we derogate anie thing herein from the power of the spirit whose direction if we could follow we should neuer do amisse but impute it to our owne weaknes ignorance corruption whereby it commeth to passe that euen the godly many times grieue Gods spirit and suffer him not to haue his perfect worke Other arguments also they haue but they haue scarce any shew of truth and therefore I thinke them not worthie answering for their places out of the fathers doe commend the faith of Rome that then was and their constancie in the same but what is that to this degenerate church of Rome that now is of the church whereof we may say as one saith of their citie that a man will seeke Rome in the midst of Rome So a man will seeke the church euen in the midst of their most shewe of religion and yet not finde it Of the markes of the Church or how wee may know the true Church CHAP. 9. THE PROTESTANTS WE must iudge of the tree of the church by the fruits that she bringeth foorth that is by the faith or religion that shee teacheth the confession or profession of the same that she maketh the exercise of the same that she vseth but we cānot iudge truely of these her fruits but only by the scriptures as in the fiue first chapters hath beene shewed therfore the true and infallible tokens or markes of the true church are to be had out of the word of God or the Scriptures THE PAPISTS NOwe the Papistes will haue their church to bee the true church because shee hath by vniust claime a good name to bee called Catholike Name catholike Antiquity Continuance Greatnesse Succession because shee is ancient and hath lasted long she is great and hath alwayes borne fruit such as it was for these are the first fiue notes reckoned vp by Bellarmine Lib. 4. de notis eccles and indeede their chiefest which especially they rest vppon And may not an euill tree haue all these properties Yes verely And as for the rest of his marks in the iudgement of an indifferent Reader they will neuer be accounted true markes of the Church excepting those notes wherein he seemeth to consent with vs to try the church by the word namely by holinesse of doctrine Because I haue in another treatise shewed I trust sufficiently that those markes of the church which they make greatest account of neither are any true markes and that we may make as good claime to them as they can it shall now be sufficient briefly to passe ouer this point and with one or two arguments to answer this question The scripture the true note of the true church Those markes of the church whereby wee may truely know the church and not be deceiued those I say onely are the true markes of the church But the scriptures onely are such Therefore they onely are the infallible markes The maior or first proposition no man will deny And that the Scriptures are such may appeare by infinite testimonies De pec merit remiss lib. 1. cap. 22. Saint Augustine saith it can not deceiue nor be deceiued And against the Donatists de bapt lib. 2. cap. 6. calleth the Scriptures the holy wey-scales or ballances Cap. 1. And in his booke de bono viduitatis he saith that the holy scripture doth set him his rule how to teach And to be short writing vpon saint Iohns Epistle he saith that Against deceitfull errours In Ioh. epist tractatu 2. God would set a strength or stay in the scriptures And Chrysostome saith vpon Genesis Hom. 12. in Genes that the Scripture wil not suffer him to erre or go astray that heareth it And therefore Gregory Nazianzene sometimes calleth the Scriptures The Kings high way Matth. 24. And our sauior Christ although he foretold the danger of error a litle before he suffered yet doeth hee not giue the Disciples any such markes whereby they should know the true Christ or true church as the Papistes speake of but he earnestly commendeth his word vnto them Ioh. 14.15 23. 15.7 And feruently prayeth vnto his father to sanctifie them with his trueth Ioh. 17.3 17 namely with his word for he knew that to be the way to keepe them from errour By all which it appeareth that the scriptures onely are accounted that perfect rule not only by the iudgement of the fathers but also by the practise of our sauiour Christ But most plainly S. Chrysost saith Opere imperf hom 49 That the true Church can be knowen only by the Scriptures I know that Bellarmine answereth this place in his 4. booke de verbo Dei ca. 11. after two sorts First that the booke sauoureth somwhat of Arianisme But in these words what Arianisme can Bellarmine finde Yea Bellarmine himselfe doth in other places alleage this booke But his second answer I confesse is very forcible For he telleth vs that in a booke printed of late that place is left out Haue they not thinke you answered the place strongly when they haue thrust it quite out of the booke If they had vsed Chrysostome onely in this sort yet were it too bad dealing but it may appeare by Franciscus Iunius his preface before the booke called Index Expurgatorius that they haue left few of the Fathers vncorrupted I would to God therefore that this and such other gelding and falsifying of the fathers by that deceiuing church of Rome which seekes to make them al say as she doth could stir vp the christiā princes that professe religion in a godly care to prouide for the safetie and maintenaunce of religion and the trueth thereof in time to come Which in my iudgement can not well be perfourmed except that to preuent the credite of those falsified copies which within short time are almost onely like to remaine because the ancient which are the truest wil be worne out the godly Princes by common consent woulde take some speedy order for printing of al the fathers according to the ancientest and most pure copies that might be found The second argument is this Whatsoeuer notes do not teach it to be euidently true that the church whereof they are the notes is the true church of God may deceiue and therefore are not certaine notes of the true church But such are the notes that the Papists would haue vs to beleeue therefore they are but deceitfull notes De verbo de◠lib. 1. cap. 2. The maior or first proposition is most true and may well bee prooued out of that axiome or rule that Bellarmine setteth downe saying De notis eccles li. 3. ca. 3. That the rule of the catholike faith must bee sure or certaine The minor or second proposition is Bellarmines owne confession euen in the selfe same words that I haue set downe Therefore it followeth necessarily that we must not trust the notes of the catholike church set downe by them CHAP. 10. Before I beginne
Gods Church much more then a thousand yeeres after Christ neither that fulnes of comfort that wee learne by the bread wine that Christ is vnto vs both meate and drinke that is the perfect and sufficient foode of our hungry and thirstie soules haue robbed the lay people of the one halfe of the Lordes supper proclaming thereby vnto the world that they are disobedient against Christes commaundement iniurious to his people and that in steede of the continuall and auncient practise of the Primitiue Church they establish their owne new deuise Lo what cause haue they to bragge of their ancient faith And for the vpholding of this their doing against both Trueth and Antiquitie they bring some reasons Fisher sometime bishop of Rochester in his booke against the assertions of Luther Artic. 16. to defende that it was lawfull for the church to alter the institution of Christ and therefore to take awaie the cup from the lay people alleadgeth the example of the Apostles who are saide to baptise in the name of Christ only whereas the sacrament of baptisme Acts 8.16 10.48 Matth. 28.19 was commaunded In the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holie Ghost But to bishop Fisher the papist I oppose Bellarmine the Iesuite and a papist who writing of the sacrament of baptisme Lib. 1. cap. 3. plainelie denieth that the Apostles baptised in the name of Christ only and largely proueth it and sheweth that where it is saide that they baptised in the name of Iesus or in the Lordes name the meaning is that they baptised in the faith of Iesus or by his authoritie or with baptisme which he instituted or in his name but not in his name only So that this reason which Fisher maketh for to proue the authoritie of the church heerein De Euch. lib. 4. cap. 28. is verie sufficiently answered by Master Bellarmine It is therefore needefull hee shoulde make a supplie of some other argument to proue that seeing hee hath taken that weapon out of their handes Let vs therefore see how hee mendeth the matter The church saith hee may ordaine and prescribe those thinges that belong not to the substaunce of the sacramentes and are not ordered by the word of God But the rite of eating vnder one kinde or vnder two is such Therefore it maie bee ordered and prescribed of the Church These are his verie wordes this is his argument whereof the maior or first proposition as himselfe saith is most true and therefore wee graunt it but the minor which is that to eate in one kinde or in both kindes is not of the substaunce of the sacrament or ordered by the word of God that is most false And because it containeth two pointes I will brieflie touch them both Where he saith it is not of the substance of the sacrament whether we receiue in one kinde or in two it is in my iudgement euen against all reason and testimony of antiquity and the very nature of a sacrament For the sacrament must needes consist of matter and forme The matter is the bread and wine I speake of that which Irene calleth the earthly matter Iren. li. 4. ca. 34 To the forme of this Sacrament belong these wordes He brake breade and gaue them and saide take eate Math. 26.26 27 this is my bodie Hee tooke the cup blessed and saide drinke yee all of this c. Yea and neither of these can be wel omitted but that therby we are the lesse occasioned to meditate of the efficacy of Christs death passion For as the breaking of the bread that it might be giuen to vs that our bodies might be nourished thereby is a representation of Christes body which was for vs tormented so the drinking of the cup is the representation of the shedding of Christs bloud for vs. Moreouer let vs consider what is that which they would haue the material part or rather a substantial part in this sacramēt To receiue the sacrament as appeares by the censure of Collen Expl. dialog 9 expl Theol lib. 7. and Andradius but in what kinde it is receiued is not materiall say they Marke their boldenesse In the institution there is not one word that willeth vs in such generall termes to receiue the Eucharist or Sacrament but expresse wordes to will vs to Take and eate the bread and to drinke of the cup and yet that which God doth not mention they will haue to be of the substance of a sacrament and that which is expresly set downe in the word they may chuse whether they wil doe it or not But how doth Bellarmine prooue that the rite of communicating in on or two kindes De Euch. li. 4. cap. ◠8. belongeth not to the substance of the sacrament The vse of a thing saith he that is permanent is not the substance of it but the communicating is the vse of the sacrament which sacrament is a thing permanent Therefore the communicating in one or two kindes is not the substance of it The whole force of this argument consisteth in that which is chiefly in question amongst vs that is whether the sacrament is a thing permanent or not And we vpon iust cause deny it And therefore his argument is a plaine fallacie called the begging of the thing that is in question and can bee no strong reason against vs. By a thing permanent they vnderstand that the Eucharist is not onely a Sacrament as they say their other sacraments are and as baptisme is in respect of the vse and receuing of it but also that it being consecrated once to be a sacrament continueth so to bee whether it be receiued or not Which opinion they holde stiffely for the maintenance of their adoration and carrying it about For they teach it still to bee a sacrament howsoeuer they vse it Out of which absurde principle hee gathereth this false and detestable doctrine that they may change this point of Christs institution as they will But wee knowing that the Sacraments are onelie helpes for our infirmities and instituted to supply our wants and that the eating of the bodily foode in the Sacrament and so applying it to the nourishment of our our bodies is that which representeth vnto vs most liuely our receiuing of Christ by a true faith to the nourishment of our soules detest and despise those captious and curious subtilties whereby the papistes doe seeke to defend their wonderfull boldnesse in changing the very institution and in breaking the expresse commaundement of Christ Wherein wee haue for our warrant the worde of Christ which biddeth vs eate and drinke and therefore it can not be but arrogant presumption for man to forbid that which Christ hath commaunded howsoeuer hee will pretend that it is not of the substance of the Sacrament We haue also the practise in the primitiue church which is testified by Isichius In Leuit. lib. 2. cap. 8. which vsed for to burne that which
of them O blasphemie intollerable if this their argument might bee allowed then the church of Rome which falsely challengeth to bee the church Caus 15. Quaest 6. ca. Autoritatem Dâ— st 34. c. sector dist 82. presbyt would soone prooue their abhominable Idolatries and heresies to be true religion And therefore doe they challenge this authoritie and striue for it And the Pope sometimes dispenseth against the Apostle as their Canonists doe note and sometimes a Councell dispenseth against the apostle and all this is to challenge vnto their church this prerogatiue that it may deale with Gods word as it will When Gregorie the thirteenth pope of that name confirmed the order of the fellowship of the blessed virgine Marie a new deuised order and come vp since the order of Iesuites in his Bull hee confirmeth and ratifieth all such priuileges as they haue or shall haue Notwithstanding anie Constitutions or Ordinances Apostolike or whatsoeuer may be against it Did you euer reade or heare any speake more like the beast mentioned in the Apocalips Apoc. 13.5 6 who had a mouth giuen vnto him that spake blasphemies But to be short I will against their argument oppose this Whatsoeuer scriptures are not giuen by inspiration of God spirit and by the godly receiued into the canon of the scripturs those are not the word of God though they haue the approbation of the latter churches but such are the Bookes which wee call Apocrypha which the councell of Trent would make of like authoritie with the canonicall Scriptures therefore those Bookes are not the vndoubted word of God And howe can any body imagine that that which once hath beene not canonicall can by continuaunce of time and confirmation of men become canonicall or that which God hath not vouched woorthy to bee his word in times past that nowe at the last he should acknowledge the same as though hee were nowe chaunged or had repented him of his former opinion Admit once this doctrine of theirs and farewell all certaintie in religion For men will wander from one thing to an other as wee see in the kingdome of darkenesse and Poperie where there is no ende of deuotions deuised and inuentions of men So that that which was good christianitie in the dayes of Christ and of his Apostles is nowe holden to be farre from the perfection of a godly life vnlesse wee doe helpe it with our will-worshippings and by the obeying the preceptes of the church Nay graunt them this and then that worde written that wee haue it shall speake nothing but Romish so that whatsoeuer is the meaning and true sense of the scriptures yet God must be taught to speake as the church of Rome will haue him De verbo dei lib. 4. cap. 11. To this ende tendeth that common axiome receiued of them all and vsed by Bellarmine The true sense of the Scripture hangeth of vnwritten traditions So that beleeue them and they will easily confute any aduersaries For first they alow for scripture what they will Secondly that which they must needes confesse to bee Scripture must bee expounded by their vnwritten Traditions That I say that is written by that which is vnwritten the certaine by the vncertaine Like to Procustes his bed which who so lay in it if he were too long he was cut shorter if he were too short he was stretched out longer So must all be made fit to their traditions Seeing therefore the Canonical Bookes haue so manifest a testimonie not onely of the godly but euen of the aduersaries themselues and the credite of the Apocrypha by so great authorities is suspect I will conclude with belâ— armines words That he is not well in his wit that not regardâ— ng â—â— e Scripture the surest and safest rule wâ— ll refeâ— re hâ— mself to the iudgement of the inward spirâ— t which is often deceitfull and alwayes vncertaine as in truth the Papists do For they will make you beleeue that because they are guided by the holy Ghost they cannot erre in their traditions This rule then of Gods written word in the Canonicall bookes of the old and new Testament being set downe as a rule most sure to trâ— e all doctrines with let vs now proceed to examine other matters in controuersy among vs when I shal first haue answered a common obiection wherein all the most ignorant sort especially of Papists doe maruellously trust and triumph and doe therewith deceiue others such as them selues are How shal I know the scriptures say they to be the scriptures but by the authoritie of the Church I will not answer although I might very well that absurdly they call that in question whereof there is no doubt among vs. For neither we nor they denie Gods word It is knowne of all it is receiued of vs all Therfore they put case of that there is not neither is likely to be amongs vs. But for their sakes that are ignorant I answer plainely and shortly out of Saint Augustine Coâ— feâ— li. 6. cap. 5. Thou Lord hast perswaded me that they are blame worthie not who haue beleeued thy bookes which thou hast so setled almost in all nations but they that haue not beleeued them And that I should not heare them if perchance any would say to me How knowest thou that those bookes the scripture are giuen to mankinde by the spirite of one very and most true God Yea Saint Augustine there confesseth that when he was but a nouice in religion yet was he perswaded that God would neuer haue made the whole world so to reuerence the Scriptures but that he meant to be beleeued in them and to be sought out by them We see then by saint Augustine that not onely that common account that the whole world not the Church onely maketh of the Scriptures should be sufficient to stop our mouths for asking that question but also that he flatly telleth vs that God would not haue vs to heare such faithles and fruitles obiections But I know they will by and by come vpon me with that place of Augustine Cont. epist 〈◊〉 c. 5. I would not beleeue the Gospel vnlesse the authoritie of the Church should moue me thereto Out of which they will perchance conclude as grosly as you heard Eckius hath done That the Scripture it selfe hath no credite but as the Church will bestow it vpon the same But Melchior Canus a learned Papist doth gather otherwise out of that place and doth in deed truely answere this common obiection for vs out of the said words of S. Augustine concluding thus Therefore it teacheth not Locor Theo lib. 1. cap. â— that beleeuing the Gospel is grounded vpon the authoritie of the Church but onely that there is no sure way whereby either Infidels or Nouices in faith may come to the holy Scriptures but the consent of the Catholike Church Yea he hath taught a little before in that Chapter that although to haue faith
