to baptiſme, and which giueth life. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that faith wherewith Chriſt, is beleiued to be God and man helpeth none: that that faith wherewith all the miſteries of our redemption are beleiued, is a feigned faith: that it is no iuſtifying faith wherewith we beleiue Chriſt, or that he was borne, ſuffered, and roſe againe.

ART. IV. WHETHER IVSTIFYING faith be one?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Epheſ. 4. v. 5. One Lord, one faith, one baptiſme. Faith is bu • one.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Iuſtif. c. 5. There are not manie faithes: For there is but one faith by reaſon of one and the ſame formall obiect, whereby all things are beleiued.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Scharpe de Iuſtif. Contr. 1. Iustifying faith according to Faith is twoefould. the diuerſitie of the ſubiect, is twoe fould; one of Infants, an other of men. The faith of Infants can nether haue knowledge nor application of the promiſes of grace, as in men it hath, yet Infants haue their notions ſtirred vp by the Holie Ghoſt.

Polanus 2. part. Theſ. tit. de Fide p. 611. Infants, albeit Infants haue a different faith from men. they haue not the ſame faith in all points that men haue, by reaſon of the weakneſſe of their organs; yet they haue ſome thing correſpondent to it, which the Holie Ghoſt worketh immediatly in them according to their capacitie and ſtrenght, for their iuſtification.

Caluin 4. Inſtitut. cap. 16. §. 19. I will not rashly ſay, that Infants are indued with the ſame faith which we feell in our ſelues. Et §. 21. If hauing receaued baptiſme, they departe this life before they come to years of diſcretion, God reneweth them by the vertue of his ſpirit in a manner vnknowne to vs, which himſelfe alone knoweth.

Beza in Explicat. Chriſtianiſmi vol. 1. p. 186. Faith is in a manner twoefould. One wherewith Chriſt is knowne in common and as it were generally, to wit, wherewith we aſſent to the hiſtorie of Chriſt and the propheties written of him, which faith is ſometimes giuen euen to the reprobates: An other, which is proper and peculier to the elect. In Colloq. Montisbel. pag. 402. The learnedeſt Diuines of our age, do not ſay, that faith it ſelfe is actually infuſed into the mynd of Infants, but onely ſome beginning thereof, and as it were ſome ſeed or roote. Wherefore Iacobus Andreae ib. fol. 403. ſaieth: Your worshippe (if I haue well vnderſtood you) diſcourſeth of a double kinde of faith, whereof A double kinde of faith the one is ioyned with vnderſtanding; the other is eſteemed of you like to ſeede.

Kemnice in 2. part. Exam. Concil. Trid. p. 92. denieth, that Infants haue the ſame faith which men haue, but ſome other thing, which (ſaieth he) we nether well vnderſtād, nor can expreſſe by words what it is, yet we call it faith, becauſe Scripture calleth that inſtrument wherewith the kingdome of heauen is gotten, faith.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture as plainely ſaieth, that there is but one faith, as it ſaieth that there is but one God, one baptiſme. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that faith is twoefould, that Infants haue ſome things correſpondent to faith, that they haue not altogether the ſame faith that men haue: that they are renewed in a manner vnknowne to vs, that they haue onely a beginning root, or ſeed of faith, that we know not what it is which they haue in ſteed of of our faith: that there is a twoefould faith, one with vnderſtanding, an othet without: that there is one faith of Infants, an other of men: one of the elect, an other of reprobats.

ART. V. WHETHER ALL THE ARTIcles of faith may be beleiued without the Holie Ghoſt?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Math. 16. v. 17. Flesh and blood hath not reuealed it to thee, Faith not without the holie Ghoſt. but my Father which is in heauen.

1. Corint. 12. v. 3. No man can ſay: our Lord Ieſus, but in the Holie Ghoſt.

2. Cor. 3. v. 5. Not that we be ſufficient to thinke any thing of our ſelues as of our ſelues: but our ſufficiencie is of God.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

D. Stapleton lib. 8. Princip cap. 2. It is an errour: that anie can beleiue all the articles of faith by onely humane faith.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Whitaker Contr. 1. q. 4. c. 1. We may in ſome ſorte know all the doctrine of Scripture, and haue hiſtoricall faith by the All articles may be beleiued without the holy Ghoſt. miniſterie of the word, ſo that we know all the articles of faith and iudge them to be true, and that without internall light of the Holie Ghoſt, as manie wicked men and the Diuels doe.

Perkins in Gal. 2. to. 2. fol. 89. The Papists define iustifying faith, that is a guift of God wherewith we beleiue the articles of faith and all the word of God to be true. But this faith the diuels haue. The ſame ſay Melancthon and Beza cited in the former article and others, who teach that diuels may haue the ſame Catholik, or (as they ſpeake) hiſtoricall faith, wherewith the miſteries of faith are beleiued, which Chriſtians haue. Wherevpon thus writeth Pareus in Gal. 3. lection. 32. Without truſt, it would be onely hiſtoricall faith, which euen hypocrites haue, yea the Diuels themſelues, who know and beleiue the Ghoſpell, to be true.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that flesh and blood reueale not the diuinitie of Chriſt, but the heauenlie Father: that none cā call Ieſus Lord but in the Holie Ghoſt: that of our ſelues we are not able ſo much as to thinke any good. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that without the light of the Holie Ghoſt we can iudge all the articles of faith to be true: that it is not a guift of God te beleiue all the articles of faith and all Gods word to be true, but that the diuels themſelues do beleiue ſo much.

ART. VI. WHETHER FAITH BE DIſtinct from Hope and Charitie.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Cor. 13. ver. 13. And now there remaine Faith, Hope, Charitie, Faith is diſtinct from Hope and Charitie. theſe three, but the greater of theſe is charitie.

Ibid. ver. 2. If I should haue all faith ſo that I could remoue mountaines, and haue not charitie, I am nothing.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in 1. Corint. 2. v. 12. We beleiue S. Paul, not Caluin, that theſe, faith, hope, charitie, are three. They are three, they are diſtinct, they are not one and the ſame; there is one nature of faith, an other of hope, an other of charitie.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Zuinglius l. de ver. & falſ. relig. c. de Merito to. 2. But who Faith, all one with Hope and Charitie. vnderſtand not, that faith, hope, and charitie are the ſelfe ſame thing, to wit, this truſt in God, wilbe forced to let paſſe manie knots in Scripture vnlooſed. Againe: If hope ſaue, and faith ſaue, faith and hope shalbe the ſame thing. And ſoone after: Faith and charitie muſt be the ſame thing. Nether let here anie merueill and feare, that theſe three Theologicall vertues are confounded of vs. Surely we haue learned this out of Scripture, that vnleſſe euerie one of theſe vertues be each other, it is quite nothing, much leſſe a vertue. Et c. de Euchar. Faith is hope and truſt. In Reſp. ad Luther. f. 397. The ſame nature and of ſpring is of faith and loue, yea both theſe are one & the ſelfe ſame thing. The like he hath in 1. Cor. 13. to. 4. And generally all Proteſtants confound faith with hope, in that they ſay, (as we shall ſee hereafter art. 14.) that faith is truſt, and truſt ether is ſtrong hope, or (as we shall heare P. Martyr there teach) differeth not from hope.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that Faith, Hope, and Charitie, are three things. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that they are the ſelfe ſame thing, that they are confounded, that each one of them is the other.

ART. VII. WHETHER FAITH BE greater then Charitie?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

1. Cor. 13. v. 13. And now there remaine Faith, Hope, Charitie, Faith leſſe then Charitie. theſe there, but the greater of theſe is charitie.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

S. Thomas in 1. Cor. 13. v. 13. Theſe three remaine now, but charitie is greater then all.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Confeſſio Auguſtana c. de diſcrim. ciborum in Melancthon. to. 3. The doctrine of Iustice by faith muſt be eminent in Faith aboue workes. the Church, that faith which beleiueth ſinnes to be remitted for Christ, be placed farre aboue workes. Et c. de bonis operibus. Amongst good workes, the chiefeſt and higheſt worshippe of God, is faith it ſelfe.

Tindal in Fox p. 1144. We can shew vnto God no greater The diuineſt of all Gods guifts. honour, then to haue faith and truſt in him.

Perkins in Hebr. 11. Hence we gather, that faith is more diuine, then all the reſt of Gods guifts.

Peter Martyr in locis claſ. 3. c. 3. §. 6. Faith, as it is a worke, ſurpaſſeth by manie degrees other workes.

Luther in Galat. 3. to. 5. fol. 346. If charitie be the forme of faith as they dote, ſtreight waies I am forced to thinke, that charitie is the chiefeſt and greateſt parte of Chriſtian religion, and ſo I leeſe Chriſt. In c. 4. fol. 382. Who ſo teach faith, as they attribute more to charitie then to faith, they greatly dishonour Chriſt, and wickedly depraue his word. De Captiuit. Babil. to. 2. The moſt excellente worke of all. The chiefeſt. f. 74. Faith is the moſt excellent worke of all workes. Poſtilla in Feria S. Ioannis fol. 93. Whatſoeuer the Ghoſpell teacheth or commandeth of workes, it ſo teacheth and commandeth, as it maketh faith the chiefe. Et in Dom. Quinquageſim. f. 207. More noble then Charitie Faith is more worthie, better, and more noble then charitie.

Herbrandus in Compendio Theol. loco. de Iuſtificat. Faith is the chiefeſt and hardeſt worshippe which we can giue to God.

Lobechius Diſput. 9. Faith hath the firſt and higheſt degree amongeſt all goods.

Reineccius to. 4. Armaturae c. 18. Yea faith is greater then Greater then Charitie. Aboue Charitie. charitie.

Caluin in 1. Cor. 13. v. 13. If we ſift all the effects of faith and compare them, faith wilbe found to be ſuperiour in manie points. Yea charitie it ſelfe, as the Apoſtle teacheth 1. Theſſalon. 1. is the effect of faith, but without doubt the effect is inferiour to the cauſe.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Charitie is greater thē Faith. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that faith is to be placed aboue workes, is greater, nobler, better then charitie, more diuine then the other guiftes of God: that charitie is inferiour to faith.

ART. VIII. WHETHER FAITH MAY BE without Charitie or good workes?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Ioan. 12. v. 42. Of the Princes alſo manie beleiued in him, but Faith without workes. for the Phariſees they did not confeſſe, that they might not be caſt out of the Synagogue. For they loued the glorie of men more then the glorie of God.

1. Cor. 13. v. 2. If I should haue all faith, ſo that I could remoue mountaines, and haue not charitie, I am nothing.

Iames 2. v. 14. What shall it profit my brethren, if a man ſay, he hath faith, but hath not workes?

Dauid alſo when he abuſed the wife of Vrias and procured him to be ſlayne, had not charitie towards his neighbour nor towards God, whome he ſo greatly offended: Nor S. Peter had charitie to Chriſt, when he denied and foreſwore him. In whome at thoſe times faith was without good, yea with verie euill workes.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent. Seſſion. 6. cap. 15. We muſt teach, that by euerie mortall ſinne, the grace of iuſtification is loſt, though not faith.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Concion. vlt. p. 695. Who thinke, that true faith Faith neuer void of good workes. may be idly, or void of good workes, do beleiue againſt the Confeſsion of our Church.—That is a falſe faith, which is not ioyned with the keeping of the commandments.

Iewel in Defenſe of the Apologie. p. 304. Yea ſay: Faith True faith without workes. without workes is neuertheleſſe a true and reall faith. Verily, ſo is fire without heat a true and reall fire.—If the wicked without good workes haue a true and reall faith, then may you alſo ſay, that the Diuel likewiſe hath a true and reall faith. This faith is no faith. It is onely an imaginarie and Mathematicall phantaſie.

Apologia Confeſſ. Auguſtanae c. 3. Our aduerſarie teach, Not with mortall ſinne. that faith may be with mortall ſinne. c. 5. They dreame that faith can ſtand with mortall ſinne. C. de reſp. ad argumenta. Faith without good workes, is hypocriſie. Liber 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 of theſe Princes (a foreſaied) albeit weake, yet was true and liuelie. The ſame ſaieth Pareus l. 1. de Iuſtificat. c. 15.

Caluin in Antidoto Concilij Seſſ. 6. Can. 28. I denie not, Faith liuelie, euen in moſt grieuous ſinnes. that ſome ſeed of faith remaineth in a man euen in moſt grieuous falls. That, how litle ſoeuer it be, I confeſſe to be a parcell of true faith, and liuelie alſo.

Zanchius in Confeſſ. c. 27. to. 8. The faith of the elect alwaies liueth.

Contra remonſtrantes in Collat. Hagae. 396. It is not ſaied here: If faith be defiled with any (grieuous) ſinne, that that faith is dead: for ſo no man should haue liuelie faith. Of the ſame opinion are all Lutherans, who ſay, that faith before and without good workes doth iuſtifie: and Sacramentaries alſo, who teach that iuſtification of faith remaineth in the faithfull, what ſinnes ſoeuer they commit. For faith ſaieth doth not iuſtifie or giue life whiles it is dead, but onely whiles it is liuelie, if it iuſtifie without good workes, yea with verie ill workes, cleare it is, that it is not dead or idle, but liuelie without good, or with ill workes.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that faith without good workes is dead, is dead in it ſelfe, is dead as a bodie without the ſoule: that all faith without charitie, is nothing. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that faith without workes is not dead, is not nothing, is not vnprofitable: that though it be defiled with great ſinnes, yet it is not dead: that it nether can be, nor cā be ſaied to be dead: that in grieuous falls it is liuelie, euen in thoſe Princes who loued the glorie of men more then the glorie of God.

ART. XI. WHETHER THE FAITH whereof S. Iames ſpeaketh be true or iuſtifying faith?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Iames 2. verſ. 22. Seeſt thou, that faith did worke with his Saint Iames ſpeaketh of iuſtifying faith. (Abrahams) workes, and by the workes the faith was conſummate, and the Scripture was fulfilled, ſaying: Abraham beleiued God, and it • as reputed him to iuſtice. Et v. 24. Do you ſee, that by workes a man is iuſtified, and not by faith onely?

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l 1. de Iuſtif. cap. 15 many waies proueth that S. Iames ſpeaketh of iuſtifying faith.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker l. 1. cont. Dureum ſect. 13. That Iames denieth He ſpeaketh of a diuelish faith. vs to be iuſtified by faith onely, is to be vnderſtood of a vaine, feigned, dead, imaginarie, and diuelish faith. The like hath Iewel cited before art. 8.

Zuinglius in Iacob. 2. to. 4. ſaieth S. Iames ſpeaketh of a counterfeit, emptie, and vaine faith.

Caluin in Iacob 2. v. 17. & 19. He ſpeaketh not of faith. In v. Of a dead image of faith 14. He ſpeaketh of a dead image of faith, of a falſe profeſsion.

Beza in Iacob. 2. v. 14. It is not true faith, but a dead image.

Peter Martyr in locis claſ. 3. c. 3. §. 23. Iames maketh mentiō of a dead faith, but that is no faith.

Pareus l. 4. de Iuſtif. c. 18. For Iames deuideth not iuſtification He remoueth faith from iuſtification. betweene faith and workes (as the Sophiſters would) but wholy remoueth faith, as a dead thing, from iustification.

THE CONFERENCE

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that S. Iames ſpooke of faith which did worke with the workes of Abraham, which was conſummate by his workes, wherewith Abraham did beleiue, which was reputed to him for iuſtice, and by which a man is iuſtified but not alone. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants ſay, that the faith whereof S. Iames ſpeaketh was not iuſtifying faith, was not faith, was not true faith, was a vaine, feigned, imaginarie, and diuelish faith, was a counterfeite and dead image of faith.

ART. XII. WHETHER ANIE FAITH be full or perfect and of ſome account in the ſight of God?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Mathew 15. v. 28. Then Ieſus anſwering ſaied to her: O Woman Some faith great. Full. great is thy faith.

Act. 6. v. 5. And they choſe Steuen a man full of faith and of the Holie Ghoſt.

Rom. 4. v. 18. Who contrarie to hope beleiued in hope. Et v. 19. Strong. And he was not weakened in faith.

2. Cor. 8. v. 7. In all things you abuond in faith. Aboundant.

Heb. 10. ver. 22. Let vs approch with a true hart in fulneſſe of faith.

Iames 2. verſ. 22. And by the workes the faith was conſummate. Conſummate.

1. Petri 1. v. 7. That the triall of your faith much more pretious Pretious. then gould, which is proued by the fire, may be found vnto praiſe.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Rom. 4. v. 2. The act of faith wherewith the vnderſtanding is captiuated vnto the obedience of Chriſt, is an act of notable vertue.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Iacobus Andreae in Colloq. Montisbel. p. 106. Faith is Faith is imperfect. imperfect, and no man beleiueth ſo firmely as he is bound to doe.

Caluin. 3. Inſtit. c. 11. §. 7. Faith, albeit of it ſelfe it be of no Of no worth. worth or value, iuſtifieth vs bringing Chriſt: as a pitcher filled with money doth enrich a man. In Math. 9. v. 22. We ſee, that faith hath need of pardon, for to pleaſe God. In Act. 6. v. 8. Nether muſt we imagin any perfection of faith, becauſe he (Saint Steuen) was ſaied to be full of faith.

Beza in Colloq. Montisbel. pag. 28. It neuer came in our Not perfect. mynd to ſay, that there was any perfect faith in any.

Peter Martyr in locis claſſe. 3. c. 3. §. 6. Which I ſay, not, that I thinke, that we are iuſtified by faith as it is a worke, for it is defiled with many ſpottes of our infirmitie. c. 4. §. 8. If faith it ſelfe be conſidered as it is worke, we cannot be iuſtified by it, ſith it is a worke lame and inperfect and farre worſe then the law requireth; but we are ſaied to be iuſtified by it as by it we apprehend and applie to our ſelues the promiſes of God and iuſtice & merits of Chriſt. Imagin a moſt filthie hand leprous and of ſome beggar, Like a moſt filthie and leprous hand. with which he receaueth almes of the giuer, ſurely that beggar is not holpen of the filthineſſe or leproſie of his hand, but of the almes which he taketh with what kinde of hand ſoeuer. And in Roman. 11. he compareth our faith, to a weake, leprous, and ſcabbie hand.

Pareus de Iuſtificat. c. 7. It is not abſurd: that with faith is Sinfull. mingled ſometimes diſtruſt or incredulitie which is a ſinne, and that ſo by an accident faith is ſinne. Againe: Faith iuſtifieth, as a beggar by a ſcabbie hand receaueth almes.

Pareus in c. 31. Enchiridij S. Auguſtini. If we conſider how Not worthie the name of vertue. faith is of it ſelfe and in vs, it is imperfect, lame, polluted, and defiled and mingled with infidelitie, ſo that it is not truely worthie of the name of vertue. Of the ſame opinion are all Proteſtāts who as we shall ſee in the next chapter thinke that all our good workes are defectuous and ſinfull. For in this, the ſame reaſon is of faith and good workes.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that ſome faith is great, full, abundant, conſummate, in hope againſt hope, nor weake, and more pretious then tried gould. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that euerie faith is imperfect, none perfect, none of anie worth or value, euerie one needeth pardon, is ſinne, is defiled with manie ſpots, worſe then the law requireth, lame, polluted, defiled with infidelitie, like a moſt filthie, leprous, and ſcabbie hand, and not truely worthie of the name of vertue.

ART. VIII. WHETHER FAITH BE CONſummate or perfected by good workes of charitie?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Iames 2. v. 22. Seeſt thou, that faith did worke with his workes, Faith perfected by workes. and by workes the faith was conſummate?

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

S. Thomas 2. 2. quaeſt. 4. artic. 3. Charitie is called the forme of faith, in that by charitie the act of faith is perfected and formed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther in Gal. 2. to. 5. f. 296. The true Ghoſpell is: that workes Workes no perfection of faith. or charitie are not the ornament or perfection of faith.

Bullinger Decade 3. Serm. 9. That opinion is altogether vnworthie of a Christian, which affirmeth, that our faith is perfected by workes, that is, that by workes is ſupplied that which wanteth to faith.

Caluin in Iacob. 2. v. 22. Faith is ſaied to haue beene perfected Faith not perfected by workes. by workes, not that it taketh its, perfection thence but becauſe thereby it is proued to be true. The ſame ſay other Proteſtants commonly.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that faith is conſummate or perfected by workes. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that faith is not adorned or perfected by workes: that workes do not perfect faith: that faith taketh not her perfection from workes.

ART. XIV. WHETHER BY FAITH WE do onely know that we are iuſtified?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Luc. 7. v. 50. And he (Ieſus) ſaied to the woman: Thy faith Faith maketh ſafe. hath made thee ſafe: goe in peace.

Rom. 1. c. 17. The iuſt liueth by faith. The ſame is Galat. 3. Giueth life. Hebr. 10. & Abacuc. 2.

Rom. 3. v. 30. For it is one God, that iuſtifieth circunciſion Iuſtifieth. by faith and prepuce by faith. c. 5. v. 1. Being therefore iuſtified by faith, let vs haue peace towardes God.

Act. 26. verſ. 18. That they may receaue remiſsion of ſinnes, and lot among the ſaints by the faith that is in me.

Gal. 2. ver. 16. We alſo beleiue in Chriſt Ieſus that we may be Saueth. iuſtified by the faith of Chriſt.

Epheſ. 2. v. 8. By grace you are ſaued through faith.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Iuſtif. c. 17. Let vs proue that true faith, is not (as our aduerſaries would) a bare and ſole apprehenſion of iuſtice, but a cauſe, and that it hath vertue of iustifying.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Zuinglius in Expoſit. Fidei to. 2. f. 557. We ſay, that ſinnes Faith onely make • h vs certaine of forgiueneſſe. are remitted by faith; whereby we meane nothing els then to ſay, that onely faith maketh a man certaine of the remiſsion of his ſinnes. De Prouidet. c. 6. to. 1. f. 371. Iuſtification and Saluation are attributed to faith, whereas they proceed onely from Gods election and liberalitie, and faith followeth the election, ſo that who haue it, may know as it were by a ſigne and pledge that they are elected. Et in Rom. 8. to. 4. If we will ſpeake properly, election Faith ſaueth not. ſaueth, not faith: but becauſe faith is a certaine ſigne that thou art an elect, it is attributed to faith, which pertaineth to election.

Sutclif. l. 2. de Eccleſ. c. 6. The iuſtice, wherewith we are iuſt Iuſtification dependeth of no act of ours. before God doth not depend of anie temporall act of man, but of the eternall decree of God, and is then indeed when a man beginneth to beleiue. The like hath Perkins in Serie Cauſarum c. 57. Abbots in Diatribam Tomſoni c. 4. He should remember, that before God we are actuallie iuſtified from all eternitie: in We are iustified from all eternitie. Faith perſwadeth vs of our iuſtification. whome yet this is not reuealed and manifeſted but in due time.

Piſcator in Theſibus l. 2. loco 8. When we ſay: we are iuſtified by faith, we meane, that by faith we are certainely perſwaded, that God imputeth iuſtice to vs, or remitteth our ſinnes for the ſatisfactiō and obedience of Christ. Of the ſame opiniō are they, who (as we shall ſee in the next article) denie, that faith is neceſſarie to iuſtification or ſaluation. For that sheweth, that in their opinion faith hath no other function in iuſtification, then to know it and to make vs certaine thereof. And perhaps for this cauſe, they both call faith an apprehenſion of iuſtice, and define it to be aknowledge of Gods will towards vs (as Caluin doth 3. Inſtit. c. 2. §. 6. and in Catheciſmo c. defide) or a perſuaſion of iuſtification or ſaluation, as do Bucer and Beza cited art. 2. For knowledge or perſuaſion doth no way cauſe the thing, but onely maketh vs certaine of it.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that we are iuſtified by faith, receaue remiſſion of ſinnes by faith: that we liue by faith, are ſaued by faith, that faith maketh vs ſafe. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that we are actually iuſtified from all eternitie, that our iuſtification dependeth of no temporall act of ours: that our iuſtification is then reuealed whē we begin to beleiue: that to be iuſtified by faith, is to be perſwaded that God imputeth iuſtice to vs: that ſinnes to be remitted by faith, is nothing els, but men to be made certaine by faith that their ſinnes are remitted.

ART. XV. WHETHER FAITH BE NEceſſarie to iuſtification or ſaluation?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Marc. 16. v. 16. He that beleiueth not, shalbe condemned. Faith neceſſarie to ſaluation.

Ioan. 3. v. 18. He that doth not beleiue, is already iudged, becauſe he beleiueth not in the name of the onely begotten Sonne of God. Et v. 36. He that is incredulous to the Sonne, shall not ſee And iuſtification. life, but the wrath of God remaineth vpon him.

Hebr. 11. v. 6. Without faith, it is impoſsible to pleaſe God.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 6. c. 7. Without faith none was euer iuſtified.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Willet Cont. 12. q. 5. p. 574. Chriſt dwelleth in Infants by his Not neceſſarie to iuſtification. Holie Spirit, though they haue no faith. The ſame he repeateth Contr. 13. q. 1. p. 592. Et Cont. 12. cit. p. 569. Infants haue nether faith nor charitie.

Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 6. c. 3. Baptiſme infuſeth not faith or any grace into Infants.

Perkins Cathol. reform. Contr. 16. c. 1. pag. 271. Though a Deſire to beleiue, is ſufficient. deſire to repent, and to beleiue, be not faith and repentance in nature, yet in Gods acceptation it is, God accepting the will for the deed. p. 272. Now if any shall ſay, that without a liuelie faith in Chriſt none can be ſaued: I anſwere, that God accepts the deſire to beleiue for liuelie faith, in the time of temptation and in the time of our firſt conuerſion. p. 273. Certaine it is, that God in ſundrie caſes accepts of this deſire to beleiue, for true faith indeed, See Rogers on the 25. Art. p. 147.

Zuinglius de Prouidentia to. 1. fol. 370. It is not generall. Faith not neceſſarie to ſaluation. that who hath not faith is to be damned. Againe: As for the damnation of the incredulous, they onely are vnderſtood, who heard and beleiued not, of others we cannot iudge. De Peccato orig. to. 2. f 118. That (who beleiueth not shalbe damned) is not to be vnderstood abſolutely, but of thē who hauing heard the Ghoſpell would not beleiue. Et in Expoſit. Fidei to 2. fol. 659. Heathens may be ſaued. he ſaieth, that in heauen we shall find Hercules, Theſeus, Numa and ſuch like Pagans; and his opinion therein defend the Tigurins in their Confeſſion of faith: Bullinger in the Preface thereof. Gualter in Praefat. operum Zuinglij, & in Apologia pro eodem. And the ſame doctrine of the ſaluation of Pagans mantayne Eraſmus, Thommer, Hardenberg, Toſſanus and other Proteſtants as Schluſſelburg reporteth l. 3. Theol. Caluin art. 7.

Bucer in Math. 19. Furthermore, out of that that Infants Infants ſaued without faith. want faith, nothing leſſe is concluded, then (which ſome thinke) that therefore they pleaſe not God, nor are Saintes.

Muſculus in locis tit. de baptiſmo. Infants are ſaued by Gods election, albeit they be taken out of this life not onely without baptiſme, but alſo without faith.

Caluin in Math. 19. v. 14. That they auouch, that we are no other waies reconciled to God and made heires of adoption, then by faith, that we confeſſe of ſuch as are of diſcretion, but for ſo much as pertaineth to infants this place conuinceth it to be falſe. Et 4. Inſtit. c. 16. §. 29. & 31. & li. cont. Seruet. p. 647. he writeth, that that ſentence: Euerie one that beleiueth not the Sōne of God, abideth in death, belongeth not to infants.

Beza in Colloq. Montisbel. p. 407. Albeit the children of Chriſtans want faith, yet is not baptiſme vnprofitable to them.

Daneus Controuerſ. de Baptiſmo c. 10. He asketh, what No faith needfull to Infants. faith it is which we require in the baptiſme of Infants: I anſwere, None.

Peter Martyr in Schluſſelburg. l. 1. Theol. Caluin art. 18. The children of faithfull parents are ſaintes by the mere mercie of God, though they haue not true faith in Chriſt.

Hungari apud Grauer. in Abſurdis Caluin cap. 4. ſect. 25. The children of Chriſtians cannot be properly ſaied to haue faith; yet all that are predeſtinate amongst them are ſaued and obtaine the kingdome of heauen.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that who beleiueth not, shalbe condemned, is already iudged, shall not ſee life, that the wrath of God abideth vpon him, and that it is impoſſible to pleaſe God without faith. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that Chriſt dwelleth in Infants though they haue no faith; that they pleaſe God, are ſaued, are Saintes without faith: that the ſentence of condemnation againſt incredulous belongeth nether to infants, nor to ſuch as haue not heard the Ghoſpell: that a man may be ſaued with deſire of faith, though he haue no faith indeed: that in diuers caſes God accepteth the deſire of faith for liuelie faith: that diuers Pagās are ſaued. Which are ſo contrarie to Scripture as diuers Proteſtants confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. XVI. WHETHER FAITH DO INdeed iuſtifie, or be a true cauſe of iuſtification?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

The holie Scripture in the places cited before artic. 14. Faith is a true cauſe of Iuſtification and Saluatiō. ſaieth, that we are iuſtified by faith, receaue remiſſion of ſinnes by faith, liue of faith, are ſaued by faith.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 6. cap. 8. Faith is the beginning of mans ſaluation, the foundation and roote of all iuſtification.

〈1… pages missing〉

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Confeſſio Belgica art. 22. Properly speaking, we meane not, Faith it ſelfe doth not iuſtifie. that faith it ſelfe, by it ſelfe, or of it ſelfe doth iuſtifie vs, as which is onely as it were an instrument, with which we apprehend Chriſt our iuſtice.

Whitaker ad Demonſtrat. 10. Sanderi. Faith is not cauſe No cauſe of ſaluation. of our ſaluation.

Perkins in Galat. 3. Faith doth not cauſe, worke, or procure Saluation dependeth not of faith. our Saluation. In Serie cauſarum cap. 57. Saluation dependeth not of our faith. The ſame hath Sutclife cited art. 14.

Illyricus in Claue Scriptur. part. 2. tract. 6. col. 551. Faith, the word, and Sacraments are ſaied to ſaue vs, whereas God alone doth ſuch things. col. 552. It is often ſaied: Thy faith hath made thee ſafe, whereas the onely mercie of God and his omnipotencie apprehended by faith doth that. Whereupon he addeth, that Faith no true cauſe ſaluation. in the Scripture; Effects are often times attributed to not true, or not to principall cauſes.

Zuinglius in Elencho to. 2. f. 34. Here is a diffcultie: Hou faith doth make bleſſed or iuſtifieth—But whatſoeuer ſeemeth hard to looſe, flieth a ſunder with a ſmall ſtroke of the figure ſynechdoche. For faith is taken for the election, the predestination, and vocation of God, all which goe before faith.

Bucanus in Inſtit. Theol. loco 31. Nether the worke nor act Faith doth not iuſtifie vs of faith doth iuſtifie vs, but Chriſt himſelfe whome we apprehend by faith.

Pareus l. 1. de Iuſtif. c. 17. It cannot be ſaied with out plaine abſurditie, and falſitie, that we are iuſtified by faith or out of faith, as by an efficient or formall cauſe. Againe: By no means that efficiencie or vertue of iuſtifying can be aſcribed to faith, without abſurditie and falſitie.

Tilenus in Syntagmate c. 41. This ſpeech: Faith doth iuſtifie vs, is figuratiue and metonymicall, and hath this ſenſe: God iuſtifieth the beleiuer for the merit of Chriſt, which the beleiuer by onely faith apprehēdeth. c. 56. Baptiſme goeth before ſaluatiō, but cauſeth it not, which we giue not to faith properly, but onely metaleptically.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that Faith truely cauſeth iuſtification and ſaluation. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that faith is no cauſe of our ſaluation, nether worketh not procureth our ſaluation: that our ſaluation dependeth not vpon our faith: that faith doth not iuſtifie vs: that without abſurditie and falſitie it cannot be ſaied faith is ether efficient, or formall cauſe of iuſtification, or hath vertue of iuſtifying.

ART. XVII. WHETHER FAITH BEING alone and without good workes can iuſtifie?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Iames 2. v. 14. What shall it profit my brethren, if a man ſay he hath faith, but hath not workes? Shall faith be able to ſaue him? v. 24. Do you ſee, that by workes a man is iuſtified, and Faith alone doth not iuſtifie nor ſaue not by faith onely. The ſame proue the places before cited, which affirme that faith without workes is dead.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 6. c. 7. Faith doth not perfectly vnite to Chriſt, nor maketh a liuelie member of him, vnleſſe to it be adioyned hope and charitie.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Confeſſio Belgica art. 24. We are iuſtified by faith in Chriſt, and that alſo before we haue done any good workes.

Luther in Gal. 2 to. 5. fol. 310. This faith, doth iuſtifie before Iuſtified before workes. and without charitie. fol. 312. It is an errour and impietie to ſay, that infuſed faith doth not iuſtifie, vnleſſe it be adorned with Faith without charitie doth iuſtifie. the workes of charitie. Et in Diſput. to. 1. f. 371. vnleſſe faith be without anie euen the leaſt workes, it doth not iustifie, nay it is 〈◊〉 • a • th.

Liber Concordiae Lutheran. c. 3 We reiect and condemne, That faith doth not iuſtifie without good workes, and ſo good The preſence of workes is not needfull. workes to be neceſſarily required to iuſtification, and that without their preſence a man cannot be iuſtified.

Illyricus in Claue Scripturae part. 2. tractat. 6. It is falſely ſaied: That faith is neuer without good workes, if it be ment of their actuall, and not onely potentiall preſence eſpecially in the firſt iuſtification. Againe: God iuſtifieth the impious euen not working: Therefore in iuſtification good workes do not onely not cooperate, but nether are they preſent.

Schluſſelbug to. 7. Catal. Haeret. pag. 837. Our propoſition Faith without workes iuſtifieth. remaineth strāge: That faith in the firſt iuſtification of a wicked ſinner, is without all good workes actually preſent.

Wigandus in Schluſſelburg lib. cit. p. 792. Faith muſt needs be firſt, and then workes follow, albeit we cannot diſcerne the time. For Luthers ſentence is certaine: Faith iuſtifieth before it doth good workes. Et p. 764. The abſence of our good workes doth Abſence of workes hindreth not iuſtification. not hinder God to impute iuſtice by Chriſt.

Authour de Iuſtif. to. 5. doctrinae Ieſuit. p. 241. The holie Scripture deſcribeth manie iuſtified in whome is no good worke ſeene but onely faith: Againe: Theſe and the like examples do clearly shew, that in the beginning faith is truely without good workes, and that it ſo voide of good works is imputed to iuſtice, and receaueth remiſsion of ſinnes. See more of their like ſayings hereafter cap. 14. art. 12. For the ſame beleiue, as well the Lutherans (who hould that the preſence of good workes is not neceſſarie to iuſtification) as Caluiniſts, who teach that iuſtification of faith remaineth in the faithfull euen in moſt grieuous ſinnes.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſayeth, that faith without workes profiteth not, ſaueth not, is dead: that a man is not ſaued with faith onely. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that faith iuſtifieth before we doe any good worke, without and before charitie, without euen the leaſt good workes, without good workes actually preſent, without the preſence of good workes: that in iuſtification good workes are not ſo much as preſent: that manie are iuſtified in whome no good workes are ſeene: that faith void of good workes is imputed to iuſtice and receaueth remiſſion of ſinnes.

ART. XVIII. WHETHER FAITH DO iuſtifie as it is Beleife, or as it beleiueth or knoweth?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Ioan. 17. v. 3. This is life euerlaſting, that they know thee the Faith iuſtifieth as it is a knowledge. onely true God, and whome thou hast ſent, Ieſus Chriſt.

1. Ioan. c. 5. ver. 1. Whoſoeuer beleiueth, that Ieſus is Chriſt, is borne of God. v. 5. Who is he that ouercometh the world, but he that beleiueth that Ieſus is the Sonne of God?

Rom. 4. v. 3. Abraham beleiued God, and it was reputed him to iuſtice. c. 10. verſ. 9. If thou confeſſe with thy mouth our Lord Ieſus, and in thy hart beleiue that God hath raiſed him vp from the dead, thou shalt be ſaued.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 6. cap. 6. They are diſpoſed to iuſtice, whilſt ſtirred vp and holpen by Gods grace, conceauing faith by hearing, they are freely moued to God, beleiuing theſe things to be true which are reuealed and promiſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Willet Controu. 19. pag. 983. Faith doth not iuſtifie vs by Faith iuſtifieth not as it is a Beleife. As it is a Beleife. But as it is a Petition. the worke of beleiuing. As it is an act of beleiuing onely, it iuſtifieth not.

Feild l. 3. de Eccleſ. c. 44. Speciall faith hath ſundrie actes, but to this purpoſe ſpecially two: The one, by way of petition hūbly intreating for acceptation and fauour: the other, in the nature of confortable aſſurance, conſisting in a perſuaſion, that that is graunted which was deſired. Faith by her firſt act obtaineth and worketh our iustification: by her ſecond act she doth not actiuely iuſtifie, but finding the thing done, certifieth and aſſureth vs of it.

Zuinglius l. de ver. & falſa relig. cap. de Merito. Faith in As it is a Truſt a Confidence. Scripture is taken manie waies. Firſt for beleife, then for ſtedfaſtnes, next for truſt in God; and of this onely it must be vnderdooſt; That faith ſaueth. Reſponſ. ad Confeſſ. Lutheri f. 507. To ſay that this kind of faith and aſſent, bringeth any comfort, ſecuritie, peace, tranquillitie or ſaluation to our ſoules, were falſe and moſt foolish.

Hemingius in Enchirid. claſſe 1. pag. 109. It is manifeſt, that none is ſaued by onely knowledge. Whereupon euerie one ſeeth, that iustifying faith is not onely the knowledge of the hiſtorie of Christ.

Lobechius Diſput. 22. Sauing faith is ſaied to iustifie, not by the foundation, as it is a knowledge and aſſent in the mynd and truſt in the will, but by reaſon of the end or obiect, which is Chriſt. And of the ſame opinion are other Proteſtants, as appeareth both by their words related before art. 2. & 3. and alſo becauſe they teach, that iuſtifying faith, is not the Catholik faith wherewith we beleiue the miſteries of faith, but a ſpeciall truſt or confidence, wherewith euerie elect faithfull man aſſureth himſelfe of the remiſſion of his ſinnes; or at leaſt, that it includeth this truſt. Herevpon Confeſſio Saxon. c. 4. ſaieth: By faith is ſignified a truſt reſting Prot • ſtants faith is Truſt. on the Sonne of God. Which is repeated c. 7. & 16. Luther Praef. in Epiſt. ad Rom. to. 5. Faith is a truſt of the mercie of God towards vs. Miniſtri Saxonici in Colloq. Aldeburg. fol. 30. Faith, in this matter we vnderſtand to be truſt relying vpon Christ. Zuinglius Reſponſ. ad Confeſſ. Lutheri to. 2. fol. 506. Faith, is no other thing, then a certaine and ſolid truſt in God onely.

Caluin in Antidoto Concilij 6. Can. 12. It pleaſeth not the reuerend fathers, that faith is a truſt wherewith we embrace the mercie of God remitting ſinnes for Chriſt, But it pleaſeth the Holie Ghoſt. And in like ſorte, others. But as Peter Martyr ſaieth in 1. Cor. 13. Hope differeth not from truſt, ſo farre as I thinke can be gathered out of the Scripture: And conſequently, their iuſtifying faith, is not beleife, but hope.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely teacheth, that faith iuſtifieth as it beleiueth God: as it knoweth God and Chriſt, as it beleiueth Chriſt to haue riſen from death, as it beleiueth Chriſt to be the Sonne of God. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that faith iuſtifieth not as it is an act of beleiuing, as it is an aſſent or knowledge, or derſuaſion: that as it is an aſſent it bringeth no good to our ſoules; but onely as it is a petition or truſt.

ART. XIX. WHETHER FAITH IT SELFE can be imputed to iuſtice?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Rom. 4. ver. 3. Abraham beleiued God, and it was reputed him Faith imputed to Abrahā to iuſtice. And to others to iuſtice. v. 5. But to him that worketh not, yet beleiueth in him that iuſtifieth the impious, his faith is reputed to iuſtice. v. 9. We ſay, that vnto Abraham faith was reputed to iuſtice. The ſame is Gal. 3. v. 6.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Rom. 4. v. 3. That act of beleiuing (In Abraham) was an act of iuſtice.

C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Iuſtif. c. 17. That it ſelfe is iudge▪ iuſtice, and therefore faith doth not apprehend iuſtice, but faith it ſelfe in Christ, is iuſtice.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins in Galat. 3. tom. 2. The act of beleiuing is not our iuſtice.

Peter Martyr in Rom. 4. verſ. 3. cit. Nether are they to be Act of faith not imputed to iuſtice. heard, who ſo expound this ſentence, that they take faith ment by Paul to be an act, as if this were the meaning: God imputed to iuſtice that act of Abraham wherewith he beleiued, as if he accounted it for iuſtice.

Beza in breui Confeſſ. vol. 1. Theol. p. 81. Paul ſaied, that we are iuſtified by faith onely, and line by it alone, that is, are happie; not as if faith properly were our iuſtice or life, but becauſe by onely faith we embrace Chriſt, and ſurely know him to be our iuſtice and life.

Sadeel ad Art. abiurat. 44. Not the act or worke of our faith, Beleife iuſtifieth not. that is, our beleife, iuſtifieth vs.

Piſcator in Theſ. l. 2. pag. 119. It is vnproperly ſaied: Faith is imputed to the beleiuer to iuſtice.

Pareus l. 1. de Iuſtific. c. 17. Faith is ſaied to be accounted for iuſtice or imputed to iuſtice, not abſolutely but relatiuely, by reaſon of her obiect, which she regardeth and apprehendeth, that is, Chriſt with his iuſtice. Againe: It is cleare, that faith to be imputed to iuſtice, is nothing els, but to ſeeke and receaue iuſtice or iustification in the death and reſurrection of Chriſt. And no meruaile that they denie that faith can be imputed to iuſtice, ſeing they ſay it is ſo vitious and defectuous, as we haue ſeene art. 12.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that the very beleiuing of Abraham, the faith of Abraham, the faith of the beleiuer is imputed to iuſtice. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that our beleiuing doth not iuſtifie vs, that the act of Abrahams beleiuing was not imputed to iuſtice; that the act of beleiuing is not our iuſtice that faith is not properly iuſtice: that faith is vnproperly ſaied to be imputed to iuſtice: that faith to be imputed to iuſtice, is nothing els, but by faith to receaue iuſtice. Which is ſo repugnant to Scripture, as ſome Proteſtants confeſſe it. See l. 2. c. 30.

ART. XX. WHETHER FAITH BE proper to the iuſt?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Ihon. 2. v. 23. And when he was at Hieruſalem in the Paſche Manie ill mē Beleiue in Chriſt. vpon the feſtiuall day, manie beleiued in his name, ſeing his ſignes which he did. But Ieſus did not commit him ſelfe vnto them, for he knew all.

Ioan. 12. v. 42. Of the Princes alſo manie beleiued in him, but for the Phariſes they did not confeſſe—For they loued the glorie of men more then the glorie of God.

Iames 2. v. 19. is ſaied to a wicked beleiuer: Thou beleiuest that there is one God. Thou doest well.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

D. Stapleton l. 8. de Iuſtif. cap. 32. The Scripture euidently witneſſeth, that faith was in manie without, charitie, repentance, and other vertues.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Whitaker Concion. vlt. That which is called faith in the impious Impious haue no true faith. or thoſe who profeſſe faith for a time, is nothing els, but ether bare knowledge, or gheſſe, or opinion, or imagination, or an image of faith, true faith it is not.

Rainalds theſ. 4. But the impious, are not faithfull. Are not faithfull. Nor true beleiuers.

Abbots in Diatribam Tomſoni c. 15. Do they ſeeme to thee to be true beleiuers or iuſtified, who loued more the glorie of men then of God? Yea if we ſpeake properly, they are not ſo much as beleiuers.

Caluin in Math. 13. v. 20. We muſt know, that none are partakers of true faith, but thoſe, who being ſealed with the ſpirit of adoption, call vpon God with their hart. Et 3. Inſtit. cap. 12. §. 9. We acknowledge onely the faith of thoſe that are godlie.

Peter Martyr in 1. Corinth. 13. We do not graunt, that thoſe The foreſaied Princes did not beleiue truely. Princes (Ioan. 12. cit.) had true faith. Et in Rom. 11. We denie, that they truely beleiued.

Muſculus in locis tit. de neceſſit. fidei: We ſpeake not of that faith, which is rather opiniō then faith; Such was their faith of which Ihon ſpeaketh c. 2. cit. The Lord did not approue their faith, becauſe it was not true.

Zanchius de Perſeuerant. c. 2. to. 7. Conſidering both their owne and the Churches iudgment, they are ſaied truely to beleiue, but in the ſight of God they beleiue not truely—Like to theſe were thoſe whereof Ihon 2. ſaieth: Manie beleiued in him but Ieſus &c. As if he had ſaied: They thought they had beleiued truely, but Chriſt ſaw that this did not beleiue truely, and therefore he did not commit himſelfe to them. Againe: This faith is in Gods ſight hypocriſie alwaies. Such was the faith of them, of whome is ſaied Ihon. 2. Manie beleiued &c. And in like manner is this place of S. Ihon expounded by Caluin 3. Inſtit. c. 2. §. 12. by Gualter in Ioan. 2. and by others.

Volanus l. 3. cont. Scargam. pag. 1069. The wicked haue no true faith, but a feigned and diſſembled faith. Et p. 1071. Of this faith were they deſtitute, who are ſaied of Ihon to haue beleiued, but not confeſſed for feare of the Phariſes.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that manie Princes who confeſſed not Chriſt, and loued the glorie of men more then of God, did beleiue in Chriſt: that manie beleiued in Chriſts name, whome Chriſt truſted not: that a euill man doth well in beleiuing. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that the foreſaied Princes did not beleiue, had not true faith, were no beleiuers: that thoſe whome Chriſt truſted not, did not beleiue in the ſight of God, that their faith was not true, not ſincere, but hypocriſie: that onely the godlie and the adopted ſonnes of God are partakers of true faith: that the faith of the impious and wicked, is feigned, diſſembled, an imagination, or image of faith, not true faith: that the impious are not faithfull.

ART. XXI. WHETHER FAITH BE proper to the Elect?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Act. 8. ver. 13. Then Simon (Magus) alſo himſelfe beleiued, Simon Magus had faith and being baptized he cleeued to Philippe: Seing alſo ſignes and very great miracles to be done, he was aſtonished with admiratiō.

Heb. 6. v. 4. For it is impoſsible for them that were once illuminated, Alſo ſome reprobates. haue tasted alſo the heauenlie guift, and were made partakers of the Holie Ghoſt &c. and are fallen, to be renewed againe to pennance.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

D. Stapleton in Actor. 8. v. 13. Simon Magus had true faith.

Card. Bellarm. l. 3. de Iuſtificat. c. 14. Faith is not proper to the elect.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Whitaker l. 8. cont. Dur. ſect. 48. True faith is proper to the the elect. In Concion. vlt. In no reprobate, true faith is found.

Zuinglius in Math. 19. tom. 4. The Scripture ſometimes Simon Magus had no faith indeed. Beleiued not all. ſaieth, that ſome beleiued who profeſſed faith, which indeed they had not, as appeareth of Simon Magus in the Actes. In expoſit. Fidei to. 2. fol. 558. There are ſome who beleiue not at all, as were Iudas and Simon Magus.

Caluin in Actor. 8. v. 3. c. The mynd (of Simon) was wrapped in diſsimulation of faith.

Beza cont. Illyric. vol. 2. p. 131. Simon Magus was quite faithleſſe. Was quite faithleſſe. In Colloq. Montisbel. p. 379. Indeed he wanted faith, indeed he beleiued not.

Volanus l. 3. cont. Scargam. p. 1070. Scarga foolishly attributeth true faith to Simon Magus.

Daneus Contr. de Baptiſmo c. 14. He obiecteth, that Simō Magus loſt faith, and that other Apoſtates did the like: But I denie, that they haue, or euer had true faith.

Pareus l. 3. de Iuſtif. c. 14. Simon was an hypocrite, beleiuing onely with mouth, not with harte. And he addeth: Nether maketh it any matter, that Luke abſolutely ſaieth, that he beleiued. And as for reprobats.

Caluin 3. Inſtitut. c. 2. § 11. None are illuminated vnto faith, None but the predeſtinate haue faith. Faith peculiar to the Elect. but they who are predeſtinated to ſaluation. In Confeſſione p. 106. I acknowledge, that faith is a peculiar guift giuen to the elect alone.

Beza in Conf. c. 4. ſect. 20. Faith is the guift of God proper and peculiar to the elect alone.

Bucer in Matthaei. 16. They are ſafe for euer, who once haue gotten true faith.

Muſculus in locis: titul. de fide. Faith in Chriſt is onely of the elect.

Zanchius de Praedeſtinat. c. 4. to. 7. The reprobates neuer Reprobates neuer beleiue truely. truely beleiue in Chriſt. And the ſame is the common doctrine of the Proteſtants.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that the reprobate Simon Magus did beleiue, was baptized, cleeued to Philippe, and was aſtonished at the miracles wrought by S. Philippe: that euen they who cannot be recalled to pennance, were once illuminated. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that Simon Magus did not beleiue at all, was wholy faithleſſe, indeed wanted faith, indeed beleiued not, had not true faith, beleiued onely with mouth not with hart: that onely the elect are illuminated vnto faith: that reprobates neuer truely beleiue: and that it maketh no matter that the Scripture abſolutely ſaieth the contrarie. Theſe are ſo oppoſite to Scripture as ſome Proteſtants confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. XXII. WHETHER FAITH BE by hearing?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Rom. 10. ver. 15. Faith then is by hearing: and hearing is by Faith is by hearing. the word of Christ.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 6. c. 6. They are diſpoſed to iuſtice, whiles ſtirred vp and holpen by Gods grace, conceauing faith by hearing, they are freely moued to God.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker l. 1. de Scriptura c. 11. ſect. 4. All true faith cometh Faith not by preachers. from the Scripture, not by the labour of the Preachers. Againe: All the Fathers with one voice teach, that faith riſeth of the Scriptures onely, not of the authoritie of the Church. Et c. 13. ſect. 8. Reading maketh that we may know the Scriptures and the doctrine of the Scriptures. Et Cont. 145. cap. 8. Faith riſeth of the Of the Scripture onely. Scripture alone. And in the ſame place thus expoundeth the aforeſaied wordes of the Apoſtle: By hearing, that is, by the ſenſe of the Scripture rightly vnderſtood.

Zuinglius in Exegeſi to. 2. fol. 347. We do not thinke, that faith, can be gotten by words, but that faith being miſtreſſe, the words which are propoſed, may be vnderstood. De Prouidentia cap. 6. tom. 1. When Paul writeth to the Romans, that faith is Not by outward hearing by hearing; after the ſame manner, he attributeth that to the nearer and more knowne cauſe to vs, which belongeth onely to the Holie Ghoſt, not to outward preaching. The like words hath Oecolampadius apud Schluſſelburg. libro. 1. Theol. Caluin. art. 1.

Caluin in Ioan. 5. verſ. 9. 3 Chriſt is not otherwaies rightly knowne but by the Scripture.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that Faith is by hearing, and addeth there alſo, that it is not without a Preacher. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that faith is not otherwaies then by Scripture, that it is by onely Scripture, by reading: that it is not by the labour of the preachers, not by the authoritie of the Church; that it is by the Holie Ghoſt and not by externall preaching: that it cannot be gotten by words.

ART. XXIII. WHETHER FAITH IS, or can euer be loſt?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Luke 8. verſ. 13. For they vpon the rock: Such as when they Some beleiue for a time. heare, with ioye receaue the word, and theſe haue no rootes: becauſe for a time they beleiue, and in time of temptation they reuoult.

Ioan. 20. verſ. 29. Then he ſaieth to Thomas: Be not incredulous, S. Thomas loſt his faith. but faithfull. And v. 25. Thomas ſaied: Vnleſſe I ſee &c. I will not beleiue.

1. Tim. 1. v. 19. Certaine haue made shipwrak about faith. c. 4. Others leeſe faith. v. 1. In the laſt times certaine shall departe from the faith. c. 6. v. 10. Certaine haue erred from the faith.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Ioan. 20. v. 28. The Ghoſpell doth plainely teach, the Fathers plainely confirme, that Thomas was incredulous and an infidell.

C. Bellarm. l. 3. de Iuſtif. c. 14. Faith once had, may be loſt.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker l. 8. cont. Dur. ſect.ect 48. True faith, which is proper to the elect, can neuer be loſt. Et Contr. 2. q. 5. c. 7. We ſay, that True faith, neuer loſt. faith once gotten, can neuer be loſt.

Perkins in Gal. 1. to. 2. Where this faith truely is, it is neuer extinguished or quite abolished.

Willet Contr. 19. q. 3. p. 1010. Our ſentence is: that he which once hath receaued a true liuelie faith, can neuer finally fall away; nether can that faith vtterly perish or faile in him.

Caluin in Ioan. 20. verſ. 28. thus writeth of S. Thomas: Faith was not in him vtterly extinct. Faith, which ſeemed to be S. Thomas loſt not his faith. abolished, lay as it were ouerwhelmed in his hart. In Math. 13. v. 10. It is impoſsible, that faith which he hath once grauen in the hart of the godlie, should vanish and perish. In Lucae 17. v. 13. Liuelie faith neuer dieth. Et 3. Inſtit. c. 2. §. 21. We auouch, that the roote of faith is ſo putt out of a faithfull breſt, that her light is neuer ſo putt out or choaked but that it lieth as it were vnder the embers.

Beza in Ioan. 6. v. 37. True faith and proper to the elect neuer falleth indeed quite away. In Colloq. Montisbel. p. 380. Who is once indued of God with true faith, can neuer leeſe it more. In Confeſſ. c. 4. ſect. 20. I affirme, that he who once in all his life felt a certaine teſtimonie of true faith, ought to be ſecure, that it not onely remaineth, but alſo shall remaine to the end, euen then when thoſe times shall come, as it ſeemeth to be vtterly wanting.

Zuinglius in Lucae 9. to. 4. None can fall from true faith. None can fall from faith.

Bullinger Serm. 5. de Fide: True faith can nether faile nor be extinguished.

Zanchius de Perſeuerant. to. 7. col. 128. It followeth, that no true Chriſtian euer failed from faith, or can faile.

Pareus de Iuſtif. l. 3. c. 15. Faith which faileth, is not true faith but apparent and hypocriticall.

Piſcator apud Vorſtium in Paraſcene cap. 9. It cannot be by any means, that thoſe which beleiue should leeſe their faith.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth: that S. Thomas for a time was incredulous, not faithfull, did not beleiue: that ſome reuolt from faith, departe from faith, make shipwrak of faith, erre from faith. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that faith in S. Thomas was not quite extinct; that it lay hidde in his hart: that true faith can neuer be loſt, neuer extinguished or quite abolished, that liuelie faith neuer dieth: that none can falle from time faith: that who once hath felt true faith may be ſure that it will euer remaine with him, euen then when it ſeemeth to be vtterly wanting: that who beleiueth can by no means leefe faith. Which are ſo oppoſite to Scripture, as ſome Proteſtants confeſſe it. See l. 2. c. 30.

ART. XXIV. WHETHER REWARD be giuen to Faith?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Ioan. 3. v. 36. He that beleiueth in the Sonne hath, life euerlaſting, Reward to faith. but he that is incredulous to the Sonne, shall not ſee life, but the wrath of God remaineth vpon him.

Ioan. 16. v. 27. For the Father himſelfe loueth you, becauſe you God loueth vs becauſe we beleiue. haue loued me, and haue beleiued that I came forth from God. c. 20. v. 29. Bleſſed are they, that haue not ſeene and haue beleiued.

Math. 15. v. 28. O Woman: great is thy faith. Be it done to the as thou wilt. Or as S. Mark hath c. 7. v. 29. For this ſaying, Goe Faith obtaineth the promiſes. thy way. The Diuell is gone out of thy daughter.

Hebr. 11. v. 33. Who by faith ouercame kingdomes, obtained promiſes.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Ioan. v. 30. The act of faith, becauſe is is an act of man, wherewith he beleiueth and giueth glorie to God, is an actiue and free worke, and therefore may be rewarded as Abrahams faith was rewarded.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Zuinglius in 2. Cor. 5. tom. 4. Not that there is reward of No reward of faith. workes, or of faith but &c.

Caluin in Ioan. 6. v. 29. Faith is a paſsiue worke (if I may ſo ſpeake) to which no reward can be rendred.

Piſcator in Theſ. loco 16. It is quite repugnant to faith, to be meritorious. Of the ſame mynd are they, who, as we reported before, ſay that faith is defectuous, ſinfull, polluted, and like to a leprous and ſcabbie hand. For boubtles ſuch a thing deſerueth no reward.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that they who beleiue are bleſſed, haue euerlaſting life, as they who beleiue not, haue eternall death: that men are loued of God becauſe they beleiue: that the womans daughter was cured by her faith: that by faith Saintes obtaine the promiſes. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that there is no reward of faith, that no reward can be rendred to it: that merit is quite contrarie to the nature of it.

ART. XXV. WHETHER THE FAITH OF them who touched the hemme of Chriſts garment, or theirs who touched the shaddow of S. Peter, and napkins of S. Paul, was pure and good?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Math. 9. v. 21. She ſaied within her ſelfe: If I shall touch onely his garment, I shall be ſafe; But Ieſus turning and ſeing her ſaied: The Hemorroiſſa her faith was good. Haue a good hart daughter, thy faith hath made thee ſafe. c. 14. v. 36. And they beſought him, that they might touch but the hemme of his garment, and whoſoeuer did touch were made hole.

Act. 5. v. 15. And the multitude of men and weomē that beleiued Who touched Chriſts hem. in our Lord was more increaſed, ſo that they did bring forth the ſick into the ſtreets, and laied them in bedds and couches, that when Peter came, his shaddow at leaſt might ouer shaddow any of them, and they all might be deliuered from their infirmities.

Act. 19. v. 11. And God wrought by the hand of Paule miracles And S. Pauls napkins. not common, ſo that there were alſo brought from his bodie napkins or hankerchefs vpon the ſick, and the diſeaſes departed from them, and the wicked ſpirits went out.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Math. 9. v. 21. Chriſt himſelfe affirmeth that this fact of hers, proceded of faith, ſauing: Thy faith hath made the ſafe: and health streight following this fact, doth shew euidently, that she thought this and touched Chriſt garment vpon an excellent and ſtrong faith.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Caluin in Math. 9. v. 21. It may be, that ſome errour and vice Some errour in the womans faith. was mingled with the womās faith. Againe: That she fluck in his garmēt rather then by praier offered her ſelfe to be cured of him, perhaps she ſlipt a litle out of the way through incōſiderate zeale. In Math. 14. v. 36. cit. It is credible, that they were ſomewhat ſuperſtitious, Some what ſuperſtitious. ſeing they reſtrained Chriſts grace to the touching of his garment.

Daneus Cōtr. 4. p. 1348. He ſuppoſeth that they who did thoſe Erroneous. things (Math 9. Act. 5. & 19. cit.) did not erre, which is falſe, albeit ſick persōs were heard of God, cured of their diſeaſes. Againe: God did not approue the manner which they choſe. Whoſe very words repeateth Hoſpin. l. de origine Templorum p. 132.

Confeſſio Heluet. c. 4. Who will beleiue that a shaddow or image of a bodie could bring any profit to the godlie?

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely teacheth, that Chriſt both by word and deed approued the faith of the woman which reuerently touched the hemme of his garment: that he both ſuffered others to touch the hemme of his garment and by miracles allowed their fact: and that by great miracles approued their faith who touched the shaddow of Saint Peter or the napkins of Saint Paul. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that perhaps there was ſome errour or vice in the faith of the woman who touched the hemme of his garment, and that she ſlipt a litle out of the way: that they were ſuperſtitious who touched our Sauiours garment: that they erred who touched his garmēt or the shaddow of S. Peter, or napkins of S. Paul, and that God did not approue their manner of doing: that none will beleiue that a shaddow can do any good to the godlie. Which are ſo oppoſite to Scripture as Proteſtants confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF FAITH.

By thoſe things which haue beene rehearſed in this chapter, plainely appeareth, how different a faith Proteſtants haue from the Scripture. For the Scripture together with Catholiks teacheth, that faith is a worke or action; that it beleiueth all the articles of faith or words of God, that it cannot be had without the holie Ghoſt, that it is but one, and diſtinct from hope and charitie, and inferiour to charitie: that it may be without confeſſion of mouth, and without charitie or good workes: that without good workes it is dead, and without them iuſtifieth not: that it iuſtifieth as it is beleife: that indeed it iuſtifieth: and that we do not onely thereby know that we are iuſtified: that it ſelfe may be imputed to iuſtice, that ſometimes it is perfect and is of great value before God: that it is neceſſarie to iuſtification and ſaluation: that it is not proper to the iuſt or elect: that it is gotten by hearing, that it may be loſt: and that reward is giuen to it. All which Proteſtāts do denie.

It appeareth alſo, that Proteſtants play the theiues euē What Proteſt. ſteale from faith. towards faith which they would ſeeme to eſteme and and aduance more then all men, and ſteale from it, that it is a worke or action, that it beleiueth all things reuealed of God, that it is diſtinct from hope and charitie, that it is one, that it iuſtifieth as it is beleife, that it iuſtifieth indeed, that it is neceſſarie to iuſtification and ſaluation, that it can be perfect, that it can be imputed to iuſtice, that it can be rewarded, that it is a vertue or truely worthie of the name of vertue. And if we take from Faith the nature of a worke or act, the beleiuing of all that is reuealed of God, the vnitie and diſtinction from hope and charitie, all perfection, power of iuſtifying, neceſſitie to iuſtification and ſaluation, worthineſſe of reward, nature of iuſtice or vertue, and finally the very name of vertue, we ſcarce leaue the name of Faith much leſſe the thing it ſelfe. Nether onely do they ſteale ſo many and ſo great good properties frō Faith, but alſo attribute manie ill, which are contrarie to the nature of it: As that it is polluted with infidelitie, like to a ſcabbie or leprous hand, need pardon, and is ſinne. Such a Faith foreſooth it is which in ſteed of the Catholik Proteſt. faith, is true infidelitie. faith deſcribed to vs in the Scripture, Proteſtants haue brought into the world, which is true infidelitie, and sheweth what kinde of men the Authours thereof are. And thus farre of Faith▪ Now of good workes.

CHAPTER XIII. OF GOOD VVORKES IN GENERALL.

ART. I. WHETHER ANIE WORKES OF a Sinner before he be iuſtified, may be good?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

IAMES 2. v 25. Rahab the harlot, was not she iuſtified A Harlot did good workes. by workes? Et v. 19. it is ſaied to a Sinner: Thou beleiueſt that there is one God. Thou doeſt well.

Luc. 7. v. 47. Manie ſinnes are forgiuen her, becauſe A ſinner doth well in beleiuing God. she hath loued much. Et c. 18. v. 13. The publican ſtanding a farre of knocked his breaſt, ſaying, God be mercifull to me a ſinner. I ſay to you this man went downe into his houſe iustified more then he. And other place teach that pennance and good workes go before iuſtification, as we shall ſee hereafter.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 6. Can. 7. If anie shall ſay, that all workes which are done before Iuſtification, in what ſorte ſoeuer they are done, are true ſinnes, or deſerue the hatred of God; be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins in Gal. 3. to. 2. We are tought that the actiōs of thoſe The actions ſinners are ſinne. that are not regenerate, are ſinnes. So Rogers on the 10. and 13. article. Apologia Confeſſ. Auguſtanae c. de Tradition. It is falſe, that he who out of grace doth the workes cammanded, doth not ſinne. c. de Iuſtif. It is falſe, that men doing the precepts out of grace do not ſinne.

Confeſſio Heluet. c. 15. We must be iuſt before we do good workes.

Lutherus Poſtilla in Dom. poſt Natiuit. The Lord defineth All workes before iuſtification are euill. Are ſinnes. in the Scripture: what workes ſoeuer go before iuſtification, are euill and of no moment.

Lobechius Diſp. 22. The workes of thoſe that are not iuſtified, cānot pleaſe God, but in his iudgmēt are accounted for ſinnes.

Bucer in Diſput. Cantabrig. pag. 714. What good worke Prouoke Gods wrath. ſoeuer we ſeeme to doe before iuſtification, is indeed ſinne and prouoketh Gods wrath againſt vs.

Peter Martyr in Rom. 11. All workes that are done before iuſtification, are ſinnes.

Caluin in Antidoto Conc. ſeſſ. 6. c. 9. What workes do they tell vs of, that are before iuſtificatiō? Poſteritie will ſcarce be perſuaded, that there was ſo much blockishneſſe in Poperie, that they would ſet any worke before iuſtification, albeit they denied that it merited ſo great a good. Et 3. Inſt. cap. 14. §. 7. What can ſinners Execrable before God. alienated from God doe, but is excrable in his iudgment?

Bezal. Qnaeſt. & reſp. vol. 1. p. 676. It is foolish to ſay, that there are any good workes of them which are not iuſtified.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that a horlot was iuſtified by her workes, that to an other manie ſinnes were forgiuen becauſe she loued much: that a Sinner in beleiuing God doth well: that the Publican did manie good workes before he was iuſtified. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that before iuſtification no workes are good, all are badde, are ſinnes, execrable before God, and prouoke Gods wrath againe the workes.

ART. II. WHETHER EVERIE GOOD worke of the Iuſt be ſinne, or the iuſt ſinne in euerie good worke?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Iob 1. v. 22. In all theſe thinges Iob ſinned not with his lippes, Iob ſinned not in ſome ſpeeches. nether ſpoake he any foolish thing againſt God. cap. 23. v. 11. My foote hath followed his ſteppes, I haue kept his way, and haue not declined out of it.

3. Reg. 15. v. 5. Becauſe Dauid had done right in the eies of our Dauid declined not but in ſome things. Lord, and had not declined from all things which he commanded him all the dayes of his life, except the matter of Vrias.

1. Cor. 7. v. 28. But if thou take a wife, thou haſt not ſinned, and if a Virgin marrie, she hath not ſinned. v. 37. He ſinneth not, if she marrie.

2. Peter 1. v. 10. Doing theſe things, you shall not ſinne at any Doing ſome things we ſinne not. time. Apoc. 3. v. 4. But thou hast a few names in Sardis, who haue not defiled their garments.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Councell of Trent Seſſ. 6. c. 11. It is manifeſt, that they are againſt true doctrine, who ſay that the iuſt man ſinneth in euerie act at least venially, or (which is more intolerable) that he deſerueth eternall paines.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Whitaker l. 2. de Peccato orig. c. 3. Inherent concupiſcence We ſinne in euerie act. maketh, that we ſinne in euerie action of ours, euē good. Againe: We teach, that the iuſt do alwaies ſinne mortally by nature of the thing and the acts themſelues. Et ad Ration. 8. Campian. All good acts are ſinnes. All good actions are ſinnes, in Gods iudgment, mortall; if God pardon them, light: This Luther ſaied, and he ſaied truely.

Tindal in Fox his Act. p. 1139. There is no deed ſo good, but that the law damneth it.

Luther de Ration. Confitendi to. 2. fol 26. Euen our good Good workes are ſinnes. workes, if God iudge them according to rigour, and not pardon them with mercie, are damnable and mortall. De Captiuit. Babilon. fol. 80. Yea good workes are found to be ſinnes. In Aſſert. art. 31. fol. 109. The iuſt ſinneth in euerie good worke. f. 110. He teacheth to ſinne, who denieth a good worke to be ſinne. In Confutat. Latomi fol. 220. All iuſtice is vncleane; euerie good worke ſinne Tomo 5. in Gal. 1. f. 227. Let there be workes, ſo it be knowne that before God they be ſinnes. 228. The workes of the law muſt needs be ſinnes, otherwiſe certainly they would iuſtifie. In c. 2. f. 231. Workes of the moſt holie law of God are ſo farre from giuing iuſtice, as that they are ſinnes and make a man worſe before God. De bonis operibus fol. 581. Let a man know, All our actions are nothing but dā nable ſinnes. that all his life and actions are nothing but damnable ſinnes in the iudgment of God. Poſtilla in Dom. 4. poſt Paſcha: With all thy workes which thou doeſt, thou canſt do nothing els but ſinne. Poſtilla in Natali Chriſti f. 374. Chriſt teacheth, that all that is ours is nothing but ſinne before God.

Illyricus apud Schluſſelburg. tom. 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 155. All Saints in euerie good worke do ſinne. Hitherto our men disputed againſt Papiſts: that all Saints in euerie good worke do ſinne.

Wigandus ib. p. 719. For this verie imperfection and pollution good works of themſelues are ſinnes.

Caluin 3. Inſtit. cap. 17. §. 11. There was neuer any worke of a pious man, which if it were examined by the ſeuere iudgment of God, was not damnable. In Refutat. Serueti pag. 655. Becauſe God pardoneth vs like his children, thereupon he by pardon imputeth free iuſtice to workes, which of themſelues are vniuſt.

Beza in Conf. c. 4. ſect. 19 If God in all rigour would examine The beſt workes are mere pollutions▪ euen the excellenteſt workes of men, nothing e • s would be determined of them, then that they are mere pollutions of Gods guifts. Et l. q. & reſp. p. 674. If you examine the beſt workes of the moſt holie men according to the rule of the law, I ſay they are ſinnes.

Bullinger Decad. 3. ſerm. 10. We ſay, that the good workes of the faithfull are ſinnes.

Serranus cont. Hayum. part. 2. p. 188. Whatſoeuer is of mā, is euill, is ſinne, what shewſoeuer it hath of vertue.

Ianius Cont. 4. l. 3. c. 2. All the workes of a man though iuſtified, are ſinnes in themſelues.

Pareus l. de Iuſtif. c. 15. The workes of the iuſt, if they be examined of God according to the rigour of the law, are mere ſinnes. Et c. 20. The iuſt ſinneth euen in well doing. We ſinne in well doing.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth: that Iob in ſome things did not ſinne with his lippes, did not decline from Gods way, that Dauid declined not from all things that God commanded except the matter of Vrias: that men ſinne not in marrying: that doing ſome things we shall not ſinne. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that in euerie good act we ſinne: that the iuſt in euerie act ſinneth: that all Saints ſinne in euerie good worke: that in well doing we ſinne: that good workes are ſinnes: that good workes are of themſelues damned, of themſelues in iuſt, of themſelues mortall ſinnes: that euen the workes of Gods moſt holie law make a man worſe before God: that euerie act in the iudgment of God is nothing but damnable ſinne, mere ſinne, nothing but ſinne, nothing but pollution of Gods guifts.

ART. III. WHETHER WORKES OF the Iuſt be a ſweet ſmell before God?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Gen. 8. verſ. 20. Noë offered holocauſtes vpon the altar, and A ſweet ſauour. our Lord ſmelled a ſweet ſauour.

Numbers 29. ver. 21. And shall offer an holocauſt for a moſt A ſweet • dour. ſweet odour to the Lord.

Apocal. 8. verſ. 3. And an other Angel came and ſtood before the altar, hauing a goulden cenſor: and there were giuen to him Incenſe. manie incenſes, that he should giue of the praier of all Saints vpon the altar of gould which is before the throne of God: And the ſmoake of the incenſes of the praiers of the Saintes aſcended from the hand of the Angel before God.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 4. de Iuſtif. cap. 20. The Scripture eueriewhere praiſeth the workes of the iuſt, and ſaieth, they are pleaſing to God and accepted as a ſweet odour.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther in Diſp. de Myſterio Trinit. to. 1. fol. 418. God exacteth Iuſtice of the the law is dung before God. Vncleane. the ciuill iuſtice of the law, and in earneſt commandeth it, though he know that before him it is dung.

Wigandus in Methodo Doctrinae c. 12. Our good workes are vncleane, are dung.

Vrbanus Regin. in Interpr. loc. com. to. 1. f. 43. Our workes Filthie. generally art filthie.

Illyricus in Claue Scripturae part. 2. tract. 6. ſaieth, that Our workes are rifraffe, or outcaſts, vertly vncleane and that they need cleanſing,

Schluſſelburg to. 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 55. Paul will haue all his righteouſneſſe to be accounted reiected and contemned as dung and outcaſts; and Iſaias a defiled cloute.

Caluin in Refut. Serueti p. 651. Whē I teach, that workes are Stinke before God. alwaies mingled as it were with ſome dreggs, ſo that they ſtincke before God if they be called to a ſtreit account, he ſaieth, that I blaſpheme against the Spirit. The like he hath de vera Ref. p. 317. Et 3. Inſtit. c. 14. §. 16 The Scripture teacheth, that all our iuſtices do ſtincke in the ſight of God, vnleſſe they draw ſome good ſmell from the innocencie of Chriſt. Et c. 12. §. 4. Workes, if they be iudged according to their worth, are nothing but pollution and filth. Et concione 158. in Iob: Whatſoeuer we can giue to God, is stenchie.

Bucer in Epitome Doctrinae Argent. art. 9. All Saints account for nothing and dung, what good ſoeuer they did.

Pareus l. 1. de Iuſt. c. 19. The Apoſtle ſimply oppoſeth the iuſtice of faith, or by faith, or the iuſtice of Chriſt and God with which alone he wilbe found in Gods iudgment, againſt all his workes preſent, paſt, and to come; accoūting them all farre leſſe, for nothing, for dung. Againe: Hitherto the Apoſtle caſting away all his workes as dung, is no more blaſphemous, then the whole Propheticall Church was blaſphemous, calling all her iustices a defiled cloute, which is as filthie a thing. Let Bellarmin goe now and crie blaſphemies, that we call his workes and iuſtices, dung. Et l. 2. c. 12. ſaieth: That inherent iuſtices euen in the ſtate of grace, are filth, euen all, in the rigour of Gods iudgment.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely faieth, that the good workes of the Iuſt are a ſweet odour, a moſt ſweet odour, a ſmoake of incenſe before God. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that the good workes of the Iuſt in the ſight of God are filth, dung, nothing but pollution, filth, and dung: that they are ſtenchie, do ſtinck before God if they be thoroughly examined; that inherent iuſtices are filth.

ART. IV. WHETHER THE GOOD workes of the Iuſt be perfectly, wholy, and intirely good?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Iſaie 38. v. 3. Ezechias praieth in theſe words: I beſeech Ezechias walked in a perfect hart. thee Lord, remember I pray thee, how I haue walked before thee in trueth, and in a perfect hart, and haue done that which is good in thine eyes.

3. Reg. 11. verſ. 4. Nether was his hart perfect with our Lord Alſo Dauid. his God, as the hart of Dauid his father. cap. 15. verſ. 4. Becauſe Dauid had done right in the eyes of our Lord.

1. Ioan. 4. v. 12. If we loue one an other, God abideth in vs, and Charitie perfiled. his charitie in vs is perfited. c. 2. v. 5. But he that keepeth his word, in him in verie deed charitie of God is perfited.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 4. de Iuſtif. c. 10. All Catholiks teach, that the workes of the iust are ſimply and abſolutely iuſt, and in their, manner, perfect; though not in that perfection, but that they may increaſe.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker l. 8. cont. Dureum. ſect. 89. There is no intire good No intire good in this life. of ours in this life. l. 9. ſect. 34. Our workes are manie waies vitious, and are not anſwerable to the perfection of Gods law. Ad Ration. 8. Campiani. In euerie action of man, though notable, Some vice in euerie act. there is ſome vice, which wholy marreth the action, and maketh it odious to God, if it be examined by the weight of his iuſtice.

Perkins in Gal. 5. ver. 17. The workes of the regenerate are in In parte euill. parte euill.

Confeſſio Wittembergenſ c. de Bonis operibus. All the Imperfect. good workes, which we doe, are imperfect, nor one can bear the ſeueritie of Gods iudgment.

Confeſſio Auguſtana. c. de operibus. The new obedience is farre from the perfection of the law. And Apologia eiuſdem cap. de Implet. legis: Our workes are vncleane and need mercie.

Confeſſio Heluet. c. 16. There are manie thinges vnworthie Haue manie imperfections of God, and very manie imperfections are found in the workes of Saints. The like hath Confeſſio Belgica art. 14. and Scotica Defiled. art. 15.

Luther in Gen. 15. to. 6. Thy workes are alwaies defiled imperfect, and polluted.

Kemnice 1. part. Exam. tit. de Iuſtif. Inherent iuſtice in this life is onely begunne, imperfect, and vncleane.

Zuinglius in Marci 10. tom. 4. In the iudgment of God all Impure. our workes, though neuer ſo good, wilbe found impure and vncleane.

Peter Martyr in 1. Cor. 7. ver. 19. We do nothing, how good Spotted. and holie ſoeuer it ſeeme to be, which indeed is not ſpotted with manie vices. Againe: As workes come from vs, they are diſgraced with infinit filth.

Caluin l. de lib. arb. p. 141. There was neuer anie good worke, Lame. which euerie way pure and perfect, wholy wanted any ſpot. In Math. 5. v. 12. What good worke ſoeuer cometh from the beſt mē, is lame and vitious. In Actor. 6. v. 11. The workes of Saints haue alwaies ſome fault mingled with them. The like he hath often times.

Beza in Confeſſ cap. 4. ſect. 19. So great is Gods goodneſſe, that he doth not onely not diſlike our workes though moſt imperfect, but alſo ſo farre alloweth them as he vouchſafeth them reward.

Vrſinus in Catechiſmo q. 62. Our beſt workes in this life are imperfect, and conſequently defiled with ſinne.

Pareus lib. 4. de Iuſtif. cap. 10. They proue that the workes of Saints are imperfect, and conſequently ſinnes. c. 15. The workes of the Iust haue an imperfect goodneſſe, their goodneſſe whatſoeuer is polluted with the filth of our flesh, like as water paſsing through a filthie channell. Et Prooemio in l. 5. The good workes of the iust are not abſolutely good, but alwaies polluted with inhabiting ſinne.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that the good workes of the Iuſt are good and right in the eyes of God: that the charitie of thoſe who loue one an other, and keepe Gods word, is perfect: that Ezechias walked before God in a perfect hart, that Dauids hart was perfect before God. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, rhat the good workes of the Iuſt are farre from perfection: that there are manie imperfections in them: that they are imperfect, moſt imperfect, lame, vitious, not wholy pure, imperfectly good, haue no perfect goodneſſe, are not abſolutely good, not abſolutely or ſimply iuſt, defiled with manie vices diſgraced with infinit filth, polluted as water running through a filthie channell in parte ill, and ſinnes, and that there is no intire good of ours in this life.

ART. V. WHETHER THE GOOD workes of the Iuſt be iuſt or iuſtice in the ſight of God?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Deuter. 24. v. 13. But if he be pore, the pledge shalt not lodge To reſtore a pledge is iuſtice before God. Phinees zeale was iuſtice. Noe Daniel and Iob had iuſtice. Iuſtice in Daniel. with the that night; but forth with thou shall reſtore it vnto him—that thou mayest haue iuſtice before our Lord thy God.

Pſal. 105. v. 30. And Phinees ſtood, and pacified, and the ſlaughter ceaſed, and it was reputed to him vnto iuſtice.

Ezech. 14. ver. 14. And if theſe three men shalbe in the middeſt thereof, Noë, Daniel, and Iob: they by their iuſtice shall deliuer their owne ſoules, ſaieth the Lord of hoſtes.

Daniel 6. ver. 22. My God hath ſent his Angel, and hath shut vp the mouthes of the lyons, and they haue not hurt me, becauſe before him iustice hath beene found in me.

Luc. 1. v. 75. That without feare being deliuered from the hand of our enemies, we may ſerue him, in holines and iuſtice before him all our dayes.

Hebr. 11. v. 33. Who by faith ouercame kingdomes, wrought Saints worke iuſtice. iuſtice.

1. Ioan. 3. v. 12. Becauſe his workes were wicked, but his brothers, iuſt.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton l. 6. de Iuſtif. cap. 8. The iuſtice of good workes done in faith is true iuſtice before God.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther in Diſp. to. 1. f. 390. God rewardeth iuſtice, which he Our iuſtice is wickedneſſe. accounteth wickedneſſe and iniquitie. Et in c. 53. Iſaiae to. 4. The iuſtice of Christians is onely in reputation iuſtice, but not formally.

Kemnice in locis tom. 2. tit. de Argumentis: To reſtore a pledge to the pore, is truely a good and iuſt worke, but not ſuch as if it be examined according to the rigour of the law deſerueth the title of iuſtice.

Caluin in Antidoto Concil. Seſſ. 6. c. 8. How farre is that Not iuſtice. Nether wholy nor in parte. newneſſe which is begunne in this life, from iuſtice. Againe: Will they bring me one place, which witneſſeth, that God approueth the begūne newneſſe of life for iustice, ether wholy or in parte? In c. 11. ver. 183. It procedeth from free imputation, that workes get the Farre from true iustice. name of iuſtice, which otherwiſe would be farre from the trueth of iuſtice. In Rom. 3. v. 27. The law of faith leaueth no iustice No iuſtice. in workes whatſoeuer they be. In c. 11. v. 6. As often as grace is named, the iuſtice of workes is brought to nothing. Et 3. Inſtit. c. 17. §. 9. There is no worke which is not ſo defiled by it owne corruption, that it retaineth not the honour of iustice. Againe: workes are iudged iuſt, aboue their worth.

Pareus l. 1. de Iuſtif. c. 19. Who make their workes, euen thoſe which they imagin to doe by the grace of Chriſt, iuſtice or merits of iuſtice before God, make idols of them, and ſo in trueth make of them dung, and dung-hill Gods. l. 2. c. 10. Hou should it be true and abſolute iuſtice, which faileth in manie things? l. 3. c. 8. That inherent iuſtice of charitie and workes, is ſo vncertaine and doubtfull, as in trueth it is none at all in the iudgment of God. Et l. 4. c. 20. Whether God examine our iuſtice according to himſelfe, or according to the rule of the law, it is found to be iniuſtice.

Miniſtri Electorales in Colloq. Aldeburg. p. 421. Nether Not to be called iuſtice. can our workes be called iustice before God.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that the good workes of the Iuſt, are iuſt, are iuſtice, are iuſtice before God: that by him they are reputed for iuſtice: that the iuſt shall deliuer their ſoules by their iuſtice. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that the good works of the Iuſt are far frō trueth of iuſtice, retaine not the honour of iuſtice, are not true and abſolute iuſtice: that before God they are nether wholy nor in parte iuſtice: that the law of faith leaueth no iuſtice in workes: that by grace the iuſtice of workes is brought to nothing: that truely there is no iuſtice in the iudgment of God: that God accounteth our iuſtice, iniuſtice wickedneſſe, iniquitie: that who make good workes done by grace to be iuſtice before God, make them idols and dunghill Gods.

ART. VI. WHETHER IN THE GOOD workes of the Iuſt there can be any worth or worthineſſe?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Philippenſ. 1. v. 26. Onely conuerſe yee worthie of the Ghoſpell Conuerſation worthie of the Ghoſpell. We are worthie of the lot of Saints. of Chriſt.

Coloſſ. 1. v. 12. God the Father hath made vs worthie vnto the parte of the lot of the Saintes in the light.

1. Theſſal. 2. v. 12. As you know in what manner we deſiring and comforting you, haue adiured euerie one of you (as a father his children) that you would walke worthie of God, who hath called you into his kingdome and glorie.

3. Ihon. v. 6. Whome, thou shalt do well, bringing on their way in manner worthie of God.

Apoc. 3. v. 4. And they shall walke with me in whites, becauſe Saints worthie to walke with Chriſt. they are worthie.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Ioan. 4. v. 14. This place teacheth the force and worth of workes which come of the Holie Ghoſt, againſt the the wicked. Heretiks of our time.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther de Seruo arb. to. 2. f. 453. In merit or Reward, ether No worth in our workes. we meane of the worth, or of the ſequele: If you meane worth, there is no merit, no reward.

Hemingius in Enchir. Claſſe 1. p. 122. If we muſt iudge of Vnworthie of the ſight of God. workes according to their worth, they are vnworthie to come in the ſight of God.

Caluin in Rom. 9. v. 11. The worth of workes is not regarded, which is none at all. 3. Inſtitut. c. 17. §. 8. If we muſt ſet a price of workes according to their worth, we ſay, they are vnworthie to come in the ſight of God. Et in Antidoto Concil. Seſſ. 6. c. vlt. They giue a falſe worthineſſe to workes, as if they pleaſe without forgiueneſſe.

Bezal. Quaeſt. vol. 1. p. 674. I ſay, that theſe workes of the regenerate, do pleaſe, not for anie worth of theirs, but for the mere grace of the Father. The like hath Bucanus in Inſtitut. Ioco 32.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that we may conuerſe worthily to the Ghoſpell of God, walke worthily of God: bring on others worthily of God: that ſome are made worthie to the parte of Saintes: that ſome are worthie to walke with God in white. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that there is no worth at all in good workes, that they are vnworthie to come in Gods ſight.

ART. VII. WHETHER LIFE EVERlaſting or reward be promiſed or giuen to good workes or good workers?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Mathew 20. verſ. 8. Call the worke men, and pay them Hire giuen to workes. their hire.

1. Tim. 4. v. 8. Pietie is profitable to all things, hauing promiſe Life to come promiſed to pietie. of the life that now is, and of that to come.

Apoc. 2. v. 7. To him that ouercometh, I will giue to eate of the tree of life.

2. Paralipomen. 15. verſ. 7. For there shalbe reward to Reward to workes. your worke.

Math. 25. v. 34. Come ye bleſſed of my Father, poſſeſſe you the The Kinkdome giuen for workes. kingdome prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was an hungred, and you gave me to eate &c.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 5. de Iuſtificat. c. 3. The Scripture in expreſſe words ſaied, that this reward is giuen to the worke, not to the promiſe onely.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Zuinglius in Lucae 13. to. 4. Workes are not the things, to Saluation not giuen to workes. Nor heauenlie rewards. which God giueth euerlaſting ſafetie.

Author libri de Iuſtif. to. 5. doctrinae Ieſuiticae p. 240. It must not be demanded nor granted, that heauenlie rewards are giuen to good workes.

Pareus l. 5. de Iuſtif. c. 3. I ſay that it is a falſe gloſe: Call the Nor life euerlasting. workmen, giue them their hire, that is, giue the workmen life euerlaſting. Againe: I denie alſo, that (life euerlaſting) is giuen to workers.

Miniſters of Saxonie in Colloq. Aldeburg. pag. 162. You neuer reade in the Scripture: That euerlaſting life is giuen to good workes.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that hire is giuen to workmē, that to him that ouercometh is giuen to eate of the tree of life; that to pietie is promiſed both this life and the next: that there is reward to workes. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that life euerlaſting is not giuen to workmen; that it is a falſe gloſe, Giue the workmen their hire, that is, giue workmen life euerlaſting: that God giueth not eternall life to workes, that he giueth not heauenlie rewards to workes.

ART. VIII. WHETHER GOOD WORKES of the Iuſt be meritorious before God?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Eccleſ. 16. v. 15. All mercie shall make place to euerie man, Merit in good workes. according to the merit of his workes.

Hebr. 13. ver. 19. And beneficence and communication do not God promerited. forgette, for with ſuch hoſtes God is promerited.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 6. c. 16. We muſt beleiue, that nothing is wanting to thoſe that are iuſtified, whereby fully they may not be iudged to haue truely merited life euerlaſting in due time by the workes which are done in God, ſo they departe hence in grace.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Confeſſio Wittenberg. c. de Iuſtif. Before the tribunall of God, where true and eternall iustice and ſaluation is handled, No place at all for merits. there is no place at all for the merits of men.

Confeſſio Belgica art. 15. We do good workes, but not to Merit is vanitie. merit any thing by them. For what can we merit?

Confeſſio Scotica art 15. Whoſoeuer brag of merit of their workes, brag of vanitie.

Perkins Cathol. reform. Contr. 5. c. 1. We renounce all perſonall All perſonall merit renounced. merits, that is, all merits within the perſon of any mere man. c. 2. It muſt needs be a fanaticall inſolencie for any man to imagin, that he can by his workes merit eternall life, who cannot We cannot merit bread merit bread.

Luther de Seruo atbit. tom. 2. fol. 480. There is no merit at all.

Zuinglius in Expoſit. Fdiei to. 2. f. 558. It is manifeſt, that the names of Merit and Reward are in the holie Scripture, but in steed of a liberall guift.

Caluin 3. Inſtit. c. 16. §. 2. We take from men the opinion of meriting. c. 7. §. 3. The workes of Gods ſeruants perpetually deſerue Not one drop of merit. rather shame, then praiſe. In Rom. 4. v. 2. Who then of vs will chalenge one drop of merit? In Gal. 6. ver. 8. I ſay, that they are not onely vnworthie of the baſeſt reward, but wholy worthie to be damned.

Beza in Ioan. 1. v. 9. Where are merits which we may bring before Away with the name of merit. God? Et l. Quaeſt. vol. 1. p. 681. Away with the name of merit, which is directly contrarie to grace. Et 690. Thou shall not find in any place of the Scripture the name of merit.

Scarpe de Iuſtific. Contr. 15. We ſay, that the workes of the Nether condigne nor cō gruoue merit. faithfull in Gods ſight are no way meritorious ether condignely or congruouſly.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that euerie one shalbe rewarded according to the merit of his workes: that God is promerited by good workes. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants ſay, that there is no merit at all, not a drop of merit in our workes, that we cannot merit bread, not the baſeſt reward, that our works are no way meritorious nether condignely nor congruouſly. Which ſome Proteſtants confeſſe to be contrarie to Scripture. See libro. 2. cap. 30.

ART. XI. WHETHER THE IVST may glorie in God of their good workes.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Cor. 1. v. 30. He that doth glorie, may glorie in our Lord. We may glorie in God. c. 9. v. 15. It is good for me to die rather, then that any man should make my glorie void.

Galat. 6. verſ. 4. Let euerie one proue his owne workes, and ſo in himſelfe onely shall he haue glorie, and not in an other.

2. Theſſalon. 2. verſus 19. and 20. For what is our hope or ioy, or crowne of glorie? Are not you before our Lord Ieſus in his coming? For you are our glorie and our ioye.

2. Corinth. 1. v. 12. For our glorie is, the teſtimonie of our In the teſtimonie of our conſcience. concience.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Rom. 3. ver. 21. Abraham had workes by which he might glorie before God.

Cardinal. Bellarmin. libro quinto de Iuſtification. cap 5. Faith excludeth all their glorying who glorie in themſelues, as if they, could worke iuſtice by their owne strength, and had of themſelues all the good which they haue; but it excludeth not the glorying of them who glorie in our Lord.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther poſtilla in Natali Dom. fol. 374. There is no cauſe No glorie in anie worke. why we should glorie neuer ſo litle in theſe (works) but rather that we should blush.

Caluin in Com. 4. verſ. 2. Abraham had not whereupon to glorie before God. In cap. 3. verſ. 27. Without doubt he ſaieth that glorying is excluded, becauſe we can bring forth nothing that is our owne, which is worthie of the approbation or commendation of God. Againe: When we come to the rule of faith, all All glorying in workes caſt downe. glorying of workes is caſt downe. The like he hath 3. Inſtit. c. 14. §. 16. and 17.

Peter Martyr in Rom. 3. The will of God taketh great care All glorying excluded. of this, that all glorying be excluded from vs. Againe: Seing God will haue glorying excluded, it is cleare how much they erre who maintayne merits. In c. 4. It cannot be that any haue glorie before God.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that we may glorie in God: that euerie one shall haue glorie in himſelfe: that they to whome we haue done well shalbe our glorie before God: that our glorie, is the teſtimonie of our conſcience. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that all glorie of workes is caſt downe: that all our glorying is excluded: that we can haue no glorie before God: that in workes there is neuer ſo litle wherevpon to glorie, but rather to be ashamed.

ART. X. WHETHER ALL GOOD workes be equall before God?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Mathew 22. verſ. 38. Thou shalt loue thy Lord thy God The greateſt commandment. from thy whole hart &c. This is the greateſt and firſt commandment.

Luc. 10. v. 42. Marie hath choſen the beſt parte. The beſt parte. Well, and better.

1. Cor. 7. v. 38. Therefore both he who ioyneth his Virgin in matrimonie, doth well: and he who ioyneth not doth better. cap. 12. v. vlt. And yet I shew you a more excellent way. cap. 13. v. 13. And now there remayne faith, hope, charitie: theſe three, but the greater of theſe is charitie.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

D. Stapleton in 1. Cor. 7. v. 38. To ioyne in marriage is good, not to ioyne, is better. Could the latter be preferred before the former in more plaine words?

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Tindal in Fox his Actes pag. 1138. There is no worke better No worke better then other. then an other to pleaſe God: To make water, to wash dishes, to be a ſouter, or an Apoſtle, all is one. To wash dishes, and to preach, all is one, as touching the deed to pleaſe God.

Luther de votis to. 2. f. 291. Let vs not diſtinguish betweene All workes equall with God. workes, they are equall with God, wich are great and litle with vs and amongst themſelues, In Pſal. 14. to 3. In faith all workes are equall. Againe: To one that beleiueth in God, all is one, whether he faſt, or pray, or ſerue his brother. For he knoweth, that he ſerueth and pleaſeth God equally in all things, whether they be great or litle workes, pretious or baſe, short or long.

De bonis operibus to 5. • . 578. In this faith all workes are made equall. Then falleth downe all difference of workes, whether they be great or litle, long or short, manie or few. For workes are not gratefull to God in themſelues but for faith. Ib. in c. 3. Petri fol. 468 Before God there is no worke better then other, but by faith all are made equall.

Confeſſio Heluet. c. 29. It is moſt certaine, that theſe works which in true faith are done of parents, by the dueties of marriage and houſekeeping, do pleaſe God no leſſe then praiers, faſting, and almes.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that in Gods commandments there is one which is the greateſt: that in workes there is the beſt parte, good and better, greater and excellenter. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that before God all workes are equall, no worke exceedeth an other, that all pleaſe God equally: that to wash dishes pleaſeth God as much as to preach, to be a ſowter, as much as to be an Apoſtle: that the dueties of marriage pleaſe God no leſſe then praying, faſting, and giuing of almes.

ART. XI. WHETHER ALL GOOD workes be commanded of God?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

1. Cor. 7. v. 25. As concerning virgins, a commandment of Some good worke not commanded. our Lord I haue not, but counſail I giue. v. 36. But if anie man thinke that he ſeemeth dishonoured vpon his virgine for that she is paſt age, and if it muſt be ſo, let him do that he will. He ſinneth In the free choice of men. not if she marrie.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

C. Bellarm. l. 2. de Monachis c. 8. It is the ſentence of all Catholiks, that there are manie true and proper Euangelicall counſails, which are nether commanded nor indifferent; but gratefull to God and commended of him.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Confeſſio Scotica art. 14. We affirme, that thoſe wholy Onely commanded workes are good. No counſails. are good workes, which by faith are done according to his commandment.

Luther l. de votis tom. 2. fol. 272. Religious men are purſuaded of this ſacrilegious and blaſphemous opinion of counſails and precepts. Againe: The counſails which they imagin, are for the moſt parte thoſe whereof Chriſt ſpeaketh Math. 5. to which adde virginitie and continencie. But that all theſe are not counſails but neceſſarie commandments, this proueth firſt of all &c. In cap. 9. Iſaiae to. 4. The Turke is better then theſe, who haue brought in this horrible errour of counſails. De bonis operibus to. 5. fol. 577. There is no worke good, but that which God hath commanded.

Hutterus in Analyſi Conf. Auguſtan. pag. 413. Wherefore workes cannot nor must not be called truely good, but ſuch as are commanded of God. p. 415. Away with that deteſtable madneſſe, which the Papiſticall Sophiſters haue moſt bouldly bewrayed in making commandments and Euangelicall counſails.

Caluin in 1. Cor. 9. v. 18. We do not acknowledge any worke to be good and acceptable to God, which is not contained in the law of God; 4. Inſtit. c. 13. §. 12. There is none ſo ſmall a word vttered of Chriſt, which we muſt not neceſſarily obey. In Math. 5. v. 44. How prepoſterous and vnſauourie the inuention of counſails is, appeareth &c.

Beza in 1. Cor. 7. v. 25. I willingly auoid that falſe diſtinction betwixt precepts and counſails.

Daneus Controu. 5. pag. 949. There are not ſome precepts; other, counſails.

Volanus l. 1. cont. Scargam. p. 1005. Thoſe which they call Counſails are precepts. counſails of Chriſt, Chriſt himſelfe plainely teacheth to be his earneſt precepts, which all muſt obey.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that virginitie is not commanded of God, but counſailed of the Apoſtle: that one without ſinne may marrie his virgin or not marrie her. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely teach, that virginitie is neceſſarily commanded; that there is no worke good but that which is commanded: that there are no counſails diſtinct from precepts: that the counſails are precepts: that they are madde, worſe then Turkes, and blasphemous, who diſtinguish betweene counſails and precepts. Which are ſo plaine againſt Scripture as diuers Proteſtants confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. XII. WHETHER GOOD WORKES be neceſſarie to iuſtification?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Math. 6. v. 15. But if you will not forgiue men, nether will your Some good worke neceſſarie to iuſtification. Father forgiue you your offenſes.

Ioan. 15. verſ. 10. If you keepe my precepts, you shall abide in my loue.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſsion. 6. Can. 9. If any shall ſay, that a ſinner is iuſtified by onely faith, ſo as he vnderſtand that nothing els is required to cooperate to the grace of iuſtification, and that it is not needfull in anie ſorte that he be diſpoſed and prepared by motion of his will, be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Confeſſ. Argentinenſis. c. 3. Whereas now ſome yeares it was tought, that mans workes are required to his iuſtification, our men haue tought that all iuſtification is to be aſcribed to Gods good will and Chriſts merits.

