Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
authority_n book_n church_n faith_n 2,919 5 5.3557 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A27112 Certamen religiosum, or, A conference between the late King of England and the late Lord Marquesse of Worcester concerning religion together with a vindication of the Protestant cause from the pretences of the Marquesse his last papers which the necessity of the King's affaires denyed him oportunity to answer. Bayly, Thomas, d. 1657? 1651 (1651) Wing B1507; ESTC R23673 451,978 466

There are 8 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

authority of the Church as if were it not for the authority of the Church the Scripture were of no force neither could deserve any credit So the Romanists do frequently pervert those words of Austine but Austines meaning was only this that the Churches authority by way of introduction was a means to bring him to beleeve the Gospel by propounding and commending the Gospel unto him as a thing to be beleeved whereas otherwise he should not have given heed to it nor taken notice of it not as if he did finally rest in the authority of the Church and resolve his faith into it No for as I have shewed before he would have the Church it selfe sought in the Scripture and proved by it Had not the woman of Samaria told those among whom she lived of Christ they had not come to the knowledge of him much lesse to beleeve in him yet having heard Christ himselfe they did not rest in the testimony of the woman but said unto her Now we beleeve not because of thy saying for we have heard him our selves and know that this is indeed the Christ and the Saviour of the world Joh. 4. 42. So should not the Church hold out unto us the Scriptures we should not know much lesse beleeve them but at length God by his Spirit opening our understandings that we may understand the Scriptures Luke 24. 45. we come to be convinced by the Scriptures themselves that they are the Oracles of God and of divine authority Melchior Canus a learned Writer of the Church of Rome holds that the formall reason of our faith is not the authority of the Church that is that the last resolution of our faith is not into the Churches testimony And he saith that he could not dissemble their errour who hold that our faith is to be reduced thither as to the utmost cause of beleeving For the confuting of this errour he saith belongs that Ioh. 4. Now we beleeve not because of thy saying for we our selves have heard him and know c. The same authour averres that the authority of the Church is not a reason by it selfe moving to beleeve but only a cause or meanes without which we should not beleeve viz. Because as he addes the Church doth propound unto us that the Scripture is the word of God and except the Church did so propound it we should never ordinarily come to beleeve it yet we doe not therefore beleeve the Scripture to be Gods word because the Church doth say it but because God doth reveal it If the Church saith he doth make way for us to know such sacred books we must not therefore rest there but we must goe further and must relye on Gods solid truth And then he brings in that very speech of Austine and shewes what he meant by it Hereby is understood saith he what Austine meant when he said I should not beleeve the Gospell except the authority of the Church did move me And again By the Catholikes I had beleeved the Gospell For Austine had to doe with the Manichees who without dispute would have a certain Gospell of theirs beleeved and so would establish the faith of the Manichees Austine therefore askes them what they would doe if they did light upon a man who did not beleeve so much as the Gospell what kind of perswasion they would use to bring him to their opinion He affirmes that himselfe could not be otherwise brought to embrace the Gospell but that the authority of the Church did overcome him He doth not therefore teach that the faith of the Gospell is grounded upon the Churches authority but only that there is no certain way whereby either infidels or novices in the faith may have entrance to the holy books but one and the same consent of the Catholike Church This he himselfe hath sufficiently explicated in the fourth Chapter of that Epistle and in his book to Honoratus concerning the benefit of beleeving I have thus largely cited the words of this learned Romanist because no Protestant can speak more clearly and more fully to the purpose That which the Marquesse after addeth is nothing against us viz. That there was a Church before there was any Scripture that though the Scripture be a light yet we have need of some to guide us though it be the food of our soules yet there must be some to administer it unto us though it be an antidote against the infection of the devill yet it is not for every one to be a compounder of the ingredients that though it be the onely sword and buckler to defend the Church from her Ghostly enemies yet this doth not exclude the noble army of Martyrs and the holy Church which through all the world doth acknowledg Christ All this I say is nothing at all against us who do so assert the authority of the Scripture as that we doe not evacuate the Churches ministery Timothy must preach but it is the word viz. of God contained in the Scriptures which he must preach 2 Tim. 4. 2. If any man speak for the instructing of others he must speak as the Oracles of God 1 Pet. 4. 11. He must confirm that which he doth speak by the Scriptures And so on the other side they that hear must take heed how and what they hear Luke 8. 18. Mark 4. 24. They must not beleeve every Spirit but must try the Spirits whether they be of God 1 John 4. 1. They must to the Law and to the Testimony for that if any speak not according to this word it is because they have no light in them Isai 8. 20. They must search the Scriptures diligently to see whether the things delivered unto them be so or no. Acts 17. 11. OF THE CHVRCH of ENGLAND THE SECOND PART OF THE Rejoynder to the Marquess of WORCESTER'S Reply MAJESTIE' 's Answer to the said Marquesse's Plea for the ROMISH RELIGION THE Marquesse saith that he will now consider the Opinions of Protestants apart from them of the Church of Rome and begin with the Church of England The Religion of this Church he saith as it is in opposition to theirs consists wholly in denying for that what she affirms they affirm the same as the Real presence the Infallibility Visibility Universality and Unity of the Church Confession and Remission of sinnes Free-will Possibility of keeping the Commandments c. And you may as well saith he deny the blessed Trinity for we have no such word in Scripture only inference as that which you have already denied for which we have plain Scripture c. But 1. it is not altogether so that what the Church of England doth affirm the same they of the Church of Rome do affirm also For the Church of England Art 9. doth affirm alleadging the authority of the Apostle for proof thereof that Concupiscence hath of it self the nature of sinne even in the regenerate which the Romanists deny the Councel of Trent accurseth