receiueth only them that acknowledge the bishop of Rome to be their head If then they dare not affirme the pope to be the head of them that are in heauen I trust they will not from henceforth charge vs to be iniurious to the church of Rome if we affirme it not to bee the true catholike church If they reply that the church may bee called catholike in other respects than in that only which I haue mentioned I graunt it But the question amongst vs in deed is whether the church of Rome be the true catholik church which euen by our creed we are bound to beleeue Which the papists affirm therfore would haue the world to imagine that we despise the catholike church which is mentioned in the creede when we vpon iust causes depart from that Romish church which hath set it selfe these many yeares against Gods church As for the principal arguments wherby they would proue that they say do nothing touch the catholike church which is the thing in question but only the state of the church in this life and therefore are not worthie the repeating But among other absurdities which they are forced to grant for to defend this their vntrue assertion this is blasphemous although they all defend it That some of the members of Christes bodie shal not be saued As though there were not vertue inough in Christ to quicken all them that are grafted into him whereas in truth He that hath the sonne hath life That is also absurd that if the wicked and reprobate bee of the church of Christ as they say theÌ„ they are members of two bodies for they are of the church malignant as they must needs confesse which is as false as that one hand may belong to two men Lastly how absurd is it that the catholike church should acknowledge the Pope for her head Shee is a citie or house she can therefore haue but one foundation shee is a fruitfull Vine shee can haue but one roote she is a Doue she can haue but one mate shee is Christs bodie she can haue but one head shee is the Lambs bride she can haue but one husband The fouÌ„dation of this house the roote of this Vine the mate of this Doue the head of this bodie Eph. 1. 5. the husbande of this wife is Christ Although most impudently the Bishop of Rome and most blasphemously doe take vppon him to be the husbande to that wife also C. quoniam de Immunitate 6. or else to take Christs wife from him We saith hee being vnwilling to neglect the vpright dealing or iustice of vs and of the Church our spouse What greater blasphemie than this can there be Saint Paule sayeth 2. Cor. 11.2 I haue prepared you for one husbande not for two and he nameth him to be Christ who though he bee absent yet is he also present absent in flesh but present in power and spirite and so will he bee alwayes with his Math. 28.20 Iho. 14.16.17.18 euen vnto the end of the worlde So that the church hath no neede of that ministeriall head that cannot bee but in one place at one time seeing Christes spirit is his Vicar in his church Ter. prescipt which can be in all places at once as the church is scattered in many places through the whole world That the catholike Church mentioned in the Articles of our beliefe is not visible or to be seene CHAP. 7 THE PROTESTANTS BEcause the Catholike Church mentioned in the Creed is that heauenly Ierusalem that is mother of vs all Gal. 4.26 and comprehendeth as S. Augustine saith not onely that part that wandreth vpon earth Enchir. ca. 56. froÌ„ the rising of the Sunne to the going downe of the same but that also that is in heauen And the company of Christians for the time in earth is not the vniuersall Church but is only a smal part therof In the preface to his booke of Images as Sander a papist coÌ„fesseth It followeth that that Church which is spoken of in the Creed is not that small flocke that waÌ„dreth here in this world And so consequently that that catholike Church because the farre greatest part thereof is in heauen and so not to be seene cannot bee seene of vs. And for that cause are wee taught to say I beleeue the holy Catholike Church but things that are seene are not nay cannot be beleeued For faith is the ground of things that are hoped for Heb. 11.1 and the euidence of things that are not seene Therefore either must we denie I beleeue the holy Catholike Church to be an Article of our faith or else must it bee confessed that the Catholike Church is inuisible THE PAPISTS BVt that whorish Romish Church which hath nothing to commend hir but an outward painting that consisteth of worldly glory wher as the glory of Christs true spouse is chiefly inward and a shew of succession in the chaire of them that were knowne to be good men Psal 45 5â— but not in their faith and godlinesse least that men should seeke to know the Church by the word which is that only infallible mark that our sauior Christ giueth Iohn 10.3 4 5.27 Ephe. 2.20 De vnitate Eccles cont Petil. ca. 10 and likewise Saint Paule to the Ephesians and Saint Augustine doeth highly commend the same so that if hee erre from the true Church seeing Christ hath giuen him so good a marke of her he confesseth himselfe to bee too blame for it Least that I say men should occupie them selues in this word written seeking to finde the Church there this seducing sinagogue doth beare vs in hand that the true Church must be glorious to the eye and easie to be seene and that there is no other Catholike Church but such a one And then they knowe that there is not in all the worlde such a one that maketh so faire a shewe to bee found but onely that of Rome which is liuely described by Saint Iohn Reuel 17. in the Apocalips And although this is a common principle in the Catholike Church and in euery bodies mouth That the Catholike church is visible which Campion in his third reason and Turrian against Sadeel Camp rat 3. doe manifestly affirme Yet I know not how it commeth to passe that euen the greatest pillars of poperie do not so much as define the Catholike church and deale as I thinke in this question verie fearefully as may appeare not onely by Melchior Canus in his fourth booke Loc. Theolo de eccle milit â—â— b. 3. cap. 12. but especially by Belarmine who appointing a whole Chapter for proofe of this point yet dareth not in the verie title of the Chapter set downe that is in question that is to say that the catholike Church is visible for so they say but onely this is the title of that chapter that the Church is visible Which if he meane it of particular Churches we say
also that they may be visible If he meane it of the catholike Church which is the thing in question why is hee afrayed to say so Surely euen his owne conscience tolde him that of all the arguments that he hath in that place there is not one out of which he may conclude That the Catholike Church catholike I say in that sense that I haue proued it to bee taken in the Creede is or can bee visible to vs in this world And therefore craftily he leaueth the question and falleth to other matters I therefore see no cause why I may not truely and boldly conclude Apoc. 21 2 9 that that Heauenly Ierusalem and bride of the Lambe that spouse of Christ mentioned in the Apocalips which in deed Saint Iohn sawe but by vision onely is the same catholike church that we speake of in the Creede but whilest wee wander here wee can not see it but by faith onely But when Christ our head and captaine shall haue put downe all rule and all authoritie and power 1. Cor. 15.24 then shall the glorie of the Church in deede appeare then shall shee be exalted aboue the mountaines In Apoc. Hom. 18 as Saint Augustine confesseth Yea then shall the Church be made perfectly catholike when no member shall be wanting vnto it Then shall the godly not by faith as now but euen with their renued eyes see her and her beautie The Church here militant vpon the earth may erre CHAP. 8 THE PROTESTANTS ALthough that part of the catholike Church which is alreadie entred into her Masters ioy Mat. 25.21 cannot erre yet this part that is here vpon the earth because it consisteth of men who are subiect to infirmities neither are they endued with the spirit but in some measure neither is it conuersant or remaining but in the vally not of misery only but of ignorance also it therfore may be subiect vnto errors for a time although it shall neuer be quite ouercome of the same For their errors shall be either of small importance or short cōtinuance THE PAPISTS BVt the Church of Rome would make vs beleeue their garden wil bring forth no weedes And that the ignorant might with reuerence receyue and beleeue whatsoeuer they say with great confidence they sound it euerie where that the church of Rome cannot erre And by the church they doe not meane all for they will not so much esteeme of the lay people but the Bishops yea the Pope himselfe although hee but one man yea and many times a most vile and lewde man yet they will in no wise that hee may erre speaking iudicially in matters of fayth Now for the Arguments whereby they would vphold their errour the first sort is grounded vpon some places of Scripture wrested and abused for their purpose as when the Scriptures promise the assistance of Gods spirit to teach vs or direct vs. And of these some are more particular than other Argument Luke 22.32 Christ said to Peter I haue prayed for thee that thy faith should not fail therfore Peter could not erre And if Peter could not erre neither his successours as they surmise Ver. 57 58 60 Answere And yet verie soone after the very same Apostle did not denie onely his maister and that three times but also began to curse and sweare that he knew him not Mat. 26.74 Shall we then say that Christ was not so good as his promise God forbid Christ therefore prayed not that Peter might not erre at all or that his faith might not any thing faint but that it might not altogether faile Or to vse the wordes of Theophilact Theo. Lu. 22 That if the leafe of his faith did fall yet the roote should not die Christs prayer therefore was not that Peter should not erre but that he should not continue in errour and so it preuailed And therefore here is no priuiledge for the church of Rome or the Pope that they may not erre because wee see Peter himselfe had no such priuiledge Neither was this prayer of Christs for Peter onely as is most plaine by the Euangelist saint Iohn Iohn 17.20 I pray not for them onely but for all that through them shall beleeue in my name It was therefore for all the Apostles yea for all the beleeuers Although Christ spake there particularly to Peter as Theophilact sayth perchaunce because he was bolder than the rest In Luke 22 and proude because of that was said vnto him And by this that hath beene said appeareth the answere to the other places of the scripture that seeme more generall Argument When Christ promiseth to giue vs his spirit to teach vs and direct vs they inferre therefore the church cannot erre Answere Wherein they commit two absurdities First in robbing a great number of Gods people of that comfort that belongeth vnto them in that they make the promises which generally belong to all the faithfull to be spoken but to some few for by the church they vnderstand either the pope or the bishops Secondly that they beare the world in hand that Christ prayed for that which he did not or that he promiseth vs that which he neuer meant or that he spake of such perfection as it is vnpossible men should attaine vnto Yea In Iohn 16 Theophilact in my iudgement most notablie sheweth that when Christ had promised to send the holy Ghost which should lead into al truth least any body should thereby imagin that the holy Ghost is greater than Christ if it can make vs partakers of greater and mo things than Christ can he addeth Hee shall not speake of himselfe that is he shall speake nothing of his owne but that is mine For he that sayth he shall speake whatsoeuer he hath hard doth signifie that he shal teach nothing but that which Christ hath taught And these are the verie wordes of Theophilact whereby he doth not onely say that the holy Ghost can adde nothing of his owne to that which Christ hath taught and so may not bring into the church any new doctrines as the church of Rome doth vnder this colour but also that it is a diminishing of Christs glorie and a preferring of the holy Ghost before Christ to suppose that the holy Ghost can or may teach any thing in Gods church that hath not bin taught by Christ himselfe Wherin he mightily beateth downe that proude bragge of the church of Rome wherby they seeke to exempt themselues from all errour because they falsely chalenge vnto themselues that their doctrines and traditions are vnwritten verities and to be beleeued as well as Gods worde as comming from this spirit whereas they are nothing consonant to that which Christ taught and therefore the spirite had no commission to teach the same Yea in vaine they say they are directed by Gods spirite when as they teach that that Gods spirit neither can nor will teach because Christ hath not taught it before Neither doe
cal the Scriptures and vnwritten which they call Traditions Traditions And the traditions say they were either deliuered by the Apostles themselues to some special men and therfore are called Apostolike or else are set downe by the Church and for that cause called Traditions of the Church Traditions equall with the word Now traditions are made equall and to be receiued with as great reuerence as the Scriptures euen by the Councel of Trent Ses 4. decre 1 Preferred before the word the most modest Papists But there are others who in their excesse of impietie preferre the trâ— ditions before the word written and make them of greater force than it as Pighius in his Ecclesiasticall hierarchie Eccl. Hierar lib. 1. cap. 4. Thesi 9. In his preface Wolfgangus Screckius Nay in that he wil by traditions haue all doctrines tried he manifestly subiecteth the pure written woorde of God to the prophane deuises of man BVt to take away the proppes of this their ruinous building let vs see what grounds or foundations for so Melchior Canus a learned Papist termeth them they lay of this their doctrine Obiection Melchior Canus in his common places of Diuinitie and Bellarmine in his controuersies lib. 3. cap. 3 Bellar. lib. 4 〈◊〉 of Gods worde dâ— written and others also set this downe as a most neceâ—â—â—rie principle That the Church is more ancient than the Scriptures As in trueth the Church was more than two thousand yeres before there was any written word of God in bookes and therefore Bellarmine inferreth That the Scriptures are not simply necessary Answere First this ground doeth not vpholde that which is in controuersie among vs. For they shoulde prooue traditions to bee a part of Gods worde so that without them Gods word could not bee counted perfect And to proue that they tel vs that it was more than two thousand yeeres before the woord was written Which maketh nothing for them vnlesse they can shew vs that this word which is now written is not that same that before was deliuered by tradition vnto the fathers of that old world For the question betweene vs and the Papists is not of the maner of deliuering Gods word whether it were deliuered by word or by writing but of the matter namely whether Gods word be any thing else than that is written in the old and new testament which we deny but they affirme it because the word was so long time vnwritten yet the church was not then without the word So that because the word was reuealed after an other manner the Papists wil haue it another word Whereas in trueth that same word that was from the beginning Iohn 1.1 what word that is that is written is that verie word of God that was so long after the beginning written for the Iewes and is now deliuered vnto vs. Wee must therefore take heede that they deceiue vs not by the double signification of the word Scripture which sometime expresseth the manner of deliuering the word namely by writing and so we confesse the scripture was not so ancient as the church by mo than two thousand yeares but sometime the word Scripture signifieth the word it selfe which is deliuered vnto vs as it is commonly now taken and in this place must so be vnderstoode And so hath the word written beene from the beginning That is to say that the selfe same word which God by word of mouth as we say and by tradition did teach the patriarkes hee afterwards did cause to be written which word wee call the holy scriptures And further also we must remember that one manner of deliuering the word of God Diuerse maners of deliuering the word at diuerse times is fit for one time and an other manner of deliuering it for an other time As may appeare by that which hath beene said how that God hath in his infinite wisedome seene it needefull to deliuer it one way afore the Lawe in an other sort vnder the Lawe and the Gospell although not in like measure in both these latter times So that this argument cannot stand good The scriptures haue not beene written in the first age amongst the patriarkes therefore they are not necessary now amongst vs in these dayes to whom God hath by them reuealed his word Which argument is strongly confuted by Chrysostome that learned and ancient Father In Matth. hom 1. But to these men who are as Tertullian calleth the Heretikes of his time lucifugae scripturarum De resurrect carnis such as shunne the light of the scriptures and flee from it I may say as the same Tertullian speaketh in an other place De prescript Beleeue without the Scriptures that yee may also beleeue against the Scriptures Let them seeke the desert of their owne deuises and follow the trod of their owne traditions to finde out some couert for their superstitions but let vs content our selues to dwell in the cities of the Lawe the Prophets the Gospel and the Apostles which are the Scriptures and not goe out of them In Mich. li. 1 as Saint Ierome speaketh For euery word of God is pure Prou. 30.5 6 hee is a shield to those that trust in him Put nothing to his word lest he reprooue thee and thou be found a liar That this VVorde is sufficient CHAP. 2 THE PROTESTANTS This word is sufficient NOw this written word of God because it is sent vs froÌ„ that most gratious God that hath loued vs and chosen vs in Christ before the foundations of the world were laide Eph. 1.4 that we might be holy with out blame before him and is brought vnto vs by that most excellent Prophet In whom are hidden all the treasures of wisedome and knowledge Coloss 2.3 and therefore can teach vs Heb. 3.2 who also is faithful and therefore wil deale truely with vs yea who so heartily loueth vs that hee died for vs and therefore doubtlesse will be careful to teach vs what behooueth vs to knowe Seeing also the Apostle saint Paul doeth testifie that he kept nothing backe that was profitable Acts 20.20 27 but shewed them all the councell of God We therefore beleeue the Scriptures to be written Ioh. 20.31 that wee might beleeue and beleeuing might haue eternall life 2. Tim. 3.16 And that the whole scripture giuen by inspiration of God is profitable to teach to improoue to correct and to instruct in righteousnesse 17 That the man of God may be absolute being made perfect vnto all good workes that is that the Scripture is so sufficient and perfect that it hath no want it needeth no supply nothing must be added THE PAPISTS BVT the Church of Rome knowing that Tertullian wrote truely De resurrect carnis That Heretikes if they be made to proue that they say by the Scriptures can not stand do find fault that they should be so straitly limited and tethered that
