A LETTER OF Mr. DE LA TOVR GENTLEMAN TO THE DVKE OF LONGVEVILLE . Written vnto Mr. de Rotois Gentleman of the Kings game .

SYR the ardent zeale I know you haue of the good and glory of our Religion , makes me suppose you wil receaue a singular content in the relation of a priuate conference , had of late in the presence of my Lord the Duke of Longueuille and his followers , of the Marques de Boniuet , of the Lady de Bourcq & diuers others aswell Catholiks as Sectaries , between Father Francis Veron of the Society of IESVS , preacher for this present in the great Church of this Citty , & M. le Hucher Minister of the Caluinists in the same place , touching that point of our Faith , of the body of the sonne of God in the Sacrament of the Altar . The said Father agreeing to deale with that Minister by the Bible of Geneua only , and the Confession of faith of the reformed . This conference hath had three sessions , at the first I was not present , not being aduertised of the same . Notwithstanding at the beginning of the second , the actes of the former session were read , alowed & auowed by both parties as authenticall . Wherfore I will make recitall of that which passed in the sight of my Lord , & vs that were attending on him , besides a great multitude of diuerse of the one , and the other Religion . The said Father on the morrow after the last conference which was Sunday , made an ample narration of the three passed meetings to aboue eight thowsand persones , assembled in the Church of our Lady to heare his sermon . The most heerof is signed as you will see after , wherfore no man can iustlie call in question a matter so cleerly testified .

Our Deuine atchieued three famous victories . For the Minister hauing promised conformably to the 31. and 5. articles of theyr Confession of their faith , to shew by the pure word of the Bible , that we erred in that beleefe we haue , that the body of our Lord is in the Eucharist , he was constrained in the first session and againe in the entrance vnto the second trial , to sly from his fortresse of the pure word , of force disclaiming from the pure scripture of Geneua : and withall aknowledged and confessed , that there was no expresse text in all the scripture , euen by the Geneua translation , which , setting a side all illations , did condemne vs of errour . But ( quoth the Minister ) by necessary consequence out of the pure worde of God I will make it cleare that you do erre .

The night comming on made our combatant cease the pursuite , & not driue him farther , who already sheltred himself within the ruinous edifice of a Consequence . The Father told me , that it was not of small importance , to make the Sectaries clearly see & confesse , that they haue not for themselues the pure scripture , but only certain consequences , for ( quoth he ) the cause that makes so many to beginne , and continue in their reuolt from Gods Church , is for that they persuade themselues , that they haue on their sides the pure word of God ; for so saith the 5. article of their Confession , that they admitt nothing for the rule of faith , but the pure word : & they do veryly suppose that that Confession conteineth nothing , but that which is in the pure worde . After the approbation of that passed before , the Minister at the second session was admitted to deduce his necessary consequence , by which he would demonstrate how farre we wandred from the truth . He first fetched long vagaries round about , afterward the Father so dexterously put him beside all his proofes , & in briefe brought him to such pangues , that for the finall proposition he had nothing to say against the Father , but , ô you deny to much ; after which he became alltogeather speechles , as I wil more largely declare her after . Certes you would haue been extraordinarily recreated to behold , how he that erewhile made profession to proue by the pure word of God that we were Idolaters , in lieu of the pure word , had not a word to help himself , saue this only , that the Iesuite denied to much wee I am sure had good sport therin . Ours which had thus chased the Minister , still put him to these pangues for a long time still vrging him thus . M. Minister prooue your consequence . Neither did he omitt to signifie plainly and alowde to the whole assemblie , to what exigents the poore Minister was brought to , who sustained the Confession of the faith of the reformed Religion , and bragged to discouer by the pure word our errours . Had not the quality of the Ministers cause been such as it was , I should haue had compassion to haue seen him in that plight , and so oppressed . He desired they would giue him that night for respite , and to thinke vppon it ; but the Father denied him ; he alleaged he was suddainly surprised , the other replied that he had had all the night , and morning before for his proofe of that consequence . It was not neede to take pitty of the Minister , for his fellow Sectaries had sufficient commiseration of him ; all of them round about me beganne to change coulour , the Elders and Superintendents stood as it were astonished , & confounded . You may coniecture easily whether we were ioyfull thereat or no Alas ( said one ) the poore Minister wants a Chirurgian to open him a vayne . This victory was more notorious by this which followeth . The conquerour exacted of the vanquisshed to subscribe to the Acts of this conference , according to the accord made between them . A lamentable case ! that the ouercome must subscribe to the actes of his owne condemnation . He refused to performe his promisse . The Father after many instant vrgings of him in vaine , turned towards my Lord , and demaunded iustice ; that the Minister signe according as he had promised . The Minister desired fauour , beseeching him often that he would not commaund him to subscribe , after many prayers adding these wordes . I know how much it stands me vppon not to signe , for if I do so , all will be published : and the Churches ( you vnderstand his meaning at least his lamenting voice discouered his intention ) the poore congregations ( he should say ) of the pure reformation will be scandalized therat . The Father hauing before desired one of ours to shutt the doore , least the Minister should runne away , bid him consult with his Elders , and Superintendents , whether it were expedient to signe the actes or no : for which cause drawing them apart it was resolued that he should not signe them . I will send you shortly more at large this debate , which lasted three quarters of an howre . In fine , with the consent of the Father , they graunted him this fauour that he should not subscribe , but with these two conditions : the first that he should subscribe the morrow after ; the second that he should continew the dispute . By this refusall to subscribe vnto the Actes , it is apparent how notable the victorie was on our parte .

In the third encounter our Champion gott a third victory , but in an other kind ; will you knowe what ? The Minister shamefully rann away . He was not willing to be laid againe a gasping as before , and therfore thought it better not to inter into the listes , as I will declare afterward . It was giuen out that the Superintendentes had expreslie forbidd him to venture himselfe with him , who before had vsed him so vnmercifully , for they well saw the confusion like to follow therof , to the great detriment of their Churches .

Your Religious minde makes me presume you take great delight in this chace ; I will therfore giue you the whole narration . But yett before hand I wil shew you a new manner of hunting , which , though you be most skilfull in that sport , is perchance vnknowne vnto you . The fashion is speedy , with little paines , and most effectuall , by which practise our Huntsman hath so happily seazed on his pray : and by the same I assure my self , that euen we whose profession is to be better at our weapon then our penne , may chace out of breath any Minister soeuer , and make any Sectarie see how grosllie he is abused . This I haue compiled as a thing I knowe to be true , and wherof I meane to serue my self on all occasions . In this Conference I haue had experience of this practise , for therein was held no other methode ; & to satisfy your desire , who I knowe are curious to learne this new manner of hunting , you may read this which followeth , the like wherof was sent vnto the Minister as a letter of defiance . Read it seriously . To me it seemes most efficacious and as easy . Wee shall all prooue hunters of these black beastes , the Ministers I meane of the pretended Religion . I would to God we could so chace away not their persons , but their errours , that we could purge all France thereof . This I now send you laid downe at large , you shall shortly haue the particulars of the conference aboue mentioned , in which you will see it practised .

A BREEFE AND EASIE meanes by which each one though ignorant of deuinity , may by the sole Bible either of Geneua , or any other , shew apperently to any Minister how farre he is deceaued , and to each Caluinist , how in all and euery point of the pretended reformation he is abused .

ENCOVNTRING a Minister or anie other Caluinist , you shall proceed in this manner .

You haue in the 31. article of the Confession of your faith these words . In our dayes , in which the estate of the Church was dissolued , God hath raised men after an extraordinary manner to repaire of new the Church which was ruinated and desolate . Thus , you say , your Religion comes to reforme our errours .

In the 5. article are these words . The word which is contayned in these bookes ( he spake of the bookes of Holy Scripture ) is the rule of all truth , containing all that is necessary for the seruice of God , and our saluation ; Neither is it lawfull for men , no nor for Angells , to adde , diminish , or change . Whence it followeth that neither Antiquitie , nor Customes , nor Multitude , nor humane wisdome nor Definitions , nor Inhibitions , nor Proclamations , nor Decrees , nor Councels , nor Reuelations , nor Miracles may be opposed to the said holy Scriptures , but on the contrarie all thinges ar to be examined ; ruled , and reformed by them . These are the wordes of this article .

