To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
2. The Melancthonian, or moderate Lutherans, which make up infinitely the greatest part of the Lutheran Churches, agree in these points with the Iesuits or Franciscan Friers, and yet are still as far from relapsing to the Church of Rome, as when they made the first separation from it.
Answ. Where, 1. It is strange that one pretending to History, should represent the infinitely far greater part of the Lutheran Churches as Melancthonian, or moderate Lu∣therans:
When as it is known, that a very great, if not the greatest part of the Lutherans, are as far from being Me∣lancthonians, or moderate, as Dr. Heylin is from being a Presbyterian or Puritan. But it seems, if men be never so violent for Ubiquity, Consubstantiation, Images, if they be but against Predestination, they shall pass for meek and mode∣rate, and Melancthonians.
2. It may a little be questioned, Whether the pre∣sent Lutherans be as far from relapsing to the Church of Rome, as were those Lutherans who made the first se∣paration from it? I know not how much there may be of truth in the talk that hath lately filled our ears, concern∣ing Unions and accommodations betwixt the Lutheran and Roman Churches. It would be very strange if the Lutherans, having all this while been bred up among Ima∣ges, should be as averse from Image-worship, as were the first Reformers.
3. It is as false as what is most false, that the Lutherans do agree with the Franciscans or Jesuits in these Points. Micraelius in his Heterodoxia Calviniana, disput. 5. par. 15, rejecteth both the Dominicans and Jesuits: the Domi∣nicans, as inclining to the Stoicks; the Jesuits, as fal∣ling in with the Pelagians. Afterwards he rejects the Je∣suits Scientia media, confessing that Voetius doth well and unanswerably prove against them, that there is nothing knowable but what is the object either of the knowledge of simple intelligence, or vision. Speaking also of Arminius, he will not undertake for him. Tarnovius openly rejects the Arminians, as of a contrary judgement from the Lutherans, Miscel. Sacrorum lib. 2. pag. 710, Vorstiniani, Arminiani, & si∣miles in Belgio, quando aiunt fide nos praedestinari ad vitam ae∣ternam, idem dicunt, non idem nobiscum sentiunt. He that would be more fully convinced of this, that the Lutherans are not Arminians, may please to consult what Durfieldus, a Divine of Rostoch, hath written against Iohannes Assuerus Amsingus; where he shall find the Arminians accused of Pelagianism, before the chief Doctors of those Universi∣ties, that follow the Augustan Confession. This I take on trust from Dr. Rivet, having not as yet had the oppor∣tunity to see the Author. But casting my eye on Ger∣hard's Son's Epistle Dedicatory, prefixed to his Father's
Comment on Deuteronomy, I found him use no obliging lan∣guage of the Arminians; for he saith, that they have ad do∣gmata Socinianorum admodum prurientes aures, and he calls Si∣mon Episcopius, the Infaelex Arminianismi interpolator. But the cutting killing Answer (which he cannot mention without triumph) is still behind, and is thus worded: