that tithes should be payd Praecidite deputate aliquid fixum ex annuis fructib vel quotidianis quaestibus defaulke sayth he and appoynt some certaine portion either of your yearely fruites or your ordinary and daylie gaines Decimas vis decimas exime Will you make choyce to pay tithes then let that be the portion And yet this is no great matter for the Pharisies whose righteousnesse you ought to exceede payed their tithes Tu vix millesimam das Thou scarce payest the thousand part Tamen non reprehendo vel hoc fac sic sitio vt ad istas micas gaudeam Yet I finde not fault doe so still for I so thirst after your well-doing that I refuse not your very crummes We see then that then the payment of tithes was voluntarie Augustine refuseth not the ten hundred that is millesimam partem the thousand part which he calleth their crummes THE SECOND PART BY WHAT RIGHT tithes are due to the Ministers of the Gospel The Papists COncerning tithes or their equiualent due to Christ the priesthood of the error 81 new Testament Rhemist annot Heb. 7.4 this then is their opinion that the priesthood of the Gospell being more excellent then the priesthood of the Law and their sacrifice which they offer vp in the Masse being of greater worthines they may with better right challenge tithes then the priests of the law did for their seruice at the altar So that tithes are due to the Church onely because of the priesthood not for any other duetie appertaining to that office as preaching the word ministring the sacraments or any such Abraham payd tithes they say to Melchisedech which was the priest of the most high God in offering the formes of bread wine wherein Melchisedech did sacrifice Ergo tithes are now due to the priests of the Gospel and new law which are all after the order of Melchisedech Rhemist Hebr. 7. sect 4. 8. Answere First Melchisedechs priesthood consisted not in offering bread and wine to God but brought them foorth to refresh Abraham neither were they formes of bread and wine onely as you imagine but very materiall bread and wine for if Melchisedechs priesthood had consisted therein the Apostle would not haue omitted the chiefe thing wherein Christs priesthood was shewed forth as he doth making no mention at all of it Heb. 7. Secondly againe it is great blasphemie to say that euery popish priest is after the order of Melchisedech nay that the proper act of Christs priesthood consisteth in the perpetuall offering of his bodie blood in the Church for by this reason euery impure priest doth more properly offer the body of Christ in the Masse then it was offered by himself vpon the cros thē the which what greater blasphemie can be vttered And yet they are not ashamed to speak it yea the sacrifice of Christ vpon the crosse say they was after the order of Aaron and not after the order of Melchisdech and so they preferre euery popish priest offering in the Masse before Iesus Christ sacrificing himself vpon the Crosse contrary to the scripture which maketh this difference between the priesthood of Aaron and the priesthood of Melchisedech that the priests of the law were many because they were taken away by death But Christs priesthood is eternall because he dieth not Heb. 7.23 But if there should be many priestes after Melchisedechs order there should heerein bee no difference at all Wherefore seeing Melchisedechs priesthood onely resteth in Christ and is not translated to any other and that there is now no sacrifice left but spirituall of prayse and thanksgiuing Heb. 13.15 it followeth that by Melchisedechs right no tithes are now due vnto the Church neither in any such regard ought to be challenged The Protestantes TIthes or their equiualent are not due to the Church in respect of any sacrificing priesthood of which sorte there is none in the new testament ordayned to continue but for other pastorall dueties and principally the preaching and dispensing of the word and instructing of the people 1 If there were any such priesthood and tithes in that right did appertaine to the Church it is most like that our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles would haue challenged them But there is no one precept in the new testament concerning paying of tithes but onely for a sufficient maintenance for the ministers of the Gospel 1. Cor. 9.14 Gal. 6.6 Fulk Hebr. 7. sect 4. 2 Saint Paul euery where so oft as he sheweth the duetie of Christians in relieuing and mayntayning their pastors maketh onely mention of sowing of spirituall things 1. Cor. 9.11 and of teaching and instructing Gal. 6.6 Ergo tithes are due vnto Pastors and Ministers onely or especially for their feeding and instructing and sowing spirituall seede which is the word of God 3 There is no such sacrificing priesthood now in the Church as wee haue partly shewed before and shall of purpose more fully declare it afterward for euery where in the new testament spirituall sacrifices are commanded and all Christians are made Kings and Priests vnto God Apocal. 