certaine external meanes and helpes are required yet those moue vs nothing without the working of Gods holy spirit And he much misliketh of them that teach that our faith must rest vpon that point That we beleue that the church is true or cannot erre For therevpon he gathereth this absurditie that our faith should be grounded vpon the truth not of God but of man He also plainly affirmeth that if a man should aske how the faithfull do know that God hath reuealed that which they beleeue they cannot answere by the authoritie of the Church but it is by the inward light of Gods spirit that they know the same If now thou aske me how I know the Scriptures to be the Scriptures I answere out of Canus not by the authority of the Church but by the motion of Gods spirit and witnesse thereof If thou vrge that place of Augustine Canus telleth thee that they who are become Christians are not so brought to beleeue the Scriptures but onely Infidels and Nouices in religion So that this place serueth nothing to obiect against vs who professe Christianitie alreadie and beleeue the worde which the Manichies did not of whom and to whom Saint Augustine there writeth But we had neede out of that place to admonish you that in respect of that reuerence which with one consent al that professe Christianitie doe yeeld vnto the scriptures you would be ashamed so to depraue and despise them so to abuse and reiect them at your owne pleasure as you alwayes haue done You make vnlawfull that which God hath mad lawfull as for example It was lawfull in the Apostles time for euerie Priest Dion Carth. 1. Tim. 3. Bishop and Deacon to haue one wife but now by the appointment of the Pope they may not haue a wife sayth a friend of your owne a bird of your owne nest So that not the scripture or the will of God but the worde of the Pope must be the rule of our life so that whereas Augustine for the Church beleeued the scriptures you for your Churches sake controll the scriptures and disobey them And for the establishing of that vndue honour which they would bestow vpon the most happie mother of Christ the virgin Mary Marke the boldnesse of Durand a great piller in the Popish Church Rathon◠di◠li. 4. rub 6. who writeth thus Although it is said in the Scriptures that Christ rising did first appeare to Marie Magdalen yet it is more truly beleeued that first of all he appeared to his mother Is it not plaine how that to establish their foolish toyes he giueth the lie to that word that is onely true O grosse boldnesse Seeing therefore this worde hath not onely testimonie within vs which is the strongest witnesse but also with so great consent is knowne to be Gods worde be ashamed now to call it into question or to put it to the triall of the Church by which the Papists alwaies vnderstand the Romish Church whether it shal be allowed for currant or not For in deede this blasphemous sense which as I haue shewed euen their owne friends can in no wise like of is now the cōmon exposition of those words of S. Aug. I will not beleeue the scriptures vnlesse the Church of Rome do allow the Bookes for Canonicall and expound them as she shall thinke good And thus much to answer this their common obiection What the Catholike Church is that is mentioned in the Creede CHAP. 6 THE PROTESTANTS VVE say with the Apostle Saint Paul that the catholike church which is spoken of in the Creede s. Tim. 3. Is the house of God the pillar and ground of truth And with the fathers that it is the companie of all the faithfull of all times and of all places And with Saint Iohn The Bride of the Lambe Apoc. 21 9. and the bodie of Christ And therefore that the wicked and faithlesse are not of this Church nor can be counted of this companie THE PAPISTS BVt the Church of Rome to get a Catholike Church admit good and bad to be of their Church namely reprobates wicked Bellar. de Eccle. li. 3. cap. 2. and vngodly ones Neither do thinke that they neede any inward vertue to bee of their Church but onely that they professe religion and be vnder the Pope Well may they in some sort seeme to haue a Catholike Church because all is fish that comes into their net but holy apostolike it shal not be nor Catholike as in the Creed is meant Wherein this is worthie to be reproued in them that whereas they crie out in worde and writing The Catholike church of Rome and vnlesse you beleeue the Catholike Church you cannot be saued And for proofe hereof they alledge this article I beleeue the Catholike church yet when they should tell vs what this Catholike church is wherevnto we must so necessarily be subiect they onely paint vnto vs I know not what Romish Church The catholike church in the Creed and the Romish contrary which is no more like the true Catholike church than that church of Israel when it was started aside from the true worship of God was like to the true church of God that remained amongest the people of the Iewes as by these few reasons may appeare The catholike church is One One that is to say one companie and vnited and knit togither by one spirite and the selfe same graces but the reprobate and vngodly who fill vp a place in the Romish catholike church neither are one company with the Saints nor vnited to them by the same spirit and graces to be partakers of the communion of Saints Therefore that catholike and the Romish catholike Church are not all one Secondly that Church is Holy Holy and that not in part but perfectly euen without spot or wrinckle Ephe. 5.26.27 For in our Creed we doe not speake of the church that is but that shal be not that which we see with our eye but by faith not that which is perfected but hoped for which we shall not in deede behold with our eyes Reuel 21 vntill it come downe from heauen as saint Iohn speaketh of the heauenly Ierusalem Apoc. 11 which as witnesseth saint Ambrose doth represent the Church that shall bee after the ende of the world Apoc. 21 Of which minde is also saint Augustine But the Romish catholike church is of omnigatheroms as people goe to faires or markets of all sorts and qualities And although a man haue not one good thing in him not one crum of honestie hee is good enough to make vp a number in the Church of Rome but such a church is not holy and therefore not that that is mentioned in the Creede Thirdly that church is catholike Catholike that is as all the godly haue acknoledged it the mother of all Christians the companie of all the saints both in heauen and vpon earth But the Romish catholike church
remained of the sacramēt Origen also reporteth the same Which they would not haue don if they had thought as do the papists that it had beene transubstantiated into Christs body or else that it had beene as heere they affirme a sacrament although it be not receiued as Christ commaunded it should be Seeing therefore these men that would seeme pillars in the church of Christ doe picke quarrelles at his ordinance and make exception to his commaundement and all to writhe their neckes out of his yoke and to free themselues from his lawes like lewd seruauntes which will not frame themselues to doe that which woulde best please their maisters but that onely which they must bee forced to doe whether they will or not let vs nowe see how in the second point they do seeke to peruert the verie decree it selfe that Christ set down concerning this matter to make men beleeue that hee meant no such thing as in trueth he did The second part of his assertion is that it is not ordered by the word of God what shall be done in that point This is an intollerable boldenesse Doth not our sauiour Christ take order as well for the cup as for the bread Doth not he that saieth Take eate say also Drinke ye all of this If any man will answere as Bellarmine doth in one place De Euchar. lib. 4. cap. 27. that they were not both giuen at one time and therefore that properly to speake the Supper of the Lord consisteth but of one kind he should plainly declare that he hath rather a desire to contend than to knowe the trueth For what is it to vs how long time was betweene the one commaundement and the other so that we know that both the one and the other is instituted of Christ Yea the Apostle saint Paul very plainely telleth vs 1. Cor. 11. that the order both for the cup and the bread is deliuered to him of the Lord That which I receiued of the Lord I deliuered vnto you And then hee sheweth Christs institution for the bread and also the cup. But with full mouth and one consent they tell vs that that commaundement belongeth to the Apostles onely and not to all the disciples And yet saint Mathew saith Math. 26.26 he gaue it to his disciples Yea and Christ commaundeth Drinke yee all of this And hath not saide concerning the bread eate ye all of this although wee deny not that euery one hauing prooued themselues should eate of it But seeing God hath giuen a more expresse commaundement vnto all for the cup than for the bread why should they rather restraine lay men from receiuing the cup than from the bread Againe doeth he not say to all them Drinke yee all of this to whome before hee saide Take eate Yes verily for the text is plaine both in the Euangelists and saint Paule But the bread must be giuen to al they confesse therefore why not the cup also And that which saint Paule wrote concerning the vse of the Sacrament it is plaine he wrote vnto all the church of Corinth not onely by that place which Kemnitius alleadgeth 1. Cor. 1.2 To all that call vppon the name of the Lorde and that hee writeth vnto the church of Corinth De Euchar. lib. 4. cap. 25. which Bellarmine doeth seeke to answere rather least he should seeme to say nothing than that in truth he saith anie thing worth the setting downe but also by the punishment that followed the abuse of the sacrament For this cause many are weake and feeble amongst you and many sleepe Which came vpon them not that did eate of that bread onely but also that drunke of that cup vnworthily And it cannot be imagined that either the ministers were so bad at that time so generally that so many of them would haue offended therein or if the fault had beene in them the Apostle would more particularly haue reprooued them neither were they then so many in one place that it could haue beene truely saide of them that many are weake and many sleepe or are dead Therefore whereas many were punished amongst the Corinthians for vnworthily receiuing both the bread and the cup and this word Many cannot as I haue prooued be there referred to their Teachers onely it followeth that this punishment was amongest the lay men as well at the last as amongst their ministers and therefore that the lay men in the church of Corinth receiued the cup. And thus much of that wicked assertion wherein they doe affirme that it is lawfull for the church to alter this part of Christes institution and also to take away the cup. Nowe to a second and as wicked a proposition as the other Wherein they teach that it is needelesse to be receiued in both kindes And to prooue this Bellarmine taketh some paines in three whole chapters De Euch. lib. 4. cap. 21 22 23 In the first two he sheweth that the whole sacrament may be receiued vnder one kinde and therefore in the last hee teacheth that no more good is to be gotten of the sacrament vnder both kindes than vnder one And although we can not allowe of that concomitance as it is termed that is that inseparable coniunction of the body and blood vnder either of the signes which especially hee prooueth in the first chapter of those three namely the one and twentieth that the whole substance of a sacrament is found in either kinde as hee teacheth in the two and twentieth chapter yet if we should grant those two points that which master Bellarmine would conclude in the three and twentieth chapter can not follow For what if Christ may bee wholy receiued vnder one kinde Yet it should not follow that vnder one as effectually he may be receiued as vnder both For as before I shewed his death is more liuely represented by the bread and his bloudsheding by the wine And that which more effectually representeth it is more profitable than that which lesse representeth the same And it is too much sawcinesse so to controll the wisedome of God that when hee saith Drinke yee all of this which is a plaine commandement any foolish man dare say It is to no profite it can do you no good As for the causes that are alleaged by Gerson and other why the popish church thought good to take away the cup from the lay people they are so foolish and friuolous that a man would think rather that they iested than spake in earnest But what cause soeuer man can pretend to alter that which Christ hath ordained it doth but testifie that he thought not Christ wise enough to preuent such inconueniences as hee by his wisedome hath prouided for Seeing therfore the church cannot forbid that that God commaundeth whatsoeuer causes they will pretend and if they might yet the causes set downe by the Romish church either are blasphemous or at the least friuolous it is a sure way for vs rather to regard
gods holy commaundement and follow the institution of our sauiour Christ than to follow any the deuises of man And when he commandeth drinke you all of this it is a great sinne and dedeserueth Gods wrath for any man to answer I will not receiue the cup because the Pope and the Popish church of late hath forbidden it Against the sacrifice of the Masse or of the Altar as they call it CHAP. 16 THE PROTESTANTS NOwe to their grosse absurdities and manifest deprauings of the institution of Christ they adde also their blasphemies against the sacrifice of Christ Iesus which as he was once offered Heb. 10.10.14 and by that one offering for sinnes hath consecrated for euer thē that are sanctified Heb. 9.12 And hath obtained eternall redemption for vs so wee confesse that by that one sacrifice he is the propitiation for our sinnes 1. Iohn 2.2 which he offered for vs vpō the crosse and cannot be dayly offered by the Priest without great wrong to Christes eternall and onely Priesthood and without great presumptiō in that priest that dare offer so excellent a sacrifice neither without derogatiō to the vertue of his death THE PAPISTS BVt the Church of Rome teacheth that in the Masse the priest a sinfull man doth offer vp that most holy sacrifice Iesus Christ vnto God the father a sacrifice propitiatorie for the quicke and the dead yea for the greatest sinnes that wee commit As for originall sin they confesse that Christ hath taken that away by his sacrifice but our voluntarie sinnes which therefore also are more odious must be taken away by this sacrifice that the priest offereth vpon the Altar So haue they turned the Sacrament into a sacrifice Christes holy ordinance into a blasphemous Idoll and al for their owne gaine that the Priestes might bee hyred to vse this remedie for the sinnes of the people this salue for all sores De Missa li. 1. cap. 6 Out of Ge. 14.18 The first argument that Bellarmine hath for proofe of this vnbloudie sacrifice of the Masse is at large handled by Bellarmine but the effect of it is this The thing figured must bee like to the figure But Melchisedech who was the figure offered to God bread and wine as a sacrifice Therefore also must Christ offer his bodie in forme of bread Bell li. 1. ca. 7. de Missa Heb. 7. and his bloud in forme of wine for a sacrifice First his first proposition is not simplie true but onely inasmuch as the one must be figured of the other But in what things Melchisedech is a figure of Christ none can better tell than the Apostle to the Hebrewes who fully handleth that matter Col. cum Tryph. fol. 36 and yet doth not once mention this sacrifice And therefore we may gather that Melchisedech was no figure of Christ in that point For if he was then was not the Apostle faithfull to omit so necessarie a point Iustin also hath a notable comparison of them but he doth not touch that in one worde Secondly a sacrifice must be offered but this bread and wine was but brought foorth for so doth their owne translation testifie Thirdly a sacrifice must be offered to God this place mentioneth no such thing and therefore most likely that it was brought to refresh Abraham and his souldiers Whereby we see that Bellarmines minor hath no truth in it wherein he affirmeth that Melchisedech offred bread and wine to God in sacrifice Lastly what a consequence is this Melchisedech offered to God bread and wine in sacrifice therefore Christ offered himselfe in forme of bread and wine Rather is this a strong argument to the contrarie if wee should graunt that he did offer the bread and wine to God which hath no probabilitie in it But I say if that should be granted wee might thus reason The thing figured must bee like to the figure but Melchisedech who was the figure offered but bread and wine therefore Christ offered nothing else but bread and wine and so maketh it nothing for that sacrifice for which the Papists doe alledge it As for his testimonies out of the fathers for proofe of Melchisedechs offering of bread and wine to God in sacrifice because I purpose especially to goe through his generall arguments I omit of purpose a particular examining of euerie place onely contenting my selfe with this generall obseruation that out of the testimonies alledged hee can hardly conclude that which hee taketh in hande to prooue because the fathers seeme rather to allude many times vnto that which he did than so to alledge his doing as that they thinke anie necessarie argument for proofe hereof is to be gathered out of the same And that may wel be gathered out of Chrysostom vpon this place who saith thus In Gen. hom 3. For the honor that he shewed to the patriarke see how a sacrament is insinuated For he offred to him bread and wine Marke to him that is to Abraham flat against that which they would And this is most agreeable vnto the hystorie written by Iosephus who by all likelihood knew best in his time how that storie was thē vnderstood Ant. li. 1. c. 18 he saith that Melchisedech gaue great intertainment vnto the souldiers of Abraham And so Chrysostome in the place alledged saith Abraham brought forth loaues and wine And thus doth the Chaldee Paraphrase expound it So that if we rightly consider not onely what they say but how they speake it and vpon what ground to answer whatsoeuer he can bring out of the fathers concerning this point will not be hard Argument 2 The celebrating of the Passeouer saith Bellarmine was an expresse figure of the Eucharist de Missa lib. 1. cap 7. But the Passeouer was a kinde of offering of a sacrifice to God Therefore the Eucharist must so be Maister Bellarmine hath forgotten what he should proue hee must teach Christ to be in his last supper a sacrifice properly so called but this argument proueth the Eucharist to be a kinde of sacrifice This argument to be short is thus answered There were two things in the Passeouer The one was the killing of it by which was Christs death represented vnto vs as Iustine Martir that ancient father teacheth Dialog cū Tryph. Iudaeo The other was the eating of it by which was figured vnto them that spirituall foode of the soule Christ Iesus who was promised vnto their fathers And in this respect may it in some sort bee called a figure of the Eucharist because it represented vnto them that thing that the Eucharist representeth vnto vs. Therfore if in the first proposition Bellarmine meaneth by celebrating the Passeouer the eating of the Passeouer I graunt it but then is his minor or second proposition vntrue For the eating of it was not the killing of it and so not a sacrifice But if by the celebrating of the Passeouer he vnderstand the killing of it then is his maior to be denied because