Confeſſio Bohemica art. 6. We teach, that men freely by Iuſtification obtained without workes. Chriſt, by faith in Chriſt through mercie are iuſtified, and obtaine ſaluation and remiſsion of ſinnes, without any worke or merit of man.

Apologia Confeſſ. Auguſtanae c. de Reſponſ. ad argum. tom. 3. Melancthonis: Doth not the Ghoſpell promiſe ſaluation Iuſtification promiſed to thoſe who haue no good workes. Preſence of good workes not neceſſarie. and remiſsion of ſinnes euen to them who haue no good workes at all?

Liber Concordiae Lutheran. in Declarat. artic cap. 3. It is falſe, if anie ſay, that faith cannot iuſtifie without good workes: or that the preſence of good workes is neceſſarie to faith for to iuſtifie: or that the preſence of good workes is neceſſarie to iuſtification, or in the moment of iustifying.

Luther de libertate to. 2. f. 5. Our faith maketh, that none None haue need of workes to be ſaued. haue need of the law or workes for to be iuſtified or ſaued. f. 6. A Chriſtian needeth no workes for to be iuſtified or ſaued. Poſtilla in Dom. poſt Natale. Nothing els is required to iuſtification, then to heare and beleiue Chriſt Ieſus our Sauiour. And as Kemnitius in Schluſſelburg. to. 7. pag. 530. ſaieth: Luther clearly prof • ſſeth, that workes are pernitious with that addition which he calleth Leuiathan, to wit, if they be ſaied to be neceſſarie to iuſtification and ſaluation.

Miniſters of Saxonie in Colloq. Aldeburg. p. 164. Whoſoeuer Workes not neceſſarily preſent in the time of iuſtification. ſaieth, that our good workes are neceſſarily preſent in the moment of iuſtification, he ſwarueth from the word of God, from the confeſsion and Apologie of Auſpurg, and from the doctrine of Luther.

Herbrandus in Compendio Theol. loco de Iuſtificat. What excludeth that word: Onely? Not workes onely from the efficient cauſe if iuſtification, and from worth and merit; but alſo from all cauſe without which not, and from all neceſs • rie of preſence in the act of iuſtification. For without workes, a ſinner beleiuing in Chriſt is iuſtified. Otherwiſe iuſtifi • ation would be alwaies vncertaine, and ſo we should doubt of it. Againe: To iuſtification, there is need of no other thing, but onely of faith. Onely faith needfull to iuſtification. Thoſe that haue no good workes may be iuſtified. Preſence of good workes not neceſſarie.

Kemnitius in Schluſſelburg. to. cit. p. 711. It is falſe, concontrarie to the Apologie it ſelfe, that none can be iustified who hath not good workes. p. 716. It is falſe, if I ſay that faith doth not iustifie vnleſſe it haue good workes actually preſent.

Morlinus in Schluſſelburg. to. cit. p. 171. It is ſimply a falſe propoſition: The preſence of good workes is howſoeuer neceſſarie in the act of iuſtification. Et 173. It ſtands for an inuincible trueth, if the preſence of good workes be accounted as neceſſarie in the act of iuſtification, it is dung and loſſe. Manie more like ſayings of Lutherans may be ſeene in Schluſſelburg to. cit.

Rainolds in Apologia Theſium p. 263. Good workes are Not required to iuſtification. not required to iuſtification.

Caluin in Math. 6. v. 12. The pardon which we aske to be giuē to vs, dependeth not vpon that, which we giue to others. The like ſayings of theirs we repeated in the former chapter art. 17. and shall hereafter alſo c. 17. art. 1. and 2.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that God will not pardon our ſinnes, vnleſſe we pardon others: that we shall abide in his loue if we keepe his precepts. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that the pardon which me aske of God dependeth not vpō that which we giue to others: that our workes or good workes are not required to iuſtification: that we may obtaine remiſſion of ſinnes without anie worke: that the Ghoſpell promiſeth remiſſion of ſinnes euen to them who haue no workes at all: that faith can iuſtifie without good workes: that the preſence of good workes is not neceſſarie in the moment of iuſtification: that we haue no need of workes to be iuſtified: that workes are pernitious if they tought neceſſarie to iuſtificatiō: that faith iuſtifieth though it haue no good workes actually preſent: that ſole faith, excludeth euen the neceſſitie of the preſence of good workes, when we are iuſtified.

ART. XIII. WHETHER GOOD WORKES be neceſſarie to ſaluation?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Math. 5. v. 21. For I tell you, that vnleſſe your iuſtice abound Our iuſtice neceſſarie to ſaluation. Likewiſe our conuerſion. And keeping of the commandments. Patience neceſſarie. And Holines more then that of the Scribes and Phariſees, you shall not enter into the kingdome of heauen. c. 18. v. 3. Amen, I ſay to you, vnleſſe you be conuerted and become as litle children, you shall not enter into the kingdome of heauen. c. 19. v. 17. If thou wilt enter into life, keepe the commandments.

Hebr. 10. v. 36. Patience is neceſsarie for you, that doing the will of God, you may receaue the promiſe. c. 12. v. 14. Follow peace with all men and holines, without which no man shall ſee God.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 4. de Iuſtif. c. 7. We ſay, that good workes are neceſſarie for a iuſt man to ſaluation.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

The Confeſſion of Bohemia and the Apologie of the Confeſſion of Auſpurg cited in the former article, denie good workes to be neceſſarie to ſaluation.

Tindal in Fox his Acts p. 1143. We need not to labour for We need not labour for heauen. all theſe things (to be Chriſts heires and to haue heauen) for theſe we haue already.

The English Tranſlatour of Luthers cōmentaries vpon the Epiſtle to the Galathians: For if there haue beene ſince the Good workes not neceſſarie to ſaluation. time of Luther, and be yet ſome, which openly defend that workes be neceſſarie to ſaluation, where he before ſo mightly hath taught the contrarie, what then would theſe haue done, if Luther had not beene? Who alſo forewarned vs of the ſame, prophecying▪ that after his times the doctrine of iustification would be almost extinguished in the Church.

Liber Concordiae Luther. in Declar. art. c. 4. Thoſe propoſitions of neceſsitie of good workes to ſaluation, take away comfort Not neceſſarie to ſaluation. from troubled and afflicted conſciences, giue occaſion of doubting of the grace of God, and are manie wayes dangerous. Againe: Thoſe propoſitions of the neceſsitie of good workes to ſaluation, are not to be taught, defended, painted: but rather to be hiſſed out, caſt out of our Churches as falſe and not ſincere.

Luther in Gal. 1. to. 5. f. 286. The falſe Apoſtles did teach, that Doctrine of falſe Apoſtles beſide faith in Chriſt the workes of Gods law are neceſſarie to ſaluatiō. l. de votis to. 2. f. 281. Thou now vnderstādeſt, why I ſaied ſo oftentimes, that nether vowes nor our workes are neceſſarie to iuſtice and ſaluation. And as Schluſſelburg. to. 7. Catal. Haer. pag. 312. reporteth: This forme of ſpeech: God workes are neceſſarie Caſt out of Luthers Churches. to ſaluation he cauſed to be blotted and taken out of ſame mens writings, and made a publike diſputation of the ſame, and therein caſt it out of his Churches, and ſent it back againe to the Popes market: or as Illyricus and Gallus ibid. pag. 567. write: In publick diſputation held at Wittemberg 1536. he more then fiue times iterated this ſpeech: That propoſition good workes be Condemned. neceſsarie to ſaluation, we will haue to be condemned, abrogated, and quite shut out of our Churches and ſcholes. The like ſaieth Scheptius cited in Colloq. Aldeburg. p. 153. 349.

The Miniſters of Saxonie in Colloq. Aldeburg. p. 6. and 7. condemne this propoſition: Good workes are neceſſarie to Popish, and impious doctrine. ſaluation. and p. 129. ſay, that it is Popish, ſcandalous, dangerous, and impious, contrarie to the word of God, the Conf • ſsion of Auſpurg and writings of Luther: to which purpoſe they cite manie of Luthers ſayings: p. 134. they ſay, it breedeth deſperation. Popish paradox. p. 151. is the onely foundation of the Popes kingdome. p. 349. a Popish paradox.

Schluſſelburg. tom. 7. Catal. Haeret. pag. 69. Good workes Popish ſpeech are neceſsarie to ſaluation, is eſpecially the ſpeech and phraſe of Papiſts, and the foundation of all Popish and Antichriſts workes. This foundation ſtanding, all Poperie ſtandeth. If therefore we Foundation of Poperie. shalbe ſo madde as to admit this propoſition, we shall take away all diſtinction betwene vs and Poperie, all our religion wilbe condemned, we iuſtly accounted Schiſmatiks, accurſed, and ether compelled to recant our doctrine, or to be damned for euer. And to the ſame purpoſe he citeth manie famous Lutherans.

Morlinus in Schluſſelburg. to 4. Catal. Haeret. pag. 229. I am aſſured, that it is the doctrine of Sathā, if any ſay or thinke, Doctrine of Sathan. that to a ſinner, as he is now after his fall, workes are any way neceſſarie to ſaluation. To which Poach addeth p. 266. that, it is doctrine of Sathan, to ſay that good workes are neceſſarie to ſaluation, ether in the law or in the Ghospell, or in anie parte whatſoeuer of Chriſtian doctrine.

Illyricus Praefat. in Epiſtol. ad Rom. Workes are not any Not any way neceſſarie. way neceſſarie to ſaluation.

Hunnius de Iuſtif. p. 187. This propoſition, wherewith it is ſaied, that workes are neceſſarie to ſaluation, I iudge to be caſt out of the Church, howſoeuer it be painted or coloured.

Herbrandus in Compendio Theol. loco de bonis operibus: Let this propoſition: God workes be neceſſarie to ſaluation, be caſt away. The ſame ſay manie other Lutherans, whome I name in my Latin booke c. 13. art. 13.

Confeſſio Heluet. cap. 16. We do not thinke, that good God workes not neceſſarie workes are ſo neceſſarie to ſaluation, that without them no man is euer ſaued. And to this Confeſſion ſubſcribed the Proteſtant Churches of England, Scotland, France, and Flanders, as is reported in Syntagmate Confeſſionum.

Caluin in Antidoto Concilij Seſſ. 6. Can. 20. In that the Ghoſpell differeth from the law, that it promiſeth life not vpon condition of workes, as that doth, but for faith.

Preus l. 3. de Iuſtif. c. 12. Whence we vnderſtand, that workes Not abſolutely neceſſarie. are not abſolutely neceſſarie to ſaluation. l. 4. c. 1. We thinke euen the thiefe, who in all his life hadde done no good, when in his agonie he fled to Christ, being preuented by death, to haue beene ſaued with out workes. Et. c. 2. Without new obediēce the promiſe of life may be ſure to the beleiuers. And in Gal. 6. lect. 73. They Contrarie to the Ghoſpell. (Interimiſts) did hould no few points of doctrine contrarie to the Ghoſpell, of ſeuen Sacraments, of workes neceſſarie to ſaluation &c.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that patience is neceſſarie to attaine the promiſes: that without holines none shall ſee God: that vnleſſe our iuſtice be greater then that of the Phariſes we shall not enter into the kingdome of heauen: that if we will haue life, we muſt keepe the commandments. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that workes are not necſſarie to ſaluation, not abſolutely neceſſarie: that the thiefe was ſaued without workes: that the Ghoſpell promiſeth ſaluation without condition of workes: that doctrine of neceſsitie of workes to ſaluation is Popish, is the foundation of all Poperie, the doctrine of Antichriſt and Sathan. Which are ſo oppoſite to Scripture, as ſometimes Proteſtants confeſſe it. See l. 2. c. 30.

ART. XIV. WHETHER GOOD WORKES be profitable or auaile any thing to iuſtification and ſaluation?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Tim. 4. v. 8. Pietie is profitable to all things, hauing promiſe Good workes profitable. of the life that now is, and of that to come. The ſame teach other places cited in the former article, and others to be cited in the next article.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Catechiſmus ad Parochos. cap. de Oratione. By deuout praiers we appeaſe God, by almes we redeeme the offenſes of men, by fasting we wash away the filth of our owne life. And albeit euerie one be profitable againſt all kinde of ſinnes, yet &c.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Apologie of the English Church: We ſay, we haue no meed No meed in workes. (in Latin, praeſidium) at all by our owne workes and deeds, but appoint all the means of our ſaluation to be in Chriſt alone.

Confeſſio Argentinenſis c. 3. It is cleare, that our workes Workes helpe nothing to iuſtice. Of no momēt. helpe nothing to this, that of iniuſt we become iuſt.

Confeſſio Belgica art. 24. Workes proceding from the true roote of faith are of no moment of all for to iuſtifie vs.

Whitaker ad Ration. 8. Campiani. God, in iuſtifying vs, Of no reckoning. makes no reckoning at all of our workes.

Tindal in Fox his actes p. 1143. All that thinke, that good Profit nothing. workes helpe or profit any thing to get the guift of ſaluatiō, they blaſpheme againſt God, and robbe God of honour. Which Fox alſo maintaineth.

Luther l. de votis to. 2. f. 279. To teach, that workes are holeſome Not profitable. or profitable, is diuelish and Apoſtaticall from faith, ſeing faith alone is neceſſarie and profitable. In 1. Petri. 1. to. 5. fol. 453. All which tend to that end, that we may learne, that we cannot be holpen by workes. In c. 40. Iſaiae in Schluſſelburg tom. 7. Catal. Haeret. fol. 320. When workes are condemned, they are Vnprofitable. ſo condemned, as vnprofitable to Christian iustice, and likewiſe to ſaluation. Poſtilla in Dom. 3. poſt Paſcha fol. 257. Nether will anie workes helpe thither, he meaneth to iuſtification. In die Aſcēſionis f. 267. Workes do nothing at all for pietie and iustification. Doe nothing. In dom. 13. poſt Trinit. Albeit I had all the workes of Abraham, Noë, and all the beloued fathers, they would profit me nothing. In Dom. 13. he ſaieth, that workes profit a man nothing. In feſto S. Annae, that they doe nothing. Et Serm. de 10. Leproſis to. 7. he writeth: Let him know, that his workes are not neceſſarie and profitable to himſelfe, but onely to his neighbour. Nor yet content to haue taught, that good workes are vnprofitable, he addeth that they are pernitious to ſaluation. For thus writeth Hoſpin. in Concordia diſcordi c. 20. Rorarius sheweth, that Luther alwaies vſed this propoſition: Good workes pernicious to ſaluation. Good workes are pernitious to ſaluation. And the ſame confeſſe the Miniſters of Saxonie in Colloq. Aldeburg. p. 205. and Luther himſelfe intimateth in c. 40. Iſaiae to. 3. in theſe words: The iustice and wiſdome of the flesh is condemned, as vnprofitable, yea pernitious to obtaine iustice and ſaluation. For by iuſtice of the flesh, he vſeth to vnderſtand good workes. And ſo Schluſſelburg in the place now cited vnderſtood him.

The Miniſters of the Elector. in Colloq. Aldeburg. p. 293. ſpeake thus: Amſdorfius hath written, and after him or Pernitious to ſaluation. by him Flac • ius: workes are not onely not neceſſarie but alſo pernitious to ſaluation: (and his words are at large related by Coccius to. 1. p. 1113.) Beſides they adde p. 121. that the ſaied Amſdarfius wrote a booke with this title: Good workes are hurtfull to ſaluation: And that no man may ſay, that Amſdorfius ſpoake or wrote this onely of the truſt of workes, himſelfe declareth, ſaying: That good workes euen according to their nature or Perni • ious euen of their nature and ſubſtance. ſubſtance as they are commanded of God, are pernitious to ſaluation. And the ſame euaſion reiecteth alſo Hoſpinian in place before alledged. Kemnitius alſo in Schluſſelburg to. 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 529. confeſſeth, that in their Church this doctrine is ſpread: The good workes of the iuſt are pernitious to ſaluation. The ſame confeſſeth liber Concordiae c. 4. Hutterus in Analyſi Confeſſ. Auguſtan. diſput. 13. Adamus Franciſci in Margarita Theol. loco. 10. Reineccius tom. 4. Armaturae c. 15.

Lubeccenſes apud Schluſſelburg to. 7. Catal. Haeret. p. The law vnprofitable to iuſtification. 607. The law is not onely not neceſſarie to iuſtification, but altogether vnprofitable.

Gerlachius to. 2. diſput. 14. The morall now ſince the fall of man is ſo vnprofitable to iuſtifie and ſaue, as &c.

Caluin in Reſp. ad Sadolet. p. 126. Surely we denie, that in iustifying mans workes are worth a haire. Againe: we denie that workes haue any thing to doe in iuſtifying a man. In Rom. 8. v. 3. The law hath no force at all to giue iuſtice.

Coccius tomo 1. pag. 1113. repeateth theſe words of Rather hindreth. Luther out of his Sermon in Natali Chriſti: It is now made euident, that to this new natiuitie worke nothing but rather hinder, precepts, laws, doctrine, free will, good workes, innocent life &c.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that pietie is profitable to all things, and hath promiſe of the life to come. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that good helpe nothing to iuſtification or ſaluation, are not worth a haire; haue nothing to doe there: that they are not profitable, worke nothing to ſaluation, profit nothing to ſaluation: that they are vnprofitable, yea pernitious to iuſtice and ſaluation, and that of their owne nature as they are commanded of God: and that to teach that workes are profitable, is diuelish, and Apoſtaticall from faith.

ART. XV. WHETHER GOOD WORKES be a cauſe of ſaluation?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Math. 25. v. 23. Becauſe thou haſt beene faithfull ouer a few Workes cauſe of entrance into ioye. And of poſſeſsing the kingdome. things, I will place the ouer maniethings; enter into the ioy of thy Lord. Et v. 34. Poſſeſſe you the kingdome prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was an hungred, and you gaue me to eate.

Rom. 8. v. 10. The bodie indeed, is dead becauſe of ſinne, but the ſpirit liueth becauſe of iuſtification.

2. Cor. 4. v. 17. For that our tribulation which preſently is momentarie and light, worketh aboue meaſure excedingly an eternall Tribulation worketh glorie. weight of glorie in vs. Et c. 7. v. 10. The ſorrow that is according to God, worketh pennance vnto ſaluation that is ſtable: but the ſorrow of the world worketh death.

Gal. 6. v. 8. He that ſoweth in his flesh, of the flesh alſo shall Life reaped of ſowing in ſpirit. reape corruption: but he that ſoweth in the ſpirit, of the ſpirit shall reape life euerlasting.

Philippenſ. 1. v. 27. And in nothing be ye terrified of the aduerſaries, Men worke their ſaluation. which to them is cauſe of perdition, but to you of ſaluation, and this of God. Et c. 2. v. 12. With feare and trembling worke your ſaluation.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton l. 8. de Iuſtific. c. 34. Good workes are truely and properly the cauſe ether of reconciliation or of ſaluation.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker lib. 2. de Scriptura cap. 14. ſect. 5. The iust The iuſt not rewarded for for workes. are not rewarded for the workes of iuſtice which they haue done.

Perkins in Serie Cauſarum c. 57. Saluation dependeth not of workes, but of our faith.

Luther in Gal. 2. to. 5. f. 308. Thus are we deliuered from ſinne, Saluation dependeth not of workes. Life not giuen for workes. Nons ſaued for workes. iuſtified, and life euerlaſting is giuen vs, not for our merits and workes, but for faith. In Catechiſmo f. 687. Surely our workes do nothing to ſaluation.

Illyricus in Claue part. 2 tractat. 6. None shalbe ſaued for his workes.

Herbrandus in Compendio theol. loco de bonis operibus: Life euerlaſting is giuen to vs freely by Chriſt, and not for our good workes.

Zuinglius in Ioan. 5. tom. 4. Workes do not ſaue, do not Workes ſaue not. iuſtifie.

Caluin in Rom. 4. v. 16. If the heauenlie inheritance come to Heauen cometh not by workes. Affliction no cauſe of ſaluation. Workes not in parte cauſe of ſaluation. No true cauſe vs by workes, faith will fall, the promiſe wilbe abrogated. In Philippen. 1. ver. 28. Certainly the Scripture no where teacheth, that the afflictions, which the Saintes ſuffer of the wicked, are cauſe of their ſaluation.

Beza in Confeſſ. c. 4. ſect. 19. For theſe things are not ſo to be vnderſtood, as if our workes were cauſe of our ſaluation ether wholy or in parte.

Peter Martyr in Rom. 9. God workes are no true cauſe of eternall ſaluation.

Zanchius l. 5. de Natura Dei cap. 2. q. 7. The workes of the godlie are no true cauſes of euerlaſting happines; but onely the meanes by which (as it were) by degrees the elect are mercifully ledde into the euerlaſting and heauenlie cittie.

Pareus libr. 4. de Iuſtificat. cap. 7. Our aduerſarie concludeth falſe: that the kingdome of heauen is giuen for good workes.

Tilenus in Syntagmate cap. 48. Good workes in reſpect of No cauſe at all. ſaluation, can be no cauſe at all.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely teacheth, not onely that we shall poſſeſſe the kingdome of heauen becauſe we haue done good workes, that we shall reape life euerlaſting of the ſpirit, that the ſoule liueth for iuſtification, that ſorrow according to God worketh ſaluation, that afflictiction worketh glorie and is cauſe of ſaluation: but alſo in the ſame manner ſaieth, that the elect shall poſſeſſe heauen becauſe they haue done good deeds, as it ſaieth, that the reprobats shall goe into euerlaſting fire becauſe they haue done ill deeds: So it ſaieth, that the ſoule liueth for iuſtification, as it ſaieth, the bodie dieth for ſinne: In like ſorte it ſaieth, that ſorrow according to God maketh ſaluation, as it ſaieth, that ſorrow of the world worketh death: Euen in the ſame ſorte it ſaieth, that of ſowing in ſpirit we shall reap life euerlaſting, as it ſaieth, that of ſowing in flesh we shall reape corruption: And in the ſame kind of ſpeach ſaieth, that perſecution is cauſe of ſaluation to thoſe who ſuffer it, as it ſaieth, that it is cauſe of damnation to thoſe who make it. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that affliction is not cauſe of ſaluation: that the heauenlie in heritance cometh not to vs by workes: that the life is not giuen for good workes: that we are not rewarded for good workes, not ſaued for workes: that ſaluation dependeth not of workes: that workes are no way cauſe ſaluation, are no cauſe of it ether wholy or in parte. Which do ſo plainely contradict the Scripture, as therefore Illyricus is forced to reproue the Scripture. For this he writeth in Claue tractat. 6. cit. tit. de varia bonorum operum praedicat. col. 551. We heare, that toto great effects and praiſes, yea euen ſaluation it ſelfe is attributed (of the Scripture) to good workes. It manifeſtly appeareth, that very often to much paiſe is giuen(by Scripture)to good workes, which doth not agree to them, nor is to be attributed, if we will speake exactly, truely, and properly. Behould how plainely he ſaieth, that Scripture attributeth to great effects vnto good workes, attributeth ſaluation vnto them, attributeth very oftentime to much praiſe vnto them, and ſuch effects as agree not to them, nor are to be be attributed to them if we will ſpeake truely. But ſurely if the Scripture attributeth to much to good workes, and that which doth not agree to them, and which is not to be attributed to them if we will ſpeake truely, the Scripture in ſo doing, doth falſely. But whether the Scripture or Illyricus know better what is to be attributed to good workes, let Chriſtians iudge.

ART. XVI. WHETHER GOOD WORKES be a teſtimonie of iuſtice and predeſtination?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Ioan. 2. ver. 5. But he that keepeth his word, in him in By good workes we know we are in God. That we are tranſlated from death. God workes make election ſure. very deed the charitie of God is perfited: in this we know that we be in him. cap. 3. ver. 14. We know, that we are tranſlated from death to life, becauſe we loue the brethren. And ver. 21. If our hart do not reprehend vs, we haue confidence towards God.

2. Peter 1. verſ. 10. Wherefore brethren labour the more, that by good workes you may make ſure your vocation and election.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Rom. 9. ver. 11. If we beleiue Saint Peter, the certaintie of our ſaluation, and conſequently of the election, is concluded in doing of good workes, not in the onely purpoſe of God.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Confeſſio Wittenbergenſis C. de Confeſſ. We know, that Workes make but doubt and despaire. if we looke vnto our workes, we should not onely doubt, but alſo despaire of our ſaluation.

Miniſtri Electorales in Colloq. Aldeburg. pag. 427. We No certaintie by good. muſt certainely determine out of the word of God deliuered and propoſed vnto vs, and not out of the feeling of infuſed newneſſe of life, as it were by an effect, that by faith freely for and by Ch • iſt we haue remiſsion of ſinnes.

Caluin 3. Inſtit. c. 2. §. 38. If we muſt iudge by workes, how God is affected toward vs, I confeſſe that we can haue but a ſmall gheſſe all it. De neceſſitate reform. pag. 47. What shall man A ſmall gheſſe by workes. Matter of doubt and deſpaire. Of trembling. find in his workes, but matter of doubting, and at length of deſpairing? And in Antidot. Concili. Seſſ. 6. cap. 8. As long as we looke what we are, we muſt tremble before God: ſo farre are we from hauing certaine and vnshaken hope of eternall life. In Rom. 4. v. 14. We are vtterly loſt and vndone, if we be ſent to our workes, when we muſt ſeeke the cauſe or certaintie of our ſaluation. In 1. Ioan. 3. v. 22. Woe to vs, if we looke to our workes, Nothing but matter of feare. which haue nothing in them but matter of feare.

Pareus lib. 1. de Iuſtificat. cap. 10. The truſt of remiſsion of ſinnes, nether dependeth nor riſeth of a good conſcience. l. 3. c. 2. Our faith and truſt doth reape nothing of our owne diſpoſition, but feare of deceit, doubt, and anxietie. Et l. 4. p. 625. Of our owne Of doubt and anxietie. accord we graunt, that if faith must relie vpon inherent iuſtice, we must not onely doubt of grace and iustice, but alſo perpetually tremble.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that we know that we are in God by keeping of his word: that we know we are tranſlated from death to life becauſe we loue our brethren: that we haue truſt toward God if our hart do not reprehend vs: that we make our vocation and election certaine by good workes. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that by workes we haue no certaine truſt: that truſt nether dependeth nor riſeth of a good conſcience: that by workes we cannot haue anie ſmall gheſſe how God is affected towards vs: that we are vndone if we muſt ſeeke the certaintie of our ſaluation out of workes: that in workes is nothing found but matter of doubting and deſpairing: that if we looke to them, we muſt not onely doubt but deſpaire of ſaluation.

ART. XVII. WHETHER GOOD WORKES be a cauſe why God loueth vs?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Ioan. 16. v. 27. For the Father himſelfe loueth you becauſe God loueth vs becauſe we loue Chriſt. Becauſe we keepe his cō mandments. you haue loued me, and haue beleiued that I comeforth from God. cap. 15. ver. 10. If you keepe my precepts, youe hall abide in my loue, as I alſo haue kept my Fathers precepts, and do abide in his loue.

Act. 10. v. 36. In euerie nation, he that feareth him and worketh iuſtice, is acceptable to him.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Ioan. 16. v. 27. Chriſt plainely ſaieth that his diſciples loue was a cauſe, why God loued them with this kind of loue.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Caluin in Ioan. 15. v. 10. The obedience, which the faithfull Good workes no cauſe of Gods loue towards vs. giue to him, is not ſo much a cauſe why he continueth his loue towards them, as an effect of his loue. Et in cap. 16. v. 17. We are here ſaied to be loued of God whiles we loue Chriſt, becauſe we haue a pledge of his fatherlie loue.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely teacheth, that God loueth vs, becauſe we loue and beleiue in Chriſt: that God continueth his loue towards vs, if we keepe his commandments. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that our obedience is no cauſe why God continueth his loue towards vs; that we are not loued of God becauſe we loue Chriſt.

ART. XVIII. WHETHER WE OVGHT to do good workes?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Luc. 17. v. 10. When you shall haue done all things that are We ought to doe good workes. commanded you, ſay: we are vnprofitable ſeruants, we haue done that which we ought to do.

1. Ioan 2. v. 6. He that ſaieth, he abideth in him, ought euen as he walked, himſelfe alſo to walke. Et c. 3. v. 16. And we ought to yeeld our liues for the brethren. Et c. 4. ver. 11. If God hath ſo loued vs, we alſo ought to loue one an other.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 6. Can. 20. If anie shall ſay, that a man iuſtified and neuer ſo perfect, is not bound to the keeping of the commandments of God and the Church, but onely to beleiue; be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Tindal cited in Caluinoturciſmo l. 4. c. 22. Thou oweſt nothing We owe nothing to God but faith. to God but faith, that thou maeſt confeſſe Chriſt Ieſus, and beleiue him to haue riſen from the dead: for ſo thou shalt be ſafe; in all other things God hath made it free to the to follow thine owne will.

Luther Poſtilla in Dom. 3. Aduentus f. 39. All workes beſides God requireth nothing but faith. Workes are indifferent. faith are to be done to our neighbour; becauſe God requireth nothing of vs but faith, with which we giue him his honour. In Gal. 2. to. 5. f. 223. Chriſt hath ſo abrogated the workes of the law, as they may be held indifferently, but they bind no more. Againe: We are not tyed to any externall worke at all, but free to any We are free to all workes. To all things. worke towards any man, at any time or manner whatſoeuer.—A Chriſtian is wholy free to all things, doing or omitting as the occaſion ſerueth or wanteth. Pſal. 5. to. 3. f. 171. Take this rule: where Luthers rule of doing good. the Scripture commandeth a good worke to be done, do thou ſo vnderſtand, that it forbiddeth thee to do a good worke. Et apud Kemnitium in locis part. 2. tit. de operibus p. 73. This phraſe of the law: A faithfull man ought to do good workes, belongeth A Chriſtian ought not to doe good. not to Chriſtians. And apud Schluſſelburg to. 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 193. We fight as well againſt good workes, as againſt ſinnes. And l. de votis apud Coccium to. 1. p. 1113. The doctrine Luther fighteth againſt good workes. of workes is neceſſarily the doctrine of diuels. Poſtilla in Natali Chriſti. ib. Good workes are a couer of filthineſſe and hypocriſie. Et Serm. de Nouo teſtamento ſeu de Miſſa: Let vs beware Bewareth of good workes. of ſinne, but much more of good workes and laws, and let vs attend to Gods promiſe and faith.

Miniſtri Electorales in Colloq. Aldeburg. p. 286. haue theſe words: Gallus affirmed, that Luther could hardly beare theſe propoſitions: Good workes are neceſſarie: A Chriſtiā ought A Christian ought not do doe good workes. to do good workes. Et p. 128. Gallus, Otto, and manie other men do openly and bitterly reiect as falſe and improper this ſpeach: Good workes are neceſſarie; and denie, that Chriſtians ought to doe good workes.

Liber Concordiae c. 4. Some haue diſputed, that good workes Good workes are free. are not neceſſarie, but free and voluntarie. And ſome haue earneſtly contended, that new obedience is not neceſſarie in the iuſtified.

Melancthon in Reſp. ad Art. 24. Bauar. to. 4. Some (Proteſtants) New obediēce not due. denie this propoſition: New obedience is due: becauſe it is voluntarie.

Illyricus apud Schiuſſelburg. to. 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 271. condemneth Maior, becauſe he teacheth, Good workes are neceſſarie to ſaluation, by reaſon of debt. Et in Apologia. cont. No debt. Tiletan. c. 6. All the obedience which Chriſt properly requireth of thoſe that are to be ſaued, is onely to beleiue in him, and to runne to free bankets, to which we are inuited of him.

Pareus l. 4. de Iuſtific. c. 1. confeſſeth, that this is the doctrine Good workes pertaine not to the kingdome of Chriſt. Belonge to Satan. We muſt pray to haue no good workes. of the rigid. Lutherans: Good workes and new obediēce partaine not to the kingdome of Chriſt but to the world: Chriſtiās with their good workes belong to Sathan; good workes are ſo farre from being neceſſarie, as that they hinder ſaluation and be pernitious: We ought to pray God, that we perſeuere to the end in faith without all good workes. And the ſame ſpeaches of theirs are repeated out of Colloq. Aldeburg by Coccius to. 1. p. 1113.

Zuinglius l. de Relig. c. de Merito: The Prophets do vehemently vrge to good workes; but whom? thoſe that beleiue not well.

Caluin in Ioan. 6. v. 29. This alone doth God aske of vs, that God requireth onely faith. we beleiue.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that we ought to do the workes which are commanded vs, that we ought to walke as Chriſt walked, that we ought to giue our liues for our brethren, that we ought to loue one an other. The ſame ſay Catholikes.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that a Chriſtian ought not to doe good workes: that good workes are indifferent, free, voluntarie, not neceſſarie; and compell no more: that a Chriſtian is indifferent to all good workes, not tyed to doe good workes: that good workes are not neceſſarie in nature of debt, new obience not due: that all the obedience which God requireth of vs, is to beleiue: that he requireth nothing of vs but to beleiue, this onely that we beleiue: that onely thoſe who beleiue not well are to be vrged to good workes; that we owe to God nothing but faith, and that in all other things God hath left vs free to follow our owne will: that good workes pertaine not to the kingdome of Chriſt, but of the world: that Chriſtians with good workes belong to the Diuel: that we muſt praie to perſeuere without good workes: That when the Scripture biddeth vs doe workes, we muſt vnderſtand that it forbiddeth vs to doe them.

ART. XIX. WHETHER GOOD WORKES may be done for rewards?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Pſal. 118. v 112. I haue inclined my hart to do thy iuſtification Dauid did good for reward. And Moiſes. For euer, for reward.

Hebr. 11. verſ. 26. By faith, Moiſes being made great, denied himſelfe to be the ſonne of Pharaos daughter, rather choſing to afflicted with the people of God, then &c. For he looked vnto the remuneration. c. 12. v. 2. looking vpon the author of faith and And Chriſt. conſummatour Ieſus, who, ioy being propoſed vnto him, ſuſtained the croſſe, contemning confuſion.

1. Corinth. 9. verſ. 25. And euerie one that striueth for We ſtriue for an incorruptible crowne. the maiſtrie, refraineth himſelfe from all things: and they certes that they may receaue a corruptible crowne, but we an incorruptible.

Philippenſ. 3. v. 13. Stretching forth my ſelfe to thoſe that are For a prize. before; I purſue the marke, to the prize of the ſupernall vocation of God in Christ Ieſus.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſion. 6. cap. 11. It is manifeſt, that they are contrarie to the doctrine of true religion, who ſay that the iuſt ſinne in all their workes, if ſtirring vp their ſloth, and encorraging themſelues to runne their race, in them, with this eſpecially that God be glorified, they do alſo looke wnto eternall reward.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Tindal in Fox his Acts p. 1144. They that for feare of hell Not for ioyes of heauen. or for the ioyes of heauen do ſerue God, do a conſtrained ſeruice, which God will not haue.

Luther de libert. Chriſtiana to. 2. f. 10 If thou pray at all, Not for eternall profit. faſt &c. beware thou doeſt it not for that end that thou m • eſt reape anie temporall or eternall profit. Deſeruo arb. f. 453 Yea Nor for the kingdome of heauen. if they did good for to obtaine the kingdome, they should neuer obtaine it, and should belong rather to the impious, who with a noughtie and mercenarie eye ſeeke thoſe things euen in God which are for themſelues. Poſtilla in Dom. 9. poſt Trinit. Good Not for eternall life. workes are not to be done for the cauſe of eternall life. Againe: All good workes must be done altogether freely, and no fruite or profit muſt be ſought by them. How can we do any thing for obtaining the inheritance, which already we poſſeſſe by faith? And Not for the prize. in Feſto Om. Sanctorum. We muſt not exerciſe pietie for this cauſe, that we may get the prize. The like he hath Serm. in Hebr. 11. tom. 7.

Vrbanus Regius in locis com. tom. 1. fol. 359. ſaieth that good workes are not to be done, for anie reſpect of merit or reward. Not for reward.

Apologia Confeſſ. Auguſtan. c. 20. Paul with his whole ſpeach condemneth all workes, if they be done, that for them we may obtaine life euerlaſting. Not for life euerlaſting.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that we may do good for reward, for remuneration, for ioy, for an incorruptible crowne, for a prize. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that we may not do good for anie eternall profit, not for the kingdome of heauen, not for the ioyes of heauen, not for eternall life, not to obtaine the inheritance, not for the prize, not for reſpect of reward.

ART. XX. WHETHER GOOD WORKES be to be done for the glorie of God?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Cor. 10. v. 31. Whether you eate or drinke, or do anie other All workes to be done for Gods glorie. thing, do all things vnto the glorie of God.

Mathew 5. v. • 5. So let your light shine before men, that they may ſee your good workes, and glorifie your father which is in heauen.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent cited in the former article: Workes are to be done eſpecially that God be glorified.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Confeſſio Argentinenſis. cap. 6. Nothing is to be reckoned Nothing is the dutie of a Chriſtian but what is profitable to others. among the duties of a Chriſtian man, but that which is ſomewhat profitable to our neighbour. The ſame hath Bucer in Math. 5.

Luther de libertat. Chriſtian. to. 2. fol. 9. A Chriſtian in all his workes ought to be imbued with this opinion, and onely looke to this, that he ſerue and profit others in all things he doeth, Hath nothing before his eyes but the profit of others. hauing nothing before his eyes, but the neceſsitie and commoditie of his neighbour. Fol. 10. What worke ſoeuer is not directed to this onely end, that it be done ether to chaſtize the bodie, or to-pleaſure our neigbour, (ſo that he aske nothing againſt God) is not good nor Chriſtian. lib. de votis fol. 280. A faithfull conſcience doth apprehend and teach, that his good workes are Doth good onely for the profit of others. Before God we muſt ceaſe from workes. Good workes not to be directed to God. No good worke but what is profitable to mā. to be done freely onely for the profit of his neighbour, and to exerciſe the bodie.

In 1. Petri 1. to. 5. fol. 449. In Gods ſight we must ceaſe from workes, but towards our neighbour we must be diligent at them. Poſtilla in Dom. 4. poſt Trinitat. fol. 289. Workes are to be directed to mā onely, and not to God. In Natali Dom. f. 56. after he had ſaied, that reaſon can not find out his doctrine, he putteth this example thereof: Who could thinke with himſelfe, that there are no good workes, but ſuch as are profitable to our neighbour, or are referred to this end? In Dom. 14. fol. 319. Thoſe onely are good workes, which ſerue and profit our neighbour. Nether it is to be meruailed, if they teach, that good workes are not to be done for Gods glorie, ſeing (as before is shewed) they teach, that God is nether worshiped nor delighted with thē, that in his ſight they be ſtenches, dung, mere iniquitie, and ſinne.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely biddeth, vs to do all our workes for the glorie of God, that God may be glorified with them. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that in doing good workes we muſt onely looke to this, haue this onely before our eyes, that we profit our neighbour: that euerie good worke is to be directed onely for chaſtizment of our bodie or profit of our neighbour: that it is not amōg the dueties of a Chriſtian man, which profiteth not our neighbour: that before God we muſt ceaſe from workes: that our workes are to be directed to man onely, and not to God. Which ſometimes Proteſtants themſelues confeſſe to be contrarie to Scripture. See l. 2. c. 30.

THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF GOOD workes in generall.

The things which we haue rehearſed in this chapter, do clearly shew, that Proteſtants teach farre otherwiſe of of good workes then Scripture doth. For the holie Scripture, and Catholiks with it, teacheth, that good workes of the iuſt are not ſinnes, are a ſweet ſauour before God, are intirely good, are iuſt or iniuſt, worthie, meritorious, vnequall, not all commanded of God, profitable and neceſſarie to iuſtification and ſaluation, cauſe of ſaluation, teſtimonie of iuſtice and election, a cauſe why God loueth vs: that we ought to do good workes, and for Gods glorie, and that we may alſo do them partly for reward. All which are denied of Proteſtants.

They alſo shew, that in this matter of good workes What Proteſt. ſteale from gooſt workes. (if in anie whatſoeuer) Proteſtants playe the thieues and ſteale. For from the workes of ſinnes they ſteale all goodneſſe; And from the workes of the iuſt they ſteale intire goodneſſe, true goodneſſe, true iuſtice, ſweetnes, worth and merit before God, who iudgeth of them as they are indeed. They ſteale away alſo their neceſſitie and vtilite of iuſtifying and ſauing, their cauſalitie of ſaluation o • of Gods loue towards vs, their force of teſtifying iuſtification or election, our obligation to do them, and the end for which they are to be done, to wit, reward and Gods glorie. And conſequently they take out of the world, all true vertue or iuſtice, and the ſweetnes thereof, and alſo the worth, the commoditie, the efficacitie, the teſtification, and end: and in their ſteed bring in mere ſinnes, mere iniquities, ſtenches, dung, vnpleaſant to God, vnworthie of God, and vnprofitable to vs, yea hurthfull and pernitious. And yet theſe men take it in euill parte to be called enemies of good workes, or that they ſpeake contemptuouſly of them. But how (I pray you) can they ſpeake more contemptuouſly of good workes, they Proteſt. enemies of good workes. callling them, ill, ſinnes, mere ſinnes, mere iniquities, mere pollutions, ſtenches, and dung in the ſight of God, who iudgeth no otherwiſe of them then they are indeed? Or how can they be greater enemies of good workes, then by taking away or denying that there are any true good workes in the world, and by putting in their places their quite contraries, that is euill workes, and ſinnes? And hitherto of good workes in generall: Now of them in par-particular.

CHAPTER XIV. OF GOOD VVORKES IN PARTICVLAR.

ART. I. WHETHER IT BE GOOD not to marrie?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

CORINT. 1. cap. 7. verſ. 8. But I ſay to the vnmarried Good, to abide vnmarried. and to woddows: it is good for them, if they ſo abide, as I alſo. And verſ. 1. It is good for a man not to touch a woman. verſ. 26. It is good for a Not no touch a woman. man ſo to be.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 2. de Monachis. cap. 9. Paul abſolutely pronounceth, that it is good not to touch a woman.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Caluin in 1. Cor 7. v. 1. The Lord calleth it euill to want a Ill to want a wife. wife. In Gen. 2. v. 18. Maniethimke, that ſingle life is good for them, and therefore leſt they should be miſerable they abſtaine A wicked. ſuggeſtion of Sathan. from marriage. But let the faithfull learne to oppoſe this ſentēce of God againſt the, wicked ſuggeſtions of Sathan.

Peter Martyr in theſibus. p. 1002. It is not good for a man Not honeſt to be ſingle. to be ſingle, for it is not pleaſant, not honeſt, not profitable.

And hereupon they condemne the vow of chaſtitie or ſingle life.

Luther de votis to. 2. fol. 273. Vowed chastitie is quite contrarie Vow of chaſtitie, contrarie to the Ghoſpell. Imptous. to the Ghospell.

Zuinglius de Relig. c. de votis. All vowes of chaſtitie are impious.

Caluin in Refutat. Cathalani prg. 384. The vow of ſingle life, is a rebellion againſt God.

Perkins in Galat 2. tom. 2. The vowes of perpetuall countinencie, pouertie, and regular obedience, are indeed the ſtate of abhomination.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that it is good to abide ſingle, and not to touch a woman. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that it is euill to want a wife, that it is a wicked ſuggeſtion of Sathan to abſtaine from marriage, that it is not good to be ſingle: and that the vow of chaſtitie or ſingle life, is nought.

ART. II. WHETHER VIRGINITIE BE a vertue, or a good that is honeſt.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Cor. 7. v. 35 after the Apoſtle had exhorted to virginitie Virginitie is honeſt or vertuous. and ſingle life, he ſaieth: And this I ſpeake to your profit, not to caſt a ſnare vpon you, but to that which is honest, and that may giue you power without impediment to pray our Lord.

Et v. 34. And the woman vnmarried and the virgin thinketh Holines in bodie and ſpirit. Better then marriage. More bleſſed. on the things that pertaine to our Lord that she may be holie both in bodie and in spirit. ver 38. He that ioyneth his virgin in matrimonie, doth well; and he that ioyneth not, doth better. v. 40. But more bleſſed shals be be, if she ſo remayne.

Math. 19. v. 12. There are Eunuchs, which haue gelded themſelues Deſired for heauen. for the kingdome of heauen.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

S. Thomas 22. q. 152. art. 3. Virginitie is a ſpeciall vertue, hauing it ſelfe to chaſtitie, as magnificence to liberalitie.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker ad Ration. 8. Campiani: Virginitie is not ſimply Virginitie is not ſimply good. good. Againe: Of them who can alwaies keepe virginall chaſtitie, virginitie is to be deſired, not altogether, but for thoſe troubles which ordinarily follow marriage.

Tindal in Fox his Actes p. 1141. Keeping of virginitie and Virginitie in the religious is diuelish. A thing indifferent. It is nothing. chaſtitie of the religious, is a diuelish thing.

Apologia Confeſſ. Auguſtanae cap. de votis: Obedience, pouertie, ſingle life, are things indifferent.

Bidenbachius in Conſenſu Ieſuit. & Chriſtian. p. 769. We thinke, that virginitie, widdowhood, and marriage are nothing.

Caluin in Math. 19. ver. 12. It is a foolish imagination, that No vertue. ſingle life is a vertue; for of it ſelfe it pleaſeth God no more then faſting, nor deſerues to be reckoned among the dueties which he requireth of vs. Et de vera reform. p. 321. Nether is virginitie praiſed, as if of it ſelfe it were a vertue.

Beza in Confeſſ. cap. 4. ſect. 16. There is a thirde kinde of Of it ſelfe nether good nor badde. workes, which of themſeues are nether properly good nor badde. Of this kind is faſting, ſobrietie, and deſire of keeping virginitie in thoſe who haue the guift of continencie. And c. 5. ſect. 39. Nether virginitie nor marriage we reckon amongst thoſe things, which ſimply and of thēſelues make vs better and more gratefull to God.

Daneus Contr. 5. p. 1045. Virginitie is no vertue, but a thing No vertue. indifferent. And generally all Proteſtants when the Apoſtle calleth virginitie, good, in Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , will not haue him vnderſtood of a good that is honeſt or vertuous, but onely of a good that is profitable.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that virginitie is honeſt: that it is a holines in bodie and ſoule: that it is better and happier then marriage: and that it is to be deſired for the kingdome of heauen. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that virginitie is a thing indifferent, is nothing, not ſimply good, not good of it nature, not of it ſelfe a vertue, not ſimply good, not a vertue, not wholy to be deſired, not required of God, and in the religious, a diuelish thing.

ART. III. WHETHER THE STATE OF virginitie be better then the ſtate of marriage?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Cor. 7. v. 38. He that ioyneth his virgin in matrimonie doth Ʋirginitie better then marriage. well, and he that toyneth not, doth better. ver. 40. More bleſſed shall she be, if she ſo remaine.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 24. Can. 10. If anie shall ſay, that it is not better and happier to abide in virginitie or ſingle life, then to marrie; be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker ad Ration. 8. Campiani: Virginitie is neuer better Not better. then marriage, but in ſome ſorte; Marriage is often times ſimply better then virginitie.

Willet Controuerſ. 15. quaeſt. 5. pag. 806. Virginitie is Not more holie. not a more holie and cleane thing in it ſelfe then marriage is: before God in themſelues nether is more holie then ether.

Confeſſio Witten bergēſis C. de votis: We muſt not thinke, Not more excellent. that this kinde of (ſingle) life, is of ſelfe before the iudgment ſeat of God more excellent and more holie then marriage.

Luther Serm de Matrimonio to. 5. f. 126. Single life in it Much more baſte thou marriage. Marriage a moſt diuine ſtate. ſelfe is much more baſer then marriage. And fol. 124. he calleth marriage a diuine life, & in 1. Cor. 7. f. 107. the higheſt religion and moſt ſpirituall state, & 107. truely heauenly, ſpirituall, and diuine ſtate, if it be compared with this spirituall ſtate. Againe: We conclude, that marriage is like gould, and this ſpirituall ſtate, dung. In Geneſ. 2. to. 6. fol. 26. To beget children, is after preaching To get children is the cheifeſt worke of the word of God, the cheifeſt worke. And in c. 21. fol. 257. Married mens life conſiſteth in the highest degree of ſpirituall life.

Vrbanus Regius in locis to. 1. f. 345. Preaching of the word Virginitie in it ſelfe baſer then marriage. of God maketh the ſtate of virginitie better then marriage by reaſon of greater impediments, which yet in it ſelfe is baſer.

Bindebachius in Conſenſu cit. p. 799. If you conſider theſe kinds of life (virginitie and marriage) by themſelues they are indifferent, and before God nether is more holie then the other.

Caluin in 1. Cor. 7. v. 35. Here thou haſt twoe things worth noting: The one is, to what end ſingle life is to be deſired, to wit, not for it ſelfe, nor becauſe it is a perfiter ſtate. In like manner Beza vpon the ſame place.

Serranus cont. Hayum part. 3. p. 159. If marriage be the Nothing better then mar-marriage. ſeminarie of mankind if the ornament, if the ſtay, as all the Polititians euer taught, can ther be any thing better or more excellent in life then marriage.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that virginitie is better and more happie then marriage. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſ • ly teach, that virginitie is not a perfecter ſtate thē marriage; not more holie, not more excellent: that it is baſer then marriage, much baſer: that marriage is the high ••• religion, moſt ſpirituall ſtate, and that in this life nothing is better or more excellent then marriage. What religion (I pray you) haue theſe men, whoſe cheife religion and moſt ſpirituall ſtate, is marriage, and who account nothing in this life better then marriage, & to beget children the cheifeſt worke beſide preaching?

ART. IV. WHETHER GOD WOVLD haue men to liue ſingle?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Cor. 7. v. 7. I would all men to be as my ſelfe. Et v. 27. Art God exhorteth all to ſingle life. thou looſe from a wife, ſeeke not a wife.

Math. 19. v. 12 He that can take, let him take.

Apocalips. 14. v. 4. Theſe are they which were not defiled with weomen. For they are virgins. Theſe follow the lambe whether ſoeuer he shall goe.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in 1. Corinth. 7. verſ. 8. The Spirit of God by the mouth of the Apoſtle exhorteth to conſtant virginitie and ſingle life.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther in Diſput. to. 1. f. 383. The word: Increaſe and multiplie, All commā ded to increaſe. is naturally ingrafted and neceſſarily impoſed generally vpon all that are men. De votis to. 2. f. 272. Plainely Chriſt did not counſaill (virginitie) but rather diſcouraged. In 1. Cor▪ 7. to. 5. f. 105. Paul will haue vniuerſally all to be married. Serm. de Matrimonio S. Paul will haue all married. f. 119. Increaſe and multiplie, is not a precept, but more thē a precept. He is a baud, that flieth marriage. Epiſtola in Wofgangum. to. 7. f. 505. God pronounceth the ſentence, that he will God will haue none vnmarried. haue none to be vnmarried, but multiplie. He that will liue vnmarried, plainely fighteth againſt God—To take a wife, and to eate and drinke, both alike are inforced by neceſsitie, and God commandeth a like both to be done. Et Epiſtol. ad Equites Teuto. 2. To marrie, as neceſſarie as to eate or drinke. Church men commanded to marrie. Preiſts commanded to marrie. Germ. Ienen. fol. 214. The word of God commandeth Church men to marrie wiues.

Confeſſio Auguſtana c. de Coniugio: Paul ſaieth that ſuch a one is be choſen Bishop, as is a husband. Et Apologia eiuſdem cap. 15. They bidde ws shew a precept which commandeth Preiſts to marrie, as if Preiſts were not men.

Melancthon Reſp. ad Acta Ratisbon. to. 4. Paul will haue a Preist to be married.

Zuinglius in Paraeneſi ad Heluetos to. 1. f. 114. The holie Miniſters commanded to marrie. And Bishops Scripture is ſo farre from forbidding Miniſters of the Church to marrie, that it commandeth it more then once. fol. 115. When they heare Paul in ſo expreſſe words commanding that a Bishop be married to a wife, &c.

Bullinger in 1. Timoth. 3. A Bishop is minister of the word: but he muſt be husband of a wife, in that he is a Bishop, and muſt commend holie marriage to others and terrifie them from fornication.

Caluin in 1. Cor. 7. v. 25. Seing the Scripture ſaieth Geneſ. 2. that male and femall were created together, it ſeemeth equally Single life not commended to anie. and without exceptiō it calleth all to marriage, at leaſt ſingle life is not commanded or commended to anie. In 4. Inſtit. c. 12 §. 24. Paul reckoneth marriage amongst the vertues of a Bishop. Et c. 13. § 3. This is indeed to tempte God, to ſtriue againſt nature which To ſtriue againſt his flesh is to tempt God. Deſire of virginitie accurſed of God. he hath giuen, and to deſpiſe his preſent guifts as if they belonged not to vs.

Sadeel ad Artic. 53. abiurat. This ſo great affectation of virginitie and ſingle life, which God at laſt did accurſe, was ſo • ſuall with the Fathers, as &c.

Zanchius in Theſibus to. 8. It is againſt Gods commandment, that a yong man who hath need of marriage, should remaine vnmarried: and ſimply that a woman should be wnmarried.

Whitaker Controuerſ. 2. quaeſt. 5. cap. 7. When Bellarmin had ſaied: Vigilantius taught that Church men ought to be married: anſwereth. If vigilantius ment the lawfull marriage of Paſtours, he was in the right.

Tindal in Fox his Actes p. 1139. A preiſt muſt haue a wife for twoe cauſes. The one &c.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth: that God by the mouth of the Apoſtle would haue all men to be a he was, that is, vnmarried: that ſuch as were vnmarried he exhorted, to remaine ſo: that Chriſt exhorted all to ſingle life who could take it; that in heauen there is a ſpeciall reward for virgins. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that Paul would haue all men to be married, would haue a Preiſt or Bishop to be married, that Chriſt terrifieth men from virginitie: that God will haue no man vnmarried: that he as much commandeth to marrie as to eate or drinke: that to increaſe and multiplie is more then a precept: that God hath accurſed the affectation of virginitie: that ſingle life is commended to none. And thus much of virginitie.

ART. V. WHETHER FASTING BE A vertue or worshippe or ſeruice of God?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Luc. 2. v. 37. Who departed not from the temple, by fastings Faſting is ſeruice of God. and praiers ſeruing night and daye.

Math. 6. ver. 17. When thou doſt fast, anointe thy head, and wash thy face, that thou appeare not to men to faſt, but to thy Father who is in ſecret: and thy Father who ſeeth in ſecret, will Rewarded of God. repay the.

Math. 4. ver. 15. But the dayes will come, when the kingdome shalbe taken away from them, and then they shall faſt.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Lucae 2. verſ. 37. This place teacheth, that faſting belongeth to the ſeruice of God, as praiers doe.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins in Cathol. reform. Contr. 6. pag. 132. Faſting is a Faſting of th ſame nature that eating is. Helpeth nothing to heauen. Profiteth nothing. Mens faſting no better then beaſts thing indifferent, of the ſame nature with eating and drinking, and of it ſelfe conferreth nothing to the obtayning of the kingdome of heauen, no more then eating and drinking doth.

Humphrey ad Ration. 3. Campiani p. 263. We graunt, that it is true which Sanders ſaieth of the Iouinianiſts and our men: That faſting, or abſtinence from certaine meats profit nothing.

Luther in Ionae 3. to. 3 fol. 422. God eſteemeth as much the faſtings and haireclothes of beaſts as of men, and contrariwiſe. What cares God for ſackcloth, faſting and hairecloth?

Caluin in Math. 16. v. 18. Faſting of it ſelfe is an indifferent A thing indifferent not required of God. No ſeruice of God. thing, not of thoſe kinde of things which God requireth and approueth. In c. 4. ver. 1. In that they perſwade themſelues, that faſting is a meritorious worke, and a parte of pietie or of Gods ſeruice, it is a noughtie ſuperſtition. In Act. 14. v. 23. Let vs not putt anie ſeruice of God in faſting, ſeing that of it ſelfe it is nothing nor is of account with God, but as it is referred to an other end. In Of no moment. Inſtit. l 4. c. 12. § 16. Nether doth Luke putt anie ſeruice of God in f • sting.—Of it ſelfe it is of no moment. c. 19. We muſt take great heed, that faſting be not accounted a kinde of Gods ſeruice.

Beza in Confeſſ c. 5. ſect. 40. We commend not true faſts as a kinde of Gods ſeruice.

Peter Martyr in locis loco 10 §. 23. There is an other abuſe, No ſeruice of God. that there be ſome who attribute holines to faſting, as if there were anie ſeruice of God in it: Whereas indeed faſting is onely an exerciſe, which of it ſelfe hath no ſanctitie.

Pareus in Collegio Theol. 1. diſput. 18. Fasting of it nature No vertue. is no morall vertue. For temperance is a morall vertue, not becauſe it abſtaineth from meat or drinke, but becauſe it moderatly vſeth meat and drinke.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that S. Anne did ſerue God by faſting and praier: that God rewardeth thoſe that faſt that Chriſt will haue his to faſt. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that faſting is no part or kinde of Gods ſeruice: that it is an indifferent thing of the ſame nature that eating: that it conferreth nothing to get heauen, that it is nothing, is onely an exerciſe: that God maketh no more account of mens faſtings then of beaſts: that God requireth it not, nor approueth it.

ART. VI. WHETHER FASTING BE A preſeruatiue againſt the Diuel?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Math. 17. v. 21. But this kind (of Diuels) is not caſt out but Some diuels caſt out by faſting. by praier and faſting.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Stapleton in Mathew. 17. ver. 28. Praier and faſting muſt be added as a most ſoueraigne antidote to driue away theſe kinde of Diuels.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Caluin in Math. 17. ver. 21. cit. The ridiculous Papiſts make No Diuels caſt out by faſting. faſting an antidote to driue away diuels.

Illyricus in Claue part. 2. tractat. 6. col. 535 thus expoundeth the foreſaied words of Scripture: This kinde &c. that is, they cannot be caſt out, but by earneſt praier proceding of earnest repentant and penitent hart; and ſo he giueth no vertue to faſting.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that certaine Diuels are not caſt out but by faſting and praier. The ſame ſay Catholiks. Proteſtants plainely ſay, that it is ridiculous to make faſting an antidote againſt Diuels.

ART. VII. WHETHER CHOICE OF meates be lawfull or vertuous?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Daniel 10. v. 3. In thoſe dayes I Daniel mourned the dayes of Daniel vſed choice of meats. three weeks, deſiderable bread I did not eate, and flesh and wine entred not into my mouth.

Math. 3. v. 4. And his (S. Ihons) meate was locuſts and wild And S. Ihon Baptiſte. honie: Luc. 1. v. 15. And wine and ſicer he shall not drinke. c. 7. ver. 33. For Ihon baptiſt came nether eating bread nor drinking wine. The like is ſaied of the mother of Sampſon Iudic 13, v. 4. and of the Rechabits Hieremie. 35.

Rom. 14. v. 21. It is good not to eate flesh, and not to drinke Good, not to eate flesh or drinke wine. wine, nor that wherein thy brother is offended or ſcandalized or weakened,

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm de bonis operibus in part. l. 2. c. 7. If Ionadab could for euer forbidde his children and nephews wine, and both his commandment and their obedience pleaſed God, why cannot our mother the Church forbidde her children ſome meates for a time, ſo that both the Churches precept and our obedience pleaſe God.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker ad Ration. 9. Campiani: It is madneſſe, to haue Madneſſe, to vſe choice of meates for religion. Foolish and wicked. No ſeruice of God. anie choice of meates for religion ſake.

Perkins in Cathol. Contr. 12. cap. 2. We hould this distinction of meates both to be foolish and wicked.

Confeſſio Argentinenſis c. 9. We haue omitted that choice of meate which was commanded vpon certaine dayes which Saint Paul attributeth to the doctrine of Diuels.

Caluin in Luc. 1. v. 15. We muſt not imagin a ſeruice of God No ſeruice of God. Fond ſuperſtition. in o • ſtayning from wine.

Beza in Confeſſ. cap. 5. ſect. 41. This choice of meats, which ſome make a ſeruice of God, we doubt not with the Apoſtle to call a diuelish and moſt fond ſuperſtition.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſ • ly ſaieth, that Daniel many days abſtained frō fle • h, wine, and deſiderable bread: that S. Ihon Baptiſte nether eate bread, nor drunke wine or ſicer that it is good not to eate flesh nor to drink wine. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that the choice of meats is ſuperſtitious, foolish, madneſſe, wicked and diuelish doctrine: that there is no ſeruice of God in abſtinence from wine. And thus much of Faſting.

ART. VIII. WHETHER IT BE LAWFVLL to pray for all?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Timoth. 2. verſ. 1. I deſire therefore firſt of all things, that We muſt pray for all men. obſecrations, praiers, poſtulations, thanks giuings, be made for all men.

Exod. 32. v. 32. Moiſes thus praieth for the idolatrous people: Moyſes praied for all. Ether forgiue this tr • ſpaſſe, or if thou do not, ſtrike me out of the booke that thou haſt written.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. lib. 1. de Septem verbis Dom. c. 1. ſaieth that Chriſt vpon the croſſe praied for Pilat, and the chiefe Preiſts, Scribes, and people of the Iews.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Rainolds in Apologia theſium. p. 245. Nether muſt we pray We muſt not pray for euerie one. for euerie one. For we are forbidden to pray for them that ſinne to death. Wherefore where we are bidden to pray for all the world: All, deſigneth all kinds, not all of euerie kinde.

Beza in Ioan. 5. ver. 16. Hereof it followeth, that no ſinnes Not for reprobates. are veniall to the reprobates, and therefore we muſt not make praiers for the ſinnes of the reprobates.

Daneus in orat. Dom. p. 593. ſaieth that: Thy will be done, belongeth not properly to reprobates, as if we praied God that they quietly and willingly ſubmitt themſelues to God and doe and execute his will, out of their harte, faithfully and obediently.

Piſcator in Theſibus lib. 3. loco 11. We ought to pray for all Nor for thoſe that ſinne to death. that are aliue, they onely excepted, whome we ſee do ſinne to death. The ſame alſo ſaieth Bucanus in Inſtir. loco. 17. to which he addeth loco 37. that a man muſt not pray for the obdurated, or thoſe that ſinne againſt the Holie Ghoſt.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that we muſt pray for all, and that Moiſes praied for the idolatrous people amongſt whome manie were reprobates. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that we muſt not pray for all, not for reprobates, not for thoſe that ſinne to death, not for the indurated, not for thoſe that ſinne gainſt the Holie Ghoſt.

ART. IX. WHETHER IT BE LAWFVLL to pray for the dead?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

2. Mach. 12. verſ. 43. And (Iudas) making a gathering, ſent twelue thouſand drachmes of ſiluer, to Hieruſalem, for ſacrifice to be offered the for ſinnes of the dead. Et ver. 16. It is therefore a A holie thing to pray for the dead. holie and healthfull cogitation to pray for the dead, that they may be looſed from ſinnes.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent. Seſſ. 25. c. 1. The Catholik Church teacheth, that the ſoules detained in Purgatorie are holpen by the ſuffrages of the faithfull.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Iewel art. 18. ſect. 3. p. 433. This kinde of praier (for the dead) It is ſuperſtitions. is mere ſuperſtitious, and vtterly without warrant of Gods word.

Confeſſio Seotica generalis: We deteſt his (Popes) praiers Deteſtable. for the dead.

Caluin Epiſtola 366. That forme of praier: God giue the One may wish well to the dead but not pray. dead a good and happie reſurrection, becauſe it is not fitting to the rule of good praier, is to be reiected: yet I do not denie, but that one may make ſuch a wish.

Brentius in Dom. 12. poſt Trinit. Albeit we may wish all happines to the dead, yet praier for them is vaine.

Confeſſio Witten bergen. c. de Memoria de functorum. Charitie requireth, that we wish all reſt and happines in Chriſt vnto the dead: But there is no testimonie of Propheticall and Apoſtolike doctrine, that they be holpen by our praiers.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the people of God vnder the law offered ſacrifices for the dead, which Caluin alſo confeſſeth 3. Inſtit. c. 5. §. 8. and that it is a holie and healthfull thing to pray for them that they be looſed from their ſinnes. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that it is lawfull to wish good to the dead, but that to pray for them is vaine, ſuperſtitious, and deteſtable. And yet Luther Serm. de de Diuite & Lazaro to. 7. f. 268. de Captiuit. Babylon. f 72. and cont. Catharin. f. 151. Et in Hoſpin. Concordia diſcor. f. 225. Apologia Confeſſ. Auguſtan. c. de vocabulis Miſſae. Agenda, Anglica apud Bucerum p. 427. 449. Zuinglius art. 60. Vrbanus Regius and others, allow praying for the dead.

ART. X. WHETHER IT BE LAWFVLL to pray for that which God hath not promiſed?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Math. 26. ver. 39. Chriſt thus praieth: My Father, if it be Chriſt praied for that which was not promiſed to him. And S. Paul. And Abraham and Dauid. poſsible, let this chalice paſſe from me.

2. Cor. 12. verſ. 8. For the which thing thrice I beſought our Lord, that it might departe from me, and he ſaied to me: My grace ſufficeth the. In like ſorte Abraham praied for Sodom Gen. 18. Dauid for the life of his child 2. Kings 12. & Hieremie for the ſauing of Hieruſalem Hier. 32. and yet had no promiſe of that for which they praied.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. de bonis operibus c. 9. Sometime the praier is meritorious and not impetratorious, as when a iuſt man of charitie asketh that which perhaps is not expedient for him, as when S. Paul praied thrice that the prick of the flesh might be taken from him—In praier is not required faith wherewith we certainly beleiue that abſolutely God will do that which we aske.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins reform. Cathol. Contr. 4. pag. 79. That which we are to aske God in praier, we muſt beleiue it shall be giuen vs as we aske it.—It is a rule of Gods word requiring that in euerie petition we bring a particular faith whereby we beleiue, that the thing lawfully asked shalbe giuen accordingly.

Tindal in Fox his Acts pag. 1139. To aske of God more then he hath promiſed, cometh of a falſe faith, and is plaine idolatrie. Idolatrie, to pray for more then God hath promiſed

Melancthon in Diſput. to. 4. p. 487. As often as thou calleſt vpon God in any buſines, firſt of all thinke certainly that thy praiers are heard for the Sonne of God. Vnleſſe this faith goe before, thy praier is vaine. ib. p. 555. Let faith aſſure vs, that our Praier for corporall goods euer heard. Euerie good man aſſured to be heard. No praier to be made with out Gods promiſe. praier for corporall goods is heard, and neuer fruſtrate.

Illyricus in Marci 5. v. 28. Euerie godlie man in praying perſwadeth himſelfe by the word and promiſe of God, that in his petition he is heard, no leſſe then if he heard God anſwering with a cleare voice, that he had heard him.

Luther Poſtilla in Dom. 5. poſt Phaſca fol. 261. Who pray without a promiſe of God, they imagin that God is angrie with them, whome by praiers they endeauour to appeaſe.—There God heareth not, and our praeier and labour is loſt.

Daneus in Exam. Kemnitij c. 29. We ought to aske nothing Nothing to be asked but what is promiſed. of God, but what he hath promiſed.

Caluin in Iacobi 1. v. 6. As we cannot pray, but the word muſt goe before, ſo muſt we beleiue before we pray. For by praying we teſtifie, that we hope for the grace which he hath promiſe.—Wherefore it is faith which relying vpon Gods promiſe, aſſureth vs to obtaine that which we aske.—This is a notable place, for to refute that doctrine of Poperie, to wit, that we muſt pray with doubt and vncertaine opinion of ſucceſſe. The like he hath. 3. Inſtit. c. 20. §. 15.

Confeſſion of Saxonie cap. 22. The praier which is without faith, that is, where a man aſſureth not himſelfe that God alloweth and heareth his praier, is vaine.

Apologia Confeſſio. Auguſtanae cap. de Tradition. Of our praier we must be aſſured, that it is effectuall, that it is heard.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Chriſt praied for the taking away the cuppe of his paſſion; S. Paul for taking away the pricke o the flesh; Abraham for Sodom, and the like; and yet they had no promiſe nor particular faith, that they should obtayne thoſe things. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that it is loſt labour and idolatrie, to pray for anie thing which God hath not promiſed: that we ought not to pray for any thing which God hath not promiſed.

ART. XI. WHETHER ANIE OBTAINE ſome thing of God for his owne or his praiers worth?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Ioan. 3. verſ. 21. If our hart do not reprehend vs we haue We obtaine becauſe we keepe the cō mandments. Good heareth the iuſt. confidence toward God, and whatſoeuer we shall aske, we shall receaue of him, becauſe we keepe his commandments.

1. Peter 3. v. 12. The eyes of our Lord are vpon the iuſt and his eares vnto their praiers.

Iames 5. verſ. 16. The continuall praier of a iuſt man auaileth much.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. lib. 1. de bonis operibus c. 9. Scripture in diuers places witneſſeth, that iustice is required in him that praieth for to obtaine aſſuredly.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther Poſtilla in Dom. 5. poſt Paſcha fol. 263. Whence None heard for his worthineſſe. it followeth, that none receaueth any thing of God for his owne worth or the worth of his praier. Thy worthines doth not helpe thee, thy vnworthines doth not hinder thee. Of the ſame opinion are other Proteſtants, who denie that there is any worth in vs or in our workes.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that a good conſcience breedeth confidence in God: that they who keepe Gods cō mandments receaue what they aske: that Gods eares are vnto the praiers of the iuſt; that a iuſt mans praier auaileth much. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that the worthineſſe of him that praieth, profiteth nothing: that no man obtaineth any thing of God for his owne or his praier worthineſſe.

ART. XII. WHETHER IT BE LAWFVLL to pray publikely in the Church in an vnknowne tongue?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Cor. 14. ver. 17. the Apoſtle thus ſaieth of one that publikely praied in the Church in an vnknowne tongue: For Praying in a ſtrāge tongue is good. thou indeed giuest thanks well.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in 1. Corint. 14. v. 17. The Apoſtle condemneth not, but approueth praier in an vnknowne tongue.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Scotica Confeſſio generalie: We deteſt his (Popes) praiers It is deteſtable. in an vnknowne tongue. The like hath Cōfeſſ. Auſtria art. 14. & Heluet. c. 22.

Iuel art. 3. ſect. 1. ſaieth, that it is not onely repugnant to the Repugnant to Scripture and commō ſenſe. Scriptures of God, but alſo contrarie to the ſenſe of nature.

Caluin 3. Inſtit. cap. 20. §. 33. Who can ſufficiently wonder at the vnbridled licence of the Papiſtes, who feare not to roare out their praiers in an vnknowne tongue?

Peter Martyr in 1. Cor. 14. verſ. 17. The Apoſtle in this his ſaying doth not approue the action. But ſaieth. Thou giueſt thāks well, becauſe the words vttered by thee, being of the Holie Ghoſt, cannot but haue a good ſenſe. Et in ver. 14. The idiots are reprehended, Praying in Latin, is reprehended. Not to be ſuffered. who pray in Latin, Pater noſter.

Aretius in locis part. 3. fol. 21. It is manifeſt, that a strange tongue is not to be ſuffered in Christs Church.

Beza in Reſponſ. ad Acta Colloq. Montibel. part. 2. p. 26. Doth not the Apoſtle in expreſſe words forbidde to pray in a Forbidden. tongue which is not vnderſtood of thoſe that are preſent?

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that he who praieth in the Church in a ſtrange tongue, giueth thanks well: The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that ſuch kinde of praier is to be condēned, and expreſſely forbidden of the Apoſtle.

ART. XIII. WHETHER WE BE COMmanded to ſay our Lords praier?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Luc. 11. ver. 1. & 2. One of his diſciples ſaied to him: Lord teach We are commanded to ſay our Lords praier. vs to pray, as Ihon alſo taught his diſciples. And he ſaied to them: when you pray ſay: Father &c.

Math. 6. verſ. 9. Thus therefore you shall pray: Our Father &c.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 1. de bonis operibus cap. 4. Our Lords praier excelleth all other formes of praier, in authouitie, breuitie, perfection, order, efficacie, neceſsitie.—In neceſsitie, becauſe there is no other forme of praier which all Chriſtians in the very words are commanded to keepe and vſe but this.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Bucer in Mat 6. Note, pray in this manner, not theſe words, Not commanded. as the common people hitherto was foolishly perſwaded, thinking that they had praied well, when they had mumbled vp theſe words—Nether are we here taught in what words we should pray, but what we ought to aske with hartie deſire.

Caluin in Math. 6. v 9. Chriſt biddeth not his diſciples pray in theſe words, but onely sheweth them whither they ought to referre all their deſires and praiers.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Chriſt commanded that whē we pray we ſay: Our father. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtāts expreſſely ſay, that Chriſt taught vs not to ſay theſe words, that he taught not what words we should pray withall: that it is a foolish perſuaſion to thinke that the recitall of our our Lords praier, were a good praier. Which is ſo contrarie to Scripture as ſome Proteſtants cō feſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. XIV. WHETHER IT BE LAWFVLL to vow any thing to God?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Pſal. 75. v. 12. Vow ye, and render to our Lord, your God. Lawfull, to vow.

Iſaie 19. v. 21. it is ſaied of the time of Ghoſpell: And they shall vow vowes to our Lord, and pay them.

Eccleſ. 5. verſ. 3. If thou hast vowed anie thing to God, differre not to pay it. But whatſoeuer thou haſt vowed, pay it.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 2. de Monachis. c. 17. Vowes haue neuer ceaſed in Christs Church ſince the promulgation of the Ghoſpell.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Tindal in Fox his Actes p. 1138. Vowes are against the ordinance Vnlawfull. of God. Which Fox there mantaineth.

Luther de Ratione Confitendi to. 2. fo. 28. I for my parte could wish, that there were no vowes at all among Chriſtians beſides theſe which which we made in baptiſme. De Captiuit. Babylon. fol. 77. One thing here I adde, which I would that I could perſwade all men, that is, that all vowes whatſoeuer were taken away and auoided. fol. 78. It is not a litle contrarie to Chriſtian Contrarie to Chriſtian life. life, that a vow is a certaine ceremoniall law, a humane tradition or preſumptiō, from which the Church is freed by baptiſme.

Vrbanus Regius de Noua & vet. doctrina tom. 2. fol. 26. Iudaical. That rite of vowing was Iudaical, and is now abolished as ſacrifices are.

Zuinglius in Explanat. art. 30. I ſpeake of vowes in generall, Contempte of God. that by Christ they are abolished. To vow, is a curioſitie, contempte, and abaſing of God, and exaltation of men.—Wherefore Sinfull. ſeing vowes proceed of perfidiouſneſſe, and fight againſt God, they are ſinnes.

Peter Martyr l. de votis col. 1337. Vowes do no more continue, the Ghoſpell being now reuealed and brought in. And 1383. Become not Chriſtians. I ſaied indeed and recall not, but make good, that vowes do not become Chriſtians.

Daneus Contr. 5. p. 1020. God no where hath commanded or preſcribed that any thing should be vowed vnto him.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that Chriſtians shall vow to God, and exhorteth them to vow and to pay their vowes. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that vowes are againſt Gods ordinance, that they fight againſt God, proceed of perfidiouſneſſe, are ſinnes,nnes, humane preſumption, curioſitie, contempt of God, and that God neuer appointed them: that they are abolished, continew no longer, become not Chriſtians, and that it were to be wished, that they were all taken away.

ART. XV. WHETHER ALMES DELIVER from death and ſinne?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Tob. 4. v. 11. Almes deliuereth from all ſinne, and from death. Almes deliuer from ſinnes and death. c. 12. v. 9. Almes deliuereth from death, and that is it which purgeth ſinnes, and maketh to find mercie and life euerlaſting.

Luke 11. v. 41. Giue almes, and behould all things are cleane vnto you.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Promptuar. Morali Dom. 1. poſt. Pentecoſt. By the liberalitie of almes we oftentimes auoid the iuſt punishments of ſinnes, and manie aſſaults of the Diuel.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Aretius in locis part. 1. f. 90. Almes deliuereth not from tē porall Nether from temporall nor eternall death. Not from ſinne. death, nor alſo deliuereth from eternall death.

Confeſſio Wittenbergenſ. c. de Eleemoſyna: What need had there beene of the paſsion of Chriſt to blot out ſinnes, if they be blotted out by the merit of almes?

Apologia Confeſſ. Auguſtanae c. de Reſp. ad argumenta: We will not ſay that (ſpeech of Tobie) is an hyperboll, although it muſt be ſo vnderſtood, leſt it detract from the praiſes of Chriſt.

Vallada in ſuo Apologia cap. 22. This manner of speech of Tobie is hyperbolicall.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that almes deliuereth from death and ſinne; The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that it deliuereth not ether from temporall or eternall death: that if it did deliuer from ſinne, Chriſts death had not beene needfull.

ART. XVI. WHETHER IT BE LAWFVLL to ſell all, and giue it to the pore?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Math. 19. v. 21. If thou wilt be perfect, goe ſell all that thou Perfect men muſt giue all to the pore. haſt, and giue to the pore, and thou shalt haue treaſure in heauē. v. 27. Then Peter anſwering, ſaied to him: Behould we haue left al things, and haue followed thee.

Act. 4. v. 32. Nether did anie one ſay, that ought was his owne, of thoſe things which he poſſeſſed, but all things were common vnto them.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Mathei 19. v. 21. It was the errour of Vigilantius, and it is now of Caluin and of all Heretiks to denie, that voluntarie pouertie is a meane and instrument of greater perfection,

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Apologia Confeſſio. Auguſtanae. cap. penult. The forſaking Forſaking of goods not counſailed. A humane tradition. Not Catholike doctrine. of goods hath no commandment nor counſaill in the Scripture. Againe: It is a mere humane tradition and vnprofitable worshippe.

Confeſſio Wittenbergenſ. c. de votis: The kinde of vowing ſingle l • fe, pouertie and obedience agreeth not with the true Catholik doctrine.

Perkins in reform. Cathol. cap. 8. p. 166. The ſecond is the vow of pouertie and monaſticall life, in which men beſtow all Againſt Gods will. they haue on the pore and giue themſelues wholy and onely to praier and faſting. This vow is againſt the will of God. The like he hath in Caſibus Conſcient. col. 1125.

Morton l. 1. Apologiae c 40. Your doctrine (of giuing all) Sauoureth hereſie. ſauoureth rather hereſie, then religion.

Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 5 c. 7. Monks and Ieſuits nether marrie Is Anabaptiſticall. wiues, nor haue anie thing proper, but haue all things cōmon: But this, to haue all things common, is Anabaptisticall.

Melancthon in locis tit. de Paupertate: The Ghoſpell nether counſaileth nor commandeth to leaue our goods, vnleſſe they be taken from vs, nether counſaileth it nor commandeth to make things common.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that to giue all to the pore is a meane of perfection: that the Apoſtles forſake all: and that the firſt Chriſtians had all things commō. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that the Scripture counſaileth not to forſake our goods: that it is a mere humane tradition: that it agreeth not with true Catholik doctrine; that it rather ſauoureth hereſie then religion: that to haue all things common, is Anabaptiſticall.

ART. XVII. WHETHER PENNANCE BE commanded to all?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Act. 17. v. 30. God now denounceth vnto men, that all euery Pennance cō manded to all where doe pennance. c. 20. v. 21. Teſtifying vnto Iews and Gentils pennance towards God and faith in our Lord Ieſus Chriſt. And To Iewes and Gentils. c. 8. v. 22 it is ſaied to Simon Magus. Do pennance from this thy wickedneſſe.

Luc. 24. v. 27. It behoued Chriſt to ſuffer, and to riſe againe To all natiōs. from the dead the third day, and pennance to be preached in his name, and remiſsion of ſinnes vnto all nations.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 3. de Paenitent. cap. 2. Who haue committed a mortall ſinne, are bound by Gods law to doe pennance.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins in Apoc. 2. to. 2. This precept of repentance, is not giuē Pennance not commanded to euerie one. ſeuerally to euerie one, but onely to the Church of God, or to that people which at laſt shalbe the Church.

Caluin de Praedeſt. pag. 706. God is ſaied to will life, as he God willeth not pennance to all but by word. willeth pennance. But this he willeth, becauſe by his words he inuiteth all to it. And of the ſame mynd are others, who ſay, that God willeth not the ſaluation of any but of the elect onely, otherwiſe then by his word; For if indeed he will not haue the reprobate do pennance, but onely in word or shew, ſurely nether doth he command them to do pē nance, otherwiſe then in word, and in outward shew.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that God denounceth pennāce to all men euerie where, to Iews and Gentils, to all Nations, to Simon Magus. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that God commandeth not pennance to euerie one, but onely to his Church, or to theſe who at laſt shalbe his Church: that he doth not will pennance to all but onely in word.

ART. XVIII. WHETHER CHASTISMENT of the bodie be a parte of pennance?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Math. 11. v. 21. Woe be to the Corozain, woe be to thee Bethſaida. For if in Tire and Sidon had beene wrought the miracles that haue beene wrought in you, they had done pennance in Bodily chaſtizment a parte of pennance. hairecloth and ashes long agoe.

Iob. 42. v. 6. I reprehend my ſelfe, and do pennance in imbers and ashes.

Ionas. 3. v. 6. And he roſe vp out of his throne, and caſt away his garment from him, and was clothed in ſackcloth and ſate in ashes. And he cried and ſaied in Niniue from the mouth of the King and his Princes, ſaying: Men and beaſts and oxen and cattell, let them not taste any thing nor feed, and let them not drinke water. And let men and beaſts be couered with ſackclothes.

Ioel. 2. v. 12. Conuert to me in all your harte, in fasting, and in weeping, and in mourning.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Math. 11. erv. 21. It is conuinced out of this place, that pennance properly conſiſteth not onely in change of life and repentance, but alſo in penall workes.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Willet Contr. 14. q. 1. p. 711. Ashes, ſackoth, was no parte of No parte of pennance. repentance, but an outward teſtification of their inward griefe.

Whitaker Praefat. ad Demonſtrat. Sanderi. I ſaied, that pennance did not conſiſt in certaine externall punishments, but in inward griefe conceaued of the remembrance of ſinne, and in amendment of life.

Caluin in Math. 11. ver. 21. Pennance is here deſcribed by externall Chriſt regardeth notmuch corporall pennance. ſignes, whereof then there was ſolemne vſe in the Church of God: not that Christ inſiſteth much vpon this vpon this point, but he accomodateth himſelfe to the capacitie of the common people. Et Concione 158. in Iob: Sackcloth and ashes are onely an externall ſigne of pennance.

Beza in Math. 11. v. 21. cit. Which cuſtome (of caſting ashes vpon themſelues) was after word trāſlated to thoſe whome they called Penitents, I wish it had beene done with more iudgment and better ſucceſſe.

Vorſtius in Antibellarm. p. 439. Painfull workes, are onely outward, and oftentimes deceitfull and feigned ſignes of pennāce. Wherefore they are not partes of true pennance.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that pennance in ſackcloth and ashes is good: that God biddeth vs to conuert to him in faſting, weeping, and mourning: that the Niniuits did pennance in ſackcloth and ashes, and Iob in embers and ashes. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that Chriſt did not much inſiſt vpon ſackcloth and ashes: that they are no partes of pennance, but onely an outward ſigne thereof: that pennance conſiſteth not in outward punishment: that the cuſtome of caſting ashes vpon penitents was done without good iudgment.

ART. XIX. WHETHER THE PENNANCE of the Niniuites were true?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Ionas 3. v. 10. And God ſaw their (Niniuites) workes, that they were conuerted from their euill way: and God had mercie on Pennance of Niniuites, was true. the euill which he had spoaken, that he would do to them, and he did it not. Et ver. 5. And the men of Niniue beleiued in God, and they proclaimed a faſt, &c.

Math. 12. v. 41. The men of Niniue shall riſe in iudgment with this generation, and shall condemne it becauſe they did pennance at the preaching of Ionas.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Catechiſmus ad Parochos cap. de Paenitentia: There are moſt cleare examples of the Niniuits, of Dauid, of the Penitent woman, of the Apoſtles: all which imploring the mercie of God with manie teares, obtained pardon of their ſinnes.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Beza lib. quaeſtion. vol. 1. Theol. pag. 674. God approued Not true pennance. the pennance of the Niniuites, although it was not true pennance, but ſome kinde of humiliation vnder the mightie hand of God.

Sadeel de vera peccator. remiſſ. p. 109. It is very abſurd to compare thoſe Heathen (Niniuites) ſtrangers from Gods couenant, and void of true doctrine, who had heard nothing of the true God, nothing of the M • ſsias, with godlie men receauing the benefit of Chriſt with true faith.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth that the Niniuites beleiued in God, did pennance, were conuerted from their euill way. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that the Niniuits were void of true doctrine, had heard nothing of the true God, and that their pennance was not true.

ART. XX. WHETHER EREMITICALL life be lawfull?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Luc. 1. verſ. 80. And the child grew and was ſtrenghtned in Eremiticall life lawfull. ſpirit, and was in the deſerts vntill the day of his manifeſtation in Iſrael.

Math. 4. v. 1. Then Ieſus was led of the Spirit into the deſert.

Hebr. 11. v. 38. Wandring in deſerts, in mountaines and dennes, and in caues of the earth.

Marc. 1. ver. 13. And he (Ieſus) was in the deſert fourtie dayes Chriſt in the deſert with beaſts. and fourtie nightes, and was tempted of Satan, and he was with beaſtes.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Promptuar. Dom. 2. Aduentus: Our Heretiks will not that S. Ihon liued in a deſert poperly termed, in a wilderneſſe, in ſolitude, leſt ſo notable example of his may ſeeme to patroniſe our Ermits and Anchorets.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

The Magdeburgians Centur. 1. l. 1. cap. 10. Luke reporteth Eremiticall life, ſuperſtitious. that the child (Ihon) abode in the deſert vnto the day of his manifeſtation; which is not to be vnderſtood of anie den farre frō all conuerſation of men, as if he had lurked there like a beare or a hater of mankind, as afterward Ermits and ſuch kind of men feigned to thēſelues ſuperſtitious religious. Et Cent. 4. c. 10. they write thus of Ermits: But who will not accurſe theſe monſters of men, as enemies of humane ſocietie, and offending againſt the whole ſecond table?

Perkins in reformed Cathol. C. 8. p. 168. For time of peace, I ſee no cauſe of ſolitarie life.

Polanus in Diſput. priuatis diſput. 22. Eremiticall life, is Sauage and in humane. clownish, ſauage, and farre from ciuilitie. The like ſay other Proteſtants.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that S. Ihon Baptiſt was frō a child in the deſert, that Chriſt was lede of the Spirit into the deſert, and was there fourtie dayes and with beaſts: that Gods Saints wandered in deſerts, denns, and caues of the earth. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that eremiticall life, is clownish, ſauage, and ſuperſtitious, that Eremits deſerue to be accurſed, and do ſinne againſt the whole ſecond table.

THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF GOOD workes in particular.

That which we haue related in this chapter euidently sheweth, that Proteſtants doctrine of good workes in particular is cleane contrarie to the doctrine of the holie Scripture. For the Scripture together with Catholiks teacheth, that not to marrie is good and counſailed of God: that virginitie is a vertue, and better then the ſtate of marriage: that faſting is a vertue and worshippe of God, and an antidote againſt the Diuel, and that choice of meats is lawfull: that we may pray for the dead, for all, and for that which God hath not promiſed, and in ſtrange tongue, and that he that praieth may be heard for his owne or his praiers worth: that it is lawfull to ſell all, and giue to the pore; that almes deliuereth from death and ſinne; that pennance is commanded to all: that punishment of the bodie is a parte of pennance: All which Proteſtants denie.

They shew alſo, that Proteſtants ſteale quite away Whatvertues Proteſt. reiect. manie particular vertues, and manie things alſo frō other vertues which they will ſeeme to leaue. For they take quite away the vertues of virginitie, of faſting, & vowing: They take from praier, that it be made for the dead, for all, and for that which God hath not promiſed: They take frō religiō the forſaking of goods, from almes the power of deliuering from death and ſinne, and from pennance the punishment of the bodie. And thus much of good workes: Now of their contraries, that is, ſinnes.

CHAPTER XV. OF SINNES

ART. I. WHETHER SINNES BE IMPVTED to the Elect and Faithfull?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

REG. 2. C. 12. V. 5. & ſeq. And Dauid ſaied to Nathan: our Lord liueth, the man that hath done this, is the child of death—And Nathan ſaied to Sinne was imputed to Dauid. Dauid: Thou art that man. Thus ſaieth the Lord God of Iſrael:—Why therefore haſt thou contemned the word of the Lord that thou wouldeſt do euill in my ſight—For which thing the ſword shall not departe from thy houſe for euer becauſe thou haſt deſpiſed me. The ſame teach both other places before cited, which ſay that God is angrie and hateth the faithfull when they ſinne grieuouſly: as alſo ſuch as teach, that God punisheth them for ſinnes, and that ſinnes are mortall euen to the elect faithfull: Which we shall cite ſoone after.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Amiſſ. Grat. c. 7. If ſinnes do remaine with a liuelie iuſtifying faith in men that are once iuſtifyed, euen by this they are not imputed: nether are they ſo much veniall and to be forgiuen, as already forgiuen and remitted, nether make they a man guiltie of any p • ine or punishment: And there is no man but ſeeth, how abſurd and pernitious this doctrine is.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Wootton in Anſwere to Popish Articles. p. 92. Sinne is Sinne is remitted before it be committed. remitted as ſoone as it is committed, or rather before it be committed, a man once iuſtified hauing obtained full remiſsion of all ſinnes, paſt, preſent, and to come.

Abbots in Diatribam Tomſonic. 20. That ſinnes be not Not imputed to the elect. imputed to the elect, pertaineth to mercie.

Luther in Gal. 2. to. 5. f. 229. Becauſe iuſtice & fulfilling of the law is begun by faith, therefore for Chriſt in whome they beleiue, the reſt of ſinnes and fulfilling of the law is not imputed. In c. 5. f. 420. A beleiuer, hauing ſinne & ſinning, neuertheleſſe remaineth Not to the faithfull. godlie.—Albeit they haue and commit ſinnes, yet let them know that they are not imputed to them through Chriſt. In c. 8. Iſaiae Sinne maketh not Chriſtians guiltie. to. 4. f. 83. This is Chriſtian libertie, that we may ſatisfie the law in ſome parte: But where we do not, there it doth not make vs guiltie, becauſe we haue remiſsion of ſinnes.

Caluin in Ioan. 5. v. 29. No not ſinnes, whereof the faithfull Sinne not imputed to the faithfull. dayly do make themſelues guiltie, are imputed to them. Et 3. In-Inſtit. cap. 4. §. 28. he ſaieth that the ſinnes of the faithfull are veniall, becauſe they are not imputed.

Beza in Epiſtola dedicator. Reſp. ad Caſtel. p. 427. Sinnes are not imputed to them that beleiue. Which he repeateth fol. Not to the beleiuers. 457. & vol. 3. p. 350.

Zanchius de Perſeuerant. q. 1. c. 2. This is moſt certaine, that God neuer imputeth ſinnes to the elect. Not to the Elect.

Pareus l. 4. de Iuſtif. c. 1. after he had related theſe words of Luther: Where faith, is no ſinne can hurt: addeth, What more true?

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that ſinne was imputed to Dauid albeit he was faithfull and elect. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that ſinne is not imputed to the faithfull, neuer imputed to the elect, that ſinne maketh not the faithfull guiltie, hurteth them not: that a beleiuer euen ſinning remaineth godlie: that ſinne is remitted to him euen before it be committed.

ART. II. WHETHER ANIE SINNES BE mortall to the faithfull and elect?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Gen. 2. v. 17. it is ſaied to Adam a faithfull and elect mā: Sinne mortall to Adam. In what day ſoeuer thou shall eate of it, thou shalt die the death.

Numbers 18. ver. 22. That the children of Iſrael approch not To the Iſraetes. any more to the tabernacle, nor commit deadlie ſinne.

Rom. 5. v. 12. As by one man ſinne entred into this world and To all men. by ſinne death, and ſo vnto all men death did paſſe. Et v. 18. As by the offence of one, vnto all men to condemnation.

1. Cor. 15. v. 22. As in Adam all die. Et Epiſt. 2. cap. 5. v. 14. If one died for all, then all were dead.

Epheſ. 2. v. 5. Euen when we were dead by ſinnes, quickened vs together in Chriſt.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Amiſſ Grat. cap. 7. That all ſinnes of the predeſtinate, be termed veniall, and all ſinnes of the reprobates, mortall, is confuted out of the examples of the Scripture with strong arguments, nor onely of Catholik Doctors, but alſo of Lutherans.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Caluin in 1. Ioan. 5. v. 16. He denieth, that they are ſinnes to Grieuous ſinnes of Saints, not mortall. death, not onely thoſe in which the Saints do dayly offend, but alſo if it chāce that ſometimes they grieuously prouoke the wrath of God. 2. Inſtit. c. 8. §. 59. The ſinnes of Saints, are veniall. l. 3. Veniall. c. 4. §. 28. The ſinnes of the faithfull be veniall.

Beza in 1. Ioan. 5. v. 19. Hence it followeth, that no ſinnes are No ſinnes of the Elect, mortall. mortall to the elect; none veniall, to the reprobate.

Zanchius in Depulſione calum. to. 7. col. 258. Becauſe ſinnes are pardoned to the elect, nor are imuputed to death, therefore in respect of the perſons which are in Chriſt, ſinnes committed of them, cannot be called mortall. De Perſeuerantia ib. col. 156. The falls of Saints are not deadlie to them, and therefore they die not in Gods ſight with ſuch falls.

Muſculus in locis tit. de Peccato: If the perſons be elect and faithfull in Chriſt, it followeth, that their ſinnes are not mortall, but veniall.

Bucanus in Inſtit. Theol. loco. 16. To the elect, all ſinnes, All ſinnes of the Elect, be veniall. euen the moſt grieuous, are veniall by Chriſt.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that ſinne was mortall to Adam, though he were both faithfull and elect: that by him death and condemnation paſſed vnto all men: that all men were dead in him. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that no ſinnes are mortall to the elect and faithfull: that no ſinnes are imputed to them to death: that no falls are deadlie to them, nor that they die with any whatſoeuer: that euen moſt grieuous ſinnes are veniall to the elect. Which ſome Proteſtants confeſſe to be againſt Scripture. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. III. WHETHER OMELY INCREdulitie be ſinne?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Ioan. 19. v. 11. Therefore he that hath betraied me to thee, hath Sinne, to betraie Chriſt. Sinne, to kill S. Stephen. Sinne, to accept perſons. Sinne, not to doe the good one knoweth. greater ſinne.

Act. 7. v. 60. Lord laie not this ſinne vnto them.

Iames. 2. v. 9. But if you accept perſons, you worke ſinne. And c. 4. v. 17. To one knowing to doe good, and not doing it; to him it is ſinne.

CATH OLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Stapleton orat. Catechet. 2. &c. Pride is ſo capitall a ſinne, as it is the ſupreme head of all ſinnes, euen of them which are termed capitall.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Luther Poſtilla in Dom. 4. poſt Paſcha. fol. 260. The Lord Onely incredulitie ſinne. teacheth here farre otherwiſe, while he ſaieth: The holie Ghoſt reproueth the world for ſinne becauſe they beleiue not in me, where onely incredulitie is accounted ſinne. In Diſput. tom. Sinne proper to incredulitie. 1. f. 371. As nothing iuſtifieth but faith: ſo nothing ſinneth but incredulitie. Iuſtification is proper to ſinne in Quarto modo. No ſinne, but incredulitie. all ſorte: ſo is ſinne to incredulitie. lib. cont. Cathar. to. 2. fol. 156. Chriſt hath appointed, that there should be no ſinne but incredulitie. Et in poſtilla Domeſtica feriae 2. Pentecoſt. impreſſ. 1601. There is no more anie ſinne, but not to beleiue.

Melancthon apud Cocleum in art. 6. Confeſſ. Auguſt. As according to the Ghoſpell onely faith is iuſtice: So contrariwiſe according to the Ghoſpell, onely incredulitie is ſinne. Onely incredulitie, ſinne.

Caluin in Ioan. 15. verſ. 22. Chriſt by theſe words ſeemeth to inſinuate, that onely ncredulitie is ſinne: and there are, who thinke ſo.

THE CONFERENCE.

The Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that it was ſinne to betraye Chriſt, to kill S. Stephen: that it is ſinne to accept perſons, and not to doe the good which we know. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay: that there is no ſinne but incredulitie, onely incredulitie is ſinne: that ſinne is in all ſortes proper to incredulitie.

ART. IV. WHETHER SINNE OVGHT to be ouercome of the faithfull?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Rom. 6. v. 11. & ſeq. So thinke you alſo, that you are dead to We ought to ouercome ſinne. ſinne—Let not ſinne therefore reigne in your mortall bodie, that you obey the concupiſcences thereof.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Roman. 6. v. 12. If the Spirit ſtruggle, but ouercometh not ſinne in the bedie: then it obeyeth and yeeldeth to the concupiſcences of the bodie. How then doth S. Paul exhorte thoſe that are regenerate in Chriſt, that ſinne reigne not in their bodies, and that they obey not concupiſcences of the flesh? Theſe carnall and Epicurean Heretiks will haue the ſpirit to ſtruggle with the flesh, but not ouercome it.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Beza in Rom. 6. ver. 12. edit. An. 1565. & 1582. This exhortation is fitly added to that which went before, that we may vnderſtand, We ought not to ouercome ſinne. how farre we be dead to ſinne as long as we liue here: to wit, ſo farre as that the spirit do ſtruggle (againſt ſinne) but not ouercome. Of the ſame opinion are others, who (as before we ſaw) do teach, that we ought not to doe good workes. For if we ought not doe good workes, ſurely we ought not to ouercome ſinne.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that we ought to thinke our ſelues dead to ſinne: that ſinne ought not to reigne in vs, nor we ought to obey the concupiſcences thereof. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that the ſpirit ought to ſtruggle againſt ſinne, but not ſo as it ouercome it.

ART. V. WHETHER ANIE THAT SERVE the flesh do alſo ſerue God?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Rom. 8. v 13. If you liue according to the flesh, you shall die. Liuers according to the flesh shall die. Pleaſe not God. Are of the Diuel. v. 8. They that are in the flesh, cannot pleaſe God.