1.6 Other priesthood we read of none Wherefore in that respect tithes cannot be due Lastly Augustine sayth Si mendicum non contemnis quanto magis bonem per quem trituratur haec area If thou despisest not a beggar how much more oughtest thou to haue regard of the oxe that treadeth out the corne on the floore That is the Minister that preacheth the Gospel for so Saint Paul expoundeth it 1. Timoth. 5.17 The Elders sayth he that labour in the word and doctrine are worthie double honour and then it followeth vers 8. for the scripture sayth Thou shalt not muzle the mouth of the oxe that treadeth out the corne Sufficient maintenance therefore to the Ministers is due for their labour and trauaile in the word THE SIXT GENERAL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE SVPERSTITIOVS ORDERS AND SECTS OF MONKES AND FRIERS MOnkes in Latine called Monachi deriued of the Greeke word were such as liued solitarilie thereupon had they their name And they were at the beginning of three sortes some were called Eremites that liued in woods and desarts by themselues there were other which were mued vp and enclosed in cels and wals which had not so much libertie as Eremites had but kept alwayes in their cages and closets and soe in miserie spent their dayes and these were called Anchorites that is separated set apart from all men and liuing by themselues There was a third sorte called Coenobites which liued in companies as it were in Colledges by them selues had all things common And these properly were called Monks Bell. lib. 2. de monach cap. 3. This controuersie hath many questiōs 1 Concerning the beginning original of Monks of their diuers sects 2. partes 2 Concerning Counsels of perfection whether they differ from Euangelicall precepts 3 Concerning vowes in generall three partes First whether it be lawfull for Christians
the Iewish ceremonies this is great presumption to thinke it is lawfull for the Church to doe whatsoeuer Christ and his Apostles did Fulk 1. Tim. 4. sect 18. The Protestants ALthough there be great moderation to bee vsed in the ceremonies of the Church and there is also some limitation for them yet hath the Church greater libertie in the rites and ceremonies which are appoynted for order and comelinesse sake then in the doctrine of fayth and religion The doctrine of saluation is alwayes the same and cannot be changed and toucheth the conscience But rites and ceremonies are externall and commanded for order sake and neither are they vniuersall the same in euery Church nor perpetuall but are changed according to times and as there is occasion Againe the precepts of Christianitie are either directly expressed or necessarilie concluded out of the scriptures but externall rites and ceremonies are not particularlie declared in the word there are onely certaine generall rules set downe according to the which all ceremonies brought into the Church are to bee examined as for the Sacraments of the Church they cannot bee altered hauing a perpetuall commandement from Christ Therefore the Church cannot appoynt what how many ceremonies soeuer she shall thinke good but according to these foure rules and conditions which followe here in order 1 All things ought to bee done to the glorie of God euen in ciuill actions much more in things appertayning to the seruice of God 1. Cor. 10.31 Our aduersaries offend agaynst this rule applying and annexing remission of sinnes to their owne inuentions and superstitious ceremonies as vnto penance and extreame vnction which they also make Sacraments for this is greatly derogatorie to Christs institution who hath only appoynted the hearing of his word and vse of the Sacraments for the begetting and encreasing of faith and by this faith only is the death of Christ applied vnto vs for the remission of sinnes 2 All things ought to be done orderly and decently 1. Cor. 14.40 Wherefore al ridiculous light vnprofitable ceremonies are to be abolished such our aduersaries haue many as knocking kneeling creeping to the Crosse lighting candles at noone day turning ouer of beades and many phantasticall gestures they haue in their idolatrous Masse as turning returning looking to the East to the West crossing lifting quaffing and shewing the emptie cup with many such toyes 3 All things ought to bee done without offence 1. Corinth 10.32 But to whom that hath but a little feeling of religion is not the abhominable sacrifice of the Masse offensiue What good conscience doth it not grieue that the Priest should create his maker as they say should offer vp the bodie of Christ in sacrifice and be an intercessor as it were for his mediatour desiring God to accept the sacrifice of his sonnes bodie As also to make it a propitiatorie sacrifice for the quicke and the dead But of these matters we shall haue fitter occasion to entreate afterward when we come to the seuerall controuersies 4 All things ought to bee done to edifying 1. Corinth 14. vers 12. But the popish ceremonies are so farre from edifying that by reason of their infinite rabble and number they are a clogge vnto Christians and more burdensome then were the obseruations of the Iewes They haue hallowed fire water bread ashes oyle waxe flowers braunches clay spittle salt incense balme chalices paxes pixes altars corporals superaltars altarclothes rings swords and an infinite companie besides doe these tend thinke you to the edification of the minde Nay they doe cleane destroy and extinguish all spirituall and internall motions drawing the heart from the spiritual worship of God to externall beggerlie and ragged reliques and ceremonies Fulk 1. Timoth. 