also is a sufficient answere to his thirde argument that hee wringeth out of these wordes Whereby he will force Saint Paule whether hee will or not to finde out an offering in the Eucharist because he saith they that eate the offrings are partakers of the altar Out of which place as hee cannot probably conclude any thing to proue a sacrifice in the eucharist so hee plainely proclaimeth that if it should be proued that their masse were a sacrifice yet the priest only is the better for it because the priest onlie eateth vp all For They that eate the offrings are partakers of the Altar The second sort of proofes which Bellarmine promised is gathered out of the fathers Lib. 1. de missa cap. 6. And the first argument of that sort is drawen from the wordes of sacrifice sacrificing offering oblation and such like Chap. 15. Why the fathers vse thus to speake of the Eucharist I haue shewed a little before in the answere to his sixte argument But nowe maister Bellarmine proueth that a sacrifice may be both commemoratiue and represent an other thing as did the sacrifices in the Leuiticall law and also be a true sacrifice indeede which is most true and thereupon concludeth that this sacrifice representatiue in the eucharist is also a true sacrifice But this his argument hath no necessarie consequence for the Leuiticall sacrifice must needes be a sacrifice truely so called that by the death of the beast offered vp and by the shedding of that blood the death blodshedding of Christ might be the more liuely represented to the faithfull and more constantly beleeued of them which thing being in trueth perfourmed and Christ Iesus the true facrifice indeede being offered Heb. 10.26 There remaineth no more sacrifice for sinne Moreouer in those sacrifices that they might bee knowen to be sacrifices instituted and appointed of God we see how the thing sacrificed the manner of sacrificing and all the circumstances are plainely set downe and commaunded by God And on the contrary in this sacrifice which they seeke to maintaine all things are obscure not so much as a probable shew of any commaundement or of any institution of a sacrifice Therefore the Iewish sacrifice can be no proofe for the sacrifice of the masse Secondly he will prooue that in the eucharist is not only a representatiue sacrifice because the fathers speake sometimes of oblations and sacrifices in the plural number and therefore there are more sacrifices than that one representatiue but he taketh more paines then he needeth for we teach that besides the representation of Christs sacrifice we offer in the Eucharist the sacrifices of prayers prayses and such like spirituall oblations Thirdly baptisme saith hee is a sacrament representing Christes death but is not called of any of the fathers a sacrifice offered to God therefore the only representation of Christs death and bloudshedding cannot make the Eucharist be called a sacrifice For baptisme it representeth vnto vs the efficacy and vertue of Christes death rather than the death it selfe So that there is great difference betweene these two sacraments For the sacrament of the Lords supper representeth the sacrifice it selfe which he vpon the crosse did offer euen the tormenting and mangling of his body the shedding of his bloud So that there is much more cause why the Eucharist should be called a sacrifice than baptisme Fourthly M. Bellarmine imagineth that if it were not indeed a very proper sacrifice we might in the Eucharist say to God truely I offer to thee this gift accept Lord this sacrifice And moreouer he chargeth vs that we doe wholy abstaine from such wordes and greatly reproue them for vsing of them And yet in one short praier vsed after the receiuing of the communion with vs we pray thus Accept this our sacrifice of praise thankesgiuing And after We offer and present vnto thee o Lord our selues our soules bodies to be a reasonable holy liuely sacrifice to thee Which wordes doe not only answere the slaunder wherewith he vniustlie chargeth our churches but also sheweth that well we maie vse those words I offer to thee this gift accept Lord this sacrifice although we take not vpon vs to offer Christ really in the Eucharist As for the hyperbolicall speeches which the fathers vse sometimes which is his first reason we learne thereby rather with howe reuerent an affection we shoulde come to these sacramentes than what wee shoulde thinke the thinges themselues to be For howe can it els bee true that Bellarmine himselfe out of the Greeke fathers alleadgeth that they call it a sacrifice terrible and full of horrour which cannot be properly verified of the sacrifice propitiatorie which they woulde haue it to bee for that must needes bee sweete and comfortable vnto vs in it is only grace and mercy no horrour no terrour Lastly because the fathers acknowledge in this sacrifice of the Eucharist that there is that honor performed which is due to God only therefore woulde master Bellarmine conclude that it must needs be more than a sacrifice of representation And we doe easily yeeld vnto him that it is also called a sacrifice of the fathers yea of vs also in respect of the spirituall sacrifices therein offered And this yet must be noted that properly to speake of the Eucharist it is but a sacrament But in the respectes aforesaide De missa li. 1. cap. 16. it is sometime called yet vnproperly a sacrifice But saith master Bellarmine the fathers make mention of an altar therefore they also proue thereby that the Eucharist is a sacrifice for there is no Altar but in respect of a reall sacrifice But the first altars were but tables of wood not altars of stone such as are now for the popish sacrifice in these daies commaunded and these altars of worde they caried about from place to place as occasion serued and therfore although the names of altars be found in the most ancient fathers almost that are yet popish altars are not thereby proued neither were there any altars of stone before the time of Siluester who liued more than three hundred yeares after Christ For hee first commaunded that stone altars should be made as their freind Gerson writeth And therefore as they call it sometime an altar so sometime they call it a Table Lib. 4. cont Floratum De consecrat dist 1. cap. Nemo as doeth Clement who they say was one of the first bishops of Rome he twice within few wordes mentioneth the Lords Table If therefore it be a good argument thus to reason The fathers do sometime mention an altare for the eucharist therefore they thought it was a sacrifice for there needeth no altar but for a sacrifice I am sure this is as good an argument Somtime they speake of a table for the eucharist as out of Athanasius Theodoret Augustine this Clement and others is most plaine and therefore they thought it not to be a sacrifice for
Iewes had such sacrifices therefore wee must haue them Chap. 21. If this argument be denied he can neuer prooue it For the Iewes had those ceremonies and rudiments of the world because they were in their nonage Galat. 4.3 and Christ was not yet come and so the reuelation of Christ was not then so plaine as now it is therefore they needed those things but we do not And moreouer if these sacrifices were so necessary as they affirme them to be as that there is no religion without them of necessity we must haue them then were the Apostles too blame who giuing direction to the Gentiles what were necessary for them Acts 15.19.20 neuer warned theÌ„ of this externall sacrifice For seeing there was not anie such thing plainely set downe in the word of God it was needefull that it should haue beene signified to them if any such thing had bin thought necessary But Bellarm. thus prooueth his argument God hath not abolished al things in his law as he hath not taken away the commandemeÌ„ts therefore he hath not abolished the ceremoniall law I would master Bellarmine would haue taken some paines to shew what part of the ceremoniall lawe is continued But he telleth vs the sacraments are not takeÌ„ away they are but changed so the sacrifices must be but changed not taken away When hee sheweth what commission hee hath to tell God what he must doe we will regard his wordes but vntill that bee shewed hee must giue vs leaue to acknowledge all these things in Christ to be performed especially seeing the worde telleth vs not of anie commaundement to change it or when how or into what it should be changed But I am loath to confute his grosse assertions and reasonlesse reasons whereby he seeketh to keepe vs still in bondage to externall things One or two arguments mo he hath the one grounded vpon such differences as themselues haue deuised betweene a sacrament and a sacrifice the other is the generall consent of the church throughout the world the first is somewhat touched in the fifteenth chapter the other is the thing that is in question whether the true church haue acknowledged it to be a sacrifice truely so called and properly Now to conclude seeing in the institution of this sacrament there is not any sacrifice prescribed as the wordes do teach vs neither can it be proued by the scriptures neither can we find any such doctrine vniuersally receiued of the fathers in the purer age of the church Lastly seeing the arguments that are brought for defence of it are so hard and obscure so forced and wrested as they are both froÌ„ the scriptures the fathers let vs rest vpon this foundation Heb. 9.28 Heb. 10.12 that Christ was once offered to take away the sinnes of many Once I say and not often and that being done He sitteth for euer at the right hand of God So that either they must deny him to haue a natural body but so deified that it may be in many places at one time as Nestorius the heretike taught or that hee sitteth not on Gods right hand against that which in our creede wee acknowledge or that he hath two bodies the one in glorie and maiestie with God in heauen the other shrowded vnder a little cake the one visible in heauen the other inuisible in the earth or else they must confesse that he cannot be changed into that little peece of bread that he may so be offered vp to God his father for a sacrifice in the Eucharist Of true and Christian Repentance and of the Popish sacrament of Penance CHAP. 17. THE PROTESTANTS WE willingly confesse and carefully teach repentance that consists of the mortification of the flesh the quickening of the spirit of dying to or from sin liuing to righteousnesse of putting off the olde man the body of sinne and putting on the new man which after God is created in holinesse and righteousnes to be most necessary for euery christian man and woman alwayes and earnestly to follow and practise And whilest wee must walke here in this wicked world where we meet with manye stumbling blockes whereat we stumble and many pits into the which we fal It is impossible we should goe on forward to the end of our iorny vnles by tru repentance proceeding from a liuely faith a true sense and feeling of Gods wrath against sinne and a hearty detestation of our owne vnthankfulnes to our good and gratious god we be raised vp again to walke in his wayes to liue in his true feare So that wee finde it to bee true that Tertull. saith Wee are borne onely to repentance Wee stand alwaies so much in neede thereof through sinne THE PAPISTS BVt the Papists not content with this plaine and pure doctrine to purchase estimation and gaine to the Popish priesthoode haue deuised a sacrament of penance whose parts are contrition Contrition which we make one part of true repentance Confession Confession not to God but in the eares of the priest of al thy sinnes which hath not any warrant at all in the word and satisfaction Satisfaction which is nothing else but a blasphemous wrong vnto that satisfactioÌ„ that is made vnto God by Christ his death Of the which three partes of Popish penance Confession must be made vnto the priest and Satisfaction must by the Priest be inioyned after Confession or shrift By which meanes they did bring into miserable bondage them whose faults they knew and that they might by masses iâ— entals and such other deuises of man helpe them to satisfie for their sins they gote no small gaine And from these two fountaines pride and greedines did spring this their sacrament of popish penance Of arguments whereby they defend this their sacrameÌ„t of penance they haue no great store and those they aledge haue no great strength Their especiall and in a manner onely place that they aledge out of the scripture is wherein it is said Ioh. 20.22 23 that Christ did breathe vpon his disciples and said to them Receiue the holy ghost whose sins you remit they are remitted to them whose-soeuer sins you retaine they are retained For vpon this place doth the councell of Trent especially rely for this their doctrine 〈◊〉 â— 4. ca. 5. as do also their other writers Belike this place is very pregnant and plaine for their purpose or else their cause is built vpon a weake foundation Let vs therefore view the strength of this place for proofe thereof for the which it is brought This text mâ— st proâ—â—â— thâ—â— pâ—â—â—â—â— is a sacrament properly so called for to this and it is alleaged by Bellarmine But how it is prooued De 〈◊〉 teâ—â—â— let the indifferent Reader iudge And first if we consider the expositions of the ancient Fathers of the purer times we shal see that they neuer gathered out of these wordes such a sacrament Read and search who
taste of christian diuinity that a man may haue faith and no grace whereas in truth faith is Gods gift and that of his especiall grace we see what vertue the papists doe attribute vnto this sacrament as they doe call it and yet Peter Lombard their owne friend Li. sentent 4. dist 18. Levit. 13. out of the priests office concerning leapers who did only iudge whether they were cleane or foule but hee coulde not make them leapers or not leapers doth appoint also those limites vnto the priests concerning binding or loosing or rather sheweth that such is their authority not that they can make any sinners or voide of sinne which lesson he learned out of Hierom but only to iudge whether they were sinners or not vpon Matth. 