Ceremonies and of Apostolicall tradition She held then besides Batisme and the Eucharist Confirmation Marriage Orders and extream Unction for true and proper Sacraments which the Church of Rome now acknowledgeth The Church in the Ceremonies of Baptisme used then oyl salt wax-lights exorcismes the signe of the Cross the word Ephata and other that accompany it none of them without reason and excellent signification The Church held then Baptisme for infants of absolute necessity and for this cause then permitted lay men to baptise in danger of death the Church used then holy water consecrated by certain words and Ceremonies and made use of it both for Baptisme and against inchantments and to make exorcismes and conjurations against evill spirits The Church held then divers degrees in the Ecclesiasticall Regiment to wit Bishops Priests Deacons Subdeacons the Acolite Exorcist Reader and Porter consesecrated and blessed them with divers Forms and Ceremonies And in the Episcopall Order acknowledged divers seats of Jurisdiction of positive right to wit Archbishops Primates Patriarchs and one Supereminent by Divine law which was the Pope without whom nothing could be decided appertaining to the universall Church and the want of whose presence either by himselfe or his Legats or his Confirmation made all Councels pretended to be universall unlawfull In the Church then the service was said throughout the East in Greek and throughout the West as well in Africa as in Europe in Latin although that in none of the provinces except in Italy and the Cities where the Romane Colonies resided the Latine tongue was understood by the common people She observed then the distinction of feasts and ordinary dayes the Distinction of Ecclesiasticall and lay habits the reverence of sacred vessels the custome of shaming and unction for the collation of orders the Ceremony of the Priest washing his hands at the Altar before the consecration of the Mysteries She then pronounced a part of the service at the Altar with a low voice made processions with the reliques of Martyrs kissed them carried them in clothes of silke and vessels of gold took and esteemed the dust from under their reliquaries accompanied the dead to their sepulchres with wax tapers in sign of joy for the certainty of their future resurrection The Church then had the picture of Christ and of his Saints both out of Churches and in them and upon the very Altars not to adore them with God like worship but by them to reverence the Souldiers and Champions of Christ The faithfull then used the sign of the Crosse in all their Conversations painted it on the portal of all the houses of the faithfull gave their blessing to the people with their hand by the signe of the Crosse imployed it to drive away evill spirits proposed in Jerusalem the very Crosse to be adored on good Friday Finally the Church held then that to the Catholick Church onely belongs the keeping of the Apostolicall tradition the Authority of interpretation of Scripture and the decision of Controversies of faith and that out of the succession of her communion of her Doctrine and her ministery there was neither Church nor Salvation Neither will I insist with you onely upon the word then but before and before and before that even to the first age of all will I shew you our doctrine of the reall presence and holy Sacrifice of the Masse Invocation of Saints Veneration of Reliques and Images Confession and Priestly absolution Purgatory and prayer for the dead Traditions c. In the fift Age or hundred of years Saint Augustine was for the reall and corporall presence In the fourth Age Saint Ambrose In the third Age Saint Cyprian In the second Age or hundred of years S. Irenaeus And in the first Age Saint Ignatius Martyr and Disciple of Saint John the Evangelist Concerning the honour and invocation of Saints In the fifth Age we find Saint Augustine praying to the Virgin Mary ond other Saints In the fourth Age we find Greg. Naz. praying to S. Basil the great In the third Age we find S. Origen praying to Father Abraham In the second Age Justin Martyr And in the first age in the Liturgy of S. James the lesse For the use and veneration of holy Reliques and Images and chiefly of the Holy Crosse in the fifth age Saint Augustine In the fourth Age Athanasius In the third Age Origen In the second Age St. Justin Martyr And in the first Age S. Ignatius Concerning Confession and Absolutions In the fifth Age S. August In the fourth Age S. Basil the Great In the third Age S. Cypr. In the second Age Tertull. And in the first Age S. Clement Now concerning Purgatory and Prayer for the dead in the fifth Age S. Augustin In the fourth Age S. Ambrose In the third Age S. Cypr. In the second Age Tertull. And in the first Age S. Clement e. Concerning Traditions in the fifth Age S. Aug. In the fourth Age S. Basil In the third Age S. Epiphanins In the second Age S. Irenaeus And in the first Age S. Dennis Now suppose that all these quotations be right The saving of a soul of your own soul of the soul of a King of the souls of so many Kingdoms and the gaining of that Kingdome for a reward which in comparison of these Earthly ones for which you so often fight so much strive and labour so much for to obtain your tetrarchate would be a gain for you to lose it so that you might but obtain that would be worth the search and when you have found them to be truly cited I dare trust your judgement that it will tell you that we have not changed our Countenance nor fled our Colours nor fallen away nor altered our Religion nor forsaken our first Love nor denyed our Principles nor brought Novelties into the Church but that we doe antiquum obtinere whereby we should be forsaken of you for forsaking our selves but rather that we should win you unto us by being still the same we were when we won you first unto us and were at the beginning And is it for the honour of the English Nation famous for the first Christian King and the first Christian Emperour to forsake her Mother Church so renowned for antiquity and to annex their Religion as a codicell to an appeal of a company of Protesters against a decree at Spira and to forsake so glorious a name as Catholick and to take a name upon them wherein they had neither right nor interest and then to take measure of the Scottish Discipline for the new fashion of their souls and to