4. sect 1. Beza lib. confess de eccles articul 18.19.20 The fift question whether the Church of Rome be the true Church THis question hath two parts First whether the Romane Church be the Catholike Church or not Secondly whether the Church of Rome be a true visible Church THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE ROMANE Church be the Catholike Church The Papists BEllarmine defining the Church maketh this one part of the definition to be error 27 subiect vnto the Bishop of Romes iurisdiction Lib. 3. de eccles cap. 2. And therefore they conclude that they are out of the Church and no better then heretikes that doe not acknowledge the Pope to be their chiefe Pastor Canis de praecept eccles cap. 9. So they make the Romane faith and Catholike to bee all one Rhemist annot in 1. Rom. sect 5. Their reasons are none other then we haue seene before taken from vniuersalitie antiquitie vnitie vnto the which wee haue alreadie answered quaest 3. of this controuersie Not. 1 2 3. The Protestants WHile the Church of Rome continued in the doctrine of the Apostles it was a notable and famous visible Church and a principall part and member of the vniuersall Catholike but now since it is degenerate and fallen away from the Apostolike faith from being the house of God to be a synagogue for Antichrist we take it not to be so much as a true visible Church But neuer was it to be counted the Catholike Church as though all other Churches were parts and members of it but it selfe onely was a part as others and Catholike too while it continued in the right faith but not Catholike as hauing iurisdiction ouer the rest and all to receiue this name of her 1 The vniuersall Catholike Church is so called because it conteyneth the whole number of the elect and first borne of God Heb. 12.23 Whereof manie are now saints in heauen many liuing in the earth many yet vnborne But all these were not neither are of the Romane faith the holie men departed knewe not of these superstitious and prodigious vsages which now doe raigne in the Church of Rome nay many of them neuer heard in their life so much as of the name of Rome Ergo. 2 It is called Catholike and vniuersall because they that are to be saued must belong vnto this companie and be of this Church for without the Church there is no saluation for Christ onely gaue himselfe for his Church to sanctifie it and cleanse it Ephes. 5.25 But all that dye out of the faith of the Romane Church do not perish Nay verely we doubt not to say but that all which depart this life in the communion thereof without repentance are barred from saluation and dye out of grace We are in the right faith neither will we be our owne iudges the scriptures shall iudge vs Euery spirit that confesseth that Iesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God 1. Iohn 4.2 We beleeue aright in both the natures and all the offices of Christ which you doe not which doe greatly deface his prophetical office in not reuerencing his word but making it imperfect his kingdom in appointing him a Vicar and Vicegerent vpon earth as though he of himselfe were not sufficient to gouerne
are Christs Disciples which is an vnreasonable supposition seeing we hold him to be Antichrist and that the Iesuite knoweth Such a Councell was that of the Iewes Iohn 9. where all they were excommunicate that confessed Christ Mark. 14 Christ himselfe was by the Councel condemned It cannot be denied that this Councell erred Let vs heare the papists goodly answeres some say that the Councel erred in a matter of fact de facto non de iure not in a case of right as whether Christ should be put to death as though in condemning him they denied not that he was the Messiah other that they erred in their owne opinion not in the sentence giuen for Christ indeede was guilty of death say they because he did beare our sinnes the Iesuite findeth not much fault with this answere yet it is an open blasphemie as is that also of the papists that the Iewes had sinned mortally if they had not put Christ to death Some of them say the Councel erred not in that which was done but in the maner of iudgement because it was tumultuous disorderly done by suborning of false witnesses and this sayth the Iesuite is probabilis responsio a probable answere sayth hee being most impious and blasphemous But he dare not rest in this answere but findeth out a fourth of his owne that the chiefe priestes and Councels of the Iewes could not erre before the comming of Christ but after he was come they might A blinde popish answere for doth not Christ euery where impugne the traditions and decrees of the Elders as Mark. 7. which our Sauiour should not haue done belike seeing