16 By which he learneth and plainely saith euen in this cause that God doth not alwaies follow the iudgement of the church And therefore god doth not alwaies binde or loose as the church doth in her consistory Is not this flatly to deny vnto this their sacrament that working vertue and power which the papistes giue to it Or rather is not this to deny it to be a sacrament seeing it is denied not only by Saint Hierom but also by a deare friend of theirs Peter Lombard that it hath such vertue as they ascribe to their Sacraments And heere their answere of the vnworthines of him that receiueth this Sacrament whereby he hindereth this worke of the Sacrament will not serue For we see that the iudgement of the church by their opinion doth only shew what men are and according to it doth binde or loose but it doth not make them good or bad And therefore Chrisostome in an homily of repentance Hom. 8. ad populum Antioch Trust not saith he vnto thy repentance for thy repentaunce is not able to take away so great sinnes Now therefore we see that neiâ—â— er the testimonie of the fathers in their commentaries vpon this place neither the words themselues if we looke vpon their naturall meaning neither yet the practise of the church for more then 1100. yeares after Christ can make these words to proue any sacrament of penance which the papists so boldly without all proofe thrust vpon vs. For I pray you where is the outward signe of this sacrament Are these words I absolue thee Concil Triden Sess 14. cap. 3. c But where are these words commanded Bellarmine hath found them in these words Whose sinnes you remit are remitted c. And how doth hee proue it Because the Lord would neuer grant vnto his Apostles power to forgiue sinnes de paâ— nit li. 1. cap. 10. but he would haue that power exercised by some externall signe for these are his words We grant it and for that cause hee hath appointed the ministery of the gospell but the promises are generall and whether they publikely or priuately are to be vsed to the comforte of the afflicted we finde not in the scripture any set forme set downe for absolution and therefore in the scriptures they caÌ„ neuer find that outward signe which is required in a sacrament And therefore it seemeth that Bellarmine scarcely dareth to defend that which the councell of Trent hath taught concerning the forme of this their sacrament For the councell of Trent saith Li. 1. de poen cap. 16. that these wordes are the forme of their Sacrament of penance But master Bellarmine saith we are not tied to those wordes but that these words I remit thee thy sinnes will also serue the turne For this matter let them agree amongst themselues But they must shew vs some outwarde signe appointed by Christ for this Sacrament or els we must denie it to be a Sacrament And that they haue laboured to doe these many yeares and yet they cannot doe it But M. Bellarmine striueth earnestly to proue that place whose sinnes so euer you remit they are remitted not to be spokeÌ„ of baptisme We will ease him of some labour we will graunt that it is not spoken only of that remission that therein is done Man is like a ruinous house that must alwaies be repaired by repentance Hom. 3. de paenitentia We haue alwaies need to pray forgiue vs our trespasses Chrisostome pretily compareth sinne in man to an oake tree which he that will cut it downe must strike not once or twise only but often yea he must neuer leaue vntill it fall So must we flie alwaies to this remedy not only once or twise but ten thousands of times if so often we offend yea alwaies The comfort of this promise therefore we will in no wise restraine to the time of our baptisme only but we confesse that that forgiuenesse of sinnes which in our baptisme is sealed vp vnto vs hath force and vertue through our whole life and thereby are we assured that this promise of the forgiuenes of our sinnes and remitting of the same is most certaine and true and belongeth to our whole life and to euery sinne that we commit Now this forgiuenes say the papists must be applied vnto vs by the sacrament of penaunce They should proue that for in matters of religion their credite is not so good that we dare trust them And the lesse wee trust them in this matter because we are sure that God hath giuen vnto vs other meanes to apply his mercy vnto vs namely his word for applying whereof vnto our consciences hee hath appointed his ministery in his church Yea he hath giuen his word to be read and knowne of euery bodie Then also hath he giuen vs Sacraments to confirme vs in this word and to make vs more confidently to beleeue it and more faithfully to receiue it These therefore are the meanes whereby our faith is nourished and made more bolde and strong to apply to our humbled hartes those comfortable promises of Gods good graces which in the words are offered and by baptisme and the supper of the Lord are sealed vp in our consciences Nowe other Sacramentes we know not and namelie this of penance Neither is there any necessarie consequence in this argument These wordes are spoken of remission of sinnes after baptisme therefore there must needes bee a Sacrament of penance And that should bee proued And therefore to grant him that which hee so striueth for will doe him no good After this one place that Bellarmine hath out of the Scriptures he commeth to the fathers De paenit li. 1. cap. 10. who because they afforde him no plaine proofe he indeuoureth to wring something from them by indirect meanes The proofe therefore that he hath from them as himselfe professeth is either because that when they reckon vp the true Sacramentes they often make mention of repentance also or els they compare it with the sacrament of baptisme shewing that it is God that worketh in them both Had it not bin better to yeeld vnto the truth then thus before hee proueth any thing out of the
commaund that ceremonie to bee vsed so neither did himselfe practise it any more but that once as may appeare in sundrie places where hee authoriseth his Apostles to preach without breathing vpon them And nowe for laying on of handes which many times the Apostles vsed wee haue not only the testimonie of manie in the popish church that thinke it not to be the principall outward signe in this sacrament but thinke the giuing of a chalice with wine and the couer of it with bread to be more essentiall and effectuall but also we see that there is no commaundement giuen to the Apostles for it and therefore neither doe they commaund it to be vsed as a thing so necessarie that it may not be omitted And whereas we acknowledge this ceremonie to haue sundrie vses first in respect of the church the partie ordained is by that ceremonie notified vnto the church secondly he is confirmed thereby in his calling put in minde of his dutie and assured of his vocation by this common approbation that hereby the church sheweth Thirdly thereby the church doeth testifie as it were before God their sincere dealing in their election and consecrate him to the seruice of God Lastly the Godly vsed manie times in praying for others to lay their hands vpon them Bellarmine in the place aboue named bestoweth some paines to proue that praier and laying on of hands are two distinct things which is not denied To be short the summe of his argument is this it was vsed of the Apostles therefore it is so necessarie that it cannot be omitted We answer that that ceremonie had good vses but yet might be omitted Because our sauiour Christ did neither vse it nor commaund it And to thinke that he omitted anie substantial point of religion or that the Apostles would account as simply necessary any thing not vsed or prescribed by Christ is to absurd And whereas they proue the promise of iustifying grace to be made by Christ vnto them that receyue this their sacrament of Orders I wonder that they see not how that both many are iustified that neuer entered into their Orders many also that haue had and haue their greasing and scraping are as wicked men and so by likelihood as far from this iustifying grace as Turkes or Iewes And so it easily appeareth that this second thing required in a sacrament namely that it should seale in vs the promise of iustification hath not so much as anie likelihoode to bee in this their sacrament of Orders The third thing necessarie in a sacrament is Gods commaundement wherin they confesse their want and that they haue no commaundement But yet because God did giue grace with laying on of the Apostles handes 1 Tim. 4. Bellar. de ord sacra li. 1. ca. 2. therefore they take it as commaunded of God If this bee a good argumente God gaue g od successe to it therefore it is commaunded of God many strange partes in Sampson Iehu and others will prooue to be commaunded of God but that is most false as the Papists themselues will confesse God did not onely prosper Phinehas Numb 25 in that which he attempted against Zimrie and Cosby but commended the fact also and graciously rewarded the same but yet he had no commaundement for so doing Therefore although God may bee saide in some sort to like of that to which he giueth good successe yet no man can thereby conclude that God hath commaunded it But rather on the contrary we may thus reason The laying on of hands was neither practised by our sauiour Christ neither commaunded by him or his Apostles therefore that ceremonie is not of such necessitie but that ordination may bee without it Yea but Christ is not tyed to the sacrament sayth master Bellarmine and therefore can giue the effect of the sacrament without the sacrament Cap. 2. li. 1. hee can make Priestes without laying on of handes That hee can so doe wee confesse but that hee dealeth so in the institution of sacraments all the Papists in the worlde will neuer bee able to proue for in them we see that all things are most plaine the outward signe the promise the commaundement nothing in them hidden nothing doubtfull But because himselfe dare not well rest vpon that answere hee concludeth that seconde chapter with another aunswere for hee telleth vs that it may bee that Christ did lay his hands vpon them whom he made ministers Is this good dealing Doeth not this manifestly bewray the weakenesse of their cause when such friuolous coniectures are the chiefe strength of their cause As for the Fathers whatsoeuer out of them they doe alledge cannot prooue that which they take in hande namely that the sacrament of Orders is a sacrament like to Baptisme and the Eucharist For all men must confesse that these two sacraments which wee acknowledge to be common to all Christians are farre vnlike in that point to that popish sacrament which belongeth but vnto a fewe And euen in this consisteth especially the true vse of Baptisme and of the Eucharist that they should be genenerall testifications vnto the whole church of Gods graces and seales of his promises and pledges of his loue and fauour And therefore the fathers sometime call Ordination a sacrament yet it followeth not that they take it to bee a sacrament in the proper sense but in that sense onely as they call manie other things Sacraments which the Popish Church doeth not receyue as Sacraments De Sacrat ord li 1. ca â— But say they the Fathers compare Ordination with Baptisme For Bellarmine maketh great reckoning of that argument The fathers may be so in some respect because the sacrament of Baptisme cannot be reiterated no more must he that is once ordained to the ministerie seeke to be ordayned againe for euerie action that he performeth in his ministerie but hee is once for all appointed thereto But what is that to the nature of the sacrament which must by a visible signe assure vs of inuisible graces So that athough Ordination be like to Baptisme after a sort yet is it not like to Baptisme in that it by a visible signe doeth assure vs of inuisible graces but onely because it is not to bee reiterated no more than Baptisme is And thus wee see the weakenesse of this argument Ordination is in some poynt like to Baptisme therefore it is a sacrament in such sort as Baptisme is Thus then I trust it appeareth howe weakely they proue Ordination to be a sacrament who haue neither scriptures Matt. 28.19 nor fathers for the same But if they could prooue that Ordination which Christ vsed to bee a sacrament what is that to Popish Ordination Christ sent the Apostles to preach Goe teach all nations but by their ordination the popish priests Receiue power to offer a sacrifice The Apostles executed their commission which Christ gaue them as appeareth in the Acts and their Epistles And the popish priests on
the other side thinke there is no seruice any thing so pleasing to God as the offering of sacrifices We see then that as Ordination euen as Christ and his Apostles vsed it is not a sacrament properly so called so popish Ordination is nothing but a meere prophanation of Christs order and a wilfull breach of his commaundement and therefore most vnworthie of the name of a Sacrament Of Matrimonie that it is not a Sacrament and that it is lawfull for all CHAP. 19 THE PROTESTANTS MArriage wee confesse to be in it selfe an estate holy and honourable and for all sortes of vs most necessary considering that men and women of all callings and conditions are subiect to noysom and filthy lusts wee dare not therefore forbid it to any sort of men or womē lest we should seem to reiect that remedy that God prouided against sinne or to refuse the helper that he made for vs or to lay a stumbling blocke before men or women whereat they might fall THE PAPISTS THe Papistes not content with that accoūt of matrimoni◠that the Scriptures doe make will needes haue it to bee one of the fiue Sacraments which they haue added to the two that were instituted by Christ And yet straitway as if they had forgotten themselues they doe thinke it to bee too base an estate too vnpure and vncleane for any man for to liue in that is called to minister before the Lorde And And therefore their priests must not bee married in any wise That matrimony is not a sacrament speaking of a sacrament properly as when wee call baptisme or the supper of the Lord sacraments it is most plaine First because the things that are required in a sacrament are not to bee found in it namely an outward signe a promise of iustifying grace Gods institution or commandement As for the commaundement some woulde wring it out of these wordes Matth. 19.6 That which God hath ioyned together let no man put asunder But that is onely a prohibition that man shal not loose that knot which God hath knit there is no sacrament commaunded And master Bellarmine spying that fault dareth not commend their indeuor therein but taketh another course For he thinketh his friends troubled themselues more than they needed to be too curious in searching where it is commanded to be made a sacrament But if Gods commandement or the institution of the sacrament be necessarily required in a sacrament as Master Bellarmine hath often shewed the Papists by his leaue shall either shew De sacram matrimon lib. 1. cap. 2. when and how it was instituted to be a sacrament or else there is no cause that we should trust them although they al had sworne that it is one For in truth this their doctrine is so doubtful vncertaine that themselues know not what to say of it For some thinke that it hath alwayes bin a sacrament euen from the beginning of the worlde De sacram matrimon lib. 1. cap. 5 Sess 24. can 2. but Bellarmine wil not in any wise agree to that And the councel of Trent is flat of that mind that it is a sacrament instituted by Christ and therfore not of the old law If then it be true that matrimony was not a sacrament vntil Christ made it one it is needful that they should prooue that Christ hath made it a sacrament before we can receiue it for one And this reason is very strong against master Bellarmine who reasoneth against them that think that matrimony was a sacrament of the old law because It is not read saith he that there was any institution of marriage in al the olde testament Ioh. 5.32 he meaneth after mans fall Therefore if they prooue no institution of it they prooue no Sacrament Nowe for the second point For to prooue it to be an outward signe they bring those wordes of Saint Paule This is a great sacrament for so the old translation hath but the word signifieth also a mysterie or secret But wee will not contend of the worde Will they imagine that this word can prooue matrimony to be a sacrament Wee see that Christ and his Apostles are more carefull of the true vse of the Sacramentes than of their names as may appeare by those two Sacramentes which we acknowledge which are not so much as named sacramentes Secondly to proue it to be a sacrament it is not enough to shew that it is a signe of a holy thing but that it was instituted to bee such a signe And that can they neuer doe in this Sacr. mat li. 1. cap. 5. For it was instituted in paradise where it was no such signe as themselues confesse as is shewed yea Bellarmine denieth that there is in matrimony any outward signe by the institution of it So that although it represent vnto vs to our vnspeakeable comfort the vnion and coniunction betweene Christ and his church yet that it was not instituted to that end that it is not an outward signe by the institution of it it is most plaine But how will they proue the third thing namely the promise of saluation to be in this their sacrament For sooth because it representeth vnto vs the spirituall loue of Christ to his church hir obediēce to him againe That is also performed in euery body of mā or womā if we marke the vnion betweene the members and the head In euery vine tree yea in euery plant if wee consider the coherence betweene the branches and the tree Yea many such things there are that haue as much in thē belonging to a sacramēt as matrimony hath And yet howsoeuer they may be vnto vs if we cōsider of thē as we may do I neuer heard or read that euer they were accōpted sacramēts in the proper sence And why because God neuer appointed them to that end for in the sacramēts Christs institutiō is the especial thing how little account so euer M. Bellar. make of it The 2. argument whereby I proue matrimony not to be a sacramēt is bicause that many of the scholemen who are the especial friends to those popish sacraments doubt whether matrimonie giueth grace which the popish church doth attribute to all sacraments For as Canus reporteth De locis Theol. li. 8. cap. 5. the Ma. of sentences Thomas of Aquine Scot Bonauenture Rich. de S. victore Paludanus Durand others do not define whether it giue grace or not but leaue it to euery mans owne opinion As for the matter or forme of this sacrament to vse Canus his words these schoolemen do shew themselues so vnconstant and wauering so vncertaine and doubtfull that he shoulde but prooue himselfe a foole that in such difference and disagreement would set downe any thing for certaine or true And for that cause the Councell of Florence saith he decreed nothing of the matter forme or minister of this sacrament because it saw that the Diuines in the schooles had concluded nothing of them Seeing