So that in the one and the other article mentioned togeather , you say that you , or your Religion , or your Ministers ( take your choise ) are raised and sent from God , to illuminate vs with the light of truth , & to shew vs our errours and that by the sole , and pure word of God contained in the holy Scripture .

1. First I might examine the conditions of these Reformers you thrust vpon vs . And vntill you shew me your letter patents and commission , I may iustly refuse to submitt my self to be reformed by you . What body politicque will allow the title of Reformour of their Lawes , and Customes ( according to which they haue hitherto proceeded in their gouernment ) in one who should say he was sent from the King for that purpose , but had no Commission to shew for the same ? Notwithstanding in curtesy I do freely admitt you to the dignity and title of a Reformer , & am content to be instructed by you in the truth , and to be reformed in whatsoeuer I do erre . I would know of you .

2. According to what rules , by what line doth it please you to straighten me , to shew my errours , and illuminate me with the truth of the Gospell ? You make me answeare in the 5. article aboue cited , that you will do all this according to the pure word of God , sett downe in Holie writt , laying aside , All Antiquity , Customes , Multitude , humane Wisdome , Definitions , Inhibitions , Proclamations , Lawes , Councels , Reuelations , Miracles . I could refuse this fashion of reforming . For why should I not , togeather with the Scripture , help my self with all other rules to discerne the truth thereby ? Especially since that the Scripture no where saith , that it self alone is the rule of all verity . It seemes hard to me to renounce al Antiquity , Councels , Miracles , & all the rest before sett downe . Neuertheles to ioyne with you in Conference , I am content of my owne accord to graunt you the title of Reformer by the pure written word , & am ready to renounce al those rules specified , prouided allwaies that you keepe your promise , to witt that you shew me my errours , by the pure Scripture .

3. There are diuers translations of the Scriptures ; by which , I pray you , will you please to reforme me ? Perchance you intend by that of Geneua . I might iustly refuse to be reformed by that Bible ; being it is so curtalled in diuers places , corrupted , and changed : Yet to haue your reformation I wil do you this third fauour . I am content to open my eyes and follow your Religion , if you shew my by the pure word contained in the Geneua version , both the truth of the faith you Euangelize , & allso my errours . I haue donne you three great fauours . 1. to graunt you the title of a Reformer . 2. to be a Reformer by the pure word . The third to make this triall by the pure word of the Geneua version . But looke you bring me nothing els but the pure word ; for if in steede of it you shift me of with your interpretations , you forsake the Confession of your faith , & breake the couenants made betweene vs . For I am not so vnaduised to renounce all Antiquity , Councells , Miracles and the rest , for your interpretations and opinions .

Agreeably to this , to your owne promise , & that which is sett downe in your 5. article , I demaund two things at your hands . First that you shew me by the pure word the truth of all those articles which you will haue me to beleeue : which I am ready to do , if I see them in the Bible euen of Geneua . Secondly that by the same pure word you shew me my errours . Both of these I demand , for both of these you professe to do when as you say , that the Scripture is the rule of all truth , and you acknowledge no other . For put the case I should erre in my faith , I would be loth to leaue that , to follow a worse . No wise man , I take it , though his horse haue but one eye wil make exchange for another that is blind ; I desire therfore to see by the pure word the truth of yours . Which you cannot refuse to do , for you are sent to illuminate vs , & shew vs the truth . To be plaine therfore , my first demaund is , that you shew me by the pure word the Articles of your Confession , by which I must be illuminated , and made to knowe the right way .

In the 36. and 37. article you say that we receaue by faith , or , to vse your ordinary termes , by the mouth of faith the body of our Lord . Shew me this in the pure word , & that the supper is the figure of his body . Through all the Geneua Bible I find not so much as mention made of the mouth of faith , neither do I finde any talke of a figure in those places , where it speakes of the supper . Shew me but this , & I will straight beleeue it and abiure my former Religion . This if you do not , I must needs hold you , as you ar , for impostours .

In the 11. article it is said . Originall sinne doth continually remaine after Baptisme in asmuch as it is a fault , howbeit the children of God are freed from the condemnation due for the same , he through his gracious goodnes not imputing it vnto them . Shew me this in the pure word of Geneua .

In the 24. article . Iesus Christ is giuen vs for our sole Aduocate , The strife between vs is about that worde Sole , shew me that in the Geneua Bible .

In the 20. article . We beleeue we are made partakers of that iustice ( to witt of Christians ) by faith alone . All the controuersie lyeth in that word alone , and whether workes donne in the faith of Christ be necessary ; shew me that worde alone in these places , where mention is made of workes donne in the faith of IESVS CHRIST , and not in these places , where the Iudaicall workes of the law are excluded from Christian iustification , for of these only do we dispute . I haue turned the Bible for the places cited in the margent for these articles , but cannot find any of these articles in the pure word .

Hauing quitt your hands well , in shewing me the truth of that which you desire I should beleeue , shew me as well that other thing I demaunde , to witt the errours of those articles which I now beleeue .

The articles of my faith are for example ( to omitt that point of the B. Sacrement allready spoken of ) That there is a Purgatory , Intercession of Saints , Auricular Confession , and the like . I acknowledge the Sanctity of Pilgrimages , of Religious vowes . Against which in your 24. article you say . Intercession of Saints is an abuse , Purgatorrie an illusion and so of religious vowes , Pilgrimages and the like . Shew me my errour in these points , & that out of the pure word . In your margent I find no text cited , which is a shrewd suspicion that you haue none . Perchance you wil aunsweare that it sufficeth for a proofe of errour in these points , that they are not found in the holy scripture , because nothing must be beleeued but that which is in the scripture . My reply to this is to know of you whether this proposition . That nothing must be beleeued which is not in the holy scripture be found in the pure word of God or . If it be not , then you M. Minister in propounding this proposition to be beleeued of me , do falsify your owne fayth , and breake your promise ; for you sayd you wold not admitt any other rule of truth but the scripture , which is in effect , that you will bring forth nothing but that which is in scripture , and now you thrust vpon me this proposition , which is not there to be found , & this as a fundamental proposition vpon which ar builded many others : but if this proposition be in the pure word , shew it ; but take heede you bring nothing , but the pure word .

When by the pure word you shall shew me the truth of your articles , and the falshood of mine , as hath been said before , I am ready forthwith to acknowledge my errour , & to embrace your faith . But remember , I pray you , your promise , that you would by the pure word shew the truth of your faith and my errours ; and that I renounced all antiquity , Councels , Miracles , Inhibitions , Lawes , visions vppon these termes only , and no other . Looke that in steed of the pure word , you do not shift me of with your interpretations or your owne consequences , for either that interpretation is in the Scripture , or no ; if it be there , bring forth the Scripture : and that the Scripture saie of each proposition you interprete , that it is so to be vnderstood , & that you only are the organe to pronounce the same , otherwise you leaue your owne faith , and forge an other to your owne liking , of which I shall argue with you after in the like sorte ; & besides that you breake your promise . I should be esteemed of small iudgment if I forsake Councells , Miracles Antiquity and the rest for your interpretation .

If the Minister pretend to warrant his interpretation by some other passage of the Scripture , for example if he vrge that those words ( This is my body ) must not be taken properlie but figuratiuelie , because these others ( I ame a vine ) haue such a signification : You shall aske him .

1. Before you passe to any interpretation , if he haue any plaine text , which abstracting from all interpretation doth condemne vs of errour : for example in that point of the B. Sacrament , in which we beleeue there is the true body of our Sauiour . If he haue any , lett him bring that which is cleare and plaine , and leaue that which is obscure : if he haue none , make him to confesse distinctly , that he hath no place out of the pure word , by which , without his interpretation , he can conuince vs of errour ; and heere you must insist on this point , till he haue confessed this . After this Confession comming to the interpretation he giues , you shall .