the Apostle there say neither so farre as I see can it in any congruity be said that the Church of Rome either is or was a Church universally spread thorough the World A part and an eminent part of the Church so universall it might be but the whole universall Church it could not be The Apostle there saith no more of the Romanes then he doth of the Thessalonians 1 Thess 1. 8. yet I presume our Adversaries will not therefore admit either the Church of Thessalonica to be universall or ever since the Apostles time to have continued sound and Orthodox And why then will they thinke to inforce so much from the Apostles words for the Church of Rome To these two places of Scripture the Marquesse addeth the testimonies of three Fathers viz. Cyprian Austine and Hierome But for the first of these his words are pitifully mistaken They are these Dum apud vos una animus unae vox est Ecclesia omnis Romana confessa est the Marquesse renders it thus whilst with you there is one minde and one voyce the whole Church is confessed to be the Roman Church whereas any that can understand Latine and wil minde the words may see that they are to be rendred thus whilest with you there is one minde and one voyce the whole Roman Church hath confessed Cyprian here wrote to Cornelius Bishop of Rome who together with others had before heathen persecutors confessed the faith For this Cyprian commends them and saith that they so confessing as they did and all being of one minde and one voyce the whole Roman Church did confesse This makes indeed for the soundnesse of the Roman Church as it was in Cyprians time but for the universality of it as if it were the universall Church or a Church universally diffused it makes nothing For Austines words de unit Eccles cap. 4. Who so doth not communicate with the whole corps of Christendome certaine it is that they are not in the holy Catholick Church I see not what they are to the purpose They cannot be so understood as that all must necessarily communicate with all that are of the corps of Christendome that is that professe themselves Christians For so all should be tied to communion with grosse and notorious Heretikes They must then be understood of communicating with all Christians so farre forth as they are indeed Christians but what is this to prove either the perpetuall universality of the Church or that the Church of Rome is such a Church Austine wrote against the Donatists who confined the Church to Affrike excluding all the World besides from being of the Church This is nothing against us who doe not confine the Church to any place whatsoever The last Father here cited is Hierom who as the Marquesse telleth us saith That it is all one to say the Roman Faith and the Catholike Faith But the Marquesses quotation of the place where this is to be found in Hierome is too laxe viz. in Apol. ad Ruffin it should be adversus Ruffin But there are two Apologies which Hierome wrote against Ruffin and one of them divided into severall Bookes it was meet therefore that the place should have been cited more particularly then it is Yet I think I have met with the place which the Marquesse meaneth which yet doth not speake so much as the Marquesse supposeth Ruffinus translating Origens workes which had many grosse errors in them into Latine to justifie himselfe said the Latine Reader shall finde nothing that differs from our faith Hereupon Hierome asked what faith he meant by our faith whether that faith which did flourish in the Church of Rome or that which was contained in the workes of Origen If saith hee he shall answer The Roman faith then are we Catholickes who have translated nothing of Origens error but if Origens blasphemy be his faith whilest he chargeth me with inconstancy he proves himselfe an Heretick Here indeed Hierome implieth the Roman faith and the Catholick faith to have been then when he wrote one and the same yet not simply but so farre forth as did concerne the errors of Origen But how can any justly hence conclude that in Hieromes Dialect it 's all one to say the Roman faith and the Catholick faith as if in Hieromes opinion the Roman faith and the Catholick faith in all points and at all times must needs be the same That Hierome did not overvalue the Church of Rome is evident For when the custome of that Church was objected against something that hee held hee rejected the authority of it with some disdaine saying If wee seek authority the World is greater then the City And againe what doe you bringing the custome of one City From Universality the Marquesse passeth to Unity saying that the unity of the Church is necessary in all points of faith and proving it first by Scriptures as Ephes 4. 5. Acts 4. 35. and 1 Cor. 1. 10. then by fathers as Austine contra Par. l. 3. c. 5. Cypr. de unit Eccles and Hilar. ad Constant. Now this unity of the Church hath been spoken of before and it hath beene shewed how far it is requisite as also how little cause they of the Church of Rome have either to applaud themselves for it or to upbraide the Reformed Churches for want of it There is one Lord one faith one baptisme faith the Apostle Eph. 4. 5. well suppose they of the Roman-church have one faith yet except they have the one faith this of which the Apostle speaketh what are they the better But indeed neither is their faith so one as they pretend there being many great and weighty points wherein they differ one from another See Gerard loc com de Eccles Sect. 240 c. On the other side as I have said before if the confessions of the reformed churches be look't upon rather then particular mens opinions or perhaps expressions there will no great difference in points of faith be found amongst them Acts 4. 35. here cited by the Marquesse is not to the purpose as not speakking of unity of faith but rather of affection 1 Cor. 1. 10. the Apostle exhorts them to unity and that there might be no divisions among them but because there was not such unity as was meet but there were divisions among them he doth not therefore say that they were no true Church In a word both the Scriptures and the Fathers are for the unity of the Church in points of Faith and so are we that the severall Articles of Protestant Churches deny this Unity the Marquesse affirmeth but doth not prove it We hold faith the Marquesse that every Minister of the Church especially the supreme Minister or Head thereof should be in a capacity of fungifying his Office in Preaching the Gospell Administring the Sacrament Baptizing Marrying and not otherwise This we have Scripture for Heb. No man taketh this honour unto himself but he that is called