owne clecking and that therein they seeke rather their owne praise than Gods glory Because thereby they teach men to looke for remission of sinnes and make it a thing meritorious and so they robbe Christ of his honour and take from him his office to attribute the same to the obseruation of their vngodly lawe And vnto this reason which is taken from the euil fruit of their wicked doctrine I might also adde the sower grape of vngodly life that followed the same Which made not Papists onely but euen the Pope himselfe to wish the abolishing of that cruel lawe and the remoouing of that dangerous stumbling blocke as before you haue heard of Pius the second pope of that name Nowe besides these wants that wee finde in the contrary doctrine which may induce vs to see the vnlikelihoode of the same wee haue also the first institution wherein it was saide to all without exception Genes 1.28 Increase and multiplie Then also wee haue that generall aduise and counsell wherein the apostle aduiseth all men and women that it is better to marry than to burne 1. Cor. 7.9 which aduise the apostle giueth in respect of that common experience wherein wee finde it to be true that euery man can not attaine to the gift of chastitie in single life Thirdly wee haue also particular direction for bishops by name so permitting marriage vnto them 1. Tim. 3.2 Tit. 1.6 that no man can doubt therof vnlesse hee wilfully winke for feare he shoulde see the light of the trueth Fourthly we haue the practise of the priests in the olde lawe who were married although they had the daily sacrifice to offer morning and euening Almost all the apostles and many bishops of the Primitiue church also if they will trust Vicelius their owne friend were married men Therefore we may conclude that for the clergie as for other it is lawfull that euery man haue his owne wife and euery woman her own husband Wherupon it also followeth that not only the Montanists Maniches Eucratians Martionists or such like who did wholy condemne marriage or at the least much mislike the same but also the papists who doe accompt it too impure for their clergie men are amongst the number of them of whom the spirit speaketh euidentlie 1. Tim. 4.1.2.3 that in the latter daies some shal departe from the faith and shall giue heede to the spirit 〈◊〉 error and doctrines of deuils who haue their consciences burned with a hote iron forbidding to marry For although others may perchaunce in that point be worse yet that proueth not that they cannot be euill And although the fathers doe expound this place of those heretickes that were before or in their time yet is that no barre to vs but that we may in like maner confute thereby all them who doe in any sort condemne matrimony But they saie they condemne not matrimonie neither force men to single life Whether they haue drawen men to their vowes or not Bellarm. de cler li. 1. cap. 20. let the world iudge But it is but a shift to saie they denie not mariage They deny it to that whole estate in so much as in Queene Maries time we haue seene the clergy forced either to leaue their function and ministery or to forsake their wiues So that although they say not to any man or woman particularly thou shalt in no wise marry yet they deny it to that estate of life which needs must be in the worlde as not holy enough for them wherein if they were well examined they would be found to conspire with those auncient heretickes Of Anoiling or extreme Vnction that it is not a Sacrament CHAP. 20 THE PROTESTANTS WE willingly confesse that the Apostles of our Sauiour Christ Mar. 6.13 Annointed many that were sicke with oile and healed them And that saint Iames confesseth Iam. 5.14 that if any be sicke they shoulde send for the Elders who shoulde pray for him and annoint him with oyle in the name of the Lord. By the which visible signe God did testifie to men of that gift of healing that he indued his church withall vntill by such myracles he had confirmed the gospel and assured mens consciences of the power of his word But that it was instituted for a sacramēt we cannot acknowledge And much lesse can we yeelde vnto that popish anoiling that it can bee called a Sacrament properly or yet be tollerated in Christ his church it is so contrary to the Apostles practise THE PAPISTS FOr without any warrant of the word they consecrate their oile which the apostles did not for any thing we can reade Secondly the church of Rome doth appoint what partes shal be annointed as the eies eares nose lippes handes feete and the reines of the backe But yet they are not agreed that all these are of the essence of anoiling Devnct c. 10 And indeede Bellar. in respect of honestie supposeth that women shuld not be anointed on their reins But Laurence Vaus In his catechisme would haue men anointed in the back womē on the belly so far hath he forgotten all honesty But thapostls were not curious in these matters Thirdly popish anoiling must not be vsed but when all hope of life is past the apostls vsed oile whē they hoped to heale men of their infirmities Bellarm. de vnctione lib. 1. cap. 2. The apostles vsed oile for all diseases Popish anoiling was but for some Other differences also might be found but these few are sufficient to shew that the church of Rome hath added to the word of God and practise of the Apostles in this point and therefore if that were graunted vnto them which they can not prooue namely that that which the Apostles did was a sacrament yet can it in no wise folowe that the Popish anoyling can bee a Sacrament vnto the which they haue added so many yea and some of them so vnseemely ceremonies And yet the councell of Trent is not ashamed to affirme that the church of Rome doeth obserue none other thing as belonging vnto the substaunce of this sacrament Sess 14. ca. 3 de sacram vnct than that which saint Iames hath prescribed Where did saint Iames appoint that the oile shoulde be consecrated for that it shoulde be consecrated De vnct lib. 1. cap. 7. it is as master Bellarmine doth terme it of the essence of the matter of this sacrament and not accidentary Master Bellarmines shift that hee hath for to answere this demaund is too holde and shamelesse and doth more lay open the badnesse of their cause For hee saieth that it is enough for them if saint Iames doe not forbid it And is that your touchstone M. Bellarmine whereby you wil trie your doctrines What will you say then to that Lawe that God hath established for euer Deut. 12.32 and 4.2 Whatsoeuer I commaund you to doe doe it Thou shalt put nothing thereto nor take aught there-from
say that this their Sacrament is not truly and properly a Sacrament instituted by Christ for so doeth the Councell of Trent Wherein I knowe not whether they haue somewhat wounded themselues Cap 1. both because they say themselues but a little before that it is insinuated by Christ which is lesse than instituted And also it is tanquam vere propriè Sacramentum as it were which is a doubtfull speach truely and properly a Sacrament De sacram Vnct. cap. 2. But let vs see howe maister Bellarmine prooueth this to bee a Sacrament out of that place of saint Iames. Hee can finde as he supposeth the outwarde signe The outward signe True it is there is an outwarde signe but it is not that which is required in annoyling nowe for nowe it must needes be consecrated but then it was not The Apostles did vse it especially against the diseases of the bodie but this Oyle is in the Popish church vsed especially for a remedie against the sickenesses of the soule Therefore I graunt it was in those dayes a signe of health of bodie whilest God left with his church that gift of healing but it was neuer a signe of spirituall grace which is it that now they do affirme As for the health of the bodie they so little regarde that it should be vsed to that ende that they must not in any wise annoyle them but such as they haue no hope that they may escape Whereas the Apostle saint Iames would haue it done to that ende that God forgiuing them their sinnes which are many times the cause of sickenesse they might be Healed as saith saint Bede vpon this place As for the promise which is a seconde thing that must be in a sacrament The promise of grace master Bellarmine maketh no doubt but that he can proue it because it is said The Lord shal raise him vp and if he haue sinned they shal be forgiuen him The meaning of the apostle in this place is verie plaine that wheras in the daies of the primitiue church there were many myracles wrought by the apostles and others they did not those things by any power which they had in them selues but by the prayer of faith the sicke were healed And if their sinnes were the cause of their sicknesse as they are many times although not alwayes Iohn 9.3 as by saint Iohns gospel it appeareth hee promiseth that God to the ende that they may not doubt but that they shall bee healed will take away their sinnes and forgiue their offences which otherwise might bee a let or hinderance And that this condition is to be vnderstoode in this promise it is plaine by these wordes And if you haue committed sinnes For the apostle nothing doubted but that they had sinnes For if wee say wee haue no sinne 1 Iohn 1.8 wee deceiue our selues and there is no truth in vs. But hee might iustly doubt whether sickenesse was alwayes layd vpon men for and in respect of their sinnes Therefore to doubt whether they might haue sinne or not belongeth vnto them that knowe not the corruption of mans nature which wee cannot thinke of the apostle saint Iames. But to knowe that God doeth not alwayes sende afflictions in respect of sinne hee had learned by that which our Sauiour Christ himselfe sayde vnto his Disciples of the blind man Neither hath this man sinned neither his parents Iohn 9.33 but that the workes of God may be manifest And for this cause saint Iames saith If hee committed sinnes they shall be forgiuen him that is if his sinnes haue beene the cause of his sickenesse his sinnes shall be forgiuen him that his sickenesse may cease So then the promise of forgiuenesse of sinnes which should especially serue to make this oyling a sacrament is but conditionall whereas in the true sacraments in deede the promise of forgiuenesse of sinnes is most certaine otherwise wee should not haue in the vse of them any true comfort Thus then seeing sicknes sometime commeth of sinne sometime of other causes the apostle sayeth if it come of sinne not onely the man ouer whom the elders make their faithfull prayer and whom they so oynt with this visible oyle shal be raised vp but also his sinnes the cause of his sicknesse shal be taken away But that not forgiuenesse of sinnes was especially regarded in this ceremonie but bodily health the fathers afore named doe proue and maister Bellarmine cannot denie but that sundrie of the Papists do affirme whilest they teach that the Apostles in the 6. of saint Marke his Gospell did practise the selfe same thing that saint Iames commaundeth The institution of this Sacrament But for the institution of this sacrament maister Bellarmine can bring no proofe at all but onely in respect of this promise of saint Iames which if it be not of spirituall grace as I trust I haue proued that it is not then is there no institution of this sacrament to be found Then wee see that all this whole building hangeth vpon a weake foundation to bee grounded vpon one onely authoritie and that so little to the purpose vnlesse it be racked besides the meaning and that out of that Epistle which although it be in our churches receyued and read yet we know that the authoritie thereof hath bin doubted of and therefore the lesse force hath it to proue any thing that is not taught in any other place And especially for their annoyling that is now vsed in the Popish church which is farre vnlike that which the apostles vsed there is in that place no proofe at all And as master Bellarmine hath the better lyking to expounde this place of saint Iames of another oynting than the apostles vsed marke eth sixt chapter Cap. 2 because as hee saieth Luther Caluine and Kemnitius doe take both places for one annointing euen so doe I and that with much better reason mislike the Popish anoyling because it commeth so neare vnto that practise of the heretikes of whom Ieremie speaketh li. 1. cap. 18. That they redeeme their dead at the ende of their race or trauell powring oyle and water vpon their heads And whereas master Bellarmine would proue out of Epiphanius that this oyntment was vsed when they were dead And therefore therein they differ from the Papists yet saint Augustine in his booke of heresies saieth Cap. 16. they did it when they were dying So that master Bellarmine must not thinke so to face out the matter as if those heretikes were nothing like them And whereas they vsed water also with their Oyle although they differ therein from the church of Rome yet the difference is nothing so great by many degrees betweene the Papists and those heretikes as is betweene the apostles and the papists for this poynt as maie appeare by that which before hath beene saide De sacra vnct li. 2. cap. 4. But after this great scarcitie of proofe out of the scriptures
hee commeth at length to the authoritie of man And hee will prooue what men will say in his behalfe where God keepeth silence And the first that he bringeth in is Innocentius that liued at the least foure hundred yeares after Christ What was it no Sacrament for foure hundred yeares and nowe vpon a sudden is it become a sacrament howe doeth hee proue it to bee a sacrament He bringeth no reason hee hath no proofe no neither yet doeth hee so much as say it is a sacrament properly so called but that it is Genus Sacramenti A kinde of Sacrament What then if we graunt to master Bellarmine that which Pope Innocentius sayeth If it bee a kinde of Sacrament as hee sayeth is it therefore a sacrament truely and properly as maister Bellarmine saieth I denie that argument and maister Bellarmine will not proue it And yet to helpe his bad cause hee lowdly and lewdly belyeth Innocentius his woordes in that hee affirmeth that Innocentius saieth expresselie and plainlie that this oynting is that sacrament explaned by saint Iames. But Innocentius hath no such wordes no neither yet any thing like But M. Bellarmine to deceiue them that can not looke into the fathers doth many times falsifie them to make his cause to seeme better And nowe what cause hath this seconde Achylles of the Catholikes for Eckius did bestow that name first vpon himselfe as you may see in his Enchiridion in the title of the church in the margent what cause I saie hath this challenging champion thus to brag against Kemnitius that hee durst not so much as name this Innocentius When his testimonie is examined the cracke is great but he doth not hit the marke that maister Bellarmine would haue him to leauell at As for Kemnitius if he haue but his due praise we must needes confesse that by his learning and trauell he hath more beaten downe the walles of that popish Babilon than that all the papists if they ioine togither hand in hand shall be able with all their skill and cunning to raise it vp againe Of Innocentius the third because he came so late he is not worth the answering for he liued about 1200. yeares after Christ in time of ignorance and much superstition As for the Councels which he alleageth the first is the Nicene councell translated into latine out of the Arabic tongue But since that canon is not amongst those canons which wee haue in the tomes of the councels and in those coppies that hitherto haue beene counted the true councels we neede not much regarde those farre fetched authorities His second authoritie is out of the councell of Cabilon and some other particular councels and although he commend their antiquitie yet the first of them was almost 800. yeares after Christ And those which I haue examined make not for his purpose For they proue not that this annointing is a sacrament properly so called Now for the fathers master Bellarmine needeth no aduersary he confesseth his want of proofe out of them For he deuideth the fathers into two sortes The one he confesseth doe not plainly saie that it is a sacrament Why then doth he produce them He hath taken in hand to proue that anoyling as it is vsed in the popish church is a true and proper sacrament If they will not proue this they maie holde their tongues For to this end only are they to be alleaged An other sort there are who speake it plainely as he telleth vs. But they are of no credit neither are once named among the ancient fathers The eldest of them is about 800. yeares after Christ And for his examples of some few men what they haue done it is no proofe to vs that we ought so to doe They might haue their reasons that might well induce them to it They might also doe therein as in many things many haue done of a blinde zeale and foolish deuotion How or in what sort they haue done that which they did I wil not take vpon me to iudge as for their doings they ought not to be an example to any man so that we should be bound to follow them But hee wil proue by reason that it must needs be a sacrament Bellarm. de sac vnct li. 1. cap. 5. For since God hath by a sacrament holpen vs in the entraunce into the church and also in our continuance in the same we maie not imagine that his prouidence shall faile vs at our going out of the church these are maister Bellarmine his wordes I might briefly answere that we are not to teach God what we thinke conuenient that he should doe but to see what he hath done and to content our selues therewith and to frame our selues to performe the same But if God faile in his prouidence if their anoyling be not a sacrament then must we imagine that God had no due regarde of the fathers of the old world or of the patriarkes or of the godly vnder the law For vntill Christs time master Bellarmine will confesse they had not this Sacrament Yea the Apostles and all other the Godly and constant Martirs in Christs church had not that sacrament Neither yet did they make complaint for want of the same but comfortably and patiently indured all torments with great ioy although they had not this anoyling nor anie hope to haue it no neither once thought of it Lastly our Sauiour Christ to prepare vs against death telleth vs that whosoeuer beleeueth in him shall not perish but haue euerlasting life and to cause vs not to feare it he saith that he is the resurrection and the life Many notable lessons did our Sauiour Christ giue to his disciples before he left the world to goe to his father which are recorded by Saint Iohn from the twelfth to the seuenteenth chapters And although he vse all arguments to comfort them yet he neuer once thought of this anoyling which yet then if he had purposed to leaue vnto his church anie such Sacrament it had beene good time to haue deliuered them for their comforte To be short whatsoeuer he commaunded vs to vse for the strengthning of our faith with boldnesse we may and with comfort and readinesse we ought to doe But it is farre from either true or sound comfort in the agony of death or a sufficient weapon to withstand the assaults of Sathan and conflicts of conscience to haue standing by thee some Idol pastor whose greatest good that he either can or will doe vnto thee is to grease some parts of thy body Let the world esteeme of these things as they will But this is certaine that it is only true obedience that hath the promise of blessing And without the commandement there can be no obedience either in our duties towardes God or our conuersation amongst men For obedience is nothing els but an earnest applying of our selues to doe that which is pleasing vnto God and which he hath commanded It is also far from the maiestie of