2. Demaunde , if the Scripture say that these words ( This is my Body ) are to be interpreted by these ( I am a vine ) or no. If it say so , lett him shew the place ; If not , then the Minister breaks his couenants , & doth not serue as an organe of the Scripture only . And heere the Minister is in little ease , neither can he , without renouncing their Confession , which professeth to allow of nothing to rule them , but pure Scripture , passe any farther . Neither is it needfull to pursue the matter anie farther , this being concluded , for heere haue you the Minister in the stocks ; and perchaunce it will be better to keepe the Ministre in this traunce speechles , then to passe farther . Yet if you desire an other victory , & that he , which encountreth the Caluinist , be learned or expert in the Scripture , he may , after the confession of the two former .

3. Harken to the interpretation the Ministre brings , and aunsweare these proofes he alleageth for that interpretation . But allwaies remember that the Caluinist , by their Confession of faith , is come to instruct vs , & consequently bound to prooue his interpretation ; for vs , if it conuince not , it sufficeth to deny , without obligation to giue any reasons for our deniall : for by those the Minister will finde meanes to slippe away , and will not be so quicklie caught : he will seek many by-waies , therfore as much as may be stoppe his passage . Behold how you are to proceede , when the Minister vndertakes to shew our pretended errours by text of Scripture , without consequences or illations .

When he will discouer our errours by some consequence , which he deduceth out of the pure word of God for example , we beleeue that the body of our Lord is in the B. Sacrament of the Altar : he will prooue by consequence deduced out of the pure and sole Scripture , that he is not there , after this manner . In the 3. of the Actes , it is said , that Heauen must conteine him vntill the Consummation of the world , therfore he is not on the earth . Behold his sillogisme . That body which is in heauen is not on the earth , the body of Iesus Christ is in heauen , therfore it is not on the earth . He must put his argument in this forme . 1. Before you come to aunswere his argument , you must aske the Minister if he haue any plaine text , which without consequence doth condemne vs of errour in this point , or no ? If he haue , lett him bring it out , who professeth to reforme vs by the pure word ; If he haue not , make him confesse that he hath no plaine text , by which ( his consequence sett a part ) we are conuinced of errour ; & heere you must stay , and exact this confession of the Minister before you passe farther . Hauing made the Minister acknowledge this , though you may content your self with this victory ( whereby you make him renounce the 5. article of their Confession of faith , and haue ouerthrowen that piller which detaines most of the Sectaries , who follow that part in their errours ; who imagine they haue on their side the pure word of God , and that they builde vpon the Scripture only ) and peraduenture it wil be better to proceed no farther , to the end to make it eccho oftener in the eares of these who are abused by them : Neuerthelesse he that will continew the chace , and hauing rowzed the deere from his lodge pursue him farther .

2. Giuing the Minister leaue to deduce his consequence , after the deduction thereof , the Catholicque must not straight examine the truth of the same , nor shew so quickly that it is false ; but first lay hold on him , and make him shew , that his consequence is deduced out of the only pure word of holy Scripture , as he promissed to deduce the same , and his 5. article doth oblige him . You must therfore proceede in this fashion . It is a thing vndoubted , and knowen to all , that euery consequence , to be good , must be inferred out of two propositions ; If then one of those two , out of which the Minister deduceth his consequence , be not in the Scripture , ( as it happeneth ordinarily in the arguments of the aduersary against vs ) heere you must demurr , and make it manifest , that the aduersarie heere abandonnes his Confession of fayth , and fayles of his promisse , in not shewing our pretended errour by consequence deduced out of the pure and only Scripture . For example , in the syllogisme before sett downe . That body which is in heauen is not on the earth , the body of Iesus Christ is in heauen , therfore it is not on the earth : you shall examine the Minister , whether the first proposition of this argument be in the pure word , or no. If it be , lett him shew it . Cleere it is , it is not there , but it is a philosophicall proposition , wherfore the Minister , which deduceth his consequence out of that , and the second adioyned , which is in the 3. of the Actes , doth not proue my errour by consequence deduced out of the pure word , but by consequence deduced out of Philosophy , and out of the word of God , and maketh such articles of faith , as are deduced out of Philosophy or Aristotle . 2. You must declare , that euery consequence must be deduced out of two propositions , placed in the true forme of a syllogisme , and that the consequence is inferred both from the propositions , and from the forme of the syllogisme ; of which forme the Scripture speakes nothing , nor prescribes any rules about that matter , but only Aristotle , and Philosophy . Wherfore the Minister in proouing his consequence , is not founded vpon the Scripture alone , which treates not of formes of consequences . And because it belongs to Aristotle , to iudge if the consequence be good or no , the Minister building vpon consequence , must admitt for his iudge , in the controuersies of our fayth , not the pure Scripture , but Aristotle : or els at least choose for vmpyre in this cause the word of God , together with Aristotle . 3. You must demaund of the Minister , if the Scripture do teach that one must beleeue as an article of faith , not only that which the Scripture saith , but also that , which by necessary consequence followeth therevpon , or no ? if he say so , make him shew the text , which without doubt he cannot throughout the whole bible : if no such be founde , then doth the Minister build his articles of fayth vpon a proposition , which is not in the pure word , to witt vpon this . That that which followeth out of Scripture by necessary consequence , must be beleeued as an article of saith . Howbeit the Scripture frames no such article , but the Minister only , and that not by the pure Scripture , but by humane reason : from which notwithstanding in his 5. Article he disclaimed wholy . For he wold haue vs take at his handes for an article of faith that proposition , which by consequence followeth out of the Scripture , though the termes of that proposition , deduced out of Scripture for an article of fayth , be not there sett downe . Hence is it that all the articles of the Confession of these sectaries , which are founded vpon a consequence , are not articles of fayth , being that they haue not for them theyr only rule of truth , the sole Scripture . Heere againe you must hold him . They will say perauenture that IESVS Christ , and the Apostles proued many thinges by consequence . I graunt it . But in so doing , they themselues made new Scriptures , or holy write : which priuiledge I thinke the Minister haue not . But they neuer taught that the Scripture , which they alledged , was the singular and sole rule of all truth , and that they spake not but by the mouth of the Scripture , as these Pretenders professe , and thyr poore flocke ( which thinke they are as good as theyr wordes ) persuade themselues .

3. If he that buckle with the Minister be learned , and will , after he hath often driuen the deere from his fortresse of the pure worde , course him alonge the plaine champion of humane and philosophicall reasons ( though , according to my aduise , it be ordinarily more expedient , to content our selues with that before sett downe ) for to cure him , if it be possible , after the aboue said he may passe to the examen of the truth , or falshod of his consequence : whether the propositions , from which it is deduced ( be they taken from philosophy or holy writt ) be true or false ; and whether the forme of the argument be according to the rules of Philosophy , and so deny that which the Minister assumed falsly . Still hauing in minde that the Minister is putt to the proofe , not the Catholick , who beares the personne of the party instructed ; & be sure not to change that personne . For the drift of all the Ministers fetches is , to vnload himself of that obligation to prooue his consequence : which he will bring to passe by this sleight , if he can make him , that defends , the disputant . For example . In the argument proposed . That body which is in heauen , is not on the earth ; The body of Iesus Christ is in heauen ; Therfore it is not on the earth . You shall deny the first proposition , and lett the Minister prooue it . If that his proofes come on to long , & he enter to farre into Philosophicall quiddities , lett the Catholicke note that it is in his free choice , to curbe the Minister short when he listeth ; demaunding him , if all the propositions which he hath brought to prooue his consequence , be in the Scripture , or no. If they be , lett him bring them forth . Many of them questionles are drawne out of Philosophy , or grounded vpon humane reasons . If they be not , the Minister which out of them inferres his consequence , doth not deduce it out of the pure word , or ( which is all one ) prooues not by consequence deduced out of the pure and only word , that the Catholicke erreth , which was that he vndertooke ; and moreouer denieth his Confession of faith : for he drawes his consequence ioyntly out of the word of God , and out of diuers propositions which are not in holie write . Is not this to flinch from their worde , and to renounce their articles of faith ? or rather do not the Minister & his confession of faith abuse people , in promising that which they neither do , nor canne performe .