he was above two hundred years after Minutius and Gregory who was about as much after Paulinus was against the worshipping of any thing made with hands as appears by the words before cited Finally saith the Marquesse the Church then held that to the Catholick Church only belongs the keeping of the Apostolical tradition the authority of interpretation of Scripture and the decision of controversies of faith and that out of the succession of her communion of her doctrine and her ministery there neither was Church nor salvation 1. For Apostolical traditions enough hath been said before 2. And so also of interpretation of Scripture and decision of controversies of faith 3. I understand not what is meant by objecting against us that out of the Catholick Church there is no Church For the Catholick Church being the Church universal and so comprehending all particular Churches as parts and members of it who can doubt that there is no Church out of the Church Catholick But what is this to the Church of Rome which once indeed was a sound part of the Catholick Church but the Catholick Church it never was nor could be except a part could be the whole In that which follows page 101. c. there is nothing but the same matter as before only the form is somewhat altered and therefore there is no need that I should trouble either my self or the Reader any further about it only I shall adde one or two Animadversions 1. Whereas it is objected page 105. c. that Luther after his deserting the communion of the Church of Rome did yet hold some points of Popery and so also Husse and Wickliffe and others that otherwise opposed themselves against the errors and corruptions of that Church I answer That as Rome was not built at once so neither was it demolished at once but by degrees it is no marvel therefore if those worthy men did at least for a while retain some Romish opinions and practices after that in many things they had discovered the truth and stood up in defence of it 2. Whereas it is pretended page 106. that before Berengarius who was above 1000. years after Christ none did oppose that reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament which the Romanists maintain besides that I have sufficiently confuted this before the Marquesse might have seen from Bellarmine himself that there were some who above 200. years before Berengarius did oppose that doctrine which in this particular the Church of Rome now doth hold namely Bertram a Presbyter who was about 800. years after Christ and saith Bellarmine was one of the first that did call in question that doctrine But Bellarmine doth too much mince the matter for Bertram did more then call in question that reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament which the Romanists do hold he did plainly assert that which Protestants maintain viz. that the substance of bread and wine doth still remain after consecration as is to be seen in Hospinians first part of the Sacramentary history and so in others that cite that Author for the book it self I confesse I have not seen that I do remember But that is here worthy to be observed which the Romish censurers of Books say speaking of this book of Bertrams about the Sacrament Although say they we do not much value this book nor should greatly eare if it were no where to be found yet seeing it hath been often printed and read of very many c. and we sufer very many errours in other ancient Catholicks we extenuate them we excuse them and finding out some device we often deny them and fain some good sense of them when they are opposed in disputations or conflicts with the adversaries we see not why Bertram may not deserve the same favour and diligent recognition lest Hereticks prate against us and say that we burn antiquity and prohibit it when it makes for them Some things therefore in Bertrams book they will have to be quite left out and some things to be quite altered as namely for visibly to be read invisibly Such devices have they of the Church of Rome to corrupt ancient Writers when they make against them and then they pretend that all are for them Thus the Marquesse in the conclusion of his Reply page 230. pretends that they have the prescription of 1600. years possession and continuance of their Churches Doctrine and evidence out of the word of God and the Fathers witnessing to that evidence and the decrees of Councels and Protestants own acknowlegdements But what ground there is for this pretence let the Reader judge by comparing and considering what is said on both sides And so I also shall leave the successe of my labour unto God in whose hand are the hearts of all An Addition of some few things omitted in the fore-going REJOINDER THe Marquesse pag. 69. citeth Basil orat in 40 it is misprinted 44 Mart. as affirming that we may pray unto the Saints departed But in that Oration Basil affirms no such thing He shews indeed his approbation of praying not unto the Martyrs but which is quite another thing to God at the monuments of the Martyrs The most learned B. Usher observes That the memory of the Martyrs indeed was from the very beginning had in great reverence and at their Memorials and Martyria that is to say at the places wherein their bodies were laid which were the Churches whereunto the Christians did in those times usually resort prayers were ordinarily offered up unto God for whose cause they laid down their lives But this is no argument that they then prayed to the Martyrs though that errour might take occasion afterwards to creep in by this meanes The Marquesse taxeth Calvin for holding that Christs soule was subject to ignorance To what I have already said in answer to this charge I adde that in this particular Fulgentius was of the same minde with Calvin For confuting those that held Christ to have no humane soul he saith thus If we must believe that the humane nature in Christ wanted a soul what is it that in Christ being an Infant is said not to have known good and evil Then he cites Isa 7. 16. expounding it of Christ and addes Therefore the humane soule which is naturally made capable of reason in Christ being an Infant is said not to have known good and evil which according to the truth of the Gospel in Christ being a child is related to have increased in wisdome c. To that also that hath been said before concerning Calvins death let this be added How far Calvin was from despairing at his death as the Marquesse doth object may appear by what he wrote to his dear friend Farel when he looked for death every moment I hardly breath saith he and expect continually that breath should fail me It is enough that I live and dye to Christ who to those that are his is both
