Format 
Page no. 
Search this text 
Title:  A challenge concerning the Romish Church, her doctrine & practises, published first against Rob. Parsons, and now againe reuiewed, enlarged, and fortified, and directed to him, to Frier Garnet, to the archpriest Blackevvell and all their adhærents, by Matth. Sutcliffe. Thereunto also is annexed an answere vnto certeine vaine, and friuolous exceptions, taken to his former challenge, and to a certeine worthlesse pamphlet lately set out by some poore disciple of Antichrist, and entituled, A detection of diuers notable vntrueths, contradictions, corruptions, and falsifications gathered out of M. Sutcliffes new challenge, &c.
Author: Sutcliffe, Matthew, 1550?-1629.
Table of contents | Add to bookbag
His slandrous wordes, where hee like a slaue of antichrist doth call vs Caluinists, doth shew his had humor, and howe without lying and rayling, neither he, nor his consorts can maintaine their credit.Proclus Haereticus apud Epiphanium haeres. 64. saith Bellar∣mine,Ibidem.dicebat peccatum in renatis semper viuere. concupiscen∣tiam enim verè esse peccatum, nec tolli per baptismum, sed so∣piri per fidem, quod idem docuerunt Meslaliani haeretici apud Theodoretum lib. 4. de haeret. fabulis. haec est ipsissima senten∣tia Lutheri artic. 2. & 31. Item Philippi in locis communibus c. de peccato Originis, & Caluini lib. 4. instit c. 15. §. 10. But to report somewhat, that may tend to slander vs, he hath re∣ported a number of lies all vpon a heape. for neither did Pro∣clus say, that concupiscence was sinne, and that it was not ta∣ken away by baptisme, but onely made dull by faith: nor did the Messalians teach any such matter. nor doth either Epi∣phanius say that of Proclus, or Theodoret of the Messalians, that Bellarmine reporteth. nor doth either Luther, or Melan∣cthon, or Caluin teach, that sinne doth liue alwaies in the re∣generat. Proclus beléeued, that the body was vinculum ani∣mae, and that the soules were created before the body: which was also the heresie of Origen. But this which Bellarmine talketh of, he neuer taught, nor was any such thing condem∣ned in him as an heresie. Luther, Melancthon, Caluin and we all doe holde, that euery christian man ought to mortifie his earthly members, and concupiscences, and that some doe it more, some lesse. Neither doth any man teach, that con∣cupiscence doth reigne, or liue in the regenerat, as this lying and slandrous mouth affirmeth. Whereas Nouatus denyed reconciliation to such as had fallen in time of persecution, Ibidem. or as Bellarmine saith, power to reconcile men to God, otherwise then by baptisme, he char∣geth Caluin with this heresie, as if Caluin did deny reconci∣liation to repentant sinners, or had said, that the church hath no power to reconcile such as are fallen. As not this therfore grosse impudency, to lye so manifestly? But saith he, Caluin denied, that there was any sacrament of repentance, beside bap∣tisme. as if he, that denied this, must néedes say, that the 0