Math. 6. v. 24. No man can ſerue two Maiſters.

1. Ioan. 3. v. 8. He that committeth ſinne, is of the Diuel.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

D. Stapleton in Math. 6. v. 24. Who ſerue God, can nether ſerue the Diuel, nor the flesh.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Caluin in Math. 6. v. 24. It is ſurely true, that the faithfull are neuer ſo wholy obedient vnto God, but that now and then they are withdrawne by the vitious luſts of the flesh: but becauſe Some ſeruer • of the flesh are approued of God. they mourne vnder this miſerable ſlauerie and diſlike themſelues, nor ſerue this flesh otherwiſe then againſt their will and ſtriuing, their deſires and endeauours are approued of God, euen as if they did afford him entire obedience. In Rom. 8. v. 5. The Apoſtle testifieth, that he accounteth not them carnall, who do aſpire to heauenlie iustice, but who are wholy giuen to the world.

Beza in Praef. ad Paſtores Baſil. vol. 1. pag. 427. To nill euill and yet to doe it, is the parte of Saints who do wrastle.

Pareus l. 2. de Iuſtif. c. 7. Sonnes of the Diuel, are not ſimply Not all grieuous ſinners, Sonnes of the Diuel. (grieuous) ſinners, but obſtinat ſinners. l. 4. cap. 17. Nether the faithfull who ſinne by chance, or of themſelues by weakneſſe, but ſuch as of themſelues giue themſelues to ſinne, ſerue the Diuel and ought to be called ſonnes of the Diuel.

Scarpe de Iuſtif. Contr. 13. They onely are ſaied to ſerue the Diuel and to be his ſonnes, in whome ſinne reigneth and who commit ſinne with a full will, but the faithfull do not ſo ſinne. See alſo what they ſay in the next article.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that who ſerue the flesh, shall die; nor cāpleaſe God: that none can ſerue twoe maiſters: that whoſoeuer committeth ſinne is of the Diuel. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that euen the ſonnes of God ſerue the flesh: that the Apoſtle accounteth none carnall but ſuch as wholy giue themſelues to the world: that onely obſtinat ſinners are ſonnes of the Diuel: that the the faithfull ſinning ether of infirmitie or wilfully, ſerue not the Diuel: that to nill euill and yet do it, is the parte of Saints: that they onely ſerue the Diuel who with full will commit ſinne.

ART. VI. WHETHER BY GRIEVOVS ſinnes the faithfull fall from grace?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Ioan. 3. v. 8. He that committeth ſinne, is of the Diuel. v. 15. No murderer hath life in him. Sinne maketh to fall from grace. You know, that no murderer hath life euerlasting abiding in himſelfe.

Gal. 5. v. 4. You are euacuated from Chriſt, that are iustified in the law, you are fallen from grace.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſion. 6. cap. 15. We muſt teach, that grace of iustification once receaued, is loſt, not onely by infidelitie, but alſo with anie other mortall ſinne, though faith be not loſt.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Contr. 4. q. 6. c. 2. But it is more abſurd which he S. Peter did not leeſe grace ſaieth, that Peter (by denying Chriſt) loſt grace. Et Concione vlt. p. 696. To goe from grace, that is, to obey the concupiſcence of the flesh, and to reſiſt Gods motions, and admonitions, is farre from falling from grace.

Perkins de Baptiſmo to. 1. col. 819. This is moſt worthie of remembrance, that the Apoſtle calleth the Galathians euen in that verie time when they erred in the foundation, and euen were gone to an other Ghoſpell, Sonnes of God, ſaying: you all are the ſonnes of God. For hereupon we may truely conclude, that not No enormious ſinne obſcureth grace. any enormious ſinne, nor euerie errour which is committed againſt the foundation, obſcurreth the grace and regeneration which maketh the Sonnes of God, much leſſe extinguish it. In Serie Caufarum c. 42. By falls, grace and faith are not taken Sinne taketh not away grace. away but illuſtrated. cap. 51. It shall appeare out of the word of God, that it is farre otherwiſe thē that grace is extinguished by euerie mortall ſinne. And de Sermon. Dom. tom. 2. col. 391. he ſaieth, that Dauid and Peter euen when they ſinned as they did, were by regeneration the Sonnes of God, and the grace of God remained in them.

Abbots in Diatribam Tomſoni c. 22. Dauid was not yet Dauid iuſt, when he committed murder. quite ſpoiled of ſpirituall life, not yet depriued of iuſtification, but worthie to be depriued. Againe: Guilt of ſinne doth not take away iustification, doth not extinguish the Holie Ghoſt, doth not exclude the right of inheritance to the kingdome of God, but onely the vſe thereof.

The vniuerſitie of Zurich apud Zanchium tom. 7. col. 74. Seing the ſtrife of the ſpirit with the flesh is alwaies in Saints, it followeth that the spirit doth alwaies remaine in them, though ſometimes they be ouercomen with the weight of the flesh.

Caluin in 2. Petri 2. v. 21. The faithfull alſo ſinne, but they Faithfull in grace euen when they ſinne. fall not from grace.

Beza in Colloq. Montisbel. p. 388. Whoſoeuer is elect, albeit Fall not from grace by ſinne he ſinne grieuously, as is ſaied of Dauid, yet he falleth not frō grace, into which God once receaued him. In Confeſſ. c. 4. ſect. 20. The Holie Ghost did teſtifie to their (Dauid Peter) ſpirit, that they, though they had moſt fouly fallen, were not withſtanſtanding accounted in the number of the Sonnes of God. And in Colloq. cit. When Smidelin had ſaied: I aske whether Dauid Dauid adultering kept the holie Ghoſt. committing adulterie, lost the Holie Ghoſt, or no? Beza anſwered: He loſt him, not but kept him. Which p. 381. he expliteth by this exāple: As drunckneſſe can for a time take away the vſe of reaſon, but yet not reaſon it ſelfe: So ſinne cā for a time take away from the elect the vſe of the Holie Ghoſt and of grace, but not grace and the Holie Ghoſt himſelfe, who abideth in them and departeth not from them, as nether he departed from Dauid. Et 2. part. reſp. ad Acta Colloq. Montisbel. p. 71. It is a vaine Nether veniall nor mortall ſinnes exclude the holie Ghoſt. diſtinction betwene veniall and mortall ſinnes. For nether the one nor the other caſt of the Holie Ghoſt, but interrupt his efficacie.

Zanchius de perſeuerantia tom. 7. col. 359. ſaieth, that it cannot be ſaied without blaſphemie, that Saints by ſinning leaue to be the ſonnes of God, & leeſe all right of euerlaſting life. Et col. 150. The Holie Ghoſt departeth not, but is contriſtated with our ſinnes.

Pareus l. 3. de Iuſtif. c. 14. denieth, that ether Dauid by adulterie and murder, or Salomon by idolatrie or S. Peter by denying Chriſt, loſt iuſtification. And l. de Amiſſ. Grat. c. 7. When the ſpirit ouercometh the flesh, there ceaſeth not to be flesh in Saints, but it abideth tamed. In like ſorte, when the flesh ouercometh the spirit, as in Dauid when he fell, the Spirit doth not ceaſe to be in Saints, but abideth ouercomen and troubled. Et c. 11. Reconciliation, grace, loue, adoption, not euerie one, nay neuer a ſinne of the faithfull, can diſſolue.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that who ſought iuſtification in the law, were euacuated from Chriſt, were fallen from grace: who committeth ſinne, is of the Diuel: and and that no murderer hath life in him. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that the faithfull by ſinning do not fall from grace: that Dauid in adulterie and murder, S. Peter in deniall of Chriſt, Salomon in idolatrie, loſt not iuſtification: that the ſinnes of the faithfull take not away the Holie Ghoſt but onely the vſe thereof: that the Holie Spirit is in the faithfull when they are ouercomen of the flesh: that no ſinne of theirs can diſſolue grace: that no enormious ſinne extinguisheth grace. Which ſome Proteſtants confeſſe to be againſt Scripture. See lib. 2. cap. 30.

ART. VII. WHETHER SINNE CAN ſtand with iuſtice?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

2. Cor. 6. v. 14. What participatiō hath iustice with iniquitie, Iuſtice and Iniquitie ſtand not together. or what ſocietie is there betwene light and darkneſſe, and what agreement with Chriſt and Belial?

Wiſdome. 1. verſ 4. Wiſdome will not enter into a militious ſoule, nor dwel in a bodie ſubiect to ſinnes.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Amiſſ. Grat. cap. 12. Sinne fighteth with grace, and cannot remaine together with iustice.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Abbots in Diatribam Tomſoni c. 25. Sinne dwelleth together Iuſtice dwelleth with ſinne. Faith with infidelitie. with iuſtice in vs.

Perkins in Galat. 5. True faith is alwaies mingled with contrarie incredulitie, in ſo much as they who beleiue, feele much incredulitie in themſelues.

Luther in Gal. 3. to. 5. f. 335. A Chriſtian is together iuſt and a ſinner, a freind and enemie of God. Et Aſſert. art. 31. tom. 2. If therefore euerie one be alſo a ſinner whileſt he is iuſt, what can A worke partely good partely nought. Life & death together. follow more euidently, then that a worke alſo is partely good, partely euill?

Caluin cont. Franciſcan. libertin. p. 471. Behould how contraries may be together in one ſubiect: For life is begun, and much of death remaineth. In Math. 17. verſ. 24. Seing faith is no where perfect, it followeth that we are partely incredulous. In Luc. 1. verſ. 6. The iuſtice which in them is praiſed, dependeth of Gods free pardon, and therefore he imputeth not that iniustice which remaineth in them.

Beza lib. Quaeſt. vol. 1. pag. 672. In one and the ſelfe ſame Puritie and filth, light and darkneſſe together. ſubiect, but in diuers reſpects, are puritie and filth, light and darkneſſe, faith and incredulitie.

Pareus l. 4. de Iuſtif. c. 17. I anſwere, that there is no abſurditie, that faith hath ſometimes diſt uſt or incredulitie mingled with it, and ſo by accident, that faith is ſinne. l. 1. c. 14. A ſinner Faith is ſinne by accident. The ſame man iuſt and and wicked. The ſame worke, good and euill. beleiuing is in the firſt moment of iustification iuſtified by grace, and wicked by nature. Et lib. 4. cap. 17. Workes are good and not good, and worthie of reward and punishmēt, but in diuers reſpects. Good, in ſo much as they are of God and done of the regenerate according to the law, by faith, and to the glorie of God: Euill; as much as they are defiled by the impure flesh and other ſinnes. Againe: They are worthie of reward in the courte of mercie, but worthie of punishment in the courte of Gods iuſtice.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that there is no participation of iuſtice with iniquitie, no ſocietie of light and darkneſſe: that the Holie Ghoſt dwelleth not in a bodie ſubiect to ſinne. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that a man is at once iuſt and wicked, freind and enemie of God: that life and death, puritie and filth, light and darkeneſſe, faith and incredulitie, ſinne and iuſtice, can be in the ſame man together, yea that the ſame act can be at once good and ill, in the ſame act, faith and incredulitie. Which ſame Proteſtants confeſſe to be contrarie to Scripture. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. VIII. WHETHER SINNES MAY be redeemed by good workes?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Daniel 4. v. 24. Redeeme then thy ſinnes with almes and Sinnes redeemed by almes thy iniquities with the mercies of the poore, perhaps he will forgiue thine offences.

Prou. 15. v. 17. By mercie and faith, ſinnes are purged. Et c. By mercie. 6. v. 6. By mercie and trueth, iniquitie is redeemed.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 2. de Paenit. c. 3. Catholiks teach, that the temporall paines of the other life, may be redeemed by fastings, praiers, almes, and other pious and painfull workes of this life.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Confeſſio Anglica art. 12. Good workes cannot putt away Sinnes not redeemed by all mes. our ſinnes.

Confeſſio Wittemberg. cap. de Eleemoſyna: What need had there beene of the paſsion and death of Chriſt, if ſinne could be blotted out by the merit of almes?

Hunnius de Iuſtif. pag. 197. Should not Chriſt haue dyed in vaine for ſinnes, if they could be redeemed by almes?

Herbrandus in Compendio loco de bonis operibus: If ſinnes were redeemed with almes, God should ſeeme iniuſt, condemning the poore for ſinnes, becauſe he had not giuen them riches, as he did to others, wherewith they might redeeme their ſinnes.

Caluin 3. Inſtit. c. 4. §. 25. Papiſts ſay, there are manie helps Nor by good workes or charitie. whereby we may redeeme our ſinnes, as tears, faſting, offerings, duties of charitie: To ſuch lies I oppoſe &c. In Luc. 7. v. 50. By this ſpeech is refuted their errour, who thinke that ſinnes can be redeemed by charitie.

Sadeel de ver. peccat. remiſſ. p. 113. If expiation of ſinnes be giuen to mens workes, then is Chriſt dead in vaine?

Aretius in locis part. 1. f. 90. Inward clenſing cometh not of almes. If it had beene poſsible to redeeme ſinnes by almes, Chriſt had died in vayne.

Homius in Diſput. 70. Almes hath not that force which Papiſts blaſphemouſly attribute to it, to wit, to diſpoſe a man to the grace of iuſtification, to wipe away ſinnes, and to ſatisfie for them.

Willet Contr. 19. q. 3. p. 1034. It is an abominable and blaſphemous Not by workes. opinion, that anie man by his workes should be able to redeeme his ſinnes.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that ſinnes are redeemed by almes, that ſinnes are purged and redeemed by mercie. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that ſinnes are not redeemed by almes or charitie: that it is not poſſible to redeeme ſinnes by almes: that Chriſts eath had beene in vaine if ſinnes could be redeemed by almes: that it is abhominable and blaſphemous to ſay that ſinne may be redeemed by almes. Which are ſo contrarie to Scripture as ſometimes Proteſtants confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. IX. WHETHER TO ABSTAINE from great ſinnes be neceſſarie to ſaluation?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Cor. 6. v. 9. Do not erre: Nether fornicatours, nor ſeruers of Great ſinners shall not enioy heauen. Idols, nor adulters, &c. shall poſſeſſe the kingdome of God.

Epheſ. 5. v. 5. Know you this, that no fornicatour, or vncleane, or couetous perſon (which is the ſeruice of idols) hath inheritance in the kingdome of Chriſt and God.

Rom. 8. v. 13. If you liue according to the flesh, you shall die. Shall die.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 4. de Iuſtif. cap. 9. It can no way be, that faith accompanied with euill workes can ſaue a man.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 5. c. 7. We ſay: If anie haue an act of No ſinne hurteth where faith. faith, that ſinne cannot hurt him: This Luther ſaieth, this we all ſay.

Luther de Captiuit. Babyl. to. 2. f. 74. So thou ſeeſt how rich A Chriſtian cannot leefe his ſaluation by anie ſinne. a Chriſtian or baptized men is; who, though he would, cannot leeſe his ſaluation with what great ſinnes ſoeuer, vnleſſe he will not beleiue. For no ſinnes can damne him, but onely incredulitie. De votis ib. fol. 281. There are none ſo ill workes of one that beleiueth in Chriſt, which can accuſe and condemne him. De libertate ib. f. 8. No worke profiteth an infidell to iuſtice and ſaluatiō, No ſinne dā neth infidelitie. and contrariwiſe no euill worke maketh him euill or damned, but incredulitie. In c. 53. Iſaiae to. 4. No ſinne can hurt him that beleiueth. In Gal. 2. to. 5. f. 313. The falſe Apoſtles taught, that vnleſſe you liue according to the law you are dead before God: Paul teacheth the plaine contrarie. In c. 4. f. 404. The true knowledge of Chriſt or faith diſputeth whether thou haſt done good workes to iuſtice, or euill workes to damnation, but ſimply thus determineth: whether thou haſt done good workes, thou art not therefore iuſtified, or whether thou haſt done ill, thou art not therefore damned. Et to. 1. Epiſt. edit. Ienae f. 345. Be a ſinner, and ſinne No murther or fornication can draw vs from Chriſt. Perſeuerer in ſinne, are iuſt. ſtoutly: Sinne shall not draw vs from Chriſt, albeit we commit fornication or murther a thouſand times a daye.

Bergenſes apud Hoſpin. in Concordia diſcordi. f. 86. Iuſtice is imputed euen to them who perſeuer in ſinne.

Melancthon in Ioan. apud Cocleum in Art. 6. Confeſſ. Auguſtanae. As by the Ghoſpell onely faith is iuſtice, ſo that though thou hadſt done all the ſinnes of all mē, yet if thou beleiueſt that the Father hath mercie vpon thee for Chriſt, thou shalt be ſafe: So contrariewiſe, by the Ghoſpell onely incredulitie is ſinne. Onely incredulitie is ſine.

Reineccius to. 4. Armaturae. c. 15. Euill workes do not make an euill man, to wit, him that is in Chriſt.

Zuinglius lib. de. ver. & falſa relig. tom. 2. c. de Peccato: Onely increduli • ie is not pardoned. It followeth, that onely incredulitie is that, to which pardon is denied.

Caluin in Rom. 8. v. 13. Howſoeuer we be yet ſubiect to ſinne, neuertheleſſe he promiſeth vs life, ſo we proſecute our deſire of mortifying the flesh.

Author reſp. ad theſes Valentinianas p. 925. This would that notable Diuine (Luther) and all our men; So we haue true faith, no ſinne how great ſoeuer shall hinder ws to be made partakers of the euerlaſting inheritance. See more in my Latin booke c. 15. art. 8.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely biddeth vs not erre, for nether fornicatours nor adulterous, nor ſuch grieuous ſinners shall poſſeſſe the kingdome of God, and that if we liue according to the flesh we shall die. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that a Chriſtian cannot be damned with what great ſinnes ſoeuer, ſo he will beleiue; that onely incredulitie can damne him: that though he commit fornication and murder a thouſand times aday shall not be drawne from Chriſt: though he had done all the ſinnes of all mē he shalbe ſaued, if he beleiue: that pardon is denied onely to incredulitie: that ſo one haue faith, ſinnes can not hurt him; that ſo we haue true faith no grieuous ſinnes whatſoeuer shall hinder vs to enter into heauen: What other I pray you is this but that voice of the Serpent to Eue; Yee shall not die.

ART. X. WHETHER SINNES BE THE cauſe for which men are damned?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Math. 25. v. 41. Get yee away from me you curſed into euerlasting Men are damned for not exerciſing charitie. According to their workes. fire which was prouided for the Diuel and his Angels: For I was an hungred, and you gaue me not to eate &c.

Apocal. 20. v. 12. And the dead were iudged of thoſe things which were written in the bookes according to their workes.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 2. de Grat. & lib. arb. c. 16. The Scripture euerie where teacheth, that eternall punishment is by the iust iudgment of God rendred to mens ſinnes.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther in Ionae. 1. to. 4. f. 409. Let vs know, that we are not Men are not damned in ſinne. Onely incredulitie damneth. damned in ſinne, nor ſaued by good workes.

Poſtilla in Dom. 8. poſt. Trinitat. f. 300. I obſerue, that no worke is ſo euill, as it can damne a man, onely incredulitie dāneth. That a man committeth adulterie, that worke condemneth not, but adulterie doth shew, that he hath loſt his faith. In Dom. 4. poſt Paſcha: Onely incredulitie is held for ſinne. In die Aſcenſionis: Nether is there anie ſinne ſo great, which can cōdemne a man: onely incredulitie damneth whoſoeuer are damned. Damnation followeth no ſinne but infidelitie.

Iacobus Andreae in Colloq. Montisbel. p. 109. None but None but infidels are damned. Men are not damned becauſe they haue ſinned. the incredulous is damned. 105. Vnleſſe incredulitie were in thoſe that are to be damned, none should be damned. p. 447. Thoſe that are to be adiudged to eternall punishmēt are not therefore dāned becauſe they haue ſinned, but becauſe they would not embrace Christ with true faith. And in the margent: Onely incredulitie damneth men. Whereupon Beza in the ſame Colloquie pag. 421. & 448. & in part. 2. reſp. pag. 215. ſaied: Surely your ſpeech ſeemed to vs intolerable: That men are not damned for ſinne, or becauſe they haue ſinned. And notwithſtanding Beza himſelfe in the ſame Colloq. pag. 103. ſaieth: The onely efficient cauſe of damnation, is our incredulitie & 106. I ſay, that onely incredulitie Onely incredulitie cauſeth damnation. is the efficient cauſe of the damnation of the impious. Et 2 part. reſp. cit. p. 6. Men perish not ſimply for ſinne, but for incredulitie.

Schluſſelburg. to. 7. Catal. Haeret. p. 824. No ſinnes condemne, vnleſſe incredulitie be adioyned.

Bidembachius in Conſenſu Ieſuit. & Chriſtian. printed at Rochel 1584. p. 733. This ſaying is not ill vſed of ſome diuines: It onely damneth. Onely incredulitie damneth: Wherefore ether Torrenſis muſt reproue the office of the Holie Ghoſt reprouing the world, and correct his tongue; or he muſt graunt that men are damned for incredulitie alone.

Reineccius to. 3. Armaturae c. 12. Man is punished not becauſe Men are not punished becauſe they did not well. Sinnes do not damne. Onely infidelitie is cauſe of damnation he did not well.

Zuinglius in Ioan. 5. tom. 4. Sinnes do not make a man vniuſt, nor damne a man, but impietie and incredulitie.

Pareus in Collegio Theol. 7. Diſput. 5. It is rightly ſaied: That onely infidelitie is the cauſe of damnation.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that men are damned for ſinnes of omiſſion, or not doing that which they were bound to doe: that euerie one is iudged according to his workes. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that men are not punished becauſe they did not well: that ſinnes condemne not mē: that men are not damned for ſinnes or becauſe they haue ſinned: that no ſinne is ſo grieuous as it can condemne a man: that damnation followeth no ſinne but incredulitie; that onely incredulitie damneth men: that men are damned for infidelitie onely.

ART. XI. WHETHER WE MVST GIVE account of our ſinnes?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Math. 12. verſ. 36. I ſay vnto you, that euerie idle word that Man muſt giue account of euerie idle word. men shall speake, they shall render an account for it in the day of iudgment.

Rom. 14. v. 12. Euerie one of vs for himſelfe shall render account to God.

2. Cor. 5. v. 10. For we muſt all be manifeſted before the iudgment Of things that he hath done. ſeat of Christ, that euerie one may receaue the proper things of the bodie according as he hath done ether good or euill.

Apoc. 20. ver. 12. And the dead were iudged of thoſe things which were written in the bookes according to their workss.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Act. 15. v. 11. Caluinists cannot abide, that workes be called to account: But theſe peſtilēt teachers lead their followers right to the pitte of hell, and directly gaineſay the holie Scripture: Workes must come to account.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Confeſſio Palatina p. 202. I beleiue and confeſſe, that God Gods iugdment not to be feared. the Father for Christs moſt full ſatisfaction, neuer remembreth my ſinnes, ſo that I haue no need to feare the iudgment of God.

Luther in Gal. 1. to. 5. f. 282. Chriſt will not exact an account He will not take account of our life. Not enter into iudgmēt with vs. of vs of our ill paſſed life.

Caluin in Math. 12. v. 36. In this is founded the truſt of our ſaluation, that God will not enter into iudgment with vs. In c. 27. v. 26. Nether is it to be feared, that our ſinnes come any more into Gods iudgment. In Roman. 4. v. 6. Who are couered with Chriſts iuſtice, they haue not onely God appeaſed to them, but alſo to their workes, whoſe ſpotts and blemishes are couered with Chriſts puritie, that they come not to account. In Gal. 3. v. 22. It followeth vndoubtedly: If workes come into iudgment, we are all damned.

Beza in Confeſſ. c. 4. ſect. 12. This ſanctification of humane nature in Christ imputed to vs by faith, hath made that the relikes of that corruption which is euen in the regenerate, come not to account before God.

Scarpe de Iuſtif. Contr. 7. Theſe ſinnes shall not come to account before God.

Tilenus in Syntagmate c. 67. The elect do know, that nether their deeds, nor all their words shalbe called to the reckoning of this (laſt) iudgment.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that we shall giue account of euerie idle word: that euerie one shall giue account for himſelfe: that euerie one shall receaue for the good or ill which he hath done: that the dead shalbe iudged according to their workes. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that Chriſt will not exact an account of our life ill paſſed: that God will not enter into iudgment with vs: that our ſinnes shall not come to iudgment: shall not come to reckoning: that nether all our deeds or words shall come to the reckoning of iudgment.

ART. XII. WHETHER THE ELECT being iuſtified committeth ill or ſinne?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Pſal. 50. ver. 6. Dauid ſaieth of himſelfe: To thee onely haue Dauid did ill. I ſinned, and haue done ill before thee.

2. Reg. 12. v. 9. Nathan ſaieth to Dauid: Why therefore haſt thou contemned the word of the Lord, that thou wouldeſt doe euill in my ſight?

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Amiſſ. Grat. c. 7. Dauid himſelfe peculiarly bewaileth his adulterie and murder, and amongst other things ſaieth: To thee onely haue I ſinned, and haue done ill before thee.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Zanchius de Perſeuerantia tom. 7. col. 124. Dauid ſinned He committed not ſinne. indeed, but neuer committed ſinne. Et 147. The regenerate commit not ſinne.

Muſculus in Locis tit. de Peccato. The elect commit not The elect commit not ſinne. ſinne, though they ſometimes do ſinne. Againe: The elect commit not ſinne, but the reprobates.

Abbots in Diatribam Tomſoni c. 20. Chriſt manifeſtly sheweth, that it is one thing to ſinne, an other to commit ſinne, and ſaieth, that the iuſtified do not commit ſinne.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that Dauid (though an elect and iuſtified man) ſinned, did ill before God, contemned Gods word. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that Dauid neuer committed ſinne, that the regenerate commit not ſinne, that the elect commit not ſine.

ART. XIII. WHETHER THE ELECT himſelfe, being iuſtified, ſinneth?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

2 Reg. 24. v. 17. Dauid ſaieth of himſelfe: I am he that haue Dauid ſinned and did wickedly. Did euill. ſinned, I haue done wickedly: Et 1. Paralipomen. 21. v. 17. It is I that haue ſinned, it is I that haue done the euill.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſion. 6. Can. 23. If anie shall ſay, that a man once iuſtified cannot ſinne, nor leeſe grace &c. be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Academie of Marpurg apud Zanchium in tom. 7. col. The elect do not ſinne. 66. The elect himſelfe doth it (ſinne) not, hut ſinne inhabiting in him.

Bucer in Matthaei 7. A Chriſtian ſinneth not, and yet he A Chriſtian ſinneth not. hath ſinne.

Zanchius in Supplicat. ad Senatum Argentinenſem tom. 7. col. 59. The elect cannot properly obey the concupiſcences Doth not obey concupiſcēce. of ſinne.

Whitaker Controu. 2. q. 2. cap. 2. True faithfull can neuer be Is not ouercomen of Sathan. ouercomen of Sathan.

Contra-remonſtrantes in Collat. Hagae. pap. 351. Sinne hath not rule ouer the elect. And 347. There is plainely ſaied, who is borne of God, that is, the true faithfull and regenerate, that he doth not ſinne ſo, as ſinne ruleth ouer him againe, nor can ſo ſinne.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that Dauid though iuſtifyed, did euill; wickedly; did ſinne The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that the elect him ſelfe committeth not ſinne, that a Chriſtian ſinneth not: that the elect properly obey not the concupiſcences of ſinne: that ſinne ruleth not ouer an elect.

ART. XIV. WHETHER THE ELECT being iuſtified, euer doe ſinne wittingly and willingly?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

2. Reg. 12. v. 9. it is ſaied to Dauid: Why haſt thou contēned Dauid contemned Gods word. Despiſed God. the word of the Lord. Et v. 10. The ſword shall not departe from thy houſe for euer, becauſe thou haſt deſpiſed me.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Rom. 6. v. 12. calleth it filthie doctrine, that the elect being iuſtified do not shake of the yoke of the law of God of ſet malice; but of frailtie, becauſe the flesh ouercometh the ſpirit ſtriuing.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Iacobus Andreae in Colloq. Montisb. p. 382. The elect The elect ſinne not of purpoſe. Not of full will. ſinne not of purpoſe, but againſt their will.

Perkins de Praedeſt. to. 1. col. 153. The regenerate do not ſinne of whole or full will.

Academie of Zurich apud Zanchium to. 7. col. 74. Nether of them (Dauid, Peter) ſinned with his whole harte and mynde. And Zanchius himſelfe ib. de Perſeuerant. col. 98. The true faithfull being once ingrafted in Chriſt neuer ſinne with their mynd, that is with their whole mynde, harte, and full will, but Onely of ignonorance. onely with flesh, ignorance, and frailtie: Et col. 363. Saints neuer ſinne of ſet malice, or (as others ſay) with their will, but alwaies ether of frailtie, or of ignorance.

Daneus Contr. de Baptiſmo c. 14. Men ſinne in two ſortes: Ether with whole affection of mynde feeling no fight betwene the ſpirit and flesh; and in this ſorte do not they ſinne, who are borne of God and haue true faith.

Pareus l. 1. de Amiſſ. Gratiae. cap. 6. Who is borne of God 〈…〉 not ſinne with his whole harte. Et l. 3. de Iuſtif. c. 15. •• ece we haue clearly, that the regenerate do not ſinne, to wit, with their whole harte and to death. 〈…〉 dea • h.

Scarpe de Iuſtif. Contr. 5. No faithfull perſons ſinne with full force of will.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely teacheth, that Dauid though an elect and iuſtified man contemned Gods word, deſpiſed God. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely teach, that the elect do not ſinne with their whole harte, neuer ſinne with their will, neuer with full will: but onely of frailtie or ignorance or with the flesh.

ART. XV. WHETHER THE WIDDOWS whereof S. Paul ſpeake did make void their faith by marrying?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Tim. 5. v. 11. & 12. But auoid the yonger widdows, for when Somewidows damned for marrying againe. they shalbe wanton, in Chriſt, they will marrie, hauing damnatiō becauſe they haue made void their first faith.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 2. de Monachis c 24. The Apoſtle faith, that they make void their firſt faith, which will marrie.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Apologia Confeſſ. Auguſtan. c. de votis: Paul condemneth Not damned becauſe the married. the widdows, not becauſe they married.

Whitaker l. 9. cont. Dureum ſect. 39. The Apoſtle writeth, that thoſe widdows were to be damned, not becauſe they married.

Lutherans de votis to. 2. f. 302. But nether doth Paul condemne this in them, that they will marrie.

Illyricus in Claue part. 1. verbo Fides: There is no ſpeech of breaking of vow or of marrying againe.

Zuinglius in Explanat. artic. 30. Paul ſaieth, that theſe broke their firſt faith, becauſe they vſed the pleaſure of the flesh not with husbands: for they who married, did not breake their faith.

Peter Martyr libr. de votis col. 1352. It cannot be gathered hence, that to haue a will to marrie was accounted ſinne in them.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that thoſe widdows whereof S. Paul ſpeaketh had their damnation by marrying, becauſe by marrying they made void their firſt faith. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that they had no damnation by marrying, that they did not ſinne by marrying; that there is no ſpeech in S. Paul of marrying againe: that he ſpoake of ſuch as out of marriage vſed the pleaſure of the flesh: Which contradiction of the Scripture is ſo euident, as ſome Proteſtants confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. XVI. WHETHER VSVRIE be ſinne?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Pſal. 14. v. 1. & 5. Lord, who shall dwel in thy tabernacle &c. Vſurie, ſinne. He that hath not giuen his money to vſurie.

Pſal. 71. ver. 14. From vſuries and iniquities he shall redeeme their ſoules.

Ezechiel 18. verſ. 5. and 8. And a man if he shalbe iust hath not lent to vſurie and not taken more, hath turned his hand from iniquitie—This man is iuſt, liuing he shall liue, ſaieth our Lord God.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

S. Thomas 2. 2. q. 78. art. 1. To take vſurie for money lent, is of it ſelfe vniuſt.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Bucer in Diſput. de Vſuris pag. 794. The Lord did not forbidde Not all vſurie forbidden. Some vſurie allowed. and condemne all vſurie, but vſurie of a certaine kind, to wit, that with biteth and helpeth not the neighbour, which alone I thinke to be allowed.

Caluin in Epiſtolis edit. 1619. pag. 488. If we condemne all vſurie, we make the ſnare of conſciences ſtraiter then the Lord himſelfe would. Againe: I find not by any testimonie of Scripture that all vſuries are condemned.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that who lendeth money to vſurie, shall not dwell in Gods tabernacle, that ſoules are to be redeemed from vſurie, that a iuſt man doth not lend to vſurie. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſeiy ſay, that al vſurie is not condemned, that ſome is to be allowed.

ART. XVII. WHETHER ALL HAVE ſinned in Adam?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Rom. 5. v. 12. As by one man ſinne entred into this world, and All men ſinned in Adam. All made ſinners in Adam. by ſinne death, and ſo vnto all men death did paſſe in whome all ſinned. Et ver. 19. As by the diſobedience of one man manie were made ſinners.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 4. de Amiſſ. Gratiae. c. 13. In that one man, all ſinned.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Zuinglius de Peccato orig. to. 2. f. 116. Nether hindreth it, We ſinned but figuratiuely in Adam. Not truely ſinned. that S. Paul Rom. 5. ſaieth: All haue ſinned. For after the ſame manner the worde, Sinned, is putte metonymically. De Ratione fidei ib. f. 539. I confeſſe that our first father committed a ſinne which is truely a ſinne, but they who are deſcended of him did not ſinne in this ſorte.

Adolphus Venator apud Homium in Specimine &c. We did not ſinne in Adam. art. 15. Thereupon it may be gathered, that we did not ſinne in Adam, becauſe &c.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that all ſinned in Adam, that by his diſobedience manie are made ſinners. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that all ſinned in Adam but figuratiuely; that Adam truely ſinned but not they who are deſcended of him; that we ſinned not in Adam.

ART. XVIII. WHETHER THERE BE anie originall ſinne?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Scripture in places before cited ſaieth, that all ſinned Originall ſinne, true ſinne. in Adam, that by his diſobedience many were made ſinners: & 1. Cor. 15. v. 12. that in Adam all died.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 5. Can. 2. If anie shall ſay, that Adam by his ſinne of diſobedience, transfuſed onely death and punishment of the bodie in all man kinde, and not ſinne, which is the death of the ſoule: be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Zuinglius de Peccato orig. to. 2. f. 115. What could be ſaied Originall ſinne, is no ſinne, Not truely called ſinne. more breefly or clearly, then that originall ſinne, is no ſinne, but a ſickneſſe: Fol. 116. This is that I will: that originall ſinne is not truely called ſinne, but metonymically of the ſinne committed of our firſt father. fol. 115. What could be ſaied more weakly and more farre from Canonicall Scripture, then that it is not a ſickneſſe, but a guilt? De Baptiſmo ibid. fol. 87. It followeth, Not guilt. No ſtaine. that litle ones or Infants are without all blemish or ſtaine. f. 90. Whence we gather, that originall ſinne is indeed a ſickneſſe, which yet of it ſelfe is not faultie, nor can cauſe the punishment of damnation. Againe: How can it be, that what is a ſickneſſe and contagion, deſerueth the name of ſinne, or is ſinne indeed? And Reſponſ. ad Luther. fol. 517. The ſumme of all which No ſinne indeed. Not ſuch a ſinne as hath fault. Not properly ſinne. Maketh not guiltie of death. I taught in my booke of originall ſinne is this: That originall contagion is not ſuch a ſinne, that hath any fault, but rather is a ſickneſſe which by reaſon of Adams ſinne, cleaueth vnto vs.

Homius in Specimine &c. art. 15. bringeth many Proteſtants who denie originall ſinne: as Venator. Originall ſinne is not properly ſinne, nor deſerueth damnation. Arminius: Originall ſinne is fondly ſaied to make guiltie of death. Borrius. There is no reaſon why God would impute this ſinne to Infants.

Beza de Praedeſtinat. cont. Caſtel. vol 1. p. 421. thus writeth of Caſtellio (whome D. Humfrey ad Ration. 1. Campiani much commendeth for learning and honeſtie) Out of which it may be eaſily gathred, that ether thou accounteſt originall Originall ſinne, a fable. ſinne, a fable; or els doeſt ſo diminish it, that what is by origin, thou wouldſt haue to be attributed to imitation. Nether is Beza himſelfe farre from the ſame opinion; for 2. part. reſp. ad acta Colloq. Montisbel. p. 103. he denieth, that elected infants need any renouation. Faber alſo and Eraſmus, whome Proteſtants challenge for theirs, do denie originall ſinne in Rom. 5.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that all haue ſinned in Adam, that all die in Adam, that by his diſobedience manie are made ſinners. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that originall ſinne, is no ſinne but a ſicknes; not truely a fault, but figuratiuely: not a guilte, not a blemish not a ſtaine, not faultie of it ſelfe, that it can not cauſe damnation; not ſuch a ſinne as hath fault, not a ſinne indeed, nor deſerueth the name of ſinne.

THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF SINNES.

The things which we hau • rehearſed in this chapter, do make manifeſt, that Proteſtants teach of ſinnes quite contrarie to holie Scripture. For the Scripture (and Catholiks with it) teacheth, that ſinnes are imputed to the faithfull: that they are mortall to them as well as to others: that they ought to be ouercomen of the faithfull: that whoſoeuer ſerue ſinne, ſerue not God: that great ſinnes putte out grace, nor can ſtād with iuſtice: that they are to be redeemed with good workes: that to abſtaine from them, is neceſſarie to ſaluation: that they are the cauſe why men are damned: that we muſt giue an account of them: that they are committed of the elect and that with full conſent: that vſurie is a ſinne, and that originall ſinne is a true ſinne. All which Proteſtants do denie.

They make alſo manifeſt, that Proteſtants play the What Proteſt take from ſinnes. theiues towards ſinnes alſo, and ſteale from them no leſſe then from good things, but that they ſteale from ſinne other kind of qualities and for an other end. For from God, from Chriſt, from Saintes, from the Church, from Sacraments, from good workes and other godlie and holie things they ſteale that which is good, vertuous, and worthie of praiſe and honour, that thereby they may not ſeeme ſo worthie to be loued and eſteemed of men: But from ſinnes they ſteale malice, all power of hurting the faithfull, in ſaying they are not imputed to them, caſt not them out of Gods grace, and ſuch like now rehearſed, to the end that they should not ſeeme ſo horrible and ſo much to be auoided of the faithfull: And thereby they shew themſelues to be freinds of ſinne, and precurſors of him who is termed: The man of ſinne. And thus much of 2. Theſſal. 2. Sinnes: Now of Iuſtification from them.

CHAPTER XVI. OF IVSTIFICATION.

ART. I. WHETHER IVSTIFICATION be of workes?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

IAMES 2. v. 21. Abraham our father was he not Abraham iuſtified by workes. Man. Rahab. iustified by workes? verſ. 24. Do you ſee, that by workes a man is iuſtified? Et v. 25. Rahab the harlot was not she iuſtified by workes?

Luc. 7. v. 47. Manie ſinnes are forgiuen her, becauſe she hath loued much.

Act. 3. verſ. 19. Be penitent therefore and conuert, that your ſinnes may be putte out.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Rom. 4. v. 2. Abrahams workes had glorie euen before God, and he was iuſtified of then as S. Iames doth most expreſſely affirme.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Apologia Confeſſ. Auguſtanae c. de Iuſtif. Reconciliation Reconciliation, not by workes. is not receaued by workes. c. de Implet. legis: If anie thinke, that he obtaineth remiſsion of ſinnes becauſe he loueth, he dishonoureth Chriſt. c. de votis: It is an impious opinion, that we obtaine remiſsion of ſinnes for our workes.

Confeſſio Bohemica art. 7. Good workes are to be done, not Iuſtification not by workes. that we thinke that we obtaine remiſsion of ſinnes for them. Gallica artic. 22. We are not iuſtified by workes. Belgica artic. 24. Good workes are of no moment at all for to iuſtifie vs. Argentinenſis Workes helpe not to iuſtification. cap. 3. Good workes helpe nothing for to make vs iuſt of vniuſt. Heluetica cap. 15. We receaue this iuſtification not by any workes.

Whitaker ad Ration. 8. Campiani. In iuſtifying vs, God maketh no reckoning of our workes. For the iuſt liueth not of workes.

Perkins in Serie Cauſarum cap. 51. To be iuſtified by good Abraham, not iuſtified by workes. workes, is both falſe and ridiculous. In Gal. 3. Abraham was not iuſtified by his good workes. In c. 4. That doctrine, which dreameth of Iuſtification by workes, bringeth in idolatrie. Et in c. 5. it ouerturneth the foundation of religion.

Luther de libertate tom. 2. fol. 4. A ſoule is iuſtified by no workes. In Gal. 1. to. 5. Sinne is taken away by no workes. In c. 3. Abraham was iuſtified by no other thing at all but faith. Epiſt. Abrahā not iuſtified by workes. ad Liuones to. 7. All doctrine of iustifying and ſauing vs by workes, is impious, diuelish, and high blaſphemie againſt God. Et to. 1. fol. 393. We must firmely beleiue against the Diuel, that the woman was ſaued by onely faith before she loued.

Caluin 3. Inſtit. c. 11. §. 6. In iuſtification there is no place for workes. c. 14. §. 5. Workes helpe nothing to iuſtifie vs. cap. 16. §. 1. Men are not iuſtified by workes. We ſay, they are not iuſtified by workes. In Gal. 2. v. 15. We cannot be iustified by workes.

Beza in Confeſſ. cap. 4. ſect. 17. How can we be iuſtified by Workes do not iuſtifie. workes? l. Quaeſt. p. 689. Good workes do not iuſtifie.

Peter Martyr in locis claſſe 3. c. 4. §. 8. Iuſtification is not had of workes.

Bullinger de Iuſtif. fidei Serm. 6. Abraham was not iuſtified by his workes.

Aretius in locis part. 2. f. 78. We are not iuſtified of workes.

Zanchius in Confeſſ. c. 21. art. 4. We conſtantly confeſſe, that a man is not iuſtified of workes. Man is not iuſtified by workes.

Polanus in Diſp. priuat. perio do 1. diſput. 36. Not becauſe the woman loued much, therefore her ſinnes were remitted her.

Pareus in Gal. 2. lect. 24. The Apoſtle denieth, that workes ether alone or with faith do iuſtifie.

Rogers artic. 11. Workes haue no place or portion in the Workes with faith do not iuſtifie. matter of our iuſtification.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Abraham was iuſtified by workes, that Rahab was iuſtified by workes: that the womans ſinnes were forgiuen becauſe she loued: that men muſt repent for to haue their ſinnes forgiuen. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that Abrahā was iuſtified by workes, by nothing els at all but by faith, that the womās ſinnes were not forgiuen becauſe she loued; that ſinne is not taken away by any workes that we are not iuſtified by any workes, that workes haue no place, are of no moment, or reckoning in iuſtification: that it is impious, diuelish, ridiculous, and moſt blaſphemous againſt God, to dreame of Iuſtification by workes.

ART. II. WHETHER IVSTIFICATION be by faith onely?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Iames 2. v. 24. Do you ſee, that by workes a man is iuſtified, Iuſtification, not by faith alone. and not by faith onely.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Councel of Trent Seſſion. 6. can. 9. If anie shall ſay, that the impious is iuſtified by faith alone, ſo as he vnderſtandeth, that nothing els is required to cooperate to the grace of iuſtification, and that it is no way neceſſarie that he be prepared and dispoſed by motion of his owne will, be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Confeſſio Saxonica c. de Remiſſ. Peccat. Wittenbergica c. de Iuſtif. Articuli Smalcaldici part. 2. c. 1. liber Concordiae c. 3. Confeſſio Anglica art. 11. Heluetica cap. 15. Belgica art. By onely faith. 22. Bohemica art. 6. teach in expreſſe termes, that we are iuſtified by onelie faith. And the ſame in other words teach Confeſſio Auguſtana. c. de fide. Argentinenſis c. 3. & Gallica art. 20.

Apologia Confeſſ. Auguſtanae c. de Iuſtif. We are iuſtified By faith alone. by faith alone, if by iuſtification we meane, to be iuſt of vniuſt, or to be regenerated. Againe: Faith alone doth iuſtifie, alone maketh iuſt of vniuſt. By faith onely we receaue remiſsion for Chriſt. Et c. de Reſp. ad Argumenta. Remiſsion of ſinnes and Onely by faith. iuſtification is receaued onely by faith. Theſe things we obtaine onely by faith.

Luther de libertate to. 2. fol. 4. A ſoule is iuſtified by faith By nothing els. alone. In Gal. 2. to. 5. Faith iuſtifieth, and nothing els.

Vrbanus Regius in Catacheſi fol. 136. We are Iuſtified by faith onely.

Schuſſelburg. l. 1. Theol. Caluin art. 15. Paul teacheth, that By faith alone. a man is iuſtified by faith onely, by faith alone.

Zuinglius ad Matthaeum Rutling. to. 2. f. 151. We are iuſtified by faith alone.

Caluin in Galat. 2. v. 16. We are iuſtified by faith alone.

Beza in Rom. 3 verſ. 20. What was the Apoſtles intent? To teach, that no man is iustified by anie other means then by faith. We are iustified by onely faith.

Peter Martyr in 1. Cor. 1. It belongeth to faith onely, that we be iustified by it.

Whitaker ad Ration. 1. Campiani: That is our doctrine moſt true and moſt holie: That a man is iuſtified by faith alone.

Perkins in Catecheſi tom. 1. col. 487. How canſt thou be Onely by faith. made partaker of Chriſt and of all his benefits, and fruitfully enioye them? Onely by faith.

Rogers artic. 11. Onely by faith we are accounted righteous before God.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that a man is not iuſtified by faith onely. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that a man is iuſtified by faith onely, by faith alone, and no other way then by faith: that nothing iuſtifieth but faith.

ART. III. WHETHER THE IVSTIFIED, be indeed, and in the ſight of God, iuſt?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Gen. 7. ver. 1. God thus ſpeaketh to Noë: I haue ſeene thee Noē iuſt in Gods ſight. iuſt in my ſight. c. 6. v. 9. Noë was a iuſt and perfect man.

Iob 32. v. 2. And Eliu was angrie and tooke indignation and he was angrie againſt Iob, for that he ſaied himſelfe to be iuſt before God.

Luc. 1. v. 6. And they were both iuſt before God. Iust before God.

1. Cor. 5. v. 21. Him that knew no ſinne, for vs he made ſinne: that we might be made the iuſtice of God in him.

Epheſ. 1. ver. 4. He choſe vs in him before the conſtitution of Holie in Gods ſight. the world, that we should be holie and immaculate in his ſight in charitie.

1. Ioan. 3. verſ. 7. He that doth iuſtice is iuſt: euen as he alſo is iuſt.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſion. 6. cap. 7. Being indued with iuſtice of God, we are not onely reputed, but alſo are named and are iuſt.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Illyricus in Math. 20. v. 12. Surely ſo it is in religion and before None is iuſt before God. God, and eſpecially in the kingdome of Grace, where all depende of free mercie, and none is iuſt. Et in Praef. partis 2. Clauis, ſaieth that Papiſt take, to iuſtifie, amiſſe, of reall, and not of imputatiue iuſtice.

Reineccius to. 4. Armaturae cap. 15. Nether doth God looke vpon vs but in his Sonne; whereupon it cometh to paſſe, that we we ſeeme quite others then we are. As looking through glaſſe We ſeeme to God others then we are. which is greene, yellow, or of ſome other colour, the things which me behould ſeeme to vs to be of the ſame colour of which the glaſſe is, through which we ſee: So to God (I ſpeake humanely for the weakneſſe of the flesh) beholding and conſidering vs in his Sonne, we ſeeme to be of his colour, and shyning with his iuſtice and innocencie: And thereby he ſeing and touching vs, thinketh that he toucheth his owne naturall Sonne, as Iſaac ſpeaking to Iacob his yonger Sonne, thought he ſpoake to Eſau his elder ſonne. And the ſame example of a great glaſſe or ſpectacles vſeth Zanchius l. 2. de Natura Dei. c. 2.

Hunnius de Iuſtif. p. 19. reiecteth it as Popish doctrine, that by iuſtification, a man is made indeed iuſt.

Zuinglius in Luc. 1. to. 4. Before God none can be iuſt. None iuſt before God. Not iuſt, but held iuſt. Not iuſt indeed.

Caluin 3. Inſtit. c. 19. §. 2. It is not inquired there (in Iuſtification) how we be iuſt; but how, (though vniust and vnworthie) we may be held for iuſt. c. 11. §. 11. Let him graunt, that they are counted iust, who are not indeed. Againe: He is iuſt, not indeed, but by imputation. In Math. 12. v. 37. The Papiſts thinke it abſurd, that we ſay a man is iuſtified by faith, becauſe they expound it to be made and be iuſt indeed: But we meane, to be accounted iust and to be abſolued in the iudgment of God. In Luc. 18. v. 19. This place plainely telleth, what is properly to be iustified, As if we were iuſt. to wit, to ſtand before God as if we were iuſt. In Rom. 3. ver. 25. I haue already eftſones admonished, that men are not iuſtified, becauſe they be ſuch indeed, but by imputation. In 2. Cor. 5. v. 21. How are we iust before God? foreſooth as Chriſt is a ſinner. In Antidoto Concil. ſeſſ. 6. c. 8. They (of Trent) affirme, that we Not truely iuſt. are truely iuſt and not onely reputed. De Caena p. 2. Let vs be aſſured, that we, though we be wicked and vncleane, neuertheleſſe, are acknowledged and receaued of the Lord and alſo helde for iuſt. Et Concione 158. in Iob. Where shall any ſuch (iuſt) be found None iuſt. amongſt men?

Beza in Math. 12. v. 37. Paul teſtifieth that we, being not in Not in our ſelues iuſt but accounted ſo. our ſelues iuſt, yet are iuſtified in Chriſt apprehended by faith, that is, accounted for iuſt, and ſo abſolued.

Pereus l 1. de Amiſſ. Grat. c. 6. It is more ſure to ſay, that they (Zacharias and Elizabeth) were iust and faultleſſe before God and men, not abſolutely, but by imputation of iuſtice. Of the ſame opinion are all others who ſay, that for God to iuſtifie men, is not to make them iuſt, but onely to declare or pronounce them ſuch.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Noë was iuſt before God, Iob iuſt before God: Zacharias and Elizabeth iuſt before God: that God choſe vs for to be iuſt in his ſight: that he made Chriſt ſinne for to make vs the iuſtice of God: and that who doeth iuſtice is iuſt, euen as God alſo is iuſt. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that none is iuſt: that in iuſtificatiō it is not enquired how we are iuſt, but how we are helde for iuſt: that to be iuſtified, is not to be iuſt: that the iuſtified are not indeed iuſt, not truely iuſt, but ſo reputed: that before God they are no otherwiſe iuſt then Chriſt was a ſinner: that we appeare quite others to God, then we are: that God looking vpon vs and touching vs, taketh vs for his owne Sonne, as Iſaac tooke Iacob, for Eſau.

ART. IV. WHETHER THE IVSTIFIED be cleane?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Ezech. 36. v 25. And I will powre vpon you cleane water, and The iuſtified, be cleanſed. you shalbe clenſed from all your contaminations.

Ioan. 13. v. 10. And you are cleane. c. 15. v. 3. Now you are cleane Are cleane. for the word which I haue ſpoaken to you.

1. Cor. 6. ver. 11. And theſe things certes you were, but you are washed, you are ſanctified.

Epheſ. 1. v. 4. He choſe vs in him that we should be holie and Immaculate. immaculate in his ſight in charitie.

Tit. 2. verſ. 14. Who gaue himſelfe for vs, that he might redeeme vs from all iniquitie, and might cleanſe to himſelfe a people acceptable.

Hebr. 9. v. 14. How much more, shall the blood of Chriſt, who Cleanſed frō dead workes. by the Holie Ghoſt offered himſelfe vnſpotted vnto God, cleanſe our conſcience from dead workes?

1. Ioan. 1. v. 7. And the blood of Ieſus Chriſt his Sonne cleāſetb Cleāſed from all ſinne. vs from all ſinne.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 5. can. 5. There is no damnation to them who are truely buried with Chriſt by baptiſme to death, who walke not according to the flesh, but putting of the ould man and putting on the new which is created according to God, are made innocent, vnspotted, pure, harmeleſſe and beloued of God.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

French Confeſſion art. 11. Euen they who excell in holineſſe Defiled with manie ſinnes. are defiled with manie ſinnes, as long as they liue in this world.

Luther in Confutat. Latomi to. 2. f. 218. The beleiuers are Vncleane. iuſt, and yet vncleane.

Zuinglius in Explanat. artic. 39. All men are vniuſt before Ʋniuſt. God.

Caluin 3. Inſtitut. cap. 15. § 5. Though we be vncleane, he is cleaneſſe to vs. In Rom. 4. v. 5. None shall come to the iuſtice of Impious. faith, but he that shalbe impious in himſelfe. In v. 20. He pronounceth Ouerwhelmed with ſinne. to hould vs for iuſt, and we are ouerwehlmed with ſinne. The like he hath in the places cited in the former article.

Beza in Rom. 4. v. 5. Who iuſtifieth the impious, that is, accounteth him iuſt in Chriſt who is himſelfe impious.

Iunius l. 4. de Eccleſ c. 11. The pious man, is in himſelfe vncleane Filthie. and filthie.

Scarpe de Iuſtif. Contr. 8. We are called iuſt for Chriſts iuſtice imputed to vs; and vniuſt, for inherent ſinne.

Pareus l. 4. de Iuſtif. c. 17. But if Christ haue now abſolutely cleanſed his Church and people, what followeth, but that the Romish Babylon is nether Church nor people of Chriſt? Of the ſame opiniō are they alſo who (as we shall ſee in the next article) teach that ſinnes remaine in the iuſtified.

And hereupon Proteſtants (albeit each of thē beleiueth as a point of faith, that he is iuſtified) profeſſe that they are Proteſtants confeſsion of their owne wickedneſſe. moſt wicked. For thus they ſay in the French Confeſſion art. 18. In our ſelues we are worthie of all hatred. Et in Confeſſ. Heluet. cap. 8. We are drowned in naughtie luſts, turned from good realie to all euill, full of all wickedneſſe, diſtruſt, contempt, and hatred of God. And in their French Common praiers: Readie to all wickedneſſe, vnprofitable to all good workes making no end of tranſgreſsing Gods commandments, and continually increaſing their damnation with impure and wicked life. Beza alſo in his Confeſſion cap. 4. ſect. 10. It is euident enough, that we are ouerwhelmed with infinit wickedneſſe. Et de Praedeſt. cont. Caſtel. p. 422. Our vices are great and manie. Caluin de Caena pag. 2. There is none of vs who can finde one crumme of iuſtice in himſelfe, but rather we are defiled with ſo manie vices and wickedneſſe, and full of ſuch a multitude of ſinnes, as &c. Whitaker l. 2. de Peccato orig. c. 3. ſaieth that they burne with hatred and contempt of God. Apologia Confeſſ. Auguſtanae c. de Peccato orig. ſaieth that their godlie men doubt of the anger of God, of the grace of God, of the word of God, are angred at the iudgment, of God, murmure at his deeds &c. Et Pareus l. 3. de Iuſtif. c. 8. addeth, that they paſſe neuer a day without manie a mortall ſinne. This verdict they giue of themſelues. Wherefore it is no meruail, that in their French Confeſſion art. 18. they ſay, that they caſt away all opinion of vertues and merits. And ſuch are they that are iuſtified after the Proteſtant faſhion, and to make vs ſuch, Chriſt (forſooth) was incarnated and ſuffered, and ſent the Holie Ghoſt into the world.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that the iuſtified are cleane, are washed, are cleanſed from all their filth, are cleanſed from dead workes, and from all ſinne, are vnſpotted. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that the iuſtified are not abſolutely cleanſed, are vncleane, impure, filthie, vniuſt, impious, defiled with manie ſinnes: and that thoſe who are iuſtified after the Proteſtant manner, are drowned in naughtie luſts, full of all wickedneſſe, worthie of all hatered, burne with hatred and contempt of God, doubt of Gods word &c. And if their iuſtified men be ſuch, what I pray you are the reſt?

ART. V. WHETHER IN THOSE THAT are iuſtified, remaine the ſinnes from which they are iuſtified?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Iſaie 44. v. 22. I haue cleane taken away thine iniquities as a Sinne taken cleane away. No iniquitie in Dauid. As for as the Eaſt from the weſt. cloude, and thy ſinnes as a miſt.

Pſal. 16. v. 3. By fire thou haſt examined me, and there is no iniquitie found in me. Pſalm. 102. v. 12. As farre as the Eaſt is from the Weſt, hath he made our iniquities farre from vs.

Ioan. 1. ver. 29. Behould the lambe of God, behould him that taketh away the ſinne of the world. 1. Ioan. 3. v. 5. And you know, Sinne taken away. that he appeared to take away our ſinnes.

Rom. 8. v. 1. There is now no damnation to them that are in Chriſt Ieſus.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 5. Con. 1. If anie denie, that by the grace of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt which is giuen in Baptiſme, the guilt of originall ſinne is remitted: or els ſaieth, that al that is not taken away which hath the true and proper nature of ſinne, but auoucheth, that that is onely shauen or not imputed; be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Confeſſio Saxonica c. 9. Let him confeſſe, that in the regenerate Manie great ſinnes in the iuſtified. there are yet manie ſinnes and great filthineſſe worthie of the wrath of God. The like hath the English Confeſſion art. 9. The French art. 11. The Flemish art. 15. The Scotish art. 15.

Whitaker l. 2. de Peccato orig. c. 3. If thou thinkeſt, that the regenerate can be without (mortall) ſinnes, thou thinkeſt againſt Scripture and true faith. l. 3. c. 3. How manie things there are in Manie things worthie of damnation. vs worthie of damnation, that ſpeech of the Apoſtle declareth, & he addeth that in the regenerate, ſinne doth liue, doth preuaile, and doth flourish.

Perkins de Baptiſmo to. 1. col. 835. Remiſsion taketh away Sinne not taken away but not imputed. ſinne, ſo as it is not imputed; not, that it is not.

Willet Contr. 12. q. 6. p. 577. The blot and ſtaine of ſinne remaineth ſtill. We are not void of ſinne.

Luther in Aſſert. art. 2. to 2. It is one thing, for all ſinnes Sinne reted, but not taken away. The iuſt are guiltie of mortall ſinne. to be remitted; an other, to be all taken away. Baptiſme remitteth all ſinnes, but taketh not quite away. De Ratione confitendi fol. 26. This is the moſt mortall of all mortall ſinnes, not to beleiue himſelfe to be guiltie of damnable and mortall ſinne before God. In Gal. 3. to. 5. Beleiuing, we are reputed iuſt, though ſinnes, and thoſe great ones, remayne in vs.

Liber Concordiae c. 3. When we teach, that by the working of the Holie Ghoſt we are regenerate and iustified, it muſt not be Iniuſtice in the regenerate. ſo taken, as if no iniuſtice at all did ſticke to the regenerate and iuſtified after regeneration.

Reineccius to. 4. Armaturae. c. 22. Sinnes are taken from Sinne not taken away but not imputed. vs, not that they are no more, but that they are not imputed, and condemne not.

Caluin in Ioan. 1. ver. 29. Abeit ſinne do euer more ſticke in vs, yet in the iudgment of God it is none. In Antidoto Concil. Truely abideth in vs. ſeſſ. 5. Truely ſinn abideth in vs.

Peter Martyr in Locis. Claſſe. 1. c. 14. When God is ſaied to Remiſsion taketh away onely the punishment. remit, to wipe out, to forgiue ſinnes, he maketh not that they be not, or haue not beene; but the obligation to beare the punishment for ſinne, is taken away.

Pareus l. 5. de Amiſſ. Grat. c. 7. Innumerable ſinnes, euen ſuch Innumerable ſinnes in the regenerate. as are worthie of death, remaine in the regenarate.

And herevpon they teach, that remiſſion, is nothing but a forgiueneſſe of the punishment.

Whitaker l. 3. de Peccato orig. cap. 3. Remiſsion doth pardon and forgiue the punishment, not take away or remoue actually To forgiue ſinnes is onely not to punish them. the fault.

Beza 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. 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. de fide, he defineth Faith, to be a ſure and ſetled knowledge of Gods fatherlie good will towards vs. The like he hath 3. Inſtit. c. 2. §. 16. & Beza in Confeſſ. c. 4. ſect. 5.

The ſixt article of Lambeth: A true faithfull man, that is, We are certaine by faith of iuſtice and ſaluation. indued with iuſtifying faith, is certaine by fulneſſe of faith of the remiſsion of his ſinnes, and his eternall ſaluation by Chriſt.

Peter Martyr in Rom. 6. We muſt be reſolued with ſtedfast faith, that God loueth vs, and hath receaued vs into grace by Chriſt.

Pareus l. 3. de Iuſtiſic. cap. 4. Without doubt it is moſt falſe in the faithfull, that none can be certaine with diuine faith of true conuerſion.

Willet Contr. 19. q. 2. pag. 1005. By a liuelie faith we may be aſſured that our ſinnes are forgiuen vs, and that we be fully iuſtified in Chriſt, reconciled to God, and are remaining in the state of grace.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that a man, knoweth not whether he be worthie of loue or hatred: that he knoweth not whether he be ſimple: that none knoweth his hart: and biddeth vs not to be without feare of the forgiueneſſe of our ſinnes. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that a man muſt firmely beleiue that he is a Saint, that his ſinnes are forgiuen; that a man may know with diuine faith that his ſinnes are forgiuen: that he beleiueth not the Ghoſpell vnleſſe he beleiue this, that he is no faithfull man except he beleiue ſo: that they are as certaine that their ſinnes are forgiuen, as if Chriſt himſelfe in preſence had ſaied ſo to them: that this kind of beleife is iuſtifying faith.

ART. XI. WHETHER PENNANCE GO before Iuſtification?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Actes 3. v. 19. Be penitent therefore, and conuert, that your Pennance before forgiueneſſe. ſinnes may be putte out. c. 2. v. 38. Do pennance, and be euerie one of you baptized in the name of Ieſus Christ for remiſsion of your ſinnes. cap. 8. v. 22. Do pennance from this thy wickedneſſe, and pray to God, if perhaps this cogitation of thy hart may be remitted thee.

2. Cor. 7. v. 10. The ſorrow that is according to God worketh pennance vnto ſaluation that is ſtable. Likewiſe the prodigall ſonne repented before he was receaued into grace of his father, and likewiſe S. Marie Magdalen, before her ſinnes were forgiuen.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Marci 1. v. 15. Pennance alwaies goeth before regeneration and remiſsion of ſinnes.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins in Apoc. 2. tom. 2. col. 114. Regeneration goeth before, Repentance followeth iuſtification. and repentance followeth as the fruit thereof.

Willet Contr. 14. q. 4. pag. 721. Faith is firſt, whereby we are iuſtified and our ſinnes remitted before God, then followeth repentance.

Caluin in 3. Inſtit. c. 3. §. 2. We will proue, that a man cannot ſeriouſly repent, vnleſſe he know that he is Gods, but none is truely perſwaded that he is Gods, vnleſſe he haue firſt apprehēded his grace. §. 1. It ought to be out of doubt, that pennance doth not onely follow faith (ſpeciall of the remiſſion of our ſinnes) but alſo that it riſeth of it. The ſame hath Beza in Abſters. calumniarum He • huſij p. 328.

Pareus l. 1. de Iuſtif. c. 20. The workes of pennance and loue Later then iuſtification. are by nature later then faith and iuſtification, as the effects of free iuſtification. Et c. 24. We haue after proued, that pennance and workes are by nature later then iuſtification. The like hath Apologia Confeſſ. Auguſtanae c. de Dilectione &c. de Iuſtificatione.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely commandeth to doe pennance for to obtaine remiſſion of ſinnes, and to haue ſinnes putte out: and ſaieth that ſorrow according to God worketh pennance to ſaluation. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants ſay, that none ſeriouſly repent but they who know they haue already obtained remiſſion of ſinnes: that pennance is the effect of iuſtification and by nature later then it.

ART. XII. WHETHER IVSTIFICATION be euer loſt, or can be loſt?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Math. 12. v. 43. When an vncleane ſpirit shall goe out of a The Diuel goeth out and returneth againe. man, he walketh through drie places, ſeeking reſt and findeth not. Then he ſaieth I will returne into my houſe whence I came out-and taketh with him ſeuen other ſpirits more wicked then himſelfe, and they entring in, dwell there; and the laſt of that man be made worſe then the firſt.

Math. 24. v. 12. And becauſe iniquitie shall abound, the charitie Charitie of ſome waxeth could. of manie shall wax could.

Ioan 15. ver. 6. If anie abide not in me, he shalbe caſt forth as the branche and shall wither, and they shall gather him vp and caſt him into the fier, and he burneth.

Rom. 11. ver. 22. See then the goodneſſe and ſeueritie of God; vpon them ſurely that are fallen, the ſeueritie: but vpon thee, the Some cutte of goodneſſe of God, if thou abide in his goodneſſe, otherwiſe thou shalt alſo be cutte of.

Gal. 5. v. 4. You are fallen from grace. Fallen from grace.

Hebr. 10. verſ. 9. How much more thinke you doth he deſerue worſe punishment, who hath troden the Sonne of God vnder foote, and eſteemed the blood as the teſtament polluted, wherein he is ſanctified.

Apoc. 2. v. 5. Be myndfull from whence thou art fallen, and do pennance.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 6. Can. 23. If anie shall ſay, that a man once iuſtified, can ſinne no more nor leeſe grace, be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Bucer apud Zanchium l. de Perſeuerantia to. 7. col. 172. Nothing is more profitable, then to preach, that is impoſsible for Impoſsible to fall from grace. None fall frō grace. Nor from remiſsion. thoſe that beleiue, euer to fall from grace.

The Academie of Heidelberg. ib. 70. The elect once receaued into grace, neuer afterward fall from it.

Zanchius himſelfe in Summa Praelect. ib. col. 274. If anie shall ſay, that remiſsion of ſinnes once obtained is in Saints made void by falls afterward, he ouerthroweth the whole ſcope of the Ghoſpell.

Caluin 3. Inſtitut. cap. 2. §. 11. The ſeed of life engrafted in the hartes of the elect neuer perisheth. l. 1. c. 14. §. 18. I denie, that the The faithfull neuer ouercomen. faithfull can euer be ouercome of Sathan.

In Ezechielis 18. v. 24. Dauid is found to be a perfidious murderer, a betraier of the armie of God, and briefly there is a huge multitude of ſinnes in that pore King, and it ſeemeth that Gods Grace neuer extinct in Dauid. grace was ſtifled in him, but not quite extinct.

Beza in 2. part. reſponſ. ad Acta Colloq. Montisbel. p. 87. The Holie Ghoſt neuer departed wholie or could departe from him who once hath had the feeling of true faith.

Polanus in Diſput. priuatis diſput. 16. The regenerate can neuer wholy leeſe faith and the grace of God.

Piſcator in Theſibus l. 2. p. 253. The faithfull neuer fall from the grace of God.

Contra remonſtrantes in Collat. Hagae p. 351. The elect neuer falleth from grace.

Rainolds theſ. 2. p. 77. It is cleare, that the iuſtified ſonnes of God by faith are often times beaten with the ſtrokes of tentation, but neuer killed.

Abbots in Diatribam Thomſoni c. 5. ſaieth, that thoſe whereof S. Mathew ſpeaketh cap. 24. cit. had neuer true charitie.

Perkins de Deſertione col. 1026. This principle is to be Who is once in grace euer continueth ſo. helde: Who is once in ſtate of grace, shall euer more continew in it.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that there are men from whome the Diuel departeth and returneth againe whoſe charitie waxeth could: that ſome fall from grace: that there are ſome branches in Chriſt which abide not in him: that ſome are ſanctified by the blood of Chriſt who afterward tread it vnder foote. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that a man once receaued into grace neuer falleth from it: that the ſeed of life once ingrafted in a faithfull hart neuer perisheth: that faithfull men are neuer ouercomen of Sathan: that it is impoſſible for beleiuers to fall from grace: that remiſſion cannot be made void by falls afterward: that there was neuer true charitie in them in whome it waxeth could. Which are ſo contrarie to Scripture, as manie Proteſtants confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. XIII. WHETHER THE IVSTIFIED man may feare to fall?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Rom. 11. ver. 20. But thou by faith doeſt ſtand: Be not highly Feare. wiſe, but feare.

1. Cor. 10. v. 21. He that thinketh himſelfe to ſtand, lete him Take heed. take heed, lest he fall.

Philippenſ. 2. ver. 12. With feare and trembling worke your Worke with feare. ſaluation.

Hebr. 4. v. 1. Let vs feare, leſt perhaps forſaking the promiſe of entring into his reſt, ſome of you be thought to be wanting.

Prou. 28. v. 14. Bleſſed is the man who is alwaies fearefull. The fearfull, bleſſed.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 6. c. 3. Who thinke, that they ſtand, let them beware leſt they fall, and let them worke their ſaluation with feare and trembling. cap. 9. Euerie one whilest he looketh vpon himſelfe and his owne indiſpoſition, may feare of his grace.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins in Conflictu Satanae to. 1. col. 1035. I account my As certaine of ſaluation as &c. ſelfe as certaine of ſaluation, as if my name were expreſſely writtē in the holie Scripture.

Tindal in Fox his Actes pag. 1137. Nether canſt thou be We cannot be damned vnleſſe Chriſt be. Chriſt muſt be damned before we be. As ſure of our ſaluation as of the Ghoſpell. Free from all feare. damned except Chriſt be damned with thee: nether can Chriſt be ſaued, except thou be ſaued with him.

Luther Poſtilla in die Natiuit fol. 52. He (Chriſt) muſt be damned, before he can be damned, for whome he hath giuen himſelfe.

Affelman l. de Praedeſt. §. 80. Euerie true Chriſtian ought to be as certaine of his ſaluation, as he muſt beleiue the Ghoſpell.

Caluin in 1. Luc. v. 73. Seing God doth reconcile men to himſelfe in Chriſt; ſeing he defendeth them with his ſafegard that they be free from all feare &c. In Ioan. 3. v. 18. Chriſt will haue the faithfull to be ſecure from feare of damnation. In Antidoto Concil. Seſſ. 6. cap. 14. That is not to ſuffered, when they exhort We muſt not feare. As ſure of heauen as Chriſt. vs to feare. Et 4. Inſtit. c. 17. §. 2. We dare bouldly auouch, that euerlaſting life is ours, and that we can no more miſſe of heauen, that Chriſt himſelfe. The like hath Conradus Fabritius apud Zuinglium to. 2. f. 28.

Beza in Luc. 1. verſ. 74. Feare in this place ſignifieth dread of future euill, which is directly contrarie to the truſt of the ſonnes of God. In Cōfeſſ. c. 4. art. 13. Let euerie one of vs thus diſcourſe We cannot perish. with himſelfe: I am in Chriſt Ieſus, and therefore I cannot perish. And in Explicat. Chriſtianiſmi c. 8. p. 200. he ſaieth, that a man may be as certaine of his ſaluatiō, as if he had climbed to heauen, and had heard it out of Gods owne mouth.

Peter Martyr in c. 11. Rom. Nether ought anie to meruaile, that we ſay, that faith expelleth that feare which is ioyned with doubt of ſaluation. Et in locis claſſe 3. c. 3. Who ſincerly beleiue Feare not to be damned. in Chriſt, do not feare to be damned for euer.

Cōtra—Remonſtrantes in Collat. Hagae p. 374. Who haue Haue no cauſe to feare. once beleiued, are certaine, that this is Gods guift; and therefore haue no cauſe to feare to be damned.

Pareus l 3. de Iuſtif. c. 2. How do they make a man ſecure, if All feare expelled. they expell not all feare—But we do thus teach: that a ſinner if he looke vpon the promiſe and mercie of God, may and ought not to feare but ſurely truſt, and that vnleſſe he do ſo, he maketh God a lier.

Bucer apud Zanchium lib. 2. de Natura Dei c. 2. The firſt thing which thou oweſt to God, is to beleiue that thou arte predeſtinated A principle of Proteſt. faith. of him. We muſt therefore preſume as a principle of faith, that we are all elected of God to this end to be ſaued for euer, and that this purpoſe of God cannot be changed.

Zanchius l. 5. de Natura Dei c. 2. to. 2. col. 497. Euerie one is bound to beleiue that he is choſen and predestinate in Chriſt to The reprobates are bound to beleiue that they shalbe ſaued. eternall ſaluation. When we ſay, Euerie one is bound to beleiue this, we except none, no not the reprobates, who shall nether euer beleiue, nor yet can beleiue in Chriſt. The like of the reprobates teacheth Perkins in Caſibus Conſcientiae cap. 7. col. 1329.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely biddeth the iuſtified to feare, to take heed leſt he fall; to worke our ſaluation with feare: to feare leſt anie of vs proue reprobate: and ſayeth that he is happie who is alwaies fearefull. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely bidde the iuſtified to be ſecure from all feare, from feare of damnation: that it is not to be ſuffered, that men be exhorted to feare: and bidde men be perſwaded, that they cannot perish, that they haue no cauſe to feare, that they dare aſſure themſelues of heauen as much as Chriſt himſelfe: that they are as ſure of ſaluation, as if their names were written in Scripture, or they heard it out of Gods mouth: that they cannot be damned vnleſſe Chriſt be damned: And adde, that euerie one, euen the reprobates, are bound to beleiue this, and that this a principle of their faith.

ART. XIV. WHETHER IVSTIFICATION be proper to the Elect.

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Ezech. 18. ver. 24. But if the iuſt man shall turne away himſelfe Some reprobates iuſtified. from his iuſtice, and do iniquitie according to all the abhominations which the impious vſeth to worke, shall he liue? All his iustices which he had done shall not be remembred, in the preuarication which he hath preuaricated, and in his ſinne which he hath ſinned, in them he shall die.

Math. 24. v. 12. And becauſe inquitie shall abound, the charitie Charitie in ſome in whome it waxeth could. of manie shall wax could.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Councel of Trent. Seſſ. 6. Can. 17. If anie shall ſay, that the grace of iuſtification, is giuen onely to the predeſtinate to life: be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 1. cap. 8. Saints indeed none are, but None ſanctified but the predeſtinate. thoſe who are predeſtinate. The onely predeſtinate are indued with the spirit of ſanctification.

Perkins de Deſert. to. 1. col. 1026. God beſtoweth his ſpirit No reprobate is regenerate. vpon the reprobate, but not ſo farre as his nature is regenerated or renewed. And Some apud ipſum col. 209. Remiſsiō of ſinnes pertaineth to the elect alone.

Caluin de Praedeſt. p. 695. He iuſtifieth none, but whome he None iuſtified but the predeſtinate. hath ordained to life. P. 713. It is certaine, that the reprobates are neuer indued with the spirit of adoption. In Antidoto Concil. ſeſſ. 6. Can. 17. Whoſoeuer is ignorant that the spirit of regeneration is not giuen but to the elect alone: I know not what he knoweth in the Scripture.

Beza l. quaeſt. vol. 1. p. 687. The elect alone repent and doe good The elect repent. workes.

Abbots in Diatribam Tomſoni cap. 5. There is nothing in reprobates borne of God: No reprobate is iuſtified. No reprobate iuſtified.

Rainolds Theſi 4. God iuſtifieth the elect alone.

Pareus l. 1. de Grat. & lib. arbit. c. 16. Albeit the reprobates ſeeme ſometimes to be conuerted, yet inwardly they are neuer regenerate.

Vrbanus Regius in locis tom. 1. fol. 307. The reprobates shall neuer haue grace which maketh gratefull, nor true faith and charitie.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that a iuſt man may turne himſelfe from iuſtice and die in ſinne: and that the charitie of manie shall waxe could. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that the predeſtinate are iuſtified, onely the elect regenerated: onely the predeſtinate are Saintes: that the reprobates are neuer adopted, neuer truely iuſtified, neuer regenerated, onely ſeeme to be cō uerted: and that there is nothing borne of God in them.

ART. XV. WHETHER A SINNER COOperate or prepare himſelfe to iuſtification?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Prou. 16. v. 1. It pertaineth to a man to prepare the hart.

Ezec. 18. v. 27. And when the impious shall turne away himſelfe Man muſt prepare his hart. He doth quicken his ſoule. Cleanſeth himſelfe. Sanctifieth himſelfe. from his impietie, he shall vinificate his ſoule. v. 31. Make to your ſelues a new hart and a new ſpirit.

2. Tim. 2. verſ. 21. If anie man therefore shall clenſe himſelfe from theſe, he shalbe a veſſell vnto honour.

1. Ioan. 3. v. 3. And euerie one that hath this hope in him ſanctifieth himſelfe.

Iames 4. v. 8. Clenſe your hands yee ſinners, and purifie your hartes, ye double of mynd.

2. Cor. 7. v. 1. Let vs clenſe our ſelues from all inquination.

1. Reg. 7. v. 3. Prepare your hartes to our Lord, and ſerue him Prepareth his hart. onely.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 6. Can. 4. If anie shall ſay, that mans free will moued and ſtirred of God, doth by aſſenting cooperate nothing with God mouing and ſtirring, whereby he may prepare and diſpoſe himſelfe to obtaine the grace of iuſtification; nor can diſſent though he would, but like to a thing without life doth nothing at all, and hath it ſelfe merly paſsiuely, be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker l. 2. de Peccato orig. c. 3. In our verie conuerſion In our conuerſion we are mere paſsiue. to God which is done by grace, our free will hath not in it ſelfe anie power, but in this matter we haue our ſelues wholy paſſiuely.

Perkins in Apoc. 3. Hence I gather, that the Papiſts doate, We diſpoſe not our ſelues to iuſtificatiō. in ſaying, that in regeneration man hath free will and the vſe thereof, and that he can diſpoſe himſelfe to iuſtification.

Luther deſeruo arb. to. 2. f. 454. In the verie renewing and We are mere paſsiue and doe nothing. change of the ould man, who is the ſonne of the Diuel, into a new man, who is the ſonne of God, a man hath himſelfe merely paſsiuely, nether doth any thing, but is wholy done. In Pſal. 5. to. 3. It is an errour, that free will hath anie actiuitie in good workes, when we ſpeake of an internall worke. What actiuitie hath claye when We haue no actiuitie. the potter giueth it a forme?

Poſtilla in die Natiuit. fol. 62. No other waies then if God No more then a dead tree. change a drie poſte into a new greene and florishing tree: ſo doth Gods grace renewe a man.

Liber Concordiae c. de lib. arbit. The conuerſion of our depraued No more then a dead man. will is the worke of God alone, as the raiſing of the dead in the reſurrection is to be attributed to God alone.

Schluſſelburg. tom. 5. Catal. Haer et. p. 44. Is it well ſaied, No more then a blocke. that a man is like a blocke in his conuerſion? Well.

Mansfeldenſes apud eundem p. 474. The true and plaine ſentence of this question, and as it were the true propoſition of all the matter, which Scripture and with it and out of it Luther ſetteth downe, is this: That a man in his cōuerſion hath himſelfe merely paſsiuely, and by his ſtrength cooperateth nothing at all to Gods grace.

Yea ſome Lutherans not content to denie, that a man cooperateth to his cōuerſion, and to ſay that he behaueth himſelfe merly paſſiuely like to a blocke, adde alſo, that he reſiſteth and repugneth to his conuerſion.

Praetorius apud Schluſſelburg. tom. cit. pag. 532. Flanius Man is conuerted againſt his will. ſaieth: A man in his conuerſion is like a blocke doing nothing of himſelfe, yea reſiſting and like an enemie ſtriuing againſt God. What do you diſlike in this doctrine of Luther and Illyricus?

Geſnerus in Compendio doctrinae caeleſtis. loco 12. It followeth, that a man in his conuerſion doth not onely cooperate nothing, but alſo reſiſteth the Holie Ghoſt.

Piſcator apud Vorſtium in Paraſceue ad Collat. c. 8. God worketh faith and conuerſion in men, whomſoeuer he conuerteth they not onely being impious, but alſo actually rebelling, and continewing in the act of rebellion. Thus they.

Caluin 2. Inſtit. c. 3. §. 7. But there be ſome, who will graunt Man hath no parte in his conuerſion. that the will of it ſelfe turned from good, is conuerted by the onely power of God, yet ſo as it being prepared hath ſome parte in working. But this is wrongly giuen to man, that he obeyeth preuenting grace with an attending will. Et ib. §. 10. It is falſe, that men are drawne willingly. Which alſo he hath in Ioa. 6. v. 44. In Actor 9. v. 5. The Papists attribute the praiſe of our conuerſion He doth not cooperate. to Gods grace, but in parte onely, becauſe they imagin that we cooperate.

Beza in Confeſſ. cap. 4. ſect. 17. There can be no concurſe of Doth not concurre: grace and free will, when the Spirit of God by his mere grace freeth vs from ſinne.

Pareus l. 6. de Grat. & lib. arbit. c. 9. God taketh away the ill will, and maketh a good. In this the Scripture attributeth no operation to the will but mere paſsion.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely teacheth, that a man muſt prepare his ſoule, prepare his hart: turne himſelfe from iniquitie, make a new hart, cleanſe and ſanctifie himſelfe. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely teach, that a man doth not cooperate, not concurre, hath no parte in working, is merly & and purely paſſiue in his conuerſion, is like a block: that the conuerſion of a ſinner is the worke of God alone as the raiſing of the dead: yea that a man in his conuerſion actually reſiſteth and rebelleth againſt God.

ART. XVI. WHETHER AFTER IVSTIFIcation there remayne at anie time any temporall punishment due?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

2. Reg. 12. verſ. 14. Nathan ſaied to Dauid: Our Lord hath Dauid punished after he was forgiuen. taken away thy ſinne, thou shalt not die. Neuertheleſſe becauſe thou haſt made the enemies of our Lord to blaſpheme; for this thing the ſonne that is borne to the dying shall die.

Numbers 20. v. 12. And our Lord ſaied to Moiſes and Aaron: Alſo Moiſes and Aaron. Becauſe you haue not beleiued me to ſanctifie before the children of Iſrael, you shall not bring in the peoples into the lād which I will giue them. Et Gen. 3. v. 17. Punishment is impoſed vpō Adam becauſe he had eaten of the forbidden aple, and yet it is not doubted but his ſinne was forgiuen him.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 14. c. 8. The Councel declareth that it is altogether falſe and contrarie to the word of God, that the fault is neuer remitted of God, but that all the punishment alſo is pardoned.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Caluin in Luc. 21. v. 43. Away with that naughtie deuiſe, of No punishment after forgiueneſſe. the retaining of punishment when the fault is remitted. In Rom. 4. v. 6. The Scholaſtiks do fable, that the fault being remitted, punishment is retained of God.

Beza in Math. 6. v. 12. It is not onely falſe, but alſo a fond and foolish opinion of the Sophiſters, who thinke that punishmēt being retained, the fault is remitted.

Daneus Contr. 6. p. 1204. It is an errour that the fault being remitted, any punishment is retained.

Bullinger de Iuſtific. Serm. 6. What I pray you had Chriſt Anie temporall punishment cōtrarie to Chriſts ſuffrances. profited vs, if yet punishment (temporall) were exacted of vs for ſinnes?

Spalatenſis l. cont. Suarem c. 2. The fault is neuer remitted, but the whole punishment is with all pardoned.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that Dauid was punished with the death of his ſonne euen after his ſinne was remitted: The like it ſaieth of Moyſes, Aaron, and Adam. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that it is falſe foolish and erroneous, to thinke that the fault being remitted anie temporall punishment is retained: that Chriſt had profited vs nothing if anie temporall punishment were exacted of vs for ſinne. Which is ſo coūtrarie to Scripture as ſometimes Proteſtants themſelues confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF iuſtification.

Out of that which we haue rehearſed in this chapter clearly appeareth, that the Proteſtants doctrine of Iuſtification is quite contrarie to the holie Scripture. For the Scripture (and Catholiks with it) teacheth that iuſtification is of workes, and not of faith onely: that the iuſtified are iuſt indeed and before God: that they are cleane, and that the ſinnes from which they are iuſtified remaine not in them: that there is in them inherent grace or iuſtice, and that it is imputed to them: that they are not certaine by infallible faith that they are iuſtified: that pennance goeth before iuſtification: that iuſtification may be loſt, and that the iuſtified ought to feare leſt he fall: that iuſtificatiō is not proper to the elect: that a ſinner cooperateth to his iuſtification: and that ſometimes after iuſtification temporall punishment remaineth: All Which Proteſtants denie.

It appeareth alſo, that Proteſtants euen in this matter keepe their ould cuſtome of ſtealing. For they take from iuſtification the vertue of abolishing ſinne in thoſe that are iuſtified, and of making them truely iuſt and cleane, and of giuing them internall iuſtice, and of making that it be imputed to them: They take alſo from it that it can be communicated to the reprobates. And thus much of Iuſtification.

CHAPTER XVII. OF LIFE AND DEATH EVERLASTING.

ART. I. WHETHER LIFE EVERLASTING be a reward?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

MATH. 5. v. 12. Be glad and reioyce, for your reward Reward in heauen. Euerlaſting life rendered to vs. is very great in heauen.

Rom. 2. v. 6. God will render to euerie man according to his workes: to them truelie that according to patience in good worke ſeeke glorie and honour and incorruption, life eternall.

Coloſſenſ. 3. ver. 24. Knowing that you shall receaue of our Heauenlieinheritance a retribution or reward. Lord the retribution (Beza and the Anglish Bible tranſlated, Reward) of inheritance.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 6. c. 16. Euerlaſting life is to be propoſed to thoſe who worke well to the end and hope in God, both as a grace mercifully promiſed to the childrē of God by Chriſt Ieſus, and as a reward, and to be faithfully giuē by Gods promiſe to their good workes and merits.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins in reformed Catholik Contr. 5. p. 110. The kingdome Kingdome of heauen not a reward properly. Not a reward or recompēſe. of heauen is called a reward not properly, but by a figure or by reſemblance.

Miniſters of Saxonie in Colloq. Aldeburg. pag. 6. reiect this propoſition: Life euerlaſting is giuen for good workes as a reward or recompenſe.

Illyricus in Math. 5. v. 12. The Lord calleth goods to come a Called a reward by abuſe. reward abuſiuely. And in Clane part. 2. tractat. 6. col. 545. It vſeth to be called ſometimes a reward by abuſe.

Gerlachius to 2. diſput. 26. Theſe guifts do not properly deſerue the name of a reward.

Zuinglius de Prouidentia cap. 6. to. 1. Theſe are hyperbols By ouerlashing of ſpeech. and ouerlasheſſe: If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandments: Who shall do the will of my father &c. and what other promiſes ſoeuer haue beene made to workes. Et in 2. Cor. 5. to. 4. Not that there is any reward of faith or workes, but &c.

Caluin in Antidoto Concilij ſeſſ. 6. c. 17. That they make No reward. euerlaſting life a reward, in that I diſſent from them. 3. Inſtit. c. 21. §. 1. Saluation cometh to vs by the mere liberalitie of God: He Mere liberalitie. ſaueth of his mercie good pleaſure, and repaieth not a reward. l. 18. §. 3. Let them know, that they haue receaued a guift of grace, Not a reward not a reward of workes. In Epheſ. 2. v. 8. That he ſaueth, is mere grace, not a reward or retribution.

Bucer in Math. 5. The things which come to vs from God, Free guift. are no reward, but his free guifts.

Peter Martyr in Roman. 4. Euerlaſting life may haue ſome Farre from the nature of reward. reſemblance of reward, but is farre diſtant from the nature thereof. Wherefore euerlaſting life cannot be called a reward but by ſome reſemblance.

Piſcator in Theſibus loco 16, If properly speaking life euerlaſting If there were reward, there were Merit. were a reward, ſurely we should merit it by good workes. Wherefore it remaineth that life euerlaſting be called a reward by a figure.

Luther apud Scioppium in Eccleſiaſt. c. 67. If I ſaw heauē open and could merit it by taking vp a ſtraw from the ground, yet would I not take vp the ſtraw.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture plainely ſaieth; that euerlaſting life is giuen according to workes, and in that manner of ſpeach, as it ſaith that wrath and indignation is giuen according to workes: that there is very great reward in heauen: that we shall receaue the retribution or reward of inheritāce. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that euerlaſting life is no retribution or reward: that it is farre from the nature of reward: that all the promiſes made in the Scripture to workes are hyperbols or ouerlashings of ſpeach: that is improperly a reward, abuſiuely a reward: that it deſerueth not the name of reward. Which are ſo contrarie to Scripture, as ſometimes Proteſtants confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. II. WHETHER LIFE EVERLASTING be a Crowne of Iuſtice?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

2. Tim. 4. v. 7. & 8. I haue fought a good fight, I haue conſummate Heauenlie reward is a crowne of iuſtice. my courſe, I haue kept the faith, Concerning the reſt, there is laid vp for me a crowne of iuſtice, which our Lord will render me at that day a iuſt iudge.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton l. 9. de Iuſtif c. 3. The Scriptures moſt manifeſtly shew, that happines is a reward of iuſtice promiſed of God.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins refor. Catholik. Contr. 5. p. 109. We muſt acknowledge life eternall to be euerie way the guift of God. p. 108. It is a free guift.

Caluin 3. Inſtit. c. 15. §. 4. Beatitude it ſelfe is the mere goodneſſe Of mere liberalitie. of God. c. 21. §. 1. Saluation cometh to vs of the mere liberalitie of God In Rom. 6. v. vlt. Hence we gather, that our ſaluation is wholy from Gods grace and mere goodneſſe. In 2. Tim. 2. v. 12. Paul acknowledgeth nothing in the whole cauſe of ſaluation, Of mere grace but mere grace of God. In Antidoto Concil. ſeſſ. 6. It cometh to vs by no other Title then of free adoption.

Beza in Confeſſ. c. 4. ſect. 7. We profeſſe, that euerlaſting By not title but of free adoption. life is wholy and in all partes the free guift of God. lib. quaeſt. vol. 1. p. 655. Wholy of his mere grace doth he giue vs the benefit of eternall life.

Bucer in Epitome doctrinae Argentinen. Euerlaſting life remaineth mere grace.

Zuinglius in Expoſit. fidei tom. 2. f. 558. Eternall happines cometh by the onely grace and liberalitie of God.

Bullinger Decade 3. Serm. 9. None is ſo ſottish, as he vnderſtandeth Wholy and merely of grace. not, that the whole benefit of ſaluation is attributed wholy and merely to grace.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that euerlaſting life is a crowne of iuſtice, to be giuē to him that hath fought a good fight and conſummated his courſe, and that of a iuſt iudge. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that life euerlaſting is mere grace, mere goodneſſe, in all partes a free guift: that it cometh to vs of mere goodneſſe, not otherwiſe then by mere guift, by no other Title then of free adoption. Wholy of mere grace: that it is nothing but mere grace: that S. Paul acknowledgeth nothing in all the courſe of ſaluatiō but mere grace. Which is ſo contrarie to Scripture as ſome Proteſtants confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. III. WHETHER SALVATION OR eternall life be of faith onely?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Iames 2. verſ. 14. What shall it profit my brethren, if a man Saluation no • of faith onely. ſay he hath faith, but hath not workes? Shall faith be able to ſaue him?

Philippen. 2. verſ. 12. With feare and trembling worke your Saluation is to be wrought of vs. ſaluation.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

C. Bellarm. l. 4. de Iuſtif. c. 7. We ſay, that good workes are neceſſarie to a iuſt man to ſaluation, not onely in manner of prepreſence, but alſo of efficiencie, becauſe they worke ſaluation, and without them faith alone worketh not ſaluation.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Perkins in Gal. 3. to. 2. col. 157. They are deceaued, who ſay, Workes no cauſe of ſalua. Faith onely ſaueth. Workes not profitable to ſaluation. that faith and workes concurre as cauſes of ſaluation.

Luther de votis to. 2. fol. 273. Faith alone ſaueth: fol. 279. This is the ſumme of ſummes: Workes and vowes can nether be taught nor perſwaded, vnleſſe we ſay, that they be holeſom and profitable to iuſtice and ſaluation: But to teach, that they are holeſome, is diuelish and Apoſtaſie from faith, becauſe faith alone is neceſſarie and holeſome. ib. de Captiuit. Baby l. f. 78. It is certaine, Faith alone is holeſome. that none of them was ſaued by his vowes and religion, but onely by faith, in which we all are ſaued. Poſtilla in die Aſcenſionis. Workes helpe nothing to ſaluation. It is enough to haue faith. Faith alone by it ſelfe and without any workes ſaueth vs, and workes do nothing at all to pietie or ſaluation. In Dom. poſt Aſcenſ. Faith deliuereth from the Diuel, hell, ſinne, and all misfortune; which if we haue, it is enough.

Miniſters in Saxonie in Colloq. Aldeburg. p. 162. Whoſoeuer teacheth, that eternall life is giuen for good workes, he departeth from the word of God, the Confeſsion of Auspurg and Life not giuen for workes. the Apologie. Thou shall neuer read in the Scripture, that eternall life is giuen for good workes.

Liber Concordiae c. 3. p. 691. By faith alone we are iustified before God and ſaued. 694. But this errour alſo is to be reiected when it is taught: That a man is any other way, or by anie other thing ſaued, then by that, by which he is iuſtified before God: as if by onely faith we were iuſtified before God, but yet that it were impoſsible to obtaine eternall ſaluation without workes. cap. 4. in Epitome art. We beleiue, teach, and confeſſe, that good workes Workes wholy excluded from ſaltion. are wholy to be excluded, not onely when we treate of the iuſtification of faith, but alſo when we diſpute of our eternall ſaluation. Againe: We reiect and condemne theſe ſpeeches: Good workes are neceſſarie to ſaluation.

Zuinglius in Expoſtulat. ad Lindouerum to. 1. fol. 204. Faith alone ſaueth vs.

Caluin in Rom. 10. v. 10. We are ſaued by faith alone. In c. 1. v. 7. It is faith alone, which bringeth euerlaſtingneſſe of life.

Beza in Explicat. Chriſtianiſmi c. 8. vol. 1. pag. 199. Who Saluation relieth not vpon workes. teach, that mens ſaluation relieth vpon workes ether wholy or in ſome parte, do plainely ouerturne all the Ghospell.

Pareus l. 4. de Iuſtif. c. 4. The Ghospell promiſeth ſaluation vnder the condition of faith alone.

Daneus Contr. de Baptiſmo c. 17. All the manner of our ſaluation purchaſed by Chriſt, ſtandeth in faith in him.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that faith alone can not ſaue vs. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that faith alone ſaueth, alone bringeth life: that by faith onely we are ſaued: that ſaluation is promiſed vpon conditiō of faith onely: that workes concurre not to ſaluation, worke nothing to ſaluation, are not neceſſarie to ſaluation, are not holeſome.

ART. IV. WHETHER ALL MEN, BOTH good and badde, be to be iudged?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Apoc. 20. v. 12. And I ſaw the dead, great and litle, standing Great and litle are to be be iudged. in the ſight of the throne, and bookes were opened, and an other booke was opened which was of life; and the dead were iudged of thoſe things which were written in the bookes according to their workes. And the ſea gaue the dead, that were in it, and death and Euerie one. All. hell gaue their dead that were in them, and it was iudged of euerie one according to their workes.

2. Cor. 5. v. 10. For we muſt all be manifeſted before the iudgmēt Euerie one ſeat of Chriſt, that euerie one may receaue the proper things of the bodie according as he hath done ether good or euill.

Mathew. 25. verſ. 32. And all nations shalbe gathered before All nations. him, and he shall ſeperate them one from an other, as the pastour ſeperateth the sheepe from the goates. Then shall the King ſay to them that shalbe at his right hand: Come ye bleſſed &c. Then shall he ſay to them alſo that be at his left hand: Goe ye away &c.

Act. 10. v. 43. It is he that of God was appointed iudge of the liuing and of the dead.

Hebr. 22. v. 22. But you are come to mount Sion, and the cittie All. of the liuing God—and the iudge of all, God.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Catechiſmus ad Parochos in Expoſit, Symboli. Of which article that is the ſenſe and meaning, that in the laſt day Chriſt our Lord shall iudg all mankind.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther apud Scioppium in ſuo Eccleſiaſt. c. 5. Chriſtians Onely infidell— know, that onely infidels who will not receaue the Ghoſpell, are to be iudged of Chriſt in the laſt day. Let vs learne and note this Not the faithfull. well, that we feare not death and the laſt iudgment: for Chriſt is not to come to iudge vs, but he will iudge them who beleiue not.

Bullinger Concione 90. in Apoc. f. 163. The impious are Impious, not the pious. to be iudged, but not the pious.—The good, becauſe they are iuſtified and abſolued, appeare in iudgment with glorie to iudge after their manner and fashiō the wicked, but not to be iudged of anie.

Tilenus in Syntagmate c. 67. The elect do know, that nether Not the elect. their deeds nor all their words are to be called to the account of this iudgment. The like ſay others, as we haue shewed before c. 3. art. 10.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that all the dead shalbe iudged according to their workes: that all muſt be manifeſted before the tribunall of Chriſt: that all Nations shalbe gathered to Chriſts iudgment: that Chriſt is iudge of the quicke and the dead: that God is iudge of all. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely ſay, that the impious are to be iudged but not the pious: that the good are not to be iudged of anie: that onely infidels shalbe iudged.

ART. V. WHETHER THERE BE ANIE. to whome, ſeeking eternall glorie according to patience of good workes, euerlaſting life is rendred?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Roman. 2. verſ. 6. and 7. Who will render to euerie man There are ſome ſuch. according to his workes; to them truely that according to patience in good worke, ſeeke glorie and honour, and incorruption, life eternall.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Rom. 2. v. 6. cit. If Chriſt alone shall bring thoſe workes, to which the Apoſtle here ſaieth that eternall life is rēdred, he should not haue ſaied: He will render to euerie one according to his workes, but to euerie one according to Christs workes.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Beza in Rom. 2. v. 6. What is here ſaied of Sophiſters, as if There are no ſuch. anie out of Chriſt, or regenerate in Chriſt, are found ſuch in the iudgment of God, as theſe here are deſcribed, doth varie much frō the ſcope of the Apoſtle. For that ſurely is moſt abſurd. Or as he hath in edition of 1565. Shall anie man bring theſe workes, to which the Apoſtle ſaieth that life eternall shalbe rendred: Ether men not regenerate, or the ſonnes of God? But nether Abraham ſurely hath whereof to glorie before God.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that there are ſome, to whome ſeeking glorie according to patience of good workes, eternall life is rendred. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtāts plainely ſay, that there are no men to whome life eternall is rendred according to their workes, nor that there are anie workes to which eternall life is rendred.