Behold a breefe , and easy methode to encounter all Ministers and Sectaries . Is it not obuious euen for those , who are not students in deuinity , to putt it in practise ? There needs no more but eyes to see , and to vnderstande English , to know if the pure word without additions , interpretations , or consequences of others , do say such a thing , or no. Do you not by this meanes euidently perceaue , that all the Ministers are abusers , and how the whole troope of Sectaries is misledde ? Yea I dare say double abusers . For first the Minister abuseth men , in that he promiseth by the pure word to shew them that , which he would haue them beleeue : next , that he will by the pure word lay open their errours pretended , and yett performeth neither the one , nor the other . Wherfore the Ministers promising in their 31. and 5. articles to performe them both , and yet effecting neither , as by the forsaid practise is made euident ; are impostours , and double impostours : as this methode , which euery Catholick may vse , doth apparently declare . And so I haue fulfilled my promise , which was to lay downe a short and easie methode , by which all Catholiques may euidently shew that each Minister in all , and euery point of his pretended religion , is an abuser , & consequently that all their followers are abused .

This therfore is my aduice to all Sectaries , to those especially which seeke sincerly theyr Saluation . Your Confession promiseth you the pure word of God , and you suppose that , according to that promise , there is nothing in your articles of fayth , which is not in the pure word ; Practise this methode , and you shall euidently , and easily perceaue how you are abused . Place on the one syde the Principall articles of your faith , which I haue cited before . That original sinne remaines after Baptisme as it is a fault . That Iesus Christ is our only Aduocate . That faith alone iustifieth , and which is cheefe of all . That the B. Sacrament is a figure of the body of our Sauiour , which is eaten by faith . Then ouer against each of these articles , set downe the textes , which are cited in the margent for eache of them ( doubtles if you had any plaine text of Scripture , which taught that which is in that articles , it wold haue been coated in the margent ) & you shall cleerly see , that the pure word , setting aside interpretations , and Ministeriall consequences , hath not that which is in your article : neither is there required ought but your eyes , and skill to reade , to see whether that be in the pure word or no. And that your Ministers preach , that the Scripture is easie , and that euery one there may learne his owne saluation ; you vnderstand I ame sure signification of English : why then finde you not in the pure word that , which the Ministers make you beleeue ? Assure your selues if you find it not , it is because it is not there . Confront therfore the place cited in the margent of the article , with the article , and you shall see how egregiously you are mocked . And that you may see this more manifestly , doe this following . Write in one line one article , or if it haue many partes , one only clause of the same . And if you finde any text of Scripture cited for that article , or peece therof , write in a second line the words of the text cited , vnder the other line . If you find no text cited ( as in many places there is not ) put vnder the first line a cypher ; for that if there were any text to authorize that article , it would be cited . This being donne , compare the first line with the second : If you find in the second line a cypher , you are cleerly cosened . If you find a text of Scripture , see if that , being precisely taken without medly of some thing els ( that is to say , you must vnderstande ; this signifieth ; or the like ; ) containe that article proposed ; if it do not , know that you are deceaued . I my self haue paralelled these articles with the textes alledged in the margent ; take you but the like paines , and I will assure you that in steed of the pure word , you shall oft tymes finde a cypher ; other tymes in the text cited you shall not find one worde of the article ; and in breefe you shall not find there one article , or entiere clause of those in Controuersy between vs . Behold how you are deluded .

ARTICLES OF THE CONFESSION OF FAITH OF the pretended reformed Churchs , confronted with the pure word of holy writt ; Where it is euidently shewed , that the textes of Scripture , euen in the Geneua Bible , cited in the margent of these articles , conteine nothing of that , which those articles teach against the Catholick faith . which is A breefe & easy meanes , by which euery Caluinist may manifestlie perceaue how he is abused , and wherby each Catholicke may shew the same vnto him .

To saue you the paines ( deceaued Countrymen ) which I wished you to take , I haue heere confronted the articles of your faith controuerted , with the places cited in the margent , after the fashion before sett downe , and haue cited these textes according to the Geneua translation , Compare them with me beginning at the 24. article .

In this article , these clauses following are sett downe without any text , cited in the margent , for proof of any of them ; wherfore in steede of Scripture , I wil giue you vnder euery clause for proofe a Cypher .

Article 24.

1. We hold that Purgatory is an Illusion .

Proofe . o.

2. By the abuse and deceipt of Sathan , Monasticall vowes were introduced .

Proofe . o.

3. Out of the same ware-howse proceeded Pilgrimages .

Proofe . o.

4. Out of the same ware-howse was brought in Auricular Confession .

Proofe . o.

5. Out of the same ware-howse sprang Indulgenees .

Proofe . o.

6. Out of the same ware-howse proceeded all other things , by which we thinke to merite grace and saluation .

Proofe . o.

7. We reiect all others meanes , which men presume to haue , to reconcile themselues to God , as derogatory from the death , and passion of Iesus Christ .

Proofe . o.

8. It is lawfull for vs to pray but only according to that forme , which God sett downe in his word .

Proofe . o.

In the 31. article you say . The estate of the Church in our times was interrupted , and hath failed ; that God hath raised some after an extraordinary manner to renew the same , being ruinated and desolate .

Proofe . o.

Behold how the Ministers , and theyr Confession of faith do abuse you , and how often in one only article . They promise you , not to instruct you but by the holy Scripture , and proposing vnto you all these clauses to be beleeued , they prooue none of them by any text of Scripture , nor bring as much as one place of Scripture for confirmation of them . Examine the articles , you will finde more then a hundred clauses as well affirmatiues , as negatiues , for proofe wherof there is no text coated , because in deed they haue it not , iudge then if you be abused or no.

And who , I pray you , can in equity accuse another , vnles he produce some lawe commaunding , or prohibiting some thing violated by the party accused ? Euery accusation , commended to be truly an accusation , not a calumny , must be founded vpon the breach of some lawe , and accompanied with it proofes . These Reformers doe not only accuse , but making themselues iudges , doe condemne of Superstitions , forgery , and high treason against the deuine Maiesty , the holy Fathers , and vs all besides in those 8. poyntes sett downe ( and in diuers others which I omitt ) pronouncing theyr bloody sentence , by which they declare both them and vs to be superstitious , deceauers , instruments of sathan in the promulgations of those diuelish illusions rehearsed . This sentence pronounced , for execution of the same they haue ouerthrowen our Monasteries ; prophaned our holy places ; and set fire on our Churches . Of what crime doe they accuse vs , do they condemne vs ? what deuine law doe they prooue to haue ben violated by vs ? They neyther prooue , nor so much as cite any law , any letter of holy write , against which the holy Fathers & we haue offended . And yet they accuse vs , they condemne vs . Shameles wretches ! but yet withall impudent liars ! They promise , not to behaue themselues but only as instruments of the holy Scripture , and not to propose ought but that ; And yet they pronounce the eight forsayd sentences , without citing one sole passage of the Scripture . See , o you sectaries , how palpably they abuse you . But to see this more cleerly , and withall to take away from the Ministers all meanes to circumuent you to your vtter ruine .

Consider with like attention that which ensueth . In the 5. article they wold make you beleeue , that the pure word , which is conteined in the bookes of holy Scripture , is the rule of all truth , and that nothing must be beleeued , but that which is in the pure word . This article is of great consequence ; for reposing and grounding your selues vppon this , and not vppon any other thing , you reiect all the traditions of the Romane Church ; you giue your sentences of condemnation against vs ; you will not allow of neyther Antiquity , nor Custome , nor Multitude , nor Humane wisedome , nor Sentences , nor Inhibitions , nor Edicts , nor Lawes , nor Councells , nor Visions , nor Miracles . And albeit all these make against your doctrine , you make no bones thereof , you scorne them all , saying that you will nothing but the pure Scripture , all the rest proceeds from men subiect vnto errours ; and that all other things must be examined , ruled , and reformed according to the same pure word . This article therfore is of great consequence : and with good reason , to be beleeued , ought to be found in the holy Scripture ; which if the Ministers should frame in the force of their owne braynes , they deserue doubtles to be banished all honest company , as men impudently bold , which seeke to make the world renounce all things abouesaid , for a proposition of their owne inuention ; and contradict themselues : hauing before said , they would only carry themselues as the organe of the wholy Scripture . Let vs therfore set downe in one line first the article , then vnder that the text , cited in the margent for proofe thereof .

Article 5.

The written word is the rule of all truth : or els , as you commonly say . Nothing is to be beleeued , but that which is in the written word . In the margent of this article you cite 4. textes for proofe of the contents .