the words of the Apostle Rom. 12. 6. Except we must to use the Marquesses expressions take them margin'd with their own notes sens'd with their own meaning and enlivened with their own private spirit As for the rule mentioned Gal. 6. 16. it is no generall rule of faith or of interpreting Scripture but a speciall rule that in Christ Iesus neither circumcision availeth any thing nor uncircumcision but a new creature as is cleare by the context ver 15. As many as walke according to this rule that is as Oecumenius expounds it as many as are content with this rule and this doctrine that all things are made a new creature and doe not subject themselves to the Law Neither is the place 2 Cor. 10. 15. to the purpose For the Apostle there speakes of a ruleby way of similitude as Cardinall Cajetan doth well expound it viz. that as an Architect or the like chiefe workman doth by rule divide the worke that is to be done and appoint under-workemen where they shall imploy themselves and how farre they shall reach so God did as it were by rule appoint Paul where he should preach the Gospell and how farre his imployment should extend in that kinde This plainly appeares to be the Apostles meaning by the two verses immediately preceding But we will not boast of things without our measure but according to the measure of the rule which God hath distributed unto us a measure to reach even unto you For we stretch not our selves beyond our measure as though wee reached not unto you for we are come as farre as you also in preaching the Gospell of Christ Then he addes Not boasting of things without our measure that is of other mens labours but having hope when your faith is encreased that we shall be enlarged by you according to our rule abundantly To preach the Gospell in the regions beyond you and not to boast in another mans line of things made ready to our hand All may plainly see that here is nothing spoken of a rule of faith or a rule for the understanding of the Scripture And therefore most impertinently is 2 Cor. 10. 16. cited as if the Apostle there did speak of a rule of faith made ready to their hands And so also is that of not measuring our selves by our selves 2 Cor. 10. 12. Neither can our Adversaries ever be able to prove that by the forme of Doctrine mentioned Rom. 6. 17. the Apostle did meane any other Doctrine then what is contained in the Scripture or that any Doctrine but the Doctrine of the Scripture is meant by that which was committed to Timotheus trust 1 Tim. 6. 20. which the Apostle there bids him keepe avoiding profane and vaine bablings c. Though such as are unlearned and unstable wrest the Scriptures c. 2 Pet. 3. 16. yet the same Apostle in the same Epistle doth teach us to take heed to the Scripture as to a light shining in a darke place 2 Pet. 1. 19. That the Apostle spake of any unwritten tradition as a rule whereby to interpret Scriptures 2 Tim. 2. 2. can never be made good by the things which Timothy heard him and was to commit to faithfull men c. hee meant nothing but the Doctrine of the Gospell as the forementioned Cajetan doth truly interpret and that Doctrine I presume is no where to be found but in the Scripture Surely the Apostle in the next Chapter after tells Timothy that from a child hee had known the holy Scriptures which were able to make him wise unto salvation thorough faith which is in Christ Iesus 2 Tim. 3. 15. After the Scriptures the Marquesse cites the Fathers as being of this opinion viz. Ireneus l. 4. c. 45. Tertull. de Praescript and Vincent Lirin in suo Commentario perhaps it should be Commonitorio But it will not appeare that the Fathers held any rule of faith and of interpreting the Scripture besides the Scripture it selfe His Majesty as I noted before cited above twice as many Fathers as the Marquesse here alledgeth plainly testifying that the Scriptures are their own interpreters and that matters of faith are to be decided by them I will adde a few more testimonies of the Fathers to this purpose As wee doe not deny saith Hierome those things which are written so we refuse those things which are not written I adore saith Tertullian the fulnesse of the Scripture And againe Let Hermogenes saith hee shew that it is written If it be not written let him feare that woe appointed for those that either adde to the Scripture or detract from it Wee doe Cyprian no wrong saith Austine when wee distinguish any of his writings from the canonicall authority of the Divine Scriptures For not without cause is such a wholesome Ecclesiasticall rule of vigilancy constituted to which certaine Bookes of the Prophets and the Apostles belong which we may not at all dare to judge and according to which wee may freely judge of other writings whether they bee of Beleevers or of unbelievers And againe I am not bound saith hee by the authority of this Epistle viz. of Cyprian because I doe not account Cyprians writings as Canonicall but I examine them by those that are Canonicall and that which is in them agreeable to the authority of the Divine Scriptures I receive with his praise and what is not agreeable I refuse with his leave For the Fathers here cited by the Marquesse Irenaeus lib. 4. cap. 45. hath nothing that may seeme to make that way except this Where saith hee the gifts of the Lord are placed there wee ought to learne truth of those with whom is that succession of the Church which is from the Apostles and that sound speech not to be reproved For they keepe that faith of ours which is in one God that made all things and increase that love which is towards the Son of God who did such great things for us and they without danger expound unto us the Scriptures neither blaspheming God nor dishonoring the Patriarcks nor contemning the Prophets Here Irenaeus speakes of some of whom truth was to be learnt who kept the faith and did expound the Scriptures without danger but hee doth not say that they had any unwritten rule of faith or any such rule whereby to expound the Scriptures No for so Irenaeus should not agree with himselfe who saith as His Majesty observed that the evidences which are in the Scriptures cannot be manifested but by the Scriptures themselves Adde hereunto another saying of the Father very pertinent to the purpose We have not known saith hee the dspensation of our salvation but by those by whom the Gospell came unto us which Gospell they preached aad afterward by the Will of God delivered unto us in the Scriptures as that which should be for the foundation and pillar of our Faith So much for Irenaeus The Marquesse cites the words of