ART. VI. WHETHER THE SOVLES OF reprobates departed this life do now ſuffer the paines of hell?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Iude. v. 7. As Sodome and Gomorrha and the citties adioyning Sodomites in eternall fire. in like manner hauing fornicated and going after an other flesh, were made an example, ſuſtaining the paine of eternall fire.

Luc. 16. verſ. 22. And the rich man alſo dead, and he was Diues in torments. buried in hell. And lifting vp his eyes when he was in torments &c.

Numbers 16. ver. 33. And they went downe into hell quicke, couered with the ground. Are in hell.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

S. Thomas. Suplement. q. 69. art. 2. As ſoone as the ſoule is looſed from the bodie, ether it is caſt into hell or mounteth to heauen, vnleſſe it be hindred be ſome guilt ſo that it need firſt to be purged. And the contrarie opinion is to be held for hereſie.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Scultet. in 1. parte Medullae in Tertulliano c. 42. As that The ſoules not punished before the bodie. poſitiō of his is new, ſo alſo is it falſe: That the ſoules ſuffer in hell before the bodies.

Confeſſion of Wittemberg. cap. de Memoria defunctorum. Faith requireth of vs to beleiue, that the dead are not nothing, but truely liue before God; the godlie, happily in Chriſt, and the imperious in horrible expectation of the reuelation of Gods iudgment.

Confeſſio Belgica art. 12. ſaieth thus of the Diuels: Reprobates expect their torments. They dayly expect the horrible torments of their wicked deeds.

Caluin 3. Inſtitut. cap. 25. §. 6. There is no doubt, but that the ſame lot befalleth to the reprobates, which Iude aſsigneth to the Diuels, to the tyed bound in chaines, till they be drawne to the punishment, to which they are adiudged. In 2. Petri 2. verſ. 4. Expect their reuenge. The reprobates ſuffer horrible torment of the reuenge prepared for them.

Luther in 25. Geneſ. to. 6. fol. 321. I cannot affirme, whether Vncertaine whether wicked ſoules be now tormented. the ſoules of the wicked be tormented ſtreight after death. 322. We know not, whether damnatiō begin ſtreight after death. Sermone de Diuite & Lazaro tom. 7. fol. 268. I dare not affirme, that Diues is now vexed with theſe torments. In cap. 2. Ionae to. 4. f. 418. I am not very certaine, what hell is before the laſt day. And apud Schioppium lib. cit. ca. 3. Nether hath the The place of the dead hath no torments. place of the dead anie torments.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the Sodomites ſuffer the paine of euerlaſting fire: that Diues is buried in hell, is in torments, and tormented with fire: that Dathan and Abiron deſcended quicke into hell. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtāts ſay, that they dare not affirme, that the ſoules of the wicked are tormented ſtreight after their death: yea they teach that it is falſe that ſoules are punished in hell before the bodies.

ART. VII. WHETHER HELL BE anie place?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Luke 16. verſ. 22. And the rich man alſo died, and he was Hell is a place of torments. buried in hell. And v. 28. Leſt they alſo come into this place of torments.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 2. de Purgatorio c. 6. Hell is a place of punishment.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther Serm. de Diuite & Lazaro tom. 7. fol. 267. Hell Hell, nothing but conſciēce. No corporall place. can be nothing els, but a conſcience void of faith and fraught with ſinne. Poſtilla in Dom. 2. poſt Trinitatem. fol. 286. True hell shall begin at the latter day. The place where a ſoule may be and yet want quiet, can not be a corporall place. Hell can be nought els but an emptie, faith leſſe, ſinfull, and wicked conſcience.

Perkins in Apocalips 2. to. 2. col. 90. We muſt not imagin, No certaine place, that hell is anie certaine definite and corporall place.

Brentius apud Hoſpin. parte. 2. Hiſtor. fol. 308. I laugh There is no locall hell. at your ould wiues dotages of a corporall and locall heauē or hell. Fol. 331. A locall hell, is a fiction.

Schluſſelburg lib. 1. Theol. Caluin art. 27. writeth, that the Catechiſme of Heidelburg calleth in doubt whether there be No ſuch appointed place. anie hell indeed, and an appointed place where the wicked and damned after this life are to be punished with eternall paines together with the wicked ſpirits. And that Bucer vpon S. Ihon openly affirmeth this.

Caluin 2. Inſtit. c. 16. §. 9. To shut vp the ſoules of the dead in priſon, is childish.

Tilenus in Syntagmate cap. 6. We condemne the Papiſts, who out of the dreame of their druncken braine do put the place of the damned in the middeſt of the earth.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that hell is a place of torments. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that hell is no place, no corporall place, no priſon; that it is nothing but a wicked conſcience; that it shall begine at a the latter day: which are ſo repugnant to Scripture, as ſome Proteſtants confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. VIII. WHETHER THE FIRE OF hell be true fire?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Mathew. 25. verſ. 41. Get ye from me you curſed into fire True fire in hell. euerlasting.

Iude. v. 7. cit. Suſtaining the paine of eternall fire.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

S. Thomas. Supplement. q. 70. art. 3. The fire of hell is not imaginarie or metaphoricall fire, but true corporall fire.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins in Apoc. 2. to. 2. col. 90. We muſt not imagin, that No corporall fire. the torments (of hell) are corporall, but rather ſpirituall, ſeing they are an apprehenſion or feeling of the wrath of God and of his reuenge.

Caluin in Math. 3. v. 12. Touching euerlaſting fire, we may Metaphoricall fire. gather, that it is a metaphoricall ſpeach.

Daneus Controu. 4. cap. 11. They feigne, that the ſoules of mē, and Diuels are tormented in hell with true and corporall fire. Controu. 6. pag. 1181. It is impoſsible, that the ſoules of men ſeparated from their bodies should be tormented with anie corporall fire.

Vorſtius in Antibellarm. p. 269. It implieth contradiction, that corporall fire should worke vpon a mere spirit, as mans ſoule is ſaied to be.

Tilenus in Syntagmate cap. 68. There is no cauſe, why we should ſay that (in hell) is corporall fire. The ſame ſaieth Polanus in Sylloge theſium. parte 2. p. 518. and Lobechius diſput. 6. & 19.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the fire of hell is fire. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that it is not true or materiall fire, but metaphoricall: that ſoules and mere ſpirits cannot be tormented with corporall fire.

THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER OF EVERLASting life and death.

What we haue rehearſed in this chapter clearely proueth, that Proteſtants teach farre otherwiſe of euerlaſting ſaluation and damnation, then Scripture doth. For Scripture (and Catholiks with it) teacheth, that eternall ſaluation is a reward, a crowne of iuſtice, and cometh not of faith onely: that the ſoules of the reprobates do now ſuffer the paines of hell: that hell is a true place, and that the fire of hell is true fire: All which Proteſtants denie.

The ſame alſo proue, that Proteſtants ſteale from eternall ſaluation the nature of a reward, and crowne of iuſtice, and dependencie of good workes: and ſteale from hell the nature of a place and true fire.

CHAPTER XVIII. OF GODS LAVV.

ART. I. WHETHER GODS LAW BE poſſible?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

EZECHIEL. 36. v. 27. And I will put my ſpirit in God will make vs to keepe his law the middeſt of you, and I will make that you walke in my precepts and keepe my iudgments and doe them.

Math. 7. ver. 21. He that doth the will of my Father Some do his will. which is in heauē, he shall enter into the kingdome of heauen. c. 11. v. 30. My yoke is ſweet, and my burden light.

Rom. 8. v. 4. God ſending his Sonne in the ſimilitude of the Iuſtification of the law fulfilled in vs flesh of ſinne, euen of ſinne damned ſinne in the flesh, that the iuſtification of the law might be fulfilled in vs. c. 13. v. 8. He that loueth his neighbour, hath fulfilled the law.

Gal. 5. ver. 14. All the law is fulfilled in one word: Thou shalt The law fulfilled in loue loue thy neighbour as thy ſelfe.

1. Ioan. 2. ver 4. He that ſaieth, he knoweth him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a lier, and the trueth is not in him. c. 5. v. 3. This is the charitie of God, that we keepe his commandmēts, and his commandments are not heauie.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 6. c. 11. No man must vſe that temerarious ſpeach and condemned of the Fathers vnder a curſe: That Gods commandments are impoſsible to be kept of a iuſtified man. For God commandeth not impoſsble things, but by commanding he admonisheth to doe what thou canſt, and to aske what thou canſt not, and helpeth that thou maieſt.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker l. 1. cōt. Dureū ſect. 9. Thou cāſt doe nothing leſſe, We can not fulfill the law the fulfill the law? No man can obey the law. And Contr. 2. q. 6. c. 3. he auoucheth it to be a foundation of Chriſtian religion: That Gods law cannot be fulfilled of vs: and ib. q. 5. c. 7. ſaieth, that the contrarie is Pelagian hereſie.

Perkins de Baptiſmo to 1. col. 833. The Papiſts thinke, that a man in this life can obſerue and fulfill the law.

Confeſſion of Auſpurg. cap. 6. So great is the weakneſſe of No man can ſatisfie the law. mans nature, as no man can ſatisfie the law.

Apologie of England. We ſay, that in this life we can no way ſatisfie the law.

Luther de libertate to. 2. fol 4. All the commandments are All the commandments are impoſsible are alike impoſsible vnto vs. In Gal. 3. f. 329. The law exacteth impoſsible things.

Caluin in Antidoto Concilij Seſſ. 10. cap. 12. They bring nothing which helpeth their wicked opinion of the poſsible obſeruation of the law. In Luc. 10. v. 26. It is impoſsible for vs to performe The law is impoſsible to be kept. that which the law commandeth. In Actor. 15. v. 10. It is manifeſt, that the law is impoſsible to be kept.

Beza in Luc. 18. v. 22. No man can keepe one commandment ſo as the law preſcribeth. In Rom. 10. ver. 6. The law propoſeth not heauen but vnder an impoſsble condition.

Daneus Contr. de Baptiſmo c. 15. It is altogether impoſsible Altogether impoſsible. to keepe the commandments. Contr. 5. p. 974. Bellarmin ſaieth, that is eaſie for him that hath charitie to keepe the law: I anſwere that euen to him it is impoſsible.

Adamus Franciſci in Margarita Theol. loco 5. Albeit Euen with God his grace regenerate men be holpen and gouerned of the Holie Ghoſt, yet they are hindred by the remnants of ſinne, that they cannot ſatisfie the law.

〈1… pages missing〉

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Gods commandments are not heauie, that his burden is light: that who loueth his neighbour, fulfilleth the law: that God will make vs to keepe his iudgments: that he ſent his Sonne, that the iuſtification of the law might be fulfilled in vs. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that no man can ſatisfie the law, that the law is impoſſible euen to a iuſtified man, that the law is impoſſible: that all the commandments are a like impoſſible: that no one can be kept: that the law propoſeth not heauen but vnder an vnpoſſible condition: that the doctrine of the poſſible obſeruation of the law, is wicked.

ART. II. WHETHER EVER ANIE HAVE kept Gods law?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Pſalm. 118. verſ. 55. I haue beene myndfull in the night of thy Dauid kept Gods law. name, o Lord, and haue kept thy law.

Luc. 1. v. 6. And they were both iuſt before God, walking in Alſo Zacharias and Elizabeth. all the commandments and iuſtifications of our Lord without blame.

Ioan. 17. v. 6. Thyne they were, and to me thou gaueſt them, And the Apoſtles. and they haue kept thy word.

Act. 13. v. 22. I haue found Dauid the ſonne of Ieſſe a man according to my hart, who shall doe all my willes.

1. Ioan. 3. v. 22. Whatſoeuer we shall aske we shall receaue of him, becauſe we keepe his commandments.

Apoc. 3. v. 10. Becauſe thou haſt kept the word of my patience, and I will keepe thee from the houre of tentation. c. 14. v. 12. Here And Saintes. is the patience of Saintes, who keepe the commandments of God, and the faith Ieſus.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 6. ca. 16. We muſt beleiue, that nothing wanteth to the iuſtified, that they may not ſeeme to haue fully ſatisfied the law of God according to the ſtate of this life with thoſe workes which are done in God.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

The Confeſſion of Scotlond artic. 15. We affirme, that None but Chriſt hath kept the law. none on earth (Chriſt onely excepted) in worke and indeed ſo performeth, and shall performe that obedience to the law, which the law requireth.

Confeſſion of Auſpurg. c. de operibus. Saintes do not ſatisfie Not Saintes. the law.

Confeſſion of Bohemia art. 7. We teach, that there is none who in deeds doeth fulfill the precepts of the law.

Luther in Gal. 3. to. f. 3. 343. Moiſes requireth a worker who perfectly doth the law; But where shall we haue him? No where. In. c. 4. f. 393. No man doth the law.

Caluin in Rom. 13. verſ. 8. No man performeth the law, nor euer performed it. In Act. 15. v. 10. The faithfull after they are regenerate with the ſpirit of God, do giue themſelues to the iuſtice of the law, but yet they performe not all, but halfe and much leſſe then halfe. In Gal.Gal 3. v. 10. It is cleare, that neuer anie was found or can be fouud, who fulfilleth the law. In verſ. 12. There is none who doth the workes of the law. The like he hath in Antidoto Concil. ſeſſ. 6. c. 12. In 3. Inſtit. c. 17. §. 3. & 13.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Dauid kept Gods law, did all his wills: that Zacharias and Elizabeth walked in all Gods commandments without blame: that the Apoſtles kept Gods word: that Saintes haue kept Gods word and commandments. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that none beſides Chriſte gaue that obedience to the law which it requireth; that no man in deed hath fulfilled the law: that no man ſatisfieth the law: that the regenerate do much leſſe then halfe of the law.

ART. III. WHETHER EVER ANIE HAVE loued or followed God in all their hartes?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Deut. 30. v. 6. Our Lord thy God will circunciſe thy hart, and God will make vs to loue him in all our hart. Dauid did ſo. the hart of thy ſeed, that thou maieſt loue our Lord thy God in all thy hart, and in all thy ſoule that thou maieſt liue.

3. Reg. 14. verſ. 8. Thou hast not beene as my ſeruant Dauid, who kept my commandments, and followed me in all his hart, doing that which was well liked in my ſight.

3. Reg. 8. v. 23. Lord God of Iſrael, who keepeſt couenant and mercie with thy ſeruants that walke before thee in all their hart.

4. Reg. 23. v. 25. There was no king before him (Ioſias) like Ioſias followed God in all his hart. to him, who returned to our Lord in all his hart, and in all his ſoule, and in all his power according to all the law of Moiſes.

Daniel. 3. 41. Azarias thus praieth: And now we follow thee Alſo Azarias. in all our hart, and feare thee, and ſeeke thy face.

Pſal. 118. v. 10. With my whole hart I haue ſought after thee. And Dauid.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 1. de Amiſſ. Gratiae. c. 12. Luke writeth of Zacharias and Elizabeth that they walked in all the commandmēts and iuſtifications of our Lord: nether would they be ſaied to haue walked, in all the commandments, who had neglected the firſt and greateſt which is of louing God with all the hart.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

The Apologie of the Confeſſion of Auſpurg. c. de Reſp. ad Argumenta. No man feareth ſo much, loueth God ſo much, beleiueth God ſo much as he ought.

Luther in Gal. 5. to. 5. f. 417. Thou shalt not find one on earth, who ſo loueth, God and his neighbour, as the law requireth. Poſtilla None can loue God in all his hart. in Dom. 10. poſt. Trinit. f. 315. He requireth, that we loue him with all our hart, which no mortall man can performe.

Brentius homilia 1. in Dom. 13. poſt. Trinit. None was euer found amongst the Saintes, who loued God perfectly with all his ſoule.

Caluin. 2. Inſtit. c. 7. §. 5. I ſay, there was no Saint, who whileſt No Saint euer loued God in all his hart. he was in this mortall life, attained to that hight of loue, that he loued God with all his ſoule, with all his hart, with all his power.

Pareus l. 4 de Iuſtif. c. 11. Such loue (of all his ſoule) none of the Saintes had, or can haue in this infirmitie.

Daneus Contr. 5. p. 973. That this precept: Thou shalt loue God &c. can be fulfilled, both vnder the ould and the new teſtament, and that God promiſed it Deuter. 10. v. 12. 30. v. 6. Hier. 24. v. 7. is moſt falſe.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely teacheth, that God will make the faithfull to loue him with all their hart: that the three children followed God in all their hart: that Dauid ſought God in all his hart: that God vſeth mercie to them who walke before him in all their hartes: that Ioſias returned to God in all his hart, in all his ſoule, in all his power, and according to all the law of Moiſes. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach; that there is not one who loueth God ſo as the law requireth: that no Saint loued God with all his hart: that no Saint euer had the loue God in all his hart.

ART. IV. WHETHER GODS LAW BE in the hartes of anie?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Hierem. 31. v. 33. I will giue my law in their bowels, and in their Gods law in the hart of ſome. hart I will write it.

Pſal. 36. 31. The law of God in his hart.

Deut. 30. v. 14. But the word is very neare thee, in thy hart and in thy mouth to doe it. The ſame Rom. 10. v. 6.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Rom. 10. verſ. 6. The Scripture here ſaieth plainely: The word is neare, that is, the commandment of the law to doe it. This is not true ſaieth the Heretike, and the word of the law, or the cōmandment of the law is not properly in our hart.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Caluin in Rom. 10. v. 6. Euen after regeneration, the word Gods law in the hart of none. of the law cannot be properly ſaied to be in our hart, becauſe it requireth perfection frō which the faithfull themſelues are farre of. The ſame ſay others who teach that the law is impoſſible. For if it be impoſſible, it is not in our hartes.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Gods law is in our bowels, is written in our hartes: is in the harts of ſome. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that the law of God is not properly in the hart of anie.

ART. V. WHETHER WE PRAY THAT we may fulfill Gods law?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Math. 6. v. 10. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heauen. We pray to fulfill Gods law.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 1. de bonis operibus in part. cap. 6. We pray that Gods helpe and grace be giuen vs, whereby we may and will fulfill Gods commandments.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Perkins in Gal. 3. to. 2. col. 135. We do not pray, that we may We pray not ſo. fulfill the law, but that we may endeauour according to our ſtrēght to fulfill it.

Caluin in Math. 10. v. 6. It ſufficeth, that with deſire we teſtifie that we hate whatſoeuer is againſt the will of God. In like ſorte Daneus in orat. Dom. and others, who teach that it is impoſſible to fulfill the law. For no man praieth for that which he knoweth to be impoſſible.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely biddeth vs pray, that Gods will be done in earth as it in heauen, where doubtles it is fulfilled The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely teach, that we do not pray that we fulfill Gods law, that it ſufficeth to teſtifie that we hate what is contrarie to Gods law. Which is ſo contrarie to Scripture as ſometimes Proteſtants themſelues confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. VI. WHETHER THE KEEPING OF the law be neceſſarie to ſaluation?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Math. 19. v. 17. If thou wilt enter into life, keepe the commandments. Keeping of the law neceſſarie to ſaluation.

Ioan. 15. ver. 10. If you keepe my precepts, you shall abide in my loue.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D, Stapleton in Math. 19. v. 17. This doctrine of Chriſt doth manifeſtly shew, that the keeping of Gods commandments is neceſſarie to euerlaſting life.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther in Galat. 2. tom. 5. f. 311. The Papiſts teach: Faith in Not neceſſarie. Chriſt iuſtifieth, but with all the commandments of God muſt be kept, becauſe the Scripture ſaieth: If thou wilt enter &c. There Chriſt is ſtreight denied and abolished.

Caluin in Math. 19. ver. 17. This anſwere of Chriſt is legall; That none is accounted iuſt before God vnleſſe he hath ſatisfied the law, which is impoſsible. 3. Inſtit. c. 17. §. 7. A legall promiſe, which added to an impoſsible condition, proueth nothing. In Antido to Concil. ſeſſ. 6. p. 280. Woe be to their Catechumens, if ſo hard a condition (of obſeruing the law) be impoſed vpon thē. what other then eternall malediction is laied vpon them. In Act. 15. v. 10. The whole world is caſt headlong into eternall perditiō, if it cannot obtaine ſaluation but by keeping the law. In Math. 9. v. 10. It ſufficeth to teſtifie this by deſire, that we hate whatſoeuer is contrarie to Gods will, and wish it were not.

Perkins in Caſes of Conſcience c. 7. If men do endeauour to yeeld God obedience in all things, God will ſo accepte this their ſlender and ſmall endeauour of doing that which they can do by his grace, as if they had perfectly ſatisfied the whole law. Slender endeauour accepted of God

Piſcator loco 17. The faithfull are freed from the rigour of the law, and therein from care and feare of maledictiō of the law for the breaking thereof.

Pareus l. 4. de Iuſtif. cap. 7. It is enough, if they endeauour to Enough to endeauour. begin the new obedience of the law according to all the commandments, and aske and impetrate the pardon of defects for the merits of Chriſt, otherwiſe no flesh would be ſaued.

Peter Martyr in 1. Cor 10. v. 12. The precepts of good workes require no other thing of vs, then endeauour and diligence to liue well. In c. 7. v. 19. vpon that: But the keeping of Gods commādments, This, ſaieth he is not expected of you, who already are children and belong to Chriſt, but onely keeping of the commandments of God ſo farre as the condition of man and ſtate of this preſent life do ſuffer.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that if we will enter to life, we muſt keepe the commandments. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that it is not neceſſarie to keepe the commandmēts: that it is enough to endeauour. to begin the keeping of them: that God accepteth a ſlēder endeauour of keeping them for a perfect keeping.

ART. VII. WHETHER THE LAW OF the ten commandments be abrogated and taken away from the faithfull?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY DENIETH.

Rom. 3. v. 31. Do we then destroie the law by faith? God forbidde: The law not abrogated by faith in Chriſt. If no law, no ſinne. But we do eſtablish the law. c. 4. v. 16. Where there is no law, nether is there preuarication.

Math. 5. v. 18. Do not thinke that I am come to breake the law or the Prophets. I am not come to breake, but to fulfill.

Ioan. 14. v. 15. If you loue me, keepe my commandments.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 9. Con. 19. If anie shall ſay, that nothing is commanded in the Ghoſpell but faith, and that the reſt are indifferent, nether commanded nor forbidden, but free, or that the ten commandments belonge nothing to Chriſtians: be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Luther Sermone de Moyſe: The ten commandments belong The ten commandments belonge not to Chriſtians. to Chriſtians: And Whitaker l. 8. cont. Dureum ſect. 91. addeth: This article is ſurely moſt worthie of Luther, becauſe it containeth moſt high trueth and comfort.

The ſame Luther in c. 18. Deut. to. 3. f. 56. Know, that Gods law is that onely which commandeth to the wicked and deſperate The law abolished to the godlie. men what is to be done, but where the godlie are, there the law is abolished. In Gal. 2. to. 5. fol. 227. The hart being iuſtified by faith, streight waies all lawes ceaſe, all things are free and lawfull. 223. The law is dead, and compelleth no more, yet we may do the law vpon charitie, but not as a law. 315. all the ceremoniall A Chriſtian not bound to the law. law or the decalog, is abrogated to a Chriſtian, becauſe he is dead to it. And to be dead to the law, is not to be bound with the law, but to be free from it and not to know it. 370. Chriſt hath abrogated all lawes vniuerſally. Poſtilla in die Pentecoſtis f. 273. The Holie Ghoſt is giuen to this end, to abrogate and take away the law. Wherefore Chriſtians are not to be gouerned by laws, but others who profeſſe not Chriſt in their hart, are to be bridled with laws, are to be remitted to hangmen and tormentours, and to be gouerned by the ſword, for to be kept in order. Et f. 272. The Holie Ghoſt doth ſo abrogate the law, that he leaueth not ſo much as the letter of the law, or if anie thing remaine, it remaineth onely for to preach by word.

Melancthon in locis apud Fabritium in art. Auguſtan. 20. p. 364. We haue diuided the law into three partes, Morall, ceremoniall, and iudiciall, all which muſt needs be abrogated if the ould teſtament be abrogated. And this was the cauſe of abrog • ting the law, becauſe it could not be performed or done. Which The morall law is abrogated. cauſe pertaining more to the morall law, then to the ceremoniall or iudiciall, we muſt needs ſay that the Decalogue alſo is abrogated.

Michael Neāder apud Schluſſelburg. to. 4. Catal. Haeret. p. 61. I abide in my opinion, that the law is not giuen to the iuſt The law hath no vſe. All lawes taken away. in anie vſe or office.

Tindal in Fox his Actes pag. 1140. Edit. An. 1610. Chriſt tooke away all lawes and maketh vs free and at libertie.

Or as M. Rainolds l. 4. Caluinuoturciſmi c. 22. reporteth his words out of an other edition: Chriſt hath freed vs from all lawes, ſo that hereafter no law bindeth vs in conſcience.

Zuinglius in Explanat. artic. 16. The law is taken from the godlie by Chriſt.

The ſame in effect ſay all other Proteſtants, who teach, that the condemnation of the law, or imputation of the breach thereof, is taken from the faithfull, ſo that it is not imputed to them ether for fault or punishment. For it implieth contradiction, that there be a law, and that the breach thereof make not the wilfull breakers ſubiect to ſinne or punishment. Wherefore Luther in Diſput. 6. to 1. propoſit. 14. ſaied truely: A law which condemneth not, is a feigned or painted law like to a Chimaera. And that the breach of no law is imputed to the faithfull is the commō doctrine of Proteſtants, as is to be ſeene in Conf. Heluet. cap. 12. Scotica art. 15. Apologia Confeſſ. Auguſtanae c. de Implet. legiſ. Martyr. in locis claſſ. 2. c. 15. Caluin. 2. Inſtitut. c. 7. Beza in 1. Ioan. 5. v. 3. & in c. 2. v. 7. Whitaker loco citat. and others.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the law is not deſtroied by faith in Chriſt but eſtablished; that Chriſt came not to breake the law but to fulfill it: that if there be no law, there is no ſinne. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that the ten commandmēts belong nothing to Chriſtians: that the lawe cōmandeth onely the wicked: that that being iuſtified all lawes ceaſe: that the lawe compelleth no more: that we are not būod with the lawe: that Chriſt hath abrogated all lawes: that that the lawe is not giuen to the iuſt in anie vſe: that no lawe bindeth anie more. Which is ſo contrarie to Scripture, as ſome Proteſtants confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER of Gods lawe.

By what hath beene reported in this Chapter clearely appeareth, that Proteſtants teach quite contrarie to the holie Scripture concerning Gods lawe. For the Scripture together with Catholiks teacheth, that Gods lawe is poſſible, that ſome kept it; that ſome haue loued God in all their harte, that Gods lawe is in the harte of ſome, that we pray to fulfill it: that the keeping of it is neceſſarie to ſaluation, and that the morall lawe of the ten cōmandments is not taken away from the faithfull: all which Proteſtants denie.

By the ſame alſo appeareth, that the Proteſtants alſo in this matter play the theeues. For they take from Gods lawe that it is poſſible, that it hath beene kept of anie, that it is in the hartes of anie, that it is neceſſarie to ſaluation, and that it obligeth the faithfull.

CHAPTER XIX. OF MANS LAVV AND SVPERIORITIE.

ART. I. WHETHER THERE BE ANIE Superioritie among Chriſtians?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

PROVERB. 8. verſ.s 15. By me Kings do reigne.

Math. 24. v. 45. Who, thinkeſt thou, is a faithfull Chriſt appointed ſome ouer his familie. All power is of God. wiſe ſeruant, whome his Lord hath appointed ouer his familie?

Rom. 13. v. 1. Let euerie ſoule be ſubiect to higher powers, for there is no power but of God.

Tite 3. v. 1. Admonish them to be ſubiect to Princes and Poteſtates.

Hebr. 13. v. 17. Obey your Prelats, and be ſubiect to them. Subiect to Prelats and Princes.

Act. 2. v. 28. The Holie Ghoſt hath placed you Bishops to rule the Church of God.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm. l. 3. de Laicis c. 3. The Prophets foretould that all the Kings of the earth should ſerue Chriſt and the Church, which cannot be vnleſſe there be Kings in the Church.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther l. de ſaeculari poteſtate apud Coccium tom. 1. l. 7. No Superioritie among Chriſtians. A Chriſtian, ſubiect to none. art. 1. Among Chriſtians there can be no ſuperioritie.

De libertate Chriſtiana to. 2. f. 3. A Christian man is the most freeſt Lord of all, ſubiect to none. De votis ibib. fol. 270. Chriſt hath giuē me ſo much libertie, that I man ſubiect to none, but to himſelfe onely; Chriſt is my immediate Lord, I know no other anie more. In 1. Petri c. 2. to. 5. f. 462. Chriſt hath cōmitted the badde to profane power, for to gouerne thē as they ought to be gouerned: the good, that is thoſe who beleiue, he hath reſerued to himſelfe, whome he gouerneth by his word onely.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that Kings reigne by God, that we muſt obey the higher powers, that we muſt be ſubieſt to Princes and Prelats, and to rulers of the Church. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that there is no ſuperioritie among Chriſtians: that a Chriſtian is ſubiect to none, vnder none but Chriſt: that Chriſt is his immediate Lord, and that he knoweth no other.

ART. II. WHETHER MAN HAVE AVthoritie to make lawes?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Act. 15. v. 29. It hath ſeemed good to the Holie Ghoſt and to The Apoſtles made lawes. vs, to lay no further burde vpon you then theſe neceſſarie things: That you abſtaine from things immolated to idols, and blood, and that which is ſtrangled.

Ibid. v. 41. Paul walked through Syria and Cilicia confirming the Churches commanding them to keepe the precepts of the Apoſtles and the Ancients.

1. Cor. 7. verſ. 12. For to the rest, I ſay, not our Lord: If anie Alſo S. Paul. brother haue a wife an infidel, and she conſent to dwel with him, let him not put her away.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Act. 15. v. 28. The Church can impoſe temporall lawes as precepts for ſome good end, to wit, to keepe peace in the Church, which binde the faithfull in conſcience and before God to obey them.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Confeſſion of Baſle art. 10. None can forbidde that which None can forbidde that which Chriſt forbade not. God alone cā make lawes. Chriſt hath not forbidde.

Lutherl cont. R. Angliae. to. 2. f. 346. The power of making lawes belonges to God alone. De Captiu. Babyl. fol. 77. Nether men nor Angels can by anie right impoſe anie lawe vpon Chriſtians, but as they will themſelues.

Caluin 4. Inſtit. c. 10. §. 7. We heare, that God chalengeth God onely a lawgiuer. this as proper to himſelfe alone, to gouerne vs by the command of his word and by lawes. Ibid. §. 8. If God be the onely lawgiuer, men muſt not take this authoritie vpon them. In Iacobi 4. v. 12. They draw to themſelues all the maieſtie of God, who chalenge authoritie to make lawes.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the Apoſtles had authoritie to impoſe neceſſarie burdens, and to command that which Chriſt had not commanded: to command their precep • s to be kept: and to make lawes for married perſons. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that none can forbidde that which Chriſt hath not forbidde: that the power of making lawes is proper to God alone: that no lawe can be impoſed vpon Chriſtians but as they will themſelues.

ART. III. WHETHER MANS LAW CAN binde the conſcience?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Rom. 13. v. 2. Who reſiſteth the power, reſiſteth the ordināce Mans lawe can binde conſcience. of God, and they that reſiſt, purchaſe to themſelues damnation. v. 5. Therefore be ſubiect of neceſsitie, not onely for wrath, but alſo for conſcience ſake.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

D. Stapleton in Rom. 13. v. 1. The breach of humane lawes offendeth alſo God—The verie conſciences of the faithfull are bound with ciuill lawes.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Contr. 4. quaeſt. 7. c. 1. We ſay, that the lawes of Princes lawes bind not conſcience. Princes binde not the conſcience, for this is proper to God. lib. 8. cont. Dur. ſect. 103 Who impoſe lawes vpon the conſcience, chalenge power of ſauing and deſtroying, and robbe God of his right. The lawes of Magiſtrates haue no power ouer the conſcience.

Perkins in Anatomia Conſcientiae: tom. 1. col. 1215. We Conſcience ſubiect to no mans lawe. acknowledge no ſubiection at all of the conſcience to mens lawes. In Galat. 5. tom. 2. col. 258. The Magiſtrates lawe maketh a thing neceſſarie externally; Neuertheleſſe the thing in it ſelfe is not made neceſſarie, but remaineth indifferent, and you may vſe it or not, if you auoide contempt or ſcandall.

Luther in 1. Petri c. 2. tom. 5. f. 464. The Magiſtrate cannot binde the conſcience. De ſeruo arbit. to. 2. fol. 431. Conſciences are bound with Gods law onely.

Zuinglius in Explanat. artic. 28. It is no ſinne which God forbiddeth not. Mans additions cannot make anie thing to be good or euill. Art. 24. No Chriſtian is bound to thoſe workes which Chriſt hath not commaunded.

Caluin in Iacobi 4. verſ. 12. It is God alone, who hath the conſcience ſubiect to his laws. In Refutat. Cathalon. p. 384. No mortall man can make lawes which binde the conſcience, and make men guiltie of Gods iudgment. De neceſſitate reform. pag. 58. We teach, that conſciences are free and quite from mens lawes. In Confeſſ. fidei p. 109. Men haue no power to binde the conſciēce vnder mortall ſinne. The like he hath 3. Inſtit. c. 19. & 4. c. 10.

Beza in Confeſſ. c. 5. ſect. 33. God hath reſerued to himſelfe alone all this power of binding the conſcience with lawes. cap. 7. ſect. 9. It is lawfull to God alone, to impoſe lawes vpon the conſcience.

Peter Martyr in locis. claſſe 4. cap. 4. §. 5. The Apoſtles No ſinne to breake the Apoſtles laws without ſcandall. did decree, that Gentils conuerted to Chriſt should abſtaine from ſtrangled meate, and immolated to idols, and from blood—If anie had eaten of them without offenſe of others he had ſinned nothing in conſcience.

Daneus Controu. 3. p. 509. Mens commandment can not bind our conſciences. Contr. 5 pa. g1125. No law, but Gods, can binde vs in conſciencience.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely ſaieth, that who reſiſteth the Magiſtrate reſiſteth Gods ordinance, and purchaſeth damnation, and that we muſt be ſubiect to him for conſcience ſake. Catholiks ſay the ſame.

Proteſtāts expreſſely ſay, that Magiſtrates cannot binde the conſcience: that God alone can binde the conſcience: that breakers of the Apoſtles precept without contempt or ſcandall did not ſinne.

THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER of mans law.

What hath beene rehearſed in this chapter plainely proueth that Proteſtants teach contrarie to the Scripture concerning mans law. For the holie Scripture and Catholiks withall, teacheth that there is ſuperioritie among Chriſtians, that men haue power to make lawes, and that their lawes may binde the conſcience: all which are denied of Proteſtants.

It proueth alſo that Proteſtants euen in this matter keepe their ould cuſtome of ſtealing: For they take from Chriſtians all ſuperioritie, all power of makinge lawes, and from their lawes all power of binding the conſcience.

CHAPTER XX. OF FREE VVILL.

ART. I. WHETHER MANS WILL BE free in indifferent matters?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

NVMBERS 30. v. 14. It shalbe in the arbitrement Man free in things indifferent. of her husband, whether she shall do it or not do it.

Ioſue 24. ver. 15. Choice is giuen you, chuſe this day that which pleaſeth you.

2. Reg. 24. verſ. 12. Choice is giuen thee of three We haue choice. things; chuſe one of them which thou wilt.

1. Corint. 7. verſ. 37. For he that hath determined in his hart being ſetled, not hauing neceſsitie, but hauing power of his owne will &c.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Concil of Trent. Seſſ. 6. Con. 5. If anie shall ſay, that mans free will is after Adams ſinne loſt and extinct, or a thing onely in Title, or a title without the thing, finally a deuiſe of Sathan brought into the Church: be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Luther art. 36. tom. 2. Free will after ſinne is a thing onely in No free will after ſinne. Title. And in aſſert. eiuſdem articuli: Free will is a deuiſe amongst things, and a title without the thing: becauſe no man hath in his power to thinke any good or ill, but all things fall out of abſolute neceſsitie. There is no doubt, but that by Sathans teaching this name, Free will, came into the Church.

The ſame Luther de ſeruo arbit. to. 2. f. 434. Mans will is Mans will is like a beaſt. ſet in the middeſt as a beaſt: if God ſitte vpon it, it willeth and goeth whither God will; if Sathan ſitte vpon it, it willeth and goeth whither Sathan will: Nether is it in his power to runne to ether rider or to ſeeke him, but the riders themſelues ſtriue about We do all things of neceſsitie. him whether shall haue him. fol. 435. It is certaine, that we do all things of neceſsitie, and nothing by free will. The like he hath p. 461. 486. and otherwhere often.

Melancthon in locis editis An. 1521. apud Bellarm. l. 4. Men haue nether free will nor reaſon. de Grat. & lib. arbit. c. 5. Men vſe the name of free will, which is moſt different from the holie ſcripture, from the ſenſe and iudgment of the Spirit. And out of Plato his ſchole, is added the word Reaſon, as pernitious as that. Againe: Seing all things that fall out, fall out neceſſarily according to Gods predeſtination, there is no libertie of will. What then (will you ſay) is there no chance in things, no happe, no fortune? The Scripture ſay, that all things fall out neceſſarily. And if there ſeeme to thee to be ſome chance in humane matters, thou muſt here command the iudgment of reaſon. Which words of his alſo are repeated by Zanchius de Praedeſtinat. c. 5. to. 7. col. 435.

Zuinglius l. de Religione c. de Merito. to. 2. Gods prouidence taketh away both free will and merit. The verie name of free will diſliked.

Caluin l. 2. lib. arb. p. 153. The name of free will diſpleaſeth me, and I would it were taken away. Et p. 154. Who mantaineth free will, vſeth an other lāguage then the Holie Ghoſt doth. 2. Inſtit. c. 2. §. 8. Becauſe I thinke it (name of free will) cannot be kept without great danger, and that it would be great good to Church if it were abolished, nether will I vſe it, and I should wish others if they will heare me, to forebeare it. Et l. 1. cap. 15. §. 8. Who do yet ſeeke will in mā loſt and drowned in ſpirituall perditiō, do plainely doate. Et in confeſſ p. 108. We nether grant merit, nor free will. No free will in indifferent things.

Polanus in Diſput. priuatis diſput 34. A ſinfull man hath no free will in indifferent and ciuill matters.

CONFERENCE OF THE FORESAIED WORDS.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that man hath freedome in choice to doe: that he hath choice to chuſe what he will: that he hath not neceſſitie but power of his will. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that free will is a deuiſe: a thing onely in title, or title without the thing: that there is no libertie no chance in things: that all things fall out of abſolute neceſſitie; that mans will is like a beaſt: that a ſinfull man hath no free will in indifferēt and ciuill things. Which ſome Proteſtants confeſſe to be contrarie to Scripture. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. II. WHETHER MANS WILL BE free in morall matters that are good or badde?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

Gen. 4. v 6. Why art thou angrie, and why is thy contenance Free will in morall matters. fallen? If thou doeſt well, shalt thou not receaue againe: but if thou doeſt ill, shall not thy ſinne forthwith be preſent at thy dore? But the lust thereof shalbe vnder thee, and thou shalt haue dominion ouer it.

Ioſue 24. v. 15. Chuſe this day that which pleaſeth you, whome We haue choice in morall matters. you ought eſpecially to ſerue. ver. 22. You are witneſſes, that your ſelues haue choſen to you our Lord for to ſerue him.

Eccleſ. 15. ver. 18. Before man there is life and death, good and Some could ſinne and did not. euill: what pleaſeth him, that shall be giuen him. c. 31. v. 10. He that could tranſgreſſe, and hath not tranſgreſſed; and do euils, and hath not done.

Philemon. ver. 14. But without thy counſaill I would do nothing: Voluntarie and not of neceſsitie, that thy good might not be as it were of neceſsitie, but voluntarie. The like is 1. Corint. 7. verſ. 37. cited in the former article.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

C. Bellarm l. 5. de Grat. & lib. arbit. c. 14. Orthodoxall trueth teacheth, that man in ſtate of corrupted nature is indued with free will in morall matters.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 5. c. 7. p. 515. Luther and Caluin grant Mans will not free to good. mans will to be free to ſinne and ill doing, but not to good. p. 517. It is the Pelagian hereſie: That man after his fall hath anie libertie left to good. The like hath Morton l. 1. Apologiae. c. 30.

Luther de ſeruo arbit. to. 2. fol. 460. If here could be anie change or freedome of will in Pharao to both partes, God could not haue ſo certainely haue foretould his induration.—Which No free will to good. could not be, vnleſſe induration were wholy beyond the power of man, and onely in Gods power. Reſp. ad Artic. Louan. fo. 504. There is no feee will to good.

Caluin 2. Inſtit. c. 3. §. 10. God moueth the will, not as it hath Not in our power to obey or reſiſt. beene taught and beleiued theſe manie ages, that afterward it is in our choice ether to obey or reſiſt the motion, but by working it effectually. We muſt caſt away that ſaying of Chryſoſtome: whome he draweth, he draweth willing. Which he repeateth in Ioan. 6. verſ. 44.

Pareus l. 5. de Grat. c. 29. p. 919. Who want iuſtice, are not free to iuſtice, but to iniuſtice: nor to good, but onely to ill.

Piſcator in Theſibus pag. 423. A man in ſinne hath no free will to good, but onely to ill.

Thus teach they of mans will to good; of the ſame towards ill, this they ſay.

Caluin 2. Inſtitut. c. 3. § 5. I maruaile, if any thinke it a harsh Man is of neceſsitie drawne to ill. ſpeach, that I ſay mans will hauing loſt libertie is by neceſsitie drawne or led to euill. Et §. A carnall man neceſſarily obeyeth euerie draught of Sathan. The ſame he hath c. 5. §. 1

Daneus Contr. 6. p. 1224. That ſinnes are not the acts of Sinne is not the act of a free will. free will, is falſe. They are the acts of our owne accord, but not of free will.

Vallada in Apologia c. 20. Who can denie this neceſsitie of ſinning in a man not regenerate? The ſame teach others as hath beene shewed before c. 2. art. 8.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that the luſt of ſinne is vnder a man: that, as it pleaſeth him, good or euill shalbe giuen to him: that he hath choice whome he will ſerue: that ſome thing is voluntarie to him and not neceſſarie: that he could haue ſinned and yet did not. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that there is no free will to good: no freedome to both partes: that it is not in our choice to obey or reſiſt: that by neceſſitie we are drawne to ill: that ſinne is not an act of free will, but onely of our owne accord. Which is ſo contrarie to Scripture, as ſome Proteſtants confeſſe it. See lib. 2. c. 30.

ART. III. WHETHER MANS WILL cooperate with Gods grace to good actes?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

1. Cor. 3. v. 9. For we are Gods coadiutors. c. 15. ver. 10. I haue We are Gods coadiutors. laboured more abundantly then all they: yet not I, the grace of God with me.

Math. 25. v. 20. Lord fiue talents thou didſt deliuer me; behould, We gaine more with Gods grace. I haue gained other fiue beſides.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

Councel of Trent Seſſ. 6. Con. 4. If anie shall ſay, that mans free will moued and ſtirred vp of God, doth cooperate nothing by aſſenting to God mouing and calling: be he accurſed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther in pſalm. 5. to. 3. fol. 174. It is an error, that free will Free will worketh not in good. hath anie actiuitie in a good worke, when we speake of an inward worke.

Zuinglius in Explanat. art. 20. The Papiſts make God the We are not Gods coadiutors. firſt and chiefe cauſe of all goodneſse, and vs cooperatours, which is craftily to withdraw themſelues from God.

Caluin 2. Inſtitut. cap. 3. §. 12. The Apoſtle ſaieth not, that Gods grace laboured with him to make himſelfe fellow of the labour; but rather giueth the whole praiſe of the labour to grace alone. §. 6. We ſee, that not content to haue giuen ſimply the praiſe of our conuerſion to God, he excludeth vs expreſſely from all fellowshippe.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that we are Gods coadiutors, that Gods grace laboureth with vs: that we gaine ouer that which was giuen vs. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants expreſſely ſay, that we are not coadiutors of labour, that we are not Gods coadiutors, that we haue no fellowshippe of the labour.

THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER of Free will.

That which we haue rehearſed in this chapter plainely declareth, that Proteſtants teach farre otherwiſe of free will then the holie Scripture doth. For that Scripture (and Catholiks with it) teacheth, that man hath free will in indifferent matters, and in morall both good and badde, and that he cooperateth with Gods grace to good: All which Proteſtants denie.

It sheweth alſo that as Proteſtants haue ſtoallen from God, from Chriſt, from Saints, from the Church, and other things ſpoaken of before, ſo alſo they ſteale from man that which is the moſt excellent thing in him, to wit, free will, or dominion ouer his owne acts, and make him a ſlaue, and like to beaſts.

CHAPTER XXI. OF MANS SOVLE.

ART. I. WHETHER MANS SOVLE BE immortall?

SCRIPTVRE EXPRESSELY AFFIRMETH.

MATH. 10. ver. 28. Feare ye not them who kill the Soule of man cannot be killed. bodie, and are not able to kill to ſoule. c. 22. ve. 32. He is not the God of the dead, but of the liuing.

Ioan. 11. ver. 26. Euerie one that liueth and beleiueth Shall not die. in me, shall not die for euer.

Eccleſ. 12. v. 7. And the ſpirit returneth to God who gaue it. Returnet to God.

CATHOLIKS EXPRESSELY AFFIRME.

S. Thomas 2. 2. q. 164. art. 1. The ſoule of man is immortall, beaſts ſoules are mortall. Et 1. parte q. 118. art. 2. It is hereſie to ſay, that a reaſonable ſoule is transfuſed with the ſeed.

PROTESTANTS EXPRESSELY DENIE.

Luther in Aſſert. art. 27. to. 2. f. 107. I giue leaue, that the Pope make articles of faith to his followers, Such as are: That bread and wine are tranſſubſtantiated in the Sacrament: That the ſoule is the ſubſtantiall forme of mans bodie: That he is Emperour of the world and king of heauē, and an earthlie God: That the ſoule is immortall, and all thoſe infinit monſters in the Romish The ſoule is mortall. dūghill of Decrees: that ſuch as his faith is, ſuch be his Ghoſpell, ſuch his faithfull, ſuch his Church, and like lippes like lettuce, and the pot may haue a fit couer. And in the Margent: Articles made of the Pope.

Zuinglius l. de Religione c. de Clauibus to. 2. f. 187. But they do not ſo agree amongst themſelues where the keyes were giuen; that it is maruaile, why the Pope of Rome, ſeing he alone can iudge the Scripture as theſe men dreame, hath not pronoūced by ſome lawe where they were giuen, leſt there should be ſo great diſſenſion in a matter of ſo great moment, or rather of profit: For The ſoule dieth with the bodie. he might eaſily, for he hath decreed, that ſoules do not die when the bodie dieth.

Vorſtius in Antibellarm. p. 543. There wāt not ſome among Infants perish like beaſts. Chriſtiās, who thinke that ether all Infants or ſome are quite extinguished by death as beaſts are. And he himſelfe inſinuateth, that mans ſoule is not a pure ſpirit, as appeareth by words cited in an other place. Caluin in Explic. perfidiae Gentilis. p. 677. Some (Proteſtants) did ſay, that there is no shorter way to abolish the protection of Saintes, ſuperſtitious praier for the dead, the inuention of Purgatorie and ſuch like, then if we would beleiue death to be the deſtruction of the ſoule. Soules perish.

Brentius homilia 35. in c. 20. Lucae apud Reginaldum l. 4. Caluinoturciſmi cap. 5. Albeit there be no publike profeſsion among vs that the ſoule perisheth with the bodie, and that there is no reſurrection of the dead; yet that moſt vncleane and moſt profane life, which the greateſt parte of men follow, clearely sheweth, that in their mynd they thinke that there is no life after this life, or at leaſt that they doubt of the life to come. No life after this. Men are begotten euen according to the ſoule.

Beſides they teach that mans ſoule is transfuſed with the ſeede.

Bergenſes apud Hoſpin. in Concordia diſcordi f. 104. Write that a mā is naturally begotten of his father and mother, both according to bodie and ſoule.

Luther diſput. 2. to. 2. fol. 500. Who shall thinke, that the ſoule is by transfuſion, ſeemeth not to thinke amiſſe from the Scripture. Et fol. 501. That is nothing, which is ſaied: A reaſonable ſoule is infuſed whileſt it is created, and created it is infuſed. Et Vorſtius in Antibellarm. p. 530. Luther thought that the ſoule was by transfuſion.

Hutterus in Analyſi Confeſſ. Auguſtanae art. 2. p. 157. We Our Soules are not created but transfuſed. reſolue, that that opinion ſeemeth more probable to vs, which thinketh that ſoules are not infuſed of God, but are propagated from parents to children by transfuſion.

Peucerus apud Schluſſelburg l. 2. Theol. Caluin. art. 6. I conclude that ſoules riſe by transfuſion.

Schluſſelburg. to. 2. Catal. Haeret. p. 195. It appeareth ſufficiently in the writings of Luther and Melancthon that they incline to this opinion, which ſaieth that ſoules are by transfuſion, and they shew great arguments out of the Scripture.

Reineccius to. 3. Armaturae cap. 6. We gather, that ſoules are together with the bodies propagated from the parents into the children, and not made of the ſeed as out of matter; but of the ſoule of the parents as one candle is lightned of an other, and that as the bodie, ſo the ſoule is in the ſeed, not actually, but in power, which being dead is raiſed vp by Gods gouernment.

But to teach that mans ſoules is by transfuſion, is in effect The Soule being dead it raiſed. and deed to ſay it is mortall, as the Proteſtants themſelues confeſſe. Pareus l. 4. de Amiſſ. Grat. c. 11. Whether we ſay that ſoules are ſowed with the bodies, or immediatly transfuſed out of other ſoules, as one light is kindled of an other, we cannot defend the immortalitie of the ſoule any more. Beza in Rom. 5. v. 12. Which opinion can no way be mantained, but that the ſubſtance of mans ſoule muſt be diuiſible and conſequently corruptible.

Moreouer they teach, that mans ſoule after his death ſleepeth and feeleth nothing.

Luther in 2. Ionae to. 4. f. 417. Scripture teacheth that the dead ſleepe: I thinke that they are ſo drowned with a meruailous The Soules ſleepe and feele nothing. and vnspeakable ſleepe, as they feele or ſee leſſe then they that otherwiſe ſleepe, and when they shalbe raiſed, they shall not know where they haue beene, or how they were ſodainlie borne a new. Ib. in c. 9. Eccleſ. f. 36. Salomon ſeemeth to thinke, that the dead ſleepe ſo, as they know nothing at all. He deſcribed the dead like to ſenſles carcaſes. Et f. 37. An other place, that the dead feele nothing. Salomon thought, that the dead did wholy ſleepe and feele nothing at all. In cap. 25. Gen. to. 6 f. 722. There is a great difference betwene the Saintes ſleeping and Chriſt raigning: they ſleepe and know not what is done.

Caluin in Pſychopanychia p. 388. I know manie good men, into whoſe mynd ſome thing was inſtilled of this ſleepe (of the ſoules) ether through to much readineſſe to beleiue, or through ignorance of Scriptures, whereby they were not ſufficiently inſtructed at the time for to reſiſt, whome I would not offend if I may.

Sleidan l. 9. Hiſtor. Luther teacheth out of Scripture, that the ſoules of the dead do reſt and expect the latter day of iudgment: and he addeth that out of this Luther ouerthrew purgatorie.

But to teach, that the ſoules haue no feeling, is as much as to ſay, that they are perished, according to the verdict of the Proteſtants themſelues. For thus Beza epiſtola 82. To depriue the ſoule of motion and ſenſe, is alone as to kill the ſoule. The ſame ſaieth Caluin lib. cit. p. 391. Daneus Contr. 2. p. 160. Zuinglius in Expoſit. fidei tom. 2. fol. 559. and in elencho fol. 37.

Caſtalio alſo apud Bezam de puniendis Haereticis, (whoſe learning and honeſtie D. Humfrey ad Ration. 1. Campiani ſaieth he well knew) writeth thus: Men diſpute of the Trinitie, of Predestination, of free will, of God, of Angels, of the ſtate of ſoules after this life, and of other ſuch matters, which nether are ſo neceſſarie to obtaine ſaluation by faith, becauſe without knowledge of 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 shalbe 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. and Luther in Galat. 1. fol. 215. The Confeſſion of Zwizerland addeth, that they were holie Churches of God. Author Reſpons ad theſes Vadimont. pag. 533. affirmeth, that they fell not from true faith. And Perkins tractat. de Baptiſmo col. 819. auoucheth, that they were the ſonnes of God. But if they who denied the reſurrection, kept the name of a true Church, remained the ſonnes of God, were not excluded from Gods mercie, fell not from faith, ſurely ether the reſurrection is no article at all of faith, or not neceſſarie ether to grace or ſaluation.

THE CONFERENCE.

Scripture plainely teacheth, that there shalbe reſurrection of the dead, and that the contrarie doctrine denieth Chriſts reſurrection and ouerthroweth all Chriſtian faith. The ſame ſay Catholiks.

Proteſtants plainely teach: that the more wittie the Gentils were, the more they laughed at the reſurrection, that the more learned men now are the more they thinke the reſurrection to be a fable: that Luther and Eraſmus were not free from this leauen, and that in this matter a faithfull ſoule is rare: that Schegkius openly denied reſurrection of this bodie, (which is indeed to denie all reſurrection, ſeing reſurrection is not but of the ſame which died) and yet was condemned of no Proteſtants, yea excuſed of ſome: that manie of them both drunke and ſober let fall ſuch ſpeaches from them, as do shew that they beleiue not the reſurrection of the dead: That amongſt the Sacramentaries two principall Apoſtles Caluin and Farel did not beleiue the reſurrection of this flesh, and conſequently not the reſurrection of the dead: that Sozinus was not ſatisfied about the reſurrection of the flesh: that manie of them denie the reſurrection of the blood: and laſty that they auouch that thoſe Chriſtians, who denied the reſurrection of the dead, fell not from true faith, not from the Church, or fauour of God.

THE SVMME OF THIS CHAPTER of mans Soule.

What we haue rehearſed in this chapter plainely sheweth, that Proteſtants thinke farre otherwiſe of mans ſoule, then the holie Scripture doth. For the Scripture, and Catholiks with it, teacheth, that the ſoule of man is the forme of the bodie, is immortall, that there shalbe reſurrection of the dead: which Proteſtants denie.

It sheweth alſo, that Proteſtants play the theiues towards their owne ſoules, whileſt take from it immortalitie, and the nature of the forme of the bodie, and denie the reſurrectiō of the dead. And hitherto we haue shewed, that Proteſtants in 260. articles contradict the expreſſe words of the holie Scripture: it remaineth, that we shew that they alſo contradict the true ſenſe of the words; which we will doe by twoe wayes, the one by generall reaſons, the other by the plaine confeſſion of The Scope of the ſecond booke. ſome Proteſtants touching manie of the foreſaied articles.

End of the firſt booke.

THE SECOND BOOKE. IN WHICH IT IS SHEVVED THAT PROTESTANTS CONTRADICT THE TRVE ſenſe of holie Scripture.

CHAPTER I. THAT PROTESTANTS CONTRADICT the true ſenſe of Scripture, becauſe in ſo manie things they gainſay the expreſſe words thereof.

FIRST of all, we muſt conſider, that when the holie Scripture and Catholiks both of purpoſe intend clearely to declare their meaning touching the foreſaied 260. articles in controuerſie, they do iumpe ether in the very ſelfe ſame, or inequiualent words: and that cōtrariwiſe, whē the Scripture and the learnedeſt of the Proteſtants intend to expreſſe their meaning cōcerning the ſaied articles, they vſe quite oppoſite and contrarie ſpeaches. Which is a manifeſt ſigne, that the Catholiks doctrine about the ſaied articles is the ſelfe ſame with the doctrine of the holie Scripture, and the Proteſtants doctrine, quite contrarie thereunto. For ſithence this agreemēt of Catholiks with the Scripture in words and ſpeach, and diſagreement of Proteſtants in the ſame, falleth out ſo often and in ſo manie and weightie matters, it cannot be attributed to chāce, becauſe chāce, as the Philoſophers 2. Phyſ • c. teach, is in thoſe things onely which fall out ſeldome: And therefore it proceedeth of the nature of theſe ſentences or doctrines, whoſe agreement or diſagreement with the ſentence of the holie Scripture, breedeth this ſo frequent agreement or diſagreement with the words or ſpeaches of the ſame. Wherefore thus I argue in forme of ſyllogiſme: Theſe doctrines, which when they are of purpoſe to be expreſſed clearely, diſtinctly, and as they differ from all other doctrines, do of their nature require to be expreſſed with the very ſame or equiualent words, are in deed one and the ſelfe ſame doctrine: And contrariwiſe, thoſe doctrines, which when they are to be ſo expreſſed, of their nature require to be expreſſed with quite oppoſite and contrarie words, or ſpeaches, are in deed oppoſite and contrarie doctrines: But the Scriptures and the Catholiks doctrines touching the foreſaied 260. articles, are of the firſt kind, and the Scripture and Proteſtants doctrines, of the ſecond: Therefore they are all one, and theſe, quite contrarie. The Maior of firſt propoſitiō is euidēt. For how could twoe doctrines or opiniōs of their nature require to be expreſſed with the ſelfe ſame or equiualent words, if there were any differēce betwene them. For vndoubtely that difference would exact ſome difference in the words; and thoſe words which clearely and fully expreſſe the one doctrine, could not clearely and fully expreſſe the other. And much leſſe could one & the ſelfe ſame ſpeach clearely expreſſely thē both, if they were contrarie one to the other. And therefore certaine it is, that twoe cōtrarie doctrines cannot of their nature require to be expreſſed by the ſelfe ſame or equiualent words. And conſequently alſo it is moſt certaine, that the Scriptures and Catholiks doctrines which touching theſe 260. articles of their nature require to be expreſſed with the ſelfe ſame or equiualent words, are not oppoſite one to the other. But thoſe doctrines, which when they are to be clearely and diſtinctly expreſſed, of their nature require to be expreſſed with oppoſite and contrarie ſpeeches, muſt needs alſo of their nature be contrarie one to the other. For els why should they of their nature require to be expreſſed by contrarie ſpeaches? And the oppoſition which is betwene the ſpeaches, wherewith they require to be ſignified, riſeth of the oppoſitiō, which is betwene the doctrines themſelues. The Minor or ſecond propoſition is proued. Firſt by the reaſon alreadie made: Becauſe it cannot come by chance, that in ſo manie and ſo weightie matters, when Catholiks and Proteſtāts do of purpoſe clearely & diſtinctly expreſſe their opiniōs, thoſe should agree in words and ſpeach with the holie Scripture, and theſe should diſagree. This agreement therefore and diſagreement in words, muſt needs riſe of the very nature of their opinions. Secondly, it may be proued by examples; but for breuities ſake I will be content with one. That the Proteſtants opinion touching the Euchariſt; or that which Chriſt after his laſt ſupper gaue with his hands to be eaten, when it is clearely and dinſtinctly to be expreſſed, as it differreth from the Catholik doctrine of the ſame matter, of it nature requireth to be expreſſed by a propoſition which is ſimply negatiue, appeareth manifeſtly: Firſt becauſe their opinion of that matter is ſimply negatiue, to wit, that it is not the bodie of Chriſt; And an opinion which is ſimply negatiue, requireth to be expreſſed by the like propoſition, ſuch as this is: This is not Chriſts bodie. Secondly, becauſe manie, and the learnedeſt of the Proteſtants, and often times, and in manie places, haue expreſſed their opinion of this matter by ſuch a propoſition, when they ment purpoſely to expreſſe it clearely and diſtinctly, as it defferreth from the Catholike doctrine, as I haue shewed before c. 11. art. 1. who beſt knew, with what kinde of propoſition their opinion required to be expreſſed when it was moſt clearely and diſtinctly to be expreſſed, when it was moſt clearely and diſtinctly to be declared. And in the ſame manner it is euident, that the Catholik doctrine of this matter, of it nature requireth to be expreſſed by a propoſition which is ſimply affirmatiue, as this is: This is Chriſts bodie, becauſe their doctrine of this matter is ſimply affirmatiue, and becauſe Catholiks vſe to expreſſe their doctrine by this kind of propoſition. And that the doctrine of the Scripture concerning the ſame point, of it nature requireth to be expreſſed by a propoſition which is ſimply affirmatiue, is manifeſt, becauſe she foure times of purpoſe expreſſing her meaning of this matter, she vſeth a propoſition which is ſimply affirmatiue, and neuer vſeth a propoſition negatiue. Wherefore ether the Scripture neuer expreſſed her meaning of this matter in ſuch a propoſition, as of it nature it required to be expreſſed withall, but alwaies by a contrarie kinde of propoſition, and then alſo when of purpoſe she ment to expreſſe her meaning moſt clearely and diſtinctly, or the Scriptures meaning touching this matter of it nature requireth to be expreſſed by a propoſition which is ſimply affirmatiue, as this is: This is my bodie: or, This is Chriſts bodie. And conſequently it is one and the ſelfe ſame kinde of propoſition, wherewith the Scriptures and Catholiks doctrine of this point requireth to be expreſſed, to wit, a propoſition ſimply affirmatiue; and the propoſitions wherewith the meaning of the Scripture and of Proteſtants of the ſame matter are to be expreſſed are quite oppoſite, to wit, the one ſimply affirmatiue; the other, ſimply negatiue; and the like are their meanings.

But that the force of this argumēt may better appeare, 1. Head from the numbers of articles in which Proteſt. contradict the Scripture. I will deuide it into diuers heads. The firſt shalbe taken from the multitude of matters of articles in which Proteſtants do contradict the expreſſe words of Scripture, which are (as we haue ſeene) 260 and more. For though it may chance, that one once, or twiſe, or ſeldome may contradict the expreſſe words of an other, and yet not contradict his ſenſe or meaning, yet it can no way be thought, that this can fall out ſo often. Becauſe ſo great and ſo frequent oppoſition betwene their words, cannot (as I ſaied before) come by chance: therefore it muſt riſe of the oppoſition which is betwene their meaning. For how should their tongues ſo often iarre, whoſes myndes alwaies agree? How should they who alwaies meane the ſame, ſo often ſpeake cōtrariwiſe? How should the ſame ſenſe and mynd, be expreſſed ſo often by contrarie ſignes?

The ſecond head shalbe taken from the qualitie and 2. From the number of Proteſt. who doe cōtradict. multitude of Proteſtants who haue croſſed the expreſſe words of Scripture. For admit, that ſome one or few Proteſtants, and thoſe not the leſt learned, should croſſe the expreſſe words of Scripture, and yet the Proteſtants doctrine should not croſſe the true meaning of the Scripture; yet it is altogether incredible, that ſo manie, and ſo famous Proteſtants, should ſo often fight with the expreſſe words of Scripture, and yet their doctrine should not be contrarie to the meaning of the Scripture: For this their croſſing of the Scriptures words could not riſe of chance, becauſe it is in ſo manie Proteſtants; nor of ignorance, becauſe they were the learnedeſt amongſt them, and therefore it proceedeth of the verie nature of their doctrine. And conſequently, their doctrine of it nature is oppoſite to the Scriptures doctrine.

The third head is taken of the manner wherewith 3. From the manner in which they contradict. Proteſtants croſſe the expreſſe words of Scripture. Becauſe, for the moſt parte, they croſſe them ſo directly, ſo plainely, ſo manifeſtly, as they croſſe the verie words of Catholiks, which of ſet purpoſe they contradict, or as euer anie Heretik croſſed the expreſſe words of Scripture, or as anie man can croſſe them. Wherefore ether let them denie, that the contradict the meaning of the Coū cel of Trent, of D. Stapleton, or C. Bellarmin which of purpoſe they do contradict: or let them grant, that they contradict alſo the meaning of the holie Scripture: or els let them ſay, that the contradictiōs of ſenſes or meanings are not to to be gathered out of anie oppoſition in words, though neuer ſo great and manifeſt, but out of their pleaſure. Beſides, ether let them denie, that euer anie Heretike cōtradicted the true meaning of the Scripture, or let them graunt the ſame of themſelues; ſeing they haue often times, as directly, and as euidently croſſed the expreſſe words of Scripture, and thoſe ſpoaken of purpoſe for to declare the Scriptures meaning, as euer anie Heretike croſſed the Scriptures words. Moreouer, they not onely croſſe the expreſſe words of Scripture as ditectly and plainely as euer anie did, but alſo they manie times croſſe them in ſo manie and ſo different formes of ſpeach, as ſcarce anie, who would haue it knowne that he did contradict the Scriptures meaning, could diuiſe more manners how to contradict it.

The fourth head, is taken out of the qualitie of the 4. From the qualitie of the words which they contradict. words of Scripture which Proteſtants do contradict. For they are expreſſe, formall, cleare, not obſcure nor doubtfull; and ſpoaken not by the way, but of purpoſe for to expreſſe the Scriptures meaning of thoſe matters, as is euident in all the articles. And what can be the true ſenſe of Scripture, if that be not, which ſuch kind of words do of themſelues moſt euidently afford? Or who can be thought to contradict the Scriptures true meaning, if he do not, who contradicteth the euident ſenſe of ſuch kind of words? Surely I doubt not, but if theſe words were written in anie other booke then in the Scripture, that the Proteſtants would confeſſe, that they contradict the ſenſe of them, as well as they contradict the ſenſe of Catholiks words. For as S. Auſtin ſaied in the like caſe of Pelagians: Lib. 1. de peccat. mer. c. 9. If I should ſpeake thus, theſe would oppoſe, and crie, that I ſpeake not well, I thought amiſſe: for they would vnderstand no other meaning in theſe words of anie man who should speake them, but this, which they will not vnderſtand in the Apoſtle. 5. From the ſenſe in which they contradict.

The fift head we will take from the ſenſe of thoſe words of Scripture which the Proteſtants contradict. For the ſenſe in which the Proteſtants oppoſe themſelues againſts the Scriptures words, is not forced or violent, but obuious, eaſie, open, and which the words of themſelues do plainely shew, and in which ſuch words vſe to to ſpoaken and vnderſtood of men. And euident it is, that all words ought to be vnderſtood according to ſuch a ſenſe and that ſuch a ſenſe is the true ſenſe of them, vnleſſe the contrarie be manifeſtly proued. For this is the verie rule of vnderſtanding words, which the Luther. de verb. cenae. to. 7. Melancthon in Hoſpin. p. 74. Martyr in loc. tit. de Euchar. Perkins in 1. Gal, v. 8. Pareus l. 5. de Illyricus in Claue part. 2. tom. 7. Proteſtāts themſelues ſometimes do vehemently vrge, and vnleſſe it be obſerued, the vnderſtanding of words wilbe vncertaine and according to euerie ones fanſie. Wherefore vnleſſe Proteſtants do euidently conuince, that thoſe words of Scripture which they contradict, are to be vnderſtood in an other ſenſe, then in that which of themſelues according to their ordinarie acception amongſt men they beare, they cannot denie, but in contradicting this ordinarie ſenſe of the words of Scripture, they contradict the true ſenſe of them. And therefore the Reader in this matter muſt diligently marke, that Catholiks are not bound to proue, that the words of Scripture or of Proteſtants be to be taken in their vſuall and ordinarie ſenſe amongſt men; but that this is to be ſuppoſed as a rule and vndoubted principle of vnderſtāding words, vnleſſe the contrarie be demonſtrated: And if anie denie it, he is not to be admitted to anie diſputation which is grounded in words or teſtimonies, becauſe he denieth the verie firſt principle of vnderſtanding words, which being denied, all diſpute grounded on words is vayne. Wherefore that Proteſtants, who ſay that Catholiks do begge that point which they ought to proue, when they vrge, that the words of Scripture are to be vnderſtood according to the ſenſe which they openly shew, and in which men vſe to ſpeake and vnderſtand ſuch words, know not, what ought to be proued in diſputations out of words, and what is to be ſuppoſed as a principle thereof. Whereupon Kemnitius himſelfe in Examen. parte 2. tit. de Miſſa. ſaieth: What madneſſe is it, to leaue the plaine ſenſe, which hath certaine and manifeſt teſtimonies of Scripture, and to deuiſe a new expoſition? And the ſame ſay other Proſtants, as we shall rehearſe hereafter. In Perorat. But if Proteſtants will haue ether the words of Scripture, or anie other words whatſoeuer, to be vnderſtood in an other ſenſe, then that wherein they vſe to be vnderſtood of men, all the burden of prouing lieth vpon them. Which becauſe they cannot proue, we iuſtly conclude, that they contradict the true ſenſe of the words of Scripture which we before haue alledged, and frame this argument: Whoſoeuer contradict that ſenſe of the Scriptures words, which of themſelues they beare, and in which they are vſually vnderſtood of men, and cannot demonſtrate, that they are to be vnderſtood in an other ſenſe, they contradict the true ſenſe of the words of Scripture: But Proteſtants do ſo. Therefore they contradict the true ſenſe of the holie Scripture. The Maior or firſt propoſition, is (as I ſaied) the principle and ground of all diſpute out of words: and the Minor or ſecond propoſition is euident by the anſweres of Catholiks vnto the proofes which Proteſtants bring for to shew that the words of Scripture are to be vnderſtood in an other ſenſe, then they shew, or men vſually vnderſtand them in.

The ſixt head is taken out of the circunſtances which 6. From the circunſtances of the words. make for the natiue and vſuall ſenſe of thoſe words of Scripture which Proteſtants contradict. For example: Chriſt ſaied ſimply of that which he gaue with his hands to his Apoſtles after his laſt Supper: This is my bodie: and the Proteſtants ſimply ſay of the ſame; This is not Chriſts bodie, and conſequently contradict Chriſts words not onely in their plaine, natiue, and vſuall ſenſe, but alſo which is confirmed by all their circunſtances, of end, of time, of place, of the ſpeaker, and of the hearers. As for the circunſtance of the end, it is plaine, that the end of theſe words was to tell clearely the Apoſtles what indeed that was which he then gaue them. And all his other words, were ether ſpoaken of other matters, or if of the ſame matter, yet they were ſpoaken to this end to tell the Apoſtles what it was which then he gaue them, but to what end they should vſe it, or for ſome ſuch like purpoſe. And that the foreſaied words do clearly expreſſe, what that was which at that time Chriſt gaue to his Apoſtles, is ſo euident, as our aduerſaries themſelues confeſſe. For thus Admonit. vlt. Caluin: I denie not, but Chriſtment to ſpeake moſt clearly. And Cont. Selnec. Beza: If the queſtion be about the word of God, ſurely we haue none more expreſſe, and in which we more willingly reſt, then the inſtitution of the Supper it ſelfe: This is my bodie. Authores Admonit. de libro Concordiae c. 3. p. 91. The words of the Supper are moſt cleare, and of themſelues abundantly ſufficient for to be rightly vnderſtood. And the ſame Whitaker ad Rat. 3. Zuinglius in Expl. art. 18. Riuet tract. 3. ſect. 12. Polanus part. 1. theſ. de caena. others confeſſe. The circonſtance alſo of the time confirmeth the ſame: For it was the laſt when Chriſt was to conuerſe with his Apoſtles in humane māner, and therefore it was behouefull, that, if euer, he should then ſpeake in muſt plaine and vſuall ſenſe, eſpecially ſpeaking of a matter newly then inſtituted by him, and bequeathed by him, by his laſt will and teſtament, and neceſſarily to be knowne of them, and yet which could no waie be knowne of them but by Chriſts words. But euident it is, that the moſt cleare manner of ſpeaking, is to ſpeake in the plaine, natiue, and vſuall ſenſe of words, And conſequently Chriſt, who by our aduerſaries confeſſion, ment to ſpeake moſt clearely, ſpeake in the plaine, natiue, and vſuall ſenſe of his words. The circunſtance of place alſo concurreth. For the place where Chriſt ſpoake theſe words, was free and void of ſtrangers, ſo that thereby no occaſion could be to meane otherwiſe then the words vſually did beare. The circunſtance alſo of the Speaker doth much confirme the ſame. For he was the word it ſelfe, the wiſdome of his Father, who both beſt knew how he ought to expreſſe his meaning about a new thing which could not be knowne of vs but by his words, & was moſt deſirous that we should know what it was, and that we should rightly vnderſtād his meaning. Finally Chriſts hearers do conteſt the ſame. For they were his Apoſtles, to whome he had made knowne the myſteries of God, and therefore of their parte there was no cauſe to ſpeake otherwiſe, then men vſe to do by ſuch kind of words.

The ſeuenth head shalbe taken from the nature or qualitie 7. From the matter. of the matter of the foreſaied articles, in which Proteſtants contradict the expreſſe words of Scripture: together with Proteſtants want of the like oppoſite words of Scripture, which may ſeeme expreſſely and without any inference or expoſition of Proteſtants, to teach as Proteſtants doe. For the matter of the foreſaied articles partely is ſuch, as the very light of reaſon doth ſee, that it is ſo as the expreſſe words of Scripture doth teach it to be: to wit, That God willeth not, doth not, commandeth not ſinne: That he tempteth not, nor prodeſtinateth men to ſinne, that he iuſtifieth not the impious remaining impious, that good workes are neceſſarie to ſaluation, and the like: Partely is knowne to be ſuch by verie experience, as, That a man hath free will in good and badde, that he cooperateth to his conuerſion, that faith is an act of man, and ſuch others: Partely it is new, neuer heard of before, and farre beyond the reach of all reaſon, as is the Euchariſt, and manie more. Now Proteſtants, in all kinds of matter What kind of words Proteſt. want. which is in controuerſie, and almoſt in all the foreſaied articles, want expreſſe words of Scripture, which were of purpoſe ſpoaken to declare what a thing was, and which, of themſelues, plainly, and directly without any inference or expoſition of men, may ſo much as ſeeme to ſay, that it is ſo as Proteſtants teach. Seing therefore that What kind of words Catholiks doe bring. in all kind of matter in controuerſie, and in all the foreſaied articles, Catholiks do bring both expreſſe words of Scripture, and ſpoaken of purpoſe to declare what we ought to beleiue touching that article, and which plainely and directly according to their natiue and vſuall ſenſe amongſt men without any inference or expoſition added to them, pronounce that it is ſo as Catholiks teach, and that the light of reaſon and experience alſo conteſt the ſame ſenſe in ſuch matters as they can reach vnto: And that Proteſtants in none or very few articles can bring anie ſuch expreſſe words of Scripture, which may ſo much as ſeeme to be ſo plaine What Proteſt. oppoſe againſt the expreſſe words of Scripture. for them, as thoſe are for Catholiks, but in all, or all moſt all the ſaied articles, onely bring their inferences or arguments, and thoſe compoſed at leaſt of one humane principle, and that in matters which humane reaſon no way can reach vnto, it is mere madneſſe to forſake the doctrine the doctrine of the Catholik Church, holie Fathers, and Councels, and the moſt expreſſe words of Scripture in all the ſaied articles, and the very light of reaſon and experience it ſelfe in manie of them, and to harken to the inferences, conſequences, and humane arguments of a few, new, and diſagreing Heretiks. For example: Seing the Euchariſt, as it is a matter of faith, to wit, a Sacrament inſtituted of Chriſt, and a guift giuen of him to the Church (whether it be onely a ſeale of grace, as Proteſtāts would, or the true bodie of Chriſt, as Catholiks beleiue) is a new thing, inſtituted firſt of Chriſt, and neuer heard of before, nor falleth vnder the reach of ſenſe or reaſon, but onely of faith, and is ſuch as Chriſt would haue it to be; is it not Madneſſe to follow mens conſequences rather then Gods words. madneſſe, to gather what it is, rather by the humane inferences or arguments compoſed of ſome few, new, and diſagreing men, of one humane principle at leaſt, then by Chriſts owne words, and thoſe moſt expreſſe, and ſpoakē of him purpoſely for to tell vs moſt clearely what he would haue the Euchariſt to be? For who well in his witts will perſwade himſelfe, ether that theſe men by their humane arguments perceaue better, what a thing, which falleth not vnder reaſon, is, then Chriſt who inſtituted it: or that they know better what Chriſt would haue it to be, then Chriſt himſelfe: or that they expreſſe Chriſts meaning more clearely by their arguments and conſequences quite oppoſite to Chriſts words, then he hath done by his owne expreſſe words ſpeaking by himſelfe of purpoſe for to declare his meaning: or finally, that Chriſt expreſſeth his meaning concerning the Euchariſt, by a humane principle no where deliuered of him, and a humane argument neuer made of him, and that alſo directly oppoſite to his owne expreſſe words, better then by his owne moſt expreſſe and cleare words, and thoſe of purpoſe ſpoaken for to expreſſe clearely what he would haue the Euchariſt to be? Can any mā beleiue, that a few, new, and diſagreing men do vnderſtand the ſupernaturall matters of faith better then God himſelfe; or that they declare better what they are by their humane inferences and arguments compoſed of humane principles, thē God himſelfe doth by his owne expreſſe words ſpoaken by him of purpoſe for to declare what they are? what it is to preferre mans word before Gods word, and man before God, if this be not? Or doth any wiſe man teach new Notethis. things, neceſſarie to be knowne of vs, and which cannot be knowne but by his teaching, and that but once in his life, and a litle before his death, onely by contraries, to wit, by ſaying that they are that which they are not indeed, and neuer ſaying, that they are that which truely they are? And shall we thinke, that Chriſt, the wiſdome of his Father, did once onely in his life, and neare vnto his death teach vs what the Euchariſt is, (which was then a new thing neuer heard of before, and neceſſarie to be knowne of vs, and yet could not be knowne but by his teaching) onely by the contrarie; to wit, by ſaying moſt expreſſely that it was his bodie giuen and broken for vs, & neuer ſaying, that it was not his bodie, but onely a figure thereof, if indeed it onely were a figure as Proteſtants beleiue? would God, or Gods Scripture (as S. Auſtin writeth) • . 33. cont. Fa • ſtum c. 7. speake in an other manner to vs then ours is? No ſurely, vnleſſe it would not be vnderſtood of vs. And who will ſay, that Is it mens cuſtome to be taught by cō traries? it is our manner to be taught new things, and that but once, and which cānot be knowne but by ſome Maiſters teaching, not by our Maiſters expreſſe words ſpoaken by him of purpoſe for to tell vs what thoſe things are, but by a quite oppoſite diſcourſe, not made of him but of ſome other, and conſiſting at leaſt of one principle which he neuer allowed?

By theſe, Reader, thou ſeeſt clearly (as I hope) that if Ether Proteſt. contradict the true ſenſe of Scripture, or 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 of the Anthropomorphites, then thou canſt obiect it to vs in this myſterie. For the Anthropomorphites in no place of Scripture had an expreſſe word, which directly ſaied God hath a bodie: We haue a moſt expreſſe word, wherewith Chriſt ſaied moſt directly of that which he gaue to his Apoſtles: This is my bodie. The Anthropomorphites had no expreſſe word, which was of purpoſe ſpoakē to tell vs what God was: we haue an expreſſe word ſpoaken purpoſely to this end, and onely to this end, to tell vs what the Euchariſt is. The Anthropomorphites had no expreſſe word, which anie circunſtances of moment did conuince to be vnderſtood in their proper ſenſe: we haue an expreſſe word, which all circuſtances do confirme ought to be vnderſtood in their natiue and vſuall ſignification. The Anthropomorphites had a word, but as a thing, which the very light of reaſon did shew to be otherwiſe then the word did ſignifie: we haue the word, of a new thing, neuer heard of before, and which can no way be knowne by the light of reaſon, but onely by the word of God. Finally (to omit al other differences taken from the Church, Fathers, and Councels) the Anthropomorphites had the word of a matter, which the Scripture other where moſt manifeſtly denieth: we haue the word of a matter which Deuter. 4. Actor. 7. Ioan. 4. the Scripture no where directly (ether clearely or obſculy) denieth, nether the deniall thereof can any way be wroūg out of the Scripture, but by adding a falſe humane principle, and by making a deceitfull humane argument. Thus manie and thus great differences are there betwene the word, wherewith we make the Euchariſt the bodie of Chriſt, and the word wherewith the Anthropomorphites made God to haue a bodie, as I thinke are not betwene the word which the Anthropomorphites alledged, and the word wherewith anie other article of Chriſtian faith is proued.

And thus much touching the firſt argument taken from the oppoſition betwixt the words of the holie Scripture and of Proteſtants in 260. articles, and ſuch words of the Scripture as were ſpoaken of purpoſe for to tell vs what we were to beleiue, and in their open and plaine ſenſe, which they manifeſtly shew, and in which ſuch words vſe to be ſpoaken and vnderſtood of men: which argument as a foundation of all the reſt that follow, shalbe included in euerie one of them.

CHAPTER II. THAT PROTESTANTS CONFESSE, that they contradict the ſenſe of thoſe words, which the Catholik Church manie ages agoe and manie of themſelues beleiue to be the words of God.

THE ſecond argument, wherewith we will proue that Proteſtants contradict the true ſenſe of the holie Scripture, we will take from their confeſſion, wherein they confeſſe, that they contradict the ſenſe of thoſe words, of which, ſome of them (to let paſſe all other proofes) are acknowledged by diuers Proteſtants, and all of them were manie ages agoe iudged by the Catholik Lutherans confeſſe that their doctrine is againſt S. Iames Epiſtle. Church to be a parte of the holie Scripture.

For Luther and the Lutheran Proteſtants do confeſſe, that the cheifeſt point of Proteſtancie, to wit, of Iuſtification by onelie faith, doth verilie contradict the Epiſtle of S. Iames, where he ſaieth. Yee ſee, that a man is iuſtified by workes, and not by faith onely. For thus writeth Luther in his Preface vpon that Epiſtle: I iudge it to be the writing of no Apoſtle, for this cauſe. Firſt becauſe directly againſt S. Paul, and all other Scripture, it attributeth iuſtification to workes. And in Luther ſaieth: S. Iames doated. c. 22. Gen. tom. 6. fol. 282. Iames concludeth ill. It followeth not as Iames doateth: Therefore the fruites do iuſtifie—let our aduerſaries therefore be packing with their Iames. Melancthon de Sacris Concion. to. 2. fol. 23. But if they cannot be mittigated by anie expoſition, as thoſe words of Iames: Yee ſee &c. theſe abſolutely are not to be admitted. Magdelburgenſes Cē tur. 1. l. 2. c. 4. col. 54. The Epistle of Iames ſwarueth not a litle from the analogie of Apoſtolik doctrine, whiles it aſcribeth iuſtification not to faith onely, but to workes. And Centur. 2. c. 4. col. 71. The Epiſtle of Iames attributeth iustice to workes contrarie to Paul and all other Scriptures. Schluſſelburg. lib. 1. Theol. Caluin. art. 15. fol. 50. Iames contrarie to Paul attributeth iuſtice to workes. And tom. 8. Catal. Haeret. pag. 500. he ſaieth of S. Iames. He fighteth directly with Paul and all the reſt of the Scripture, by giuing iuſtice before God to mans workes. The ſame confeſſe Pomeranus and Vitus Theodorus cited by Coccius to. 1. lib. 6. art. 23. and Pappus cited by Gretſer l. 1. de verbo Dei c. 18. and the ſame is inſinuated by Hunnius de Iuſtific. pag. 219. Wherevpon Daneus in Enchirid. Auguſtini c. 67. ſaieth: It troubleth manie now a dayes, ſo that ſome haue caſt out the Epiſtle of Iames, others haue called it ſtraweish. And Pareus l. 4. de Iuſtif. c. 18. Luther could not accord (Iames with Paul) but by caſting away the whole Epiſtle. Beza alſo in Iac. 2. v. 14. Manie haue caſt away this Epiſtle for this cauſe, as if it were contrarie to true doctrine. Nether do onelie Lutherans iudge thus of S. Iames his Epiſtle, but alſo ſome Sacramentaries. For Muſculus de locis tit. de Some Sacramentaries reiect Sainct Iames. Iuſtificat. ſaieth: That impertinentlie he alledgeth the examples of Abraham; That he confoundeth the word of faith, and ſetteth downe a ſentence different from Apoſtolicall doctrine. And ib. tit. de Scriptur. pa. 172. plainelie profeſſeth, that he houldeth it not for authenticall Scripture. And the Confeſſion Heluet. c. 15. ſaieth: The ſame ſaied he (Iames) not contradicting S. Paul, otherwiſe he were to be reiected. And neuertheleſſe, commonly all Sacramentaries account S. Iames Epiſtle to be a parte of holie Scripture; in ſo much as the English, French, and Flemish Proteſtants haue put it in their Confeſſions, as a point of their faith.

Wherefore thus I argue in forme: what contradicteth the Epiſtle of S. Iames, contradicteth the holie Scripture. The cheifeſt point of Proteſtancie touching Iuſtification by onely faith cōtradicteth the Epiſtle of S. Iames: Therefore it contradicteth the holie Scripture. The Maior or firſt Proporſition is not onely beleiued and tought of all Catholiks, but alſo commonelie of Sacramentaries: And the Minor or ſecond Propoſition is graunted by the Lutherans.

In like ſorte all Proteſtants acknowledge their doctrine Proteſtants confeſſe that they teach contrarie to Machab. Tobie. &c. of not praying for the dead to be contrarie to thoſe words of 2. Machab. c. 12. It is a holie and holeſome cogitation to pray for the dead, that they may be looſe from their ſinnes. Wherevpon Caluin in Antidoto Concil. Trident. ſeſſ. 4. p. 265. ſaieth: Out of the 2. of Machabes both Purgatorie will be proued, and the Interceſsion of Saints: out of Tobie, Satisfactions, Exorciſmes, and what not? They will borrow no few matters of Eccleſiaſticus. For from whence might they better draw their dreggs. So plainelie he confeſſeth, that his doctrine in the foreſaied points contradicted the bookes of Machabes, Tobie, and Eccleſiaſticus. And notwithſtanding S. Auſtin (whome Caluin 4. Inſtit. c. 14. §. 26. Proteſtants account the beſt witneſſe of antiquitie) clearelie teſtifieth that manie ages agoe the holie Church held the bookes of Machabes for Canonicall Scripture. For thus he writeth of them lib. 18. de Ciuitat. c. 36. Which, not Iewes, but the Church holdeth for Canonicall. And the like he ſaieth lib. 1. cont. Gaudent. cap. 23. Lib. de doctrin. Chriſt. c. 8. l. 2. Retract. c. 4. and otherwhere. Beſides manie Proteſtantt, as Caluin in Antidot. cit. p. 266. Whitaker Contr. 3. q. 6. c. 3. Perkins de Symbol. p. 787. and alſo Hyperius, Zanchius, Lubbertus, Hoſpinian, Rainolds, Feild, and others alledged in the Proteſtants Apologie Tract. 1. Sect. 3. confeſſe, that the Councel of Carthage (where S. Auſtin was preſent and ſubſcribed thereto) did reckon the bookes of Machabes in the nūber of Canonicall Scripture. And to omit all other arguments drawne out of the Scripture and Fathers for the infallibilitie of the Church, the Proteſtants themſelues eftſoones confeſſe, that the Church can diſcerne true Scriptures from falſe, and that we are bound to yeeld to her iudgment. For thus ſaieth Luther l. de Captiuit. to. 2. fol. 84. This indeed hath the Church, that she can diſcerne The Church can diſcerne the word of God. Hath authoritie to iudge. the word of God from the word of men, as Auſtin confeſſeth that he beleiued the Ghoſpell being moued by the authoritie of the Church. The Confeſſion of Wittenberg. cap. de Eccleſ. The Church hath authoritie to iudge of all doctrines. And cap. de Concilijs: She hath an aſſured promiſſe of the perpetuall preſence of Chriſt, and she is gouerned of the holie Ghoſt. Melancthon Reſponſ. ad Acta Ratisbon. tom. 3. pag. 732. We acknowledge this authoritie of teſtifying the Apostolicall Scriptures, or diſcerning the writings of the Apoſtles from counterfait, doth agree to the true Church. Caluin de vera ref. p. 232. I denie not, but that it is the proper office of Church to diſcerne true The proper office of the Church. Scriptures from counterfeit. Peter Martyr Praefat. 1. Epiſt. ad Corinth. We will eaſily graunt, that the ancient Church was indued ſo much with the holie Ghoſt, that by his leading and directiō they eaſily diſcerned betwene thoſe which were propoſed to them, which were the true and ſincere words of God, and by this ſpirituall power they diſtinguished the Canon of Scriptures from apocryphall bookes. And in locis Claſſ. 1. c. 6. §. 6. We acknowledge the office of the Church to be, that being indued with Gods Spirit, she may diſtinguish the true and ſincere bookes of holie writ from counterfeit and apocryphall. Iuel in Defenſ. of the Apologie pag. 204. The Church of God, had the ſpirit of wiſdome, She hath the ſpirit of wiſdome. Can diſcerne true Scriptures. whereby she might diſcerne true Scriptures from falſe. Fulke in his Anſwere to a falſe Cathol. p. 5. The Church of Chriſt indeed can diſcerne true Scriptures from falſe. Perkins de Serm. Dom. tom. 2. col. 252. The Church hath the guift of iudging of greateſt matters. She can iudge of the booke of Scripture, Hath the guift of iudging. which are Canonicall, which are not, of the ſpirits of men, and of their doctrines, and therefore ſurely can iudge which companie of men is the true Church, which is not. Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 3. c. 1. pag. 315. We denie not, that it belongeth to the Church, to approue, to acknowledge, to receaue, to promulgate, to commend the Scriptures to all her children, and we ſay, that this teſtimonie is true and ought to be admitted of all. Cap. 2. pag. 316. It is the office of the Church to iudge and diſcerne true ſincere and right Scriptures from falſe, counterfait, and baſtard. And for to diſcharge Hath the ſpirit of Chriſt to diſtinguish this office, she hath the Spirit of Chriſt, by which she may distinguish trueth from lyes, she knoweth the voice of her Spouſe, she is most iuditious and can diſcerne ſpirits. Cap. 5. p. Her tradition conuinceth. 322. I denie not, that the Tradition of the Church is an argumēt by which it may be cōuinced, which kookes are Canonicall, which not Canonicall. cap. 6. pag. 323. The Church hath the Spirit of God, by which being taught, she heareth the voice of he Spouſe, and acknowledgeth his doctrine. cap. 7. pag. 324. Indeed we may Her authoritie cōpelleth be compelled by the authoritie of the Church to acknowledge the Canonicall Scripture: I ſay (as I often ſaied before) that we are compelled by the authoritie of the Church to beleiue theſe bookes to be Canonicall. And cap. 9. pag. 326. We graunt with Ireney, A ſound demonſtration. that the authoritie of the Church is a ſound and breife demūſtration a poſteriori, of Canonicall doctrine. And l. 1. de Scriptura c. 1. ſect. 9. he affirmeth, that the teſtimonie of the Church ought to be receaued, and who receaueth it not, is guiltie of ſacriledge. And lib. 2. cap. 4. ſect. 4. p. 227. I ſay the teſtimonie of the Church is ſufficient to refute and conuince thoſe, who thinke amiſſe of the Scriptures. The like he hath ib. p. 218. 228. and and other where often.

Out of which confeſſions of Proteſtants of the authorite and power of the Church to diſcerne and diſtinguish true Scripture from falſe, we may thus argue. It belongeth to the Church, yea it is her function and proper office, to diſcerne true Scriptures from falſe, she hath that she can diſtinguish the word of God from the word of man, she is taught of the holie Ghoſt, indued with Gods Spirit, hath the guift of iudging, the ſpirit of wiſdome for to diſcerne, by her tradition it may be conuinced which bookes are Canonicall which not, by her authoritie, we may be compelled to acknowledge the Canonicall Scripture, her authoritie is a ſound demonſtration of Canonicall doctrine, her teſtimonie ought to be receaued of all, and who receaueth it not, is guiltie of ſacriledge. But this holie Church manie ages agoe hath iudged the bookes of Machabes to be Canonicall; Therefore they are ſuch. The Maior or firſt Propoſition is the confeſſion of Proteſtants now rehearſed, and the Minor is confirmed by the foreſaied teſtimonie of S. Auſtin and the confeſſions of the forenamed Proteſtants. And howſoeuer Proteſtants, The Cath. aduantage ouer Proteſt. will delude this argument, they muſt needs confeſſe, that Catholiks haue the aduantage of them, in that Proteſtāts produce no teſtimonie which forceth Catholiks to reiect anie booke which anie Father teſtifieth to haue beene anciently held of the Church for Canonicall, as Catholiks produce the teſtimonie of S. Iames, which maketh the Lutherans to reiect his epiſtle, which other Proteſtants confeſſe to be Canonicall, and an other teſtimonie out of the bookes of Machabes, which forceth all Proteſtants to reiect thoſe bookes, which S. Auſtin and other do witneſſe to haue beene anciently held of the Church for Canonicall. Wherefore let this be one argument.

Who not onely in manie and weightie articles do contradict the expreſſe words of holie Scripture, and thoſe ſpoakē of purpoſe that we might know the true meaning thereof touching thoſe articles, but alſo are forced to reiect manie bookes of Scripture, whereof ſome, euen manie of themſelues, and all of them, the holie Church manie ages ſince hath iudged to be partes of the holie Scripture, thoſe contradict the very true ſenſe of Scripture: But Proteſtants doe ſo: Therefore they contradict the true ſenſe of Scripture.

CHAPTER III. THAT PROTESTANTS ARE FORCED to vſe violence to the text of that parte of Scripture which they receaue.

IN the former chapter, we ſaw how Proteſtants were forced to reiect a good parte of the holie Scripture, now we shall ſee, how they deale with that parte which they ſeeme to admit, by adding to it, by detracting from it, by changing ſome words, by calling others in doubt, by falſe tranſlating ſome, by changing the order of others, and ſuch like dealings. And let the Reader note, What falſifications of Scripture are here touched. that whereas Proteſtants corrupt the words or ſenſe of holie Scripture for twoe ends, whereof the one is, that it may ſeeme to make for them: the other is, that it may not ſeeme to make againſt them; I will in this, and the next chapters relate onely their faſhions of corrupting the Scripture that it may not ſeeme to make againſt them; becauſe theſe make more to my purpoſe, which is to shew that Proteſtants contradict the true ſenſe of the holie Scripture: And by that which shalbe ſaied of this their manner of corrupting, it will eaſily be gathered, what their other manner of corrupting Scripture is. Let him alſo note that I intend not to bring all the examples of Proteſtants corrupting Scripture in anie kind whatſoeuer, but onely ſo manie as may ſuffice to proue, that they vſe to corrupte Scripture in ſuch ſorte. For as Tertullian obſerued l. Praeſcript. c. 38. Who meane to teach new doctrine, are forced by neceſsitie to alter the inſtruments of doctrine. Et c. 17. Hereſie, if it admit anie Scripture, doth change it by addition and detraction for to ſerue her turne.

Wherefore becauſe theſe words of the Apoſtle Rom. They adde to the text. 11. v. 32. For God hath concluded all things into incredulitie, that he may haue mercie on all: do proue, that God hath a will to haue mercie an all. Beza twiſe addeth to the text the Pronoune Them, in this manner: For God hath concluded all them in obſtinacie, that he might haue mercie on all them: Leſt the Apoſtle should ſeeme to ſpeake ſimply of all, and not of the elect onely, as Beza would.

Becauſe thoſe words Rom. 2. v. 27. And that which of nature They adde. is prepuce, fulfilling the law, shall iudge thee, who by the letter and circumciſion art a preuaricatour of the law: Proue that ſome do fulfill the law, Beza addeth twiſe the particle If, in this ſorte. If it fulfill the law. And ſo of an abſolute propoſition maketh a conditionall. The ſame doth Caluin, the Kings and Queen Elizabeths, Bible, and the French Geneua Bible of the yeares 1562. 1568. 1605. and 1610.

Becauſe thoſe words of the Apoſtle ad Philemon v. 14. They adde. But without thy counſaill I would do nothing, that thy good might be not as it were of neceſsitie, but voluntarie: proue good workes to be voluntarie and not done neceſſarily, the French Bibles An. 1605. and 1610. adde this particle: As; and make the Apoſtle to ſay: But as voluntarie. The Kings Bible for voluntarie, hath willingly.

Becauſe thoſe words Tit. 5. v. 3. According to his mercie he hath ſaued vs by the lauer of regeneration and renouation of the holie Ghoſt, proue, that Baptiſme concurreth to worke our ſaluation, the French Bibles An. 1562. 1568. 1605. and 1610. take away thoſe words, He hath ſaued vs, and put them in the former verſe, where they make not ſo much againſt them. The Kings Bible putteth a comma betwixt: He hath ſaued vs, and, By the lauer &c. Leſt the Apoſtle should ſeeme to ſay, that God worketh our ſaluation by baptiſme, and as Catholiks teach, and not onely ſignifie it thereby, as Proteſtants would.

Becauſe thoſe words 2. Pet. 1. v. 10. Wherefore brethren labour, They take from the text. that by good workes you may make ſure your vocation and election: proue good workes to be neceſſarie to ſaluation, and to breed aſſurance thereof: Luther in his Dutch Bible and in his Commentarie vpon that place tom. 5. blotteth out thoſe words: By good workes. And ſo doth the Kings Bible, Beza, Tremellius and other. Schioppius alſo in Eccleſiaſtico c. 12. writeth, that Luther in his Bible left out thoſe words Mark 11. v. 26. If ſo be that you will not forgiue, nether will your Father that is in heauen forgiue you your ſinnes: Which teach that our good workes are neceſſarie to remiſſion of ſinnes.