the Elders before his comming could not erre or will they say that those traditions were right and good before and afterward erronious I know not els what they should say 3. We see by experience that many councels haue erred we let pas those which the Iesuite himself cōfesseth to haue erred as the third Coūcel of Antioch where Athanasius was condemned and the Arrian heresie approoued the Councel of Arimine where the same heresie was furthered the fourth Ephesine approuing Eutiches heresie These Councels though they were generall the papists confesse to haue erred and they haue a trick to shift it off but a silly one God knoweth They were not approoued by the Pope saye they As though all verity knowledge in the whole earth were locked vp in the Popes breast But wee will bring an instance of such Councels as the Pope allowed and yet by the papists owne confession erred In the Councell of Naeo-Caesarea confirmed by Leo 4. in the 7. canon second marriage is forbidden In the Councel Toletan 1. the 17. canon it is thus written that one may be admitted to the communion though he haue a concubine modò non sit vxoratus so hee be not wiued the Iesuites poore shift is this that a concubine is here vnderstoode for a wife without a dowrie and further sayth that Agar was Abrahams wife and not his concubine agaynst the scripture for Abraham should haue done euill in sending of her away as he did if she were his wife and the scripture calleth Sara by the name onely of Abrahams wife the other by the name of a bond woman Gen. 21.8.12 In the sixt Synod confirmed by Adrian the 1. canon 72. the mariages betweene Catholikes and hereticks are adiudged to be voyde In the second Councel of Nice act 5. it was concluded that Angels and mens souls are bodily and circumscriptible In the Councel of Rome vnder Pope Stephan the 7. all the acts of Formosus his predecessor were reuoked And in the Councel of Rauenna vnder Iohn 9. Pope Formosus actes were established and Stephans decrees abrogate Lastly in the Councel of Constance they are excommunicate that receiue the sacrament in both kinds the Councel of Basile on the contrary side permitteth and giueth leaue to the Bohemians to vse both kindes One of these Councels must needs erre both of them were confirmed by the Popes the Councel of Constance by Martin the 5. the Councel of Basile by Foelix 5. By this induction of many particulars we inferre and conclude that Councels euen approued by the Pope may and haue erred 4. Lastly Augustines opinion is this that prouincial Councels ought to giue place to general Et ipsa plenaria priora posteriorib emendari and the former general Councels must be amended by the latter The Rhemists haue found out this shift that in matters indifferent which are to be chāged according to time and place Councels may be altered Act. 15. sect 8. But to that it is aunswered that the word emendare signifieth not onely a change but a correcting of that which is amisse And that clause of Augustines must bee put in why Councels must be amended si a veritate deuiatum fit if they swarue from the truth de baptism lib 2. cap. 3. Wherfore we conclude that Councels may erre THE SIXT QVESTION CONCERNING THE AVthority of general Councels whether they may absolutely determine without scripture and necessarily binde all men to the obedience of their Canons The Papists IN words they would seem to magnifie the scripture aboue Councels for error 34 they say that the authority of the scripture depēdeth not in himself of Church Pope or Councels but in respect of vs the word of God is the word of God say they though there be no determination of the Church but we doe not know it so to be but because the Church hath so defined Bellarmine lib. 2. de con cap. 12. Here is a goodly glosse but nothing to the purpose for in that they say the Church hath absolute authoritie to declare and pronounce which is the word which indeed it hath not without testimonie and warrant of the word it selfe by this meanes it commeth about that much is taken for the worde of GOD which is not and so the Church doth not onely declare the worde but maketh that the word which is not First beside the Apocrypha which they make part of the word as we haue shewed afore they hold that their traditions are also the word of God Bellarmine cap. 12. Secondly Gratian is so bolde to affirme that the decretall Epistles of the Popes are to be counted amongst the Canonical scriptures dist 19. can in canonicis that the Canons of Councels are of the same authority dist 20. can decretales And Greg. 1. epist. 24. saith he doth reuerēce the 4. general Councels as the foure Euangelists Thirdly they shamefully affirme that whatsoeuer the pastors and priests do teach in the vnity of the Church is the word of God Rhemens 1. Thes. 2. v. 12. First then they conclude that Councels are not bound to determine according to the scriptures but as iudges may determine of their own authority Secondly that al men are bound of necessity to receiue the decrees of Councels without any further triall or examination They reason thus out of the