particular That it was no generall confession but in particular the Marquesse saith appeares by Acts 19. 18 19. But if this confession spoken of Acts 19. were in particular doth it follow that therefore the other mentioned Mat. 3. was so also I see no force at all in this consequence the confessions being made by severall persons at severall times and upon severall occasions Cajetan indeed doth parallell these two places together but so as that he maketh them both to speake of a generall confession or a confession onely of such sinnes as were publick and notorious Neither of them hee saith was a sacramentall confession but onely a profession that they did repent of their life past However these places of Scripture can make nothing for Popish confession which is injoyned and forced as without which they say salvation is not to be expected but this which the Scriptures here speake of was voluntary and free the persons that confessed did it of their own accord The Popish confession is auricular as it is called secret in the eare of a Priest this appeares to have been open and publick The Popish confession is a particular enumeration of all known sinnes this if it were of any particular sinnes at all as that mentioned Acts 19. may seeme to have been yet onely of such as more especially did trouble their conscience as may be collected from Acts 19. 20. and in such a case to confesse not onely unto God but also unto men and especially unto Ministers Protestants doe not condemne but hold requisite onely they condemne that manner of confession which in the Church of Rome is maintained and practised And no marvell seeing some of the Roman Church themselves have shewed a great dislike of it Beatus Rhenanus a man of great learning and never that I know withdrawing from the communion of the Church of Rome speakes of the Romish confession as a thing but of late devised and by himselfe little observed Hee cites also one Grilerius whom he calles a grave and holy Divine that was a long time Preacher at Strasburg who hee saith did often testifie among his friends that according to the late Roman dictates it is impossible to confesse and thereupon did write a Booke in the German tongue which he intituled Of the disease of confession then which disease saith Rhenanus they that are troubled with it deny that any is more grievous For the Fathers cited by the Marquesse the supposed Clemens whatsoever he say need not much trouble us the Epistles going under his name are suspected and scrupled at by Bellarmine himselfe in his Booke of Ecclesiasticall Writers and therefore it seemes he thought it not meete to alledge his authority in this point as the Marquesse doth Origen also is cited li. 3. a strange citation I suppose it should be in Levit. Hom. 3. for thence Bellarmine doth fetch a testimony to prove their confession But when as Chemnitius alledged something out of those Homilies upon Leviticus against Popish Traditions ascribing them unto Cyrill as also the Rhemists doe adding that some say they are Origens Bellarmine answers with disdaine that those Homilies are not Cyrils but Origens or some others hee could not tell whose who did destroy the Letter of the Scripture that he might establish mysticall senses out of his own head and that therefore those Homilies are of no great authority But were the authority of those Homilies never so great and unquestionable I see not how they make any thing for that confession which our adversaries maintaine and wee impugne Hom. 3. Origen or who ever was the author saith that if wee prevent Satan and accuse our selves we shall escape the malice of Satan who is our adversary and our accuser But to whom we should accuse our selves by confessing our sins this Author shews not Bellarmin indeed saith that hee speakes of confessing unto a Priest but in the words as Bellarmine himselfe doth cite them there is neither Priest nor any other to whom confession of sinne should be made expressed And farre more congruous it is to understand it so that as Satan doth accuse us unto God as he accused Iob though falsly Iob 1. and 2. And see Revel 12. 10. So we should prevent him by accusing our selves and confessing our sinnes unto God also Indeed Hom. 2. that author doth speake of confessing sinne unto a Priest but that is onely in some speciall case when sinne doth lie so sore upon the conscience That a sinner doth wash his bed with his teares and his teares are his meat day night In which case no Protestants that I know but hold it good and requisite to lay open the malady to such as are most likely to apply a remedy Thus also seemes that to be understood which the Marquesse bringeth out of Paulinus writing the life of Ambrose for that is meant by the quotation which is mis-printed Amb. Ex Paulsino viz. that Ambrose sat to heare confession Paulinus saith of Ambrose that he would rejoyce with those that did rejoyce and weep with those that wept And that whensoever any came to confesse their sinnes unto him hee would so weepe as to constraine the party confessing to weepe also The Marquesse further citeth Ambr. Orat. in muliere peccatrice it should be I presume in mulierem peccdtricem but I finde no such peece among Ambrose his workes However if Ambrose any where doth say as hee is cited confesse freely to the Priest the hidden sinnes of thy soule yet it doth not appeare that hee doth require this otherwise then in the case before mentioned Irenaeus also is cited lib. 1. cap. 9. and Tertull. lib. de Poenitent Now these speak of publike confession and so speake not to our Adversaries purpose the very word which they use for confession viz. Exomologesis is commonly so used for that confession which is publike Irenaeus speakes of some Women who had followed Marcus an Heretick but when they were converted to the Church they confessed their wickednesse their sinne being open and scandalous they made open and publike confession of it It 's true Irenaeus saith that those women confessed how they had beene defiled by Marcus and how much they had loved him which was more then any could have known but by their own confession Yet this hinders not but that the confession was publike they first confessing publikely that which was publikely known to shew the sincerity of their Repentance the more might proceede to confesse also that which was secret yet was a concomitant of that which was publike viz. their adhering unto the Heretick Tertullian also clearly speakes of publike confession that which was made inter Patres atque conservos amongst Brethren and fellow-servants so that the whole body would grieve for the paine of one member The body saith he cannot rejoyce at the paine of one member It must needs all sorrow with it and labour together for