Becauſe the verbe: Is: in the words of the inſtitution of They change the words of the text. the holie Euchariſt, do proue that it is the bodie and blood of Chriſt, the Proteſtants of Zurich in their Dutch Bibles haue changed is into this verbe: Signifieth, as Schluſſelburg. l. 2. Theol. Caluin c. 6. witneſſeth that he hath ſeene and read. Yea Zuinglius l. de ver. relig. c. de Euchar. to. 2. was ſo audacious as to write thus: Thus hath Luke, which Euangeliſt onely we will alledge: This ſignifieth my bodie which is giuen for you. For as he ſaieth l. de Caena tom. 2. fol 274. If Is be put ſubſtantiuely, we muſt needs confeſſe, that the true ſubſtance of the true fllesh as Chriſt is preſent in the ſupper. And Reſponſ. ad Billican. tom. 2. fol. 261. If you take, Is, ſubſtantiuely, then the Papiſts haue wone. A goodly excuſe ſurely for to corrupt the holie text: For if it muſt be corrupte, it muſt be done for to vp hould hereſie. But this corruption of Scripture is ſo great and ſo manifeſt, as Schluſſelburg. l. cit. ſaied iuſtly: This onely corruption of the words of the Sōne of God, ought to driue all men from the companie and impietie of Caluiniſts.

Becauſe the words, Benediction, and we do bleſſe, in that They change. ſpeach of S. Paul 1. Corinth. 10. The Cuppe of benediction which we do bleſſe, &c. do inſinuate, that the wine in the Cuppe ought to be bleſſed, Zuinglius l. de Caena. tom. 2. fol. 294. ſaieth: The words of Benediction and bleſsing ought not to be vſed in this place. For commonely they vſe to be taken for the word of Conſecration. And 1. Corinth. 5. to 4. thus he writeth: Thus are the words: The Cuppe of thanks giuing wherewith we giue thanks is it not &c. And in like ſorte he hath l. de Subſidio tom. 2. fol. 253. of which corruption of Scripture thus writeth Illyricus vpon this place: Some corrupt this text, by tranſlating: The Cuppe of thanks giuing by which we giue thanks, and the text ſo corrupted they vſe in their liturgies in ſteed of the words of the Inſtitution or holie ſupper, making a duble ſacriledge. Caluin alſo in Math. 26. ver. 26. not onely expoundeth the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , by He gaue thāks, but alſo in the very text, tranſlateth it when he had giuen thanks. And yet (as himſelfe confeſſeth there) Mathew and Marke vſe the word of Bleſsing. Why therefore would not he vſe the ſame word in S. Mathews text?

Becauſe thoſe words Acts 2. v. 27. Becauſe thou wilt not They change. leaue my ſoule in hell, proue that Chriſts ſoule deſcended into hel, Beza in his tranſlation An. 1557. thus changeth the text: Becauſe thou wilt not leaue my carcaſſe in the graue. Et ad Defenſ. Caſtell. p. 460. he ſaieth: My ſoule, in the text I did tranſlate My carcaſſe, but in my Notes, My life: but we may alſo take, My ſoule, in ſteed of the Pronoune, Me. Which expoſition (ſaieth he) is moſt plaine. And he addeth: Where as I noted, that by the ancient tranſlation (my ſoule) the error roſe, I did it not without cauſe, ſith we ſee that Papiſts wrest this place especially for to ſetle their Limbus, and the Fathers from thence deuiſed that deſcent of Chriſt ſoule into hell. As if he had ſaied, I was forced to alter the tongue of the holie Ghoſt, becauſe he ſpoake againſt me. In like ſorte, becauſe we proue the ſame out of that paſſage Act. 2. v. 3 • . Foreſeing he spoake of the reſurrection of Christ, for nether was he left in hell &c. the French Bibles An. 1562. 1567. 1568. 1605. of Hell, haue made Graue, as alſo hath Tremellius done in his Latin tranſlation of the Bible neuewed by Iunius & printed at Hannow 1603.

Becauſe thoſe words Pſalm. 5. verſs. 5. Thou art not a God They change. that wilt iniquitie: proue that God no way willeth iniquitie or ſinne: the Kings Bible tranſlateth the place thus: That hath pleaſure in wickedneſſe. The French Bibles An. 1568. That loueth iniquitie: And thoſe of 1588. and 1610. That art not delighted with iniquitie. And the like hath Piſcator apud Vorſtium in Paraſceue cap. 3. and Tremellius in this place. That ſo they may defēd their blaſphemous doctrine, that God willeth iniquitie, though he do not loue it.

Becauſe theſe words Ezechiel. 33. verſ. 11. Liue I, ſayeth They change. our Lord: I will not the death of the wicked, but that he be conuerted from his way and liue: do proue that God of himſelfe willeth no mans death, the Kings Bible tranſlateth them thus: I haue no pleaſure in the death &c. and ſo alſo doth Muſculus in locis tit. de veritate, Tremellius in this place, Piſcator in Theſibus l. 2. p. 187. and others. That God may ſeeme of himſelfe to will mens death, though he take not pleaſure in it, as (ſay they) a ſicke man willeth a bitter potion, though he take no delighte in it.

Becauſe the words 2. Theſſalon. 2. v. 15. Hould the traditions They change. which yee haue learnt, whether it be by word or by our Epiſtle: do proue that traditions not written are as well to be held as thoſe that are written: Beza in his tranſlation An. 1598. changeth the diſiunctiue particle whether, into the coniunctiue Alſo, in this manner: Hould the traditions which yee haue learnt by ſpeach and alſo by our Epiſtle. Whome follow Author Reſponſ. ad Theſes Vadimontanas pag. 647. and others. An other tranſlation of Beza in Tremellius hath thus: Hould the deliuered doctrine, which you haue beene taught both by speach and by Epiſtle. Where for whether he hath And, and for Traditions, Deliuered doctrine, as Tremellius for Traditions, hath, Commandments, The French An. 1568. and 1605. haue Inſtitutions, and the Queens Bible, hath Ordinances.

Becauſe thoſe words 1. Timoth. 2. v. 4. Who will all men They change. to be ſaued, shew that God hath a will to ſaue all men, Beza in that place changeth All, into whomſoeuer: that God may ſeeme to haue onely a will to ſaue whatſoeuer kinde of men. In like ſorte ib. v. 6. Where the Scripture ſaieth: Who gaue himſelfe a redemption for all. Beza tranſlateth, For whomſoeuer.

Becauſe that ſpeach 1. Timoth. 4. v. 10. Who is the Saniour They change. of all men, eſpecially of the faithfull: declare that Chriſt redeemed all men: Beza in that place in ſteed of Sauiour, putteth, Preſeruer. And ſaieth: Becauſe the name of Sauiour troubleth manie, in that commonly it ſignifieth eternall life purchaſed by Christ, therefore to auoid ambiguitie, I choſe rather to ſay Preſeruer. As if he had ſaied: Becauſe the word which the Scripture vſeth, doth shew that Chriſt purchaſed eternall life for all, therefore I haue changed it for an other.

Becauſe thoſe words Coloſſ. 1. v. 10. That yee may walke They change. worthie of God: and 1. Theſſalon. 2. v. 11. We haue adiured euerie one of you that you walke worthie of God: and 3. Epiſtle of 5. Ihon. v. 6. Whome, thou shalt doe well, bringing on their way in manner worthie of God: do shew that good workes may be worthie of God; Beza in all theſe places, for worthie of God: hath Agreable to God. Tremellius 1. Coloſſ. v. 10. for worthie of God, hath: It is iust. and 1. Theſſal. 2. It is agreable to God. The Kings Bible 3. Ioan. 6. cit. hath After a godlie ſorte.

Becauſe Chriſts words Lucae 7. ver. 47. Manie ſinnes are They change. forgiuen her, becauſe she hath loued much: inſinuate iuſtification by workes. Beza in place of Becauſe (in Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) tranſlateth For. And addeth that he did ſo, that it might be more eaſily perceaued, that in theſe words is not shewed the cauſe of remiſsion of ſinnes. The Kings Bible, Illyricus and others follow Beza herein.

Becauſe thoſe words of S. Luke c. 1. v. 6. They were both They tranſlate ill. iuſt before God, walking in all the commandements and iustifications of our Lord without blame: helpe to proue, that good workes are iuſtifications, and do iuſtifie: Beza, though he confeſſe that the Greek word which S. Luke vſeth, be to be literally tranſlated Iustifications: Yet ſaieth, that he would not ſo interprete it, that (ſaieth he) I might take away this occaſion of impugning iuſtification by (onely) faith, and ſo in ſteed of Iuſtifications, hath, Rites. Tremellius, hath Righteouſneſſe. Queen Elizabeths and King Iames Bible, ordinances.

Becauſe thoſe words Philip. 2. v. 12. Worke your ſaluation Tranſlate ill. with feare and trembling: proue, that we may worke our ſaluation: The French Bibles An. 1562. 1568. 1605. 1610. in ſteed of worke haue, Endeauour you: that the Scripture may ſeeme onely to ſay, that we may endeauour to worke, but not worke our ſaluation.

Becauſe thoſe words Iames 5. v. 16. Confeſſe your ſinnes Tranſlate ill. one to an other: proue, that we ought to confeſſe our ſinnes to men, the French Bibles An. 1605. 1610. tranſlate them thus: Confeſſe your faults one againſt an other, as if the Apoſtle had bidden, onely to confeſſe offences done againſt men. The ſame inſinuateth the Kings Bibles, whiles for Sinnes it hath Faultes.

Becauſe thoſe words Actor. 23. v. 11. And the night following, Tranſlate ill. our Lord ſtanding by him, ſaied &c. do proue, that Chriſt was preſent with S. Paul in priſon, the French Bibles An. 1560 1562. 1568. 1605. in ſteed of Standing by, tranſlate, He preſented himſelfe. Tremellius hath, He was ſeene.

Becauſe thoſe words Hebr, 4. ver. 14. Hauing therefore a Tranſlate ill. great high Preiſt that hath penetrated the heauens, Caluin for Penetrated the heauenes, tranſlated: He entred, Beza, He paſſed through: Tromellius, He aſcended.

Becauſe that Pronoune demonſtratiue Hic, This: in thoſe words of Chriſt: This is my blood, doth proue, that it Tranſlate ill. is not referred to the word Cuppe or wine, but to the word Blood, Beza in Math. 26. v. 28. would not tranſlate it Hic in the maſculine gender, but Hoc in the neuter gender. For (ſaieth he) homilia 2. de ver. preſent. vol. 3. pag. 316. Surely who ſaieth Hic, This is my blood; pointeth at nothing, but his owne blood. The like he ſaieth in Cyclope pag. 268. Piſcator l. 2. Theſ. p. 450. And yet as Illyricus ſaieth: All both ancient and new, and Caluin himſelfe tranſlate, Hic: This is my blood. And Beza himſelfe Hebr 9. ver. 20. tranſlateth the very ſelfe ſame Greek words thus, Hic eſt ſanguis: This is my blood: becauſe there they proue not that the Euchariſte is the bloud of Chriſt, as they do Mathew. 26. v. 28. cit. Muſculus alſo in locis tit. de Caena pag. 360. affirmeth, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 vſed by S. Mathew and S. Mark, is not well tranſlated in the Maſculin gender Hic, Vnleſſe we vnderſtand Calix, and neuertheleſſe in the ſame place ſaieth, that Mathew and Mark write, that our Lord ſaied: Hic: This is my my blood of the new teſtament. So that though twoe Euangeliſts teach that our Lord ſaied Hic, This, in the Maſculine gender, yet it is not well tranſlated ſo.

Becauſe thoſe Greek words Luc. 22. verſ. 20. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that is. This is the new cuppe which the new teſtament in my blood, that (Cuppe) which is shed for you, do euidently shew that the word Shed is referred to the word (Cuppe) and conſequently doe proue that it was a Cuppe of the true blood of Chriſt, Beza vpon that place, and Reſpons. ad Illyr. p. 198. and other Proteſtants after him, ſaieth, that ether there is a manifeſt Solloecophanes, wherein the They call in do o • the words. Nominatiue caſe is put for the Datiue, or els theſe words are foiſted into the text: And yet confeſſeth, that all our ancient Copies haue the nominatiue caſe: or as Fulk ſaieth Praef. in nou. teſtam. not. 49. All the Copies extant haue it in the nominatiue caſe. And Beza herein is followed of Whitaker l. 1. cont. Dur. ſect. 35. Daneus Contr. de Euchar. p. 544. Bucanus loco. 48. Piſcator in Refutat. Sophiſmatum Hunnij p. 468. and of others. Zuinglius reſp. ad Matthaeum Rulling. tom. 2. fol. 156. ſomewhat bolder, tranſlated theſe Greek words ſo, as the word Shed cannot be referred to the word Cup to which alone S. Luke referreth it, for thus he hath: Hoc poculum in ſanguine meo, qui pro vobis funditur: and Reſponſ. ad Confeſſ Lutheri tom. 2. fol. 511. ſaieth, that it is an Enallage or Change of the Nominatiue caſe for the Datiue. Moreouer Beza Luc. 22. verſ. 17. calleth in doubt: thoſe words: Which is giuen for you: Whereby the real preſence is confirmed.

Becauſe thoſe words Math. 10. verſ. 2. The names of the They call in doubt. twelue Apoſtles be theſe: Theſe firſt, Simon, who is called Peter: proue the primacie of S. Peter; Beza vpon that place ſaieth: What if this word, Firſt, be added by ſome, who would ſtablish the the primacie of Peter? And neuertheleſſe addeth: We find it ſo written in all Copies. And ſo by his owne confeſſion, contrarie to the teſtimonie of all Copies calleth in queſtion a word which fauoureth the Primacie of S. Peter.

Becauſe the Pronoune Hoc or Hic in the words of They •• ll in doubt. the Euchariſt, being taken adiectiuely, helpeth to proue the Euchariſt to be the bodie & blood of Chriſt: Daneus l. 1. de Euchar. c. 1. pag. 543. ſaieth: What if I except, that the proper words of Chriſt were onely theſe twoe? Is my ſtesh: I shall with one word fruſtrate all this proofe by the Pronoune, Hoc: But if thou canſt nether proue thy exceptiō of Chriſts words, nor canſt denie, but that the Euangeliſts haue the pronoune Hoc, This, is not thy exception both vaine and impious?

Becauſe thoſe words 1. Corinth. 13. v. 2. If I should haue Tranſlate ill. all faith, ſo that I could remoue mountaines, and haue not charitie, I am nothing: do proue, that no faith at all worketh iuſtification without charitie: Beza therefore All tranſlateth whole, and ſaieth he doth it, leſt this text should deceaue anie.

Becauſe thoſe words Daniel 4. v. 24. Redeeme thou thy Tranſlate ill. ſinnes with almes, proue, that good workes do redeeme ſinnes: The Kings Bible tranſlateth it thus: Breake of thy ſinnes by righteouſneſſe: And others ſay, that our tranſlatiō is naught: And neuertheleſſe P. Martyr on this place auoucheth. That the Chaldee, in which tongue this was written, hath word for word, Redeeme thy ſinnes by iuſtices, and ſo it is cited by Caluin 3. Inſtit. c. 4. §. 36. Apolog. Confeſſ. Auguſt. c. de reſponſ. ad argumenta, and alſo by others reported in the Proteſtants Apologie Tract. 1. ſect. 4. ſubdiuis. 7.

Becauſe thoſe words Hebr. 2. ver. 9. But him, that was a They change the order of the words. litle leſſened vnder the Angels, we ſee Ieſus becauſe of the paſsion of death, crowned with glorie and honor: proue, that Chriſt was crowned with glorie, becauſe he ſuffered death: Beza turneth the words thus: But we ſee that Ieſus crowned with glorie and honor, who for a time was made inferior to Angels for ſuffering of death. And King Iames Bible followeth him: As if the Apoſtle had not ſaied, why Chriſt was crowned with glorie, but why he whas made inferiour to Angels. And yet Beza is not ashamed to adde: Let no man meruaile that I haue changed the placing of the words.

Becauſe the words 2. Pet. 2. v. 8. For in ſight and hearing They 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 . he was iuſt, dwelling with thē who from day to day vexed the iuſt ſoule with vniuſt workes: proue, that mē may be iuſte in ſome deeds: The King and Queens Bible turne the words thus: For being righteous, and dwelling amōg thē, in ſeing and hearing vexed his ſoule. Where they do not refer iuſt or righteous to Seing and hearing as the text doth.

Becauſe thoſe words 1. Corinth. 14. verſ. 17. Thou indeed They omit words. giueſt thanks well, do plainely approue praier in an vnknowne tongue; Zuinglius Caluin and Beza in their Cō mentaries ſlippe ouer theſe words. Yea Caluin 3. Inſtit. c. 20. §. 33. citing this ſentence, omitteth the word well. In like ſorte Caluin and Beza Luc. 22. v. 32. ſlippe ouer thoſe words of Chriſt: I haue praied for thee, by which S. Peters Primacie is confirmed.

Wherefore thus I make my third argumēt: Who beſide the foreſaied oppoſition to the expreſſe words of Scripture, are forced many times to vſe violence to the very ſacred text by adding or taking away words, by changing, by calling in doubt, by ill tranſlating, by omitting, by changing the order of the words, they are to be iudged to contradict the true ſenſe of the holie Scripture. But Proteſtants do ſo. Therefore &c.

CHAPTER IV. THAT PROTESTANTS OVERTHROW all force of the words of holie Scripture, yea contemne and deride them.

OVR fourth argument shalbe, that Proteſtants, when they nether dare denie, nor change the words of Scripture, yet ouerthrow all the force of them, yea ſometimes contemne and ſcoffe at them.

The firſt way by which they delude the expreſſe word of God, is that in what kind of matter ſoeuer, to wit, whether it be of precept or doctrine, whether it can be knowne onely by Gods word or no: and in what places ſoeuer, to wit, whether in them the matter be handled purpoſely, or no; in what kind of matter ſoeuer (I ſay) and in what kind of place ſoeuer, the holie Scripture ſpeaketh expreſſely againſt thē, they crie, that we muſt not ſtick to the letter nor vrge it. Zuinglius in Math. 19. to. 4. The words Proteſt. will not haue the word of God vrged againſt them. of Chriſt: what God hath ioyned, let not man ſeperate, are ſo drie, that it may ſeeme, that married perſons can be ſeperated for no cauſe. Here becauſe the letter clearely maketh againſt him, he addeth: But we will not after the Iewish manner ſticke ſo ſuperſtitiously to the letter. And in Mark. 1. We must not ſtick faſt to the bare letter, but the letter is to be expounded and directed according to the rule of the (Proteſtants) Spirit. Et Inſtitut. de caena. tom. 2. fol. 288. Is it fit in Scripture to vrge earneſtly onely the letter, or rather hauing conſulted other places, we ought to conſider, what the authoritie of it may admit. Becauſe in the matter of the Euchariſt, the words of Scripture are clare aga •• ſt them: Caluin 4. Inſtit. cap. 17. §. 20. ſaieth: Chriſts words are not vnder the common rule, nor are to be examined gramatically. §. 23. Theſe good Maiſters, that they may appeare men of letters, do forbidde to Caluin ſcoffeth at thoſe who vrge the word of God. goe any whit from the letter. What monſtruous abſurdities cānot phrentik men gather, if they may obiect euerie tittle for confirmation of their opinions. And he termeth it foolish stubberneſſe, to contend earneſtly about (Chriſts) words. And calleth vs Catchers of ſyllables, froward and ſtubbern exactours of the letter, foolish and ridiculous maiſters of letters, becauſe in the matter of the Euchariſt we ſtick cloſe to the expreſſe words of Scripture, and vrge them againſt him; as if with ſcoffes and taunts he would beat vs from the expreſſe word and letter of almightie God. Moreouer in Math. 3. v. 16. he ſaieth: Some do foolishly and prepoſterouſly vrge the letter, that they may include the thing in the ſigne. And in Math 26. v. 28. The Papiſts and ſuch like are foolishly ſuperſtitious, whiles they lay faſt hould vpon (Chriſts) words. And Admonit. vlt. ad Weſtphal. pag. 8 • 7. We must not earneſtly inſiſt vpon the words. Beza cont. Weſtphal. p. 214. By what right is it not lawfull for vs to appeall (as I may ſay ſo) from the word to the ſenſe? P. Martyr l. de Euchar. p. 124. Yee muſt not alwaies obiect the clearneſſe of the ſenſe. pag. 126. Yee muſt not take firſt ſenſe which offereth it ſelfe. p. 126. Yee should not ſo much vrge the plainenes of the ſenſe. and pag. 149. They obiect againe vs the ſimple ſenſe and hould that firmely. Zanchius l. 1. Epiſt. p. 34. They haue cried to importunely and till they were hoarſe: The word, the words. Kerberman l 1. Syſtem. Theol. pag. 169. They importunely vrge the letter or words of Scripture. Willet in Synopſi Contr. 19. pag. 885. We muſt not take the letter, but follow the ſenſe, where we find mention made of the vniuerſalitie of Christs death. pag. 886. It cannot literally be vnderſtood, that God would abſolutely haue all mē to be ſaued. Thus ſpeake theſe men, when the letter or plaine ſenſe of Scripture maketh expreſſely againſt them. In the meane tyme whenſoeuer the letter of Scripture ſeemeth to fauour thē, they moſt veliemently preſſ •• . As for example, becauſe S. Paul ſometimes calleth the Euchariſt bread, they will needs haue it to be materiall bread. Caluin in Math. 26. verſ. 28. The Papiſts denie, that bread is shewed, but Paul refuteth their Difference betwene the words which Proteſt. and which Cath. vrge. dotage, affirming that the bread which we break is the communication of the bodie of Chriſt. The like he hath 4. Inſtit. c. 17. §. 15. and others after him: And neuertheleſſe, the Scripture neuer ſaieth directly of the Euchariſt: This is bread, as four times it ſaieth moſt directly of it: This is Chriſts bodie: Nether doth it in anie place reſtraine the word, Bread when thereby it ſignifieth the Euchariſt, to the proper ſignification of materiall bread, as it doth manie waies reſtraine the word Bodie to ſignifie the true bodie of Chriſt, by adding that it is the bodie giuen deliuered or broken for vs. Moreouer the Scripture it ſelfe Ioan. 6. clearely expoundeth, that when by the word Bread it ſignifieth the Euchariſt, it meaneth the very flesh of Chriſt. So that in the ſelfe ſame matter, that word which is ſaied of the Euchariſt in an identicall ſpeach ſaying, This is this, and which oftētimes and moſt clearely is tied to it proper ſignification, nor is euer expounded in Scripture to be otherwiſe taken, muſt not be vrged againſt Proteſtants, becauſe it maketh againſt them; and an other word, which nether is euer ſo ſaied of the Euchariſt, nor is any way reſtrained to it proper ſignification, yea which the Scripture it ſelfe expoundeth figuratiuely, muſt be vrged, becauſe it ſeemeth to fauour Proteſtants: and conſequētly the letter or word of Scripture is to be vrged, or not vrged, according as it fauoureth or disfauoureth Proteſtāts. Which is indeed to shape the Scripture to their opinions, not to frame their opinions to the Scripture.

But if they cannot obtaine, that the letter of the holie They call it begging of the queſtion, to vrge the letter. Scripture be not vrged againſt them, they take an other courſe to delude the authoritie or force thereof. For they call the open and plaine ſenſe of it into controuerſie, and then crie, that it is the begging of the queſtion to argue againſt them out of a ſenſe which is controuerted. Thus do the Proteſtants, when we vrge againſt them the words of the Euchariſt, as yee may ſee in Zuinglius in Exegeſi to. 2. fol. 338. Ad Epiſtol. Amici fol. 322. Caluin Admonit. vlt. ad Weſtphal. p. 805. Beza cont. Weſtphal. pag. 232. P. Martyr 1. Corint. 11. fol. 158. Iuel art. 5. ſect. 5. and others. Yea ſometimes they goe ſo farre as to ſay, that it is a manifeſt abuſe, follie, vanitie, and dotage to argue againſt them out of the words of the Supper or Euchariſt. Author orthodoxi Conſenſus in Schluſſelburg lib. 4. Theol. Caluin. art. 20. pag. 125. It is a manifeſt abuſe of the words of the Supper, to proue that by the words which is queſtion or controuerſie. Humfre ad Rat. 2. Campiani p. 118. He will play the foole, who diſputeth out of this place, which is in controuerſie. Caluin Admonit. vlt. cit. p. 821. Let them leaue to pretend a vaine preiudice of words, of whoſe ſenſe and meaning the contention is betweene vs. And in Gratulat. ad Precentor. p. 379. We except, that it is foolishly preſſed as most certaine, whereof doubt is. But what argument taken out of the Scriptures words can be good and ſtrong, if that which is taken out of Chriſts expreſſe words, which are both cleare, and of purpoſe ſpoaken to declare what the Euchariſt is (which what it is cannot be knowne but by his plaine words) and which alone were ſpoaken of him to this end, be a begging of the queſtion, a vaine, foolish, and friuolous argument, onely becauſe it hath pleaſed ſome few, new, Heretiks, to call the cleare ſenſe of theſe words into queſtion.

Thirdly if they dare not ſay, that the words which They deuiſe manie ſenſes. make againſt them, haue an other ſenſe, then that which they clearely afford, yet they will deuiſe manie ſenſes, and ſay; that it is vncertaine in which of thoſe ſenſes the words are to be vnderſtood, and conſequently that nothing can be certainely gathered of them. Thus dealeth Kemnice in Exam. tit. de Baptiſmo pag. 69. Where hauing brought manie expoſitions of the word Baptiſme Actor. 19. Whence we proue, that the baptiſme of Chriſt was different from that of S. Ihon, thus at laſt he concludeth: Nothing cā be proued out of places, that are obſcure, ambiguous, and in controuerſie. Indeed if thoſe places muſt be counted ſuch, of which it hath pleaſed new Hheretiks to deuiſe diuers ſenſes; Let them giue the like libertie to other Heretiks, and they shall ſee how much they will preuaile againſt them by any words of Scripture whatſoeuer.

Their fourth shift is, that when the words of Scripture They will haue Gods meaning rather out of by places, then out of proper. which are ſpoaken purpoſely of anie matter, make againſt them, they will not haue the queſtion to be denied by them, but ether by words which are not ſpoaken at all of that matter, or but incidently and by the way, and will haue theſe to be the rule of expounding to others, and ſo gather the ſenſe of Scripture rather out of a ſtrange place then out of the proper place. Thus the Sacramentaries will haue the queſtion of the Euchariſt to be tried rather out of the 6. of S. Ihon (though commonly they teach that there Chriſt ſpoake not of Euchariſt) or out of words which ſpeak of Chriſts aſcenſion into heauen, or out of words which ſpeake of the end of the Euchariſt, then out of thoſe which purpoſely and which onely ſpeake of the ſubſtance of the Euchariſt. Zuinglius Epiſt. ad Matheum Rutling. tom. 2. fol. 153. ſaieth that Chriſt ſpeaketh not of the Euchariſt in the 6. of S. Ihon: and yet frō thence taketh (as he ſpeaketh fol. 155. his Buckler, and l. de relig. fol. 206. his braſen wall and sheeld, and fol. 215. his hard adamant. Note. And ſaieth. fol. 155. cit. that we muſt onely stick to theſe words: Flesh profiteth nothing: or (as he ſpeaketh in Exegeſi fol. 336.) To them before all others. And as for the words of the Supper, which were ſpoaken purpoſely of this matter, he ſaieth plainely l. de relig. c. de Euchar. We relie not vpon them, but onely vpon this word. Flesh profiteth nothing. And addeth: What thinke yee of this ſubtill deuiſe, which forſooth relieth vpon (Chriſtes) words onely. And Reſp. ad Billican. fol. 264. This dispute doth not relie vpon thoſe words: This is my bodie. For we would not ſeeme to ground our opinion vpō theſe letters. For that were vnlawfull. See more of the like ſtuffe in his Apologie tom. 2. fol. 371.

Bullinger cited by Schluſlelburg. loc. cit. We deſire our Chriſts words of the Euchar. are no Proteſt. ground of that matter aduerſaries that they do not (as heretofore they haue done) make the words of the Lords ſupper which are in controuerſie, as the foundation of their doctrine. Melancthon. Epiſt. ad Frideric. Elector. apud Martyrem in Dial. col. 112. In this controuerſie (of the Euchariſt) the beſt is, to bould the words of Paul: The bread which we breake is the communication of the bodie. Peter Martyr cont. Gardiner. col. 440. It is fond which he addeth, that in the myſterie of the Euchariſt we muſt recurre to the words of our Lord inſtituting it. Caluin Admonit. vlt. ad Weſtphal. pag. 818. In vaine they shall crie: we muſt goe to the fountaine. And de Rat. concordiae pag. 866. There is no reaſon to inſiſt vpon the eſſentiall verbe; Is. Yee ſee, that in the very queſtion, what the Euchariſt is, they ſay that it is fond and contrarie to reaſon, to recurre to the words of the Inſtitution thereof, to inſiſt in them and make them our foundation, and neuertheleſſe the words of the Inſtitution are ſpoake purpoſely, and that onely to tell vs what the Euchariſt is; but will haue vs to runne to other places where it is not ſpoaken at all of the Euchariſt, or at leaſt not of the ſubſtance thereof. This plainely sheweth, that in very deed they make not the Scripture the foundation of their faith, nor gather their beleife from thence: Which themſelues ſometimes do plainely confeſſe. For thus P. Martyr Proteſt. gather not their faith out of the Scripture. praefat lib. de Euchariſt pag. 26. This is the baſis ſtrength and foundation of the opinion (of the Euchariſt) which I haue ſet downe: That it is proper to God to be euery where, and that the condition of humane nature is to be contained in ſome certaine Reaſon, groūd of Proteſt. in the Euchar. place, nor can be diffuſed to manie places at once. Caluin 4. Inſtit. c. 17. §. 20. The reuerence of Chriſts words is no ſufficient pretext, why they should ſo reiect all the reaſons which we obiect. Author Orthodoxi Conſenſus in Schluſſerburg. lib. 1. Theol. Caluin. art. 23. We muſt not ſimply behould the 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. OEcolā padius 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 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, shalbe, 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 Contraremonſtrantes 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 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 shalbe, 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 speake • h by graunt or conceſſion. Scripture ſpeaketh by conceſſiō or graūt. 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 shalbe 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, shalbe 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 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, shalbe 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. An ill man hath faith: Ironically. Thou beleiueſt that there is one God: Thou doeſt well: Beza ib. anſwereth: That which followeth: Thou haſt faith, is ſpoaken ironically: And Caluin. ib. v. 18. Eraſmus is much deceaued in that he acknowledgeth not an ironie in theſe words. The ſpeech is ironicall. And Thou doeſt well, is added for to extenuate. And likewiſe in Rom. 3. v. 30. he ſaieth: I thinke that there is an ironie in the words. And lib. 6. de lib. arbit. pag. 198. Salomon Mans is to prepare his heart: Ironically. ſaieth (Prouerb. 16.) it is mans parte to prepare the hart, and the Lords to gouerne the tongue. Who ſeeth not that it is an ironicall deſcription of mans arrogancie, who challengeth to himſelfe all high matters, and hath not the leaſt matter in his power?

If we proue, that good workes do cleanſe from ſinne, Almes cleanſeth ſinne. Ironically. becauſe Chriſt ſaieth. Luc. 11. v. 41. But yet that that remaineth, giue almes, and behould all things are cleane vnto you: Vallada in his Apologie c. 22. pag. 300. anſwereth: Chriſt is farre from teaching that by almes ſinnes are redeemed, that on the contrarie he derideth and rebuketh the Phariſees that they had this opinion. And the Apologie Conf. Auguſt. c. de reſponſ. ad argum. There are manie who interprete it to be an ironie. This interpretation is not abſurd, nor hath anie thing which is contrarie to other Scriptures. P. Martyr in Rom. 11. Thoſe words: Giue almes &c. may be expounded three waies. The firſt is, to ſay, that the ſpeach is ironicall. And this he repeateth in locis claſſ. 3. c. 4. §. 34. Aretius alſo in locis part. 1. fol. 90. ſaieth: Others chuſe rather to take this ſentence of Chriſt ironically.

If we proue that ſinnes may be redeemed by almes, becauſe Daniel ſaieth c. 4. ver. 24. Redeeme thy ſinnes by almes: Schluſſelburg. tom. 8. Catal. pag. 524. ſaieth: There are Almes redeeme ſinne. Ironically. ſome that expound this place ironically. Which he doth not diſlike.

If we proue that the commandements may be kept, becauſe Luc. 18. v. 22. a man that ſaied he had kept them all, Chriſt reprehendeth not, but ſaieth: Yet one thing thou One thing lacking: Ironically. lackest: Sell all that euer thou haſt, and giue to the poore &c. Beza ib. anſwereth: Yea all things (lack) ſeing no man can keepe euen one commandment ſo as the law appointeth: wherefore Chriſt ſpeaketh with a holie ironie.

If we proue that a ſinner hath free will or power to conuerte himſelfe, becauſe God ſaieth Oſeae. 5. ver. vlt. Going I will returne to my place, vntill you faile and ſeeke my Men ſeeke God: Ironically. face: Whitaker and Rat. 9. Campiani anſwereth: Which words truely he ſpoake ironically and mimetically. And lib. 9. cont. Dur. ſect. 25. It is manifeſt, that the Lord ſpoake ironically. Thus you ſee in how great matters they ſay, that the Prophets, Apoſtles, Chriſt, and God himſelfe ſpoake ironically or ſcoffingly, when they ſpeake againſt thē, which is indeed to make the Prophets, Apoſtles, Chriſt, and God himſelfe to be ſcoffers, or rather to ſcoffe and mock them. Now let vs ſee, how they ſay, that the Scripture ſpeaketh mimetically, or by imitation of others.

If we proue that faith, is a worke, becauſe Chriſt Faith is a worke: Mimetically. ſaieth. Ioan. 6. v. 29. This is the worke of God, that you beleiue in him. Beza ib. anſwereth: Perhaps this kind of ſpeach, is borrowed of the common vſes and is to be expounded by mimeſis or imitation: as if one comming to a Phiſician should aske of him for how much money would he cure him, and the Phyſician should anſwere in theſe words: All the money which I demaund of you is this, that you truſt me and be perſwaded that I ſeeke nought but your health. If I ſay the Phyſician should thus anſwere, who could gather out of this anſwere that money is the truſt which the Phyſician demandeth of the ſicke man for to obey holeſome aduiſe. Wherefore they are very ridiculous (that I may omit other paralogiſmes) who out of that place do gather that faith is a worke. Pareus l. 1. de Iuſtificat. c. 16. Faith is improperly called a worke. For Chriſt calleth faith in it ſelfe a worke of God, according to the ſpeach of the Iewes who asked him. And Whitaker lib. 8. cont. Dur. ſect. 88. Chriſt called faith a worke, ether mimetically, or becauſe it is the worke of the holie Ghoſt.

If we proue, that that faith whereof S. Iames ſpeaketh Faith iuſtifieth: Mimetically. is iuſtifying faith, becauſe c. 2. v. 24. he ſaieth: Yee ſee, that a man is iuſtified by workes, and not by faith onely: that is: Man is iuſtified by faith, but not by onely faith: Pareus l. 4. de Iuſtificat. c. 18. anſwereth: He addeth that Antitheſis: And not by faith onely: by mimeſis or imitation of the hypocrites: we are iuſtified by faith onely: yee ſee (ſaieth he) this is falſe.

If we proue that Chriſts flesh is truely eaten, becauſe he ſaieth Ioan. 6. My flesh is truely meate: Zuinglius in Exegeſi tom. Chriſt flesh eaten: Mimetically. 2. fol. 333. anſwereth: He finely obſerueth the imitation of the Iewes, who ether thought or would ſeeme to thinke that he was but a mere man. And vpbraiding to theſe men their error, he ſaieth: His flesh is truely meate. The ſame he repeateth in Ioan. 6. tom. 4. fol. 308. And addeth fol. 334 According to etheologie and mimeſis which are a kind of alleoſis, that is by imitation, wherewith he spoake according to the ſpeach and opinion of his enemies: he vſeth the word Flesh and meaneth Saieth Flesh, and meaneth Spirit. the Spirit, that is his Diuinitie, as often as he attributeth life to his flesh.

If we proue that there are twoe teſtaments becauſe S. Paul ſaieth Gal. 4. For theſe are twoe testaments, the one truely One teſtamēt. Mimetically. &c. Zuinglius in Elencho tom. 2. fol. 3. anſwereth: Paul calleth it one teſtament, not that it was truely a teſtament, but by etheologie or imitatiō of them who ſo called it. And he addeth: who more stifly—embraced shaddows (as it is the groſſe diſpoſitiō of men) more then they ought, would rather leeſe light then darkneſſe: not vnlike to that madde man, who greatly complained that his freinds had procured him to be reſtored to his witts. After the manner of theſe men Paul ſaieth that there are twoe teſtaments. See how he ſaieth that Saint Paul ſpeaketh like a madde man. And in Ioan. 6. tom. 4. p. 305. Where Chriſt calleth faith a worke, he ſaieth, Christ plaieth in the word, worke, and calleth faith a worke, becauſe they looked to workes. So in the Epiſtle to the Rom. and Galat. by imitation he calleth grace, the law of the ſpirit. And in Math. Grace called a law. Mimetically. 19. pag. 107. The Lord continueth in his imitation, and accommodateth his ſpeach to the mynd of the yong man, who after a Phariſaicall manner did think, that iuſtification and life euerlaſting were to be gotten by workes. And in Iacob. 2. p. 549. he ſaieth, that when S. Iames termeth faith that which is without workes, he ſpeaketh by imitation, imitating them Faith without workes: Mimetically. who bragged of dead faith, which is no faith, as of liuelie and true faith. Illyricus alſo in Claue tract. 4. col. 332. ſaieth, that by imitation the Ghoſpell is called the law of faith Rom. 3. and faith a The Ghoſpell law of faith, Mimetically. worke Ioan. 6. and in like manner it is ſaied: Make to your ſelues freinds of the mammon of iniquitie.

If we proue that thoſe things which are written in the booke of wiſdome, were ſpoaken of Salomon becauſe the praier to God which is in the 9. chapter can agree to no other, Whitaker Controu. 1. quaeſt. 1. c. 12. anſwereth: That might be done mimetically by imitation, of the writer, Salomon praieth to God Mimetically. whoſoeuer, he was. And the ſame ſaieth Rainolds Praelect. 20. and. 21. As if imitations which are grounded in lyes, and that in praiers to God were to be admitted in Scripture. What other thing were this for Scripture but to imitate others in lyes, and euen then when it ſpeaketh to God? And thus much of their Mimeſes or imitation: Now let vs ſee ſome of their hyperboles.

If we proue that faith may moue mountaines, becauſe Faith may moue mountaines Hyperbolically. Chriſt ſaieth Math. 17. ver. 20. If you haue faith as a muſtard ſeed, you shall ſay to this moūtaine, Remoue from hence thither, and it shall remoue: Caluin ib. in v. 19. anſwereth: It is certaine, that it is an hyperbolicall kind of ſpeach, whē he ſaieth that by faith trees and mountaines may be remoued. The ſame hath Illyricus vpon this place.

If we haue proue that almes deliuereth from ſinne, becauſe Almes deliuereth from ſinne: Hyperbolically. it is ſaied Tobie 4. v. 11. Almes deliuereth from all ſinne and from death: Vallada in his Apologie cit. pag. 304. anſwereth: This kind of ſpeach of Tobie is hyperbolicall: And Apologia Confeſſ. Auguſt. c. de reſponſ. ad argum. We will not ſay that it is an hyperbole, albeit it muſt be ſo taken, leaſt it detract from the praiſe of Chriſt, whoſe proper office is to deliuer from death and ſinne.

If we proue that one man by his praier may procure One man procureth life to an o • her: Hyperbolically. life to an other, becauſe it is ſaied. 1. Ioan. 5. verſ. 16. He that knoweth his brother to ſinne a ſinne not to death, let him aske, and life shalbe giuen him ſinning not to death: Caluin ib. anſwereth: If you vnderſtand of man, that he giueth life to his brother, it is an hyperbolicall ſpeach.

If we proue that God hath promiſed reward to good God rewardeth works Hyperbolically. workes, Zuinglius de Prouident. c. 6. anſwereth: Theſe are hyperboles and hyperoches: If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandements: Who shall doe the will of my father, &c. and what promiſes ſoeuer els are made to workes. Thus they deuiſe hyperboles in Scripture: and yet Pareus lib. 1. de Iuſtific. cap. 15. and in Galat. 1. Lect. 9. ſaieth: I dare not ſay that there is an hyperbole in Scripture, ſith it ouerlas heth the trueth, and ſeemeth to be a kind of lie.

If we proue that faith can be without charitie, becauſe Faith without charitie: A fiction. S. Paul ſaieth 1. Cor. 13. v. 2. If I haue all faith ſo as I remoue mountaines, and haue not charitie, I am nothing: P. Martyr ib. anſwereth: The Apoſtle ſpeaketh by fiction for to exaggerate the dignitie of charitie.—Who ſeeth not, that Paul ſpeaketh here hyperbolically? And in Rom. 11. When the Apoſtle Impoſsible. Charitie extolled, by fiction. by all means extolled charitie, he vſed a fiction for to extoll it. But Luther Poſtilla in Domin. Quinquageſimae, ſaieth: Paul brought an impoſsible example.

If we proue that faith may be without workes becauſe S. Iames ſaieth cap. 2. v. 18. Shew me thy faith without Faith without workes. workes: Caluin ib. anſwereth: In that he biddeth shew faith without workes, he argueth from an impoſsible thing: And in v. 17. It is cleare enough, that the Apoſtle doth reaſon from an impoſsible thing.

If we proue that widdows marrying after they haue giuen their faith to the contrarie; are damned, becauſe (as S. Paul ſpeaketh 1. Timoth. 5 verſ. 12.) they haue made voide their firſt faith: Caluin 4. Inſtit c. 13. §. 18. anſwereth: The Widows leeſe their firſt faith: By Amplification. Apoſtle for amplification ſake addeth, that they haue broken or made voide their firſt faith.

Wherefore in forme thus I argue: Who not onely in ſo manie and ſo great matters contradict ſuch words of Scripture, and in ſuch a ſenſe as we haue ſeene, but alſo in manie and great matters are forced to ſay, that the Scripture ſeaketh ironically, mimetically, hyperbolically, by way of fiction, and of amplificatiō, and by impoſſibilities, they are to be thought to contradict the true ſenſe of the Scripture. But Proteſtants do ſo. Therefore &c.

CHAPTER VIII. THAT PROTESTANTS ARE COMpelled to turne the moſt generall propoſitions of the Scripture into particulars.

THE eight argument wherewith I will proue that Proteſtants cōtradict the true ſenſe of holie Scripture shalbe, becauſe in manie and weightie mattie, to wit, of God, of Chriſt, of the Church, of Sacraments, of faith and the like, they are forced to turne the moſt vniuerſall propoſitions of Scripture into particulars.

For touching God: If we proue that he hath a will to haue mercie on all, becauſe Rom. 11. v. 32. it is ſaied: God Touching God. hath concluded all into incredulitie, that he may haue mercie on all: Beza ib. anſwereth: The vniuerſall particle (All) is to be reſtrained, to wit, (as he ſaieth l. de Praedeſt. cont. Caſtel. All, that is, Some. p. 360.) All who shall beleiue. The like he hath in Colloq. Montisbel. p. 421. and in Reſp. p. 216. 223. and Caluin 3. Inſtit. c. 24. §. 17. But Zanchius l. 1. de Nat. Dei. c. 2. tom. 2. cal. 562. ſaieth that this place and alſo that other: Preach the Ghoſpell to euerie creature and the like, belong onely to the elect. If we proue the ſame becauſe Sapient. 11. v. 24. it is ſaied: Thou haſt mercie on all &c. P. Martyr in Rom. 9. anſwereth: But it eaſily appeareth, that theſe things are to be vnderſtood All, that is, Some. of the vniuerſall companie of the elect.

If we proue that God hath a will to ſaue all, becauſe 1. Timot. 2. v. 4 it is ſaied of God: Who will all men to be ſaued: Bucer in Math. 6. anſwereth: That he ſaieth, All; is as much as if he had ſaied, ſome of all. Et Idem apud Zanchium l. de Perſeuerant. to. 2. col. 343. That place 1. Timoth. 2. Who will all: and 1. Ioan. 2. He is the propitiation &c. cannot be vnderſtood but ſynechdochically, for manie, that is for the elect. And againe: It is certaine that the places, which promiſe ſaluation vniuerſally, belong onely to the elect. And Beza in Ioan. 6. v. 40. It muſt not be taken for an vniuerſall, but for an indefinit propoſition: Caluin vpon the place cited, ſaieth: It speaketh of kinds of men, not of all perſons. And Perkins in Serie cauſarum c. 52. We muſt know, that this propoſition is not generall, but indefinit.

If we proue the ſame out of theſe words. 2. Pet. 3. v. 10. Not ſome, but all, that is, Some. Not willing that anie perish, but all to returne to pennance: Beza in Colloq. Montisbel. p. 422. & in reſponſ. p. 231. and De Praedeſtinat. cont. Caſtel. p. 355. anſwereth: It is plaine, that Peter speaketh onely to the faithfull. Zanchius l. 5. de Nat. Dei. cap 2. It is vnderſtood onely of the elect. And Bucer in Math. 6. It is ment of them onely whome he hath choſen for to be conuerted and liue.

If we proue that God calleth all, becauſe Chriſt Math. 11. ver. 28. crieth: Come to me all that labour and are burdened All, that is, Some. and I will refresh you. Beza l. quaeſt. & reſp. vol. 1. p. 699. anſwereth: But yee will ſay the calling and promiſe is vniuerſall. But vnderſtand it indefinite, (and that in regard of certaine circuſtances of which we ſpoake) and thou shall thinke more rightly. For otherwiſe behould with how neceſſarie reaſons that vniuerſall calling, is refuted: wherefore not an vniuerſall calling, but onely an indefinite can and must be defended.

If we proue that God hateth euen the faithfull when they worke iniquitie, becauſe Pſalm. 5. v. 7. it is ſaied: Thou hatest all who worke iniquitie: they will except the All, that is, Some. faithfull as appeareth by what we rehearſed l. 1. c. 2. art. 9.

If we proue that all things are poſſible to God, becauſe ſo it is ſaied. Math. 19. v. 26. Beza Dial. cont. Heshus: vol. 1. anſwereth: That ſaying of thine: All things are poſsible to God: hath ſome exception.

Of Chriſt: if we proue that he died for all, becauſe it is Touching Chriſt. ſaied. 2. Cor. 5. ver. 15. If one died for all, then all were dead and Chriſt died for all: Beza ib. anſwereth: Sith it is here spoaken All, that is, Some. of the Church or of the elect onely conſidered vniuerſally, we must needs reſtraine, All, to that whereof the ſpeach is, Et Contraremonſtrantes in Collat. Hagae p. 131. That All, wherewith it is ſaied, Chriſt died for all, is expounded not to be extēded vniuerſally to all and euerie and none excepted, but is to be reſtrained onely to the faithfull.

If we proue, that Chriſt is the propitiation for the ſinnes of all the world becauſe 1. Ioan. 2. v. 2. it is ſaied: He is the All the world, that is, Some. propitiation for our ſinnes, and not for ours onely; but alſo for the whole worlds: Zanchius in Summa Praelect. tom. 7. col. 264. anſwereth: When he ſaieth, Chriſt is the propitiation for the ſinnes of the whole world, we are not compelled by name of the world (He amitteth, whole) to vnderſtand all men vniuerſally. Agayne: Chriſt is the propitiation onely for the ſinnes of the elect of the whole world. Caluin vpon this place: Nether had Ihon anie other meaning, then to make this good common to the whole Church. Beza ib. By the name of the world (He alſo omitteth whole) are vnderſtood all the elect of all ages, degrees, and places.

If we proue that Chriſt is the Sauiour of all men becauſe it is ſaied. 1. Timoth. 4. v. 10. Which is the Sauiour of All, that is, Some. all men eſpecially of the faithfull. Author Reſp. ad Theſes Vademont. p. 482. anſwereth: This pertaineth to the elect onely.

Of the Church: if we proue, that she erreth not in anie Touching the Church. point of faith: becauſe Chriſt ſaieth Ioan. 16. v. 13. When he the ſpirit of trueth cometh, he shall teach you all trueth: Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 4. c. 2. expoundeth it thus: That is, All trueth, that is, Some. all neceſſarie trueth. Agayne: I anſwere, that Chriſt and the holie Ghoſt teacheth the Church all trueth ſimply neceſſarie, but yet oftentimes leaueth ſome error. The like hath Rainalds theſi. 2. and Bucanus loco 41. But Daneus Contr. 4. p. 632. ſaieth: Properly and truely this promiſe of Chriſt pertaineth to thoſe twelue whome he then ſpoake vnto: Wherefore it is a perſonall bleſsing, which muſt, not be extended to anie other then to thoſe twelue Apoſtles. The like hath Moulins in his Buckler pag. 51.

If we proue that wicked men may be in the Church which is the bodie of Chriſt, becauſe S. Paul ſaieth. 1 Cor. 10. v. 17. For being manie, we are one bread, one bodie, all that All, that is, Some. participate of one bread Beza dial. cont. Heshuſ. p. 280. anſwereth: That, All that participate, cannot be extended to the wicked. Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 1. c. 11. ſaieth: The Apoſtle ſpeaketh onely of the good and godlie, the wicked do not participate that bread whereof the Apostle ſpeaketh.

If we proue that all the Corinthians and Galathians baptized, were in the Church and had put on Chriſt, becauſe 1. Cor. 12. v. 13. it is ſaied: For in one Spirit we were all All, that is, Some. baptized into one bodie: And Galat. 3. ver. 27. For as manie of you as are baptized in Christ, haue put on Chriſt: Whitaker Contr. 24. 1. cap. 8. anſwereth. The Apoſtle in theſe places ſpeaketh not of all the Corinthians and Galathians, but of thoſe onely who were endued with the ſpirit of Chriſt and true faith.

Touching Sacraments: If we proue that Baptiſme is Touching Sacraments. neceſſarie to all, becauſe Chriſt ſaieth Ioan. 3. v. 5. Vnleſſe one be borne againe of water &c. Pareus l. 6. de Amiſſ. Grat. c. 1. anſwereth: The propoſition is to be limitated. And commonly One, that is, Some. they except infants.

If we proue that baptiſme is effectuall alſo in the reprobate, becauſe Galat. 3. ver. 27. For as manie of you as are baptized As manie, that is, Some in Chriſt, haue put on Chriſt. Beza ib. anſwereth: It is added (As manie) for to take away the difference of nations, ſtates, and ſexes. And 2. part. reſp. ad Acta Montisb p. 62. By no colour of reaſon it can be vnderstood vniuerſally of euerie baptized perſon. Zuinglius in Elencho tom. 2. fol 13. ſaieth: It is ſpoaken ſynechdochically: All did eate the ſame ſpirituall bread, when as they onely eate it who were ſpirituall.

If we proue that the bound of marriage dureth all the life of the married parties, becauſe it is ſaied. 1. Cor. 7. v. 39. A woman is bound to the law, ſo long time as here husband So long, that is, for a time. liueth. Peter Martyr ib. anſwereth: When he writeth, that a woman is bound to hir husband ſo long as he liueth, the exception which Chriſt hath muſt be added, to wit, vnleſſe adulterie be committed. Beza l. de Diuort. vol. 2. p. 87. ſaieth: The Apoſtle respecteth that which is ordinarie, and falleth out for the moſt parte, as ſuppoſing that amongst the faithfull, to whome he wrote, marriages could ſcarce be diſſolued by anie other means then by death.

If we proue that all ſick folke are to be anointed with oile, becauſe S. Iames ſaieth cap. 5. ver. 14. Is anie man ſick Anie man, that is, Some. among you? let him bring in the preiſts of the Church and let them pray ouer him anoiling him with oile in the name of our Lord. Tilenus in Syntagm. cap. 58. anſwereth: As if thoſe things which are ſpoaken indefinitly and commonly, were to be taken vniuerſally.

Concerning faith: If wee proue that faith it is neceſſarie Touching faith. to all, becauſe it is ſaied Ioan. 3. ver. 36. Who beleiueth not, abideth in death: Caluin 4. Inſtit. c. 16. § 31. anſwereth: Christ ſpeaketh not there of the generall guilt, wherewith all the Who: that is, Some. posteritie of Adam is infected, but onely threatneth the deſpiſers of the Ghoſpell, who proudly and obſtinately refuſe grace offered to them. The like hath Vorſtius in Antibel. pag. 375. If we proue the ſame out of thoſe words Marke vlt. ver. 16. He He, that is, Some. that beleiueth not, shalbe damned. Zuinglius lib. de Peccat. orig. tom. 2. fol. 118. This is no way to be vnderstood ſimply, but of thoſe who hauing heard the Ghoſpell would not beleiue.

If we proue that no faith auaileth anie thing without charitie, becauſe it is ſaied 1. Cor. 13. v. 2. If I haue all faith ſo All, that is, Some. as I remoue motūaines, and haue not charitie, I am nothing: Caluin ib. anſwereth: The faith whereof he ſpeaketh is particular. Beza ib. As for All, that ſignifieth not in this place all kindes of faith, but declareth a certaine perfection of this kind, that is, it ſignifieth rather whole, then all. Peter Martyr in Rom. 11. pag. 935. ſaieth: We muſt know, that vniuerſall propoſitions are to be reſtrained to the matter whereof the ſpeach is: And in Rom. 9. p. 725. and 728. he limitateth manie vniuerſall propoſitions of the Scripture.

Touching good workes: If we proue that charitie falleth Of good workes. not away in heauen, becauſe it is ſaied 1. Co. 13. ver. 8. Charitie neuer falleth away: Caluin ib. anſwereth: What if I Neuer, that is, not for a time. except, that the perpetuitie of charitie, whereof the Apoſtle here ſpeaketh, is after the laſt day and belongeth not to the time betweene. And in Zacharie 1. v. 12. We know, that the offices of charitie are restrained to the courſe of this life.

If we proue that the Apoſtle doth counſel ſingle life vnto all men, by theſe words 1. Cor. 7. v. 7. I would all men to be as my ſelfe: Bullinger ib. anſwereth: I would indeed all All, that is, Some. men, to wit, who feigne chaſtitie (obſerue (ſaieth he) the ſynechdoche) and leaue their wiues, to be as my ſelfe.

If we proue that God graunteth chaſtitie to all that aske it out of that moſt vniuerſall promiſe of Chriſt Ioan. 16. Any thing, that is, Some. ver. 23. Amen, Amen, I ſay to you if you aske the Father any thing in my name, he will giue it you. Daneus Contr. 5. p. 1038. anſwereth: That generall promiſe of Chriſt doth not legitimate (that I may ſo ſpeake) or make lawfull all our praiers before the Lord, but onely thoſe things which we aske according to Gods expreſſe and reuealed will, and not other things. And Perkins in Caſibus Conſcient. l. 2. c. 15. Chriſts promiſe is to be vnderſtood of thoſe things which are neceſſarie to ſaluation, and not of theſe eſpeciall guifts. In like ſorte anſwereth P. Martyr de Votis. col. 1437. Riuet in Contr. tract. 1. ſect. 67. Vorſtius in Antibel. p. 224. and others.

If we proue that we may pray for all men, becauſe S. Paul ſaieth. 1. Timoth. 2. v. 1. I deſire therefore firſt of all things, that obſecrations, praiers, poſtulations, thanks giuings, be made for all men. Rainolds Apol. Theſ. pag. 245. Anſwereth: Where we are bidden to pray for all, the word All, doth not ſignifie All, that is, Some. euerie of the kind, but euerie kind of men.

Concerning ſinnes: If we proue that euen a faithfull Of Sinnes. man committing a great ſinne, becometh the ſonne of the Diuel, becauſe. 1. Ioan. 3. v. 8. it is ſaied: Euerie one that committeth Euerie one, that is, Some. ſinne, is of the Diuel. Scarpe de Iuſtificat. Contr. 13. anſwereth: They onely are ſaied to ſerue the Diuel and to be his children, in whome ſinne reigneth, and who commit ſinne with a full will: but the faithfull doe not ſinne ſo. The like hath Pareus lib. 2. de Iuſtific. cap. 17. and lib. 4. cap. 17. And if we proue that Dauid when he committed murder, had not life in him, becauſe 1. Ioan. 3. v. 15. is ſaied: And you know that no murderer hath life euerlaſting in himſelfe: Proteſtants will except both Dauid and all the elect faithfull, as appeareth by what we rehearſed l. 1. c. 16. art 5. and 6.

If we proue that no fornicatour hath inheritance, in Chriſts kingdome, becauſe S. Paul ſaieth Epheſ. 5. verſ. 5. Know you this that no fornicator hath inheritance in the kingdome None, that is, not Some. of Chriſt and of God: Scarpius de Iuſtif. Contr. 5. pag. 86. excepteth the faithfull.

If we proue that all faithfull muſt feare leaſt they fall, Who, that is, Some. becauſe it is ſaied. 1. Cor. 11. v. 12. Who thinketh himſelfe to ſtand let him take heed. Et Rom. 11. v. 20. Thou by faith doſt ſtand, be not to highly wiſe, but feare. Caluin. 3. Inſt. c. 12. §. 22. He doth not warne euerie man. Of Gods law.

Touching the law of God: If we proue that the faithfull may keepe all the commandements, becauſe it is ſaied All, that is, Some. of Zacharie and Elizabeth. Luc. 1. v. 6. They were both iuſt before God, walking in all the commandements and iustifications of our Lord without blame: Caluin. ib. ſaieth: I anſwere that theſe praiſes, wherewith Gods ſeruants are ſo highly commended, are to be taken with ſome exception.

If we proue that Ioſias did keepe the whole law of God, becauſe it is ſaied of him. 4. Reg. 23. He turned to our Lord in all his heart, according to all the law of Moiſes: Hunnius All, that is, Some. tractat. de Iuſtific. p. 170. anſwereth: That which is added (According to all the law of Moiſes) doth chiefly reſpect that reformation in religiō inſtituted according to the law of Moyſes.

Thou ſeeſt (Reader) how often and in how manie, and weightie matters Proteſtants are forced to turne the moſt generall or vniuerſall ſayings of the Scripture into particulars, and how manie vniuerſall particles both affirmatiue, as All, Euerie one, Euerie creature, As manie, Whole, As long time, Who, Anie man, Anie thing and Negatiues, as Not anie, Neuer, No fornicator, No murderer, they change into particulars, whenſoeuer they make againſt them. Which is ſo great and ſo manifeſt an abuſe of Scripture as What ſome Proteſtants thing of turning vniuerſall propoſitions into particulars. ſome of themſelues crie out againſt it. For thus Iacobus Andreae in Colloq. Montisbel. p. 418. ſpeaketh to Beza: It is impietie to exclude anie man from this vniuerſall promiſe. p. 419. It is manifeſt impietie and abhominable doctrine, contrarie to the expreſſe letter to make a particular promiſe of an vniuerſall. Et pag. 421. It is horrible to heare, ſo manifeſt an vniuerſall propoſition to be made a particular.

Wherefore I thus frame my eight argument: Who beſides the foreſaied oppoſition to the expreſſe words of Scripture, are compelled in ſo manie and ſo great matters to change ſo manie and ſo manifeſt vniuerſall propoſitiōs of the holie Scripture into particulars, they are to be iudged to gainſay the true ſenſe of the Scripture. But Proteſtants do ſo. Therefore &c. And the more forcible this argument ought to be againſt them, becauſe themſelues teach: That as often as there is an vniuerſall propoſition in Scripture, it muſt not be limited by anie diſtinction, vnleſſe that be grounded vpon certaine and cleare words of Scripture; For otherwiſe euerie doctrine may be deluded by ſubtilitie of diſtinctions. So Gerlachius tom. 2. diſp. 24.

CHAPTER IX. THAT PROTESTANTS DO LIMITATE manie vnlimited Propoſitions of the Scripture.

MY ninth argument, that Proteſtants contradict the true ſenſe of Scripture, I will take frō thence, that they are forced to limitate manie vnlimitated propoſitions of Scripture, touching great matters, as of God, of Chriſt, of the Church, and the like.

For if we proue that God doth not at all tempt to euil, Touching God. becauſe S. Iames ſaieth abſolutely. c. 1. v. 13. God is no tempter of euill, and he tempteth no man: P. Martyr in locis. claſ. 1. c. 15. §. 9. anſwereth: When Iames denieth, that God tempteth, he denieth it not altogether, but in that ſorte in which thoſe carnall Chriſtians of his time, did affirme him to tempt, as if they when they ſinned, had not beene in fault. Caluin vpon this place: He ſpeaketh here of inward temptations, which are nothing but inordinate deſires, which prouoke vs to ſinne: And he rightly denieth God to be author of them. Pareus l 2. de Amiſſ. Grat. c. 8. Iames doth not remoue from God ſimply all temptation, but onely the inward temptation, and ſuch as may make a man excuſable.

If we proue that God willeth not iniquitie at all, that is nether for it ſelfe, nor for anie other thing, becauſe. pſ. 1. v. 5. it is ſaied without anie limitation: Thou wilſt not iniquitie: they limitate this ſaying manie waies, as that God willeth not iniquitie for it ſelfe, or by his word, or by allowance, or delighte in it, as appeareth by what we rehearſed l. 1. c. 2. art. 1.

If we proue that God of himſelfe willeth not the death of anie man, becauſe he ſaieth. Ezech. 33. v. 11. I will not the death of the wicked, and c. 18. v. 32. I will not the death of him that dieth: Zanchius l. 3. de Nat. Dei c. 4. q. 4. anſwereth: If thou vrgeſt the word: I will not the death of a ſinner, and that God ſpeaketh of his good pleaſure, I ſay that place is to be vnderſtood of the elect onely. Beza 2. art. reſp. ad Acta Montisbel. p. 196. That restriction of conuerſion, sheweth that this is to be vnderſtood onely of them, to whome is graunted the grace of conuerſion, which ſurely is proper to the elect. Piſcator in Theſib. l. 2. p. 187. The Prophet speaketh not here of euerie ſinner, but of him onely that is conuerted. But Luther lib. de ſeru. arbitr. tom. 2. fol. 450. ſaieth. God willeth manie things, which by his word he sheweth that he willeth not. So he will not the death of a ſinner, to wit, by word, but he willeth it by his vnſearchable will.

If we proue that God willeth the conuerſion of euerie ſinner, becauſe he ſaieth without limitation Ezech. 33. v. 11. I will not the death of the wicked, but that he be conuerted and liue: Caluin l. de Praedeſt. p. 786. and de Prouident. p. 737. anſwereth: God is ſaied to will life, as he is ſaied to will pennance, and this he willeth becauſe by his words he inuiteth all to it: but this is not contrarie to his ſecret counſaile, wherein he hath decreed to conuert none but his elect. Piſcator in Theſibus lib. 2. pag. 236. ſaieth: That God ſpeaketh there of the wicked who is conuerted.

If we proue that Chriſt, euen as he is God, would gather thoſe who will not be gathered, becauſe he ſaieth abſolutely Math. 23. v 37. How often would I gather together thy children, as the hen doth goth gather together her chickins vnder her wings, and thou wouldest not? Perkins de Praedeſt. tom. 1. col. 157. anſwereth: I ſay, that Chriſt ſpeaketh here not as he was God, but as he was miniſter of the circumciſion: The ſame ſaieth Luther lib. cit. fol. 451. and others.

If we proue that God calleth euen the reprobate, becauſe he ſaieth without limitation Apocal. 3. v. 20. I ſtand at the dore and knock: Perkins loc. iam cit. anſwereth: Thoſe at whoſe dore Chriſt ſtandeth are the faithfull and the conuerted.

If we proue that God euen by inward vocation calleth the reprobate, becauſe without all limitation it is ſaied, Math. 23. v. 37. How often would I gather thy Children: And Iſaiae 65. v. 2. I haue spred fourth my hands all the day to an incredulous people, And c. 5. v. 4. What is there that I ought to doe more to my vineyard, and haue not done to it? Et Prou. 1. v. 24. I haue called, and you haue refuſed: Contra-remonſtrantes in Collat. Hagae p. 245. & ſeq. limitate all theſe ſayings onely to outward calling. And Pareus l. 1. de Grat. & lib. arb. c. 11. to onely calling by outwarde means. After which manner Proteſtants alſo limitate thoſe words Math. 22. v. 14. Manie are called, but few are choſen.

If we proue that men may reſiſt the holie Ghoſt ſpeaking within them, becauſe without limitation it is ſaied Acts 7. v. 51. You haue alwaies reſiſted the holie Ghoſt: Caluin. ib. anſwereth: They are ſaied to reſiſt the holie Ghoſt, who obſtinately reiect him ſpeaking by the Prophets, for here is no ſpeach of inward reuelations which God inwardly inſpireth to anie, but of the outward miniſterie.

If we proue that Chriſt did not teach his Apoſtles all Touching Chriſt. the points of faith, becauſe himſelfe ſaieth. Ioan. 16. v. 12. Yet manie things I haue to ſay to you, but you cannot beare them now: But when he the Spirit of trueth cometh, he shall teach you all trueth: they limite this to rites and diſcipline. Beza ib: Theſe words are to be vnderſtood of thoſe things, which pertained to the execution of the Apoſtolicall function and foundation of Churches.

If we proue that Chriſt was Mediator of all men becauſe it is ſaied 1. Tim. 2. v. 6. One Mediator of God and men, the man Ieſus Chriſt: they limite this to the elect faithfull: Beza Epiſt. 28. It is falſe, that Christ is mediator alſo of the infidels. In like ſorte Hunnius de Iuſtif. pag. 179. reſtraineth that ſaying Hebr. 5. ver. 9. He was made to all that obey him, cauſe of eternall ſaluation, to obedience in faith.

If we proue that vnwritten traditions of faith are to be Touching Traditions. beleiued, becauſe S. Paul ſaieth without limitation 2. Theſſal. 2. ver. 15. Stand, and hould the traditions, which you haue learned, whether it be by word, or by our epiſtle; they limite this to onely traditions of rites or ceremonies; Whitaker Contr. 1. q. 6. cap. 10. Other (Proteſtantes) thinke, that Paul ſpeaketh of certaine externall matters and rites of no great moment. Academia Nemauſ. Reſp. ad Tournon. pag. 554. By the word Tradition in the Apoſtles writings, is meant ether the application and right handling of doctrine, or the appointing of rites and diſcipline.

If we proue that Chriſt committed all his sheepe to S. Touching S. Peter. Peter becauſe without anie limitation he ſaieth to him Ioan. 21. v. 17. Feed my sheepe. Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 5. cap. 5. anſwereth: Chriſt doth not ſay to Peter: Feed all my sheepe, but speaketh indefinitely. And Beza ib. in verſ. 15. Muſt Gods word be thus profaned? Surely Christ did not adde All; and the difference betwixt vniuerſall and indefinite propoſitions, is well knowne. As if Proteſtants did not as well limitate vniuerſall propoſitions, as indefinite; as appeared in the former chapter. Beſides Daneus Contr. 3. p. 127. faithfull: An indefinite What Proteſt. ſay of an indefinite propoſition. propoſition is equiualent to an vniuerſall. And Caluin in 1. Ioan. 3. v. 3. An indefinite ſpeach is as much as an vniu •• ſall. And 4. Inſtit. c. 17. §. 29. It is our parte, whatſoeuer is abſolutely ſpoake of Chriſt ſo to embrace, as without exception that take place with vs which he would ſay.

If we proue that the Church is alwaies famous and viſible, Touching the Church. becauſe Iſaie c. 2. v. 2. ſaieth without limitation of time: And in the latter dayes the mountaine of the houſe of our Lord shall be prepared in the top of mountaines, and shalbe eleuated aboue the litle hilles, and all nations shall flow vnto it. Et c. 61. ver. 9. And they shall know their ſeed in the Gentils and their budde in the middeſt of peoples. And Miche. 4. v. 8. And the remanent of Iacob shall be in the Gentils in the middest of manie peoples, as a Lion amōg the beaſts of the foreſt. Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 2. c. 2. anſwereth: The Prophets foretell that no kingdome shalbe ſo glorious, no cittie ſo ample, no Empire ſo large as the Church shalbe in the times of the Meſsias—But we neuer read, that the Lord hath promiſed that this maiestie and glorie of the Church shalbe constant and perpetuall. Et Morton. in Apolog. part. 1. l. 1. c. 13. The league is indeed perpetuall, but this ſo admirable ſucceſſe is not alwaies ſo vniuerſall, but in a manner peculiar to the age of the Apoſtles.

If we proue that the Paſtors of the Church be alwaies viſible, becauſe Chriſt ſaieth of them Math. 5. v. 15. A cittie cannot be hid ſituated vpon a mountaine. Whitaker loc. cit. anſwereth: Albeit Chriſt ſay, that godlie Doctors and Paſtors shall not be obſcure, nor eſcape the ſight of men; yet he ſaieth not, that there shalbe alwaies ſuch Doctors which may be as viſible as mountaines.

If we proue that the Church is the pillar of all trueth of faith, becauſe S. Paul 1. Timoth. 3. ver. 15. without anie limitation calleth her the pillar and ſtrength of trueth: Whitake Contr. 2. q. 4. c. 2. anſwereth: In this place is meant not ſimply all trueth, but onely neceſſarie trueth. And Vorſtius in Antibel. p. 143. The Apoſtle ſpeaketh not of euerie trueth that howſoeuer pertaineth to religion, but onely of holeſome trueth, or which is neceſſarie to ſaluation, and that conditionally alſo, to wit, ſo long as she shall remayne the true Church of Chriſt.

If we proue that the Church is alwaies infallible in faith, becauſe, without limitation to anie time, she is called loc. cit. The pillar and ſtrength of trueth: P. Martyr in locis claſ. 4. c. 4. §. 21. ſaieth: I graunt, She is indeed the pillar of trueth, but not alwaies, but when she relieth vpon the word of God. Confeſſio. Heluet. c. 17. She erreth not, as long as she relieth vpon the rock Chriſt, and the foundation of the Prophets and Apoſtles. Daneus Contr. 4. p. 717. The place of Paul ſpeaketh of the viſible Church, which on earth is the keeper of heauenlie doctrine, ſo long as she is true. Bullinger Dec 4. Serm. 5. The Church erreth not ſo long as she heareth the voice of her Spouſe and Paſtor. Herbrandus in Compend. loc. de Eccleſ. She erreth not ſo long as she houldeth and followeth the word of God.

Of we proue that the Church is to be heard ſimply in all things, becauſe our Sauiour without anielimitation ſaieth Math. 18. v. 19. If he will not heare the Church, let him be to thee as an Ethnik and Publican. Whitaker lib. 1. de Scriptura c. 13. ſect. 1. anſwereth: The Sonne of God himſelfe commanded to heare the voice of the Church, but not preaching anie thing but Scripture. Herbrand. loc. cit. ſaieth the Church is to be heard, as long as she preacheth heauenlie and incorrupt doctrine. Moulins in his Buckler p. 84. limitateth this ſpeach of Chriſt, to quarrels betwixt particular men, and not to queſtions of religion. The like ſaied Feild. l. 4. de Eccleſ. c. 4. and others.

If we proue that the Church in teaching cannot erre, becauſe Iſaias ſaieth c. 59. v. 21. This is my couenant with them ſaieth, our Lord: My ſpirit is in thee and my words which I haue put in thy mouth shall not departe out of thy mouth, and out of the mouth of thy ſeed, and out of the mouth of thy ſeeds ſeed, ſaieth our Lord, from this preſent for euer. Whitaker libr. 1. de Scriptura cap. 11. ſect. vlt. anſwereth: This promiſe is not made to the teaching Church, but to the whole Church, that is, to the elect.

If we proue that the militant Church is perpetuall, becauſe the Scripture ſaieth, that Chriſts kingdome shalbe perpetuall, Daneus Contr. 4. p. 718. anſwereth: All theſe places and the like properly pertaine to that Church which God shall gather in heauen, not on earth.

If we proue that the viſible Church is alwaies the true Church, becauſe she is called 1. Timoth 3. the pillar of trueth: Daneus loc cit. pag. 721. anſwereth: Let him know, that the viſible Church then, and ſo long is ſaied to be the true Church, as long as the voice of heauenlie and Euangelicall trueth ſoundeth in her.

If we proue that the viſible Church cannot erre, becauſe Math. 16. v. 18. it is ſaied, that the gates of hel shall not preuaile againſt the Church: Moulins in his Buckler p. 49. anſwereth: That is meant of the Church of the elect, not of the vniuerſall viſible Church.

If we proue, that the Church of anie age is to be heard, becauſe Chriſt Math. 18. Without anie limitation of time biddeth vs to heare the Church: Herbrand. in Compend. loc. de Eccleſ. anſwereth: This command is not vniuerſall of the Church of all times, but Chriſt ſpeaketh of his litle Church according to the condition of thoſe times, which then wanted a pious politik Magiſtrate who was a mēber of the Church. In like ſorte Whitaker l. 1. de Script. c. 7. ſect. 8. limitateth thoſe words of Chriſt. Ioan. 6. He shall teach you all trueth: and thoſe. Luc. 10. v. 16. Who heareth you, heareth me ib. c. 8. ſect. 1. and thoſe of S. Ihon. 1. c. 4. v. 6. Who knoweth God, heareth vs, in l. 2. de Script. c. 6. ſect. 3. to the Apoſtles onely.

If we proue that none may preach vnleſſe he be ſent, becauſe S. Paul ſaieth abſolutely Rom. 10. v. 15. How shall they preach, vnleſſe they be ſent? they except where a Church is not yet founded, or where Paſtors teach not truely, or where all things are in confuſion, as appeareth by what we tould. l. 1. c. 7. art. 8.

If we proue that none may marrie after diuorce, becauſe without anie limitation it is ſaied 1. Corinth. 7. v. 10. But to Touching, Matrimonie. them that are ioyned in matrimonie, not I giue commandment but our Lord, that the wife departe not from her husband, and if she depart, to remaine vnmarried or to be reconciled to her husband: Caluin ib. anſwereth: This is not meant of thoſe who haue beene diuorced for adulterie. Others except other caſes as appeareth by whath hath beene ſaied l. 1. c. 12. art. 6. And in like manner they limitate thoſe words Math. 19. ver. 9. He that shall marrie her that is dimiſſed, committeth aduoutrie: For thus Beza in Luc. 16. v. 18. The Lord ſpeaketh of diuorces vſed amongſt the Iews, amongſt which diuorce for adulterie cannot be reckoned. The like he hath in 1. Cor. 7. v. 11. Bucer in Math 8. and others.

If we proue that all men ought to confeſſe all their Touching Confeſſion. ſinnes to men, becauſe S. Iames c. 5. v. 16. abſolutely ſaieth: Confeſſe your ſinnes one to an other: Caluin. 3. Inſtit. c. 4. §. 12. anſwereth: Such a confeſsiō muſt befree, ſo as it be not exacted of all, but onely commended who feell that they haue need of it: And moreouer, that nether they who vſe it for their need, be compelled by any precept, or drawne by any cunning to tell all their ſinnes, but as farre forth as themſelues shall thinke fit. Cō feſſio Heluet. cap. 14. reſtraineth Saint Iames words to thoſe ſinnes onely which are committed againſt our neighbour.

If we proue that now a dayes ſick perſons are to be Touching extreme Vnction. anointed with oile becauſe S. Iames. c. 5. v. 14. ſaieth: Is any man ſick among you? Let him bring in the Preiſts of the Church, and let them pray ouer him anoiling him with oile in the name of our Lord: Caluin. 4. Inſtit. 19. §. 19. anſwereth: This is commanded by Iames: To wit, Iames ſpoake for that time, whiles as yet the Church did enioy this bleſsing.

If we proue that all who ſoeuer beleiue not, shalbe Touching faith. damned, becauſe Chriſt ſaieth abſolutely. Marke vlt. v. 16. He that beleiueth not, shalbe condemned: Zuinglius l. de baptiſmo tom. 2. fol. 93. anſwereth: What man is ſo doltish, blockish, and blind, who ſeeth not that theſe words of Chriſt are ſpoaken onely of thoſe, who hauing heard the Ghoſpell, do not beleiue? Muſculus in locis lit. de Baptiſmo: Theſe kind of ſentences concerning faith are not to be applied to infants, as theſe: Without faith it is impoſsible to pleaſe God &c.

If we proue that almes deliuereth as well from ſinne Touching good workes. paſt or preſent, as to come, becauſe it is ſaied Tobie. 4. ver. 11. Almes deliuereth from all ſinne and from death: they reſtraine this to future ſinnes: Apologia Confeſſ. Auguſtan. c. de Reſp. ad Argum. We grauut that almes do merit many benefits of God, and deliuereth, not from preſent, but from future ſinne, that is, deſerue that we be defended in dangers of ſinne and death.

If we proue that almes do purge inwardly, or the ſoule, becauſe without limitation it is ſaied Luke 11. v. 14. Giue almes, and behould all things are cleane vnto you: they limitate this to outward cleaſing onely: Peter Martyr in Rom. 11. The third way (of expounding this place) is more fit, as I thinke. For Chriſt exhorteth them to cleanſe their ſoule, which is within, and that is done by faith: And as touching outward things he addeth: Giue almes ſo all things shalbe cleane to you.

If we proue that we may ſell all and giue to the poore, becauſe our Sauiour ſaieth Math. 19. verſ. 21. If thou wilt be perfect, ſell what thou haſt &c. Perkins in Caſibus Conſciēt. l. 3. c. 4. limitateth that counſaile of Chriſt, to that man alone to whome he ſpoake, ſaying: Thoſe words containe a perſonall and particular commandment. And in like ſort Fulk Math. 19. not. 9. and Mark. 10. not. 3.

If we proue that the conception of concupiſcence, or Touching ſinne. the inuoluntarie act thereof is no ſinne before God, becauſe S. Iames ſaieth. cap. 1. v. 15. Concupiſcence, when it hath conceaue, bringeth forth ſinne: Caluin. ib. anſwereth: Iames diſputeth not when ſinne beginneth to be borne, ſo that it be ſinne and reputed for ſuch before God, but when it sheweth it ſelfe.

If we proue that the keeping of the law is abſolutely neceſſarie to life euerlaſting: becauſe Chriſt ſaieth abſolutely. Math. 19. v. 17. If thou wilt enter to life, keepe the commandements, they limitate theſe words to a certaine manner of entring, to wit (as they ſpeake) by entring by the law, or by good workes, or merits. Caluin in Math. 5. ver. 21. Who will enter to life by good workes, thoſe he biddeth nothing els but to keepe the commandments of the law: And vpon this place: We gather, that this anſwere of Chriſt is according to the law. And in Antidot. Concil. ſeſſion. 6. cap. 9. Surely whoſoeuer will merit eternall life, hath a rule preſcribed to him by the law: Doe theſe, and thou shalt liue. In like ſorte anſwereth Pareus lib. 4. de luſtificat. cap. 2. And Illyricus in Claue part. 2. tract. 6. ſaieth: That all men are bound to doe good and auoid ſinne vnder paine of loſſe of eternall life, is a ſentence of the law, and both muſt and ought to be restrained by the (Proteſtant) Ghoſpell or remiſsion of ſinnes. So that no precepts of doing good and auoiding ill, pertaine to the Proteſtant Ghoſpell.

If we proue that with Gods grace a man may inwardly conuert himſelfe from euill to good, becauſe it is ſaied abſolutely Zacharie 1. ver. 3. Conuert to me, ſaieth the Lord of hostes, and I will conuert to you: they limitate this onely to outward conuerſion: Peter Martyr in Roman. 11. The Prophet spoake not of inward iuſtification, but of outward conuerſion to good workes.

If we proue that we are not infallibly certaine of forgiueneſſe Touching Iuſtification. of ſinnes or eternall punishment, becauſe it is ſaied abſolutely Ioel. 2. v. 14. Who knoweth if he (God) will conuert and forgiue? and the like is ſaied Ion. 3. v. 9. Kemnice in locis part. 2. tit. de Argum. limitateth this to forgiueneſſe of temporall punishment, and ſaieth: All the ſpeach of the Prophet tendeth to that he treateth of remiſsion of temporall punishment. In like ſorte he limitateth manie other places of Scripture, in which forgiueneſſe is attributed to workes, onely to forgiueneſſe of temporall punishment. That alſo of Tobie cap. 4. Almes deliuereth from death, he reſtraineth to temporall death. And in like manner, promiſes made to good workes he limitateth to certaine bleſſings in this world or in the next, but will not haue them extended to eternall life. And finally whereſoeuer in the Scripture anie man praieth God to iudge or reward him according to his iuſtice, he limitateth that to the iuſtice of his cauſe or quarell with other men.

If we proue that euerlaſting happines is giuen for good Touching eternall life. workes, becauſe S. Iames ſaieth cap. 1. ver. 25. He that hath remained in it, not made a forgetfull hearer, but a doer of the worke, this man shalbe bleſſed in his deed; they limitate this to bleſſednes in this life: Schluſſelburg. to. 8. Catal. Haeret. p. 497. thus anſwereth to this place: To be bleſſed, is not alwaies taken in holie writ for eternall ſaluation, but for bleſſednes in this life.

If we proue that we muſt not onely beleiue but alſo keepe the law, becauſe Chriſt ſaieth Math. 5. ver. 18. I am not come to break (the law) but to fulfill: Caluin. ibid. anſwereth: Here is treated of doctrine, not of life. Touching doctrine we muſt not imagin anie abrogation of the law by the coming of Chriſt. And v. 19. where is ſaied: One iot or one tittle shall not paſſe of the law till all be fulfilled: Caluin. ibid. ſaieth: I anſwere that word be done (or fulfilled) is not referred to mens liues, but to the ſolide trueth of doctrine.

If we proue that our conſciences are obliged by the particular Touching laws of men. iuſt lawes of Princes, becauſe it is abſolutely ſaied Rom. 3. v. 2. He that reſiſteth power, reſiſteth the ordinance of of God: and v. 5. Be ſubiect of neceſsitie, not onely for wrath, but alſo for conſcience ſake: they limitate theſe words to the power of Magiſtrates in generall. Daneus Contr. 5. p. 1127. To obey the Magiſtrate in generall, is a matter of conſcience, but to obey this or that law of the Magiſtrate wholy and in all points, we are not bound in conſcience. And Whitaker libr. 8. cont. Dureum ſect. vlt. We muſt obey the Magiſtrate in generall for conſcience ſake, becauſe by a generall precept we are commanded to obey the Magiſtrate: but particular lawes of Magiſtrates haue no command ouer our conſciences. In like ſorte Caluin 4. Inſtit. c. 10. §. 5.

Wherefore thus in forme I frame my ninth argument. who not onely in ſo manie and ſo great matters do contradict ſuch words of holie Scripture and in ſuch ſenſe, as we haue ſeene, but alſo take ſo much vpon them, as limitate and reſtraine ſo manie and ſo weightie ſentences of Scripture, they are to be thought to gayne ſay the right ſenſe of Scripture. But Proteſtants do ſo. Therefore &c.

CHAPTER X. THAT PROTESTANTS CHANGE manie abſolute Propoſitions of Scripture into conditionals.

THE tenth argument shalbe taken from that Proteſtants are forced to change manie and weightie abſolute Propoſitions of Scripture into conditionals.

For if we proue, that abſolutely God will not the death Touching God. of a ſinner, but rather his life and conuerſion, becauſe he abſolutely ſaieth Ezechiel 18. and 33. I will not the death of a ſinner, but rather that he be conuerted and liue: Caluin l. de Praedeſtinat. pag. 706. anſwereth: Whereas the Prophets speach exhorteth to pennace, no maruaile if God ſay, he will haue all to be ſaued; but the mutuall relation betwene threats and promiſes sheweth that ſuch kind of ſpeaches are conditionall.—So the promiſes which inuite all to ſaluation, shew not what ſimply and preciſely God hath decreed in his ſecret counſaile, but what he is readie to doe to all that are brought to faith and pennance.

Touching the Church, if we proue that the gates of Touching the Church. hell shall not preuaile againſt her, becauſe Chriſt doth abſolutely ſo promiſe Math. 16. ver. 16. Beſnagus l. de ſtatu Eccleſ. cap. 8. and others, adde this condition: If she forſake not her dutie and the word of God. If we proue that ſimply we muſt heare the Paſtors of the Church, becauſe Chriſt ſaieth. Luk. 10. ver. 16. He that heareth you heareth me, and he that deſpiſeth you, deſpiſeth me: Caluin. ib. addeth this condition: If the Church do faithfully her dutie.

If we proue that the Church is ſimply infallible, becauſe 1. Timoth. 3. she is ſimply called the pillar and ſtrength of trueth: Vallada in Apol. cont. Epiſcop. Luſonenſem cap. 20. anſwereth: The viſible Church cannot be the pillar of trueth, but as it is grounded vpon the doctrine of the Apostles. Vorſtius in Antibell. pag. 143. The Apoſtle ſpeaketh conditionally, to wit, as long as the Church perſeuereth to be the Church of Chriſt. Academia Nemauſ. reſp. ad Tournon. p. 546. Let it be a true and faithfull Church, if it diſcerne trueth from falſitie by vndoubted and authenticall trueth.

If we proue that the Church is ſimply to be heard, becauſe Chriſt ſaieth. Math. 18. ver. 17. If he heare not the Church, let him be to thee as an Ethnick and Publican: White in his way p. 78. anſwereth: The ſenſe is, that we muſt obediently heare the Church, and obey her, not ſimply in all things, but conditionally, as long as she ſpeaketh agreably to Gods word. And Author reſponſ. ad Theſes Vademont. pag. 688. The anſwere is eaſie and readie: As long as the Church teacheth the word of God, she is to be heard, but her authoritie is none when she ſeperateth her ſelfe from Gods word. And when Bellarmin had brought manie places of Scripture to proue that the Church cannot faile: Vorſtius libr. cit. pag. anſwereth: In them certaine conditionall promiſes are propoſed vnto vs, by which eternall ſaluation and ſecuritie againſt Satan, death, &c. is promiſed of God to all and euerie faithfull, to wit, as farre forth and as long as they shalbe ſuch, or perſeuer in true faith.

If we proue that there are ſome doers of the law, as Touching Gods law. well as there are hearers, becauſe Saint Paul ſaieth abſolutely Rom. 2. ver. 13. Not the hearers of the law are iuſt with God, but the doers of the law shalbe iuſtified: Caluin. ibidem anſwereth: This ſentence hath onely this meaning: If iuſtice be ſought by the law, we muſt fulfill the law, becauſe the iuſtice of the law conſiſteth in the perfection of workes. Peter Martyr ibid. That which he ſaieth, hath this meaning: If anie were to be iuſtified before God by the iuſtice of the law, he muſt fulfill the law. Pareus libr. 4. de Iuſtificat. cap. 14. The Apoſtleſaieth indeed: Doers of the law shalbe iuſtified, but he meaneth conditionally if there be anie. And Illyricus in Claue part. 2. tract. 4. writeth thus: Roman. 2. When Gentils doe thoſe things which are of the law: that is, if they did them. Againe: Doe this, and thou shalt liue, is put for: If thou doeſt them, thou shalt liue.

If we proue that there are ſome which loue their neighbour and fulfill the law, becauſe it is ſaied Rom. 13. v. 8. Who loueth his neighbour, hath fulfilled the law: Caluin. ib. anſwereth: Paul ſaieth not what men doe or not doe, but speaketh vpon condition, which you shall not find any where fulfilled. And if you proue that the law may be fulfilled becauſe the Apoſtle ſaieth. Galat. 6. v. 2. Beare yee one an others burdens, and ſo yee shall fulfill the law of Chriſt: Caluin ibid. anſwereth: Becauſe none performeth altogether that which Paul requireth, therefore we are all farre from perfection.

If we proue that ſingle life is ſimply good, becauſe S. Paul ſaieth abſolutely 1. Cor. 7. v. 1. It is good for a man not to touch a woman: P. Martyr in locis Claſſe 3. cap. 7. §. 17. anſwereth: They should ſee, that what Paul hath of the praiſes of ſingle life, are neuer ſpoaken abſolutely.

If we proue that virginitie may be abſolutely counſelled Of good workes, to men, becauſe S. Paul. 1. Corinth. 7. v. 7. ſaieth abſolutely: I would all men to be as my ſelfe: And ver. 25. A concerning virgins, a commandement of our Lord I haue not, but counſaile I giue: And ver. 28. Art thou looſe from a wife, ſeeke not a wife. Caluin in ver. 25. cit. anſwereth: Becauſe it is a ſlipperie matter and full of difficulties, he ſpeaketh alwaies vnder condition. And in v. 27. This ſecond member muſt be taken vnder condition.

If we proue that ſome may fall from grace becauſe S. Of Iuſtification. Paul ſaieth. Gal. 5. v. 4. You are fallen from grace: Pareus in Galat. 1. lect. 7. anſwereth: The Apoſtle ſpeaketh that conditionally. And in cap. 5. verſ. 4. lect. 61. For the Apoſtle affirmeth not that the Galathians were fallen, but threatneth, that if that if they will be iustified by the law, that it will come to poſſe that they fall.

wherefore thus I make my tenth argument: Who beſide the foreſaied oppoſition on to ſo manie and ſuch words of holie Scripture, are forced to change manie and weightie abſolute ſayings of Scripture into conditionals they contradict the true meaning of the holie Scripture. But Proteſtants doe ſo. Therefore &c.

CHAPTER XI. THAT PROTESTANTS CHANGE Conditionall Propoſitions of the Scripture into Abſolute, and delude them diuers other waies.

THE eleuenth argument for to proue that Proteſtants contradict the true ſenſe of holie Scripture, shalbe becauſe they are ſometimes forced to change conditionall propoſitions thereof into abſolute, and to delude them diuers other waies.

For if we proue that our freindshippe with God dependeth of our keeping the commandements, becauſe Chriſt ſaied conditionally Ioan. 15. v. 14. Yee are my freinds, if yee doe the things that I command yee: Caluin. ibid. anſwereth: He meaneth not, that we obtaine ſo great honor by anie merit of ours, but onely admonisheth vs, vpon what condition he receaueth vs into fauour and vouch ſafeth to reckon vs amongst his freinds.

But this wilbe more euident by that we shall shew in the next chapter how they of cauſall propoſitions make no cauſall.

Diuers others waies they delude and fruſtrate the conditionall propoſitiōs of holie Scripture. For if they can by anie colour they expound them of onely faith, or of the holie ghoſt: So they delude thoſe places: Ioan. 6. verſ. 53. Vnleſſe yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood, yee shall not haue life in yee: and Ioan. 3. ver. 5. Vnleſſe a man be borne agayne of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdome of God: Which teach that Sacraments are neceſſarie to ſaluation. Or if they muſt needs expound them of good workes, they will not expoūd thē of doing all neceſſarie good workes and auoiding all neceſſarie euill, but of ſome onely or in parte, or of endeauor to doe or auoid them: ſo they delude thoſe ſayings of the Scripture Rom. 8. v. 13. If you liue according to the flesh, you shall die: but if by the ſpirit you mortifie the deeds of the flesh you shall liue. Caluin. ib. He promiſeth vs life, if we endeauour to mortifie the flesh. For he doth not exactly require the death of the flesh, but onely biddeth vs endeauour to tame the lustes thereof. And the like he doth in manie other places, as may be ſeene hereafter c. 16. And in like manner they delude all other ſentences of Scripture which teach, that if we wilbe ſaued or iuſtified, we muſt doe good workes and eſchew euill. And according to this they ſay, that we muſt doe ſome good, or haue ſome good workes: that we muſt haue a begun or imperfect newneſſe of life, and keepe the lawe in ſome ſorte or fashion: Luther in Iſaiae 8. to. 4. f. 83. The holie Ghoſt is giuen that we may ſatisfie the law in ſome parte. In ſome parte. And in Pſal. 51. to. 3. fol. 455. We will fulfill and keepe the law, but with a large, that is, with a true Euangelicall dispenſation. Confeſſio Saxon. c. 9. It is needfull that there be ſome obediēce Proteſt. diſpenſation. Some obedience. Some beginning. In ſome ſorte. In ſome kind. To begin. in thoſe that are iuſtified. Schluſſelb. to. 4. Catal. p. 176. The iuſtified are free from the accuſation and damnation of the law, not from beginning of obedience. Bucer in Rom. 8. Chriſt giueth that ſpirit whereby we auoid ſinne in ſome ſorte. Pareus l. 3 de Iuſtif. p. 645. Saints doe not doubt of ſome kind of inherent iuſtice: and l. 4. c. 7. It is enough if we endeauour to begin the new obedience of the law according to all the commandements. So that whereſoeuer the Scripture ſaieth conditionally: If thou wilt be iuſtified or ſaued doe this or doe not that, they vnderſtand it with a large diſpenſation: that is, doe ſomewhat, or doe not ſomewhat of it: or begin or endeauour to doe or not doe it.

But if this shift will not ſerue, becauſe the Scripture ſpeaketh conditionally of keeping the whole law, as Math. 9. v. 17. If thou wilt enter into life, keepe the commandements; and the like, thē they ſay it is the doctrine of the law not of the Ghoſpell. Caluin ib. We gather, that this anſwere of Chriſt is according to the law. Illyricus in Claue part. 2. tract. 6. col. 543. That all be bound vnder payne of loſſe of eternall life to doe good and auoid ſinne, is a ſentence of the law, and muſt and ought to be corrected and reſtrained by the (Proteſtant) Ghoſpell or by remiſsion of ſinnes. Peter Martyr in Rom. 11. That ſaying: Forgiue, and it shalbe forgiuen, is a precept, and therefore pertaineth to the law. Melancthon in Apologia tom. 3. c. de argumentis: The promiſe of reconciliation and of eternall life is free, but proper legall promiſes are added for workes: as who shall giue a draught of water, shall not want his reward.

Wherefore thus I frame my eleuenth argument. Who not onely contradict the expreſſe words of Scripture, but alſo are compelled to turne conditionall propoſitions of Scripture into abſolute, and to delude them diuers other waies, do contradict alſo the ſincere meaning of the Scripture. But thus doe Proteſtants. Therefore &c.

CHAPTER XII. THAT PROTESTANTS CHANGE manie cauſall propoſitions of Scripture into not cauſall.

THE 12. argument for to proue that Proteſtants contradict the true ſenſe of Scripture, shalbe becauſe they are compelled in manie and weightie controuerſies to turne cauſall propoſitions into not cauſall.

For is we proue that Chriſt was exalted for his humiliation, becauſe it is ſaied. Philippen. 2. ver. 8. He humbled himſelfe made obedient vnto death euen the death of the croſſe. For: For the which thing God hath exalted him. Caluin ibid. anſwereth: That illatiue particle (wherefore) in this place ſignifieth rather conſequence, then cauſe. And 2. Inſtit. c. 17. §. vlt. The ſolution is eaſie, that Paul there ſpeaketh not of the cauſe of Christs exaltation, but onely sheweth the conſequence. And Daneus Controuer. 2. pag. 201. The particle, For which, sheweth the order and continuation of the ſpeach, not the cauſe for which. If we proue the ſame, out of thoſe wordes Hebrew. 2. ver. 9. We ſee Ieſus becauſe of the paſsion of death, crowned with glorie and honour: Caluin. ib. anſwereth: Becauſe of the paſsion of death, is as much, as if he had ſaied, Chriſt hauing died, was raiſed to this glorie which he hath gotten—For the meanes onely (that I may ſo ſpeake) of obtaining glorie is declared.

If we proue that confeſſion of faith is cauſe of ſaluatiō, as faith is cauſe of iuſtification, out of thoſe words Rom. 10. ver. 10. For with heart we beleiue vnto iuſtice, but with the To. mouth confeſson is made to ſaluation: Caluin. ib. anſwereth: We muſt not gather thereof, that confeſsion is cauſe of ſaluation: he ment onely to tell how God doth perfect our ſaluation. It is a neceſsitie of perpetuall conſequence, not that he attributeth ſaluation to confeſsion. Hunnius lib. de Iuſtificat. p. 186. ſaieth: That Confeſsion to ſaluation is the ſame, that confeſsion of ſaluation. Which the Electorall Miniſters in Colloq. Aldeburg. p. 295. affirme to be a corruption of Scripture.

If we proue that keeping of the commandements is cauſe of our freindship with God, by thoſe words Ioan. 15. v. 14. You are my freinds if you doe the things that I commād If. you: Caluin ib. anſwereth: He meaneth not, that we get ſo much honour by anie merit of ours; but onely admonisheth vs vpon what condition he receaueth vs into grace, and vouchſafeth to reckon vs among his freinds.

If we proue that the forgiueneſſe of our ſinnes dependeth vpon our forgiuing of others, out of thoſe words. Luc. 11. v. 4. Forgiue vs our ſinnes, for becauſe our ſelues alſo do Becauſe. forgiue euerie one that is in debt to vs. Caluin in Math. 6. v. 11. anſwereth: Neuertheleſſe forgiueneſſe which we demand for our ſelues, dependeth not of that which we giue: but by this means Christ would exhorte vs to forgiue all offenſes, and withall confirme more our truſt of forgiueneſſe as it were by fealing it. Nether skilleth it that in Luke is the particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which is as much as, For becauſe, or For, becauſe Christs meaning was not to note the cauſe, but onely to aduertiſe what kind of mind we ought to haue towards our brethren whiles we ſeeke to be reconciled to God.

If we proue that by charitie we be made the ſonnes of God, out of thoſe words. Math. 5. ver. 45. But I ſay to you: That. loue your enemies, doe good to them that hate you, and pray for them that perſecure and abuſe you, that you may be the children of your father which is in heauen. Calum ib. anſwereth: Vnderſtand not, that by our beneficence we become the children of God: But becauſe the ſame Spirit which is witneſſe, aſſurance, and ſeall of our free adoption, doth correct the naughtie affectiōs of the flesh, which are contrarie to charitie, Chriſt proueth by the effect, that no others are the children of God, but thoſe who reſemble him in clemencie and meeknes.