argument The apostle speaking of Christs loue to the church his spouse sayth He gaue himselfe for it that he might sanctifie it and cleanse it Ephe. 5.25 26 27 by the washing of water in the worde that he might make it vnto himselfe a grorious church not hauing spot or wrinkle c. Now if I should expound this place Ezec. 47. by the 47. Chapter of Ezechiel vnto the which the apostle may verie well seeme to allude I knowe this exposition would be thought newe and singular But yet as this exposition hath nothing in it against the rule of faith so by saint Ieroms interpretation of that place of Ezechiel it seemeth to be warranted For by the waters mentioned in that place hee vnderstandeth that which our sauiour Christ taught as also both hee and Primasius doe expound this place of the apostle As water say they washeth the bodie Ierom Primasius vpon Ephes 5. so teaching doeth cleanse the soule And so the apostle doth seeme to expound himselfe when hee sheweth that this washing is in the worde And thus this place serueth no more for his purpose then the rest For none of them proue that baptisme taketh away all sinne But admit that saint Paule speaketh in that place of baptisme yet this place will not serue to proue that they would haue it For then the apostle teacheth vs how the church of Christ I say that complete and whole bodie of Christ is sanctified namely by himselfe in the worde whereof baptisme is the sacrament So that therein appeareth how or rather by what meanes the bodie of Christ his wife and spouse shall be without spot and wrinkle but not in what maner or in what compasse of time euerie particular member of this bodie shall be freed from sinne which is in controuersie amongst vs. But to ende this first argument As this doctrine of the Romish Church sauoureth of Pelagianisme so master Bellarmine and his fellowes borrow weapons of the Pelagians to fight withall For saint Augustine doth note this place amongst those which the Pelagians did alledge to proue that man may be without sinne De perfect iust cont Celest But more plainly writing to Boniface hee writeth thus Lib. 4. cap 1 The Pelagians doe say that men by baptisme are perfectly renued and bring for proofe the witnesse of the Apostle to the Ephes 5. Not one ape is then liker another than are the Pelagians and Papists both in their doctrine and in their proofe of it But of all such testimonies I may say with saint August Some of them exhort them that do runne De perfect iust cont Celest that they run as they shoulde some other shewe to what ende they should runne And thus much for his first argument His second argument is this Arg. 2. of M. Bellarmine The Scriptures say that our spots defilings or pollutions and our iniquities are taken away therefore in baptisme all sinne is taken away For by these wordes is signified saith hee the verie corruption of sinne His argument is not good For we confesse his antecedent namely that these things are taken away as before hath beene shewed But it followeth not thereupon that by baptisme all sinne is taken away wee acknowledge also that Christ is made vnto vs Sanctification but in deed this holinesse wee say is not in this life perfected 1. Cor. 1.30 Begun it is in Gods children which walke not after the flesh Rom. 8.1 but after the spirit But doe what we can we had need alwayes to pray as our Sauiour Christ taught his apostles Forgiue vs our trespasses as saint Augustin doth often teach vs De perfect Iust Celest De Amiss gratiae li. 5 cap. 8 and namely in the end of his booke of the perfection of Iustice which place I the rather note because most vntruly master Bellarmine writeth that saint Augustine in that place saith That the vnwilling motions of concupiscence are so farre from being sinne that a man neede not for the forgiuenesse of them say Forgiue vs our trespasses But saint Augustine affirmeth the contrary For hauing alleadged that place of S. Iohn 1. Iohn 1.8 If we say we haue no sin we deceiue our selues and the truth is not in vs then he addeth that if any will say that the apostle speaketh there of concupiscence that concupiscence if it be not consented vnto is not sinne He putteth a subtill difference which I would haue our aduersaries to marke that they may know that S. Aug. counteth that but a subtill shift And then he sheweth that we do somtimes somewhat consent to the lusts of that sinne because otherwise we needed not to say Forgiue vs our trespasses So that we see saint Augustine maketh that a reason to prooue that concupiscence often preuaileth because wee haue neede so to pray And thus we see how cleane contrarie to all shew of trueth master Bellarmine falsifieth saint Augustine Which I would wish the simple to consider of For many times either himselfe is so deceiued or else hee seeketh to deceiue his Reader But to returne to his argument this we say that euen here in this life Gods children begin to haue a mislike of sin a loue of godlines yea and also by the assistance of Gods good spirit increase therin But this shal not be perfected in vs vntill we be deliuered from this bodie of death Rom. 7 Vpon Iohn tract 41 and that made the apostle to crie out as he did And therefore saint Augustine saith that none in this life can be without sinne yet sinne is diminished in the life of them that do profit but consumed it is in the life of the perfect meaning after this life when corruption hath put on incorruption who then would allowe of this reason The verie filth and corruption of sin is taken away therefore it must needes be taken away here by baptisme Whereas on the contrarie we are called children of God because at the first not in faith onely but in life also we are beginners and weake and must growe stronger and stronger in both Arg. 3 His third argument In circumcision the flesh onely was cut away not by imputation onely Master Bellarmine verie vnskilfully doeth match togither things not of like nature For as Circumcision is the cutting off the foreskinne so is baptisme the washing of the bodie But this is nothing to the effect of the Sacrament to tel vs what the externall thing doth of it selfe Out of that that hath beene said it is not hard to answer his 4. 6. 7. 8 and 9. arguments if wee remember that God beginneth in vs holines here which shal be perfected else where But in the meane time for his Christs sake hee accepteth our vnperfect holinesse for perfect and forgiueth euen the many and great sinnes of his children As for his fift argument Bella. De iustificat li. 2. cap. 7. Rom. 5.19 which in another place he saith
time are not worthy of the glory which shall be shewed vnto vs. And if all we can suffer here haue no comparison with that glorie what infinite goodnesse can wee imagin our works may haue And whereas the Scriptures in this matter of iustification do take all the glorie from our workes Rom. 3.26 27.28 and giue it vnto God they so part stakes betweene God and their good workes that their workes being holpē but in part that is but a little by grace doe woorthily deserue eternall life So it seemeth that they will not be much beholding to God for their saluation as the indifferent Reader may soone perceiue Who if they continue in this their blasphemie Aug. in Psal 31. praefat and bragge thus of their merites they shal without question fall from grace And if they will needs seek to establish their owne righteousnesse Rom. 10.3 they can not be partakers of Gods righteousnesse And if they will not haue it by faith without the workes of the lawe Rom. 3.28 they can neuer haue it Yet to say our owne workes cannot saue vs Act. Monum Fox lib. c. 1117. hath bin counted heresie Now that our aduersaries are in this point so stiffe vpon so small a ground it being so necessary a point of religion that without true knowledge thereof they cannot be saued I cannot but maruell For besides that which before I haue said of the imperfection of our works which is confessed by themselues for Andradius confesseth that the Iesuits of Colen say that it cannot be Orthod explic lib. 5. that we can loue God perfectly and sufficiently in this life besides that imperfection I say which is in any thing that we can do which cannot answere for that perfect righteousnes which God iustly may require of vs there are sundry other great reasons to induce vs to detest that doctrine as a thing most dāgerous for christians to giue eare vnto Luc. 17.9 Our sauiour Christ when he hath by the parable of the seruant taught vs that it is our duetie to do that which he commaundeth vs he addeth this So likewise yee 10. when you haue done all those things that are commanded you say we are vnprofitable seruauntes wee haue done that was our dutie to doe If then it be our dutie to keepe Gods commaundements yea and that not once but that so long as wee liue In luc li. 8. wee must doe it as Saint Ambrose saieth In luc ca. 17. and if as Theophilact saith that wee are bounde to keepe all Gods commaundements I would faine learne of some of our aduersaries howe the doing of that thing which wee alwaies ought to doe can satisfie Gods wrath for neglect of such dueties as we haue not done and such sinnes as wee haue committed contrary to Gods lawe for if now I keepe the commaundement it is my duety nowe and alwayes to doe it Can this then bee any recompence to satisfy God for such times as I haue omitted my duetie It cannot be it hath no likelihoode of trueth Nay if he worke not saieth Theophilact hee is woorthy of many stripes Luc. 17. and if he worke let him content himselfe that he is not beaten Therefore let him not seeke for reward or honor for it Therfore seeing euery worke that wee do is a sacrifice that then must be offered a duty that then must be performed and that also very short I warrant you of that wee should performe if it were well sifted how can we say that such a worke can merite eternall life Or if that worke can but serue that duety that then is required what recompence shall wee make for all other our sinnes For it is a question amongst themselues whether Christ by his death did take away any sinnes but only originall sinne For Ambrose Catharinus an archbishop In his booke de Incruento sacrif and a great man at the Councell of Trent doeth plainely write that Christ died onely for originall sinne As for actuall sinnes they must be taken away by masses and such helps saith he Now if we had no other hope but such paltry popish deuises to take away our sinnes wherein we continually offend we were the most miserable of all creatures But to returne to the wordes of our sauiour Christ Out of them we may reason thus If our most perfect obedience be but duety it is not merit but it is but duety therefore no merit This whole argument is necessarily to be gathered out of the words themselues as you see the forenamed fathers doe testifie Which place also is very strong against their most blasphemous doctrine of their workes of supererrogation For if all wee can doe Against workes of Supererrogation Cap. 20. bee scarce our owne dutie then can it not serue for others to satisfie for their sinnes And yet is this doctrine defended by them as by Nichol Burne in his booke yea and by master Bellarmine who is so little ashamed thereof that as it were a doctrine that must needes be graunted vnto him he endeuoureth thereby to prooue that we may keepe Gods lawe A man saieth he may doe more than God commaundeth De iustificat lib. 4. cap. 13 therefore much more may hee fulfill the law Now if you will knowe the mystery of this great abhomination it is this as they tel vs. Whereas some men say they haue beene so godly that they haue done mo good workes than they needed these are as it were the treasure of the church which the Pope may at his pleasure bestow And so he doth for the pardons and indulgences haue their vertue from these workes So that if there bee no such workes then the Pope like a false merchant hath deceiued the world for many yeeres as still he doeth For his pardons Agnus Dei his grana benedicta and such baggage haue no vertue but from their workes of supererrogation And here I can but wonder at the whorish forehead of the church of Rome in this thing Shee can in no wise abide the imputation of Christes righteousnesse for our iustification shee may not heare of it All Popish Writers write against it And yet their doctrine of merites especially of the workes of supererrogation what is it but the imputation of other mens merites as they think to satisfie for vs and for our iustification Shal Christes righteousnesse imputed to vs be absurd to teach and to teach the imputation of mans workes a sound doctrine We may see by this that in the church of Rome that doctrine is best that is most gainefull For the Pope can gaine but little worldly wealth by preaching the imputation of Christes righteousnesse vnto vs But by this doctrine of the workes of supererrogation hee gaineth much For because it is the treasure of the church whosoeuer will haue thereof must pay well for it to the church that is to the pope But howe doth master Bellarmine proue that we
according to promise And out of the reuelation Apoc. 2.10 Be thou faithful vnto the death and I will giue thee a crowne of life How can he proue merites out of it Is this a good argument I will giue thee therefore thou hast deserued it Two or three places more he there alleadgeth but out of that I haue said it is easie to answere them His fift sort of places are such as promise to good workes eternall life And out of them he reasoneth thus Promise of rewarde for a worke doeth make that he that doth the worke maie bee saide to merite his rewarde That the reward is due but yet not deserued I shewed before in the answere to his first argument and I need not heere to repeat it His sixt argument is taken from those places that speake of our worthines and are of two sortes 2. Thess 1.5 Luc. 20.35 For two of them namely that That yee maie be counted worthy of the kingdome of God and that also They shal be counted worthy to inioy that world and the resurrection of the dead doe answere themselues For that may be accounted worthy which of it selfe is not so in truth As in our workes is seene which are accounted of not as they proceed from vs but as they are presented before God in the name of Christ and their imperfection couered with his perfect obedience The other two places seeme more pertinent to his purpose but yet being rightlie vnderstood prooue nothing for him The first is in the booke of wisedome which booke although it is not Canonicall yet because the place alleadged seemeth like vnto the words that he alleadgeth out of the reuelation they may both receiue one answere Wisdom 3.5 Apocal. 3.4 God proueth them and findeth them worthy for himselfe The other place is They shall walke with me in white for they are worthy First that this worthines doth many times signifie an aptnes or fitnes it cannot be denied Who saith Salomon can iudge 2. Cron. 1.10 this thy great people worthily Where by worthely he meaneth not as they deserue for they were a stubborne and bad people many times but as is fit or meete to gouerne them And so the Apostle willeth vs to walke worthy of God worthy of our calling worthy of the gospell that is as becommeth Gods children them that are called and fit for the professours of the gospell And this fitnes is said to be in vs in respect of the new man that is begun within vs not in respect of perfection that we doe or can attaine vnto And yet if we should indeed be worthy we must be perfect which heere we cannot be And in this sence you see his argument hath no necessity Men are worthy of loue that is fit to loued therefore they haue deserued it for this fitnesse is not of themselues Secondly although we be called worthy in respect of our election in Christ or in respect of the fruits of the spirite which God commendeth in vs although they haue their wants that we might not be discouraged but go on forwards in the wayes of godlinesse yet this argument will not hold We are worthy of loue therefore our workes haue deserued this loue or made vs worthy For our worthinesse hangeth nothing vpon our works but that God wil vouch vs to be so esteemed But in respect of our works we must confesse with the prophet Dauid Psal 53.3 There is none that doth good no not one And therefore we must pleade euen the best of vs mercy and forgiuenesse not merite or worthinesse Super Cantic ser 61. My merit saith Saint Bernard is the Lordes mercy neither am I without merite so long as hee is not without mercie His seuenth argument is grounded vpon those places of scripture that say that God accepteth no persons But must he needes therefore respect the worthinesse of the worke If there be with him no difference betweene Iew and Gentile bond or free male or female must merites needes be established I haue often said that God respecteth vs and our workes but not for our goodnesse but for his mercy sake For this must needs be true that S. Paul teacheth vs according to the consent of the scripturs that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe Rom. 3 2◠Therefore as saith S. August let mans merits be silent which were lost through Adam De praedest Sanct. ca. 1◠and let the grace of God through Iesus Christ raigne as indeede it doth raigne Now for the Fathers if I should answer to euery testimony alleadged out of them it would be too long especially considering how largely I haue already handled this question Onely thus much woulde I admonish the christian Reader that when he readeth them he should remember they be but men Dial. 3. Impatib And if Theodoret said truly of the doctrines of the church the decrees of the church are to be prooued and not to be pronounced in maner of a iudgement then how much more should we reiect whatsoeuer any men speake without a good warrant Then also as they were men so were many of them great Philosophers might somwhat perchance smel of that infection speake more of mans worthines than had bin expedient for christian religion Aduersus Hermog Orat. 21. In so much as not without great cause did Tertull. cal philosophers The patriarchs of heretikes And G. Nazian cōpareth the subtilties of philosophy which he saith came vnhappily into the church vnto the whips wherewith the Aegyptians did scourge the Israelits Ser. de Arian In which kind of reasoning the tongue fighteth the words are speares the speech is the sword there is no end of contention all the day long as the same father saith in an other place And no maruel for the Philosopher is gloriae animal De anima euen the creature of glory as Tertull writeth No doubt therfore but they might be somwhat caried away with her intising words especially to thinke wel of that thēselues do Thirdly as I haue said in the former chapter the absurdities of thē that did teach that God moued man wrought in or by him as a workeman might do in or by a stocke or stone they not hauing so much as will thereto made the fathers to speake more not only of mans freewil as before I taught but also of the reward of them that worke according to the same And that this did the rather moue the fathers to speake somwhat too largely vpon this matter vnlesse they be warely red it may be gathered euen by that place that M. Bella. out of Origen alleadgeth Lib. 2. in Rom. in ca. 2. first saith he let heretikes be excluded that say that the nature of soules is good or bad let thē heare that God wil reward them not according to their nature but according to their merits Now cōcerning the vnderstāding of these words Rom
