The commentaries of M. John Calvin upon the Acts of the Apostles, faithfully translated…The commentaries of M. Iohn Caluin vpon the Actes of the Apostles, faithfully translated…

and in most points they do as much ⟨p. 62⟩dissent from the same, and have as little agreement therewith, as light with darkness. The rule of worshipping God, which ought to be fet out of the pure word of God alone, is only made and patched together amongst the papists, of the superstitious inventions of men. They have translated unto the merits of works, the hope of salvation which ought to have rested in Christ alone. The invocation of God is altogether polluted with innumerable profane dotinges of men. Finally, whatsoever is heard amongst them, it is either a deforming of the Apostles doctrine, or else a clear overthrowing and destroying of the same. Therefore we may as easily refute the foolish arrogance of the papists, as they can cloak their dealings with the title of the Church. For this shall be the state: whether they have retained the purity of doctrine, from which they are as far as Hell is from Heaven. But they are wise enough in that point, because they will have no controversy moved about doctrine. But we as I have said, may freely contemn that vain visor: forasmuch as the Spirit of God doth pronounce, that the Church is principally to be esteemed and discerned by this mark, if the simplicity or purity of the doctrine delivered by the Apostles do flourish and be of force in the same.

and in most points they do as much ⟨p. 62⟩dissent from the same, and haue as little agreement therewith, as light with darkenesse. The rule of worshipping God, which ought to bee fet out of the pure worde of God alone, is onely made and patcht togither amongst the papists, of the superstitious inuentions of men. They haue translated vnto the merites of workes, the hope of saluation which ought to haue rested in Christ alone. The inuocation of God is altogither polluted with innumerable profane dotinges of men. Finallie, whatsoeuer is heard amongst them, it is either a deforming of the Apostles doctrine, or else a cleere ouerthrowing and destroying of the same. Therefore we may as easily refute the foolish arrogancie of the papists, as they can cloake their dealings with the title of the Church. For this shall bee the state: whether they haue retained the puritie of doctrine, from which they are as farre as Hell is from Heauen. But they are wise ynough in that point, because they will haue no controuersie moued about doctrine. But wee as I haue said, may freely contemne that vaine visure: forasmuch as the Spirit of God doth pronounce, that the Church is principallie to bee esteemed and discerned by this marke, if the simplicitie or puritie of the doctrine deliuered by the Apostles doe florish and be of force in the same.