If we proue that loue is the cauſe of forgiuing ſinnes, by thoſe words. Luc. 7. v. 47. Manie ſinnes are forgiuen her, Becauſe. becauſe she hath loued much: Aretius in locis part. 1. fol. 84. anſwereth: Becauſe, is taken oſtentiuely, not cauſatiuely: This is ſo neceſſarie, as the place cannot be otherwiſe vnderſtood. The like hath Illyricus in Claue part. 2. tract. 4. Polanus in diſp. priuat. 36.

If we proue that keeping of the commandments is cauſe of obtaining what we pray for, out of thoſe words. 1. Ioan. 3. v. 22. Whatſoeuer we shall aske, we shall receaue of Becauſe. him, becauſe we keep his commandements. Caluin. ibidem anſwereth: He meaneth not, that our truſt in praier conſiſteth in our workes, but this onely he vrgeth, that pietie and ſincere worshippe of God cannot be ſeperated from faith. Nether muſt it ſeeme abſurd, that he vſeth the cauſall particle though he meane not of the cauſe, for the inſeperable accident vſeth ſometime to be put for the cauſe.

If we proue that workes are cauſe of reward, out of theſe words. Math. 16. ver. 27. He will render to euerie man According. according to his workes: Caluin ibid. anſwereth: As often as reward is promiſed to good workes, the cauſe of ſaluation is not shewed, but the faithfull are onely encouraged to doe well, becauſe they are aſſured that they shall not leeſe their labour.

If we proue that good workes are cauſe of eternall happines, out of theſe words. Math. 25. v. 34. Poſſeſſethe For. kingdome &c. For I was hungrie, and you gaue me to eate. And c. 25. v. 23. Becauſe thou haſt beene faithfull ouer a few things I will place the ouer manie things, enter into the ioy of thy Lord. And Apocal. 7. ver. 14. Theſe are they which are come out of Therefore. great tribulation &c. therefore they are before the throne of God. Pareus lib. 5. de Iuſtificat. c. 3. ſaieth: The anſwere of all Proteſtants is, that the cauſall particle in the places alledged, doth not ſignifie cauſe, but conſequence. And Caluin. Math. 25. ver. cit. That they inſiſt vpon the cauſall particle is a weake thing; for we know that not alwaies the cauſe, but rather the conſequēce is meant, when euerlaſting life is promiſed to the iuſt. And in the ſame manner doth Kemnice in locis tom. 2. tit. de Argum. delude manie places of Scripture.

If we proue that Chriſt is cauſe of our election, by thoſe words. Epheſ. 1. v. 3. As he hath choſen vs in him (Chriſt) In. before the conſtitution of the world: Piſcator in Theſibus, loco. 19. anſwereth: Paul would ſay nothing, but that he hath choſen vs to this end that he might adopte vs in Chriſt, and ſaue vs for him and by him. Which he repeateth libr. 2. p. 288. In like ſorte Zanchius l. 5 de Natur. Dei. c. 2. q. 4.

If we proue that Saints shall haue glorie for their worthe or merit, by thoſe words Apocal. 3. ver. 4. They Becauſe. shall walke with me in whites, becauſe they are worthie: Pareus l. 5. de Iuſtif. c. 2. anſwereth: He ſignifieth not the cauſe meritorie, but the condition in holie Martyrs agreing with the rule of iustice; So that we may vnderſtand, not wherefore, but what of kind men shall walke with Chriſt.

If we proue that good workes are the cauſe of glorie out of thoſe words. Rom. 8. v. 17. If we ſuffer with him, that That. we may be glorifid with him: Caluin ibidem. anſwereth: This forme of ſpeach sheweth the order which the Lord obſerueth in beſtowing ſaluation vpon vs, rather then the cauſe—He diſcourſeth not frō whence ſaluatiō cometh, but how the Lord gouerneth his ſeruants. If we proue the ſame out of thoſe words. Hebr. 10. v. 36. For patience is neceſſarie for you: that doing the will of God, you may receaue the promiſe: Pareus l. 4. de Iuſtific. pag. 1032. anſwereth: We denie not but ſome relation of patience vnto ſaluation is ſignified by the finall condition, to wit, relation of order, of means, or of condition without which not, but falſe it is, that thereby is ſignified a cauſall relation.

If we proue that good workes are cauſe of ſaluation, as bad are the cauſe of damnation, becauſe it is often ſaied in Scripture: He will render to euerie one according to his workes: According. Bucanus Inſtitut. loco 32. anſwereth: The particle According, in thoſe ſpeaches doth not ſignifie cauſe but conformitie. And Martyr in 1. Corinth. 3. ſaieth: According, doth not ſignifie Merit or cauſe, but rather proportion, forme or ſimilitude.

If we proue that virginitie helpeth to heauen, by thoſe words Math. 19. v. 12. There are Eunuches which haue gelded For. themſelues for the kingdome of heauen: Muſculus in locis tit. de votis anſwereth: We muſt not vnderſtand it ſo, as if this kind of gelding helped any thing to ſaluation.

Behould (Reader how manie kinds of cauſall propoſitions are they forced to make not cauſall, and how manie and expreſſe cauſall particles, to wit: For: To: That: In: According: Becauſe, they make fruſtrate & to no purpoſe.

Wherefore thus I argue: who beſides their oppoſition to the expreſſe words of Scripture, are forced in ſo manie & ſo great matters, to make ſo manie and ſo cleare cauſall propoſitions to be not cauſals, and to fruſtrate ſo manie and ſo euident cauſal particles, they are alſo cōtrarie to the true sēſe of Scripture. But Proteſtāts doe ſo. Therefore &c.

CHAPTER XIII. THAT WHAT IS SPOAKEN SIMPLY they make to be ſpoaken in parte or reſpectiuely.

MY 13. argument shalbe, becauſe Proteſtants are compelled to make that to be ſpoaken in parte, which the Scripture ſpeaketh ſimply or abſolutely.

For if we proue that God ſimply will not the death of Of God. a ſinner, becauſe he ſimply ſaieth and ſweareth it Ezech. c. 18. Perkins in Expoſit. Symbol. to. 1. col. 777. anſwereth: This place muſt not be taken ſimply but respectiuely: to wit, that Not ſimply but respectiuely. of the twoe, God would rather the one, to wit, that a ſinner should rather liue then dye. Finally ſo farre forth he willeth not death as it is the deſtructiō of his creature. The like he hath in Serie Cauſarum c. 52. And Caluin de Prouid. p. 737. So farre as So farre forth. he exhorteth all to pennance, the Prophet iuſtely denieth that he willeth the death of a ſinner. And in the ſame ſorte he expoundeth that ſaying of S. Peter 2. c. 3. v. 9. Not willing that anie should die: Indeed (ſaieth Caluin) as farre as God will receaue all to pennance, he will none should perish.

If we proue that God taketh our ſinnes from vs, by thoſe words 1. Ioan. 3. ver. 8. For this, appeared the Sonne of God, that he might diſſolue the workes of the Diuel. Caluin. ib. In a ſorte. anſwereth: But if in this life there be no full and ſolid regeneration, he freeth vs not from ſinne and ſlauerie but in a ſorte. And Daneus Contr. de Baptiſmo. c. 14. on earth ſinne is not In parte. quite taken away but in parte.

If we proue that there is nothing worthie of damnation Of Iuſtification. in thoſe that are iuſtified, becauſe ſimply it is ſaied Rom. 8. ver. 1. There is no damnation to them that are in Chriſt Not ſimply. Ieſus. Illyricus in Apol. pro Confeſſ. Antuerp. anſwereth: No damnation is in them who are in Chriſt Ieſus, not ſimply and in it ſelfe, but by accident, to wit, continuall praier for forgiueneſſe of ſinnes being adioyned: And Pareus l. 5. de Amiſſ. Grat. c 7. It is moſt true, that ſinnes are not ſimply forgiuen, but continuall praier for forgiueneſſe being added.

If we proue that ſimply there are ſome things hard in Of Scripture. Scripture, becauſe it is ſo ſaied 2. Pet. 3. v. 16. As alſo in all his Epiſtles ſpeaking in them of theſe things, in which are certaine things hard to be vnderſtood: Zanchius de Scriptura to. 8. col. 412. anſwereth: He ſaieth not, that they are hard to Not to anie. anie, but to twoe kinds of men? to wit, to the vnlearned and vnskilfull of the Scriptures and that are not taught of God, and to the vnſtable, that is, who are not firme in faith. In like ſorte. Bullinger Serm. 3. de verbo Dei. and others.

If we proue that Saints haue true iuſtice before God, If iuſtification. becauſe Dauid offereth his iuſtice to be examined by the iudgement of God and deſireth to be iudged thereby; Caluin. 3. Inſtit. cap. 17. §. 14. anſwereth: Saints nether will Not wholy. haue enquirie to be made of them wholy, that according to the whole tenour of their life they may be quitted or damned: nether challenge to themſelues iuſtice of diuine perfection, but in compariſon of the wicked and impious.

If we proue that charitie is ſimply greater then faith, Of good workes. becauſe the Apoſtle ſimply ſaieth. 1. Cor. 13. v. 13. And now there remaine, faith, hope, and charitie, theſe three, but the greater of theſe is charitie: Caluin. ib. anſwereth: It is manifeſt, Not in all points. that charitie is here ſaied to be the greater, not in all points, but as farre as it shalbe perpetuall, and now is the cheife, in conſeruing the Church. Whitaker l. 9. cont. Dur. ſect. 24. The Not euerie way. Apoſtle ſaieth that charitie is greater then hope and faith, not euerie way, but onely in parte. Hunnius de Iuſtif. p. 154. preferreth Not ſimply. charitie before faith and hope, not vniuerſally or ſimply, but in parte. And Luther Poſtilla in Dom. Quinquageſim. who doth not acknowledge that Paul ſpeaketh here of the continuance of charitie and of the other guifts, not of their dignitie or vertue?

If we proue that the Church is to be ſimply heard, becauſe Of the Church. she is ſimply called the Pillar and ſtrength of trueth. 1. Tim. 3. Academia Nemauſ. Reſp ad Tournon. pag. 546. anſwereth: Let the Church be the keeper and interpreter of trueth, Not ſimply. not ſimply and abſolutely, but in parte. Serranus cont. Hayum. part. 3. p. 145. When the Church is called the mother of the faithfull, the pillar and ſtrength of trueth, thoſe ſayings of the authoritie of the Church nether ought, nor can be vnderſtood ſimply, but in parte or in ſomeſorte. Author reſponſ. ad Theſ. Vademont. But in parte. p. 492. and 523. I anſwere, the Church is called the pillar and ſtrength of trueth, not ſimply, but in ſomeſorte. And p. 689. God hath not commanded to obey, the pastour or the Church ſimply, but in ſomeſorte.

If we proue that ſingle life is ſimply good, becauſe S. Paul. 1. Corinth. 7. ſimply ſaieth: It is good for a man not to Not abſolutely. touch a woman: Reineccius tom. 4. Armaturae. cap. 23. anſwereth: The Apostle speaketh ſo not ſimply and abſolutely, but in ſome ſorte and reſpectiuely. And ib. addeth, that when S. Paul ſaieth: It is good for a man to be ſo: Pauls counſaile is to be taken in ſome ſorte, to wit, of an incommodious thing. Et Whitaker l. 8. cont. Dur. ſect. 86. Paul praiſeth virginitie, not in it ſelfe, but for ſome other end.

If we proue that Virginitie is ſimply better then marriage, becauſe ſimply it is ſaied. 1. Cor. 7. v. 38. Who ioyneth Not ſimply but vpon condition. his virgin in marriage doth well, and who ioyneth not, doth better: Beza ib. anſwereth: That is, prouideth better for his children; and that not ſimply, but vpon conditions before expreſſed by the Apoſtle: In like ſorte is that to be vnderſtood which is added: She is more happie who marrieth not againe. Zuinglius alſo ibid. When he ſaieth: He doth better, and ſoone after: He Vpon compariſon. shalbe more happie, he meaneth not ſimply, but in compariſon.

If we proue that there may be ſome perfect men in this life, becauſe ſome are ſimply ſo called 1. Cor. 2. Philippen. 3. and other where, Pareus lib. 2. 2. de Iuſtificat. cap. 7. anſwereth: He attributeth perfection to himſelfe and to others, In compariſō. not abſolutely but in compariſon of Catechumens. And l. 4 c. 11. Moſt places ſpeake of perfection not abſolutely, but in reſpect of In respect. the moſt corrupted world. So alſo Lobechius diſput. 9. p. 191.

If we proue that there are ſome men iuſt, perfect, keepers of the commandements, and the like, becauſe the Scripture ſimply calleth ſome ſo: Pareus l. 4 de Iuſtificat. c. 11 anſwereth: Theſe Saints are praiſed that they were perfect, Not abſolutely. followed the Lord in all their heart, &c. not abſolutely, but becauſe they were ſincere worshippers of God. And Hunnius de Iuſtif. p. 169. They are termed perfect after their manner, that is, imperfectly and in compariſon of the wicked. And Illyricus in Claue part. 2. tractat. 4. writeth thus. Tobie 4. Almes deliuereth from ſinne: to wit, concerning ſome temporall punishment, not touching ſinne or eternall punishment. In like ſorte: Redeeme thy ſinnes with almes Daniel. 4. And Author Gratiani Antiieſuitae part. 2. p. 33. The Ieſuit obiecteth, that Paul. 1. Cor. 10. affirmeth the Sacraments of the ould law to haue beene I ſome ſorte. types: I anſwere (ſaieth he) It is true, but in ſome ſorte, not ſimply. And p. ſeq. to that Heb. 10. v. 1. The law hauing a shaddow of future goods, he thus anſwereth: Theſe things are spoaken comparatiuely of the Apoſtle, not ſimply. Finally Caluin Admonit. vlt. p. 830. ſaieth: Becauſe the bread is a Sacrament of the bodie, it is the bodie in ſome ſorte.

Let this therefore be my 13. argument. Who beſide the foreſaied oppoſition to the expreſſe words the Scripture, in manie and great controuerſies are forced to expound that in ſome ſorte, or in parte, or reſpectiuely, which is ſpoaken of the Scripture ſimply and abſolutely, they contradict the true meaning of the holie Scripture: But Proteſtants doe ſo: Therefore &c.

CHAPTER XIV. THAT PROTESTANTS WILL NOT expound there ſayings of the Scripture, of that time whereof it ſpeaketh.

MY fourtenth argument shalbe taken from that Proteſtants are forced to expound the ſayings of Scripture of a different time from that of which Scripture ſpeaketh, and that in manie and great matters.

For if we proue that at the very time of the inſtitution Of the Euchariſt. Not is shed, but shalle. of the Euchariſt, Chriſts bodie was giuen and broken, & his blood shed for vs, becauſe three Euangeliſts and Saint Paul in Greek relating Chriſts words, vſe the participle of the preſent tenſe as alſo doth S. Luke in the vulgare Latin text: neuertheleſſe Proteſtants will not vnderſtand Chriſts words of the time then preſent, but onely of the time thē to come, as we shewed. l. 1. c. 11. art. 5.

If we proue that thoſe that are iuſtified, are now in herently Of iuſtification. luſt, by thoſe words. Rom. 8. v. 29. Whome he hath foreknowne, he hath alſo predeſtinated to be made conformable to the image of his Sonne: 1. Cor. 15. v. 49. As we haue borne the Conformable not now, his hereafter. image of the earthlie, let vs alſo beare the image of the heauenlie: Pareus l. 2. de Iuſtif. c. 3. anſwereth: We graunt all this, of the ſtate to come, when we shall be fully conformable to the image of Chriſt by iuſtice and glorie (keeping the proportion of the head and members) but it maketh nothing for our aduerſarie for the preſent ſtate.

If we proue that in this life our ſinnes are taken from vs, Of Sinnes. becauſe the Scripture ſaieth, that God taketh away, cleanſeth, blotteth out ſinne: Pareus l. cit. c. 7. anſwereth: The Sinnes taken away not now but hereafter. phraſes of Scripture speake of ſanctification of the Church, now indeed begun, but hereafter to be perfected, by which the filth of ſinne now beginneth by the vertue of Chriſts ſpirit to be taken away by the rootes, to be blotted out, cleanſed, and purged out of our flesh, and at length shalbe quite taken away and blotted out.

If we proue that God doth now cleanſe vs from all iniquitie, becauſe it is ſaied. 1. Ioan. 1. v. 19. He is faithfull and iust to forgiue vs our ſinnes and cleanſe vs from all iniquitie: Caluin ib. anſwereth: If anie obiect that whilest we liue in this life we are neuer cleanſed from all iniuſtice, for ſo much as belongeth to reformation: that is true indeed, but Ihon teacheth not what God doth now perfect in vs.

If we proue that in this life ſome are made iuſt by the merits of Chriſt, as by Adams demerit they were made iniuſt, by theſe words Rom. 5. v. 19. As by the diſobedience of one man manie were made ſinners, ſo alſo by the obedience of one, manie shalbe made iuſt. Pareus l. 2. de Iuſtificat. cap. 3. anſwereth: In this life we are made iuſt imperfectly, in the next, we shalbe made perfectly iuſt. Hereupon perchaunce Luther ſaied Diſput. 3. tom. 1. We thinke, that a man to be iuſtified, is not to be yet iuſt, but to be in the way and courſe to iuſtice.

If we proue that faith without workes is alwaies dead, becauſe it is ſaied. Iames 2. verſ. vlt. Faith without workes is dead: Schluſſelburg. to. 8. Catal. p. 526. anſwereth: The ſaying of Iames touching faith dead without workes, is to be vnderſtood of ehe time after iuſtification: So that he will not haue faith to be dead without good workes whileſt it iuſtifieth.

If we proue, that God alwaies will all men to be ſaued, by thoſe words. 1. Tim. 2. Who will all men to be ſaued: Perkins in Caſes of Conſcience cap. 7. ſect. 3. anſwereth: God will all men to be ſaued: vnderstand, now in this laſt age of the world.

If we proue, that Saintes in heauen aske mercie for the faithfull, becauſe they aske reuenge vpon their perſecutors, by thoſe words Apocal. 6. verſ. 9 I ſaw vnder the aultar the ſoules of them that were ſlanie for the word of God &c. and they cried with a loud voice ſaying: How long Lord holie and true iudg • st thou not and reuengest not our blood on them that dwell on the earth: Confeſſio Wittember. c. de Inuocat. Sanctorum vnderſtandeth this onely of praiers, made whiles the Saints were on earth: In the Apocalypſe the ſoules of the Saints that were ſlaine do crie that their blood be reuenged, not that now reſting in the Lord they are deſirous of reuenge after a humane manner, but becauſe the Lord euen after their death is myndfull of the praiers which whiles they yet liued on earth the made for the deliuerie of themſelues and the Church.

If we proue, that in this life we fulfill the law, doe the will of God, and obey Chriſt, by thoſe words. Rom. 8. v. 4 God ſent his Sonne &c. that the iuſtification of the law might be fullfilled in vs. Et Math. 6. Thy will be done on earth: And Hebr. 5. verſ. 9. Christ is made the cauſe of ſaluation to all that obey him: Scharpius de Iuſtif. Contr. 12. anſwereth: Out of theſe places nothing followeth but that the faithfull fulfill the law, but it followeth not that they fulfill it in this life.

Wherefore I thus make my fourtenth argument: Who beſides the foreſaied oppoſition to the expreſſe words of Scripture, will not expound the words of Scripture on that time whereof it ſpeaketh, do contradict the true ſenſe thereof. Proteſtants doe ſo. Therefore &c.

CHAPTER XV. THAT PROTESTANTS OF MANIE ſayings of Scripture make one.

MY fiftenth argument shalbe becauſe Proteſtants are forced to confound manie ſayings of Scripture in one, and ſo make one of manie.

For if we proue, that God will not the death of a ſinner, but willeth his conuerſion, by thoſe words Ezechiel. 18. I will not the death of a ſinner, but that he be conuerted and liue: Caluin. l. de Praedeſt pag. 706. anſwereth: If (as we ought to doe) thoſe twoe be read ioyntly, I will that a ſinner which is conuerted, liue: the cauill is eaſily refuted. The ſome hath Beza. 2 part. reſp. ad Acta Montisbel. p. 196.

If we proue, that God would haue al to be ſaued and come to the knowledge of the trueth, becauſe it is ſo ſaied. 1. Tim. 2. v. 4. Beza lib. quaeſt. & reſponſ. vol. 1. Theol. p. 684. ſaieth: Thoſe twoe: To ſaue, and to come to the knowledge of trueth: are to be ioyned, that ſo God may be vnderſtood to will that they be ſaued, whome he will haue to come to the knowledge of the trueth. So alſo he anſwereth in Reſponſ. ad Acta Montisb. p. 194. And there p. 196. in the ſame ſorte expoundeth that Ezech. 18. I will not the death of a ſinner, but that be conuerted.

If we proue, that Chriſts baptiſme was different from S. Ihons, becauſe Actor. 19. S. Luke. telleth, that ſome who haue beene baptized with S. Ihons baptiſme, were baptized againe of S. Paul: Beza ib. ver. 5. ſaieth; that theſe are not the words of S. Luke telling who were baptized of S. Paul, but of S. Paul telling what was the baptiſme of Saint Ihon. Caluin. l cont. Anabap. p. 415. ſaieth: There is ſaied, that Paul baptized them in the name of Chriſt, then to explicate what this meaneth, is added, that he laied hands vpon them and the holie Ghoſt deſcended. Wherefore the ſame thing is diuerſely expreſſed by twoe wayes as the Scripture vſeth. Et 4. Inſt. c. 15. §. 18. Luke doth not tell twoe different things, but keepeth the forme of relating vſed of the Hebrews, who firſt ſet downe the ſumme of the matter, and after explane it more at large.

If we proue, that we muſt be borne againe both of water and of the holie Ghoſt, by theſe words Ioan. 3. v. 5. Vnleſſe one be borne againe of water and the holie Ghoſt &c. Caluin. ib. anſwereth: It is one ſimple ſentence: that we muſt be borne a new, for to be Gods children, and that of this ſecond birth the holie Ghoſt is author. Therefore he put water and Spirit for the ſame thing. And in this manner they confound manie things, which the Scripture diſtinguisheth, and ſay, that ether they be Synonimies, or that one exegetically expoundeth the other.

Wherefore this is my 15. argument. Who beſides the foreſaied oppoſition to the expreſſe words of Scripture, are compelled to confound manie different ſayings of the Scripture in one, thoſe are alſo oppoſite to the true meaning of the holie Scripture. Proteſtants doe ſo. Therefore &c.

And hitherto we haue ſeene how manie and what kind of Propoſitions of Scripture, almoſt in all kinds of controuerſies, Proteſtants doe change and depraue, and that no kind of ſpeach can be ſo plaine, ſtrong, and forcible, as it can recall them from their errours, but that they break through, delude, & depraue all: Now let vs ſee how they deale will the wordes of Scripture. For as Tertullian ſaieth cont. Hermogenen. It is the Heretiks cuſtome to wreſte all ſimple words.

CHAPTER XVI. THAT WORDS OF SCRIPTVRE WHICH ſignifie the working or doing of a thing, Proteſtants expound of onely endeauour or deſire to do it.

THE 16. argument shalbe taken from thence, that words of Scripture which ſignifie the working or doing of a thing, Proteſtants are compelled to expound of onely endeauour or deſire to worke or doe it. Thus they delude thoſe words of Scripture, which ſay that ſome men are iuſt, are perfect, auoide euill, doe the will of God, loue him with all their heart, fulfill the law, keepe the commandements, worke their ſaluation, and the like.

Caluin in Math. 12. verſ. 33. thoſe words: Ether make a Make good. 1. aſpire to good. tree good &c. expoundeth thus: It cometh of the free indulgence of God, that he vouchſafeth them ſo honorable a title (of good) who aſpire to goodneſſe. In Math. 6. v. 9. Thy will be done: This ſufficeth (ſaieth he) to teſtifie by deſire, that we Keepé. 1. applie their endeauour. hate and are ſorie for whatſoeuer we ſee contrarie to Gods will, and deſire to haue it deſtroied. In Ioan. 15. v. 10. If yee keepe my commandements: The faithfull (ſaieth he) are accoūted to keepe Chriſts commandements, when they applie thereto their endeauour, albeit they be farre from the marke. Vpon that Rom. 8. v. 1. Who walke according to the flesh: He ſaieth they walke according to the flesh, not who haue quite caſt of all ſenſe of the flesh, but who diligently labour to tame and mortifie the flesh, that the deſire of pietie may ſeeme to reigne in them. Et verſ. 5. He teſtifieth, that he accounteth not them carnall, who aſpire to heauenlie iuſtice, but them who are wholy addicted to the world. In Philip. 2. verſ. 3. Worke your ſaluation: We are Worke. 1. aſpire to it. Iuſt. 1. aſpire to iuſtice. ſaied to worke it, when gouerned by the holie Ghoſt, we aſpire to heauenlie life. In 1. Tim. 1. v. 9. The law is not ſet for the iuſt: I anſwere, that Paul here calleth them iuſt, not who are wholy perfect, as there is none to be found, but who with a ſingular deſire of heart aſpire to goodneſſe. Et ib. c. 4. v. vlt. Thou shalt ſaue thy ſelfe: The Pastour is ſaied to ſaue himſelfe, becauſe that is Worke. 1. Goe forward. vſuall, that the faithfull worke their ſaluation, when they goe forewarde in the courſe thereof. In 1. Pet. 4. v. 18. If a iuſt man shall ſcarce be ſaued: He calleth them iuſt, not who are perfectly iuſt, but who endeauour to liue well. In 1. Ioan. 2. verſ. 3. If Keepe. 1. Endeauour. we keepe his commandements: He meaneth not, to keepe the commandements, to fully ſatisfie the law (which example can neuer be found in the world) but who according to mans infirmitie doe endeauour to frame their life to Gods ſeruice. And ib. v. 5. But who keepeth his word, truely in him the loue of God is perfect: I anſwere (ſaieth Caluin) that it ſufficeth, ſo euerie one according to the meaſure of grace giuen to him, doe aſpire to this perfection. And ib in c. 3. v. 5. There is no ſinne in him: They are eſteemed of the cheifeſt parte, that is, they are ſaied to be iuſt and to liue iuſtly, becauſe with a ſincere aff • ction of heart they aſpire to iuſtice. This and manie ſuch like Caluin.

Bucer vpon that Math 7. v. 21. But who doeth the will Doeth. 1. Endeauoureth. of my Father: That is (ſaieth he) who with his mynd doth endeauour to frame himſelfe to the will of the Father. In Math. 12 v. 50. Whoſoeuer doth the will of my Father: We muſt muſt note, that to doe the will of the Father, is all one, as to heare the words of Chriſt, and to doe them, that is, to endeauour from our heart to doe them. And in Ioan. 14. he ſaieth: To keepe the commandement of the Lord, here is nothing els, but to beleiue that it is true and holeſome, and to loue it with all our heart.

Zuinglius in Explanat. art. 14. Here we vnderſtand to doe according to the rule of Christ and precepts of God, to come neare to the rule of God, and with all endeauour to conforme himſelfe to the word of God, as farre as a man can in this mortall bodie. Et in Luc. 1. tom. 4. p. 183. Manie trouble themſelues here, how they are ſaied to haue beene iuſt before God, whereas before him no mortall man can be iuſt. This knot is eaſily looſed, if we Iuſt. 1. Endeauour to be. vnderſtand ſimply according to the phraſe of the Hebrew tongue which calleth them iuſt before God, who for feare of God and loue of iuſtice endeauour to be innocent and holie.

Schluſſelburg. to. 7. Catal. Haeret. pag. 235. expoundeth thoſe words Philip. 2. ver. 12. in this ſorte: To worke, in this place ſignifieth to labour and to be carefull of the true way which God hath propoſed for to obtaine ſaluation.

Pareus l. 4. de Iuſtif. c. 15. ſaieth: Iob indeed is ſaied to be iuſt, perfect, and fearing God, and auoiding euill: becauſe he was a ſincere worshiper of God, hauing an earneſt deſire to doe well.

Tilenus in Syntagm. c. 46. They are called iuſt and perfect, Iuſt. 1. Labour to be. who labour for iuſtice and aſpire to perfection.

Perkins vpon that Galat. 6. ver. 2. So yee shall fulfill the Fulfill. 1. deſire. law of Chriſt: Here the Galathians are ſaied to fulfill the law, becauſe God accepteth the ſincere affection of the mynd for the full effect. And Whitaker libr. 8. contr. Dur. ſect. 49. They are ſaied to keepe, who endeauour to keepe. And ſect. 39. They loued the law with their heart, and for that cauſe they are accounted iuſt.

Muſculus in locis tit. de Peccato. What other thing is it: I haue kept my feet from all ill way, but I haue carefully endeauoured to commit no euill? hIaue done iudgement and iuſtice; but I haue had a deſire to doe iudgement and iuſtice?

Wherefore thus I conclude: Who beſide the foreſaied oppoſition to the expreſſe words of holie Scripture, are alſo forced in ſo manie and ſo great matters to expound the words thereof ſignifying effecting, working, or doing, of onely deſire to effect, work, or doe, they contradict the true ſenſe of Scripture. But Proteſtants doe ſo. Therefore &c.

CHAPTER XVII. THAT WORDS SIGNIFYING A CAVSE, Proteſtants expound of a way or meane: and what the Scripture attributeth to one cauſe, they giue to an other.

THe 17. argument shalbe taken from that Proteſtants are forced to expound words that ſignifie a Cauſe, of a way, order, or meane. Thus they depraue thoſe words of Scripture which teach that faith or good workes are the cauſes of our iuſtice or ſaluation.

Perkins in Cathol. reform. Controu. 4. c. 4. expoundeth thoſe words 2. Corin. 4. v. 17. For that our tribulation which preſently is momentanie and light, worketh aboue meaſure exceedingly an eternall weight of glorie in vs, in this ſorte: Afflictiōs Worke. 1. are • eans. worke ſaluation, not as cauſes effecting it, but as means leading vs to it. And he addeth withal: Which we muſt vniuerſally and alwaies obſerue and hould of workes in the cauſe of our ſaluation, to wit, that they are as a way and certaine markes which lead vs to glorie, but not by cauſing or working it.

Caluin vpon thoſe words. 2. Cor. 7. v. 10. For the ſorrow that is according to God, worketh pennance vnto ſaluation that is ſtable, writeth thus: Paul enquireth not of the cauſe of ſaluation, but onely commending pennance of the fruite which it Worke. 1. is as a way. bringeth forth, doth ſay, that it is like a way whereby we come to ſaluation. In this ſorte conſequence is rather ſignified then anie cauſe. And to the ſame place Pareus libr. 4. de Iuſtificat. cap. 7. anſwereth: No efficient cauſe, but a meane or condition which helpeth ether by it ſelfe or by accident, is ſignified. And Scarpius de Iuſtification. Controuerſ. 12. Pennance is ſaied to worke ſaluation, not by making it by it vertue, but by leading as by a way to ſaluation.

The ſame Caluin in 1. Corinth. 7. verſ. 19. Circumciſion is nothing and prepuce is nothing, but the obſeruation of the commandements of God. Here (ſaieth he) Paul diſputeth not of the cauſe of iustice, nor how we obtaine it, but onely to what the faithfull ought to bend endeauour. And vpon that Wash. 1. feele. Actorum 22. verſ. 16. Be baptized and wash away thy ſinnes: Ablution, (he ſaieth he) ſignifieth not the cauſe, but is referred to Paules feeling; who hauing receaued the Symbol, knew better that his ſinnes were forgiuen. And 3. Inſtitution. cap. 4. §. 36. he ſaieth: Where ſinne is ſaied to be purged by mercie and bountifulneſſe (Prouerb. 16.) is not meant that by them it is recompenſed in the ſight of God; but is shewed, that they shall find God mercifull to them who forſaking vice, are turned to pietie, as if he had ſaied, Gods wrath is appeaſed when we leaue our wickedneſſe. And ibidem cap. 14. §. vltim. hauing obiected to himſelfe that the Scripture declareth, that good workes are the cauſe that God doth fauour them, he anſwereth: That which in order goeth firſt, he calleth the cauſe of that which followeth. In this manner he deriueth Cauſe. 1. a ſtep ſometimes eternall life from good workes, not that it is giuen for them, but becauſe whom God hath choſen he iuſtifieth, that afterward he may glorifie, the former grace which is a ſteppe to the later, he after a ſorte maketh a cauſe—Finally by theſe kinde of speaches order is rather ſignified then cauſe.

Pareus l. 3. de Iuſtif. c. 12. ſaieth, that by thoſe words 2. Timoth. 4. I haue fought a good fight: the order and way to the crowne is noted, not the cauſe. So that what the Scripture maketh the cauſe, according to theſe men, is onely a meane, a way, ſteppe, or order.

In like manner, what the Scripture attributeth to one cauſe, they giue to an other; as what it atttibuteth to good workes, they giue to faith onely; what it aſcribeth to faith or Sacraments, they appropriate to God alone.

Zuinglius l. de Prouident. cap. 6. When Paul writeth to Hearing. 1. Spirit. the Romans, that faith cometh of hearing, in the ſame manner, he attributeth that to the nearer cauſe and more knowne to vs, which cometh onely from the Spirit, and not from outward preaching. And in Math. 4. Oftentimes that is attributed to the later, which belongeth to the former: as to workes, which rather belongeth to faith, and againe, to faith, which moſt properly Workes. 1. faith. and truely belongeth to Gods election.

Sadeel de ver. Peccat. remiſſ p. 139. anſwering to thoſe words Prouerb. 16. Iniquitie is purged by bountie and mercie, ſaieth: That is attributed to the effects which is proper to the cauſe, after the vſuall manner (ſaieth he) of Scripture. That is attributed to their vertue, which properly is to be attributed to the benefit of Chriſt alone.

Illyricus in Claue part. 2. tract. 6. Faith, word, and Sacraments Faith &c. 1. God. are ſaied to ſaue vs, whereas God alone doth thoſe things. And ibid. Thy faith hath ſaued thee, whereas onely Gods mercie and omni potēcie apprehēded by faith doth that. And he addeth. Scripture oftentimes attributeth things not to their true cauſes. Oftentimes effects are attributed (by the Scripture) to not true or not principall cauſes. Herevpon it cometh that there is often mention of Alleoſis with Zuinglius, and of Metalepſis with others, by which figures what the Scripture giueth to one thing they transfer to an other. Which Alleoſis Zuinglius in Exegeſi. to. 2. f. 350. calleth interchangable ſpeach; but Luther in Hoſpin. part. 2. Hiſtor. f. 57. termeth it the Diuels mask.

Wherefore thus I argue in forme. Who gayneſay the expreſſe words of Scripture in ſuch ſorte as we haue ſeene in the firſt booke, and beſides in manie and weightie matters, words which ſignifie a cauſe do expound of a way, meane, or order, and what the Scripture attributeth to one cauſe do transferre to an other, they contradict the true ſenſe of holie Scripture: Proteſtants doe ſo. Therefore &c.

CHAPTER XVIII. THAT WORDS OF SCRIPTVRE Which ſay a thing is, Proteſtants expound by ought to be.

THE 18. argument shalbe becauſe what the Scripture ſaieth Is, Proteſtants expound It ought to be. Pareus l. 2. de Iuſtif. c. 7. thoſe words. 1. Ioan. 2. v. 5. But he that keepeth his word, in him the charitie of God is Is. 1. ought to be. perfected: expoundeth thus: The ſentence of S. Ihon (as others ſuch like) is to be vnderſtood of right or dutie, not of fact: What kinde of charitie ought to be, not what kinde is in vs. And ibid. thoſe words. Coloſſ. 3. v. 14. Haue charitie, which is the bound of perfection, he gloſſeth thus: Charitie is called the bound of perfection, not which we haue, but which we ought to haue, and which we shall haue in euerlaſting life. Et l. 4 c. 11. thoſe words Deuter. 30. v. 6. Our Lord God shall circumciſe thy heart, and the heart of thy ſeed, that thou maiſt loue thy Lord God with all thy heart. He interpreteth in this ſorte: The promiſe, to loue God with all thy heart, ether ſpeaketh of dutie, how we ought to loue God, to wit, ſincerely and perfectly: or it ſpeaketh of ſinceritie. And the ſame Pareus l. 4. de Grat. & lib. arbit. c. 6. that ſentence of the Apoſtle 1. Tim. 3. he thus expoundeth: The Church is called the pillar and ſtrength of trueth, of dutie, becauſe she ought alwaies to be ſo, albeit she be not ſo alwaies in act. The ſame he hath in Gal. 2. lect. 18. Moulins in his Bucler. pag. 50. and others.

Tilenus in Syntagmate cap. 46. writeth, that in thoſe places Ioan. 14. v. 21. Rom. 13. 8. and Gal. 5. 14. Where the Scripture affirmeth, that thoſe who loue God, doe keepe his commandements, it meaneth not of mans power to performe the law, but of our dutie. His meaning is, that the Scripture meaneth not, that who loue God keepe his commā dements (which it ſaieth plainely) but onely that they ought to keepe them.

Wherefore I thus argue. They who beſides the foreſaied direct oppoſition to the expreſſe words of holie writt, are alſo forced to expound that by Ought to be, which the Scripture plainely ſaieth Is; contradict the true meaning of the holie Scripture. Proteſtants doe ſo. Thererefore &c.

CHAPTER XIV. THAT WORDS OF SCRIPTVRE SIGnifying a true thing they expound of an apparent or shew.

MY 19. proof shalbe, becauſe words of Scripture which ſignifie a true thing, Proteſtants are compelled to expound of an apparent, or shew before men. Thus they delude the words of Scripture which teach that Sacraments or good works doe iuſtifie or redeeme ſinnes, that euill or reprobate men may beleiue, or be in the Church, that reprobates may be iuſtified, doe good workes, and the like.

When the Scripture ſaieth. 10. v. 10. With the mouth confeſsion is made to ſaluation: Luther apud Schluſſelburg. to. 7. To ſaluation. 1. to a ſigne thereof. Catal. p. 234. anſwereth: to wit, to testifie ſaluation obtained by faith. Kemnitius ib. p. 559. Paul speaketh ſo, that confeſsion ſaueth, to shew what kind of faith obtaineth eternall life, to wit firme and effectuall. Wigandus ib. p. 746. The ſenſe is: By faith ſaluation is apprehended, but by month is manifeſted, and confeſsion of ſaluation vttered. Et P. Martyr. in 1. Cor. 12. Saluation is attributed to confeſsion, becauſe thence it beginneth to be declared as by an outward ſigne. He would. 1. He made ſuch shew.

Luther in Poſtilla in Feſto Stephani, writeth thus: What he here ſaieth: How often would I gather together thy children, as &c. ſignifith that God delt ſo with the Iews as no man could thinke or imagin otherwiſe, then that the earnestly would gather them. For he behaued himſelfe, as a man should, who indeed would it. And Poſtilla in Dom. 1. Aduentus, thoſe words: Redeeme thy ſinnes by almes, he thus expoundeth: Shew that they are blotted out. And Dom. 4. poſt Trinit. thoſe words. Luke 6. Forgiue, and yee shall be forgiuen: in this ſorte: If I forgiue, that forgiueneſſe maketh meaſſured of the ſinceritie of my faith, and certifieth me, and declareth my faith. And in Dom. 9. Make your ſelues freinds of the mammō of iniquitie: that is, by outward almes openly shew your faith, whereby you may get freinds, that poore men may be witneſſes of your manifeſt worke, that you beleiue ſincerely.

Schluſſelburg. tom. 7. Catal. p. 235. writeth thus. Sorrow Worketh. 1. sheweth. according to God worketh pennance of worke to ſaluation, that is, according to Luthers interpretation, is ſuch a worke as teſtifieth of ſaluation. And pag ſeq. The ſaying of Ioel: Euerie one that calleth vpon the name of the Lord shalbe ſafe, hath this meaning: that calling vpon the Lords name is a testimonie of ſaluation receaued by faith.

Brentius homil. 1. in Dom. 13 poſt Trinit. writeth, that that ſpeach of Ioſias. 4. Reg. 23. He returned to our Lord in all his heart: is to be vnderſtood what Ioſias was in the iudgement of men for the gouernement of his kingdome, not what he was in the iudgment of God for his priuate faultes.

Reineccius to. 4. Armat. c. 15. thoſe words Rom. 2. Gentils who haue not the law, doe naturally the things of the law, expoundeth of politike, philoſophicall, and Phariſaicalliuſtice.

Kemnitius in locis tit. de Argument. part. 2. ſaieth that thoſe words Deuter. 6. It shalbe iuſtice to vs before God, if Iuſtitie. 1. in title. we keeepe his commandments, are ether meant of legall iuſtice, or that though our iuſtice be vncleane, yet God giueth it the title of Iuſtice. He would ſay, that the keeping of the commandements, is ether onely legall iuſtice, or onely iuſtice in name ſake. And of the faſt of Phinees he ſaieth: of it ſelfe it could not haue the title of iuſtice, but was reputed as a deed iuſtly done.

Herbrand. in Compend. Theol. loco de bonis oper. If the letter (Redeeme thy ſinnes by almes) be vrged, it is cleare, that the ſenſe of thoſe words are contrarie to the ſcope of the whole Scripture, and to the analogie of faith. But this is the proper and true meaning of the place of Daniel: Beleiue God to be Redeem • . 1. Sh • w • hy faith. be angrie with ſinne, and to be appeaſed with the iust, that is, the beleiuers, and shew this faith to be true by workes. In like ſorte ſpeaketh Hunnius l. de Iuſtif. p. 198. of thoſe words Tobie 4. Almes deliuereth from all ſinne, and from death.

Zuinglius reſponſ. ad Confeſſ. Lutheri. tom. 2. fol. 477. Thoſe ſayings of Paul, which he allledgetb out of Epheſ. 5. and Cleanſe. 1. Signifie cleanſing. Tit. 3. of the waters cleanſing by the word, and of the lauer of regeneration, they vndeſtand not to be enallages, that is, changings of functions, by which it vſeth to be attributed to ſignes, which they ſignifie onely.

Caluin in Ioan. 15. v. 2. thoſe words: Euerie branch in me &c. expoundeth thus: I anſwere manie are held by the opinion of mē to be the vine, which indeed haue no roote in the vine. In c. 16. verſ. 27. We are ſaied to be loued of God, whiles we loue In. 1. in mens opinion. Chriſt, becauſe we haue a pledge of his fatherlie loue. In Actor. 8. v. 13. He beleiued, he expoundeth: He thought he beleiued. In Iuſt. 1. in outward shew. Ezech. 18. ver. 24. How doth Ezechiel meane, that the iuſt fall away? This queſtion is ſoone anſwered, becauſe he treateth not of the liuelie roote of iuſtice, but of the outward shew or apparence. In Epheſ. 5. v. 26. That Paul ſaieth we are washed by baptiſme, is becauſe there God teſtifieth our washing vnto vs, and with all doth what he sheweth. In Coloſ. 2. v. 12. We are buried together with him by baptiſme, he ſpeaketh after his manner, attributing the efficacie to the Sacrament, leſt it should in vaine ſignifie that which is not. In Iacob. 2. verſ. 23. He is iuſtified by workes: Iuſtified. 1. Knowne. that is, by the fruites his iuſtice is knowneand approued. De Praedeſt. pag. 714. It is no meruaile if (the Scripture) esteeming Sauls workes by the outward shew, commendeth his innocencie and honeſtie. Et 3. Inſtit. c. 4. §. 36. That to redeeme (Dan. 4.) is rather referred to men then to God. And the ſame he ſaieth of that of Salomon: Charitie couereth ſinnes, and of other ſuch places.

Beza in Colloq. Montisbel. p. 388. We ſay, that baptiſme of water is the lauer of regeneration, that is, ſignifieth the inward Regeneratiō. 1. Signe thereof. regeneration. In 1. Tim. 4. v. 1. It is one thing truely to embrace Chriſt, an other onely with mouth to profeſſe Chriſt with Simon Magus and Iudas: and yet theſe are ſaied euen to beleiue, to wit, according to the common vſe of speach, becauſe they ſeeme to beleiue. In Math. 19. ver. 2. If thou wilt be perfect &c. That is, if thou wilt indeed shew thy ſelfe ſuch, as thou boaſteſt to be.

Pareus Contr. 5. col. 1009. Hauing damnation &c. 1. Tim. 5. v. 11. Bucers and Martyrs opinion is true, when they take the word Damnation in this place of Paul, for damnation which is pronounced of men againſt thoſe yōg widows who marrie againe. And Mar • yr l. de votis. col. 1355. Thoſe words of the Apoſtle Damnation. 1. in mens iudgement. may be vnderſtood of mens iudgement. The ſame Daneus. Contr. 6. col. 1187. When Concupiſcence hath coceaued &c. Iac. 1. ver. 15. Iames ſpeaketh of that effect of ſinne which appeareth to vs men. Et p. 1205. Bellarmin anſwereth out of Dan. 4. v. 4. and Philip. 2. v. 12. that we can redeeme our ſinnes. But Bellarmin is deceaued, for thoſe places of Scripture onely teach what we can and ought to doe in regard of men, not in regard of God. Et Contr. 2. c. 16. Verbes actiue, which are ſpoaken by the Scripture Cauſeth. 1. Teſtifieth. of the Sacraments, doe not ſignifie cauſe, or action cauſing and effecting, but onely action testifying.

Pareus de Iuſtif. c. 15. 1. Ioan. 3. c. 7. Who worketh iuſtice, is iuſt; That is, he sheweth by workes, that he is iuſtified by faith. Et l. 3. c. 14. Ioan. 15. Euerie branche in me: he expoundeth of thoſe, who adhere to Chriſt in onely outward profeſsion and shew. And that Math. 24. The charitie of manie shall wax could: of thoſe who in outward appearence are iuſt. And that 1. Tim. 1. Some haue made shipwrack of faith, of onely apparent faith: Et l. 4. c. 18. ſaieth: With Iames, to Iuſtifie, is to shew by workes before men the iuſtice of faith.

Zanchius in Summa Praelect. to. 7. col. 276. The place 2. Pet. 1. (Forgetting the purgation &c.) is to be vnderstood according to the cuſtome of holie Scripture, which according to the iudgement of charitie, calleth all Saints, Iuſt, and Cleanſed from ſinne, whoſoeuer are baptized in Chriſt, and profeſſe Christ, though all be not ſuch before God. Et ib. That Ezech. 18. If a iuſt man turne himſelfe from iuſtice: Is not meant of one that is truely iuſt, but who to men onely ſeemeth iuſt. Et de Perſeuer. c. 2. Manie beleiued in him Ioan. 12. Becauſe to themſelues they ſeemed truely to beleiue in Chriſt, whereas notwithſtandind they doe not truely beleiue.

Perkins in Cathol. Reform. Contr. 4. c. 4. vpon that Pſ. 105. It was reputed to him to iuſtice, writeth thus: Surely not Iuſtice. 1. a Signe thereof. becauſe that fact was a full ſatisfaction of the law, but becauſe God ai • accept that iuſt worke as a note and ſigne of iustice, and of that zele which he had for the glorie of God. Et in Pſal. Happie Happie. 1. a ſigne thereof. is the man who walketh in the law: He ſaieth: He is happie, that he is in Chriſt, of which thing the obediēce giuen to the law, is a ſigne. Et ib. We ſay, that workes concurre to iuſtification, and that we are iuſtified by them as by certaine ſignes and effects, not as by cauſes. And tom. 2. in Galat. 5. They are ſaied to fall Fallen. 1. shew they neuer ſtood. from grace, not that indeed all had beene vnder grace and after had fallen from it: but becauſe God made it manifeſt to men that indeed they had neuer beene vnder his fauour. And Apocalipſ. 2. When Dauid praied God to create a new heart in him, Perkins ſaieth: He ſpeaketh not as he was before God and by faith; but according to his feeling; for his faith did not put forth it ſelfe before men and himſelfe.

Polanus in Diſp. priuat. p. 24. that Ezech. 18. He shall quickē Quicken. 1. teſtifie. his owne ſoule expoundeth thus: He by his workes shall teſtifie, that he is truely regenerate. Et pag. 108. Faith is perfected by workes, that is, perfectly knowne.

Bucanus Inſt. loc. 18. Zacharias in theſe words. Be conuerted to me, ſpeaketh of outward conuerſion. Et loco 30. Charitie couereth a multitude of ſinnes, not before God, but before men.

Vrſinus in Catechiſ. p. 40. That ſaying of Peter: Denying the Lord who bought them: Agayne: He forgot that he was Cleanſed. 1. in outward Signifie. cleanſed from his ould ſinnes, and ſuch like, are manifestly ſpoakē ether onely of outward shew and gloriation of redemption or purgation, or &c. Et q. 63. Who doeth iuſtice, is iuſt; to wit, before men. And in like ſorte Piſcator in Theſ. l. 2. p. 94. expoundeth that place Rom. 6. Who is dead, is iuſtified from ſinne.

Aretius in locis part. 1. f. 9. ſaieth to that Tobie 4. & 12. Deliuer. 1. Sgnifie. Almes deliuer from death: They deliuer from eternall death, that is, are ſignes and firme arguments in the godlie, that they are deliuered from that death. Et Confeſſio Wittemberg. c. de Eleemoſyna. We teach, that almes doth ſo blot out ſinne, that it is the fruite of charitie towards our neighbour, by which worke we teſtifie the faith and obedience which we owe to God.

P. Martyr in Rom. 9. Nether is proued out of this place (If anie shall cleanſe himſelfe) that men can cleanſe themſelues, or make themſelues honorable veſſells. Wherefore we muſt not gather more out of thoſe words of Paul, thē that ſuch a cleanſing is a ſigne, whereby we iudge of the worthe or vnworthineſſe of veſſells in the Church.

Tilenus in Syntagmate c. 41. giueth this rule of deluding A generall of deluding words of Scripture. all places of Scripture, which teach that charitie, hope, feare or pennance doe iuſtifie, to wit, that ether by theſe names is vnderſtood faith, or that they onely declare iuſtification.

Scharpius de Iuſt. Contr. 5. denieth that ſpeach Luc. 8. They beleiue for a time: or that 1. Tim. 1. They haue made shipwrack Faith. 1. in shew. of faith: & cap. 5. & 6. they shall depart from faith: They haue fallen from faith, to be meant of true faith: Nether will he haue that Ezech. 18. When a iust man shall turne himſelfe Iuſt. 1. in shew▪ from iuſtice, to be meant of one truely iuſt: nor that Math. 18. When the vncleane spirit shall goe forth of a man, to be meant of the Diuel truely gone forth. Nor that Math 24. Charitie of manie shall wax could, Of true charitie: Nor that Galat. 5. Yee are fallen from grace: of true grace: Nor that Hebr. 6. Were illuminated, or Hebr. 10. In which he was ſanctified, of truely illuminated or ſanctified: Nor that 2. Pet. 1. Forgetting the purgation &c. and c. 2. A ſowe washed &c. of true purgation, or true washing. Nor finally that Actor. 10. Simon beleiued, of true faith. And in like ſorte Contr. 6. he denieth that Ioan. 12. Manie of the Princes beleiued: and that 1. Cor. 13. If I haue all faith, to be meant of true faith: and Contr. 7. that Iacob. 2. Not by faith onely, of true faith. And Contr. 12. When anie are ſaied, to be perfect or iuſt, as Gen. 6. 1. Reg. 15. Luc. 1. Actor. 13. he ſaieth this is not meant of true iuſtice or perfection, but of apparent. So that with theſe men nothing is true if it be againſt them, but onely apparent, as is indeed their religion.

Wherefore thus I argue in forme. Who beſide the foreſaied oppoſition to the expreſſe words of Scripture, in manie and great matters, words which ſignifie true things, are forced to expound them of apparence, outward shews, teſtifications, and ſignifications before men, they contradict the true ſenſe of Scripture. Proteſtants doe ſo. Therefore &c.

CHAPTER XX. THAT PROTESTANTS ARE FORCED to expound the words of holie Scripture by diuers, diſparates, and contraries.

THE 20. argument wherewith we will proue that Proteſtants doe contradict the true meaning of holie Scripture, shalbe becauſe they are cōpelled to expound the words thereof by things that are quite different, yea diſparate or nothing like, and plaine concrarie; of which doings of theirs amongſt innumerable I will note ſome few examples.

They expound the words of Scripture by things different or diuerſe. For thus dealeth Zuinglius in Marci. 1. to. 4. p. 141. All were baptized, that is (ſaieth he) were taught in Baptized 1. Taught. the Ghoſpell. In Ioan. 3. v. 5. The kingdome of God, is here taken for heauenlie doctrine and preaching of the Ghoſpell. In hiſtor. reſur. pag. 401. The ſenſe is: Whoſe ſinnes you forgiue, that is, Forgiue. 1. Preache. to whome you shall tell the forgiueneſſe of ſinnes. In Roman, 5. pag. 419. Sinne in this place (As ſinne by one man &c.) is Sinne. 1. Diſ • aſe. Faith. 1. Preaching. taken for a diſeaſe. In cap. 10. pag. 434. Faith is by hearing: Here marke, that Faith is taken of Paul, for the manifeſted will of God, and for the manifest and publike preaching of faith amongst the Iews and Gentils. In 1. Cor. 7. p. 463. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 : Good, is here taken for commodious and quiet. Et tom. 2. in Elencho Faith. 1 Gods election. Which. 1. Whiles. Bleſſed. 1. Bad Fairewell. fol. 34. Faith iuſtifieth, that is, the election of God. In Subſidio. f. 245. Which is powred out for manie, that is, whiles, or as it is powred out for manie. In Exegeſi f 355. And it happened as he bleſſed, that is: bidde them, fairewell. Et in Expoſit. fidei fol. 558. It is cleare, that the name of Merit or Reward is in holie Scripture, but inſteed of a Free guift.

Caluin in Luc. 1. ver. 15. Replenished with the holie Ghoſt, expoundeth: To be indued with greater grace aboue che common vulgar ſorte. In c. 7. ver. 48. he expoundeth: Forgiue vs Forgiue. 1. Seale. our treſp • ſſes: thus: Seale more and more mercie in our hearts. In c. 8. v. 13. They beleiue for a time: thus: They giue an honor to the Ghoſpell like to faith. In Math. 7. verſ. 21. By, doing Doe Gods will 1. Beleiue the will of the Father, he vnderſtandeth. Philoſophically to frame his life and manners to the rule of virtue, and to beleiue in Chriſt. In cap. 21. verſ. 32. The name of Iuſtice here ſignifieth, Iuſtice. 1. Doctrine. nothing els, but that Ihons doctrine was pure and right. In cap. 23. verſ. 22. To ſit in the chaire of Moiſes is nothing els, then to deliuer out of the law of God, how men ought to liue. In Ioannis 3. verſ. 5. By water, he vnderſtandeth, Water. 1. Holie Ghoſt. Charitie in vs. 1. Towards vs. the Holie Ghoſt. In Actor. 8. ver. 18. by the Holie Ghoſt; Singular guifts. In Rom. 5. v. 5. by the Charitie of God diffuſed in vs: he vnderſtandeth, our knowledge of Gods charitie towards vs. In 2. Co. 2. v. 10. I haue giuen in the perſon of Chriſt: that is (ſaieth he) ſincerely and without ſimulation. In 1. Timot. 1. and 6. by Faith, he expoundeth: Holeſome doctrine. Faith. 1. Holeſome doctrine. In Tit. 1. v. 16. Appoint Bishops: that is: Be preſident in the choice of them. And in Hebr. 9. v. 26. Deſtruction of ſinne, he expoundeth: freing from the guilt of paine. Sinne. 1. Guilt of paine

Beza in Math. 3. v. 1. by Deſert, vnderſtandeth A hillie countrie. And in verſ. 6. by Confeſsing their ſinnes: Profeſsing Deſert. 1. Hillie place. themſelues to be ſinners. And in cap. 5. verſ. 20. Vpon that: Vnleſſe your iuſtice abound &c. by the, Kingdome of heauē he meaneth: the Church militant: and by Enter, Teach.

Peter Martyr in Roman. 18. ſaieth: When the Scripture Faith. 1. Gods mercie. ſaieth that we are iuſtified by faith, when we heare the name of faith, we muſt vnderſtand the obiect of faith, to wit, the mercie of God. Polanus in Syntagm. l. 6. c. 36. Faith is imputed to iuſtice, Faith. 1. Chriſts iuſtice that is, the iuſtice of Chriſt, which faith apprehendeth, is imputed. Sadeel ad art. 44. abiurat. When we are ſaied to be iuſtified by faith, by the name of faith we muſt vnderſtand Chriſt: And ſo alſo Bullinger. dec. 3. ſerm. 9. The Confeſſion of Saxonie c. de Remiſſ. Peccat. This ſaying is to be vnderſtood correlatiuely: we are iuſtified by faith: that is, we are iuſtified by confidence of the Sonne of God.

Zanchius de Perſeuerant. tom. 7. col. 143 by that: You are Faith. 1. Confidence. fallen from grace, vnderſtandeth: you are fallen from the doctrine of grace, or from the Ghoſpell. Pareus l. 2. de Iuſtif. c. 7. Grace. 1. Doctrine. by Perfect charitie, vnderſtandeth, ſincere. Et lib. 4. c. 7. by, worke your ſaluation: Doe thoſe things which are neceſſarie for to obtaine ſaluation.

Perkins in Cathol. reform. Contr. 5. c. 3. ſaieth: In all the promiſes of the Ghospell, in which God doth voluntarily binde himſelfe to reward our workes, the obligation doth not directly pertaine to vs, but in reſpect of the perſon and obedience of Chriſt. Apologia Confeſſ. Aug. c. de Implet. legis: Becauſe Loue. 1. Beleiue. she loued much, that is (ſay they) becauſe she truely worshiped me with faith and with exerciſes and ſignes of faith. Et de Reſp. ad Argum. When the text ſaieth, that eternall life is rendered to workes, it meaneth, that it is rendered to thoſe that are iuſtified. Agayne: Almes is ſaied to deliuer from death and to purge from ſinne, not in it ſelfe, but in the cauſe thereof, that is, in faith. Almes. i. Faith. Brentius hom. 1. in feſtum om. ſanctorum. To hunger after iuſtice, is to haue a iuſt cauſe, and yet not be able to follow it in law. Reineccius to. 4. Armaturae c. 19. by Sacrifice the Phaſe, vnderſtandeth Kill it, leſt he should be confeſſed that the paſcal lam be was ſacrificed: Illyricus. 1. Ioan. 2. v. 3. The keeping Keeping. 1. Knowing. of the cōmandements, in this place ſignifieth the true knowledge of his doctrine. Piſcator in Theſibus l. 2. p. 192. 2. Pet. 2. They denie the Lord, who hath bought them, that is, whome before they had profeſſed, that he had bought them, Et p. 472. he Buye. 1. Profeſſe to buye. Which. 1. As farreforth. ſaieth that, which, in the words of Conſecration ſignifieth, As farreforth: As (ſaieth he) the Pronoune (which) in thoſe words: The bread which I shall giue is my flesh which I shall giue for the life of the world. Moulins in his Bucler part. 2. pag. 51. ſaieth that thoſe words Iacob. 5. If he be in ſinne, they shalbe forgiuen him, ſignifie as much, as health shalbe restored to him, all ſinnes being forgiuen for which God had afflicted him. And he addeth in the next page: Chriſt doth teach vs Math. 9. Forgiuen. 1. Ariſe. that to ſay to the ſicke: Thy ſinnes are forgiuen thee, and to ſay, Ariſe and walke; are equiualent things: Let then he and his fellow Myniſters ſay: Ariſe and walke when they preach of remiſſion of ſinnes.

They expound alſo by diſparate or quite differēt things. For thus Zuinglius in Schluſſelburg. lib. 1. Theol. Caluin. art. 2. Bodie in the words of the Supper may be taken alſo for the Bodie. 1. Churche. Church. Et in Ioan. 6. to. 4. he ſaieth: By which alſo the words of Chriſt wax cleare: This is my bodie, where Bodie is put for Bodie. 1. Death. Death. In lib. de Relig. cap. de Euchar. to. 2. Now followeth a rite, whereby it appeareth, that this is the ſenſe, and that Bodie here (Is it not a participation of the bodie of our Lord. 1. Cor. 10.) is otherwiſe taken then for the Symboll of his bodie, to wit, for the Church. In lib. de Caena. fol. 294. he ſaith, that by Communication of the bodie of Chriſt, by Communion Communion. 1. Sermon. Chalice. 1. Our ſelues. you may vnderſtand a ſermon or the Church: Et 1. Cor. 10. that the ſenſe of theſe words: The Chalice of bleſsing which we bleſſe &c. is: The Cuppe of thankeſgiuing with which we giue thanks, what other thing I pray you is it but our ſelues. Agayne: Blood. 1. Chriſtians. He calleth the blood of Chriſt, thoſe who truſt in his blood. Et in Exegeſi f. 359. Flesh in this place. Ioan. 6. is put for the Diuine Flesh. 1. Diuinitie. Bodie and blood. 1. Faith Nature. In Explic. art. 18. to. 1. f. 37. Thou ſeeſt here Ioan. 6. that the bodie and blood of Chriſt is nothing els, but the word of faith: to wit, that his bodie dead for vs, his blood shed for vs redeemed vs. And in other places oftentimes ſaieth, that the word Bodie in the words of Conſecration ſignifieth a Figure or Symboll of Chriſt his bodie.

The ſame Zuinglius in Exegeſi tom. 2. fol. 350. thus writeth: Eate. 1. • eleiue. Vnleſſe yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of man &c. is as much, as who beleiueth not, to wit, the Ghoſpell being preached, shalbe condemned. In Ioan. 6. tom. 4. To eate bread and flesh is Eate. 1. Truſt. nothing els but to beleiue: Againe: To eate, is to truſt. In Elenc. fol. 30. When faith is ſaied to ſaue, faith is taken for the election of God. In lib. de baptiſ. fol. 61. In the 6. of the Acts, the Beleiue. 1. Heare. word of Beleiuing is taken for to heare the doctrine, or to adioyne himſelfe to the number of the beleiuers. The ſame man Epiſt. ad Lindouer. to 1. fol. 204. Thou ſeeſt here 1. Pet. 3. Baptiſme Baptiſme. 1. Faith. hath made vs ſafe, fi • st that baptiſme is taken for faith. In lib. de Relig. c. de Baptiſ. to. 2. fol. 201. It was cleare to him, that they had beene baptized by Apollo, that is, taught. In lib. de Baptiſ f. 61. We ſaied, that baptiſme was taken for the inward Baptiſme. Faith. Baptiſme. 1. Doctrine. faith. 1. Pet. 3. Et f. 63. We muſt note, that the words of Baptizing in theſe words of Paul. Act. 16. is taken for doctrine. Et f. 81. In what then were yee baptized, must not be vnderſtood of the externall baptiſme of water, but of doctrine and inſtruction. In Subſidio ib. f. 254. Baptiſme 1. Pet. 3. is taken for Chriſt, when Baptiſme. 1. Chriſt. he ſaieth that we are ſaued by baptiſme. Et in Reſp. ad Huber. fol. 107. he addeth, that Baptiſme 1. Pet. 3. is taken for Chriſt or for the very Ghoſpell. Moreouer l. de Baptiſ. to. 2. fol. 73. Baptiſme. 1. Ghospell. he thus writeth: They haue oftentimes learned of vs, that by water in this place (Ioan. 3.) ought to be vnderſtood the knowledge Water. 1. Knowledge. Keyes. 1. Words of Keyes. 1. Faith. Keyes. 1. Preaching. Looſe and binde. 1. Preach. Binde. 1. Leaue in error. Binde. 1. Not beleiue. Forgiue. 1. Aſſure. of Chriſt and the comfort of faith. Et in Explic. art. 50. to 2. f. 92. The keyes are nothing els but the pure word of God and the ſincere preaching of the Ghoſpell. In Exegeſi. ib. f. 258. The keyes are not other thing but faith of the Ghoſpell. Reſp. ad Luther. ib f. 378. It is cleare, that the keyes are nothing but the preaching of the Ghoſpell. Agayne in Explic. art. 50. to. 1. f. 93. We learne, that in Luke, to looſe and binde, is nothing els but to preach the Ghospell. lib. de Relig. c. de Clauibus. to. 2. f. 191. It appeareth here, that to Binde, is nothing els but to leaue in error. And in Schluſſelb. l. 1. Theol. Caluin. art. 9. The words of Binding and looſing, ſignifie nothing els but to beleiue, and not beleiue.

Perkins in Cathol. ref. Contr. 3. c. 3. writeth thus: I anſwere, that we doe not aske remiſsion of ſinnes, becauſe we are not certaine of it: but rather becauſe that certaintie is weake and infirme, that continually indued with new grace of Chriſt we may dayly increaſe and be comforted.

Daneus Contr. 7. pag. 1317. Saints are ſaied to gouerne the Saintes. 1. Chriſt. world Apoc. 2. and 3. We graunt (ſaieth he) that the godlie both now and after death doe gouerne the wicked world, in ſo much, as Christ gouerneth it, of whoſe kingdome they are partakers, as being his members. Et to. 2. Contr. de Baptiſ. c. 4. he ſaieth, that in thoſe wordes: Vnleſſe a man be borne of water and the And. 1. O • . holie Ghost, the particle And, is to be taken for the diſiunctiue particle Or. Et Contr. de Euchar. c. 10. & 11. he will haue the verbe Is in the words of Conſecration to ſtand for: Is. 1. Signifieth. Signifieth, Repreſenteth, Sealeth.

Rainolds in Apol. Theſ. p. 333. ſaieth that the Apoſtle 2. Theſſalon. 2. in thoſe words: Hould traditions &c. by the Speach. 1. Scripture. word Speach comprehendeth other Scriptures: or as Iuel in Defenſ. Apol. part. 2. cap. 9. ſec. 1. Will haue it: The very ſubſtance of the Ghoſpell. Others in Whitaker Contr. 1. q. 6. c. 10. will haue whether, put for Alſo, as Beza putteth in the very Whether. 1. Alſo. text of that place.

Whitaker Contr. 11. q. 5. c. 4. by Preiſts in thoſe words of Preiſts. 1. Chiefe men. the pſal. 99. Moyſes and Aaron in his preiſts, will haue to be meant: Chiefe men of the people. And the ſame ſaieth Iuel lib. cit. p. 6. c. 11. ſect. 4. and Hunnius in Colloq. Ratisbon. ſeſſ. 2. Where he addeth, that Moyſes did ſacrifice as a Prophet of God and not as a Preiſt.

Luther to 1. f. 398. writeth in this ſorte: Paul in this place Faith. 1. Guift of God. (1. Cor. 13. If I had all &c. taketh faith for the guift of the holie Ghoſt. Et fol. 397. The ſenſe (of theſe words Redeeme thy Redeeme. 1. Beleiue, leaue, apprehend. ſinnes &c. Dan.) is, to beleiue that God is angrie with ſinne, and is pleaſed with the iuſt, and shew this faith to be true by workes. But Melacthon thus expoundeth theſe words: leaue, giue ouer ſinning: Et Martyr. ibid. hom. 21. Apprehend the Meſsias by faith.

Illyricus in Math. 7. v. 82. To performe the words of Chriſt Performe. 1. Beleiue. is to embrace him truely and from the heart, and ſecondly to relie vpon his doctrine well vnderſtood. Bullinger Dec. 3. ſermon. 9. writeth, that when S. Iames ſaieth a man is iuſtified by Workes. 1. Faith. workes, he meaneth. By faith fruitfull of good workes. Et l. de Orig. Error. c. 18. Theſe ſentences: I will protect this cittie for my ſelfe and for my ſeruant Dauid: And I will protect this cittie for my ſelfe and for promiſe made to Dauid are all one. Sadeel Dauid. 1. Promiſe to Dauid or Chriſt. Sorrow Pietie. • Faith. ad Art. 57. expoundeth, For Dauid, that is, For Chriſt. Hunnius tract. de Iuſtif. p. 145. ſaieth, that by the word, Sorrow, in that 2. Cor. 7. Sorrow according to God &c. and alſo by the word, Pietie, in that 1. Timot. 4. Pietie hath promiſes, is vnderſtood Faith.

But moſt of all this their manner of expounding by diſparate or quite different things appeareth in their expounding the words of Chriſt his ſoules deſcent into hell: where by Soule they vnderſtand Dead bodie or Carcaſſe: by Deſcended, Suffered: and by Hell, Graue, Death, or Paines of hell, and the like. For thus Zuinglius in Hofmeiſter in Art. Deſcended. 1. Redeemed. 3. Confeſſ. Aug. He deſcended into hell, that is, his death re-redeemed thoſe which were in hell. OEcolampadius ib. It is an Deſcended. 1. Buried. expoſition of that: He was buried. Bucer in Math. 27. In the 2. of the Acts for the ſame is put, that his ſoule is not forſaken in hell, and the holie did not ſee the graue of corruption, to wit, for that which is; Not to be forſaken in death. What other thing is it here to deſcēd to hell, then the bodie to be buried vnder earth? In this ſorce then deſcended life or a liuelie bodie into hell, that is, being truely dead was put in the graue: Agayne: That article of the Symbol: He deſcended into hell, is an explication of that which went before, He was dead and burried. P Martyr in locis Claſſ. 2. p. 428. He deſcended into hell, ſignifieth nothing els, Deſcended. 1. In eſtate of the dead. Deſcended. 1. Suffered death. Deſcended. 1. Laied in the the graue. Soule. 1. Carcaſſe. Hell. 1. Graue. but that he was in the very ſame eſtate in which other ſoules are that haue departed from their bodies. Caluin. 2. Inſtit. c. 16. ſer. 10. If he be ſaied to haue deſcended into hell, no meruaile, ſeing he ſuffered that death wich by Gods wrath is inflicted vpon the wicked. Beza in Act. 2. v. 27. To deſcend to hell, properly ſignifieth to be laied in the graue. Et ib. edit. An. 1565. In my former edition I rightly tranſlated it: Thou shalt not forſake my carcaſſe in the graue. In Defenſ. cont. Caſtel. vol. 1. Theol. pag. 460. In the text, My ſoule, I tranſlated, my carcaſſe: Et p. ſeq. I still keepe the ſame ſenſe. Serranus cont. Hayum. part. 3. p. 520. ſpendeth manie words to proue, that by Soule. Act. 2. v. 27. is not meat Soule, but a Deade mā or carcaſſe, and addeth: Flesh. 1. Soule. No man can doubt, but by the word flesh is meat Soule. So that by Soule shall not be meant Soule, but Carcaſſe, and agayne by Flesh, not flesh but ſoule. Vrſinus in Carechiſm. q. 44. In this article Hell is taken for great affliction. Whitaker. l. 8. cōt. Dur. ſect. 7. That the Prophet ſaieth: Thou shalt not forſake my ſoule in hell, is as much, as if he had ſaied: Thou shalt not forſake me lying in the graue: Et Sect. 22. It is manifest, that it is Deſcended. 1. Buried. the ſame ſenſe in both words: that to be buried, is to deſcēd to hell, and that to deſcend to hell, is to be buried. Perkins in Explic. Symboli tom. 1. col. 680. He deſcended into hell, that is, being dead and buried, was detained captiue in the graue, and kept of death for three dayes. Et col. 676. Others expound it thus: He felt and bore the torments and anguishes of hell. This (ſaieth he) is a good and true expoſition. Et in Serie Cauſarum c. 18. The deſcent into hell, is the ignominious dominion of death ouer him being buried. Daneus Contr. 2. p. 161. By the name of the death Death. 1. torments of ſoule of Chriſt are meant the torments of ſoule and the curſe of God, which is felt in the mynd. P. 169. It is apparent out of the Acts 2. that the Greek word, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , is put for graue of the bodie. Et pag. 172. he ſaieth: Of the deſcent of Christ to hell, that is, of the ſorrow in ſoule ſuffered by Chriſt. Tilenus in Syntagm. c. 6. vnderſtandeth by the deſcent to hell, the dominion of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which it obtained by thy continuate death of Chriſt oppreſſed and shut vp in a graue ſealed and kept with ſouldiors for three dayes together. Bucanus in loco 25. By Chriſts deſcent into hell are meant thoſe great torments of mynd, which he ſuſtained in his agonie and on the croſſe. Polanus in Syntagm. l. 6. c. 21. We declare, that the deſcent of Chriſt into hell, is his voluntarie demiſsion of himſelfe to abide and wraſtle out the paines of hell. Finally Vorſtins in Antibel. pag 40. Writeth thus: All Proteteſtants do not wholy agree about the true ſenſe of this article, whileſt ſome accommodate this phraſe properly to the death and burriall of Chriſt, as an explication thereof: others metaphorically to the inward griefs of the mynd, or infernall torments which Chriſt ſuffered at the time of his death or paſsion: and others metonymically or effectiuely by a kinde of proſopopeia to the fruite of the death and paſsion of Chriſt exhibited vnto vs miſerable and damned. Et p. 41. We ſay: that ſpeach: Deſcend to hell moſt truely doth ſignifie in Scripture nothing els, thē ſimply to dye or to brought into the ſtate of the dead; and ſo buried. Et p. 42. The ſenſe of thoſe words. Thou shalt not leaue my ſoule in hell, may moſt fitly be expreſſed thus: Thou shalt not leaue my life in death, or thou shalt not leaue me in the power of death. Albeit Soule. 1. Dead bodie. Hell. 1. Graue. nothing hindreth by Soule to vnderſtand ſynechdochically the very bodie and that alſo dead, and to take the name of Hell for the Graue. Expoſitions by quite contraries.

They expound alſo the words of the holie Scripture by quite cōtraries. For touching faith whē S. Iames c. 2. ſaieth that a man, is not iuſtified by faith onely, they ſay, he meaneth not of faith, but onely of a shaddow or dead image of faith. So Fai • b. 1. Not faith. Zuinglius, Caluin, Beza vpon that place, Luther in Poſtilla in Dom. 9. poſt Trinit. Bucer in Math. 8. Whitaker. l. 1. cōt. Beleiue. 1. Deceaue themſelues and others. Dur. ſect. 13. & others. In like ſorte the word Beleiue in that Luc. 7. v. 13. They beleiue for a time, with them ſignifieth not to beleiue: but to deceaue mens eyes and their owne mynd with a deceitfull shew of faith. So Caluin. 2. Inſtit. c. 2. §. 10. Where he calleth this beleife, a shaddow and shew of faith, and ſaieth, that it is of no reckoning and vnworthie of the name of faith. When S. Ihon. 12. ver. 23. ſaieth: Manie beleiued in his name: Caluin. ibidem. thus expoundeth him: Their faith was prepoſterous: It is euident, that their faith was not true and lawfull. Luther in Poſtil. in Dom. Quinquagueſ. ſaieth, that when S. Paul. 1. Corinth. 13. Writeth: If I haue all faith &c. he doth not speake of Chriſtian faith. In like ſorte: To be illuminated, To taſte the heauenlie guift, and to be made partaker of the holie Ghoſt Hebr. 6. verſ. 4. according to them, is not to haue true light, or the holie Ghoſt, but onely to haue ſome ſuch thing. So Caluin 3. Inſtit. c. 2. §. 11. and. 12. and Heb. loc. cit ibique Beza and others. Moreouer, faith to be conſummated by workes. Iac. 2. v. 22. in their opinion, is not to be conſummated or perfect by Perfected. 1. Not perfected workes, but to be tried to be ſuch. Caluin ibid. It is ſaied to be perfected by workes, not that it taketh thence perfection, but be cauſe it is proued to be true thereby. Finally when Chriſt Ioan. 6. calleth faith a worke, Zuinglius l. de relig. c. de orat. expoundeth Worke. 1. No worke. him: So he calleth it a worke, as by the contrarie ſenſe he would ſay, yee shalbe made happie by faith, and by no worke. And in this ſorte they depraue all thoſe places of the holie Scripture, which teach that the euil or reprobates, do beleiue, are illuminated, doe repent, and the like.

Touching workes: they denie that To worke, in that 2. Cor. Touching workes. 7. v. 10. Sorrow according to God worketh pennance ſtabill to ſaluation, ſignifieth not, To Cauſe, but onely to goe before ſaluatiō: Caluin ib. For he inquireth not of the cauſe of ſaluatiō, but onely cōmending pennāce as a fruite which it worketh, ſaieth that it is like a way by which we come to ſaluatiō. Likewiſe: worke your ſaluatiō. Phil. 2. with thē doth not cōmand vs to worke our ſaluatiō, but onely to doe thoſe things which become thē that are to be ſaued. For thus Zuinglius vpon that place: For Paul in this place commandeth not to doe good works that we may get ſaluatiō by thē, but that we may doe thoſe things which become the childrē of God who are ſaued by faith. Whē the Scripture ſaieth: Feare of God expelleth ſinne: Almes purgeth, ſinne, expelleth ſinne: By mercie ſinnes are purged, Kemnice in locis part. 2. de arg. anſwereth: It ſpeaketh not of propitiation or ſatisfactiō for ſinne; but ſaieth that ſinnes are auoided & eſchewed. So that, to expell, to purge, to extinguish ſinne, is not to purge ſinnes already cōmitted, but onely to beware of cō mitting thē. To be doers of the word. Iac. 1. v. 22. in their opiniō is not to be doers of the word, but hartely to embrace it. Caluin. ib. A doer here doth not ſignifie him who ſatisfieth the law, and fulfilleth it in all points, but who hartely embraceth the word of God, & by his life in earneſt witneſſeth that he beleiueth. Perfect charitie. 1. Ioā. 2. v. 5. With thē, is not perfect, but true: Beza ib. It is not inquired in this place, who loueth God perfectly, but who loueth him truely. To doe the will of God. 1. Ioā. 2. v. 17. according to thē is not to doe, but to beleiue: Caluin. ib. If anie obiect, that done what God cōmandeth, the anſwere is, at hand, that here is no ſpeach of the abſolute keeping of the law, but of the obedience of faith. In like ſorte: Doe this. Luc. 10. v. 28. With them is not to doe, but to beleiue. Luther in Gal. 3. to. 5. p. 345. The meaning of this place: Doe this and thou shalt liue, is this: Thou shalt liue for this faithfull doing, or this doing shall giue the life for onely faith. In this ſorte iuſtification, is attributed to onely faith, as creation is to the Godhead. Weomen in thoſe words. Apoc. 14. v. 4. Theſe are thoſe who were not defiled Weomen. 1. not weomen but idols. with weomen, according to their mynd ſignifieth not weomen, but idols. Tilenus in Syntagm. cap. 47. It is not meant of carnall copulation with weomen, but of ſpirituall whoredome with idols: Forſooth leaſt virginitie might be thought to haue a ſpeciall reward in heauen. Iuſt and Iuſtice. Ezech. 18. verſ. 14. When the iuſt shall turne himſelfe from his iuſtice, with theſe men ſignifieth not iuſt nor iuſtice. Pareus lib. 3. de Iuſtif. cap. 14. My aduerſarie wrongfully wreſteth this Scripture, from temporally iust, to truely iuſt. They doe, Rom. 2. v. 14. thoſe things which are of the law, is not meant of doing, but of commanding: Beza ib. edit. 1565. That is, they command honeſt things and forbidde dishoneſt. For Paul ſpeaketh not this of the obſeruation of the law, but onely of that māner which euen profane people followed in making laws.

Touching ſinnes: Iniquitie in thoſe words Prouerb. 16. Touching ſinne. Iniquitie. 1. not iniquitie. verſ. 6. Iniquitie is redeemed by mercie and trueth, with theſe men, is not iniquitie or ſinne, but temporall punishment: Kemnice in locis. part. 2. tit. de Argum. Mercie is an expiation, not of ſinne, but of temporall punishment. Sinnes to be takē away. 1. Ioan. 1. verſ. 29. is not to be taken away, but onely not to be imputed: Caluin. ibid. Albeit ſinne do perpetually stick in vs, yet in Gods iudgement it is none, becauſe being abolished by Chriſts grace, it is not imputed. In like ſorte. To be blotted out like a miſt; Eſaiae. 44. is not to be blotted out, but to be not imputed: Bidenbachius in Conſenſu &c. p. 724. Our ſinnes are ſaied to be blotted out as a miſt, to be caſt behind the back, and to be drowned in the depth of the ſea, not as if they were no more, but becauſe they are not imputed to the beleiuer.

Touching Iuſtification: Groſſius in Apol. pro Diſput. Touching Iuſtification. writeth thus: Sanctification by the blood of the couenāt (Heb. 10. v. 29.) is not the inward cleanſing of the heart from ſinne. To receaue the holie Ghoſt. Act. 19. v. 2. With them is not to receaue grace, but ſome ſpeciall guifts: Caluin. ibid. Here is not ſpoaken of the ſpirit of regeneration, but of ſpeciall guifts. In like ſorte by; The holie Ghoſt ib. Nether haue we heard that there is a holie Ghost: is not meant the holie Ghoſt. For thus Caluin ib. How could it be that Iews had not heard of the holie Ghoſt. Et Beza ibid. It were moſt abſurd to thinke, that they knew not that there was anie holie Ghoſt. To be ſanctified. Hebr. 10. v. 29. is not to be truely ſanctified: For thus Contraremonſtrantes in Collat. Hagae p. 391. Nether yet can it be concluded thereof, that they were truely faithfull and indeed ſanctified. To fall from grace. Gal. 5. ver. 5. With them is not to fall from grace, but to fall from the hope of obtaining it. Contrare monſtrantes. loc. cit. p. 388. Theſe are ſaied to fall from the grace of iustification, not that euer they were partakers thereof, but becauſe they are excluded from al hope of obtaining it, ſo long as they wilbe iuſtified by the law.

Touching baptiſme: To be baptized. Act. 19. v. 3. In whome Touching Baptiſme. then were you baptized, with them is not to haue receaued baptiſme, but other guifts: Beza ib. We muſt needs graunt, that here is not treated of baptiſme, but of guifts wherewith God was wonte ſpecially to adorne thoſe whome he made rulers of Churches. Gual • erus ib. hom. 125. Theſe words muſt not be expoūded of the baptiſme of water, but of the baptiſme of fire. Likewiſe Baptiſme. 1. Pet. 3. with them ſignifieth not baptiſme but Chriſt: Zuinglius reſp. ad Huber. tom. 2. It is certainely euident, that Peter in that place by Baptiſme vnderſtandeth no other thing but Christ. Water, alſo Ioan. 3. v. 5. Vnleſſe one be borne agayne of water, ſignifieth not water, but the holie Ghoſt: Caluin. ibid. I can no way be perſuaded to beleiue that Chriſt ſpeaketh of baptiſme. And in Refutat. Serueti. This pertaineth nothing to baptiſme, but the name of water is metaphorically attributed to the holie Ghoſt. Zuinglius vpon this place: By water here he meaneth not that element, but the word of God, grace of God, heauenlie water, that is the illuſtration of the no •• e Ghoſt. And in the ſame manner other Proteſtants commonlie.

Touching the Euchariſt: Is, in the words of conſecratiō Touching the Euchariſt. with them is not, Is, but Signifieth, nor Bodie giuen for vs; Blood shed for vs, is the true bodie and blood of Chriſt, but onely figures of them, as appeareth by what hath beene ſaied. lib. 1. cap. 11. art. 1. To eate the flesh and drinke the blood of Chriſt, ſo often repeated. Ioan. 6. is not to eate or drinke, but onely to beleiue: P. Martyr cont. Gardiner. part. 1. col. col. 866. We ſtill ſay, that to eate, to wit, the flesh of Chriſt, is nothing els then to apprehend it by faith, as giuen for vs as price of our redemption. Which alſo he hath col. 863. And Luther Poſtil. in Dom. poſt Natiuit. To eate and drinke his flesh and To eate. 1. not to eate but to beleiue. blood, is no other thing then to beleiue that Christ truely tooke theſe for our ſake, and repaied them agayne at death. The like hath Zuinglius in Ioan. 6. and in Hiſtor. paſſionis, and l. de Relig. c. de Euchar. Bullinger Dec. 5. ſerm. 9. Vrſinus in Catechiſm. q. 76. Flesh, in thoſe words of Chriſt Ioan. 6. My Flesh. 1. not flesh but diuinitie. flesh is truely meate, with them is not flesh, but the Godhead: Zuinglius in Exegeſi to. 2. fol. 333. He ſaieth; his flesh is truely meate, meaning ſurely not his flesh, but his better nature which had taken flesh. The Bodie of our Lord, in thoſe words 1. Cor. 10. The bread which we breake, is it not the participation of the bodie of our Lord, with theſe men is not the bodie of Chriſt. 1. Chriſtians. Chriſt, but Chriſtians: Zuinglius lib. cit. Thou mights haue ſeene at the firſt, how that Communion and Bodie are not taken Bodie of Chriſt. 1. men. for diſtribution of Chriſts bodie, but for men themſelues.

Finally Luther was ſo bould as to ſet downe a Canon Luthers Canō of expounding Words by cō traries. of expounding the words of holie Scripture by cōtraries. For thus he writeth in Pſ. 5. to. 3. fol. 171. Let this be a Canon for thee: Where the Scripture commandeth a good worke to be done, do thou ſo vnderſtand it, that it forbiddeth thee doe good workes, ſeing thou canſt not, but that thou maiest ſanctifie the Lord, be dead and buried, and ſuffer God to worke in thee. Which Canon Proteſtants do well follow, as appeareth by what hath beene related in this chapter, and before in the ſixt and ſeuenth chapter, where we shewed that in the weightieſte matters they expounded the words of holie Scripture ironically, and according to others mēs mynde.

Theſe and innumerable the like doe Proteſtants, of which we might eaſily gather not onely a chapter, but a booke full. But out of theſe which we haue rehearſed, it clearely appeareth: Firſt how great hereticall libertie (as Tertullian ſpeaketh) is, which turneth the words of holie Scripture this way, and that way, in to this forme and that, and toſſeth them vp and downe like tenis balls. Secondly how eaſie it may be for euerie idiote with this libertie for to defend what hereſie ſoeuer though neuer ſo contrarie to Scripture. For who cannot expound the words of Scripture, by diuerſe, by diſparate, and contrarie things. Thirdly, how impoſſible it is, if this libertie be admitted, to refute by Scripture any hereſie at all, or to proue anie thing by anie words whatſoeuer ether of God or man. Fourthly how that Proteſtants by this kinde of dealing, do more dishonor God and the holie Scripture, then if they should quite reiect it. For if they should reiect the Scripture, they should onely reiect Gods word and trueth: But by this manner of dealing they doe not onely reiect Gods trueth and meaning, but alſo in ſteede thereof foiſt in the contrarie vntrueth: and ſo (as S. Hierome ſpeaketh) In Galat. • of the word of God, they make the word of the Diuel. Fiftly it appeareth that theſe expoſitions of Proteſtants are like to that which Luther merly deuiſed for to shew the Sacramentaries how they expounded the words of conſecration, in Defenſ. verb. cenae. to. 7. fol. 384. where he A fit exāple of Proteſt. expoſitions. writeth thus: Surely they doe a great and weightie matter: But no otherwiſe, then if I should denie that God made heauen and earth, & whē one should obiect that of Moiſes: In the beginning God created heauen and earth, I should expound Moiſes words in this ſorte: God, that is, a Cuccou: Made, that is, deuoured: Heauen and earth, that is, a Hedge ſparow all and whole: It not this a trick of arte? Yes ſurely not vnknowne nor vnſemely to ſtage plaiers. Thus Luther, who as being beſt practiſed in this arte, could beſt of all others deſcribe it. Finally it appeareth, that Proteſtants haue not onely forged a new faith, but alſo a new tongue, a new Grammar, a new frame of ſpeach. For concerning Propoſitions, they bidde vs vnderſtand an Affirmation by a Negation, and a Negation by an Affirmation, and words they bidde vs expoūd by diuerſe, by diſparate, and contraries to theſe which they ſignifie with other men. And this new Grammar of theirs Luther acknowledgeth in theſe words. Gal. 3. tom. 5. fol. 345. Thoſe words, To doe, To worke, are to be taken Proteſtants new Grāmar or language. three manner of waies, Substantially or naturally, Morally, and Theologically. Inſubſtances, natures, and morall matters, theſe words are taken in their vſuall and naturall ſignification, but in diuinitie they are made plainely new words, and get a new ſignification. Wherefore when thou readeſt in Scripture, of Fathers, of Prophets, of Kings, that they wrought iuſtice &c. remember, that ſuch and the like ſayings are to be vnderſtood according to the new and Theologicall Grammar (of Proteſtants) wherefore I admonish yee agayne, that the ſentences which the aduerſaries obiect out of Scripture, of workes and reward, be alwaies to be vnderſtood Theologically by the definition: As if they obiect that ſaying of Daniel 4. Redeeme thy ſinnes by almes, ſtreight we must runne to the Theologicall grammar, and not to the morall. The like he hath in cap. 4. Geneſ. fol. 60. Nor much otherwiſe writeth Kemnice. libr. de origin. Ieſuit. pag. 47. When he ſaieth: It is moſt certaine, that the Holie Ghoſt would that in this article of Iuſtification, not onely the things themſelues and the meaning, but alſo the very names should be by a peculiar ſignification diſtinct from the words of Philoſophers. Schluſſelburg. alſo Praefat. libr. Theolog. Caluin. diſtinguisheth betwene the Grammar of Nations, and of Deuines, and ſaieth that that taketh the word of Iuſtice actiuely, but this taketh it paſsiuely. The like hath Geſnerus loc. 2. de Iuſtif. pag. 47.

But what we ought to thinke of theſe inuentors of Luthers Cenſure of theſe new word mongers. a new Grammar, themſelues doe ſometimes tell vs. For thus writeth Luther. lib. de ſeruo. arbitr. tom. 2. fol. 435. Whoe will not mock or rather hate this vnſemely changer of words, who againſt all vſe endeauoureth to bring in ſuch kinde of speach, as to call a begger, a rich man—By this abuſe of ſpeach anie man may bragge of anie thing. But this is not the parte of Diuines, but of Cooſeners and Stageplayers. And Caluin. libr. contr. Libertin. cap. 3. The libertines at Libertines. the first bouldly reiected the Scriptures, but when they ſaw that thereby they were abhorred of all men, they meant to deale more cloſely and more couertely, that making shew not to caſt away Scripture, they might turne it into allegories, and wreſt it into diuerſe and ſtrange ſenſes, changing a horſe into a man, and as the common ſpeach is, feigning the horne of a lanterne to be a cloude. And capit. 7. Like as Egyptians and other vagabonds, ſuch as thoſe who going out of Bohemia wander vp and downe the whole world, vſe a certaine peculiar ſpeach, which none vnderſtand but thoſe of their owne crew and brotherhood, So &c.—I denie not but they vſe the common words, but ſo they alter their ſignification, as no man can vnderstand what the matter is which is propoſed, nor what they would affirme or denie.

Beza alſo l. de puniend. Haer. vol. 1. Theol. Sathan, when he could not quite caſt the Scripture out of the Church, yet by vaine allegories made it altogether vprofitable, which courſe now the libertines and Anabaptiſtes do take. Bullinger. Concion. Anabaptiſte. Arians. Seruetians. Familiſtes. 25. in Apocal. thus writeth of the Arians and Seruetians: They turne and winde the words of God with their Giganticall bouldneſſe, as they liſt. Whitaker l. 1. de Script. c. vlt. ſect. 4. The Familists do leaue almoſt no article of our faith vntouched, whilest with their allegories they turne and corrupt all things: And Reinolds in his Conference cap. 2. ſect. 2. The Familiſts, for to ſaue their phrenſies, from the Scripture reiect the literall ſenſe, which is the very edge thereof, and put that vp into the ſcabarde of their fanaticall dreames and allegories. The like hath Perkins in Conflictu Chriſti. tom. 2. This they note in the Libertines, Familiſts, Anabaptiſts, and others, whereof themſelues are no leſſe guiltie, then thoſe be, as appeareth by what hath beene already related. But as Luther him ſelfe ſaieth. Geneſ. 6. tom. 6. fol. 84. Who would ſuffer this libertie in deprauing the true ſenſe in the fables of Terence, or Virgils Ecloges, and shall we ſuffer it in the Church? And Defenſion. verb. Cenae tom. 7. fol. 397. Surely I cannot ſee, that they can be excuſed by anie plauſible pretext as if vpon a good meaning they had beene deceaued by ſome curiofitie or spirituall blindneſſe, as it happeneth to moſt Heretiks. But it appeareth that they mocke the word of God vpon obſtinacie and malice. For I doe not thinke that it can be that theſe ſillie trifles and toies should in earneſt moue a man in his wittes, whether he were a Turk or Iew, much leſſe a Chriſtian. Thus the Proteſtants owne Prophet and Father ſpeaketh of Proteſtants.

Wherefore thus I argue in the 20. place. Who not onely gayneſay the words of holie Scripture ſo directly and ſo often as is shewed in the firſt booke, but alſo in ſo manie and ſo great matters expound the words thereof by diuerſe, by diſparates, and by contraries, ſo that they bring in a new grammar, a new language and ſignification of words neuer heard of before, they manifeſtly contradict, nay mock the true ſenſe of holie Scripture: But Proteſtants doe ſo. Therefore &c.

CHAPTER XXI. THAT PROTESTANTS ARE COMpelled to deuiſe improprietie of words and all kinds of figures.

THE 21. Argument, wherewith we will proue, that Proteſtants doe contradict the true ſenſe of holie Scripture, is becauſe when the proprietie of the word is againſt them, they deuiſe improprieties and all kind of figures.

Caluin. 4. Inſtit. c. 8. §. 2. Authoritie is not properly giuen to Not properly. men. Beza in Confeſſ. c. 5. ſect. 27. Nether Paſtors nor Doctors can properly binde or looſe anie man. Zanchius de Eccleſ. c. 9. Power of forgiuing ſinnes is not properly giuen to the Apoſtles or to others, for they doe not properly forgiue ſinnes. Vorſtius in Reſp. ad Homium p. 31. I doe not ſay that faith it ſelfe doth properly iustifie vs. Perkins in Cathol. Reform. Cont. 5. c. 3. The kingdome of heauen is called a reward, not properly but by a figure. Et Cont. 10. c. 4. Theſe words: This is my bodie, must not be vnderſtood properly, but by a figure: Pareus l. 5. de Iuſtif. c. 3. Nether is eternall life called a reward properly. Piſcator in Theſ. l. 2. p. 103. Faith, properly ſpeaking, doth not purge ſinnes. Et p. 112. We must not properly vnderſtand that Chriſt purged the Church by the lauer of water in the word, but metonymically, Imperpely.

In like ſorte, for improperly: Caluin in Ioan▪ 4. ver. 39. The word, Beleiue, improperly ſignifieth, that they were ſtirred vp by the ſpeach of the woman to acknowledge Chriſt a Prophet. In c. 6. v. 29. It is euident enough, that Chriſt ſpoake improperly, when he calleth faith a worke. In cap. 12. ver. 42. He ſeemeth to ſpeake improperly, whileſt he ſeperateth faith from confeſsion. In Math. 6. v. 16. That he promiſeth reward from God vnto faſting; is an improper ſpeach. In illud. Math. 12. v. 33. Make a good tree. It is an improper ſpeach: In illud. c. 13. v. 19. He ſcrapeth away that which was ſowed in the heart: That Chriſt ſaieth: the word was ſowed in their hearts, is an improper speach. In c. 26. v. 26. The word of Bodie is improperly trāsferred to bread, of which it is a ſigne. In illud Rom. 11. v. 22. If he remaine in goodneſſe: This should be improperly ſpoaken peculiarly of anie good man, that God had mercie on him when he choſe him, if ſo he remaine in mercie. Goodneſſe. In illud Epheſ. 2. verſ. 20. Built vpon the foundation of the Apoſtles: Properly Chriſt is the onely foundation. Beza in Colloq. Montisb. pag. 120. ſaieth: Baptiſme was heth away ſinnes, is an improper ſpeach. Aretius in locis. part. 1. f. 84. There is an other improper forgiueneſſe of ſinnes: as is that of the Miniſters. Bullinger. Dec. 3. Serm. 9. The Apoſtles improperly attribute iuſtice to good workes, but truely and properly to faith, and moſt properly to Chriſt himſelfe. Piſcator in Theſ. l. 2. p. 119. It is improperly ſaied: that faith is imputed to iustice. Theſe and manie other things they ſay are ſpoaken improperly or not properly when the proprietie of the word maketh againſt them.

Somethings they ſay are to be vnderſtood tropically Tropically or Figuratiuely. or figuratiuely. P. Martyr cont. Gardiner. col 623. We ſay, That speach: This is my bodie, is not proper, but metopharicall and tropicall. And in Hoſpin. part. 2. Hiſtor. fol. 239. The words: This is &c. cannot be taken ſimply and without a figure. They are a tropicall manner of ſpeaking. And Hoſpin. himſelfe. ib. fol. 26. ſaieth: Zuinglius expounded Christ his words; This is &c. by a metonymie, interpreting, Is, for, ſignifieth. Fol. 35. OEcolampadius sheweth, that the figure is in the word Bodie. And fol. 161. Thoſe of Strasburg and Zurich agree, that the words are tropicall. Caluin de Rat. Concordiae. The word Bodie is figuratiuely giuen to bread. Beza in Colloq. Mōt. pag. 302. Our men denie not this propoſition: Man is God, but tell how it is to be expounded, we ſay, it is a tropicall ſpeach. Daneus. Cont. de Euchar. c. 10. Bread it ſelfe is tropically called the bodie of Chriſt.

Vorſtius in Antibel. p. 394. It appeareth, that thoſe words of Chriſt muſt needs be meant by a figure. Tilenus in Syntagm. c. 64. The Apoſtle indeed ſaieth, Chriſtians haue an altar, but not a materiall and viſible, but figuratiuely.

Some things they will haue be expounded Symbolically: Symbolically. Caluin in Admonition. vltim. ad Weſtphal. Bread is ſymbolically called Bodie. Et cont. Heshuſ. p. 844. Touching bread, the ſpeach is metonymicall, that it may truely be ſymbolically called the true bodie of Chriſt. Zuinglius in Subſid. to. 2. f. 245. The diſciples vnderſtood Chriſts ſpeach rightly, but ſymbolically.