1. Text.

You shall not add any thing to the worde which I commaunde , nor take any thing from the same . Saith Moyses to the people of Israel . Deuter. 4. Vers. 2.

2. Text.

That which I commaund you , that shall you doe , neither shall you adde any thing , nor diminish . Deut. 12. Vers. 32.

Examen .

Heere is not any worde of the article in these passages , for you neyther finde ( written word ) nor ( rule of all truth ) which are the two termes of the article ; wherfore this pure word doth not conteine that , which the article affirmeth . Lett vs weigh it more exactly . 1. Moyses spake vnto the Iewes of that only , which he ordained , to witt of the Iudaicall law , and of no other . 2. he spake not of the written worde , of which alone the article is , but vniuersally of the word . 3. Albeit he spake vnto Christians , and of the only written word : haue we increased the bookes of Moyses ? haue we added ought vnto them ? 4. Thinke you that the Prophets composing new Scriptures , and ioyning them with the bookes of Moyses , haue infringed this precept ? 5. if Moyses forbid to beleeue any thing but that , which he ordayned ; we must neyther beleeue the Psalmes of Dauid , nor the other Prophets , nor the Ghospell : for he ordained not that which these conteyne . Perceaue you not how ridiculous a thing it is , to alledge this text , to verify by the pure word your article ? which sayth , the written word is the rule if all truth . The same article is prooued by an other passage . Galat. 1. Vers. 8.

3. Text.

Although we , or an Angell from heauen preach otherwise , then that which we haue preached vnto you , be he accursed .

Examen .

In this text I neither read ( written word ) nor ( rule of all truth ) which are the two termes of the article ; wherefore the text hath not that , which the article teacheth . Nay it containes not one only word therof , come to the examen . 1. Is there in the text anie mention of the written word ? of which onlie we dispute , and the article speakes of no other . 2. Who knoweth not that the Apocalipse was reuealed , and writt after that epistle of S. Paule ? and yet besides that , which S. Paule euangelized , it also must be beleeued . Or is he which preacheth , and beleeueth the Apocalipse accursed ? Or rather is S. Paule accursed , who preached manie things afterward , which are not in that epistle to the Galathians ? who is there of so small capacitie , that in the reading of this chapter doth not see , that the word ( otherwise ) is the same in sense with ( against . ) The Apostle , as it is manifest at the verie opening of the epistle , crieth out against those , which togeather with the law of Christ , would ioyne Circumcision against the doctrine of the Apostles . The wordes immediatlie going before , make the matter more cleere . I maruaile saith he to the Galat: 1. Vers. 6. 7.8 . that leauing him , who hath called you vnto the grace of Christ , you are so soone transferred vnto an other Ghospell : which is not another , vnles there be some that trouble you , & will inuert the Ghospell of Christ : But although we , or an Angell from heauen preach to you otherwise then that , which we haue preached to you , be he accursed . Is it not euident that S. Paul reiecteth that only , which is against that which he had preached ? Then it is apparent also , that this text makes nothing for that , which the article contains to witt : That the written word is the rule of all truth .

The last passage , cited for the forsaid article , is out of the Apocalipse 22. Vers. 18. in these wordes .

4. Texte .

I testifie to euerie one , hearing the wordes of the prophecie of this booke . If any man shall add to these things , God shall adde vppon him the plagues written in this booke . And if anie man shall diminish of the words of the booke of this prophecy , God shall take away his part out of the booke of life , and out of the holy Citty , and of these things that be written in this booke .

Neither do I reade in this passage ( written word of the entyre Bible ) of which only the Article intreats , nor ( rule of all truth ) wherfore the text sayth not , that the pure word of the entire Bible is the rule of all truth , as the Article auerreth , rather the text consents not in one only terme with the article . Examine it . 1. Is it not manifest , that S. Iohn spake not but of the word conteyned in the Apocalipse ? which the Ministers will not allowe to be the rule of all truth ; to what purpose then for proofe of that Article , That the pure word of the entire Bible is the rule of all truth , do they bring out this text ? 2. if S. Iohn sayd , that nothing must be added to that word of the Apocalipse in this sense , and after this Ministerial paraphrase ( that nothing must be beleeued which is not therin contained ) then he which should beleeue the Ghospell , the Epistles of S. Paul , of S. Iohn , and others , and the old testament , should be accursed . Where were the Ministers witts , thinke you , when to proue that nothing must be bleeued , but that which is in the Bible , they alledged this passage ? 3. To adde to the Apocalipse , is to thrust in somthing as part of that sacred booke : doe we doe so ? What frantik people are your Ministers ? and you , o Caluinists ? how grossely doth your Confession of fayth abuse you , which treats you in such a fashion , as if you had not eyes to reade , nor iudgment to vnderstand the signification of one pure text ? How many Ministeriall glosses ar heere wanting , to make these textes speake that , which this article contaynes ? Lett vs go on .

Whence haue you , that the bookes of the old and new Testament are holy Scripture ? how know you that these bookes are Canonicall ? By the inward persuasion of the holy Ghost , so you aunsweare in the 4. article That he makes vs decerne them from other Ecclesiasticall bookes . It is not then by the holy Scripture that you know this , for your inward persuasion is not the written word . Consequently it is false , That the pure word is the rule of all truth , and that all things must be examined , ruled , and reformed by the same . For it is not the rule of this verity , and that of greatest consequence : to witt , that the bookes of the old and new Testament are canonicall , and writen by deuine reuelation . Again , to reiect any booke from the number of the Canonicall ( as for example you doe reiect that of Tobias , and admitt the Ghospell of S. Mathew ) you guide not your selues by this rule of the pure word , but , as you giue it out , of the inward persuasion of the holy Ghost . See how your articles destroy each other . Tell me farther . Do you hold that one may , and ought to baptize little infants ? That we must not rebaptize hereticques , which haue been baptized in the name of the B. Trinity ; that we must keepe holy sunday , and not saturday ; you beleeue that the Mother of God remayned alwayes a virgin . Notwithstanding you finde not one text of Scripture , to iustify any of these points ; why do you then contradict your selues and your article , which teacheth , that the written word is the rule of all truth . Doth not S. Paul in the. 2. to the Thessalon . 2. vers. 15. exhort saying . Stand , and hold fast the instructions ( our translation reads traditions ) which you haue learned eyther by our word , or by our epistle . Note that he makes mention of the word besides that , which is written in Scripture ; and in the 2. to Timothe . 2. Vers. 2. The things which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses , these commend to faythfull men , which shall be fitt to teach others also . Doe not you perceaue a diuine word , taught not by writing , but by word of mouth ? In the. 1. to the Cor. 11. Vers. 34. Other things I will set in order when I come . Such ordinances by word of mouth , are they not as well deuine as those , which are sett downe in writing ? I omit many other authorities to this purpose , by the way only citing these , for that it is not my intent to iustify , and prooue vnto you in this treatise that , which we beleeue . My only scope is to shew vnto you , that you are abused ; and that the pure word teacheth no such thing , as your articles report . This haue I performed in this article , which I haue examined with the textes cited for the same ; for the Article saith , that the written word is the rule of all truth ; and in the passages alledged , we neyther read written word , nor the rule of all truth . Wherfore they haue not that which the article saith , otherwise , knowing to reade , we should see it there . For conclusion heereof the Caluinists , in this article of greatest importance , are therefore abused , and by consequence in all the rest I before marked , which are out of this deduced against vs , which are in great number . Reuew them , and in so many points acknowledg your selues deceaued .