that that these things merit or deserue Gods wrath to be turned away He cannot proue it We denie not but God looketh vpon these things but not for the merit of them but for his owne mercies And therefore master Bellarmine hath not yet prooued that fasting doth merit And this is the thing that hee should proue But on the contrarie A true vse of fasting in our fasting we acknowledge our selues to bee vnworthie of Gods creatures and that by our sinnes wee haue depriued our selues of the vse of his benefites and deserue not euen these his ordinarie graces which the verie beastes themselues maie freely enioy And in this heartie acknowledging of our owne vnworthinesse wee prostrate our selues before Gods mercie seate seeking for mercie not pleading but fearing and refusing our merit Now of this popish opinion of merit by fasting hath sprung vp another abuse in fasting Of popish fasting dayes That the papists haue dedicated these their fasting dayes not onely to the seruice of God for they supposed that they could by such meanes please him whereas it is all one to him whether wee come full or fasting so that wee come so as our hearts may bee most sitte to serue him but also to the honour of their Saints imagining thereby to deserue some fauour at their handes And for this cause did they deuise to fast vpon their Saintes Euens and at such other times as wee see the Popish Church vseth not so much to tame the flesh for that fasting we also affirme to be necessarie neither yet in any politike respect which belongeth not to our question but euen because they foolishly thinke that in so doing they worship God and the Saints and do a thing acceptable to him And to this ende is also appointed their lent fast their wednesdaie and fryday fast saterday fast embar fast the fasts of aduent and cogation weeke But that these cannot be accounted times of necessitie to be kept and obserued for fasting in respect of any religious obseruation of the same it cannot better be proued than by that diuersitie of opinions and iudgement which M. Bellarmine himselfe is forced to confesse to be in the ancient fathers De bonis operibus in part li. 2. As they shall vnderstand that reade of the book before alleadged the fifteeneth the seuenteenth eightteenth and nineteenth chapters As for their fastes vppon saintes eues they come after al the rest Seeing therefore there is herein such diuersitie it is plaine enough that neither any certainty of doctrine can heere be gathered neither can they cal it a catholicke religion that is like Iacobs coate of many colours farre from vnity of faith But with saint Hillary I maie say In ps 118. A It is most hard for a man by the doctours of this world to vnderstande the meaning of heauenly precepts And this I could wish that at al times we would striue by this and other good meanes to tame our rebellious flesh and that we also would prepare our selues vnto the holy exercises of our religion either by this or anie other way that maie further therein but that fasting it selfe doth make vs acceptable to God wee must not thinke And out of this their opinion of the merit of fasting ariseth another most absurd doctrine of binding the conscience to their lawes of fasting Their lawes of fasting bind not the conscience Li. 2. de bonis operibus in part ca. 7. Ierem. 5.6 as the church of Rome teacheth with one consent as M. Bellarmine confesseth And he wil proue it by the example of the Rechabites who vpon the commandement of Ionadab their father abstained from drinking of wine A weake proofe The Rechabites obeied the politicke lawe that their father Ionadab gaue them therefore the church may binde mens consciences with the law of fasting It is one thing to bind the conscience another thing to require external obedience The fast and holie daie which is commaunded to be continued in the storie of Hester is like vnto it Hester 9.31 for a day of remembraunce of Gods great benefit towardes them but not to binde the conscience Such also is the fast mentioned in Zachary of the fourth fifth seuenth and tenth monethes which although it might perchance vppon good and godlie consideration be taken vp and we debarre none but exhort all persons to humble themselues vnto the Lord yet how little their conscience is bound thereto it partly appeareth because God faith in the former Chapter that they did not fast vnto him and willeth them to harken vnto the ministerie of prophets and to execute true iudgement and shewe mercy and compassion euery man to his brother not to oppresse for these are in deede good workes that God regardeth in comparison of which hee little esteemeth those their fastes Partlie also because God wil turne their fasting into feasting into ioy and gladnes and prosperous high feastes as there he saith Act. 15.29 And lastly he bringeth that law that the apostles set downe of not eating the bloud and things strangled A law I saie made by the direction of Gods spirite as there is witnessed for a lawe whereof they can finde no such praise A law that was made according to the necessity of that time to auoide diuision and for the better vniting and gathering of the church of the Iewes and gentiles as M. Bellarmine confesseth and therefore such a law as lawfully might be made For in thinges indifferent the church maie take order for the quietnes or anie other waie for the benefit of the fame Whereby they would establish a law for euer to binde the conscience A law I say which themselues wil confesse we are not bound vnto but doe against that law that the apostles made But how could we breake that law if it bound the conscience Or if it doe not binde the conscience why doth M. Bellarmine bring it to proue that the church may tie or bind the consciences of the faithfull vnto their lawes of fasting Thus we see that not one of all the places alleadged by him out of the scripture doth prooue the necessity of these lawes of fasting which so straitly they command Therefore by the weakenes of their proofe we may see the falsenes of their doctrine Difference of meates Now I come vnto the last point of their doctrine which we mislike which is the difference of meats that they make Wherein if they doe not conspire with the Ebionites and sundry other hereticks that did condemne flesh as a thing vnpure yet it seemeth that they haue bin brought vp in the schoole of the heretickes called Apostolici Serm. 66. in Cantica of whom S. Bernard reporteth that they would eate no whit-meate milke and whatsoeuer came of it or whatsoeuer was ingendred But our aduersaries tel vs that the Ebionites Tatianites Maniches Priscillianists and such other heretickes doe vtterly condemne flesh as vncleane or vnlawful to be eaten at any time
he abstained from flesh onely or that hee abstained from all dainty fare If because he abstained from al daintie fare as saint Hierome in plaine wordes doth expound it then it maketh nothing for the forbidding of flesh onely Iero. in Dan. cap. 1. But that is it that the Papists so stiffely maintaine and so superstitiously hold that they suppose themselues more to breake their fast in eating but one bit of flesh be it neuer so meane or of little nourishing or neuer so little whitmeate than if they should eate a sufficient meale of daintie and nourishing fish Now if one should aske them whether one bit or lesse of flesh doeth more pamper our bodie than a good quanti◠ie of daintie fish our aduersaries must needes confesse that a sufficient meale of the one nourisheth more than the small quantitie of the other And yet a crumme of flesh doeth breake their fast and a meale of fish doth not So that they make the vnlawfulnesse to be in the meate it selfe which howe neere it commeth to the former heresies let the world iudge If they doe answere that the commandement of the church doth make it vnlawfull I reply that the church hath not power to take away our christian liberty neither must in things indifferent set downe a constant and continuall order for al times and places And also the reason that master Bellarmine giueth why the church forbade flesh is for taming of the flesh which in this case set downe is more pampered by the fish De operibus bonis in part lib. 2. cap. 4. And therefore the very respect that their church had in giuing this commandement maketh not simply gainst the vse but against the abuse of it So that still the strait forbidding of the vse of flesh with such scourings washings and cleansings of any thing that hath come neare flesh as they vse to haue seemeth to come from no other but those ancient heretikes But they will not be compared to them Yet they must not take scorne to be yoked with the Manichees whose fastings saint Augustine describeth as like the Popish fasting as one egge can be like an other not in their diet onely but in their opinion of it also For hee there sheweth how the Manichees vsing in their fasts daintie fare and much spice and costly drinkes woulde yet preferre their fasts before an other that had not touched a peece of resty bacon with his lippes whose follie hee much inueyeth against And who knoweth not De moribus Manichaeorum li. 2. c. 13 that the fasts of many euen of them whom they call religious men amongest the Papistes are more nourishing vnto the body than the best feast that many a poore man getteth throughout the whole yeare Yea one draught of their spiced cuppes is much better than his Christmasse dinner And yet these men whose meanest meale shoulde bee a poore mans feast are saide to fast And the other whose greatest fare is with scarcitie doth not fast Let our fast then bee an abstinence from anie thing that may pamper the flesh yet not superstitious not ioyned with opinion of merite not thinking any meate vnlawful but in Christian sorrow for sinnes to humble our selues Of Purgatorie CHAP. 31 THE PROTESTANTS AS for Purgatory wee know none neither any purgation for our sin or anie remedie for the same 1. Iohn 1.7 but only that bloude of Christ which clenseth vs from all sinne Iohn 1.29 Only that Lambe of God that taketh away the sinnes of the world by vertue wherof because wee knowe our sinnes are satisfied for and we reconciled vnto God as here we cānot so els wher we need not make other attonmēt with god for them For he that is so purged shall not perish Iohn 3.16 Iohn 5.24 he shall not come into condemnation but hath passed from death to life as he that cānot lie hath told vs. THE PAPISTS OVR aduersaries teach Concil Trid. Sess 22. ca. 2. that because there are sinners which are not in Christ fully purged Cens Colon dialog 10. and wee may perchance die before we haue done due penaunce or fully satisfied for our sinnes therefore there is no remedy but to purgatory we must go For although we be reconciled to God by Christ Cens Colon ibidem and receiued to his fauour yet is not that sufficient to bring vs to heauen vntil we or others for vs haue added somwhat to that satisfaction of Christ Se. 6. Can. 30 And he that wil teach contrary to this is accounted accursed by the councell of Trent The absurditie of this their doctrine maketh me loath almost to meddle with it for what christian eares can heare the blasphemy of the councell of Trent in the place before alleadged The blasphemous saying of the ◠ouncel of Trēt the Iesuites that there are some they meane of such as shall dwell with God that are not fully purged in Christ And yet the scriptures do onely and wholy ascribe vnto Christ our perfect redemption whereof his bloud is the price his death is our ransome Or who can but detest the folly of those Iesuites who are not ashamed to write that God receiueth such to fauour as he wil not suffer to come where he is vntill they haue satiffied for their punishment No they blush not to affirme that God is like to a froward man who although he can be content by intreaty to forgiue yet will he not forget the offences that are committed against him but will haue them punished with temporall punishments either here or else-where Which not to be true among other the thiefe vppon the crosse may teach vs. For what satisfaction did hee make for his temporall punishment None at all for Christ said to him Luc. 23.43 This day shalt thou be with mee in Paradise Yea this example prooueth that it is not according vnto Gods iustice so to deale For if hee being a malefactor had no punishment enioyned vnto him but were freelie pardoned howe can wee imagine that God will deale more hardly with other Againe to say that wee must make any satisfaction is to ouerthrowe that free grace and mercy of God and the only merit of Iesus Christ and so to diminish the benefite that wee haue of his gratious goodnesse or to charge him with weakenesse and impotencie as though hee were not able without our satisfaction for our sinnes to take away the same And how doubtfully they set downe this their doctrine their Writings doe testifie to beare witnesse of their owne vncertaintie of that which they doe teach For Allen that most vnnaturall countrey man of ours but he that sitteth in heauen hath defeated his purposes and laughed him to scorne concerning this point hee thus setteth it downe that Often there remaineth a due temporal punishment for satisfaction And master Bellarmine saith Defence of purgatorie chap. 1. De purgat li. 1. cap. 7. Censur Colon dial 10.
how to iudge betweene truth and falshode in the holie Scriptures Interpreting scripture euen by interpreting the same according to the traditions of the vniuersall church and the rules of the catholike doctrine and the consent that hath beene at all times and in all places amongst the teachers And yet not euery question must be thus decided This way is to be vsed onely in the greatest matters but only matters of faith such as the very foundation of catholike doctrine resteth vpon for so he saith after fol. 50. neither are al heresies thus to be confuted and at al times but only new heresies euen at their first beginning And lately sprung vp heresies Before they haue falsified the rules of the ancient faith and the writings of the fathers But old heresies which haue had long time to steale away the truth must be coÌ„uinced if need be Stealing the truth such thenâ—â— are the papistes as their coorupting the fathers proueth When the fathers must be heard by the only authority of scripture or must be shuÌ„ned as being condeÌ„ned in the old councels As for heresies newly sprung vp they by the iudgements of the fathers are to be reiected of those fathers I say that continued in the faith so that al or most of them haue set it down in one and the self same meaning plainly often continuing in it as it were in a councell of such masters agreeing in one And such a ful consent must not be despised Then he maketh a recapitulation of that which he hath said in these two caueats and induceth the example of the councel of Ephesus wherein the iudgement of the ancient fathers being examined Nestorius was found to be against the catholike old faith and Cyril to agree with holy antiquitie And to make the matter more plaine he setteth downe the names of those holy fathers by whose vniforme consent and iudgement both the testimonies of Gods lawe were expounded and also the rule of the holy doctrine was established And so reckoneth vp sundry of the Greeke church then also of the Latine and west churches wherein he maketh mention of certaine leters written vnto some from Foelix and Iulius two bishops of Rome And Bellarm. de Roman pontif lib. 2. cap. 16. endeuoureth by this testimonie to prooue the Pope to be head of the church But consider I pray you how negligeÌ„tly he performeth it Vincentius saith that the city of Rome was the head of the world and we confesse whilest the empire flourished it was so called as by the stories appeareth Now he proueth by this that the pope is head of the church by a strange Metamorphosis changing the citie into the Pope and the world into the church contrary to the Author his words or meaning that not only The head of the worlde but the sides also might yeelde their testimonie to that iudgement Cyprian and Ambrose consented thervnto And lastly he confirmeth this by the iudgment of Capreolus bishop of Carthage who endeuoured to ouerthrow newnes and to defend antiquitie Which was also approued by Cyrils testimonie who would haue the doctrines of the ancient faith confirmed New doctrine condemned and that which is new and superfluously inuented and wickedly published to be reiected and condemned wherunto the whole councell agreed And though there were many in that Councell The councell of Ephesus â—â— rst deuise no new doctrine men of singular great learning in such sort gathered togither which might haue imboldned theÌ„ to decree somwhat of their owne yet would they alter nothing but tooke all heede possible that they deliuered nothing to their posteritie but that they had receyued of their predecessours leauing also to them that example Ancient faith the onely good faith He inueigheth against the pride of Nestorius in defence of antiquitie alledging that of Xistus bishop of Rome Let not newnesse doe any thing because it is not fit any thing should bee added vnto antiquitie And that of Caelestinus who would not haue Newnesse to trouble antiquitie Whose meaning is not that antiquitie should cease to ouerthrow newnesse but that newnesse should cease to molest antiquitie Which thing whosoeuer will not yeeld vnto he must despise the authoritie of Celestinus Xistus Cyril Capreolus the councell of Ephesus who all had learned of God to decree that not any thing should bee deliuered to their posteritie but that onely that sacred antiquitie of the holie fathers and agreing with it selfe in Christ did holde yea not to yeeld vnto this is to iustifie Nestorius by them condemned and to despise the whole Church of Christ The praise of the church to keepe the faith deliuâ— red to her not to inuent a new and the teachers therein the Apostles and Prophets but especially the Apostle saint Paul The Church of Christ I say that neuer yet departed from a religious reuerencing and adorning of the faith deliuered to her by saint Paul who said O Timothie keepe that which was committed to thee auoyding newnesse of wordes And Ifanie preach to you any other thing than that you haue heard let him be accursed And if neither the lawes of the apostles nor decrees of the church are to be broken according to which heretikes are worthily condemned it behoueth all men that will bee accounted the true children of their mother the church to sticke euen to the death True children of holy church vnto the sacred faith of their holy fathers and to hate that that is newe Thus haue I set downe I trust truly and faithfully the summe of this whole treatise of Vincentius Lyrmensis especially whatsouer may be thought pertinent to the matter for which the Papists so triumphingly alledge him And as I endeuoured to be short yet so that I omit not any materiall poynt by him touched so that his meaning may the better appeare I haue as neare as I could kept his owne wordes yea I haue set downe euen his most materiall sentences that his whole minde and intent may the better bee knowne vnto the Reader Iudge nowe I pray thee Christian Reader what Catholike and auncient faith it is that the Church of Rome so much braggeth of Compare it with this that Vincentius commendeth If they bee any thing like I desire no credite I will but giue thee a taste hereof euen out of one of their chiefe poyntes of their Religion Cap. 2. I haue shewed before euen by their owne confession that traditions must needes bee admitted or else the Church of Rome must needes faile in proofe in many articles of their Religion Their Religion therefore in such poynts cannot be Catholike It cannot be that which was Committed to Timothie which was Once deliuered as Vincentius speaketh often whose growing is without change whose perfection is without addition so that their doctrine of traditions is a strong argument to proue that their faith is not Catholike according to Vincentius rules Then also we see how plainly he