Other things they vnderſtand aequiuocally. Pareus l. Aequiuecally. 4. de Iuſtif. cap. 4. I confeſſe, that in Scripture, the Ghospell is equiuocally called the law of faith, the law of Chriſt, the law of libertie: In which ſenſe we graunt that Chriſt is called a lawgiuer, a law maker, that is a Teacher. Other things they expound Analogically. Perkins in Cathol. Refor. Contr. 11. c. 2. Bread is the bodie of Christ ſacramentally, by analogie, and no otherwiſe.

Some things they will haue to be taken Synecdochically. Synechdochically. Luther in Hoſpin. l. cit. fol. 76. There is a ſynechdoche (in the words of conſecration) as a ſword with a ſcabbard. Weſtphalus in Schluſſelb. to. 7. Catal. p. 176. Luther acknowledgeth a ſynechdochicall ſpeach in the words of Chriſt, This is &c. and the ſame ſaieth Adamus Franciſci in Margarita loco. 16. Bucer l. de Miniſterio. pag. 609. It is euident, that thoſe: Take, Eate, are ſynechdochicall, and are referred to twoe things. Peter Martyr contra Gardiner. col. 933. I alwaies pretēded, that I did acknowledge a metonymie or ſynechdoche in thoſe words of the Supper. And he addeth: It cannot be denied, but there is a manifeſt alleoſis. And col. 965. I confeſſe, that Bucer liked better a ſynecdoche. Vorſtius in Antibellarm. p. 42. Nothing hindreth, by Soule ſynechdochically to vnderſtand the bodie it ſelfe, and that alſo dead. Wigand in Schluſſeb. to. 7. Catal. p. 754. Worke your ſaluation with feare and trembling, is a ſynecdoche, that is: Doe true pennance. Lobechius diſput. 22. The Scripture, ſaieth that faith iuſtifieth vs, and faith is imputed to iuſtice by metalepſis and ſynechdoche taking faith for the obiect of faith, that is, for Chriſt or the iuſtice of Chriſt. Scarpius alſo de Iuſtif. Cont. 1. ſaieth, that this ſpeach. Faith iuſtifieth, is ſynecdochicall.

Sometimes, that words which make againſt them are Catachreſtically. taken Catechreſtically or abuſiuely. Zuinglius l. de Relig. cap. de oration. Chriſt abuſiuely calleth faith a worke. Agayne: Teſtament is taken here abuſiuely, for the ſigne or ſymboll of the testament. In Elencho fol. 31. Paul ſpeaketh of twoe teſtaments, but the one he calleth catachreſtically a teſtament. In Reſponſ. ad Billican: O Ecolampadius ſaith that here (in words of the Supper) is a catachreſis or metonymie. In Math. cap. 9. That the Scripture calleth faith, that which is dead, is done by abuſe of the word, as we ſay: the faith of Iews, the faith of Turkes. And in Hoſpin. lib. 2. Hiſtor. fol. 35. When I ſay, that by Catachreſis: This bread ſignifieth my bodie, and OEcolampadius ſaieth metonymically: This bread is a figure of my bodie, what difference, I pray you, is there in the ſumme of the ſenſe. Illyricus in Mathew. 5. verſ. 12. Chriſt abuſiuely calleth future goods, a reward. Caluin. 3. Inſtitut. cap. 2. §. 9. The teſtimonie of faith is attributed to ſuch, but by catachreſis. Zanchius in Supplication. tom. 7. pagin. 59. That ſpeach: To obey their concupiſcences, when it is attributed to the elect, is to be vnderſtood catachreſtically. Pareus l. 1. de Iuſtif. c. 15. A dead faith, is not a true faith, though abuſiuely it be called faith. Author Reſp. ad theſ. Valent. Our men do ſay truely and orderly, that the Ghoſpell cannot be called a law, but catachreſtically.

Otherwhile they will haue the words of Scripture, which are contrarie to them, to be taken metaleptically: Zuinglius in Math. 24. tom. 4. Saluation is to be attributed Metaleptically. to nothing how holie ſoeuer, but to the pure and mere grace of God. And if in Scripture any thing be attributed to thoſe things, that is done by metalepticall and ſynecdochicall speaches. Vrſinus in Catechiſ. q. 63. Faith is our iuſtice: is vnderſtood correlatiuely and metaleptically, and otherwiſe falſely. Agayne: Faith is correlatiuely imputed to iuſtice, by metalepſis. Scarpius Contr. 7. de Iuſtific. It is taken correlatiuely and by metalepſis. Tilenus in Syntagm. c. 56. We attribute the cauſe of ſaluation not to faith it ſelfe properly, but onely metaleptically. To thoſe I adde, that Zuinglius in Hebr. 6. tom. 4. ſaieth: We thinke that theſe things are rightly ſaied by hyperoches, as Chriſt ſpeaketh that Math. 18. of power to binde and looſe. And when the Angel praieth for the people Zachariae. 1. Bullinger l. de orig. Erroris. c. 8. ſaieth, It is in hypotypoſis ſuffiguration of a thing preſent.

Oftentimes they will haue the words of Scripture oppoſite Metonymically. to them, to be taken metonymically. Zuinglius lib. de Pec. orig. to. 2. f. 156. This is that which I would: That originall ſinne, is not truely, but metonymically termed ſinne. That Paul ſaieth: All haue ſinned, the word of ſinning is put metonymically: Caluin in Math. 26. v. 26. None that is conuerſant in Scripture will denie, but that a ſacramentall ſpeach is to be taken metonymically. Beza in Reſp. altera ad Selnener. p. 270. The names of Bodie and Blood are not attributed to bread and wine but metonymically. Daneus Cont. 4. c. 4. This ſpeach: Faith iuſtifieth vs, is metonymicall: for the continent is taken for the contained. Et Cont. de Euchar. c. 1. The ſacramentall bread is here metonymically termed the bodie of Chriſt. Whitaker Contr. 4. q. 1. c. 2. The Church is ſaied to be founded in the Apoſtles, metonymically, not properly. Bucanus in Inſtitut. loco. 48. This propoſition is figuratiue, and that not ſimply metaphoricall or allegoricall, but metonymicall. Piſcator in Theſ. l. 2. p. 512. God to haue ſaued vs by the lauer of regeneration Tit. 3. ether is not meant of baptiſme, or if it be, it is ſpoaken metonymically. Agayne: Regeneration is made by baptiſme metonymically.

Sometimes they will haue them to be ſpoaken metaphorically. Metaphorically. Zuinglius in Subſid. tom. 2. fol. 247. We ſay that the figure of this ſpeach (of the Supper) is to be expounded by a metaphor. Thou ſaieſt, there is a metonymie, where no metonymie is properlie. Caluin. in Math. 3. v. 12. The ſpeach of euerlaſting fire, is metaphoricall. In Refutat. Catalani. There is no ſpea • h here (Ioan. 3.) of baptiſme, but the name of water is metaphorically attributed to the Spirit. Muſculus in locis tit. de Caena. The bodie of the Lord is eaten improperly and metaphorically.

But it is wonderous how manie, and what kinds of figures How manie figures they find in foure words. The Lutherans. they deuiſe in thoſe foure plaine words of conſecration: This is my bodie. For the Lutherans, albeit the will haue thē to be vnderſtood according to the letter, yet in Hoſp. part. 2. Hiſt. f. 352. ſay: In this propoſition: This is &c. the affirmation is beſide nature and not according to nature. Selneccer. ib. will haue it to be an vnuſuall ſpeach. Heshuſius in Beza in dial. cont. eum. I ſay (quoth he) that it is an vnuſuall kinde of ſpeach, contrarie to all the rules of Logicians and Rhetoriciās. Hemingius in Enchir. claſ. 3. ſaieth. It is not a philoſophicall kind of ſpeach, but diuine. Lobechius diſput. 12. The words are taken properly, but the manner of speaking is ſingular and vnuſuall. Hutter in Anal. Cōf. Aug calleth it an vnuſuall ſpeach, that is, myſticall and ſingular, and that the letter is kept in regard of euerie word, but that the manner of ſpeaking is vnuſuall in regard of the whole propoſitiō Adā Frā. in Margarita Theol. loc. 16. It is a ſpeach not regular nor figuratiue, but vnuſuall, contrarie to the order of nature. And the like hath Reineccius to. 4. Arm. c. 16. Finally Grauerus in Abſurdis Caluin. c 1. ſec. 7. & vlt. ſaieth that it is a dominatiue speach. But in Antitheſ. p. 410. ſaieth, that Lutherans put a gramaticall ſynecdoche, not rhetoricall. Amongſt the Sacramentaries (as appeareath by The Sacramentaries. what hath beene alreadie rehearſed) ſome will haue to be here a Catachreſis, ſome a ſynechdoche, ſome alleoſis, others a metaphor, and others a metonymie: Likewiſe ſome will haue the figure to be in the word This, others in the word Is, and others in the word Bodie. And as Kikerman writeth. libr. 3. Syſtem. Theol. p. 445. There are manie that ſay, There is no figure nether in the Predicate, nor in the verbe, but in the connexion of the Predicate with the Subiect, that is, in the forme of this propoſition. Polanus in Sylloge theſ. part. 1. de Caena. There is a threfould figure in theſe words. This is &c. Synechdoche of the gender, a metaphor, and a metonymie of the Subiect. Ramus in Schluſſelb. l. 1. Theol. Caluin. artic. 22. will haue three figures in theſe words. Aretius ib. ſaieth, that this ſpeach of Chriſt, is ether metaphoricall, or catachreſticall, or metonymicall. Pencier ib. In theſe words of Chriſt, ether there is a metaphor, or a metonymie, or a ſynechdoche, or alleoſis. Et Zuinglius in Hoſpin. part. 2. f. 143. Theſe words: This is &c. are not to be vnderſtood naturally, and in the proper ſenſe of the words, but ſymbolically, denominatiuely, and metonymically. Thus (as Tertullian ſaied Cap. 27. of the Valentinians) They turne all into figures and images, being themſelues imaginarie men. And as Illyricus in Claue part. 2. tract. 4. writeth: Nothing is more eaſie, then to ſay: It is a trope, a figure, a phraſe of ſpeach, an Hebraiſme, as Auſtine grauely noteth.

Wherefore I argue thus in the 21. place. Who beſide their foreſaied oppoſition to the expreſſe words of Scripture, doe alſo in ſo manie and ſo weightie matters delude the proper ſenſe of the words of Scripture by ſo manie kinds of figures, they contradict the true ſenſe of the holie Scripture. But ſo doe Proteſtants. Therefore &c.

CHAPTER XXII. THAT PROTESTANTS ARE FORCED to coine manie distinctions friuolous, voluntarie, oppoſite to themſelues, and vnheard of before.

THE 22. argument which we will make for to shew, that Proteſtanrs contradict the true meaning of the holie Scripture, is becauſe they are cō pelled to deuiſe manie diſtinctions friuolous, voluntarie, contrarie to themſelues, and neuer heard of before.

Their friuolous diſtinctions are of this ſorte. Dauid ſinned indeed, but neuer committed ſinne: It is an other thing to ſinne, and an other, to commit ſinne. As we related lib. 1. c. 16. art. 12.

Zanchius de Perſeuer. tom. 7. maketh this diſtinction: Friuolous diſtinctions. Saintes ſlide into ſinne, but doe not foreſlide. Lambert. ib. The elect oftentimes doe erre, but yet are neuer lead into error. Rainolds theſ. 2. He inſinuatcth the (the gates of Hell) shall vaile against the Church, but not preuaile. Caluin de Ration. Concordiae. The word Bodie is by a figure transferred to bread, but not figuratiuely. Beza reſponſ. ad Act. part. 2. pag. 104. To euerie one of the baptized grace is offered, but not giuen. p. 123. The elect dying children, are renouated, but not regenerated. p. 177. I did not ſay, that the firſt man did ſinne by Gods will, but that he fell by Gods will. Perkins de Serm. Dom. to. 2. col. 575. Chriſt did not properly die the ſecond death, but yet he ſuffered it. Scarpius de Iuſtific. cont. 14. It is one thing to keepe the commandments, an other to fulfill them. Pareus l. 4. de Amiſſ Grat. c. 10. It is true, that Infants doe not actually ſinne, but it •• falſe, that they doe inclinatiuelie ſinne. l. 1. de Iuſtif. c. 13. The Scripture requireth the Sacraments and pennance to conuerſion and regeneration, but not to iuſtificatiō. Et l. 2. c. 3. It is manifeſt, that we shalbe iuſtified, and we shalbe made Iuſt, is not all one with the Apoſtle. Et c. 9. To be constituited iuſt, is not the ſame that is to be made iuſt in this life. In Colleg. Theol. 7. diſp. 7. It is a farre other thing (for God) to will that all be ſaued, and to will to ſaue all. l. 2. de Amiſſ. Grat. c. 4. Sinne and the fall of Adam were neuer the ſame thing.

Voluntarie diſtinctions I call thoſe, by which for their Voluntarie diſtinctions. pleaſure they draw the ſame words into diuerſe ſenſes. As when the Scripture biddeth vs loue God with all our heart, then they will haue that with all the heart, ſignifieth all kind of degree of loue, ſo that this precept be impoſſible for vs: but when it ſaieth, that anie hath loued God with all the heart, then they will haue, with all the heart, to ſignifie onely ſincerely and without hypocriſie. So Caluin in Actor. 8. v. 9. Pareus l. 1. de Iuſtif. c. 10. l. 2. c. 7. and others. In like ſorte, when the Scripture. 1. Cor. 11. affirmeth the Euchariſt to be the bodie of Chriſt, then the word Bodie is taken for a figure; But when in the ſame place, it ſaieth, that vnworthie receauers are guiltie of the bodie of Chriſt, thē it is taken for the true bodie of Chriſt. And ſo of innumerable other words, which they expoūd diuerſely as it pleaſeth them.

Their diſtinctions which deſtroie themſelues are of Diſtinctions deſtroying themſelues. this ſorte. Pareus. l. 4. de Iuſtific. c. 4. diſtinguisheth ſtipend, into a free ſtipend, and a due: and ſaieth, that eternall life is a free ſtipend, but not due. As if it could be imagined, how a ſtipend could not be due. Like to this is their diſtinction of reward, into due and vndue. For if it be no waies due, it is no reward, but a mere gift. Whereupon Eucan. Inſtit. loc. 32. ſaieth: Reward properly is nothing els, but which is giuen of debt. Et Scarpius de Iuſtif. Controu. 15. In morall matters, where there is reward, there is merit. Muſculus in locis titul. de Meritis. Surely there can be no reward, but in reſpect of merit. Yea and Pareus himſelfe in Prooem. l. 5. de Iuſtific. Reward properly called, is due. The ſame man. l. 4. cit. c. 10. addeth: that iuſt men can fulfill the law by an inchoate fulfilling, but not by a perfect. Which he repeateth. c. 13. as if there could be a fulfilling which is onely inchoate or begun. And neuertheleſſe by this diſtinction doe they delude all thoſe teſtimonies of Scripture, which teach, that ſome doe fulfill the law, loue God, doe good workes, and the like. Which they interpret of an imperfect fulfilling, louing, and doing. Beza in Dial. cont. Heshuſſ. vol. 1. ſaieth: The fathers before Chriſt were one thing with the flesh of Chriſt, then to come, but not actually. And in Colloq. Montisbel. p. 27. We confeſſe, that Chriſt God and man, was not actually a man, before his reall incarnation, yet we ſay, that he was truely preſent to theſe Fathers. And p. 63. I will not ſay, that Chriſts bodie was not at the time Abraham. For it was, but not actually. Gerlachius to. 2. diſp. 17. Noë indeed was perfectly iuſt: but not abſolutely iuſt.

But as for diſtinctions neuer heard of before, they haue deuiſed innumerable. For as it appeareth by what Diſtinctions vnheard of. Of God. hath beene related lib. 1. cap. 2. they diſtinguish of God, that he will ſinne for ſome other end, but not for it ſelfe: That he willeth, that is, decreeth it, but not willeth, that is, not approueth it: That the hidden God willeth death, but not the reuealed: That he will haue all to be ſaued, by his reuealed will, but not by his hidden will: or as ſpeaketh Beza part. 2. reſponſ. ad Colloq. Montisbel. He will haue all ſaued by his open will, but not by his pleaſure. And agayne: He will not the death of a ſinner, by his open will, but by his ſecret will. That he inuiteth all to him by words, but not by his mynd: That he punisheth the faithfull leſt they ſinne, not becauſe they haue ſinned: that he iuſtifieth a wicked man remaining wicked, by the Ghoſpell, not by law: And manie other ſuch diſtinctions as may be gathered out of the ſaied chapter &c. To which I adde theſe. Beza cont. Heshuſ. vol. 1. Alie pleaſeth God, not as it is a lie, but as it is a iust punishement. Muſculus in locis titul. de iuſtific. God iuſtifieth a wicked man abiding ſuch, in his throne of grace, not in his throne of iuſtice. Tilenus in Syntagm. cap. 46. God iudgeth iust mens workes to be good according to the Ghoſpell, not according to law. Perkins in Apoc 2. tom. 2. Gods reuealed will hath with it adioyned a condition, but not his ſecret will.

Touching Chriſt; they diſtinguish, that he is ā ſinner Of Chriſt. by imputation, but not by inherence: That he died for all, but not for euerie one: That ſometime he ſpeaketh as others thought, not as himſelfe: That he is a lawmaker, head of the Church, to be adored, to be inuocated, can forgiue ſinnes, and worke miracles, not as man, but as God onely. See more l. 1. c. 3.

Of Saints: they diſtinguish in this new manner. They Of Saints. wish for vs heauen, but pray not: we may wish that they praied for vs, but may not pray: They pray for vs in generall, but not in particular: They may be worshipped of vs after a ciuill or profane māner, but not after a religious. And as Perkins ſaieth in Cathol. reform. Contr. 14. cap. 2. When Angels appeared, they were lawfullie honored, but not now.

Touching Scripture; they haue coined theſe new diſtinctions: Of Scripture. In Paulſome things are hard, not of themſelues, but by accident. So Reineccius to. 1. Arm. c. 10. In Scripture there are ſome things hard to be vnderſtood and obſcure to vs, though all the Scripture 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 tom. 4. Armat. cap. 15. ſaieth. Faith is called a worke not abſolutely, as it is conſidered in it ſelfe, but relatiuely, as it apprehendeth Chriſt. Hunnius de Iuſtificat. pagin. 157. Faith worketh by charitie towards our neighbour, not toward God. Finally Perkins in Caſibus c. 7. That which euerie one is bound to beleiue, is indeed true according to the intention of God who bindeth him: but it is not true alwaies according to the euent.

Of good works in generall: they coyne theſe diſtinctions: Of good works in generall. The good workes of the iuſt are good in parte, not wholy: They are all equall before God, but not in themſelues. They are acceptable to God in his throne of mercie, but not of iuſtice. They are neceſſarie to iuſtification by neceſſitie of preſence, but not of cauſe: They are neceſſarie to ſaluation, not to iuſtificatiō. See l. 1. c. 14. art. 15.

To which we adde, that Pareus lib. 4. de Iuſtificat. capite. 17. ſaieth. That good works are worthie of reward in the courte of mercie, but worthie of punishment in the courte of iuſtice of God. Et l. 1. c. 16. 23. & 24. Works are required to regeneration, not to iuſtification: or as Reineccius ſpeaketh 10. 1. Arm. c. 20. They are neceſſarie to ſanctification not to iuſtification Who alſo to. 4 c. 22. diſtinguisheth a worke in Giuing and Receauing, and ſaieth, that faith is a giuing worke, not a receauing Schluſſelb. to. 7. Catal. p. 446. writeth, that obedience is neceſſarie to ſaluation, but an others obedience, not ours. And addeth: The dutie of obedience is indeed neceſſarie to ſaluation, forſooth if it be not freely remitted. Scarpius de Iuſtif. Contr. 15. Iuſt men are worthie of the kingdome of God, by the worth of aptneſſe, not of perfection or merit. Riuet. tract. 3 ſect. 36. There may be a relation of Merit and Reward betwene men, but not betwene God and men. Perkins in Cathol. Ref. Cont. 4. cap. 6. Good workes are neceſſarie to ſaluation, not as cauſe, but onely as a thing neceſſarie following faith.

Touching good works in particular, they thus diſtinguish: of good works in particular. That to liue ſingle, is a good profitable, but not honeſt or vertuous: That virginitie is better then mariage in ſomething, but not ſimply: That faſting is a parte of Gods worshippe in the law, but not in the Ghoſpel: That almes deliuereth from ſinne and death, not by it ſelfe, but by the cauſe thereof: That it is lawfull to pray for the elect, not for others: for the liuing, not for the dead, for things promiſed in the Scripture not for other things, as appeareth by what hath beene rehearſed c. 15. To which we adde that Perkins in Cathol. reform. Cont. 3. c. 3. writeth, that we pray not ſo much for the forgiueneſſe of ſinnes paſt, as preſent. Confeſſio Wittember. ſaieth: We may wish to the dead all rest and happines in Chriſt, but we may not pray for them. Luther in Poſtil. Dom. 2. poſt Trin. graunteth, that we may once or twiſe pray for the dead, but not often: And at home and in our chamber, but not in the Church. And the like hath Vrbanus Regius in formulis caute loquendi to. 1. Who alſo in locis. fol. 322. ſaieth, that we may pray cōditionally for the ſoule of our brother, but not abſolutely. Feild l. 3. de Eccleſ. c. 17. teacheth, that we may pray for one that is dead ſtreigth after his death, but not afterward, Zuingle in art. 60. ſaieth: I condemne not, if one being carefull for the dead, doe implore or pray Gods mercie for them, but to define any time for this, is diabolicall. Spalata l. 5. Repub. c. 8. n. 132. writeth, that God at the interceſsion of the Church forgiueth litle ſinnes ſoone after death, but not long after. Thus they diſtinguish about praier fore the dead. Perkins in Apoc. 2. tom. 2. The precept of repentance is directly giuē to the elect, indirectly to the reprobate. Et Tilenus in Syntagm. c. 47. There is no counſaile inferred out of. 1. Corint. 7. but onely a deſire and wish of one deſiring the guift of continencie.

Touching ſinne: theſe new diſtinctions they make: Of ſinne. That it is imputed to reprobates and infidels, not to the faithfull and elect: That it is veniall to the elect, not to others: that it may ſtand with iuſtice with ſome wraſtling, no otherwiſe: that byting vſurie is condemned not other, as we haue related l. 1. c. 16. Beſides Perkins in Cathol. ref. Cont. 2. cap. 1. ſaieth, that in iuſtification, ſinne is taken away not in it ſelfe, but as it is in the perſon: or as Riuet ſpeaketh Cōt. tract. 3. ſect. 26. Sinne remaineth in parte, not wholy. Caluin in Ioā. 1. v. 29. Sinne is in vs but not in the iudgement of God. Beza in 2. part. reſp. ad Coll. Montisb. p. 73. Dauid ſinned, but not whole, but as he was not regenerate. p. 79. He did not retaine the holie Ghoſt, but ſome thing of the holie Ghoſt. pag. 71. Sinne caſteth not of the holie Ghoſt, but hindreth his efficacie. Et p. 87. It maketh the holie Ghost a ſleepe for a time, but doth not caſt him of. Pareus l. 1. de Amiſſ. Grat. c. 7. Adam fell not as he was predestinate, but as he was to be predestinated: He loſt the grace of creation, but not the grace of iuſtification. And Piſcator in Theſ. loc. 20. The elect do ſlide, but are not caſt downe.

Touching iuſtification, theſe new diſtinctions they Of iuſtification. frame. It is declared by workes, but not cauſed: It forgiueth ſinnes, but taketh them not away: It maketh that ſinne is not imputed, but not that it is no more. It maketh a man iuſt not in himſelfe, but in Chriſt. And others ſuch like as may be ſeene lib. 1. c. 17. Moreouer Luther in Zanchius de Perſeuer. to. 7. col. 128. ſaieth: When Peter ſinned, his loue towards God and Chriſt was not drowned, but onelie floated. Reineccius to. 4. Arm. c. 15. Sanctification increaſeth and decreaſeth, but not iuſtification. Kemnice in locis. part. 2. tit. de Argum. writeth, that when in Scripture God is required to iudge vs, or reward vs according to our iuſtice, that ſpeach is not of the iuſtice of perſon, but of our cauſe or controuerſie with other men. And agayne: That ſame: yee are cleane Ioan. 13. And yee are washed and ſanctified. 1. Cor. 7. is to be vnderſtood imputatiuely: Whitaker ad Rat. 8. Camp. Faith, hope and charitie doe make vs iuſt, inchoately not abſolutely. Perkins de Praedeſt to 1. diſtingui • heth grace into that which repreſſeth; which he ſaieth is cōmon to reprobates & into that which reneweth, which he maketh proper to the elect. Et in Cath ref. Cont 4. c. 4. ſaieth: Adam had imputed iuſtice according to the ſubstance thereof, but not according to imputation. Illyricusin Claue part. 2. tract. 6. Sinne is abolished by right & promiſe for the time to come, but not in act and deed. Geſner in Cōp. loco. 22. In Scripture thoſe are called i • ſt, who a • oūd with iuſtice, according to the doctrine of the law, not of the Ghoſpell Scarpe de Iuſt. Cōt. 1. Iustificatiō effectiuely is immediatly of Chriſt alone, but ſanctificatiō is of the holie Ghoſt. Iuſtificatiō quitteth vs in the iudgemēt of God, not ſanctificatiō. Et Cōt. 7. There is a twoefould ablutiō of ſinne; the firſt is of the guilt, and this is iuſt • ficatiō: the ſecond is of the inherence thereof, and this is ſanct • fication. Bullinger. dec. 3. ſerm. 9. There is a duble iuſtice, iuſtificant and obedi • nt. Polanus part. 2. theſ. The grace which Adam receaued in creation, was not grace which maketh gratefull. Et in Diſp. priuat. Sinnes are blotted out by pennance not cauſatiuely, but oſtēſiuely. Riuet. tract. 3. ſec. 26. We are perfectiuely imputatiuely iuſt, but inherētly iuſt, onely imperfectly.

Touching the law: they diſtinguish in this new ſorte: It is Of Gods law. abrogated from the faithfull according to rigor and imputatiō, no according to obligation: There is a twoefould fulfilling of the law: legall and Euangelicall. Mans law bindeth in generall, not in particular. Whitaker libr 8. cont. Dur. ſect. 96. ſaieth. The Decalogue is taken away in parte, but not ſimply. Caluin in Actor. 15. verſ. 10. The commandements are an vnſupportable yoake for to be exacted, not for doctrine. Pareus l. 2. de Iuſtif. cap. 7. They are heauie concerning perfection, not for inchoation. Reineccius to. 4. Arm. cap. 13. They are light in respect of imputation and inchoation, but not of perfect fulfilling. Bucan in Inſtit. loco. 19. To the regenerate, the law is poſsible by imputation of the ſatisfaction of Chriſt, and by inchoation of newneſſe. Scarpius de Iuſtif. Cōt. 12. The law is poſsible for outward precepts, not inward; in parte not in whole, or by inchoation, or in Chriſt, not in our ſelues. Muſculus in locis titul. de Legibus: Christians fulfill the law perfectly in Chriſt, imperfectly in themſelues. Polanus in diſput. priuat. 40. The regenerate keepe the precepts of God by by imputation, but themſelues keepe them not. Reineccius tom. 4. Armat. cap. 13. According to the law none is worthie before God, but according to the Ghoſpell, the godlie are worthie before God.

Theſe and manie ſuch other diſtinctions neuer heard What onely diſtinctions Proteſtants ſay they allow. of before among Chriſtians, haue Proteſtants deuiſed, againſt which at this preſent I obiect onelie this, that themſelues teach, that no diſtinctions are to be admitted in Diuinitie, which are not gathered out of expreſſe and plaine places of Scripture. For thus Whitaker. Contr. 4. quaeſt. 1. cap. 3. That rule is much to be eſteemed: That in diuinitie no diſtinctions are to be allowed, but ſuch as are proued by plaine paſſages of Scripture: And lib. 2. de Concupiſc. cap. 7. We may ſay and defend what we will, if ſuch diſtinctions be accepted. Sadeel ad Repetit. Sophiſm. Turriani: It is a theologicall rule: All diſtinctions in diuinitie muſt be proued by expreſſe places of Scripture. The like hath Perkins l. de Caena. to. 1. col. 861. and others.

Their moſt vſuall diſtinctions wherewith moſt cōmonly Moſt vſuall diſtinctions with Proteſt. they delude the teſtimonies of Scripture, are theſe, though perhaps all of them vſe not the verie ſelfe ſame termes. To wit: Before men, not before God: or which cometh all to one: It ſeemeth ſo, but is not: By this diſtinction they delude all thoſe teſtimonies of Scripture, which teach that reprobate or euill men may beleiue, doe good workes, be in the Church, that reprobates may be iuſtified, that good workes doe iuſtifie, redeeme ſinnes or the like: Which they expound, before men, not before God, or in shew, not in deed. An other vſuall diſtinction of theirs is: In it ſelfe, or in an other thing. By this they delude thoſe teſtimonies of Scripture, which ſay that good men are iuſt, worthie of God, fulfill the law, that baptiſme forgiueth ſinnes, Almes deliuereth from death, and ſuch like, which they expound, in an other, not in themſelues: as that good men are iuſt, worthie of God, fulfill the law, in Chriſt not in themſelues: that almes deliuereth from death, not in it ſelfe, but in faith, as ſaieth Confeſſio Auguſtana. c. de Implet. legis, and that baptiſme remitteth ſinnes not in it ſelfe but in faith. So Caluin in Act. 2. v. 38. A third vſuall diſtinction of theirs is, Significātly not Cauſally: By this they delude thoſe teſtimonies of Scripture, which teach that Sacraments worke grace, Preiſts remit ſinnes, good works doe iuſtifie, doe cauſe life euerlaſting, and the like. Which they expound Significantly or oſtenſiuely, not Cauſally. Their fourth accuſtomed diſtinction, is In parte, not ſimply or wholy, Thus they delude thoſe teſtimonies which auouch that there is inherent iuſtice, that ſinners are taken away, that good mens good workes are good, and ſuch like, which they expound, In parte, not ſimply or wholy. Their fift vſuall diſtinction is: A ſaying of the law, not of the Ghospell. Thus they delude all the ſentences of Scripture, which declare that iuſtice and life euerlaſting is to be purchaſed by good works, that the keeping of the law is neceſſarie to life, and ſuch like. For theſe kind of ſayings, they will haue to be onely of the law not of the Ghoſpell. But their moſt vſuall diſtinction of all is. Figuratiuely not Properly: which kind of deluding the Scripture is moſt ample and containeth almoſt all the former kinds. For what ſeemeth to be, & is not, is figuratiuely not properly. Likewiſe what is in parte, and not ſimply, what is not in it ſelfe but in another, is figuratiuely and not properly. Yet becauſe this their diſtinction would wax ſtale, if it were vſed vnder the ſame termes in all places, and the vanitie thereof would eaſily appeare if nakedly it were applied to ſome places, therefore at leaſt in words and with ſome litle differences they haue deuided it into diuers. Peculiarly by this diſtinction they delude all thoſe teſtimonies of Scripture, which teach that the Euchariſt is the bodie and blood of Chriſt, that eternall life is a reward, that the Apoſtles are the foundations of the Church, that the Ghoſpell is a law, Chriſt a law giuer, deſcended into hell, that there is in the Church an altar, a ſacrifice, and the like. Theſe forſooth are their fine plaiſters which they applie to cure all the wounds which are giuen them by the ſword of the word of God, which if they will let other Heretiks vſe in ſuch ſorte as they doe, nothing at all will be proued out of Scripture.

Wherefore thus I frame my 22. argument. They who beſides their oppoſition to the expreſſe words of holie Scripture related in the firſt booke, are forced in manie and great matters to deuiſe friuolous and verball diſtinctions, and ſuch as deſtroye themſelues, and were neuer heard of before among Chriſtians, they contradict the true ſenſe of holie Scripture. Proteſtants doe ſo. Therefore &c.

CHAPTER XXIII. THAT PROTESTANTS CONFESSE THE vniforme conſent of Fathers, Councels, and of the Church to be againſt them, and neglect and condemne it.

THE 23. argument wherewith we will proue the oppoſition of Proteſtants with the Scripture, shalbe, becauſe ſometimes they be forced to acknowledge that they contradict the vniforme conſent of the Fathers, Councels, and Church, yea neglect and contemne it.

That ſometimes they confeſſe the vniforme conſent Proteſt. confeſſe that • hey are againſt Fathers. How manie ſoeuer. of the Fathers, Councels, and Church is againſt them, is manifeſt. For thus writeth Luther in 2. Petri to. 5. fol. 490. Here stumbled how manie ſoeuer ether Fathers are Doctors haue heretofore expounded the Scripture, as when that Math. 16. Thou art Peter &c. they interpreted of the Pope. Tom. 2. l. de lib. arbit. fol 480. What auaileth it, if one shall relie vpon the ancient Fathers approued by the courſe of ſo manie ages? Were All of them. they not all of them together blind? Et to. 6. in Gen. c. 42. Here ſurely all the Fathers, Auſtin, Ambroſe, &c. were deceaued, nor vnderstood any thing, Kemnice in loc. part. 1. p. 166. All antiquitie with one mouth reiect thoſe propoſitions: That all things that are done, are done neceſſarilie: That men ſinne of neceſsitie. And yet Proteſtants teach ſo, as appeareth. l. 1. c. 2. art. 8. &c. 21. art. 1. & 2. Schluſſelburg to. 8. Catal. p. 379. We deny that The ancient Doctors. the ancient Doctors of the Church were Catholiks euery where, for they were deceaued ſometimes and peruerted ſome articles of faith. Zuingle in Reſponſ. ad Epiſt. Conſtant. to. 1. ſpeaking of the expoſition of Malachias touching ſacrifice in the Church, ſaieth: The expoſition of the Ancient is reiected. And l. de Baptiſm. to. 2. We muſt ſay, that almoſt all whoſoeuer haue Almoſt all from the Apoſtles. Ould and new. All Diuines. written vpon baptiſme euen from the very Apoſtles time, haue erred from the marke, and that not in few points. Wherefore we will ſee what thing baptiſme is after a farre other manner, then ether the ancient or the new writers, yea then thoſe of our dayes haue done, Ib. fol. 74. Nether they onely ſay that (Saint Ihons baptiſme is different from Chriſts) but alſo all Diuines whome I remember euer to haue read, doe follow this their ſentence moſt conſtantly. Ib. in Paraen. fol. 603. They were Fathers begot the Popedome, the moſt wicked brood of Antichriſt. Bullinger dec. 4. ſerm. 10. It is true which they ſay, that the anciēts prated for the dead. Gualter. in Actor. 19. hom. 125. It is euident, that the Fathers abuſed this place: It deceaued them, that they thought Ihons baptiſme of water and Chriſts to be differēt. P. Martyr l. de votis. Surely that I may confeſſe that which is true, we haue them (Fathers) harder againſt vs in this cauſe. In 1. Cor. 15. All the Fathers make for this opinion. Againe: We All the Fathers. confeſſe freely that the Fathers make differences of rewards. Zanchius de Eccleſ. cap. 9. tom. 8. The Fathers expoſition is not admitted in this place. Agayne: The Fathers expoſition is The Fathers. not admitted in this place; Vpon this rock that is, vpon Peter Muſculus in locis tit. de ſignis. The Fathers doe attribute more efficacie to our Sacraments, then to thoſe of the ould teſtament, in ſo much as they ſay they be effectuall ſignes of grace. This error is to be beaten out of the heads of all the faithfull. Ib. tit. de bapt. The Fathers did denie ſaluation to the children of Chriſtiās takē away by death before they were baptized. Caluin in 1. Cor. 7. v. 5. The Fathers. Let no man meruaile, that in this matter we freely diſſent frō the Fathers. Againe: Fathers erred in approuing inconſiderately the vow of chaſtitie. Ib. v. 7. The Fathers will haue virginitie to be a worshippe of God. Now therein is a pernitious error. In Act 19. v. 9. With the Fathers that opiniō had force, that Ihons and Chriſts baptiſmes were different. And for breuities ſake to omit his In how manie points Caluin is againſt the Fathers. words, 2. Inſt. c. 2. §. 4. he confeſſeth, that the Fathers be againſt him touching free will. c. 4. §. 3. touching permiſſiō of ſinne. c. 14. §. 3. touching Chriſt mediator as he is God. c. 16. §. 9. touching the deſcēt of Chriſt to hell. Et l. 3. c. 4. §. 38 39. touching ſatisfactiō. c. 5. §. 10. touching praier for the dead. Et l. 4. c. 15. §. 7. touching the differēce betwixt S. Ihons and Chriſts Baptiſme, & §. 20. touchings laicks baptizing in caſe of neceſſitie. c. 17. §. 39. touching the carying of the Euchariſt to the ſick. c. 18. §. 10. touching Sacrifice. Et §. 43. touching exufflation and chriſme in baptiſme. The like he acknowledgeth Luc. 7. v. 13. Math. 19. v. 9. & 17. 1. Cor. 15. v. 10. Hebr. 7. v. 9. & other where oftē. Beza in reſp. ad Caſt. vo. 1. Theol. We ſee, that this place eſpecially was wreſted by the Fathers for to proue their limbus. And the Fathers from hence alſo deuiſed that deſcent of Chriſts ſoule into hell: Beſides in Marc. 1. v. 4. In act. 2. v. 27. In c. 19. v. 2. In Rom. 4. v. 11. and otherwhere oftē times, he profeſſeth to diſagree frō the Fathers. Dan. Cōtr. 3. p. 277. ſaieth, that the Fathers haue moſt naughtily expoūded that ſaying of Chriſt Math. 16. Thou art Peter, of the perſon of Peter. Et. p. 281. They haue moſt naughtily expounded the place. Sadeel ad art. abiur. 26. We hould this article (of Chriſts deſcēt) but we vnderſtād it otherwiſe thē the Fathers did. Whitaker Contr. 2. q. 5. c. 7. We confeſſe indeed, that ſome Popish errors are ancient, and held and defended of the Fathers, which truely we doe freely and openly profeſſe. Lib. 6. cont. Dur. ſect. 7. Your Poperie is errors of the Fathers. mingle mangle of Popish religion is pached vp of the errors of the Fathers. lib. 8. ſect. 7. Both of them iustly exclude that fictitious limbus of the Fathers. l. 2. de Script. p. 280. Luther durst diſſent from the Fathers, whome he perceaued plainely to diſſent from the Scriptures. Perkins in Gal. 1. verſ. 8 Manie doctrines From the time of the Apoles. haue beene receaued and beleiued euen from the time of the Apoſtles, of the interceſsion of Saints, of the praier to the dead, and for the dead in purgatorie, and the the like, and theſe doctrines haue beene confirmed by diuers reuelations. Spalata. l. 5. de Repub. c. 11. n. 41. That Preiſts doe truely and properly forgiue ſinnes Common conſent of Fathers. Vniuerſally receaued. by the keyes, is the moſt common conſent of the Fathers. cap. 8. numero. 37. It was a moſt ancient cuſtome and moſt vniuerſally receaued in the Church, that praiers and oblatiōs should be made for the dead. Sutclif. l. 1. de Eccleſ. Bellarmin meaneth any conſent whatſoeuer with the Fathers in doctrine of free will, of mens ſatisfactions for ſinnes, of limbus, of purgatorie, of praier for the dead, of praier to the dead, of forbiddacne of marriage, and other ſuch like doctrines: This conſent we denie to be a note of the Church, for in all theſe things they did dot conſent with the Ancient fathers with mutuall conſent. Apoſtolicall Church. Duditius in Beza epiſt. 1. ſaieth thus: If it be trueth which the ancient Fathers haue profeſſed with mutuall conſent, that is all on the Papiſts ſide. Thus they touching their diſſent from the Fathers.

In like manner they confeſſe, that they diſſent from the Church and Councells. For thus P. Martyr in 1. Cor. 3. That The Church alwai • s praied for dead. The ancient Church. The Church at 500. alſo vſeth to be obiected to vs. That the Church hath alwaies praied for the dead: which truely I doe not denie. Whitaker Cōt. 2. q. 5. c. 7. I anſwere. True it is, that Caluin ſaieth and the Centurie writers, that the ancient Church erred in manie things, as of limbus, of free will, of merit of works, and the other things before rehearſed. Agayne: I ſay that the Church which was 500. or 600. years after Chriſt did not hould in all points the doctrine of the Apoſtles. For she held ſome errors. Caſaubon. epiſt. ad Cardin. Perron. It was a moſt ancient cuſtome, that in the publike praiers of the Church remembrance should be made of the The ancient Church. dead, and reſt praied for them of God. The ancient Church by this means approued her faith of the reſurrection to come. Zuinglius in Elencho. tom. 2. ſpeaking of the ceremonies In the beginning of the Church. Generall Councells of baptiſme, ſaieth: We know, that in the beginning of the Church theſe things were vſed. The like they confeſſe touching Councells. For thus Confeſſio Anglica. art. 21. Generall Councells may erre, and ſometimes haue erred euen in the things which belonge to the rule of pietie. Vrban Regius in Interpret. All Councells The ancient Councels. loc. to 1. It is more cleare then the light, that all Councells haue pernitiouſly erred. Caluin. 4 Inſit. c. 9. §. 10. There is ſome thing wanting euen in thoſe ancient and purer Councells. There was a notable example hereof in the Councell of Nice. Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 7. c 7. auoucheth, that the Councell of Nice and Chalcedon haue erred.

Nether doe Proteſtants onely diſſent frō the vniforme conſent of Fathers, Councels, and Church, but alſo they make ſmall account thereof. For thus P. Martyr in loc. Tit. Not Fathers euen agreing. Script. §. 16. But at leaſt (ſay they) then are the Fathers to be allowed, when they agree amongst themſelues. No not then alwaies. Et lib. de votis. As long as we abide in the Fathers, we shall alwaies remayne in the ſame errors. Whitaker. Cont. 1. q. 5. c: 8. The agreing expoſition of the Fathers, is no rule of expoū ding Not witneſſes without exceptiō. Scriptures. Cont. 2. q. 7. c. 7. We denie not but the Fathers be witneſſe of the trueth, but ſo as they be not without exception, for all haue erred. l. 6. cont. Dur. ſect. 3. The conſent of Fathers is not ſure and free from error. Et ad Demonſt. 7. Sanderi. Not the whole Senate of Fathers. Nether will we thinke, that thou haſt demonſtrated any thing, though thou couldeſt bring the whole Senate of Fathers againſt vs. Rainolds in his Conference p. 151. Trueth is not to Not all. be tried by conſent of Fathers. Pſal. 150. If not one or twoe of the Fathers, but all haue thought it, nor thought it onely but haue written it, nor written it onely but thought it, not obſcurely but clearely, nor ſeldome but often, nor for a time but perpetually, yet their conſent were not ſecure. And he termeth vniuerſalitie, antiquitie, conſent, rotten poſtes. Yea in his 5. Theſis he will haue the Roman Church to be no true Church, becauſe she forbiddeth the Scriptures to be expounded contrarie to that ſenſe which our holie mother the Church doth hould, or contrarie to the vniforme conſent of Fathers. By which forbiddance (ſaieth he) are often reiected thoſe ſenſes which the ſpirit by the tenor of the words and ſentences doth teach to be the meaning of the holie text. Mortō in Apol. part. 1. l. 1. c. 69. Sometimes neglecting the perſons (of the Fathers) it is moſt ſafe to fech the prime antiquitie out of the Apoſtolicall writings. Which is (ſaieth he) the Proteſt. defenſe, to reiect the Fathers. prore and puppe of the Proteſtants defenſe. Caluin 4. Inſtit. c. 9. §. 12. Let no names of Coūcells, of Paſtours, of Bishops hinder vs, that we trie not all the ſpirits of them all with the ſquare of Gods word, for to finde whether they be of God. Daneus Cōtr. p. 289. Touching the ſaying of the Fathers, this is our breif anſwere to them all: We regard not what the Fathers haue ſaied, but how Saying of Fathers not reguarded. truely. Et Cont. 5. p. 698. We must not looke what the Fathers haue written, but what they should haue writtē. Vorſtius in Antib. p. 395. The Proteſtants doe not thinke that they ought much to care, what the ancient Fathers haue thought or written of this Not to be cared for. matter. Pareus l. 5. de Iuſt. c. 5. I ſay that Scripture is to be expoū ded by Scripture, not by Fathers. Et l. 2. de Grat. c. 14. Though all the Fathers agreed well, yet were it weake. Reineccius to. 1. Arm. Not all fathers together c. 9 Whē all Doctors of the Church with a common conſent doe teach ſome thing to come from Apoſtolicall tradition, is that to be beleiued to be Apoſtolicall tradition? No. Gerlachius diſp. 22. de Eccleſ. The Fathers haue ſtraied from the path of trueth, not in theſe onely wherein they diſagree with themſelues and with others, but in thoſe alſo which they haue vniformely deliuered. Celius Secundus de Amplit. regni Dei. lib. 1. Should then the Their authoritie nothing at all. authoritie of ſo manie ancient Fathers, the conſent of ages auaile nothings? Nothing at all. Polanus in theſ. part. 3. p. 546. We cite them ( • eſtimonies of Fathers) • ſpecially when we handle points of religion controuerted with Papiſts, not for our ſake but for Papiſts, that we may refute Papiſts by the Fathers, whome they haue Fathers cited as Heathens. made their iudges: as in ould time the, Fathers refuted the Heathē by the teſtimonies of the Sybills, of Poets, Philoſophers, orators, and Heathen Hiſtorians. As therefore the Fathers vſed the teſtimonies of Heathens againſt Heathēs: So we produce the teſtimonies of Fathers againſt Papiſts. Muſcul. in loc. tit. de Scrip. As for me, I require not the teſtimonies of Fathers for to giue authoritie to Canonicall Scripture, and to make diſtinction betwene it and the Fathers writings, contenting my ſelfe with the authoritie and canon of the Scripture it ſelfe. But becauſe our aduerſaries endeauour to trouble the trueth by pretext of Fathers, I well alledge them where they are againſt their endeauours, but when they cite any thing out of the Fathers writings againſt vs, I plainely ſay that I will not binde my ſelfe to their authoritie.

In like ſorte they make litle reckoning of the Church & Authoritie of the Churche auaileth nothing. Councels. For thus writeth Whitaker ad Rat. 3. Camp. Can the Church afford vs no confirmation of doctrine, no arguments of faith? None. Et Cōt. 1. q. 5. c. 10. The practiſe of the Church, is the opinion of men. The ſentences of the Fathers, is an opinion of Merely humane. men. The definition of Councels is the iudgement of mē. Vorſtius in Antib. pag. 1. ſaieth, that the teſtimonie of the Church is merely humane, Et p. 382. An Argument from the practiſe of the ancient Church concludeth nothing. Proteſt. contemne Fathers Church and Councels. Not to be regarded. Contemned.

Finally they profeſſe to cōtemne both Fathers Church, and Coūcells. For thus writeth Luther de ſer. arb. to. 2. fol. 433. The Fathers authoritie is not to be regarded. Et l. de Concil. Twentie years agoe I was forced to contemne the Fathers commentaries. Melancthon. in loc. edit. An. 1523. I am of opinion that in matters of religion mens commentaries are to be fled like the plague. Reineccius to. 4. Armat. cap. 15. There are Fathers who hould the ſame error with the Papists, whoſe teſtimonies we reiect as falſe and fond. Bullinger dec. 5. Serm. 4. We anſwere in one word to the ancient writers of the Church, whome they obiect vnto vs, teſtifying I know not what of Peters primacie, we doe not ſo much care what the Fathers thought, Litle moued. as what Chriſt hath inſtituted. Caluin. 3. Inſtitut. cap. 14. §. 38. I am litle moued with thoſe things which euerie where are to be found in the writings of the Fathers touching ſatisfaction. Et de ver. reform. Nether care I for the ſentences of the Fathers which theſe Moderators bring for to tread downe the trueth. What to doe with Father • Humfrey in Proregom. What haue we to doe with Fathers, with flesh and blood, or what pertaineth it to vs what the falſe ſynods of Bishops doe decree. Whitaker lib. 8. cont. Dur. ſect. 62. I care litle for the Fathers. Sect. 69. I care not what We care not. What to doe with Coūcels. the Fathers thought of Ihons baptiſme. Cont. 1. q. 5. c. 10. What haue we to doe with Churches or Councells, vnleſſe they shew that thoſe things which they define be aggreable to Scripture. Et l. de Script. c. 1. ſect. 7. An argument which is taken from the bare teſtimonie of the Church to confirme the Scriptures, or anie parte of them, or anie point of our faith, I ſay is inualide, vneffectuall and vnfit to perſwade. Iuel in Apol part. 4. ſaieth, that Way of the Church fanaticall. the way to find the trueth by God ſpeaking in the Church and Councels, is very vncertaine, very dangerous, and in a manner fanaticall.

Thus thou ſeeſt Reader, that Proteſtants confeſſe, that in manie and great matters, the Fathers, the ancient, all Fathers, all from the Apoſtles time, the ancient Fathers with mutuall conſent, all antiquitie: likewiſe, the ancient Church, the Church of the firſt 500. or 600. yeares, the Church in the very beginning: Finally generall Councells, all generall Councells are oppoſite to them: and that the Catholik doctrine doth conſiſt of the ſentences of the Fathers, hath beene beleiued and receaued ſince the Apoſtles time, and all deliuered by the Fathers with mutuall conſent. Moreouer thou ſeeſt, how litle they eſteeme the vniforme conſent of Fathers, Church, and Councells, yea in plaine termes profeſſe to contemne it. I diſpute not now, how the vniforme cōſent of Fathers, of the Church, and Councells is infallible in matters of faith: which hath beene manifeſtly proued by many Catholiks writers, onely I propoſe to the Readers conſideration, how much Note. Proteſtants doe preiudice their cauſe in the iudgement of all reaſonable men, by reiecting and contemning the vniforme conſent of Fathers, of the Church and Councells, touching the expoſition of Scripture. Forſooth yong mē contemne moſt ancient; few, very manie; diſagreing, thoſe that moſt agree; men of meane wit or learning, thoſe that were moſt wittie and learned: men of ſmall diligēce, thoſe that haue beene moſt diligent: vulgar, yea profane men, thoſe that were moſt holie: nether will admit ſuch and ſo manie men now happily reigning with Chriſt, who nether knew vs nor them, ſo that could not be partiall, ether for iudges, or arbiters, or witneſſes ſufficient of the ſenſe of Scripture, but quite reiect them as inſufficient to decide this controuerſie. Surely hereby it is euident, that the ſenſe which Proteſtants attribute to the Scripture, is not euidēt, and cōſequently no point of faith, ſeing ſo manie, ſo learned, ſo wittie, ſo holie, ſo diligent ſearchers of Scripture in ſo manie ages could not finde it. For as Andrews ſaieth in Tortura Torti: It is monſtrous, if among ſo manie eyes, eagles eyes, eyes dayly conuerſant in Scriptures (I adde eyes lightened by the holie Ghoſt) none perceaued this ſenſe grounded as they ſay must plainely—If it had beene moſt plainely grounded, I thinke ſome Father would haue ſeene through a lattiſe at leaſt he would not haue denied it, and taught the contrarie: Yea it followeth that the ſenſe in which Catholiks expound the Scripture: is manifeſt, ſeing ſo manie and ſo great Fathers haue vniformely deliuered it, nor deliuered it onely, but alſo condemned thoſe who followed that ſenſe which the Proteſtants embrace, as Heretiks, as shall appeare in the Chapter following. I adde alſo that Caſaubō in his epiſtle to Card Perron thus writeth: The King will willingly graunt, that now it is not lawfull No end of controuerſies without the Fathers. for anie to condemne thoſe things, which are euident to haue beene approued by the Fathers of the firſt ages by an vniforme conſent for good and lawfull. Agayne: If the teſtimonie and weight of the primitiue Church be taken away, the King willingly graunteth that amongst men the controuerſies of theſe times will neuer haue an end. Luther alſo in Defenſ. verb. Caenae. to. 7. If this frame of the world shall continew ſome ages, humane means wilbe agayne ſet downe, after the manner of the Fathers, for to take away diſtinctions, and laws and decrees wilbe made for to reconcile and to keepe agreement in religion.

In forme therefore thus I make my 23. argument Who not onely gaineſay the expreſſe words of holie Scripture in ſuch ſorte as hath beene ſet downe in the former booke, but alſo confeſſe, that in manie and gerat matters, they contrarie to the vniforme conſent of holie Fathers, of the Church and Councels, yea reiect and contemne it, they are alſo contrarie to the true ſenſe of holie Scripture. Proteſtants doe ſo. Therefore &c.

CHAPTER XXIV. THAT PROTESTANTS CONFESSE, that their doctrine was in ould time condemned for Hereſie.

THE 24. argument for to proue that Proteſtants cōtradict the right ſenſe of holie Scripture, shalbe becauſe it is ſo manifeſt that much of their doctrine was in ould time condemned of the Fathers for hereſie, as themſelues confeſſe it.

For touching the hereſies of Aërius, thus writeth Bucan. Inſtit. loc. 42. Did the Fathers rightly reckon the opinion Proteſt. confeſſe they hould the hereſies: Of Aerius. of Aërius who made no diſtinction betwene a Bishop and a Preist, amongst hereſies? No more ſurely, then theſe other his opinions. 1. That we ought not to make praiers or offerings for the dead. 2. That dead Saints are not to be praied vnto. 3. That there ought not to be anie ſet dayes of faſting. Beza reſponſ. ad Serau. c. 32. Surely Serauia, if thou doeſt thinke Aërius to haue beene an Heretike in thoſe three former points, all the reformed Churches this day are Heretiks to thee, as well as they are to the Papiſts. Vorſtius in Antibel. p. 201. Aërius was vniuſtly condemned of hereſie by the Fathers. Angelocrator. l. 7. de chronol. The opinions of Aërius a moſt learned man, that he reiected praier for dead and ſet faſt, and made a Preiſt equall to a Bishop, were to be borne withall, vnleſſe with Aërius he had impugned the Trinitie. Whitaker. Cont. 2. q. 5. cap. 7. Epiphanius indeed and Auſtin after him, put Aërius amongst Heretiks. But if he held nothing but theſe points, he was no Hereike. Cartwright Replica. 2. p. 618. If it muſt preuaile against me, that Aerius an Heretiks would make a Bishop and Prieſt all one, whome Epiphanius a Catholike thought to be diſtinct and different by the word of God, or that Auſtin reckoned it amongst the hereſies of of Aërius; by this way will riſe a great preiudice to the trueth, wherewith we beleiue, that we ought not to pray for the dead, nor offer ſacrifice for them. For Epiphanius to. 1. haer. 7. calleth this an hereſie of Aërius, and of the ſame iudgement is Auſtin. haer. 51. which notwithſtanding is orthodox doctrine. Gratianus Antiieſuita part. 1. pagin. 528. Surely if one take away thoſe things which Aërius is rather feigned then proued to haue held with the Ariās about the diuinitie of Chriſt, there wilbe nothing which may be iuſtly and deſeruedly reprehended in his doctrine. Daneus in libr. Auguſtini de Haereſ. capit. 53. The Aërians were quickly ſuppreſt, becauſe they were oppugned by the common conſent of all Bishops. 1. Aërius taught that a Preiſt did not differ from a Bishop in order and degree. Which doctrine I ſee not why it should be condemned. 2. That praiers are not to be made for the dead, becauſe they cānot be holpen by ſuch ſuffrages of ours. Why Chriſtians should not admit this, I ſee not. 3. That faſts are not be appointed vpon certaine ſet and ſolemne dayes yearely, as was the faſt of lent: for that all this kind of aniuerſarie faſts is ſuperstitious, and not to be vſed of Chriſtians. Which ſurely is true. 4. That there is no paſcha among Chriſtiās which is to be kept and celebrated. Nether ought this opinion of the Aërians to be condemned, becauſe it is true. Wherefore we haue not noted theſe men among Heretiks.

Touching the hereſies of Iouinian, thus writeth the Of Iouinian. ſame Daneus l. cit. c. 82. Iouinian did equall mariage with ſingle life, and virginitie, for that both of thē are of thēſelues indiff • ēt and no parte of Gods true worship, as alſo becauſe &c. This why it should be erroneus, nether Hierome proueth, nor any other of the Fathers hath proued. Whitaker loc. cit. Iouiniā thought that the choice of meates and faſting was not meritorious. I anſwere. Is the choice of meates, meritorious? Follie. To faſt for this end to merit eternall life, is to abuſe faſting. We willingly agree with Iouiniā in this point. Iouiniā taught that mariage was equall to virginitie in dignitie and merit. So alſo Paul, ſo Chriſt, ſo we all teach. Indeed Hierome inuetheth againſt Iouinian for this cauſe. Hū fre. ad Rat. 3. Camp. We grant, it is true which Sanders ſaieth of the Iouinians and Proteſtants: That faſting or abſtinence frō ſome certaine meats profiteth nothing.

Touching the hereſies of Vigilantius thus Humfre loc. cit. Of Vigilantius. He taught, that the reliks of Saints are not to be worshiped. And we alſo. Vigilantius taught, that there was no need to light torches, or to wachat the ſepulchres of Martyres. And why should not we teach the ſame, and much rather? He taught that Saints are not to be worshipped, nor that men ought ſuperſtitiouſly to runne to their monuments: We ſay the ſame. Vorſtius in Antibel. p. 162. The hereſies alledged of Bellarmin, are indeed no hereſies, for example, which he alledgeth out of Hierome touching Iouinian and Vigilantius, and out of Epiphanius touching Aerius and ſome few others. Angelocrator loc. cit. Vigilantius, a Frenchman, but a moſt learned Prelat in Spaine, denieth, that Saints are to be reuerenced, and would, haue riches to be preferred before pouertie: Againſt him Hierome wrote. Beza in 2. part. reſp. ad Acta Montisb. Hierome defending an ill cauſe, that is inuocation of Saints against Vigilantius &c. Luther in Poſtilla Exalt. Sanctae Crucis: Vigilantius wrote of this matter (worshippe of reliks) againſt whome Hierome earneſtly oppoſed himſelfe; which I wish had not beene done, and if Vigilantius his booke were extant as Hieroms is, I beleiue Vigilantius wrote more Christianely of this matter then Hierome. Serranus cont. Hayum part. 3. The diſcreet Reader ſeeth, that Hierome in that booke againſt Vigilantius paſſeth not onely the boundes of modeſtie, but alſo of trueth. Iuel in Defēſ. Apol. part. 1. c. 2. ſect. 3. Hierome reproueth Vigilantius that he reprehended wakes, inuocation of Saints, worshippe of relikes, lights, and other ſuch things. Of Origen.

As for the hereſies of Origen, thus writeth Spalatenſis l. 5. de Repub. c. 6. n. 44. Origen was shroudly taxed of Theophilus, becauſe he held that the Sacraments did not worke ſanctification by the worke (as I may ſo ſpeake) wrought, but onely by the worke of the worker, and that God doth not vſe materiall and inſenſible creatures to importe ſanctification to men. But Theophilus whilest he doth reproue this opinion or error of Origen, is all &c. And yet herein Proteſtants teach as Origen did, as appeareth by what hath beene related l. 1. cap. 10. artic. 7.

Finally Daneus Contr. 4. pag. 770. confeſſeth to agree Of Meſſaliās, and Nouatiās with the Meſſalians, that habituall concupiſcence in the iuſt is ſinne: and with Nouatians, that Chriſtians are not to be anointed.

Thou ſeeſt Reader that Proteſtants plainely confeſſe, that they defend the condemned doctrine, of Aërius, Iouinian, Vigilantius, Origen, Meſſalians, Nouatians: and that S. Auſtin, S. Hierome, S. Epiphanians, Fathers, Bishops with common conſent of all, did cōdemne their doctrines for hereſies, and them for heretiks. Whome I aduiſe to conſider well thoſe words of Beza written of a late Heretik epiſt. 81. He plainely and without diſsimulation houldeth and accounteth Origen, Aërius, Heluidius &c. not for Heretiks, but for maintainers of the trueth. Theſe are ſuch things, as that now it may onely ſeeme to be wanting to ſet the Diuel himſelfe in the throne of God and of trueth. And Epiſt. 16. What I Good counſell of Beza. admonished before, I admonish now in the Lord agayne and agayne, to wit, that at leſt they would conſider with themſelues from whome and to whome are they gone. For that I may imitate the words of S. Auſtin l. 2. cont. Iulian. c. 10. Hath long time ſo confounded the higheſt with the loweſt: Shall light ſo be termed darkeneſſe, and darkeneſſe light, that Aërius, Iouinian, Vigilantius, become to ſee, and Auſtin, Hierome, Epiphanius be blinde.

But in ſome I thus argue in the 24. place: whoſe doctrine in manie and greateſt points is oppoſite to the expreſſe words of Scripture, and beſides (as themſelues confeſſe) was condemned of the ancient Church and holie Fathers, for hereſie, that is repugnant to the true ſenſe of Scripture: But ſuch is the doctrine of Proteſtants. Therefore &c.

CHAPTER XXV. THAT PROTESTANTS THEMSELVES ſometimes confeſſe that diuers of their opinions be blaſphemous.

THE 25. argument wherewith we will proue that Proteſtants contradict the true ſenſe of the Scripture, shalbe, becauſe it is ſo manifeſt that diuers of their doctrines which in the former booke I shewed to be oppoſite to the expreſſe words of Scripture, are blaſphemous, as partely the very Authors of them, partely other learned Proteſtants being compelled by their conſcience and the euidencie of the matter doe confeſſe it.

Concerning God: Proteſtāts teach that he willeth ſinne, Blaſphemie: that God willeth ſinne. as hath beene ſeene l. 1. c. 2. art. 1. Which doctrine to be blaſphemous, thus confeſſeth Caluin in Reſp. ad Nebulon. p. 732. Was it a doubtfull blaſphemie, to make God the author of of ſinne, to will ſinne, to thruſt to ſinne? Beza de Praed. cōt. Caſtel. vol. 1. Theol. p. 372. Out of theſe things none of theſe blaſphemies followeth, to wit, ether that God is the author of ſinne, or is delighted with ſinne, or alſo willeth ſinne. Et p. 397. It cānot be ſaied without blaſphemie, that God willeth iniuſtice. Ib. l. Queſt. & Reſp. p. 681. What then? Shall we ſay, that God willeth iniquitie? God forbidde. For this is the moſt horrible blaſphemie of all. Zanchius l. 3. de Nat. Dei c. 4. We should ſurely ſay; that God is the cauſe and author of ſinne, if we should ſay that properly ſpeaking he willeth ſinne, or would haue ſinne to be done. Hutterus in Analyſi Cōf. Aug. p. 625. The blaſphemie of Sacramentaries is execrable; who are not ashamed to referre the moſt dolefull fall of our firſt parents and all that world of euils, which thereō inſued, not in regard of the punishmēt, but of the ſinne, vnto an abſolute and eternall decree of God, and to his effectuall working and immutable will Et p. ſeq. But let heauē be aſtonished & the elements amazed at ſuch moſtrous blaſphemies, whereof no pious man should ſuffer to heare the onely outward noiſe without shaking, much leſſe should aſſent vnto them in his heart. And Ioannes Andrae in Colloquio Montisb. p. 422. This aſſertion (that man fell by Gods will) is impious and horrible to heare, and ſo contrarie to the expreſſe and reuealed word of God.

They teach alſo that God willeth ſinne euen as it is That God willeth ſinne as ſinne. ſinne, as hath beene shewed lib. 1. cap. art. 2. But that this is blaſphemous, is acknowledged by Beza l. de Praedeſt. p. 410. in the words: If euer we had thought to ſpeake or write, that ſinnes as ſinnes proceed from the will of God, we would confeſſe, that we were worthie of all punishment. Lobechius alſo Diſp. 21. This principle of Diuinitie is firmely to be held and to be beleiued with all our heart: that God nether willeth nor commandeth ill deeds as they are ſuch, much leſſe worketh or helpeth them, or by an eternall decree doth destinate or ſecretly driue men to commit them.

They teach alſo, that God worketh ſinne and is the That God is cauſe of ſinne. cauſe and author of it as is to be ſeene l. 1. c. 2. art. 4. And yet Caluin. l. de Prouident. p. 742. aliâs 736. confeſſeth, that it is a monſtrous blaſphemie, that wickedneſſe is done not onely by the will of God, but alſo he being the author thereof. And pag. 471. Thou wranglest with me, as if I had ſaied, that ſinne is the iuſt worke of God, which in all my writings I euer more deteſt. Inſtruct. contr. Libertin. cap. 14. God muſt denie himſelfe and become a Deuil, if he did worke euill, which theſe men doe attribute vnto him. The like he hath libr. de Praedeſtin. pag. 711. And in Actor. 2. ver. 23. ſaieth: I denie that God is the author of euill, becauſe in this word an euill affection is inſinuated. Beza in Abſterſ. Calumn. Heshus. pag. 316. calleth it blaſphemie: That God worketh the wickedneſſe of the wicked. And de Praedeſt. cont. Caſtel. p. 401. God forbidde, that anie of ours should haue ſaied or written, as thou auoncheſt, that God ether giue, or permit, or worke an euill will, or anie wicked or filthie deſires: when as euen our thoughts doe altogether abhorre from theſe kinde of blasphemies. P. Mart. in locis claſſe 1. c. 14. If God wrought ſinne, he were a ſinner. Kemnice in locis part. 1. tit de Cauſa Peccati: All mens mynds and eares do ſo abhorre from that speach: God is the cauſe of ſinne, that therefore the Maniches did feigne an other God. Vrſin. in Miſcellan. p. 72. Thou ſaieſt, that theſe are the ſpeaches of manie of men: God doth effectually worke in the reprobate, that they ſinne: With all our heart we accurſe this ſpeach and doctrine. Whitaker ad Rat. 9. Campia. That is horrible, Campian, and not to be spoaken which thou ſaieſt; that anie should make God the Author of ſinne, He deſerueth that God should streigth with a thunder boult cast him into the bottomleſſe pit of hell. Pareus in Colleg. Theol. 1. diſput. 2. The Fathers iuſtly condemned that impious doctrine of the Maniches and Libertins, aſcribing the cauſe of fall and ſinne to God the Creator. And Diſput. 3. God was not, nor is not the efficient cauſe of ſinne, which heretofore was the blaſphemie of the Maniches, and now is of ſome Libertines.

They teach that God doth predeſtinate and ordaine That he predeſtinated men to ſinne. mē to ſinne, as is related l. 1. c. 2. art. 5. Which to be blaſphemous, confeſſeth Vorſtius in Amica Collat. ſect. 89. in the words: which doctrine (that God doth deſtinate men to ſinne) I ſcarce beleiue that thy ſelfe wilt thinke to be voide of blaſphemie if thou doeſt well conſider it. Hutter in Anal. Confeſ. Auguſt. c. 9. The troupe of Sacramentaries, Beza, Caluin, Renecher, doth not feare to write with a moſt execrable and moſt wonderfull blaſphemie, that ſome are fatally and abſolutely deſtinated not onely to their last end, to wit, damnation, but alſo to the 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 would not giue them faith or Chriſt, that he might ſurely bring thē to their end by infidelitie as by the fruite of this reprobation: they adde p. 128. We obiect, that this doctrine is of it ſelfe ſo abſurd and horrible, that to proue and refute the horror thereof, in a manner ſufficieth to point at it.

They teach alſo that God doth not dāne mē for ſinne, as That • e damneth not for ſinne. is shewed l. 1. c. 2. art. 23. And yet Vrſin. in Miſcel p. 87. giueth this cenſure hereof: This wicked and abſurde doctrine, wherewith he concludeth an other no leſſe falſe and abſurd: That as manie wicked as haue perished, doe perish, or shall perish, haue not perished, doe not perish or shall perish for their ſinnes, but for incredultie onely. Et Beza reſp ad Acta Monti • . part. 2. p. 215. ſaieth, that it is an intolerable ſpeach that men are not damned for ſinne.

Finally they teach that God by his omnipotencie cannot make that Chriſts bodie should be at once in diuers places, as is shewed l. 1. c. 2. art. 23. And yet liber Concordiae c. 5. ſaieth that it is horrible to ſay and heare, that God not with all his omnipotent power can make that Chriſts bodie at the ſame can be ſubſtantially preſent in more then one place. Thus much of their confeſſed blaſphemies againſt God.

Touching Chriſt, they teach that his humanitie is not Touching Chriſt. to be worshipped or praied vnto l. 1. c. 3. art. 3. Which to be blaſphemous thus teacheth Hutter in Anal. Confeſ. Aug. Blasphemie: that Chriſts humanitie is not to be worshipped. art. 3. Away with that impious ſpeach of Daneus blaſphemouſly ſaying, that Chriſts humane nature albeit perſonally vnited to the diuinitie, is not capable of whorshippe or religious hope. Gerlachius tom. 2. diſput. 5. Now all the faithfull ſee the execrable impietie of the Caluiniſts, who wickedly blaspheme that Chriſt as man is not to be worshipped or praied vnto. Reineccius tom. 2. Armat. c. 37. ſaieth that the impietie of Daneus who denieth that Chriſts humanitie is religiouſly to be worshipped is to be refuted, not by words, but by thunderbolts, yea with the fire of hell.

They teach that the humanitie of Chriſt, or Chriſt as That Chriſt as man cannot giue life, &c. man, hath no power to giue life to forgiue ſinnes, to worke miracles, as we related l. 1. cap. 3. art. 4. Which to be blaſphemous thus confeſſeth Hutter in Anal. cit. art. 3. For not (as the Sacramētaries do wickedly auouch) the of power miracles is to be attributed onely to the diuinitie of Christ, but to his whole perſon, and therefore to both natures together. Gerlachius to 2. diſp. 4. By theſe now may appeare the impietie of the Caluiniſts, for they take from Chriſt power to giue life. Muſculus in Hoſpin. part. 2. Hiſt. f. 323. There is none but a plaine wicked Atheiſt, who can denie, that to forgiue ſinnes is imparted to the finit humanitie of Chriſt.

They teach, that Chriſt was ouerwhelmed with deſperation, That he deſpaired. as is to be ſeene lib. 1. c. 3. art. 11. Which Zuinglius, in Hiſtor. paſſionis to. 4. cōfeſſeth to be blaſphemie ſaying. Away with their doctrine out of the Church of Chriſt, who affirme that Chriſt on the Croſſe deſpaired. And Tilenus in Syntagm. cap. 65. They are extremely infidels who deſpaire of their ſaluation.

They teach alſo that Chriſt died for the elect onely, as That he died but for the elect. hath beene shewed l. 1. c. 3. art. 18. Which Lobechius diſp. 6. confeſſeth to be blaſphemous in theſe words: The Caluiniſts affirme, that Chriſt died for the elect onely and not for all men. By which blaſphemie they not onely depriue Chriſt of a great parte of his honor, and the Church of comfort, but alſo cō tradict the holie Ghoſt to his face. The like hath Adamus Franciſci. loco 17. and Gerlachius diſput. 16. And Grauerus in Abſurdis Caluin. c. 5. ſect. 58. ſaieth that it is an abſurd and blaſphemous Caluiniſticall doctrine. Iames Andreae in Beza reſp. ad acta Montisb. p. 212. ſaieth. It is a horrible doctrine of Beza, that Christ died not for the ſinnes of the whole world.

Finally they teach, that the blood of Chriſt wherewith That his blood is corrupted. he redeemed vs, is corrupted, and now no more in being: as appeareth l. 1. c. 3. art. 20. of which doctrine thus pronounceth Schluſſelburg. lib. 1. Theol. Caluin. art. 2. This is a horrible blaſphemie, dishonorable to the blood of the Sonne of God with which we were redeemed.

Touching the Scripture, they teach that it can be vnderſtood Touching Scripture. without the holie Ghoſt: as is proued l. 1. c. 5. art. 2. Which doctrine thus condemneth Caſaubon. Exercit. 16. cont. Baron. ſect. 215. Baronius addeth, that the Scriptures cannot be vnderſtood without the helpe of God, and this he confirmeth with ſome teſtimonies of the Fathers, as if there were anie Christian who denieth this or calleth it in doubt.

Concerning the Church they teach that she doth not Touching the Church. perpetually continew, as is proued l. 1. cap. 8. art. 4. Which Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 3. c. 2. confeſſeth to be baſphemous in theſe words: Who denieth or doubteth that the Church is founded for euer and is to continew for euer, he is no Chriſtian.

Concerning Baptiſme: they teach that when water Touching Baptiſme. wanteth it may be miniſtred in anie other liquor, as is to be ſeene l. 1. cap. 10. art. 1. Which as blaſphemous thus condemneth Hutter in Anal. Confeſſ. p. 466. Beza is blaſphemous, who affirmeth that he doth not against the will and pleaſure of Christ, who ether in adminiſtring baptiſme, vſeth milke or anie other liquor whatſoeuer, or in theſe countries where there is no vſe of wine, or if be nature he abhorre wine, doth in the Lords ſupper vſe anie other kinde of drinke. Et p. 490. The licēce which Beza of his owne head taketh, was ſacrilegious, ſaying: If there want water, and yet the baptiſme of ſome cannot be differred with edification nor ought not, ſurely I would as well baptize with anie other liquor as with water. The like iudgement hereof giueth Grauer in Abſurdis Caluin. c. 4. ſec. 6.

They teach that Baptiſme doth not giue grace, and that the childrē of the faithfull are in the grace of God before they be baptized, l. 1. c. 10. art. 79. Which doctrine thus cenſureth Hutter in Anal cit. art. 13. It is the madneſſe of the Sacramentarians, who will haue that the grace of regeneratiō is not giuen by the vſe of Sacramēts but that the children of the faithfull and elect haue it before. The like ſaieth. Grau. l cit. ſect. 10.

Touching the holie Euchariſt: they ſay that it is not the Touching the Euchariſt. bodie and blood of Chriſt. lib. 1. c. 11. art. 1. Which to be blaſphemie thus iudgeth Hutter in Anal. cit. pag. 536. It is extreme impudencie, deſperate bouldneſſe, horrible blaſpemie, to oppoſe a contradictorte propoſition to the words of Chriſts institution. For Chriſt ſaieth: This which I giue you to eate, is my bodie. The Sacramentaries denie it, and ſay: That which thou giuest vs to eate, is not thy bodie. The like hath Muſculus art. cit.

They teach that Chriſt is not in the Supper. l. 1. c. 11. art. 1. And neuertheleſſe thus writeth. Beza in Hoſpin. part. 2. Hiſtor. fol. 301. Manie thinke, that we would exclude Chriſt from the Supper, which is plainely impious. We are ſo farre from ſaying, that Christ Ieſus is abſent from the Supper, that aboue all men we moſt repugne this blaſphemie.

Concerning faith they teach that it is not ſimply neceſſarie to ſaluation. l. 1. c. 13. art. 15. Which is blaſphemous Touching Faith. in the iudgement of Luther in Geneſ. 47. tom. 6. Zuinglius (ſaieth he) wrote of late that Numa Pompilius, Hercules, Scipio, Hector, do enioy euerlaſting happines in heauen with Peter and other Saints. Which is nothing els then plainely to confeſſe that they thinke there is no faith no Chriſtianitie. The like ſaieth Beza l. de puniend. Haeret.

Touching good works they denie that it is neceſſarie Touching good workes. they should be preſent when we are iuſtified. l. 1. c. 14 art. 12. Of which doctrine thus pronounce the Electorall Miniſters in Colloq. Aldel. p. 343. It is horrible dishonor to God and a barbarous doctrine, to profeſſe, that in the very inſtant and act of iuſtification, not onely merit, but alſo neceſsitie of the preſence of good works is excluded.

They ſay that all the good works of iuſt men are ſinnes and mere iniquities lib. 1. cap. 14. art. 2. Of which doctrine Zuinglius giue • h this verdict in Expoſit. Fidei. to. 2. Some of ours haue ſaied paradox like, that euerie worke of ours is abhomination.

They ſay alſo that we may not doe good for reward. l. 1. c. 14. art. 19. Of which doctrine Remonſtrantes in Collat. Hagae. p. 95 giue this cenſure: Who denie that the faithfull may doe good workes in regard of reward due to good works, he peruerteth and denieth the nature of faith, of Gods law, of eternall life and death.

Touching ſinne: they teach that in the faithfull it doth Touching ſinne. not expell grace. l. 1. c. 16. art. 6. Of which Hutter thus writeth: They plainely make the Apoſtle a liar, who with open mouth pronounceth that euerie fornicator, vncleane, and couetous man is excluded out of the kingdome of heauen: and alſo Chriſt our Sauiour, who pronounceth this ſentence againſt thoſe that denie him: whoſoeuer shall denie me &c.

They teach that men shall not be damned for their ſinfull works, but onely for incredulitie. l 1. c. 16. art. 10. And yet Beza in 2. part. Reſp. ad Acta Montisb. pag. 218. after he had recited theſe poſitions of Iames Andrews: Onely incredulitie damneth men: Men are not damned, becauſe they haue ſinned: addeth: Durſt euer man before this ſo impudently bring into Gods Church, ſo falſe, ſo monſtrous, ſo abhominable doctrine? Et p. 215. Surely your ſpeach ſeemed into lerable to vs: that men are not damned for ſinne. The like hath Vrſin. in Miſcellan. p. 84.

Touching Iuſtification: they teach that a iuſtified man Touching Iuſication. cannot leeſe grace by any ſinne that he committeth: lib. 1. c. 17. art. 12. Which doctrine is thus cenſured by Wittembergenſes in Schluſſelb. lib. 1. Theol. art. 7. It is a great madneſſe of the Anabaptiſtes and other frantike men, who ſay that the iuſtified cannot fall, or at leaſt not leeſe the holie Ghoſt, and become againe guiltie of Gods wrath, albeit they breake Gods commandments against their conſcience. Hutter in Anal. cit. p. 562. It is a blasphemous speach of Zanchius, ſaying that forgiueneſſe of ſinnes once obtained is not made voyde by ſinnes folowing, and that the holie Ghoſt once giuen to the iuſtified remaineth with him for euer: And of Beza writing that Peter denying Chriſt, and Dauid falling into adulterie, did not leeſe the holie Goſt. Adamus Franciſci. loc. 6. The Caluiniſts with a horrible madneſſe imagin that the regenerate cānot fall into mortall ſinne, and that if they fall, notwithſtanding they retaine Gods grace, the holie Ghoſt, and faith. Et Confeſſ. Auguſt. c. 11. condemneth the Anabaptiſtes: who denie that they who are once iuſtified can againe leeſe the holie Ghoſt.

They teach that a Sinner doth not cooperate to his conuerſeſion, but that he is iuſtified doing nothing as a logge, or els rebelling. lib. 1. c. 17. art. 15. Which doctrine thus the Wittembergians condemne in Schluſſelb. to. 5. Catal. Haer. With all our hearts we abhor from that doctrine dishonorable to God and full of Blaſphemies againſt the Sonne of God: A man is conuerted not onely as a logge, but alſo reſiſting, and we ſay that by ſuch ſpeach not onely ſecuritie, and profane contempt of God, but alſo horrible ſinnes of men are bolſtered.

Of free will, they teach that man hath no freedome in good or euill deeds. l. 1. c. 21. art. 2. Which doctrine Melancthon lib. de Cauſa Peccati to. 2. thus condemneth: We doe not applaude the madneſſe of the Stoickes or Maniches, who are dishonorable to God and pernitious to mans life, feigning that men do neceſſarily commit ſinne.

Finally Iames Andrews in Colloq. Montisb. condemned manie doctrines of Beza as blaſphemous, as pag. 381. That the elect though they ſinne grieuouſly doe retaine the holie Ghoſt. pag. 393. That onely the elect infants are adopted in baptiſme. p. 447. That Chriſt died not for the ſinnes of the whole world. p. 422. That God will haue ſome to perish. Et p. 423. That God will not haue mercie on ſome, and that he created ſome to this end to shew his wrath in them. Vorſtius alſo in Paraſceue oftentimes condemneth Piſcators doctrine of blaphemie: And ſcarce is there anie Proteſtant that writeth againſt an other who doth not accuſe him of blaſphemie.

Wherefore let this be my 25. argument. Whoſe ſundrie doctrines are not onely ſo oppoſite to the expreſſe words of Scripture as hath beene shewed in the firſt booke, but alſo ſo blaſphemous as ſometimes the very Authors of them, partely other learned Proteſtants their brethren do confeſſe it, they are oppoſite to the true meaning of holie Scripture But manie doctrines of the Proteſtants are ſuch. Therefore &c.

CHAPTER XXVI. THAT PROTESTANTS DOE FRVSſtrate and make voide the ends of the coming and paſsion of Chriſt.

MY 26. argument, wherewith I will proue that Proteſtāts cōtradict the true ſenſe of holie Scripture shalbe, becauſe manie of their poſitions doe fruſtrate and make voide the coming and paſſion of Chriſt.

For one end of the coming and paſſion of Chriſt was Proteſt. ſay Chriſt tooke, not away ſinne. to take away and exhauſt our ſinnes: 1. Ioan. 3. v. 5. And you know, that he appeared to take away our ſinnes. Hebr. 9. v. 28. Chriſt was offered once to exhauſt the ſinnes of manie. But Proteſtants (as we shewed l. 1. c. 17. art. 5.) ſay, that Chriſt did not take away or exhauſt our ſinnes but leaueth thē in vs.

An other end of his coming and paſſion was to deſtroie and diſſolue ſinne Hebr. 6. v. 6. this, that our ould man is Nor deſtroied ſinne. crucified with him, that the bodie of ſinne may be deſtroied And cap. 9. ver. 26. But now once in the conſummation of the worlds, to the destruction of ſinnes, he hath appeared by his owne hoſte. And 1. Ioan. 3. verſ. 8. For this appeared the Sonne of God, that he might diſſolue the works of the Diuel. But Proteſtants ſay that ſinne is not deſtroied in the regenerate, but that it abideth and liueth in them, as is to be ſeene l. 1. c. 17. art. 5.

A third end was to cleanſe vs from ſinne. Tit. 2. v. 14. Nor cleanſed ſinne. Who gaue himſelfe for vs, that he might redeeme vs from all iniquities and might cleanſe to himſelfe a people acceptable. Et 1. Ioan. 1. v. 7. And the blood of Ieſus Chriſt his Sonne cleanſeth vs from all ſinne. But Proteſtants ſay that the regenerate are not cleanſed from ſinne, but remaine vncleane, impure, filthie, as is to be ſeene l. 1. c. 17. art 4.

A fourth end was that we might be truely ſanctified, Nor truely ſanctified vs. and become holie and immaculate in the ſight of God. Ioan. 17. v. 19. And for them I do ſanctifie my ſelfe, that they alſo may be ſanctified in trueth. Epheſ. 1. v. 4. As he choſe vs in him before the conſtitution of the world that we should be holie and immaculate in his ſight in charitie. But Proteſtants denie that we are truely ſanctified, or holie and immaculate in the ſight of God. See li. 1. c. 17. art. 3.

A fift end was that we should follow or doe good Nor made vs to follow good workes. works Tit. 2. v. 14. That he might cleanſe to himſelfe a people acceptable, a purſuer of good works. But Proteſtants denie that our workes are truely good, and ſay that they are mere ſinnes. See l. 1. c. 14. art. 2.

A ſixt end was that we should liue iuſtly and piouſly in Nor mad vs liue in holineſſe before God. holineſſe and iuſtice before God Luc. 1. v. 74. That without feare being deliuered from the hand of our enemies we may ſerue him in holineſſe and iuſtice before him all our dayes. Tit. 2. v. 12. For the grace of God our Sauiour hath appeared to all men, inſtructing vs that denying impietie and wordly deſires, we liue ſoberly and iuſtly and godly in this world. But Proteſtants denie that the workes or liues of the iuſt are pious, holie, or iuſt before God. See lib. 1. cap. 14. art. 5. A ſeuenth end of Nor made vs to fulfill the law. Chriſts coming was, that the iuſtification of the law might be fulfilled in vs. Rom. 8. v. 3. God ſending his Sonne in the ſimilitude of the flesh of ſinne, euen of ſinne damned ſinne in the flesh, that the iuſtification of the law might be fulfilled in vs. But Proteſtants ſay that the law cannot be fulfilled in vs, but onely in Chriſt. See lib. 1. c. 19. art. 1.

An eight end was to preach a day of retribution Luc. 4. v. 19. To Euangelize vnto the pore he ſent me to preach the acceptable yeare of our Lord and the day of retribution. But Proteſtants denie that there is anie day of reward or retribution, but onely of mere bountie and liberalitie. See l. 1. c 18 art. 1. To theſe I adde, that thus writeth Perkins in Gal. 1. v. 3. It is the fault of our age; that all profeſſe Chriſt, yet manie admit not Chriſt but their owne deuiſes, to wit, a Chriſt who muſt be a Sauiour to deliuer them from hell, but not a Lord to giue them commandements, this they cannot ſuffer. But Proteſtants as we shewed l. 1. c. art. 7. denie Chriſt to be a lawgiuer or Lord to giue commandements, according to Perkins admit not Chriſt, but their owne deuiſes.

Wherefore thus I make my 26. argument. Whoſe doctrine Nor preached reward. not onely in ſo manie and ſo great points is againſt the expreſſe words of God and in their vſuall ſenſe, but alſo doth make voide and fruſtrate ſo manie ends of the coming and paſſion of Chriſt; it doth contradict the true ſenſe of Scripture. Such is the Proteſtants doctrine. Therefore. &c.

CHAPTER XXVII. THAT PROTESTANTS TAKE AWAY encouragements to vertue, yea all vertue: and in ſteed of them put allurements to vice and remoue the impediments thereof.

MY 27. argument, that Proteſtants contradict the true meaning of holie Scripture shalbe, becauſe they take away the encouragements to vertue, yea all vertue out of the world, and in place of them put allurements to vice and remoue the impediments thereof.

They take away encouragements to vertue: becauſe as Proteſt. take away encouragements to vertue. we shewed l. 1. c. 2. art. 13. they teach, that God careth not for good workes. art. 14. that he is not honored with thē. art. 16. that he is not appeaſed with them: And c. 14. Art. 6. that there is no dignitie or worth in them. Art. 7. that there is no reward promiſed to them. Art. 10. that all good workes are equall before God. Art. 12. and 13. that they are not neceſſarie to iuſtification or ſaluation. Art. 15. that they are not cauſe of ſaluation. Art. 16. Not ſo much as a teſtimonie of iuſtification or ſaluation. Art. 18. that we ought not to doe them. Cap. 17. artic. 15. That a ſinner doth not cooperate to his iuſtification. Cap. 18. art. 1. That ſaluation is no reward or retribution. Art. 2. No crowne of iuſtice. Art. 3. That it is of faith onely. And cap. 21. art. 1. That our will is not free in morall works. Art. 3. That it doth not cooperate with the grace of God to good works. But who can denie, but that Gods fauour towards good works, their worth and reward, their efficacie and neceſſitie to iuſtification and ſaluation, mans freedome and cooperation to acts of vertue and ſaluatiō, be great ſpurres and encouragements to vertue. Which notwithſtanding all, and others ſuch like, Proteſtants take away.

They take alſo away all vertue. For firſt they denie to fulfill the law. diuers particular vertues, as faith, the roote of all vertue, which they ſay is vitious and vnworthie the name of vertue l. 1. c. 13. art. 12. They take away the higheſt degree of Chaſtitie, to wit, virginitie, c. 15. art. 2. and the perfecteſt part of Temperancie, to wit, Faſting, ib. art. 5. and all choice of meates artic. 7. They takeaway alſo praier for all men art. 8. Vows art. 14. and Eremiticall life. art. 15. Beſides, they takeaway all inherent iuſtice. c. 17. art. 8. and denie, that the iuſtified are truely iuſt. art. 3. or cleane art. 4. but retaine ſinne in them art. 5. Finally they take away all vertue. For they teach, that all the good works of ſinners or of good men are ſinnes, yea mere ſinnes c. 14. art. 1. and 2. that they are filth, dūgge, and ſtinke in the face of God art. 3. But if all If all good workes be ſinne there can be no vertue. good works be ſinnes, and mere ſinnes, ſurely there is no vertue at all. For (as Whitaker ſaieth. l. 2. de Pec. orig. c. 14.) Tell vs, how ſinnes can be good workes. Which is much more true, if they be mere ſinnes.

They ſet alſo allurements to ſinne. For as is shewed l. Proteſt. ſet allurements to ſinne. 1. c. 2. art. 1. they teach, that God willeth ſinne. art. 2. That ſinne pleaſeth God. art. 4. That God worketh ſinne. art. 5. That God predeſtinateth to ſinne. artic. 6. That he commandeth to ſinne. art. 7. That he tempeth to ſinne. art. 8. That he neceſſitateth to ſinne. art. 10. That he iuſtifieth the wicked remaining wicked. artic. 17. That he will not haue his commandements kept. And cap. 3. artic. 11. That Chriſt was truely a ſinner. c 4. art. 1. That the Angels in heauen do ſinne. c. 13. art. 17. That faith being alone doth iuſtifie. art. 23. That it can neuer be loſt. c. 16. artic. 4. That ſinne muſt not be ouercomen of vs. art. 13. That the Elect doe not ſinne. art. 16. That all vſurie is not ſinne. Et c. 19. art. 1. That the law of God is not poſſible. art. 2. That neuer anie kept it. art. 3. That none euer loued God with all his heart. But what man in his witts can denie, that theſe Poſitions: Sinne pleaſeth God: God willeth, doeth, commandeth ſinne: He predeſtinateth, neceſsitateth, tempteth to ſinne: He will not haue his commandements kept: Chriſt and the Angels in heauen doe ſinne: The wicked is iuſtified remayning wicked, faith being alone doth iuſtifie, it can neuer be loſt, ſinne muſt not be ouercomen of the faithfull, they themſelues neuer ſinne, and ſuch like be great enticements to ſinne?

They take away alſo the obſtacles or impediments They remoue impediments of ſinne. of ſinne, in teaching (as we haue shewed l. 1. c. 2. art. 3.) That God hateth not ſinne. art. 9. That God hateth not the faithfull when they worke wickedneſſe. art. 11. That he is not angrie with the faithfull whileſt they ſinne. art. 12. That he neuer punisheth for anie ſinne committed. art. 23. That he damneth not men for ſinne. And c. 3. art. 7. That Chriſt gaue no laws. art. 8. That he is no iudge. c. 5. art. 6. That the Ghoſpell promiſeth ſaluation without anie condition of workes. art. 5. That it doth not reproue ſinne. c. 10. art. 8. That in baptiſme al ſinnes, paſt, preſent, and to come, are forgiuen. c. 16. art. 1. That ſinnes are not imputed to the faithfull art. 2. That they are not mortall to them. art. 5. That ſeruing the flesh we may ſerue God. art. 6. That no ſinnes caſt of grace. art. 7. That ſinnes can ſtand with grace. artic. 9. That to abſtaine from ſinnes, is not neceſſarie to ſaluation. artic. 10. That ſinne is not the cauſe of damnation. artic. 11. That we muſt not giue account of ſinnes. cap. 17. artic. 12. That iuſtification is neuer loſt. artic. 13. That the iuſtified need not feare to fall. artic. 16. That he is to ſuffer no punishment at all. c. 18. art. 4. That the faithfull are not to be iudged. art. 4. That Hell is no place art. 7. That hell fire is no true fire. And cap. 19. art. 7. That the law is abrogated from the faithfull But it is moſt euident, that taking away Gods wrath, hatred, and punishment of ſinnes and ſinners, taking away Chriſts lawgiuing and iudgement: taking from men all feare of iudgement damnation, wrath, and hatred of God, and of loſſe of iuſtice and ſaluation: and putting ſecuritie that men euen committing heynous ſinnes, are certaine of Gods loue, of grace, and eternall ſaluation, and free from all punishment whatſoeuer, all impediments of ſinne on Gods parte are taken away, and if anie beleiuing this doctrine, do forbeare ſinne, it proceedeth not but from a naturall engrafted horror of ſinne, or els from feare or or shame of men.

Yea ſo euident it is, that diuers poſitions of Proteſtants Proteſt. confeſſe, that ſome of their opinions allure to ſinne. are allurements to ſinne, as ſome Proteſtants confeſſe it. For thus write the Wittembergians cited before cap. 25. That to denie a man to cooperate to his conuerſion, doth ſettle horrible wickedneſſe. Which yet Proteſtants denie lib. 1. cap. 17. artic. 15. Remonſtrantes apud Hom. in Specim. Cont. Belg. pag. 126. ſay: The doctrine of their perſeuerance in faith who haue once beleiued, is of it nature and condition ſufficiet to engender a ſecuritie in men, for to ſerue them as a cushion in midſt of their ſinnes. Againe: Of it ſelfe it is hurtfull to true pietie and good manners. And yet Proteſtants teach thus, libr. 1. cap. 13. art. 23. Schluſſelburg. tom. 7. Catal. writeth thus: To pardon ſinnes to come, which one doth ſtudie to commit, is ſurely to graunt an Epicurean licence to ſinne: And yet this is Proteſtants doctrine l. 1. cap. 10. art. 8. Melancthon in Cocleus in art. 6. Confeſſ. Auguſt. thus ſpeaketh: Now it is vſuall to speake of faith, and faith cannot be vnderſtood, vnleſſe pennance be preached: Surely they poure new wine into ould veſſels, who preach faith without pennance, without doctrine of the feare of God, without the doctrine of the law, accustome the people to a carnall kind of ſecuritie. That ſecuritie is worſe, then all the errors vnder Poperie were. And yet Proteſtants ſay, that the Ghoſpell doth not reproue ſinne, doth not preach pennance, promiſeth ſaluation vpon condition of faith onely, as is shewed l. 1. c. 5. art. 5. 6. Hutter in Anal. Cōfeſſ Auguſt. p. 571. writeth that: The error of the Anabaptiſts, who denie that men once iuſtified can leeſe the holie Ghost, doth giue full licence to commit all kind of villanie vnder the abſolute perſeuerance of thoſe that are once iuſtified. And yet this is the doctrine of Proteſtants l. 1. c. 17. art. 12. other Proteſtants in Zanchius de Perſeuer. to. 7. col. 159. ſay: that the opinion which teacheth, that the faithfull cannot fall from grace, taketh away pennance, looſeth the reines to concupiſcence, maketh a man ſecure that he dare ſinne euen againſt his conſcience. And Liber Concord. Luther. c. de bonis oper. That falſe and Epicurean opinion is sharpely to be reproued, wherewith ſome feigne that faith and grace once receaued or ſaluation cannot be loſt by anie ſinne or wickedneſſe whatſoeuer, albeit it be moſt freely committed. Alſo other Proteſtants as Gualterus Praefat. Epiſt. Rom. reporteth, when they thinke ſeriouſly of pietie, doe feare, that we deuiſe to eaſie a way to ſaluation, and leaſt this doctrine breed a licēce to ſinne, and opē, a gappe for men to dare to doe any thing. Moreouer diuers of them confeſſe, that men take occaſion to ſinne by their doctrine, as Luther tom. 5. in Gal. 6. Iames Andrews Conc. 4. in Luc. 21. Perkins de Serm. Dom. to. 2. and in Gal. 5. ver. 13. and others in Eraſmus in Epiſt. ad Fratres. Finally Luther in Poſtilla domeſt. Dom. 1. Aduentus ſaieth. Oh ſorrow: The world dayly becometh worſe by The world worſe by Luthers doctrine this doctrine: and Caſtalio in Caluin de Prouident. Theſe are the things (Caluin) which thy aduerſaries reporte of thy doctrine, and warne men to iudge of this doctrine by the fruits thereof. For they ſay that thou and thy diſciples carrie manie fruits of thy God, that moſt of you are contentious, reuengefull, myndfull of wrong; and endowed with ſuch vices as thy God doth ſuggeſt.

Where thus I argue in the 27. place. Whoſe doctrine is not onely ſo oppoſite to the expreſſe words of Scripture as was ſeene in the firſt booke, but alſo taketh away encouragements to vertue, yea all vertue out of the world, and remoueth impediments of ſinne, and giueth allurements theertoe; that is oppoſite to the true ſenſe of holie Scripture. But ſuch is the doctrine of Proteſtants. Therefore &c.

CHAPTER XXVIII. THAT PROTESTANTS HAVE NO infallible interpretation of Scripture.

THE 28. Argument to proue that Proteſtants muſt needs contradict the true ſenſe of holie Scripture, is becauſe they haue no ſure and infallible means to attaine to the true meaning thereof. But before we proue that they haue no infallible mean to come to the right ſenſe of Scripture, we muſt proue that Scripture (at leſt in ſome points of faith) needeth ſome means to interpret or expound it, to wit, ether becauſe no where it deliuereth ſome points of faith ſo clearely, that the onely words thereof ſufffice to captiuate the vnderſtanding: or becauſe, though ſome where it deliuer clearly enough ſome points of faith, yet other where it ſeemeth ſo to teach the contrarie, as without ſome infallible interpreter it would ſeeme vncertaine whether of the twoe it did teach.

That therefore Scripture doth not of it ſelfe teach That Scripture needeth an Interpreter. clearely all points of faith, ſo as it need no interpreter for that purpoſe, I proue firſt out of the Scripture it ſelfe. For the holie Eunuch did read the Scripture ſpeaking of the paſſion of Chriſt Actor. 8. and yet being asked of Philip whether he vnderſtood what he read, anſwered: And how can I, if none shall shew me. You ſee, that the Scripture did not clearely foretell the paſſion of Chriſt, as that a pious man by the onely words thereof without an interpreter could vnderſtand the meaning thereof. And Luk. vlt. v. 27. And beginning from Moyſes and all the Prophets, he did interprete vnto them in all the Scriptures the things that were concerning him. Et v. 45. Then he opened their vnderſtanding, that they might vnderſtand the Scriptures. But if Chriſts diſciples did not vnderſtand the Scriptures which ſpoake of him, and the Apoſtles had need that Chriſt should open their vnderſtanding for to vnderſtād the Scriptures, it is euident that the Scriptures by themſelues doe not ſo plainely teach all matters of faith, as they need no interpretation for to be rightly vnderſtood of the faithfull. Beſides 2. Pet. vlt. it is ſaied, that in S. Pauls epiſtles there are ſome things hard to be vnderſtood. And that theſe hard things do containe points of faith, is cleare; both becauſe without cauſe they should be limited to other things, as alſo becauſe it is added, that the learned and vnſtable doe depraue theſe hard things to their owne deſtruction: but ſuch things are eſpecially matters of faith. Moreouer, if the Scripture did ſo clearely teach all points of faith, that for them it needed no interpreter, it would follow, that the guift of interpretation had beene ſuperfluouſly giuen to the Church for to expound Scripture in matters belonging to faith.