I haue at large examined this article , aswell for that , as hath been shewed , it is of greatest importance ; as also for that the falshood therof being discouered , the Ministers are bereaued of the most efficatious , and ordinary meanes they had to defend themselues , in these conflicts ; for they alwayes fly for refuge to this Proposition , That nothing must be beleeued , bus that which is in the Scripture Their custome is to question vs , where finde you Purgatory in the Scripture ? or the reall presence of the body of Iesus Christ in the sacrament of the Altar &c. For , say they , if it be not there , it is superstition to beleeue it . And by this meanes , in lieu of reforming our pretended abuses by the pure word , they cunningly engage vs to prooue our faith . A wyly deuise . Catholicks looke vnto their fingers , and be sure that when they make you such questions , you take not vppon you to be disputants : but allthough you haue many authorities , yett bring no place of Scripture to iustify your cause . Marke well the wilines of the Aduersaries . They are bound by their .31 . article to reforme vs , and by their . 5 . to do it by the pure word : by this disguise and faire apparence drawing many to their part . But their practise is after another fashion . For knowing well that they are neuer able to performe that , which they haue bound themselues vnto , to disingage themselues from this obligation , by a fine deuise they endeuour to make vs the plaintifs , questioning vs after the fashion aforesaid . And if in awnswere of their questions , you bring some expresse textes for your self , behold , by this the Minister hath gott his neck out of the coller , and hauing before hand quitt himself of all Anquity , Fathers , Miracles &c. he will turne of the Scripture at his owne pleasure , and in fine delude you , though you haue ten cleere textes for your purpose : Of this we haue dayly experience . Handle him in an other fashion . You must neuer lett him change his coate . He is obliged by the Confession of his faith to shew you by the pure word your errours ; hold him to it there to his testimonies of the pure word , which must sett downe your pretended errours ; Doe but this , and I warrant you the Minister will quickly be brought vpon his knees ; and haue a care you release him not , but keepe him downe . But how ? vrge him still with this , that he shew you some expresse text of Scripture which sayth , That there is no Purgatory ; or That , the body of Iesus Christ is not in the Eucharist . It is his charge to do it , who hath pawned his word to shew vs by the pure word our errours . But if he hope to scape the torture by this sleight , saying that he sufficiently sheweth our errour in that ( as he sayth ) we cannot shew by the Scripture Purgatory , or the reall presence : Haue a care , that though you haue many cleere textes on your side , bring none , make not your selues Plaintifs , for so he will be deliuered from the rack ; but presse him eagrely that he shw you that he promised , or at least , that nothing must be beleeued but that , which is in the Scripture ( for by this maxime alone doth he argue you of errour ) And then that after he hath donne this , you will produce your places . Not being able to shew this proposition in the whole Scripture ( as by the precedent examen I haue shewd he cannot ) he is driuen to a non plus , nor hath he any meanes to scape away . Thus shall you shew breefly & euidently , that their 31. and 5. articles ar false , which promised to reforme our pretended abuses by the pure word , and cannot do it : And that the Mimisters are egregious impostours , which vnder such a faire pretext haue seduced so many thowsands of soules . And you of the pretended religion , put but your Ministers to this triall , and you will see them presently fall speechles , and your selues apparently abused .

Before we passe any farther , I cannot omitt to examine breeflie one clause of the 24. article , which I before let passe , for that for it there is cited in the margent a texte , which is not donne in the other clauses .

An other clause of the 24. article .

Out of the ware-howse of the deuill , proceede the forbidding to marrie , and the free vse of meates , and the ceremonious obseruation of some daies .

Text.

In the last times certaine shalt depart from the faith , attending to spirits of errours , forbidding to marry , commaunding to abstaine from meates , which God created for the faithfull , to receaue them with thanks giuing , for euerie creature of God is good , and nothing to be reiected . 1. Timoth. 4. Vers. 3.

Examen .

By this clause the Article seemes to reprehend the Catholicque Church , but wrongfullie . For. 1. shee forbids not to marrie , otherwise no Catholick could be married , but that he must breake the precept of the Church ; shee onlie causeth that to be kept , which God in his Scriptures commaundeth : to witt , that men fulfill their vowes , and for this cause that Preests , and others which haue vowed chastity , and continencie , obserue their vowes , wherby it followeth that they may not marrie . Neither doth the text alledged say ought to the contrarie . 2. I admire the little iudgment of the Ministers ; doe they thinke that the Physitians commaunding their patients to abstaine from some meates for a time to recouer their health , doe goe against the Apostle , and teach a deuilish doctrine ?

I ame more amazed at the impudency of these men , whoe reading the prohibition of some meates made by the Apostles , gathered togeather in the 1. Councell . Act. 15. vers. 28. in these wordes It hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to vs , to lay no further burden vppon you , then these necessary things . Among other things that you abstaine from bloud and that which is strangled . They dare , abusing the text cited , say , not without execrable blasphemy , against the holy Apostles , and against the holy Ghost . That from the ware-howse of the diuell proceedeth the prohition of some meates ; terming heereby the holy Ghost sathan , and the first sacred Councell of the Apostles , the ware-howse of the deuill , and theyr prohibition an abuse and illusion . S. Paul , which assisted at that sacred Councell , is farr of from censuring in that manner that precept , which he with the rest had decreed to abstaine from certayn meates . But forseeing that there wold come heretiques , that wold forbidde mariage as a thing in it self vnlawfull , and inuented by the deuill ; and some meates as naught in themselues and of their owne nature ( so did the Maniche , Marcion and Tatian , as S. Augustine , with others recounteth ) these the Apostle condemneth . The Church is farr distant from this errour . Thus doe S. Augustine , S. Chrisostome , S. Hierome , and S. Ambrose expound this place ; and the reason which the Apostle bringeth for his condemnation conteined in these words , euery creature of God is good , doth authorize the same . And it belongs to the Minister , who is plaintife , to prooue the contrarie . Finally , the Church doth not absolutelie commaund to abstaine from meates , for it forbiddeth not fish , whice is meate ; nor at all times , but onlie certaine particular meates , and at certaine times ; which thing the Apostle reprehends not , who speaketh of these , who absolutelie commaunde to abstaine from meates , and that without limitation to any times . 3. for the proofe of the 3. clause of the obseruation of daies , the article hath cited no texte , in that therfore it deceaueth .

An other clause of the 24. article .

IESVS CHRIST is giuen vs for the sole Aduocate : All that which men haue imagined about the intercession of Saintes departed , is nought els but an abuse and deceipt of Sathan .

Examen .

The onlie pointe of controuersie between vs in the first clause of this article , is of the word ( sole ) for thes two textes are cited in margent , for the second clause nothing , the first in the 1. Timoth. 2.5 .

Texte .

There is one only God , and one onlie mediatour between God and men , man IESVS CHRIST .

Examen .

I will set downe the texte entierly , to make it more cleere that he saith not that , which the article teacheth : behold the Apostles wordes .

God will that all men be saued , and come to the knowledge of truth , for there is one only God , and one only mediatour betweene God and men , man IESVS CHRIST who gaue himselfe for reedmption of all .

I finde not in this passage alledged the termes ( of Aduocate , of intercession ) of which we debate , neither finde I that Saints are shutt out from that office of Aduocate , as saith the article . And if the Minister say that the name of mediatour , as S. Paul vnderstands it , is the same with Aduocate ; I aunsweare first , that the Minister , or rather his Confession of faith , must prooue that the name of mediatour is taken for mediatour , and Aduocate by intercession , and not for mediatour and Aduocate by redemption ; He I say must prooue this , and that by the pure word alone , otherwise the place alledged consenteth not with the Confession of faith , neither doth it reiect the intercession of Saintes . 2. I make aunsweare ( which by the place entirely cited doth appeare ) that S. Paul spake of one Mediatour ( they are the Apostles owne words ) who hath giuen himselfe a redemption for all : of such a Mediatour he saith that he is one alone , neither doe the Catholickes teach that the Saintes are such mediatours . This passage therfore prooues nothing against Catholicques , neither doth it say that IESVS CHRIST is giuen vs for our sole Aduocate , nor that to beleeue the intercession of Saints is an abuse , and deceipt of the deuill . ● . This word ( sole ) hath beene added by the Ministers in the Geneua Bible for it is neither in the Greeke nor Latin texte : and S. Paule to the Galat. 3. calleth Moyses Mediatour .

The seconde passage , alledged for this clause in their Confession , is in the 1. epistle of S. Iohn . 2. Vers. 1.2 .

2. Texte .

These things I write vnto you , that you sinne not . But & if any one sinne , we haue an Aduocate with the Father , IESVS Christ the iust : for he is the propitiation for our sinnes , and not for ours only ; but also for those of the whole worlde .

Examen .