which she heard the Scripture expressely saying v. 14. that she knew Peters voyce On the otherside if a Heavenly Angell be there meant it seemes to imply that they supposed the Angell that garded Peter and therefore is called his Angel to represent the person of Peter and to assume his voyce which conceit seemes very uncouth However if such an Angell be there meant yet onely this can be inferred from thence that Peter had his Angell to guard him but it followes not that therefore he had an Angell proper and peculiar to himselfe and that only one certaine Angell was appointed his guardian Neither doe the Fathers that are cited so far as I can see speake home to the point in question Gregory of whom mention is first made is here so impertinently alledged that I suppose there was some oversight in it For hee speakes nothing at all of the Angels guarding men but onely of their being present at the celebration of the Eucharist which is nothing to our present purpose Athanasius who is mentioned next saith onely that there are some supercaelestiall powers qui apud homines permanent that doe abide with men and are hominum paedagogi mens instructors or governours but of particular Angels belonging to particular men hee speakes nothing Chrysostome in one place which the Marquesse quoteth speakes of the Angels being present when the Eucharist is celebrated and of their conveying to Heaven the soules of such as immediately before their death with a pure conscience received that Sacrament which hee saith one told him that saw it but to the question now agitated I finde not that hee saith any thing in that place Indeed Hom. 3. not as it is misquoted Hom. 2. in Coloss hee citeth Mat. 18. 10. and saith Every Believer hath an Angell but this doth not necessarily import that each Believer hath his peculiar Angell What Gregorious Turonensis saith whose testimony is the next wanting his works I cannot yet examine The next after him is Austine but he is mis-alledged viz. Epist ad Probam cap. 19. Whereas there are but 16. Chapters in that Epistle which is wholly about prayer and hath nothing that I finde about Angels The last witnesse is Hierome who saith indeed Great is the dignity of soules that every one from his birth hath an Angell appointed to keepe him But it doth not appeare that he thought every one to have his peculiar Angell The contrary rather appeares by that which hee addes immediatly after viz. that hereupon Iohn Revel 2. 3. was bidden to write to the Angell of Ephesus Thyatira Philadelphia and the other foure Cburches there mentioned Though Hierome doe mis-interpret the Angels there spoken of in the Revelation and therefore both hee and some others of the ancients are in this rejected by Ribera yet thereby we may perceive that he did not hold every one to have a peculiar Angell but one Angell to be for a whole Church If it be said that there by Angell he meant Angells the singular number being put for the plurall the same may be said concerning the other words which are objected But enough of this point there is more controversie about those that follow We say saith the Marquesse the Angells pray for us knowing our thoughts and deeds you deny it We have Scipture for it Zach. 1. 9 10 11 12. Then the Angell of the Lord answered and said O Lord of hostes how long wilt thou not have mercy on Ierusalem and on the Cities of Iudah against whom thou hast had indignation these threescore and ten yeares Apoc. 8. 4. And the smoak of the incense of the prayers of the Saints ascended from the hand of the Angell before the Lord. This place was so understood by Irenaeus lib. 4. cap. 34. and S. Hilary in Psal 129. tells us This intercession of Angels Gods Nature needeth not but our infirmities doe So S. Ambrose lib. de viduis Victor Utic lib. 3. de persecut Vandal Answ Had the Marquesse onely said that the Angels know our deedes and pray for us there had beene little cause to oppose but whereas hee saith that they know our thoughts that may not bee granted the Scripture making this Gods Prerogative For thou even thou onely knowest the hearts of all the children of men 1 Kings 8. 39. Theophylact therefore upon Luke 5. 22. saith that CHRIST proved himselfe to be God by this that as it is there said hee knew mens thoughts And the same also is observed by Iansenius in his Comment upon the place For that in Zach. 1. 12. some by the Angell there spoken of understand Christ the Angel or Messenger of the Covenant as he is called Mal. 3. 1. But others understand a created Angell viz. the Angell that talked with the Prophet Zachary and thence observe that the Angels pray for the Church This seemes more probable by the words immediately following And the Lord answered the Angell that talked with me v. 13. In the other place viz. Revel 8. 4. Ribera telleth us that many thinke the Angell there mentioned to be Christ And though he dislike that Exposition yet it is more then probable by that which is said v. 3. There was given him much incense that he should offer it with the prayers of all Saints c. For what can we well understand by that incense but Christs Merit and Meditation whereby the prayers of the Saints are acceptable and well pleasing unto God For the Fathers alledged Irenaeus speaketh not either of this Angell spoken of Revel 8. 4. or at all of Angells praying for us All that he saith is that there is an altar in Heaven to which our prayers must be directed and then hee cites Iohn saying in the Revelation that the Temple and Tabernacle of God was opened but this is nothing to the point in hand Hilary is truly cited speaking of the intercession of Angels he saith that not Gods Nature but our infirmity doth stand in need of it But as I said before I see not why wee should deny that the Angels pray for us for it doth not therefore sollow that wee may pray to them which is the next point to be considered Yet I should have liked it better if Hilary had grounded himselfe upon that place of Zachary which the Marquesse produced then that hee should build upon the Booke of Tobit as also doth Ambrose Ser. 92. for I finde nothing this way in the place which the Marquesse quoteth that Booke as Hierome long agoe hath censured it being Apocryphall and of no authority for the determining of matters of this nature What the last Author saith viz. Victor Vticensis being not furnished with his Booke I cannot tell neither is there neede to inquire after him hee being alledged for no more then Hilarie and hee asserting no more then I thinke may be granted But from the angels praying for us the Marquess passeth to