Secondly I proue this out of the Fathers: but for breuities ſake I will content my ſelfe with one teſtimonie of S. Auſtin: He lib. de Vtil. cred c 7. to one that ſaied: When I read the Scriptures, by my ſelfe I vnderstood them: thus anſwereth: Is it ſo? Without ſome skill in poetrie thou dareſt not read Terentian Maurus. Aſper, Cornutus, Donatus, and manie more are neceſſarie for to vnderſtand anie Poet, and thou falleſt vpon thoſe bookes without a guide, and dareſt giue thy opinion of them without a teacher. Loe how plainely he ſaieth, that we can not vnderſtand the Scriptures by our ſelues, and by how familiar an example he proueth it.

Thirdly I proue it by the verie cōfeſſion of Proteſtāts. For Proteſt. confeſſe that Scripture alone ſufficeth not. thus writeth Whitaker Cōt. 1. q. 4. c. 1. When Bellarmin maketh this to be the ſtate of the queſtiō; Whether the the Scripture by it ſelfe be ſo cleare, as without anie interpretatiō it ſufficeth of it ſelfe to determine and decide all controuerſies of faith, he fighteth without an aduerſarie, for ſurely in this point we are not againſt him. Agayne: They ſay, that we thinke (but falſely) that all things in Scripture, are plaine, and that they without anie interpretation are ſufficient to determine all controuerſies. without Behould how plainely he denieth, that Proteſtants think, that Scripture of it ſelfe without anie interpretatiō is ſufficiēt to end all controuerſies of faith. And the like hath Iunius l. 3. de verb. Dei c. 3. When he graunteth, that Scripture needeth an interpreter. Kemnice 1. part. Exa. p. 104. It hath need of the guift and helpe of interpretatiō. And the Magdeburgiās Cēt. 1. l. 2. c. 4. The Apoſtles thought, that the Scripture cānot be vnderſtood without the holie Ghoſt and an interpreter: and the ſame meā all other Proteſtāts, who admit that the Scripture is obſcure, or that the guift of interpretatiō is needfull for the expoſitiō thereof. For doubtles they meane that, as well of ſuch places of Scripture wherein points of faith are deliuered, as of others: & this Caluin 4. Inſt. c 17. §. 25. clearely enough inſinuateth, where, whē Catholiks obiected, that they had the word of God wherein he affirmeth that the Euchariſt is his bodie, he anſwereth: Indeed, if they may banish the guift of Interpretatiō out of the Church. Wherefore he thinketh, that there is in the Church the guift of Interpretation euen for to expound Scriptures touching points of faith, ſuch as the Euchariſt is. Furthermore Pleſſie. l. 3. de Eccl. c. 3. writeth, that the cōtrouerſie of Schiſme cānot be properly decided by the Scripture, becauſe it is rather a queſtion of fact, then doctrine. If therefore Scripture by it ſelfe can determine nether the queſtiō of Schiſme, nor yet all controuerſies of faith, it is manifeſt, that the interpretation of ſome is neceſſarie, and that alſo infallible, becauſe fallible interpretatiō is not ſufficiēt to put vs out of doubt. And ſurely Proteſtants muſt needs teach, that Scripture by it ſelfe alone, is not ſufficient to decide all controuerſies of faith, both becauſe els it had decided all controuerſies amongſt themſelues, or betwene anie that are not obſtinate; as alſo becauſe ſcarce in anie controuerſies that are betwixt vs and them, Scripture doth ſo much as in shew directly and immediatly giue ſentence for them, but they haue need to conferre places, and adioyne thereto ſome humane principle, and make an argument, for to draw in what manner ſoeuer their doctrine out of Scripture: which conference of places, adiunction of a humane principle, and diſcourſe, ſeing it is not made by the Scripture, but by Proteſtants by their guift of Interpretatation, they muſt needs graunt, that the Scripture hath need of Interpretation for to determine all the controuerſies that are betwixt vs and them. And for this cauſe, albeit Whē Proteſt. will haue expreſſe Scripture, when conſequence thereof. when they put vs to the proofe, they vſe to crie, Nothing is to be beleiued which is not expreſſely in Scripture; yet when they are to proue, they will haue it ſuffice, that it may be gathered out of Scripture by good cōſequence. For ſo ſay the Lutherans in Colloq. Ratisbon. Seſſ 3. & 13. Kemnice in 1. part. Exam. p. 320. Beza in Reſp. ad Acta Mō tisb. part. 2 p. 46. & l. de Notis Eccleſ. Daneus Cont. 1. p. 86. Pareus l. 1. de Iuſtif. c. 16. Piſcator de Iuſtif. l. 1. c. 5. Riuet. in Contr. tract. 1. ſect. 18. and others commonly. And ſeing this Inference by good conſequence is not made by the Scripture, but by themſelues, by their Interpretation, they muſt needs ſay, that beſides the Scripture there is neceſſarie ſome Interpreter for to know all points of faith.

Now that Proteſtants haue no infallible interpretation of Scripture, is manifeſt: Firſt, becauſe they confeſſe, that Proteſt. haue no infallible interpreter. that they haue no infallible Interpreter of Scripture. Pareus in Colleg. Theol 2. diſp. 1. The word of God cannot abide anie infallible Interpreter beſides God himſelfe who inſpired the Scripture. Secondly, becauſe they denie that the whole Senate of Fathers, the Catholik Church or generall Councels haue the guift of infallible interpretation in all points of faith, and therefore ridiculouſly should they arrogate this guift to themſelues. And ſeing they teach, that all Paſtors, together, and all the true Church (whichſoeuer it is) may erre in matters of faith, they cannot chalenge to their Paſtors this infallible guift. Thirdly, for if they doe infallibly interprete the Scripture in all points of faith, ether they doe it by means, or without means. Not without means: for ſuch interpretation were Propheticall by immediate reuelation from God, or rather Enthuſiaſticall by illuſion from the Diuel. Whereupon ſaieth Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 4. c. 5. If the holie Ghoſt teach the Church to interprete theſe places of Scripture without means, Proteſt, require means to interprete. this is Enthuſiaſticall, and Anabaptiſticall, and extraordinarie. For the Spirit teacheth now onely by meanes, nether muſt we now looke for new inſpirations or reuelations. Et Cōt. 1. q. 5. c. 9. Now must we treate of the meās to finde the ſenſe of Scripture. For ſith the Scripture hath not a liuely voice for vs to heare, we muſt vſe ſome means for to finde out which is the ſenſe and meaning of the Scripture. Agayne: The Church hath alwaies vſed ſome means for to expound the Scripture. But if they expound the Scripture by means, then (according to their owne opinion) if their means be fallible, their interpretation alſo muſt be fallible. For thus Whitaker c. 3. cit. If by means, then ſuch as the means be, ſuch muſt needs the interpretation be. But the means, which Proteſtants haue, are but humane and fallible. For (as they graunt) they are no other then ſuch as the Catholik Church, holie Fathers, & generall Coūcels haue vſed. For thus Whitaker c. 3. cit. But the means (of the Church) to expound obſcure places, are vncertaine, doubtfull, and ambiguous. And they muſt needs ſay ſo, becauſe otherwiſe they muſt confeſſe, that the Church is infallible in expounding the Scripture. Secondly, becauſe the means Proteſt meās, but humane. which Proteſtants vſe, are theſe: Pondering of circumſtances, of the ſtile and Phraſe of Scripture, conference of places, recurring to the Hebrew and Greek text, praier, and the like, as yee may ſee in Rainolds Confer. lib. 2. diuiſ. 2. Confeſ. Heluet. c. 2. Whitaker. Cont. 1. q. 5. c. 9. Humfrey ad Rat. 1. Camp. and others. But all theſe means are humane, for they be our pondering, our conference, our recurring, our praier. And all humane means are fallible, as euerie man is ſubiect to lie. Thirdly becauſe no where in Scripture is there promiſed infallible aſſiſtance to them that vſe theſe means. And if anie ſay, that it is promiſed to praier, whatſoeuer we aske: firſt he maketh onely praier an infallible meane. Agayne, it ſufficeth not to pray how ſoeuer, but we muſt pray well and perſeuerantlie. For Iac. 4. v. 3. it is ſaied: Yee pray and obtayne not, becauſe yee pray ill. But it is not praied well, that euerie priuat man by him ſelfe should vnderſtand the Scriptures; but rather ill, becauſe the Scripture ſaieth Malac. 2. The lippes of the Prieſt keepe knowledge, and they shall require the law out of his mouth. and Epheſ. 4. He hath giuen Paſtors and Doctors for the conſumnation of Saints. Fourthly, becauſe all vſe theſe means, Catholiks, Heretiks, Iews, and yet all doe not attaine to the right ſenſe of Scripture by them.

Fiftly, becauſe, Proteſtants themſelues doe inſinuate Their means not infallible. that theſe means are not infallible. For Whitaker beſides the words already related, ſaieth Cōt. 1. q. 5. c. 9. & 10. That we muſt vſe theſe means rightly, and thereby declareth that theſe means are not infallible vnleſſe they be rightly vſed, and yet he doth not ſet downe the meane how to vſe thē rightly. Et c. 10. cit. addeth, that all theſe means muſt be accommodated to the rule of faith. Which be clearely enough sheweth, that of themſelues they are not infallible. Rainolds alſo loc. cit. ſaieth: that all their means are vaine. Vnleſſe God giue eyes to ſee.

Sixtlie, theſe means are not onelie fallible, but alſo inſufficient. Their means not common to all. For we muſt not onelie know to conferre places, but alſo what places are to be conferred, and what not, and with what places they are to be conferred, and with what not. Beſides, we muſt know how we muſt cōferre. For otherwiſe (as Tertullian ſaied of examining Scriptures) we may ſay of conferring: As if hauing ill examined all, we may not fall into error, by making choice of ſome euill. But the foreſaied means teach vs not this.

Finally, theſe means are not common to all the faithfull. For thus writeth Whitaker c. 9. cit. The vnlearned know not how to vſe theſe means rightly: and Rainolds libr. cit. cap. 5. diuiſ. 1. Becauſe the infirme and vnlearned ſorte of Christians haue no skill to diſcerne the right ſenſe of Scripture from the falſe, he (Vincent) accommodateth himſelfe to their infirmitie, and giueth them externall ſenſible means to know it. I aske therefore, whether vnlearned Proteſtants do truely know the right ſenſe of Scripture by means, or without means? If without means? they are Enthuſiaſts. If by means, there are others then thoſe which Proteſtants aſſigne. I let paſſe, that the Lutherans ſay, that the Sacramē taries had their expoſition of the Scripture frō the Diuell, and that Luther profeſſeth that he was taught of the Diuell: as perhaps we shall proue an other time at large.

Wherefore thus I make my 28. argument. They who in ſo manie and weightie matters do expreſſely contradict ſuch plaine words of Scripture, and yet haue no infallible way to attaine to the true ſenſe thereof, muſt needs contradict the true ſenſe of Scripture. But Proteſtants be ſuch. Therefore &c.

CHAPTER XXIX. THAT PROTESTANTS ARE FORCED to admit no Iudge in the Church, to whoſe iudgement they will ſtand.

THE 29. Argument wherewith we will proue, that Proteſtants are againſt the true ſenſe of Scriptrue, shalbe, becauſe their doctrine is ſo plainelie againſt Scripture, as they dare not admit anie Iudge thereof. For thus Zuinglius tom. 1. in Explanat. artic. 67. Proteſt admit Iudge. I ſuffer no man to be iudge in the matter of trueth and faith. Whitaker Contr. 1. quaeſt. 5. c. 4. God hath reſerued to himſelfe the iudgement of religion, and hath not graunted it to anie man. And Contr. 4. q. 1, c. 2. There is now no infallible iudge on earth which is man. Vorſtius in Antibel. pag. 80. We haue proued, that onely Chriſt or the holie Ghoſt ſpeaking plainely in Scripture, is to be accounted this ſupreme iudge of controuerſies of faith. Pareus in Colleg. Theol. 4. Diſputatio. 2. The ſupreme iudge of interpretations of Scripture and controuerſies of faith, from whome there is no Appeale, is is no man now, nor ſince the Apostles, nether Church, nor Councell &c. Lutherans in Colloq. Ratisb. Seſſion. 9. Proue this, that beſides the written law, there muſt be an other viſible iudge appointed. The like ſaieth Academia Nemauſienſis Reſp. ad Tournon. Elienſis reſp. ad Apol. Bellarm. c. 14. Feild l. 3. de Eccleſ. cap. 13 & 16. Moulins in his Bucler art. 3. ſect. 6. and other Proteſtants commonly.

But that there muſt needs be admitted a iudge in the Church to whoſe iudgement we muſt ſtand, I proue: Firſt out of Scripture. For Deut. 17. it is ſaied: If thou perceaue that There muſt needs be a Iudge. the iudgement with thee be hard and doubtfull thou shalt come to the Preiſts of the leuiticall ſtock and to the Iudge that shalbe at that time, and thou shalt aske of them who shall shew thee the trueth of the iudgement, and thou shalt doe whatſoeuer they that are preſidents of the place, which our Lord shall chuſe, shall ſay and teach thee according to the law and shalt follow their ſentence, nether shalt thou decline to the right hand, nor to the left hand. But he that shalbe proud refuſing to obey the commandement of the Preiſt, who at that time miniſtreth to our Lord thy God, and the decree of the Iudge, that man shall die. Behould a Iudge inſtituted in the Church vnder the law, and him to be obeyed vnder paine of death. Likewiſe Math. 18. Chriſt ſaieth: If he will not heare the Church, let him be to the as an Ethnik and Publican. And Actor. 15. When the Chriſtians did diſagree about the obſeruation of Iewish ceremonies, they apointed that Paul and Barnabas should goe vp, and certaine others of the rest, to the Apostles, and Preiſts in Hieruſalem vpon this queſtion, and all true Chriſtians ſubmitted themſelues to their decree, and S. Paul commanded it to be kept. And the like practiſe hath beene euer obſerued in the Church, and they held for Heretiks who did not ſubmit themſelues to the iudgement of a lawfull Councell.

Secondely I proue it out of the Fathers. For thus S. Ciprian Epiſt. 55. For nether are Hereſies riſen or Schiſmes ſprung from anie other roote, then becauſe the Preiſt of God is not obeyed, nor beleiued that there is one preiſt for a time in the Church, and one Iudge for a time in ſteed of Chriſt. Loe to denie, that there is a iudge in the Church in ſteed of Chriſt, is the occaſion of all Hereſies and Schiſmes. And S. Auſtin l. 1. cont. Creſcon. c. 33. Whoſoeuer feareth to be deceaued in the obſcuritie of this queſtion, let him aske the Church of it, whome the holie Scripture doth shew without anie doubt.

Thirdly, becauſe it was euer the cuſtome of Heretiks Heretiks denie a Iudge. to denie, that there is a Iudge in the Church. Whereupon the Donatiſts in Breuic. Collat. ſay that Chriſt muſt be the iudge of this cauſe, stirring vp enuie to Catholiks becauſe they had requeſted a man to be iudge.

Fourthlie, I proue it by reaſon, becauſe it is a plaine argument of an euill cauſe, that the Patrons thereof dare not ſubmit it to the iudgment of anie Iudge in the common wealth. Beſides, there can be no peace in anie ſocietie or commonwealth, vnleſſe beſide the laws, there be ſome Iudge, who may determine matters, and to whoſe iudgement men muſt ſtand. And who denie ſuch Iudges, ether mantaine an ill cauſe, or loue not peace, but continuall braules.

For theſe and the like arguments, Proteſtants ſometime Proteſt ſometime admit a Iudge in Words. in words doe admitt a Iudge in the Church. For thus Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 5. c. 4. I confeſſe, that in euerie common wealth there ought to be Iudges, who may make an end of contentions amongst men. Et c. 7. God indeed hath left a Iudge to his Church, but who it is, now is queſtion and debate betwene vs and the Papiſts. Elienſis. cap. 14. cit. But beſide the law, there is need of another liuely Iudge. Who denieth that? Melancthon in Reſp. ad Ant. Bauar. tom. 3. We openly confeſſe, that there muſt be iudgments in the Church. But indeed they will haue the Scripture onelie to be this Iudge: For thus Zuinglius. diſput. 1. to. 1. I will neuer admit any other iudges beſide the holie Scriptures. Which is in word to admit a Iudge, and in effect But not in effect. to denie him. For the Scripture is the law of Chriſtians, and therefore not their Iudge, who is to giue ſentence according to the law. And the Lutherans in Colloq. Ratisbon. ſeſſ 1. when they had ſaied, that Scripture is the rule and ſquare of faith, afterward doe adde: It is one thing to shew the Iudge • another, to shew the rule; Wherein they plainelie diſtinguish the Scripture and the Iudge. Moreouer the teſtimonies of Scriptures, of Fathers, and the reaſons before alledged do proue, that there muſt be a liuelie or ſpeaking Iudge in the Church, which is different from the law or Scripture. Finallie it is fond, to make Proteſt iudge can nether heare nor ſpeake. ſuch a Iudge, and him onely, who is both deafe and dūbe, and who can nether heare thoſe that contend, nor pronounce ſentence, nor compell them to obey it. Furthermore (as hath beene often ſaied) in moſt controuerſies betwixt vs and Proteſtants, Scripture doth not ſo much as ſeeme to giue ſentence for Proteſtants, vnleſſe it be 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 euē 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 ſentēce: 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 obey • , 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 sēſe of the law: And the Lutherās 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 Cōt. 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 Cour • 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 • 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, shalbe 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 conceaue, how (God) in different manner willeth and willeth the ſame thing. Againe: Where we conceiue not, how (God) will haue that to be done, which he forbiddeth to doe let vs remember our weakneſſe. Et 3. Inſtit. c. 24. §. 17. When he had ſaied, that God willeth that, which he profeſſeth that he will not; he addeth: Albeit according to our vnderſtanding, Gods will be manifould, yet in himſelfe he willeth not this and that, but by his manifould wiſdome maketh our vnderstanding astonished, till it shalbe graunted to vs to know, that wonderfully he willeth that, which now ſeemeth contrarie to his will. And cap. 11. §. 11. This is a meruailous manner of iuſtifying, that they that are couered with Chriſt iustice, feare not the iudgement which they deſerue, and whilest iuſtly they condemne themſelues, they are iudged iust out of themſelues. De Praedeſt. pag. 704. Let our faith adore a farre of with decent ſobrietie the hidden counſail of God, wherewith the fall of man was preordained. And pag. 711. How it was appointed by the foreſight and decree of God what was to become of man, and yet God is not to be madde partaker of the ſinne, as if he were ether author or allower thereof, ſeing it is clearely a ſecret farre beyond the reach of mans wit, let vs not be ashamed to confeſſe our ignorance. In Ioan. 12. ver. 27. But it ſeemeth, that this doth not become the Sonne of God, that an inconſiderate deſire eſcapeth him, which he muſt ſtreight renounce for to obey his Father. I confeſſe (ſaieth he) that truely this is the follie of the croſſe, which is a ſcandall to proud men. Nay, it is not the follie of the croſſe, but the impietie of Caluin to attribute an in cō ſiderate deſire to Chriſt. And in Math. 26. verſ. 39. If anie obiect, that the firſt motion which should haue beene bridled, before it went further, was not temperate as it beſeemed: I anſwere (ſaieth he) that in this corruption of our nature there cannot be ſeene the feruor of paſsions with that temper which was in Chriſt; but we muſt yeeld this honor to the Sonne of God, that we iudge not of him by our ſelues. Forſooth the impoſtures of Caluin not onelie wāting all word of God, but alſo quite cōtrarie thereto, muſt be beleiued, though they cannot be vnderſtood, and the Catholik doctrine of the Euchariſt and the like muſt not be beleiued becauſe it cannot be vnderſtood. Beza in Explicat. Chriſtianiſmi c. 3. After a wonderfull and incomprehēſible manner it pleaſeth God, that euen that, which as it is ſinne he alloweth not, yet is not done without his will. De Praedeſt. cont. Caſt. p. 340. When he had ſaied, that God decreeth the cauſes of damnation, and that none can reſiſt his decree, he asketh: Is not then all the falut in God? and anſwereth: This difficultie is vnexplicable for men. Agayne: How God is not in fault, if he ordayne the cauſes of dānation, we thinke with the Apoſtle, that it is a queſtion vnexplicable for mans wit. Et in Colloq. Montisb. p. 427. There is no parte of Chriſtian doctrine from which ſenſe and humane reaſon doth more abhorre. Pareus l. 2. de Amiſſ. Grat. c. 13. after he had ſaied p. 358. that God doth enforce mē to ſinnes as they are his ſecret iudgements: addeth. p. 363. that this manner is vnexplicable. Indeed this their excuſe of the inexplicabilitie of the thing were tolerable, if the Scripture did clearely teach, what they ſay: but ſeing it doth not clearelie teach ſo, as appeareth by the anſwers of Catholiks; yea ſo clearely teach the contrarie, as Proteſtants are forced to confeſſe, that they know not how to reconcile ſo manie of their poſitions with the Scripture, it is a verie great proofe, that in verie deed their doctrine is repugnant to Scripture.

An other manner whereby implicitlie they cōfeſſe, that Proteſt. confeſſe that the words of Scripture ſeeme againſt them. their doctrine is repugnāt to Scripture, is, becauſe in manie and great matters they acknowledge, that the words of Scripture, and ſuch as are of purpoſe ſpoakē for to declare vnto vs what we ought to beleiue of ſuch matters, ſeeme to fauour vs more then them, are hard to them and torment them shrewdly. Luther in Poſtill. Dom. 9. poſt. Trin. This dayes Ghoſpell, if it be nakedly looked into without the (Proteſtant) ſpirit, is plainely Papiſticall. Zuinglius l. de Rel. c. de Merito. None denieth, but that in Scripture there are almoſt more places which attribute merit to our works, then denie it. And in Explanat. art. 20. The places of Scripture at firſt ſight ſeeme to attribute ſome what to Merit. Bullinger Dec. 3. Serm. 9. We acknowledge, that the Scripture euerie were doth ſeeme to attribut life and iuſtice to good works. Rainolds in Confer. c. ſect. 1. What if in that other place the Scripture in shew do fauour you more then vs. And he addeth, that he eaſilie graunteth, that the shew of the words of Scripture maketh more for vs then for them. Agayne: I will graunt, 〈◊〉 the words of Chriſt: This is my bodie, in shew do fauour more your reall preſence, then that ſacramentall which we mantaine. And in an other place: In shew of words our Sauiour ſeemeth to haue promiſed the keys to Peter onely. Herbrand. in Compendio Theol. pag. 340. ſaieth: If the letter be vrged in thoſe The letter againſt Proteſtants. words of Daniel: Redeeme thy ſinnes by almes, they be contrarie to their doctrine. The ſame confeſſeth Hunnius l. de Iuſtif. of thoſe words of Tobie: Almes deliuereth from all ſinne and from death. And the ſame is euident by infinit places of Scripture, which Proteſtants are forced to expound figuratiuelie becauſe the proprietie of the word is for vs.

Zuinglius Epiſt. ad Matthaeum Rutling. to. 2. thus ſpeaketh: Now remaineth that which in this matter is the hardeſt A hard matter for Proteſt. to wreſt the words. of all, to wit, how we may wreſt the words of Chriſt which they terme words of conſecration. Here verily we muſt ſtretch all the veyns of faith. Et in Reſp. ad Billican. he ſaieth, that he vſeth pulleis and preſſes to wring out the ſenſe of the words of conſecration, and addeth: We denie, that anie one They need pullies and preſſes. litle droppe, at leaſt ſincere and pure, will come from them, vn-vnleſſe they be preſt with the weight of other places. And againe: How manie had we ſome years agoe, who could acquit themſelues handſomely of thoſe words of Chriſt, Thou art Peter &c. and shew the figure of the ſpeach? And yet it was no hindrance, that we could not handſomely dispatch our ſelues of the word. Caluin 3. Inſtit. c. 2. §. 11. I know, it ſeemeth hard to ſome, where faith is attributed to the reprobates. In Luc. 3. verſ. 9. As for Merit, that knot is to be looſed, which hindreth manie: For the Scripture ſo often promiſing reward to works, ſeemeth to attribute ſome merit to them. Peter Martyr in Dom. 4. Hom. Proteſt. tormented with the words of Scripture. 21. The (Proteſtant) interpreters do torment themſelues, in that Daniel ſeemeth to attribute redemption or remiſsion of ſinnes to mans iuſtice and works of mercie. For they well admonish, that it is repugnant to the chiefe point of our religion. Daneus in c. 67. Enchir. Aug. ſaieth, that ſaying of S. Iames: We are not iuſtified by faith onelie: doth this day tormēt manie, ſo that ſome haue reiected the epiſtle, others haue called it ſtrawish. Kemnice in loc. to. 2. tit. de Argum. That ſaying of Daniel. c. 4. ſeemeth very hard againſt free iuſtification.

The third way by which they tacitelie confeſſe, that Proteſt forced to denie their doctrine. their doctrine is contrarie to Scripture is, becauſe when it maketh for their purpoſe, they denie that they teach manie of thoſe points which in the former booke we haue clearelie shewed that they plainelie teach. And becauſe they do this ſo frequentlie, as I need not bring manie examples thereof, I will here cite onelie ſome few. Touching God: Pareus thus writeth Colleg. Theol. 9. diſp. 32. It is a ſlaunder, that we ſimply ſay that God would and decreed that our firſt parents should fall. See l. 1. cap. 2. art. 5. Of Scripture: thus Whitaker Cont. 1. q. 4. cap. 1. Our aduerſaries attribute vnto vs this doctrine, as if we ſaied, that the Catholik Church could faile, which is moſt falſe. See lib. 1. cap. 8. art. The ſame man. q 3. cit. c. 2. Our aduerſaries ſlander vs, when they ſay, that we make ſuch a Church, which ſometime is no where, and can be ſeene of none. See l. 1. c. 8. art. 5. Touching the Euchariſt, Elienſis Reſp. ad Apol. Bellar. c. 1. We agree with you of the matter, all the contention is about the manner—A preſence (I ſay) we beleiue, nor leſſe reall then you. Perkins in Cath. refor. Contr. 10. cap. 1. We beleiue and teach a reall preſence of the bodie and blood of Chriſt in the Sacrament of the Supper, and that not feigned, but true and reall. Argentinenſes in Hoſpin. part. 2. Hiſtor. Be they accurſed, who will haue nothing to be exhibited here but a ſigne and figure. And Hoſpinian. himſelfe. Our men neuer denied, that the bodie of Chriſt was truely in their Supper. Beza l. qq. ſaieth, that it is a ſlander, that they exclude Chriſt from their Supper. Gratianus Antiieſuita p. 140. There is no controuerſie, whether the true bodie and blood of the Lord be contained in the Sacrament of the Eucharist. Et Riuet. tract. 3. ſec. 12. The queſtion betwene vs, is not ſimply, whether the bodie and blood of Chriſt be truely and really in this Sacrament. Et Spalatenſis libr. contr. Suar. cap. 1. num. 39. Who denieth that the Euchariſt is the onely flesh and onely blood of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt? See the contrarie of all theſe lib. 1. c. 11. art. 1.

Touching faith; thus writeth Peter Martyr in loc. Claſſ. 3. §. 24. We make faith, hope, and charitie, three different things, nether doe we confound them, as our aduerſaries accuſe vs. See the contrarie lib. 1. c. 13. art. 6. Of good works thus Tilenus in Syntag. cap. 46. It is a cruell ſlander of our aduerſaries, where they feigne, that we teach, that all the works of the iust be properly and ſimply ſinnes. Et Riuet. tract. 3. ſect. 31. None of ours ſaieth abſolutely, that all works are ſinne, nether ſay we, that they are mingled with ſinne abſolutely. See the contrarie lib. 1. c. 14. art. 2.

Touching good works in particular; thus Riuet. tract. 1. ſect. 73. We reiect this poſition: That it is one of the conditions neceſſarie to a Bishop, that he be married. See the contrarie lib. 1. cap. 15. art. 4. Of reward: thus the ſome Riuet. 3. ſect. 39. We denie not the reward of good works. See the contrarie lib. 1. c. 14. art. 7. c. 18. arr. 1. Of free will thus Serranus l. 3. cont. Hayum. Doth anie of ours denie, or euer denied, that thoſe that are not regenerate doe fall to ſinne of their prone and free will? See the contrarie lib. 1. c. 16. art. 14.

But finally they doe plainely and expreſſely graunt that Proteſt. confeſſe much of their doctrine to be againſt Scripture. Of God. manie points of Proteſtants doctrine are cōtrarie to Scripture. For touching God, thus writeth Confeſſio Saxon. c. God nether willeth ſinne, nor approueth, nor helpeth it, as it is written: when the Diuel speaketh a lie, he ſpeaketh of his owne: and 1. Ioan. 3. Who committeth ſinne, is of the Diuel. Gerlachius tom. 2. diſput. 15. It is impoſsible, that God should will ſinne, of whome it is ſaied. pſalm. 5. Thou art not a God that willeth ini-inquitie. Et Polanus in Diſput. priuat. p. 235. God nether willeth, nor can will the ill of offence or ſinne properly taken pſal. 5. verſ. 5. Melancthon in diſput. to. 4. p. 623. The conference of the continuall doctrine in the writings of the Prophets and Apoſtles doth shew, that God nether wille •• nor worketh ſinne, as it is expreſſely ſaied: Thou art not a Gad that willeth iniquitie; And out of this ſame place Pareus in Colleg. Theol. 1. diſp. 2. proueth, that Gods will is no efficient cauſe of ſinne. And yet Proteſtants teach both that God willeth ſinne, and worketh ſinne: See lib. 1. c. 2. art. 1. 4. They teach alſo, that God hath ordained and predeſtinated men to ſinne. l. 1. c. 2. art. 5. of which doctrine Melancthon in diſp. to. 4. p. 572. giueth this cenſure. There are certaine frantike fellows much worſe then the Stoicks, who teach, that God of himſelfe doth ordaine and predeſtinate haynous ſinnes, and that he willeth them, and not onely ſuffereth them. And in locis tit. de Cauſa Peccat. Sinne is nether done of God, nor ordained of him. They teach, that God commandeth, vrgeth and tempteth to ſinne. lib. 1. cap. 2. art. 7. Which is contrarie to Scripture, by iudgment of Riuet tract. 3. ſect. 33. The Scripture expreſſely ſaieth, that God will not iniquitie, that he commandeth none to doe ill, that he cannot tempt to ill. Moulins in his Bucler. p. 97. God doth not ſtirre vp mē to doe ill, as it is ſaied pſ. 45. Thou haſt loued iuſtice and hated iniquitie. Et Calu. in Math. 4. v. 1. Wherevpon we gather, that tentations which incite vs to ill, come not frō God. They teach that God is not angrie with the faithfull when they worke iniquitie. lib. 1. c. 2. art. 11. Which to be contrarie to Scripture Proteſtants in Zanchius in Supplicat. confeſſe in theſe words: God doth threaten his anger to all the tranſgreſſors of his law, and they cite thereto that Pſ. 5. Thou haſt hated all that worke iniquitie. They teach, that God hath no will that all should be ſaued, li. c. 2. art. 19. Which is againſt Scripture as cōfeſſeth Hemingius in theſe words in Enchir. claſ. 3. They accuſe God of a lye, whoſoeuer thinke that he will not the ſaluation of ſome, as farre as perteineth to the coū ſail of creation. Geſnerus in Compend. loc. 30. The Scripture doth plainely teſtifie, that God hath in earneſt a will that all should be ſaued. Affelmā de Praed. §. 36. The Scripture teſtifieth by words, by oath, by telling, by oblation, that God would haue all mē ſaued. They teach, that God doth not call al mē to him, nor offer his grace to thē. l. 1. c. 2. art. 21. of which thus writeth Illyricus in Claue part. 2. tract. 4. Some by miſunderſtanding predeſtinatiō, vſe hurtefully to reſtraine the vniuerſall promiſes and callings of the Ghospell, and to make them particulars: by which error of theirs, they quite ouerthrow the Ghoſpell of Chriſt. Gerlachius to. 2. diſp. 15. The plaine teſtimonies of Scripture do proue the vniuerſall will of God. Hemingius in Schluſ. l. 1. Theol. Calu. art. 11. Who denie grace to be vniuerſall, do corrupt the doctrine of the Ghoſpell, oppoſe themſelues and others. The like hath Confeſſ. Saxon. c. 4. They denie, that Gods wrath is appeaſed by good works l. 1. c. 2. art. 16. And yet thus hath Confeſſio Aug. art. 11. We confeſſe, that by good works, preſent calamities are aſwaged as I ſaye teacheth c. 58. The like hath Apol. Conf. c. de reſp. ad Argum.

Touching Chriſt, they denie that he is God of God l. 1. Of Chriſt. c. 3 art. 1. And yet the Miniſters of Poland in Zāchius epiſt. 1. ſay it is Iudaiſme: He denieth (ſay they) with the Iews, that Chriſt is God of God. They teach, that Chriſts humanitie is not to be inuocated or adored l. 1. c. 3. art. 3. Of which thus writeth Caluin Admonit. vlt. They pretend, that there is no where anie precept of adoring Chriſts bodie: Surely of Chriſt as man it is properly ſpoaken: God hath exalted him, and giuen him &c. Wherefore Auſtin rightly gathereth frō hence, that Chriſts flesh is to be adored in the perſon of the Mediator. They teach, that Chriſt as man is not head of the Church l. 1. c. 3. art. 6. And yet thus writeth Kickerman. l. 3. Syſtem. p. 322. There is giuen alſo to the flesh of Christ for the vnion, the higheſt power of office, to be head of the Church: This is that which he ſaieth: All power is giuen to me, that is, full power of gouernement in the Church. They teach, that Chriſt is not iudge as he is man. l. 1. c. 3. art. 8. And yet Lobechius diſp. 19. Whence it is rightly gathered, that Chriſt hath iudiciall power, not onely by his deitie, but alſo by his humanitie, as it is euident by manifeſt teſtimonies of Scripture. The like hath Caluin in Ro. 2. v. 16. They denie, that Chriſts humanitie hath power to giue life l. 1. c. 3. art. 4. Of which thus Hutter in Anal. p. 293. Who shall dare to denie, that power of giuing life was giuen to Chriſts humanitie, he doth manifeſtly accuſe Chriſt, who, Ioan. 6. oftentimes attributeth this power to his flesh. They ſay, that Chriſt did not make a new teſtamēt. l. 1. c. 3. art. 9. of which point thus pronounceth Gerlachius to. 2. diſp. 14. This is no other thing, then to contradict the Apoſtle. Et Schluſſelb. l. 1. Theol. art. 17. The word of God teacheth, that there are twoe couenants or teſtaments, and not one and the ſame in ſubſtance. The ſame ſaieth Illyricus praefat. in nou. teſtam. They denie, that Chriſt redeemed vs with his blood or corporall death. l. 1. c. 3. art. 17. Of which doctrine this cenſure giueth Serranus contr. Hayum. part. 3. The Scripture affirmeth, that we are purged by the blood of Chriſt, that our ſinnes are plainely expiated, that God, by that price paied for vs, was truely appeaſed. Calu. reſ. ad Sadolet. p. 126. Runne ouer all the Oracles of God, if the onely blood of Chriſt be euery where propoſed for the price of ſatisfaction, for pacification, for oblation, with what bouldeneſſe dareſt thou &c. Moulins in his Bucler, p. 154. ſaieth, that it is the ſumme of the Ghoſpell, that Chriſts death was a full and entire ſatisfaction. They ſay, that Chriſt did not dye for thoſe that are damned. l. 1. c. 3. art. 18. Of which point thus writeth Hutter in Anal. art. 3. It is falſe which the Caluiniſts feigne, that the ſacrifice of the paſsion and death of Chriſt was not offered for all but for ſome onely: The impietie of which doctrine all the Scripture doth greatly refute. Gerlachius to. 2. diſput. 15. They lye horribly, that God the Father did apoint the ſatisfaction of his Sonne for ſome onely: Against this blaſphemie we oppoſe the moſt cleare words of the Scripture. Polanus part. 3. theſ. Chriſt died for all. Ro. 5. v. 2. Cor. 5. v. 15. And Roger Art. 3. putteth it as an error in faith. They ſay that the blood of Chriſt wherewith we were redeemed, is corrupted and now no more in being l. 1. c. 3. art. 20. Which Schuſſelb. l. 1. Theol. at. 20. proueth to be contrarie to Scripture. They denie that the Soule of Chriſt deſcended into hell. l. 1. c. 3. art. 21. Which is contrarie to Scripture as teſtifieth Lobechius diſput. 6. in theſe words: We beleiue, and embrace with ſimple faith as true and aggreable to Scripture and the Creeds, that Chriſt truely deſcended into hell. Luther in pſ. 16. According to the words of the Prophet, the Soule of Chriſt in ſubſtance deſcended into hell. They denie that Chriſt entred to his diſciples the dores being shut l. 1. c. 3. art. 23. Which is repugnant to Scripture according to Luther in def. verb. cenae. to. 7. The teſtimonies (ſaieth he) of Scripture are manifeſt, that Christ paſſed through the dores shut vnto his diſciples, And Zuinglius in Hiſtor. reſur. tom. 4. The Euangelist Ioan doth witneſſe, that the dores were shut, and that Ieſus entred in the dores being shut. They denie that Chriſt praieth for vs in heauen l. 1. c. 3. art. 25. which is oppoſite to Scripture as Melancthon confeſſeth in reſp. ad art Bauar. ſaying: He is to be deteſted, who denieth, that Chriſt now praieth for vs, ſith it is plainely written to the Hebrews: Alwaies liuing that he may pray for vs. Et Kemnice in Exam. part. 3. c. de Inuoc. ſaieth that it is repugnant to Scripture and depriueth Chriſt of a parte of his Preiſthood.

Touching Angels and Saints: They teach that the glorie Of Saintes. of all Saints is equal. l. 1. c. 4. art. 3. which is againſt Scripture in the iudgement of Caluin. in 1. Cor. 15. v. 41. It is moſt, true, and it is proued by the teſtimonies of Scripture, that there be differēt degrees of honor and glorie of the Saints. They denie that Angels or Saints pray for vs: cap. 4. art. 4. which the ſame Caluin auoucheth to be againſt Scripture: In Zachar. 1. v. 12. The Scripture witneſſeth that Angels ſuppliantly pray to God for vs: Zacharie ſaieth that the Angel praied: O Lord of hoſtes. Apol. Conf. Aug. c. de Inuoc. We graunt that Angels pray for vs. For there are teſtimonies Zach. 1. Where the Angel praieth: O Lord of hoſtes. The ſame ſaieth P. Martyr in Rom. 8. & Schluſ. to. 8. Catal. p. 65. They denie that Angels offer vp our praiers to God. l. 1. c. 4. art. 7. Which Beza teacheth to be cōtrarie to Scripture in Apoc. 8. v. 3. Ihon learned by this viſiō, that the praiers of Saints in this world, to wit, of thoſe that dayly offer to God pure ſacrifices of praiers and good deeds, are offered to God by the miniſterie of Angels. They denie, that we ought to pray to Saints lib. 1. c. 4 art. 8. Which to be repugnant to Scripture thus confeſſeth Luther to. 1. de 1 precept. f. 12. I ſay that in anie caſe we muſt recurre to the ſuffrages of Saints, as in Iob it is ſaied: And turne thy ſelfe to ſome of the Saints, and as Salomon alledgeth his father: Remember Dauid O Lord. And alſo the Patriach Iacob ſaied of Ephraim and Manaſſe; let my name be inuocated vpon theſe children.

Touching Scripture: they teach, that there is nothing Of Scripture. hard in it. lib. 1. c. 5. art. 1. Which is againſt Scripture as confeſſeth Chriſtian ad Portum lib. cont. Verron. We confeſſe (ſaieth he) plainely with S. Peter, as in the Epiſtles of S. Paul, ſo in the Scripture, that there are manie things hard to vnderſtād. Whitaker lib. 6. cont. Dur. ſect. 22. I confeſſe, as Peter ſaieth, that there in Scriptures manie things hard to vnderſtand. The like ſaieth Pareus in Gal. 2. lect. 25. They teach, that the law is contrarie to the Ghoſpel. l. 1. c. 5. art. 7. Of which doctrine thus Serranus cōt. Hayum. part. 3. With a more groſſe and dangerous ignorance doth he oppoſe the law of Moiſes and the law of the Ghoſpell like twoe principles of Maniche, as if they were contrarie.

Concerning S. Peter: They denie, that the Church was Of S. Peter. founded vpon him, l. 1. c. 6. art. 2. Which to be againſt Scripture thus confeſſeth Whitaker. Cont. 4. q. 2. cap. 2. We denie not, that Peter was the foundation and gouernour of the Church, and if they require, we will graunt alſo, that this was promiſed to him in theſe words. Et. l. 5. cont. Dur. ſec. 4. Who doth not confeſſe, that Peter is the rock and foundation of the Church? They denie, that the keys of heauen were giuen to Peter l. 1. c. 6. art. 3. Which is againſt Scripture. For thus Spalatenſis l. 1. de Rep. c. 7. Chriſt expreſſely ſaieth to Peter: I will giue the keys: wherefore fairewell they and let them be gone, who vſing force to the letter, will haue the keys to be giuen or promiſed not immediatly to Peter, but excluding Peters perſon, ether to the whole Church, or to ſome other that is not Peter. Et Whitaker. Cont. 4. q. 2. c. 4. I graunt that the keys were promiſed to Peter, for the place doth conuince that, and I will neuer repugne. Eliēſis in reſp. ad Apol. Bellar. c. 8. Who doubts that the keys, were promiſed to Peter? They denie that the Apoſtles were foundations of the Church l. 1. c. 6. art. 5. Which Rainolds in his Confer. c. 2. ſec. 1. acknowledgeth to be againſt the Scripture in theſe words. The 12. Apostles are called 12. foundations Apoc. 21. v. 14. Et Serran. cōt. Hayum. part. 3. All the Prophets and Apoſtles are termed (in Scripture) foundations of the Church.

Cōcerning Paſtors of the Church: They denie that there Of Paſtors. are alwaies ſome, l. 1. c. 7. art. 1. which thus cenſureth Melancthō apud Luther. 10. 1. f. 483. Where the Church is, there muſt be the right ordering of Miniſters, becauſe the ordination of Miniſters is one of the proper guifts of the Church, according to that Epheſ. 4. He gaue Paſtors &c. Kemnice in Exam. part. 2. tit. de ordine: The Sonne of God himſelfe will haue the Miniſterie of thoſe that teach the Ghoſpell to be conſerued with a continuall vocation in the Church. So Paul ſaieth Epheſ. 4. Et Caluin in Epheſ. 4. verſ. 13. Here (Paul) admonis heth, that the vſe of the Miniſterie is not for a time, but perpetuall as long as we liue in the world.

Touching the Church: they denie that she doth perpetually Of the Church endure. l. 1. c. 8. art. 4. And notwithſtanding Whitaker Cōt. 2. q. 3. c. 2. ſaieth: Who denieth or doubteth, that the Church is founded for cuer, and to cōtinew for euer, he is no Christian. They denie alſo, that she is alwaies viſible l. 1. c. 8. art. 5. Which thus condemneth Daneus l. de viſib. Eccleſ. Who denieth the true Church of God and her to haue beene viſible frō the beginning of the world, he doubtleſſe sheweth himſelfe to be ignorant of the firſt page of the Bible. Et Reineccius to. 4. Arm. c. 3. The teſtimonies of Scripture teach, that the viſible companie neuer perisheth quite. They teach, that the Church can erre euen in fundamētall points. lib. 1. c. 8. art. 6. And yet Caluin writeth 4. Inſtit. c. §. 10. By which words Paul doth ſignifie, that to the end Gods trueth faile not in the world, the Church is a faithfull keeper thereof.

Touching Baptiſme: they denie that ether water, or Of Baptiſme. the naming of the B. Trinitie is neceſſarie thereto l. 1. c. 10. art. 1. 2. And yet Reineccius to. 4. Armat. c. 18. thus writeth: Beza most fondely imagineth that in want of water, we may vſe other liquor. And Beza l. quaeſtionum. & reſp. vol. 3. If anie should not baptize in the name of the Trinitie, or for water, (eſpecially wittingly) should vſe ſome other thing, ſurely this would not be the baptiſme which Chriſt inſtituted. Pareus in Colleg. Theol. 9. diſp. 22. There is no Chriſtian that doubteth, that the baptiſme of water according to Chriſts inſtitution ought to be adminiſtred onely in the name of the Father &c. They denie that baptiſme is neceſſarie to Infants. l. 1. c. 10. art. 9. Of which thing Melancthon in Catecheſi tom. 3. giueth this iudgement: I anſwere, that baptiſme is neceſſarie to Infants, becauſe Chriſts commandement is vniuerſall, Ioan. 3. vnleſſe &c. Vrbanus Regius in Epiſt. ad Heminges to. 2. The Catholik Church doth rightly beleiue out of the Scriptures that Baptiſme is neceſſarie to ſaluation. They denie that the children of the faithfull are in ſtate of damnation before they be baptized. l. 1. c. 10 art. 9. Which thus cōdemneth Schluſſelburg. l. 1. Theol. art. 18. It may be proued manie wayes out of the word of God, that the children of the faithfull are not holie from their mothers wombs. They ſay that baptiſme is not the lauer of the ſoule, nor purgeth ſinnes. l. 1. cap. 10. art. 6. And yet thus writeth Beza in Prae. 2. part. reſp. ad Montisb. Did euer anie Chriſtian denie, that baptiſme is the lauer of regeneration, which the Apoſtle witneſſeth in expreſſe words. Et Shluſſelb. l. 1. Theol. art. 18. This blasphemie of the Caluiniſts (that Baptiſme doth not purge ſinnes) the holie Ghoſt in manie places refuteth. In like ſorte Grauer in Abſurdis Caluin. c. 14. ſer. 10.

Touching the Euchariſt: they denie, that it is the bodie Of the Euchariſt. and blood of Chriſt. l. 1. c. 11. art. 1. Which is againſt Scripture. For thus Muſcul. in loc. tit. de Caena: I may not ſay, the bread of the Supper is not the bodie of the Lord. For in ſo ſaying I should contradict the Lord ſaying: This is my bodie. Againe: Otherwiſe bread should not be the bodie of the Lord againſt his expreſſe word. Beza in Hoſp. part. 2. f. 300. being asked whether he diſliked that one should ſay: The bread of the Supper is the bodie of Chriſt, anſwered, No: for they are the words of Chriſt. Et Hoſp. ib. f. 136. We denie not, that bread and wine are the bodie and blood of Chriſt: For Chriſt himſelfe ſaied: This is my bodie. They ſay, that thoſe words: This is my bodie, muſt be thus expounded: This ſignifieth my bodie. Of which expoſition Muſculus in Schluſſelb. l. 1. Theol. Caluin. art. 22. giueth this iudgement: We muſt beware of that expoſition, wherewith Chriſts words are thought to be the ſame as if he had ſaied: This ſignifieth my bodie. For this is not Chriſts meaning, to shew that this bread ſignifieth his bodie. They denie, that Chriſt gaue vs his bodie to eate or his blood to drinke. l. 1. c. 11. art. 2. Which doctrine thus cenſureth Caluin l. de Neceſ. ref. Chriſt ſaied in plaine termes that he gaue them his bodie. Beza epiſt. 5. But I anſwere, that is all one as to make Chriſt a lyer, as who in cleare and plaine words ſaieth, he gaue them that bodie which was deliuered for vs. Et Apol. 1. contr. Saintem. p. 292. To denie all eating of flesh, were plainely to denie the very words of Chriſt. They denie that the Cuppe is the new teſtament l. 1. c. 11. art. 4. And yet Simlerus in Hoſp. part. 2. f. 348. ſaieth: The proper ſenſe of theſe words, is: The Cuppe is the new teſtament or the blood of the new testament. Iames Andreae in Colloq. Montisbel. p. 38. To me it ſeemeth altogether new and vnheard of that the Supper is denied to be the testamēt of Chriſt, againſt the plaine words alledged out of Luke. Et Muſculus in locis titul. de Caena: In Luke and Paul it is ſaied of this Cuppe, that it is the new testament. They denie, that the Cuppe of the Euchariſt was shed for vs. l. 1. c. 11. art 6. And yet Illyricus in Luc. 22. v. 20. writeth: Which is powred out for you, in the Greek text muſt needs be referred to the Cuppe.

Touching Matrimonie: they denie that it is a Sacramēt. Of Matrimonie: c. 12. art. 5. And yet thus profeſſeth the Confeſſion of Wittemberg. c. de Coniugio: We confeſſe, that Mariage is a kind of life inſtituted and approued by God, and a myſterie, as commonly it is expounded, a great Sacrament in Chriſt and the Church, as Paul ſaieth.

Touching faith: they denie that it can be without good Of Faith. works l. 1. cap. 13. art. 8. which doctrine thus condemneth Schluſſelburg. l. 1. Theol. art. 15. Aretius ſaieth, that faith and good works are conioyned as the ſpecies and her proprietie, as a man and reaſon; But we out of the word of God teach and learne that this doctrine is falſe. They denie that faith it ſelfe is imputed to vs for iuſtice. l. 1. c. 13. art. 19. And yet thus iudgeth Vrbanus Regius in loc. fol. 46. Sincere faith on the mercie of God and Ieſus Christ, is our verie iuſtice. Faith is imputed for iustice to the beleiuer. Abraham beleiued and it was imputed to him for iuſtice. They denie that the faith of the Hemorroïſſa was pure libr. 1. capit. 13. articul. 25. And yet thus Bullinger in Marci 5. The power of true faith is ſingularly expreſſed

Touching good works: they denie, that they are neceſſarie Of good workes. to ſaluation. l. 1. c. 14. art. 13. And yet Piſcator ſaieth in Theſ. loc. 10. The Scripture teacheth, that good works are neceſſarie to ſaluation. The ſame ſay the Electorals in Colloq. Aldeburgico. They denie alſo, that good works are cauſe of ſaluation lib. 1. cap. 14. art. 15. And yet thus writeth Illyricus in Claue tractat. 6. titul. de Var. bonum operum praed. We heare that to manie effects and praiſes, and euen ſaluation it ſelfe is attributed (in Scripture) to good works,—It is plaine, that oftentimes ſomewhat to much praiſe is aſcribed to good works, which doth not agree to them, nor is to be aſcribed to them, if we will ſpeake exactly, truely, and properly. They denie, that they are meritorious lib. 1. cap. 14. art. 8. And yet thus profeſſeth Apollog. Confeſſion. in Melancthon. tom. 3. Seing works are ſome fulfilling of the law they are truely ſaied to be meritorious, reward is rightly ſaied to be due to them. Agayne: The text of Scripture ſaieth that life euerlaſting is rendered to them. Which Proteſtants denie lib. 1. cap. 14. articul. 7. They denie alſo that they are to be done for God. lib. 1. cap. 14. art. 20. Of which point thus iudgeth Kemnice in locis tit. de bonis oper. The teſtimonies of Scripture moſt clearely teach, that good works are to be done for Gods ſake.

Touching virginitie: they denie that it is counſailed in Scripture l 1. c. 15. art. 4. And neuertheleſſe Vrbanus Regius in locis fol. 372. ſaieth: Virginitie is counſailed in the Gh • ſpell, not commanded. And in Interp. loc. 49. Virginitie is onely a counſaile, not a precept.

Concerning ſinne: they teach, that it can remayne with Of ſinne. iuſtice l. 1. c. 16. art. 17. Yet thus pronuonceth Luther in Gal. 3. Theſe are directly oppoſit: That a Chriſtian is iust and loued of God, and yet with all is a ſinner. Againe: How are theſe twoe cō tradictories true at once? I h • ue ſinnes & am moſt worthie of the wrath of God, and the Father loueth me. They denie that ſinne putteth a man out of grace. l. 1 c. 16. art. 6. And yet thus writeth Hemingius in Enchir claſſ. 2. If a penitent ſinne againſt his conſcience, as Dauid did with murder and adulterie, he casteth of the holie Ghoſt, and becometh guiltie of Gods wrath, and vnleſſe he doe pennance falleth into eternall punishment. It is a horrible madneſſe to ſay that ſuch retaine the holie Ghoſt, whē as Paul ſaieth plainely Gal. 5. The works of the flesh are manifeſt, and they that doe ſuch, shall not poſſeſſe the kingdome of God. They denie that the widdows (whereof S. Paul ſpeaketh 1. Timoth.) did ſinne in marrying l. 1. c. 16. art. 15. And yet thus Bullinger in Tim. 5. Surely to marrie, of it ſelfe, is no ſinne: But becauſe they haue once giuen their promiſe to Chriſt the ſpouſe and to the Church, and of their owne accord haue left marriage, hereupon their marriage turneth to the diſgrace of Christ, which is that which Paul termeth to become wanton against Chriſt. Bucer lib. 2. de Regno Chriſti c. 23. They who haue giuen their firſt promiſe to God, of a ſingle life, haue indeed iudgement and reprehenſion. Caluin vpon this place ſaieth that theſe widdows: gaue away their libertie to marrie, and did free themſelues from the bound of marriage for all their life, and did depriue themſelues of the libertie to marrie. How then did not they ſinne by marrying.

Touching Iuſtification: they teach, that it is neuer laſt. Of Iuſtification. l. 1. c. 17. art. 15. Which is contrarie to Scripture to Scripture, as Confeſſ. Saxon. cap. 11. confeſſeth in theſe words: By the ſaying of Luke: He goeth and bringeth other ſpirits, and the like ſayings, it is manifeſt, that ſome regenerate do contriſtate and caſt of the holie Ghoſt, and are afterward caſt away of God, and become guiltie of his wrath and eternall punishment.

Touching eternall life: they denie that it is a reward. l. 1. Of eternall life. c. 18. art. 1. And yet thus ſpeaketh Apologia Confeſſ. Aug. in Melancthon: tom. 3. The Scripture calleth eternall life, areward: Agayne: The name of reward in this manner agreeth to eternall life, becauſe eternall life rewardeth good works.

Touching Hell: they denie that it is a place. l. 1. c 18. act. Of Hell, 7. Which to be contrarie to Scripture thus confeſſeth Bucanus loc. 4. Hell is a certaine place hid and horrible, appointed of God for damned men and Angels to their eternall paine. Nu. 16. 30. Math. 8. 12. Et Piſcat or l. 1. loc. 22. The Scripture euerie where teſtifieth, that the damned shall ſuffer theſe torments in hell, to wit a place vnder earth appointed for their punishment. And Regius in loc. tit. l de Peccato. The Scripture expreſſely deputeth twoe places for ſoules, heauen for the good, and hell for the badde.

Touching the law of God: they denie that we may pray Of Gods law. for the fulfilling of it. lib. 1. c. 19. art. 5. And yet thus writeth Perkins in Explic. orat. Dom. Be done, that is, let obedience be giuen to it, let it be fulfilled of all men.

Concerning mans will: they denie that it is free in euill Of mans will l. 1. c. 21. art. 2. And yet thus writeth Regius in locis tit. de Peccato: To ſay with Maniche; that man cannot auoide ſinne; this error is hereſie. Rogers on the 10. Article. The Maniches affirmed how man is not voluntarily brought but neceſſarilie driuen vnto ſinne.

Theſe and manie moe Proteſtanticall doctrines Proteſtants themſelues confeſſe to be contrarie to the true ſenſe of holie Scripture. Why then may not we conclude, that Proteſtāts do contradict the holie Scripture, ſeing beſides all the foreſaied arguments, they themſelues plainely confeſſe it of manie points of their doctrine: Which was the end and ſcope of this worke.

PERORATION Or Concluſion to the Reader.

THov haſt ſeene (good Reader) in this worke, Catholiks aduantages for, Scripture ouer Proteſtants. what great aduantage Catholiks haue ouer Proteſtants euen for the written word of God or holie Scripture. Thou haſt ſeene, that the Catholik doctrine in more then twoe hundred and ſixtie points of cō trouerſie relieth vpon the expreſſe word of God; whereas the Proteſtants Doctrine relieth vpon humane principles, humane conferences, humane conſequences, that is, vpon the word of man. Thou haſt ſeene, that the holie Scripture in all theſe foreſaied articles giueth ſentence for the Catholik doctrine, and condemneth the Proteſtant, in expreſſe words, and thoſe purpoſely ſpoaken, and in their plaine & vſuall ſenſe, in which ſuch words vſe to be ſpoakē and taken of men: then the which no ſentence can be giuē clearer or manifeſter. Thou haſt ſeene how manie, how voluntarie, how intollerable corruptiōs both of the words and ſenſe of Scripture Proteſtants are forced to make, leſt they should ſeeme to be condemned by the ſentence of holie Scripture. They haue now that Iudge to whome alone they appeale, let them heare him, let them ſubmit themſelues to his ſentence. He ſpeaketh plainely, directly, and purpoſely, and (as I ſaied) in the plaine and vſuall ſenſe in which men vſe ſuch words, that I may not ſay alſo in the ſenſe, in which he is vnderſtood of the holie Fathers and the Catholik Church. Now all and the onelie pretext of Proteſtants touching the Scripture is taken away. For who, vnleſſe he will shut his eyes, doth not ſee, but that they are moſt plainelie condemned of the Scripture, who are condemned of it in ſo manie, and ſo weightie articles, in ſuch plaine words, and ſo cleare ſenſe, and that it is but a vaine ſtrugling to ſeek to obſcure the clearneſſe of ſuch a ſentence by humane gloſſes and expoſitions, ſuch as were neuer wanting, nor euer wilbe wanting to anie Heretik? The Proteſtants haue often cried, that the Scripture is the onelie rule and foundation of faith, that faith relieth onelie vpon Scripture: which I would to God they would follow in the foreſaied 260. articles, and let goe their owne gloſſes and conſequences, which are not ſound in Scripture, and follow them who produce the expreſſe word of God againſt the word of man. Which counſail though it of it ſelfe be moſt reaſonable, yet becauſe they will more willinglie follow it when they shall heare it approued by their owne Maiſters, I will here ſet downe the words of ſome of them. Luther in Poſtilla in Feſto Aſſumpt. Alwaies Proteſt. aduiſe vs to follow them that follow Scripture. ſticke to th • ſe things, which are clearely deliuered by the Scriptures: and relie not vpon that which hath not manifeſt authoritie in Scripture. The Proteſtante Princes in Praefar. libr. Concordiae. In true ſimplicitie of faith they shall firmely inſiſt in the plaine words of Chriſt: which is the ſureſt manner and fitteſt to teach the ignorant. Melancthon in Actis Wormat. tom. 4. When the letter is plaine, it is manifeſt we muſt not goe from it. Et ib. in Reſp. ad Staphilum: Nether is it to to be doubted, but that the letter, when there is no obſcuritie or anbiguitie, is to be preferred before all the decrees of all men. Againe: Where the word is manifeſt, and without obſcuritie or ambiguitie: it is impietie to teach or thinke the contrarie. And in Hoſpin. part. 2. Hiſtor. fol. 115. What wilbe in time of tentation, Harken to this, Proteſtants. when the conſcience shall aske what cauſe it had to goe from the recaued doctrine of the Church: Then theſe words: This is my bodie, wilbe lightnings. What will the terrified mynd oppoſe againſt theſe, with what Scripture, with what word of God, will she ſtrenghthen and perſwade her ſelfe, that it was need to interpret them by a metaphor. They ſeeme not to be well acquainted with theſe diſputes, who ſo much delighte in wit, as them more admire ſubtilly deuiſed reaſons then the words of Scripture. Iames Andrews in Colloq. Montisbel. pag. 456. Let them examine and iudge the doctrine of both partes, not by humane gloſſes, but by the word of God. Zuinglius libr. de Author. ſedit. tom. 2. As often as thou ſeeſt Chriſtian Doctors to cōtend and diſagree, ſtick to him who bringeth a cleare, euident, and expreſſe oracle of God. Caluin. l. de ver. ref. p. 326. We denie, that it is lawfull for vs to goe from the certaine words of Chriſt. And 4. Inſtit. c. 17. §. 35. Our ſoules relie vpon the onely certaine word of God, when they are called to account. Sadeel libr. de Human. Chriſt. I cannot ſufficiently admire them, who by thoſe things which are not extant in Scripture, will take awaye the things which are approued by moſt certaine and euident teſtimonies of Scripture. And de ver. peccat. remiſſio. No opinion is Theologicall, which is againſt the expreſſe places of Scripture. Fulk. in Hebr. 6. not. 3. Nether is the expoſition of anie man to be receaued, that goeth directly againſt the words of the text, and the manifould teſtimonies of the Scripture. Vorſtius in Amica Collat. ſec. 101. Who ſimply ſo affirme and teach al theſe things, they are ſecure before God, becauſe they can ſafely retire themſelues vnder the sheild of the holie Scripture; But who denie them, or by meruailous gloſſes obſcure or corrupt them, thy finde no where ſure footing. There is nothing more ſecure, thē ſimply to ſtick to the cleare word of God expounded by it ſelfe: and contrariewiſe, nothing more dangerous, then to adde or detract neuer ſo litle of our owne, eſpecially in matters of ſo great moment. Thus the cheife Proteſtant maiſters, which if ether themſelues would haue followed, or their diſciples yet would follow, ſoone would there be an end of theſe controuerſies.

With what aſſurance (ô God) may Catholiks appeare Confidence of Cath. for their faith. before thy tribunall for to anſwere for the faith which they maintaine againſt Proteſtants, ſeing they finde it is auouched in ſo manie and ſo great articles by thy expreſſe words ſpoaken not by the way, but of ſet purpoſe to tell vs what thou wouldeſt haue vs beleiue of theſe matters, and in their cleare and plaine ſenſe, which they manifeſtly beare, and in which ſuch words vſe to be taken of men, ſo that vnleſſe thou doe deceaue then or be deceaued, they cānot in theſe points be deceaued? But with what diſtruſt Deſperation of Proteſt. or rather deſperation will Proteſtants appeare, ſeing they haue left that which ſo expreſſe words of God do auouch, & follow that which they moſt clearelie condēne, & onelie humane conſequences, humane gloſſes, humane ſubtilities doe vphould? Then theſe words of God, wilbe (as Melancthon ſaied) lightnings, or as S. Auſtin ſpeaketh, thundrings Lib. 1. contr. Parm. c. 2. and heauenly lightnings, and Proteſtants cōſequences, figures, and gloſſes, will vanish to nothing. Then it will clearelie appeare, that Proteſtants without all word of God, without all diuine authoritie, but onelie vpon their owne fancies haue preferred their conſequences, their conferences, their idle reaſons before Gods expreſſe word, and that they might not ſeeme to haue done ſo, haue changed the true and natiue ſenſe of Gods words into a ſtrange, figuratiue, and violent ſenſe. And shall we Neuer anie ſo contrarie to Scripture as Proteſtants. thinke, that theſe men are Ghoſpelers, reſtorers of the Ghoſpel, or ſent of God, and their doctrine the pure Ghoſpell? Whereas neuer was there doctrine more oppoſit to the Ghoſpell, nor euer anie who in ſo manie and weightie matters, ſo directlie oppoſed themſelues to the plaine words and open ſenſe of the Ghoſpell. O bouldneſſe of men that durſt do thus againſt the expreſſe word of God himſelfe. O impudencie of them who would auouch ſuch doctrine, for the Ghoſpell. And ô blindneſſes or madneſſe of them, who ſuffer themſelues to be deceaued of ſuch men in a matter ſo euident. O bewiched and blinded mē, awaken at lenght, open your eyes, conſider your eſtate, ſearch the Scriptures here ſet before your eyes, and compare them with the doctrine of your Maiſters, and conſider whether they who in ſo manie and ſo great matters ſpeak ſo contrarie, can ſpeake with the ſame ſpirit, thinke the ſame thing. Demand of your Maiſters 1. by what authoritie Demands to be made to Miniſters. of God, by what word of God, they dare ſpeake contrarie to the words and phraſe of Scripture, of ſo manie and ſo great matters: 2. by what authoritie or word of God, they dare thinke of ſo manie and ſo great matters, otherwiſe then the expreſſe word of God ſpoaken purpoſelie and in it plaine and open ſenſe, taught them to thinke. 3. By what authoritie or word of God, they haue changed the proper vſuall and manifeſt ſenſe of his words, into figuratiue, vnuſuall, and violent ſenſes,

If they can alledge no expreſſe authoritie or word of Miniſters draw men from Gods expreſſe word to their conſequences. God for their ſo doing (as in trueth in moſt of theſe Articles they can giue no colour of Gods expreſſe word) but oneliepretend their conſequences, their conferences, their reaſons, ſuffer not your ſelues by this moſt deceitfull and fond humane pretext to be drawne from Gods expreſſe and their manifeſt ſenſe. Let vs (ſaieth S. Auſtin) heare our Lib. de peccat. mer. c. 20. our Lord not the gheſſes and ſuspicions of men. But that God ſpeaking to men, ſpeaking according to the manner of men, ſpeaking of diuine and ſupernaturall things which cannot be knowne of vs but by his words, and ſpeaking of them purpoſely for to declare his mynd concerning Note. them, should ſo often and in ſo manie and ſo wheigtie points, thinke otherwiſe then he ſpeaketh, or otherwiſe thinke then his words do shew, or otherwiſe then men to whome he ſpeaketh vſe to vnderſtand them, and yet not once should expreſſely ſay the cōtrarie, is not Gods word but the gheſſes and ſuſpicions, yea the impoſtures and lies of men. In this point therefore conſiſteth almoſt all the The Summe whether Catholiks or Proteſt, be to be followed. ſumme of deliberation whether Catholiks or Proteſtants be to be followed, to wit, whether in ſupernaturall matters, which cannot be knowne but by Gods expreſſe words, we ought to follow rather the expreſſe words of God purpoſely ſpoaken of him for to tell vs thoſe matters, Is whether Gods word, or mans reaſon. rather then the conſequences, conferences, & reaſons, of ſome new ſlart vp men not well agreing among themſelues: Then the which conſultation none can be eaſier. For if euen in matters which are ſubiect to ſenſe & reaſon, we ought to preferre Gods word before reaſon of what men ſoeuer; how much more in things which farre ſurpaſſe the reach of mens ſenſe or reaſon, ought we to preferre it before the reaſons of a few, new, and iangling fellows? Let that faith liue, florish, and triumphe, which Let that faith preuaile which Scripture moſt fauoureth. in diuine matters that cannot be knowne but by Gods words, is authorized by Gods expreſſe word ſpoaken of purpoſe to declare Gods mynd, and in the plaine and opē ſenſe wherein men vſe to take ſuch words, and againſt which ſenſe no other expreſſe words are directly contrarie: And let that faith, or rather infidelitie, fall, perish, vanish, which in more then 260. articles is condemned of ſuch words of God and in ſuch a ſenſe, and in moſt points is onely ſupported by humane conſequences, humane conferences, and humane reaſons or arguments.

Theſe are the points (Chriſtian Reader) taken out of How Proteſt. handle the letter of Scripture. the firſt booke, which I deſire to faſten and engraue in thy memorie: which yet will be more forcible, if thou adde to them things which I haue ſet before thy eyes in thy ſecond booke. For there I haue shewed, that the holie Scripture doth ſo manifeſtly condemne the Proteſtants doctrine, as that touching the letter thereof, they are forced to reiect ſome openly, others priuilie to ſcrape out, to call ſome in doubt, to adde ſome, to tranſlate ſome wrong, and change the order of others: Touching the propoſitiōs How the ſayings. of Scripture, they are compelled to ſay, that ſome of them were certainlie knowne of God himſelfe, others not ſpoaken according to his owne mynd, others ſpoaken ironically, mimeticallie, hyperbolicallie, by fiction and amplification: and to change vniuerſall propoſitions into particulars, vnlimited into limited, abſolute into conditionals, theſe that were ſpoakē ſimply into thoſe that were ſpoakē in parte, and thoſe that were ſpoaken of one time, into thoſe that were ſpoaken of an other. Touching the ſingle How the ſimple words. words of Scripture, they are forced, thoſe words which ſignifie the doing of a thing, to expound of endeauour to doe it; thoſe which ſignifie the cauſe, to expound of the way or means to an end: Which ſignifie that a thing is, to expound that it ought to be: Which ſignifie a true thing, to expound of an apparent or ſigne thereof: to expound words, by diuerſe, by diſparate, or vnlikelie, yea by oppoſites or contraries: to deuiſe all kinde of figures when the proprietie of the word is againſt them: to find out new & and neuer heard of diſtinctions: to reiect the vnanimous expoſition of Fathers, Church, and Councels: to fruſtrate the ends of the paſſion of Chriſt: to take out of the world all true vertue, and to open the way to all vice: to confeſſe, that they hould opinions her to fore condemned for hereſies of the Church and Fathers: to acknowledge that ſome of their opinions are plainely blaſphemous: and finally (which is the end of this worke) directly oppoſite to holie Scripture. Who (I ſay) in more then 260. articles of cōtrouerſie, not onelie oppoſe themſelues to the expreſſe words of Scripture, ſpoaken of purpoſe to tell vs Gods meaning cōcerning matters that farre paſſe all mās reach, in their proper ſenſe, and in which men vſuallie vnderſtand them, and to which no other places of Scripture are directlie oppoſite: but alſo, laie violent hands vpon the ſacred letter or word, change almoſt all the kinds of propoſitions which the Scripture vſeth, impiouſlie depraue the ſenſe of the words, reiect the expoſition of Fathers, Church, and Councells, make voide the ends of Chriſts paſſion take away all vertue and bring in vice, and finallie confeſſe, that diuers of their opinions are blaſphemous & contrarie to ſcripture, they are to be accounted, auoided and eſchewed, not onely as Heretiks condemned by the Scripture and holie Church, but euen of themſelues.

A note to the Reader.

I HAVE not ſet downe the editions of the Proteſtants bookes which I cite in this worke, becauſe I haue done that in my booke de Authore Prot. Eccleſiae put forth An. 1619. Where he that liſt may ſee them, as alſo he may there ſee the laws which I preſcribe to him that will anſwere ether that booke or this. Moreouer in this English worke I doe not cite the English words of our English Proteſtant writers becauſe I had not their English works at hand, but tranſlate them out of their Latin works. Beſides I am not ſo curious to cite the leafe or page as I was in the Latin edition, becauſe the vnlearned will not be able to ſeeke the Latin, and the learned Reader will rather (I ſuppoſe) peruſe my Latin copie, where he shall find the leaues or pages as carefully cited as I could doe by the errors of the Scribe or Printer, whoſe fault no diſcret reader will impute to me; and whoſe error I hope is no where to be found both in the number of the chapters, and of the leaues or pages together: So that the one of them may bring the Reader to the place which I alledge, if the other chance to be miſprinted.

Laus Deo Virginique Matri.

AN INDEX OF THE CHAPTERS and Articles contained in the firſt booke.

CHAPTR 1. Of the owners of Scripture.

Whether Catholiks or Proteſtants be true owners of the Scripture.

CHAP. 2. Of God.

ARt. 2. Whether God willeth ſinne. page. 45. 2. Whether ſinne pleaſeth God. p. 49. 3. Whether God hateth ſinne. p. 50. 4. Whether God worketh ſinne. p. 51. 5. Whether God ordaineth ſinne to be. p. 33. 6. Whether God commandeth ſinne? p. 56. 7. Whether God tempteth to ſinne? p. 57 8. Whether God neceſſitateth to ſinne? p. 59. 9. Whether God hateth all that ſinne? p. 61. 10. Whether God iuſtifieth the ſinner remaining a ſinner? p. 62. 11. Whether God be angrie with the faithfull when they ſinne? p. 65. 12. Whether God be delighted with good works. p. 67. 14. Whether God be ſerued by good works. p. 69. 15. Whether God eſteeme of good works which are not commanded? 70. 16. Whether God be appeaſed by good workes? p. 71. 17. Whether God will haue his commā dements kept. p. 73. 18. Whether God loueth all men. p. 75. 19. Whether God would haue all men to be ſaued. p. 77. 20. Whether God would haue ſome cō uerted who will not conuert. p. 78. 21. Whether God call all men. p. 80. 22. Whether God of himſelfe will the death and damnation of men. p. 81. 23. Whether God dāneth men for ſinne? p. 85. 24. Whether God can doe all things. p. 86. 25. Whether God can make a Camell paſſe through a needls eye. p. 88. 26. Whether God can doe that which shall neuer be. p. 90. 27. Whether Gods miracles be a ſufficient proof of trueth? p. 91.

Chap. 3. Of Chriſt.

Art. 1. Whether God the Sonne had his being of his Father. p. 96. 2. Whether Chriſt was predeſtinated the Sonne of God. p. 97. 3. Whether Chriſt as man is to be adored. p. 98. 4. Whether Chriſt as man could worke miracles. p. 100. 5. Whether Chriſts humanitie be euerie where. p. 102. 6. Whether Chriſt as man be head of the Church. p. 104. 7. Whether Chriſt as man made lawes? p. 105. 8. Whether Chriſt as mā be Iudge? 107. 9. Whether Chriſt made a new teſtament? p. 109. 10. Whether as man he were ignorant? p. 111. 11. Whether as man he were a ſinner? p. 113. 12. Whether he refuſed to doe the office of a Redeemer? p. 116. 13 Whether he was aſſured of his ſaluation? 118 14 VVhether he had commandment to giue his life for vs? 120 15 VVhether he merited any thing for himſelfe? 121 16 VVhether he ſufficiently redeemed vs? 123 17. VVhether he redeemed vs with his blood? 125 18. VVhether he died for reprobates? 127 19. VVhether he died for all? 129 20. VVhether his blood be corrupted? 131 21. VVhether his ſoule deſcēded to hell? 132 22. VVhether he ſuffered the paines of hell? 134 23. VVhether he entred to his diſciples, the doores being shut? 136 24. VVhether he penetrated the heauēs? 138 25. VVhether he praieth for vs in heauen? 139

Chap. 4. Of Angels and Saints.

Art. 1. VVhether Angels and Saints doe the will of God? 144 2. VVhether Saints enioye their felicitie? 145 3. VVhether the glorie of Saints be equall? 147 4. VVhether Angels and Saints pray for vs. 148 5. VVhether Saints haue care of vs? 150 6. VVhether they heare our praiers. 152. 7. VVhether Angels offer our praiers to God? 153 8. VVhether they be to be praied vnto? 155 9. VVhether God be to be praied vnto by the names of Saints? 156 10. VVhether God haue mercie on vs for Saints ſake? 158 11. VVhether Angels or Saints be to be bowed vnto? 159 12. VVhether Saints be to be imitated of vs? 161 13. VVhether holie men receaue vs into heauenlie tabernacles? 162 14. VVhether anie Saint may be termed our hope? 163 15. VVhether anie had power to worke Miracles? 164 16. VVhether Saints do reigne with Chriſt? 166 17. VVhether anie was full of grace? 167

Chap. 5. Of the Scripture or worde of God.

Art. 1. VVhether anie place of Scripture be hard to vnderſtand? 170 2. VVhether Scripture can be vnderſtood without the holie Ghoſt? 172 3. VVhether the Ghoſpel containe any law? 174 4. VVhether the Ghoſpell preach pennance? 167 5. VVhether the Ghoſpell reproue ſinne? 178 6. VVhether the Ghopell promiſe ſaluation without conditiō of works? 180 7. VVhether the Goſpell be contrarie to the law? 182 8. VVhether the law of Moyſes commanded faith in Chriſt? 184. 9. VVhether anie vnwritten traditions be to be kept? 186

Chap. 6. Of S. Peter and the Apoſtles.

Art. 1. VVhether S. Peter were firſt of the Apoſtles? 189. 2. VVhether the Church was built on S. Peter? 190. 3. VVhether the keyes were giuen to him? 192. 4. VVhether his faith failed? 193. 5. VVhether the Apoſtles were foundations of the Church? 195. 6. VVhether the Apoſtles were ſimply to be heard? 196. 7. VVhether they were ſufficient witneſſes of the trueth? 198 8. VVhether they learned anie point after Chriſts aſcenſion? 200. 9. VVhether Iudas was truely a diſciple? 201. 10. VVhether Iudas was a Bishop? 202.

Chap. 7. Of Paſtors of the Church.

Art. 1. Whether Paſtors alwaies continew? 204. 2. VVhether authoritie be in the Paſtors? 206. 3. VVhether one Paſtor can excommunicate? 208. 4. VVhether Paſtors can make lawes? 209. 5. VVhether Bishops be rulers of the Church? 210 6. VVhether they rule the Church? 211. 7. VVhether Paſtors be to be called Prieſts? 213. 8. VVhether a Paſtor can be without calling? 214. 9 Whether a Paſtor may haue temporall iuriſdiction? 216. 10 VVhether Moyſes were a Preiſt? 218.

Chap. 8. Of the Church.

Art. 1. VVhether the Church be one? 220. 2. VVhether ill men be of the Church? 223. 3 Whether reprobats be of the Church? 225. 4 VVhether the Church euer continew? 226. 5. VVhether it be alwaies viſible? 228. 6. VVhether it be infallible? 230. 7. VVhether it be ſimply to be heard? 231. 8. VVhether trueth relieth on the Church? 232.

Chap. 9. Of Temples or materiall Churches.

Art. 1. VVhether Churches be for priuat Praiers? 235. 2. VVhether Churches be to be adorned? 237. 3. VVhether Images may be ſet in Churches? 4. VVhether Heatens thought their idols to be Gods? 240

Chap. 10. Of Baptiſme.

Art. 1. Whether water be neceſſarie to baptiſme? p. 242. 2. Whether inuocation of the Trinitie be neceſſarie to baptiſme? p. 243. 3. Whether baptiſme be neceſſarie as by precept? p. 245. 4. VVhether it be neceſſarie as a meane? p. 246. 5. VVhether Simon Magus and ſuch were baptized? p. 248. 6. VVhether baptiſme be effectuall in reprobats. p. 150. 7. VVhether baptiſme clenſeth ſinne? p. 252. 8. VVhether it pardonneth ſinnes to come? p. 256. 9. VVhether before baptiſme children be in ſtate of damnation? p. 258. 10. VVhether the baptiſme of S. Ihon and of Chriſt were different? p. 261. 11. VVhether certaine Epheſians had receaued S. Ihons baptiſme? p. 262. 12. VVhether they had heard of the holie Ghoſt? p. 264.

Chap. 11. Of the Eucharist.

Art. 1. VVhether the Euchariſt be the bodie and blood of Chriſt? p. 266. 2. VVhether Chriſts flesh be to be eaten, and his blood to be drunk? p. 280. 3. VVhether Chriſt gaue the blood of the new teſtament to be drunk? p. 283. 4. VVhether the Euchariſticall Chalice be Chriſts teſtament? p. 284. 5. Vhether at the time of his Supper his blood was shed? p. 286. 6. VVhether the Euchariſticall Chalice was shed for vs? p. 288. 7. VVhether bread be neceſſarie to the Euchariſt? p. 289. 8. VVhether the Euchariſt be to be made of azime bread? p. 290. 9. VVhether bread and wine whereof the Euchariſt is made, be to be bleſſed? p. 292. 10. VVhether there ought to be anie preparation to the Euchariſt? p. 293. 11. VVhether there be anie Sacrifice in the Church? p. 295. 12. VVhether is there anie altar in the Church. p. 296. 13. VVhether the Paſchal lambe was ſacrificed? p. 297.

Chap. 12. Of the other Sacraments.

Art. 1. VVhether Preiſts can forgiue ſinnes? p. 300. 2. VVhether we muſt cōfeſſe our ſinnes. p. 302. 3. VVhether grace be giuen by impoſition of hands? p. 305. 4. VVhether hands be to be impoſed vpon thoſe that are baptized? p. 305. 5. VVhether Matrimonie be a Sacrament? p. 306. 6. VVhether one may marrie after diuorce. p. 307. 7. VVhether the ſick are to be anoiled? p. 310. 8. VVhether the new Sacraments excell the ould. p. 311.

Chap. 13. Of faith.

Art. 1. VVhether faith be a worke? 314. 2. VVhether faith beleiue onely God his promiſes. 315. 3. VVhether to beleiue that Chriſt is God, be iuſtifying faith? 317. 4. VVhether faith be one? 319. 5. VVhether all articles of faith may be beleiued without the holie Ghoſt. 321. 6. VVhether faith differ from hope and charitie? 322. 7. VVhether faith be greater then charitie? 324. 8. VVhether faith be without charitie? 325. 9. VVhether it be without confeſſion? 328. 10. VVhether without good works it be dead? 329. 11. VVhether faith whereof S. Iames ſpeaketh be iuſtifying faith? 331. 12. VVhether anie faith be perfect? 333. 13. VVhether faith be perfected by good works. 331. 14. VVhether by faith we onely know that we are iuſtified? 336. 15. VVhether faith be neceſſarie to iuſtification or ſaluation. 338. 16. VVhether faith be anie cauſe of iuſtificatien? 340. 17. VVhether faith alone cā iuſtifie. 342. 18. VVhether faith iuſtifie, as it is beleife. 344. 19. VVhether faith it ſelfe be imputed to iuſtice. 346 20. VVhether faith be proper to the iuſt. 348 21 VVhether it be proper to the Elect? 350 22. VVhether faith come by hearing? 352 23. VVhether faith be euer loſt? 353 24. VVhether faith be rewarded? 355 25. VVhether the faith of thoſe who toucht Chriſts garments, were pure? 356

Chap. 14. Of good workes in generall.

Art. 1. VVhether anie worke of a Sinner may be good. p. 360 2 VVhether euerie good worke, be ſinne? 362 3 VVhether good works, be a ſweet ſmell to God, 364 4 VVhether good works be fully good? 366 5 VVhether they be iuſt or iuſtice in the ſight of God? 369 6 VVhether in good works there be anie worth? 371 7 VVhether eternall life be promiſed to good works? 373 8 VVhether good works be meritorious. 374 9 VVhether there may be glorie in good works? 376 10 VVhether all good works be equall before God? 378 11 VVhether good works be commanded of God? 379 12 VVhether they be neceſſarie to iuſtification? 381 13 VVhether they be neceſſarie to ſaluation? 384 14 VVhether they be profitable to ſaluation or iuſtification? 387 15 VVhether they be anie cauſe of ſaluation? 390 16 VVhether they be a teſtimonie of iuſtification or predeſtination? 393 17 VVhether they be a cauſe of Gods loue towards vs? 395 18 VVhether we ought to doe good works? 396 19 VVhether they may be done for reward? 399 20 VVhether they be to be done for the glorie of God? 401

Chap. 15. Of workes in particular.

Art. 1. VVhether it be good not to marrie? 406 2 VVhether virginitie, be a vertue? 406. 3. VVhether the ſtate of virginitie be better then marriage? 408 4. VVhether God would haue men to liue ſingle? 410 5. VVhether Faſting be a vertue? 412. 6. VVhether faſting be a preſeruatiue againſt the Diuel? 414. 7. VVhether choice of meats be laudable? 415. 8 VVhether we may pray for all? 416. 9. VVhether we may pray for the dead? 417. 10 VVhether we may pray for that which God hath not promiſed? 419 11. VVhether anie obtaine for the worth of their praier? 421. 12. VVhether we may pray in an vnknowne tongue? 422. 13. VVhether we be commanded to ſay our lords praier? 423 14. VVhether we may make vows? 424 15. VVhether almes deliuer from death and ſinne? 426 16. VVhether we may giue all to the poore? 427 17. VVhether pennance be commanded to all? 428 18 VVhether affliction of the bodie be a parte of pennance? 429. 19 VVhether pennance of the Niniuites was good? 431 20. VVhether Eremitical life be lawfull?

Chap. 16. Of Sinnes.

Art. 1. VVhether ſinnes be imputed to the faithfull? 435. 2. VVhether anie ſinne be mortall to the Elect and faithfull? 437. 3. VVhether onely incredulitie be ſinne? 438. 4. VVhether ſinne ought to be ouercomen of vs? 440. 5. VVhether anie that ſerue the flesh, can ſerue God? 441. 6 VVhether by greuous ſinnes we fall from grace? 442. 7 VVhether ſinne can ſtād with iuſtice? 8. VVhether ſinne may be redeemed by good works? 447. 9. VVhether to abſtaine from great ſinnes, be neceſſarie to ſaluation? 448 10. VVhether ſinne be the cauſe of damnation? 451. 11. VVhether we muſt giue account of our ſinnes? 453. 12. VVhether the iuſtified commit ill? p. 454. 13. VVhether the iuſtified commit ſinne? 455. 14 VVhether the iuſtified euer do ſinne wilfully? 457. 15 VVhether the widows 1. Tim. 5. did ſinne in marrying? 458. 16 VVhether vſurie be ſinne? 459. 17. VVhether all ſinned in Adam? 460. 18. VVhether there is originall ſinne? 461.

Chap. 17. Of Iustification.

Art. 1. VVhether Iuſtification be of works? 465. 2. VVhether it be of faith onely? 467. 3. VVhether the iuſtified be iuſt in Gods fight? 469. 4. VVhether the iuſtified be cleane? 472 5. VVhether ſinne remaine in the iuſtified? 474. 6. VVhether ſinnes be ſimply forgiuen? 477. 7. VVhether all the iuſtified be equally iuſt? 478. 8. VVhether there is anie inherent iuſtice? 478. 9. Whether inherent iuſtice can be imputed. 481. 10. Whether the iuſtified be infallibly certaine of their iuſtice? 482. 11. Whether pennance goe before iuſtification? 845. 12. Whether iuſtificatiō can be loſt? 487. 13. Whether the iuſtified may feare to fall? 489. 14. Whether iuſtification be proper to the Elect? 492. 15. Whether we cooperate to our iuſtification? 493. 16. Whether after iuſtification anie punishment remaine? 496

Chapt. 18. Of life and death euerlaſting.

ART. 1. Whether life euerlaſting be a reward? p. 499. 2. Whether it be a crowne of iuſtice? 501. 3. Whether it be of faith onely? 503. 4. Whether all men be to be iudged? 505 5. Whether eternall life be to be rendered to anie? 506. 6. Whether the ſoules of the Reprobates doe now ſuffer in Hell. 507. 7. Whether Hell be anie place? 509. 8. Whether Hell fire be true fire? 510.

Chapt. 19. Of Gods law.

ART. 1. Whether Gods law be poſſible? 513. 2. Whether euer anie kept Gods law? 515. 3. Whether anie loued God in all the •• heart? 517. 4. Whether Gods law be in th • heart of anie? 519. 5. Whether we • 〈◊〉 • that we may keepe Gods law? 520. 6. Whether the keeping of Gods law be neceſſarie to ſaluation? 521. 7. Whether the law of God be abrogated from the faithfull. 522.

Chapt. 20. Of mans law and ſuperioritie.

ART. 1. Whether there be anie Superioritie among Chriſtians? 526. 2. Whether man can make laws? 527. 3. Whether mans law bindeth the conſcience? 529.

Chapt. 21. Of free will.

ART. Whether man be free in indifferent matters? 532. 2. Whether man be free in morall matters? 534. 3. Whether man cooperate with Gods grace to good? 536.

Chap. 22. Of mans Soule.

ART. 1. Whether mans Soule be immortall? 539. 2. Whether Mans ſoule be the forme of his bodie? 545. 3 Whether there be anie reſurrection of the dead? 547.

THE INDEX. OF THE CHAPTERS CONTAINED in the ſecond booke.

CHAPTER. 1. That Proteſtants contradict the tru • ſenſe of Scripture, becauſe i • ſo manie points they gayneſay the expreſſe words thereof. pag. 549. Chapt. 2. That Proteſtants confeſſe, they contradict the ſenſe of thoſe words, which the Cathol. Church long ſince, and manie of themſelues now, beleiue to be the words of God. p. 611. Chapt. 3. That Proteſtants are forced to vſe violence to that parte of Scripture which they receaue. p. 615. Chapt. 4. That Proteſtants ouerthrow all force of the words of Scripture, yea contemne and deride them. p. 620. Chapt. 5. That Proteſtants ſay, that words of Scripture which make againſt them, were not ſpoaken of certaine knowledge. p. 630. Chapt. 6. That Proteſtants ſaye, that manie weightie ſayings of the Scripture were not ſpoaken according to the mynd of the ſpeakers. p. 633. Chapt. 7. That Proteſtants are forced to ſay, that the Scripture ſpeaketh ironically, &c. p. 640. Chapt. 8. That Proteſtants are forced to turne the moſt generall ſpeaches of the Scripture into particulars. p. 647. Chapt. 9. That Proteſtants limitate manie propoſitions, not limitated by the Scripture. p. 654. Chapt. 10. That Proteſtants change manie abſolute ſpeaches of Scripture into conditionals. p. 665. Chapt. 11. That Proteſtants change conditionall ſpeaches of Scripture into abſolute. p. 668. Chapt. 12. That Proteſtants change manie cauſall ſpeaches of Scripture into not cauſal. p. 670. Chapt. 13. That what is ſimply ſpoaken of Scripture, they make to be ſpoaken in parte. p. 674. Chapt. 14. That they will not vnderſtād the ſpeaches of Scripture of that time of which it ſpeaketh. p. 678. Chapt. 15. That of manie ſayings of Scripture they make one. p. 681. Chapt. 16. That words which ſignifie effecting a thing, they expound of endeauoring. p. 683. Chapt. 17. That words which ſignifie a cauſe, they expound of a way or meane. p. 686. Chap. 18. That words which ſignifie a thing to be, they expound, that it ought to be. p. 689. Chapt. 19. That words ſignifying a true thing, they expound of an apparent. p. 690. Chapt. 20. That they are forced to expound the words of Scripture, by diuers, by diſparats, and contraries. p. 696. Chapt. 21. That they are forced to deuiſe improprietie of words and all figures. p. 712. Chapt. 22. That they are forced to coyne manie diſtinctions, friuolous, repugnant, and vnheard of. p. 719. Chapt. 23. That they confeſſe that they teach againſt the vniforme conſent of Fathers, the Church, and Councels. p. 731. Chapt. 24. That they confeſſe that they teach ould damned hereſies. p. 740. Chapt. 25. That they confeſſe that ſome of the Proteſtants opinions are blaſphemous. p. 744. Chapt. 26. That they make fruſtrate the ends of Chriſts incarnation and paſſion. p. 755. Chapt. 27. That they take away all vertue, and open a way to all ſinne. p. 758. Chapt. 28. That they haue no infallible interpretation of Scripture. p. 763. Chapt. 29. That they admit no Iudge to whoſe iudgment they will ſtand. p. 769. Chapt. 30. That ſometimes they confeſſe their doctrine to be contrarie to holie Scripture. p. 757. Peroration or Concluſion to the Reader. p. 791.

FINIS.

Faults eſcaped in the printing.

In the Preface to the booke.

Page 5. line 8. let is. Correction, let vs. ibid. l. 26. ſixte. cor. ſixtie. p. 8. l. 15. is moſt. cor. is a moſt. ib. eaſe. cor. eaſie. ib. l. 38 dele. all p. 9. l. 10. gods. cor. God. p. 12. l. 2. thefe. cor. theſe. p. 15. l. 34. for as cor. ſo for as. p. 17. l. 37. like moſt &c. cor. like booſt of them all. But this moſt. &c. p. 19. l. 7. proporſe is cor. propoſe. p. 20. l. 37. Word. cor. worke. p. 23. l. 31. proportions cor. propoſitions. p. 25. l. 27. Workes. cor. worke is. p. 26. l 10. if cite. cor. I cite. p. 27. l. 20. thaught cor. taught.

In the booke.

Pag. 2. line. 18. hould cor. hold. p. 3. l. 28. herie cor. heire. p. 6. l. 1. with cor. with them. p. 10. l. 28. for better cor. far better. p. 14. l. 20. be cor. he. p. 20. l. 19. rocke. cor. the rocke. p. 23. l. 21. right cor. night. ib. l. 27. image cor. of Image. ib. l 28. not cor. nor. p. 25. l. 2. whas hed cor. washed. p 28. l. 36. ſweel cor. ſweet. p. 48. l. 3. damnations cor. damnation. p. 49. l. 33. dath cor. doth. p, 50. l. 23. aboues cor. aboue. p. 51. l. 13. vn cor. vnto. p. 52 l. 10. is cor. his. p. 53. l. 21. it cor. is. p. 55. l. 11. to will cor. to witt. p. 56. l. 25. for cor. for to. p. 65. l. 5. punisheth cor. he punisheth. ib. l. 16. hath anger cor. hath no anger. p. 68. l 17 Manlins cor. Moulins. p. 69. l. 19. to will cor. to wit. p. 74. l. 31. declare cor. deelared. p. 80. l. 13 came cor. come. p. 81. l. 22. burdered cor. burdened. p. 82. l 32. shat cor. that. p. 92. l 36. as once cor. at once. p 102. l 22. forgiuen cor. forgiuing. p. 105 l. 3. know cor. bow. p 123. l. 26. obut cor. but. p. 138 l. 14. cannot be cor. cannot but be. ib. l. 35. bought cor. brought. p. 145. l. 27. came cor. come. p. 146. l. 19. enioyned cor. enioyed. p. 155. l. 19. two cor. to. p. 156. l. 17. any cor. an. p. 177. l. 16. workeſſe cor. workes. p. 182. l. 3 mayes cor. wayes. p. 191. l. 24. oppoſition cor. expoſition. p. 193 l. 23. affirmeth cor. denyeth. p. 194. l. 1. affirme cor. deny. ib l. 3. denie cor. affirme. p. 202 l. 5. one cor. are. ib l 26. deny cor. affirme. p. 209 l. 23. diuel cor. dwell. p. 210. l. 24. prieſts cor. prieſt. p. 211. l. 13. whether do, cor. whether Paſtors doe. p 313. l 17. followes cor. fellowes. p. 215. l. 17. port cor. part. p. 218. l. 20. as cor was p. 260. l. 1. roshly cor. rashly. p. 269. l. 26. if cor. of. p. 271. l. 34. of paſtie cor. or paſtie. p. 274. l. 35. if the cor. of the. p. 278 l. • 8. them cor. then. p. 289. l. 10. he cor. be. ib. l. 20. ad cor. and p. 305. l. 17. deſcricbed cor. deſcribed. p. 309. l. 1. of cor a. ib. l. 25. husband cor her husband. p. 315 l 20. to God cor. God. p. 317. l 27. beleuie cor. beleiue. p. 328. l 22. with cor. with hearte. p. 331. l. 6. faith ſaieth cor. ſith faith. p 341. l. 1. Catholikes cor. Proteſtants. p. 342 l. 4. not cor nor. p 343. l. 12. ſtrang cor. ſtrong. p 346. l. 12. derſwaſion cor. perſuaſion. p 349. l. 17. this cor. they. p. 355. l. 15. leefe cor leeſe. p. 357 l. 16. ſauing cor. ſaying. p. 365 l. 18. art cor. are. p. 377. l. 5. Com cor. Rom. p. 396. l. 19 youehall cor. you shall. p. 409. l. 3. of ſelf cor of it ſelfe p. 420. l. 21. promiſe cor. promiſed p. 426. l. 26. ſuo cor. ſua. p. 444. l. 9. him, not cor him not. p. 448. l. 22. eath cor. death. p 458. l. 23. faith cor, ſayeth p. 460 l. 9 with cor. which p 465. l. 17. then cor. them. p. 487. l. 22 as cor. of. p. 489 l. 18 lete cor. let. p. 490. l. 17. to cor. to be ib. l. 20. that cor. then. p. 514 l. 8. the cor. then. p. 522. l. 5. būod cor. bound. p. 542. l. 19. alone cor. all one p 543 l 17. ſtyme cor. ſlyme. p. 545. l. 12. thoum, y cor. thou, my p. 550. l 22. as cor. of. p. 634. l. 3 there cor. their. p. 636. l 30 prayed cor. prayers. p. 639. l. 12. and tyme dele tyme. ib l 24. boaſting cor. that boaſting. p. 656. l. 13. fourth cor. forth. 657 l. 29. vniuſall cor vniuerſall p 659 l 6. of cor. if p 662. l 18. conceaue cor. conceaued. p. 664 l 27 as cor. as to. p. 673. l. 28. of kinde cor. kind of. p 690. l. 27 month cor. mouth p. 691 l. 2. the cor. he p. 698. l. 29 be confeſſed cor. confeſſe. p. 704. l 2. to cor. to be p. 709. l. 22. merly cor merily p. 728. l. 29 perfectiuely cor perfectly. p 732. l. 4. are cor or. p 734. l. 21. forbiddacne cor. forbiddance. ib. l. 32. dot cor. not p. 743. l 14. muſt cor moſt p. 748. l. 31 men cor. man. p. 750 l. 25. of power cor. power of. p 764. l, 10. learned cor. vnlearned. p. 773 l 6. is in cor. in p. 774. l. 4. diſtruction cor. diſtinction. p. 775 l. 28. willeth cor. willeth not. p. 790. l. 20. laſt cor. loſt. p 793 l. 18. them cor. they. p. 794. l. 19. then cor. them.

In the Margents.

Pag. 20. not rocke cor. not the rocke. ib keyos cor. keyes p. 27. diuarce cor. diuorce. ib aduantrie cor. aduoutrie ib. to worke cor. a worke p. 65 euer cor. Eue. p. 118. the cor. he p. 146 heauen cor heare. p. 161. followed cor. followed p 223. bod cor. bad. p. 226. hane cor. haue. p. 240 theirs cor. their p. 258. ſote cor. ſtate. p. 276. ward. cor. word. p. 278. thou cor then. p. 309. liuing • cor. liuing. p. 327. thou cor. then. p 350. all cor. at all. p 361. ſinners cor. of ſinners. p. 367 perfiled cor. perfited. p. 403. gooſt cor. good p 475 reted cor. remitted. p. 539. returnet cor. returneth. p. 659. thing cor. thinke p. 695. generall of cor. generall way of. p. 713. imperpely cor. improperly.

FINIS.