Is it not manifest , that he speaketh not of euery Aduocate , but of an Aduocate which is a propitiation for the sinnes of the whole world , to witt by the effusion of his bloud ? The Catholicques hold not any other such Aduocate , but our Sauiour . To what purpose then is it to bring this passage , which toucheth not that which is in controuersie ? And marke well that it is the Ministers parte , who is Plaintife , to shew that the name of Aduocate is heere taken for anie intercessour , euen him , who is not a propitiation for the sinnes of the world by his passion ; and all this by the pure worde . 2. Besides , if the Minister will pertinaciously vnderstand by the name of Aduocate him , who is not a propitiation for the sinnes of the world which is of his owne head without the pure word , yea against the pure word alledged . ) This word only ) of which wee only striue , not being in this text , this place vere●eth not this article that IESVS Christ only Aduocate .

Let vs come to the 20. Article .

These are the wordes .

Article . 20.

We beleeue that we are made partakers of that iustice ( to witt Christian ) by faith alone .

Textes cited in the Margent of this Article .

Man is iustified by faith , without the workes of the lawe . Rom. 3. Vers. 28.

Man is not iustified by the workes of the Lawe , but only by the faith of IESVS Christ . Galat. 2. Vers. 16.

Before faith came we were kept vnder the law , shut vp vnto that faith which was to be reuealed . Therfore the lawe was our Pedagogue in Christ , that we might be iustified by faith , but when that faith is come now we are not vnder a Pedagogue Galat. 3. Vers. 23.

Examen .

I reade not one word , in all these textes , of the workes of Christian faith , of which alone , and of no others we speake , and hold necessary to iustification . It is manifest that this pure word alledged , speaketh of workes of the Iudaicall religion , styled commonly by S. Paul by the name of the Lawe , and not of the workes of Christian Religion . These passages therfore say onlie , that Christian faith without Circumcision , and other ceremonies of the Iewes , doth iustifie . Who denieth this ? is this all one , or as much as to say that Christian faith , without the workes , which proceed from the said faith in IESVS Christ , as is penance , doth iustifie ? Which is that the article teacheth . Wherfore this pure worde seconds not that which the article sayeth . I am amazed at the impudency , or ignorance of the Ministers : S. Paul discoursing so largely in fiue whole chapters of that epistle to the Galathians , against those which would ioyne with Christian faith Circumcision , and other workes of Iudaisme ; and the very titles of those chapters in the Geneua translation noting the same : yet the aduersaries will alledge these against them , who hold that Christian workes are necessarie to iustification . Open but the epistle , and thou wilt detest such abusers ; the whole epistle sheweth that which I say . It shall suffise for proofe heereof to cite the words of the. 5. chapter . 2. verse . Behold I tell you , that if you be circumcised , Christ shall proffit you nothing , and I testifie againe to euerie man circumciding himself , that he is a debter to doe the whole law ; you are euacuated from Christ , that are iustified in the law . You are fallen from grace , for we by faith exspect the hope of iustice . In IESVS Christ neither circumcision auaileth ought , uor prepuce , but faith working by charity . Do not you falsefye ? doth not S. Paul teach in these laste wordes the contrarie to your article ? The Apostle opposeth Christian Religion , which is called faith in Christ , vnto the Iudaicall religion , which is named the lawe ; and teacheth that this later is not necessary to iustification , but that the former suffiseth , and doth not oppose Christian faith to Christian workes . The last texte cited for the foresaid article , hath as little energy as the precedents . it is this of S. Iohn 3. Vers. 15.16 .

As Moyses exalted the Serpent in the desert , so must the sonne of man be exalted , that euerie one which beleeueth in him , perish not , but may haue life euerlasting . For so God loued the world , that he gaue his only begotten sonne , that euery one that beleeueth in him , perish not , but haue life euerlasting .

The word ( only ) of which only is our variance , and which is in your article , teaching that faith only iustifieth , is not in this text : wherefore this , vnles you add thereto the word ( only ) makes nothing to your purpose ; and how often doth this speech , to beleeue in IESVS Christ , signifie to professe the Ghospell , and liue according to the same ? for faith , saith S. Iames in the 1. chapter 17. verse . If it haue not workes is dead . Doth not S. Paul . Galat. 5. Vers. 6. say that that which iustifieth is faith , working by charitie ? Doth not our Sauiour pronounce this sentence ; if thou wilt enter into life keepe the commaundements ? But I am not bound to prooue , that faith alone without Christian workes doth not iustifie , it is you that are engaged to prooue by the pure worde , that that alone doth iustifie ; alone , I say , for of that alone doe we dispute . In the 11. article it is said that .

Article 11.

Originall sinne after Baptisme is still sinne , as it is a fault ; howbeit the condemnation thereof is taken away in the children of God , who of his mercifull goodnes doth not impute it vnto them .

In proofe of this is alledged one only place in the margent . Rom. 7. Vers. 7.

Texte .

What shall we say then ? is the lawe sinne ? God forbid , but sinne I did not know , but by the lawe , for concupiscence I knew not , vnles the law did say , thou shalt not couet .

Examen .

Here is not in the text one word contained in the article ; wherefore this Confession , promising to say nothing but by the pure word , abuseth vs in this point . Go on .

Let vs examine the 36. and 37. articles , which speake of the B. Sacrament : which since it is obscurely spoken of , for more perspicuity I will borrow somewhat out of your Catechisme .

The 1. clause of the 36. article .

We testifie that the Supper is a testimonie of the vnitie , which we haue with IESVS Christ ; whose body ( you say in your Catechisme in the 53. lesson or Sunday ) is not included vnder the bread , nor his bloud within the chalice , that we must not seeke him in these corruptible elementes . For proofe you alleadge this texte .

Text.

The cuppe of benediction which we do blesse , is it not the communion of the bloud of Christ ? and the bread which we do breake , is it not the communion of the bodie of Christ ? for being manie , we are one only bread , and one only body , for we all partake of one only bread . 1. Corinth . 10. Vers. 16.17 .

Examen .

I reade not in this text ( testimony of the vnity with IESVS Christ ) the text therfore agrees not with the article . But I reade communion of bloud , communion of body , which is a different matter from testimony of vnity with IESVS Christ , and sheweth that the body of IESVS Christ may be founde in these corruptible elements , vnder the accidents of bread and wine ; which this article denieth .

An other clause of the same article

In the supper are Signss , which testify that the body and bloud of IESVS Christ , serueth no lesse for the soule to eate and drinke , then bread and wine doth for the body . These Articles say not in expresse termes that the body of IESVS Christ is not in the Eucharist to couer with obscurity theyr errour ; to disperse this darknes I must borrow some light from theyr Catechisme in the 53. lesson . we must not ( sayth it ) vnderstand that the body is inclosed within the bread , nor the bloud within the chalice ; but contrariwise , to haue the verity of this sacrament , we must lift vp our hartes on high to heauen , where IESVS Christ is , and not seeke him in these corruptible elements . For this clause you cite two textes .

1. Texte .

I am the liuing bread , that came downe from heauen : if any man eate of this bread , he shall liue for euer , and the bread which I will giue is my flesh , which I will giue for the life of the world . Iohn . 6. Vers. 51.

Examen .

First I reade not in this text ( signes which testify ) but this expressely , that Christ is the liuing bread , not comon bread made of flowre , and baked ; but which is his flesh , which sayth he , I will giue for the life of the world ; As also in the geuing of it he sayd , Take , This is my body , which shal be giuen for you . Was it a signe , or figure of his body , which was nayled one the crosse : was it not his proper body ? This clause then is false . 2. The ministers , whoe haue promised to propose nothing but the pure Scripture , how doe they thrust vppon vs this clause so weighty , The body of IESVS Christ is not contained , and included within the bread , nor the blood &c. Without any written word ? see theyr fraude , and how well they keepe theyr word in a matter of greatest moment .

2. Texte .

IESVS tooke bread , and hauing giuen thankes brake it , and said take , eate . This is my bodie , which is broken for you ; do this in commemoration of me . In like manner after supper he tooke the cuppe saying , this cuppe is the new testament in my blood , this do ye , as often as you shall drinke therof in remembrance of me . 1. Corinth . 11. Vers. 24.

Examen .