God so nigh at hand how doe things heavenly and eternall succeede things earthly and fading if after this life the soules of Christians may continue many hundred years perhaps in the flames of Purgatory before they can get to Heaven Might not this well make every one to feare death and to tremble at the approach of it Might not a Christian at his Death well cry out with the Heathen Emperour O poore Soule whither art thou now going But Cyprian goes on and citing that of Simeon Lord now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace for mine eyes have seene thy salvation he addes that then the servants of God have peace then they have free and calme quietnesse when being taken out of the tempests of this world we arrive at the haven of eternall rest and security when as this death being past we come to immortality And so againe God doth promise immortality and eternity unto thee when thou goest out of the world and doest thou doubt This is not at all to know God this is to offend Christ the Lord and Master of believers with the sinne of unbeliefe this is to be in the Church the house of Faith and yet to have no Faith How profitable it is to goe out of the World Christ himselfe the Master of our salvation and welfare doth shew who when his Disciples were sorrowfull because he said he was to leave them said If you had loved me you would rejoyce because I goe to the Father Joh. 14. 28. teaching us that we should rather rejoyce then be sorry when they depart out of the world whom we love who are dear unto us Thus also Hierome writing to Paula to comfort her concerning the Death of her Daughter Blaesilla saith Let the dead be lamented but such an one whom the place of torment doth receive whom Hell doth devoure for whose punishment the everlasting fire doth burne We whose departure a troupe of Angels doth accompany whom Christ doth come to meet are more grieved or as some reade gravemur let us be more grieved if we abide longer in this Tabernacle of death because so long as we abide here we are as pilgrimes absent from the Lord. Let that desire possesse us woe is me that my pilgrimage is prolonged c. Austine plainly saith that the Catholike faith by Divine authority doth believe the first place to be the Kingdome of Heaven the second to be Hell where every apostate or such us are aliens from the faith of Christ doe suffer everlasting punishments a third place we are altogether ignorant of yea we finde in the holy Scriptures that there is no such place Bellarmine answers that Austine there speakes of those places which are everlasting Which indeed is true for he speakes of Heaven and of Hell the place of torment which are everlasting places for those to abide in that are in them But withall hee saith that there is no third place viz. for those that depart out of this life Besides how can the Romanists yeeld that there is no everlasting place besides Heaven and Hell viz. Gehenna which is the word that Austine useth the Hell of the damned when as they hold a Limbus infantium an everlasting place for Infants to abide in that die without Baptisme which place they make to be distinct both from Heaven and from the place of torment For there they say such children as die unbaptized suffer the punishment of losse whereby the place differs from Heaven but not the punishment of sense whereby it differs from the Hell of the damned But Bellarmine proves that Austine or whosoever was the Authour of the booke called Hypognosticon did not deny that there is a third place to abide in for a time after this life because the Catholike faith doth teach that besides Heaven and Hell there was before Christs death Abrahams bosome where the soules of the holy Fathers did abide I answer that Abrahams bosome was any such Limbus Patrum as the Romanists imagine was no part of Austines Creede as I have shewed before out of Austines undoubted writings And therefore Erasmus though Bellarmine unjustly carpe at him for it might well write Purgatory in the margent over against those words a third place we are altogether ignorant of signifying that Purgatory is a third place of which the Catholike faith is ignorant But what neede is there to alledge particular Fathers when as the Bishop of Rochester who was beheaded in the reigne of Henry the Eighth for maintaining the Popes supremacy in his booke against Luther as hee is cited by Polydore Vergill who was an agent here in England for the Pope in the time of Henry 8. when as I say that Authour confesseth that Purgatory is never or very seldome mentioned by the antient writers and that the Grecians to this day doe not believe that there is any such thing as Purgatory Now for the place of Scripture which the Marquesse saith they have for Purgatory viz. 1 Cor. 3. 13 15. First it is to be observed that whereas Bellarmine doth alledge diverse other places besides this for proofe of Purgatory the Marquesse waves all the other and mentiones onely this conceiving it as it seemes more plaine and pregnant then the rest Yet 2. Bellarmine tells us and bids us marke it that this is one of the most obscure places of all the Scripture though withall hee saith it is one of the most usefull places because from thence they have as hee supposeth a foundation both for Purgatory and for veniall sinnes But as hath beene observed before out of Austine the Scripture is cleare in those things which concerne faith and therefore we must not build pointes of faith upon obscure places Now so obscure is this place viz. 1 Cor. 3. 13 15. that Bellarmine spendes a long Chapter meerely in the explication of it And yet when all is done nothing can be made of it for Purgatory For Bellarmine confutes those that thinke Purgatory to be meant by the fire mentioned v. 13. The fire shall try every mans worke of what sort it is and he proves that the fire there mentioned is the fire of Gods severe and just judgement which is not a purging and afflicting but a proving and examining fire So that Bellarmine doth take away one halfe of the Marquesses quotation and indeed the whole quotation For though Bellarmine would have those words v. 15. he himselfe shall be saved yet so as by fire to be understood of Purgatory yet who seeth not that it is absurd to take the word fire otherwise there then v. 13. And therefore Estius upon the place saith that it is evident that one and the same fire is meant in both Verses Which fire hee will have to be that which shall burne up the World at the last day So also Bellarmine notes some to understand it as some of the tribulations of this life and some