Who can finde out in this texte . Signes which testify ; figure ; signe of the body of IESVS Christ ; which is not in the bread , nor the bloud in the chalice ? all which the article teacheth . The text then helpes them nothing ; nay how could the text more cleerly reiect the aduersaries beleefe , which is that the body is not vnder the bread nor the bloud within the chalice . Let the Caluinistes consider if they be abused or no : The Ministers haue entred bondes to shew by the pure word , That the supper is a signe which tesstifieth , a figure of the body of our sauiour , which is not vnder the bread , and of the bloud which is not within the chalice : and to cancell theyr obligations , they bring for paiment this texte of Scripture , in which ( being it is written downe ) if you reade it not , eyther you want your sight , or they deceaue you . Rather see you not the contrary ? then say they are doubled iuglers .

An other clause of that Article .

After affirming that IESVS Christ doth nourish , and quicken vs with the substance of his body , and of his bloud , that which the Catholickes beleeue also ; they add , ( in which we disagree ) without aledging any texte for the same ( wherefore put vnderneath for proofe a cypher as before . )

1. We hold notwithstanding , that this is donne spiritually .

Proofe . o.

2. The supper is a figure of the body , or , In the supper is figured the bodie of IESVS Christ .

Proofe . o.

3. Because the misterie of this supper is celestiall , it cannot be taken but by faith , or to vse their vulgar phrase , by the mouth of faith : Those which bring with them a pure faith as a vessell , receaue trulie that which the signes testifie ; commonlie they say , That in the supper is eaten the bodie of IESVS Christ by the mouth of faith and in the 53. Sunday of their Catechisme , it is said , to haue the veritie of the Sacrament , we must lift vp our hartes to heauen where it is .

Proofe . o.

Behold many articles , and of greate consequence proued by a Cypher . Behold how you are abused . The Ministers make you beleeue all this , not being able to shew for it any texte of Scripture . The consequence will be , that your supper is purely their owne inuention : This by your principles I shew . For you haue no pure textes which say that , which you affirmatiuely beleeue of the supper , of which you hold those three thinges aforesayd principally . It is figure &c. that by the mouthe of fayth the body eateh &c. you should distinctly sett downe that , which of our fayth you deny in this matter , from that which therein you positiuely beleeue : for how be it that we did erre ( of which I haue shewed the contrary ) and that your negatiue propositions IESVS Christ is not in the Eucharist , and the like were true ; it followeth not that that , which you affirmatiuely beleeue , most needes be true ; and that you erre not therein . Because one goeth wrong one way , is he , which takes an other , certaine to goe right ? may not both be out of their way ? Examine therfore your assertions , and you finde not any shew of textes that teache , that the supper is a figure of the body &c. nor which speake of the mouth of faith . Consequently your whole supper is a humane inuention . Which being so , in my opinion in the eating a good capon , or a cock , you may more easely remember the death of the sonne of God , for that therein is made mention of the crowing of a cock ; then in eating a bit of bread . For which cause you shall do more prudently , to make of them a figure & memorie , then of a peece of bread ; which is no more holie , then that you eate commonlie at your table .

It may be that some Caluiniste , thinking himselfe better skilled in the Scriptures , then the Ministers which composed the Confession of faith , and cited for proofe therof those sacred textes they iudged most fauourable , will vrge , to prooue the supper to be a figure , that , which our Sauiour said Iohn . 6. Vers. 63. It is the spirit which quickeneth , the flesh proffiteth nothing , the words which I speake vnto you are spirit and life . For awnswere . 1. You must vnderstand , that your Ministers are at variance , whether in the 6. of S. Iohn anie thing be spoken of the supper . Caluin in the fourth booke of his Instit. cap. 17. § . 33. Kemnicius , and Zuinglius deny it . How then will you establish this firme article of your faith vpon so weake a foundation , doubted of by these of your owne faction ? How can you serue your selues of that passage against vs , either for your figure , or for your Spiritually ? 2. I reade not in this text figure : and if anie one say that spiritt and figure is all one ; I may not beleeue him without his proofe , and that by the pure Scripture . And who perceaues not how ridiculous this deuise is ? the diuells are spirites , are they figures ? the Angells and our soules are spirittes ? are they also figures ? God himself is he not a most pure spiritt ? is he a figure ? it belongs not to me to explicate this place . I only shew that the pure word saith not that , which the article conteineth , & consequently the Ministers mock vs . Yet by the way , knowe that the sense of this texte is , that our Sauiour would not giue vs to eate his flesh dead , and in peeces ( as we eate of the ordinarie flesh , as the Capharnaites imagined ) to eate of flesh in this manner , proffitteth nothing to saluation ; but flesh animated by his spirite , and quickened by his deuine life : in this manner we eate it . In which fashion we cannot eate anie other flesh , for it must first be dead , before it nourish vs . Remember finally that I doe not by this Scripture prooue my faith , this suffiseth me , that in these words you reade not either figure of body , or that we hold that it is donne spiritually , in such manner that the body is not contained there , this , I say , suffiseth to make you know you are misledd . For since you reade it not , ( which doubtles if it were there , you might ) the pure word warranteth not that which this article containeth .

Behold Syr the arte , which in this letter I promised to discouer vnto you : is it not a rare & worthy hunting-game ? haue you ere this seene such coursing ? F. Veron in teaching it me , told me that , which I know will giue it no small luster in your eye : that he receaued the origine , and substance therof from the R.F. Gontery , which famous hunter was the authour , and inuentour of this so efficacious , and facile sport ; who also vsed no other in his disputes a-against the Ministers , iudging this the best , and most powerfull of all . And you know well , that that fearfull scourge of the Hereticke is most expert in these combats 〈◊〉 being so beaten a soldiour in those warres , each prudent man wil make a great esteme of his aduise herein . He hath putt to slight the Ministers of Dieppe , of Caen , of Sedan &c. and among the rest some Allmaines he founde at Tourlac . But how ? Truly by no other meanes but this , by the pure Scripture alone , and that after the Geneua Translation , by the practise before set downe : Sauing that he brideled them in more shortly , for he neuer suffered them in any point debated , to proceed by consequences , which they said they would deduce out of the Scripture , vnles they first subscribed , that they could not enter combate with vs by the pure written word .

I should now sende you the relation promised of this Conference , between F. Veron , and the Minister Hucher , but because the printer , by reason of the great frostes could not dispatch the same so soone , as I hoped ; not to keepe you wholy in suspence , I send you the summary thereof , togeather with the meanes to buckle with the Sectaries . The whole Conference is vnder the presse , you shall haue it within eight daies ; ioyne it to this fashion of hunting which I now send you , for in that you will see the practise of this kinde of chace , vsed by the Father in this conflict . Heere will you also see , by this so succesfull and remarkable victory , the efficacy of this arte . It is scarcely possible to putt a man to more confusion , then the Minister was in . The fame of this victory strooke the sectaries to the harte . Seeing the title of this epistle before it was printed , they were much offended at it , but all partes thereof are easily iustified , by the Actes of the Conference signed . Behold out of them the Ministers owne wordes . He hauing promised to shew by the pure word , that IESVS Christ is not in the Eucharist , after a little pressing said ; The truth is , that these words ( the body of IESVS Christ is not in the Eucharist ) are not in the Scripture . And after being vrged a little harder , he confessed besides twice , before all the assembly , that he had not any text in Scripture , which , setting aside all consequences , conteyned formally and expresly the sense of this proposition . IESVS Christ is not in the Eucharist , which notwithstanding he before vndertooke to shew by the pure word ; and so to reforme the Iesuite in his errour . Is not this as much as to confesse , that he could not by the pure word reforme vs in this point ? is not this to forsake it ? is not this to renounce the office and exercise of a reformer ? thinke you these fittes proceede from a merry hart ? wherfore with reason the epistle beares for title The Minister of Amiens constrained to renounce the pure word of holy write : He stayed so long dumme , and in presence of so many personnes , and of such quality , that there is no tergiuersation : and refused so long time in the third session , to come to the proofe of that , in which the day before he was struck speechles , or also to deale in any other point ; that the flight is as euident , as the day light . Wherfore the epistle hath right vnto his title . Within few dayes you shall see the narration at large , well subscribed and signed ; in the meane tyme notwithstanding , for iustification of the summary thereof , sett downe in the beginning of this letter , I haue procured these subscriptions following .