Scripture We will brieflie runne them ouer not to derogate from the blessed memorie of so excellent an Apostle but a litle to stay and bridle the preposterous zeale of our aduersaries who doe ascribe more vnto him then euer he would haue challenged to himselfe To let passe the smaller slippes and scapes of this Apostle as his rashnesse in aduenturing beyond his strength to walke vppon the Sea Matth. 14. Secondlie his vnaduised speech in the Mountaine Math. 17. let vs make three Tabernacles thirdlie his ignorance Matth. 19. In saying to Christ how often shall I forgiue my brother till seuen times Fourthlie his impatiencie as in drawing out his sworde and cutting off Malchus eare Fifthlie his timorousnesse in flying from Christ at his apprehension Sixtlie his curiositie Iohn 21. In asking concerning Iohn what shall this man doe To let passe these as common infirmities There are fower great faultes which Peter fell into much amplified and stoode vppon by the fathers 1 He deâ—orted our Sauiour from his passion with these words Master fauour thy selfe Math. 16. and was therefore called Sathan an aduersarie to the death of Christ and so to the redemption of man Augustine chargeth him with great forgetfulnes hauing made so notable a confession of Christ before and noteth him for some sparkes of distrust and infidelitie Ille Petrus qui iam eum confessus fuerat filium dei timuit ne sicut filius hominis moreretur in Psal. 138. The same Peter sayth he which a little before had confessed him to be the Sonne of God feared lest he should dye and perish as a man 2 In promising rashly not to denye Christ yea vnto death whereas Christ had foretold him of his fall before Augustine noteth great presumption Petrus ex egregio praesumptore creber negator effectus Epist. 120. cap. 14. Peter of a great presumer is become a desperate denyer 3 The third great sinne was committed by Peter in denying of Christ and that thrice yea with an oath at the instance of a mayden and in a very short while before the cocke crewe twise Mark 14.72 The Iesuite answereth that this was no hinderance to Peters primacie but a furtherance and a confirmation of it But whether it were a let to his primacie or not let all men iudge seeing it had been sufficient to haue hindered his saluation and destroyed his faith without the great mercie of God Let vs heare Augustines iudgement of Peters fall Some man may excuse Peter and say that he did nothing but as Christ forewarned him What then sayth he if Peter therefore did not amisse because his fall was foretold by Christ Rectè etiam fecit Iudas qui tradidit dominum quia hoc praedixerat dominus then Iudas did well too sayth he in betraying of Christ for this also Christ shewed afore But some agayne may say he denyed not Christ for hee sayd hee knewe not the man Quasi vero sayth he qui hominem Christum negat non Christum neget as though hee that denyeth the man Christ doth not flatly denye Christ. Christ also taketh away all doubts saith he when he thus said to Peter the cock shall not crowe till thou hast denyed me thrice he sayth not till thou hast denyed the man but me Agayne Ipse potius redarguit defensores suos Peter himselfe doth confute his maintayners and defenders Agnouit planè peccatum suum infirmitas Petri Peters owne conscience gaue him that hee had sinned for he went out and wept bitterly But if by this meanes his primacie was confirmed he had occasion to reioyce and not to weepe Yea he wept bitterly his sinne was very great how then dare one of your sect say with a blasphemous mouth Petrus non fidem Christi sed Christum salua fide negauit Peter denyed not the faith of Christ but his faith remayning safe and sound he denyed Christ The ancient writers durst not so extenuate Peters fall no nor Peter himselfe that wept full sore as these men presume to doe 4 The last fault noted in Peter was that for the which he is reproued of Paul Act. 2. Tush saith Bellarmine it was a very small and light offence Yea was it so smal a fault to constrayne the Gentiles to doe like the Iewes for this was the poynt as S. Paul writeth Galath 2.14 And Augustine saith Petrus non obiurgatus a Paulo fuit quòd seruabat consuetudinem Iudaeorum in qua natus educatus fuit sed quòd eam gentibus imponere volebat Exposit. ad Galat. Peter was not rebuked of Paule because hee kept the custome of the Iewes wherein hee was brought vp but because he would lay it vpon the Gentiles Was this leuissimum peccatum a small transgression S. Paule should greatly haue been to blame for rebuking Peter openly and so plainly for so small an offence and should haue done agaynst his owne rule Galath 6.1 But Peter did it of a good mind sayth Bellarmine Yea did then he was worthie to be excused not worthie of blame as S. Paule writeth He might also doe it ignorantly and vnwittingly saith hee How can that be seeing he was one that made the decree Act. 15 That no yoke should be layd vpon the Gentiles other then there expressed and now contrarie to that decree hee constrayneth the Gentiles Iudaizare to play the Iewes These things doe not hang together I will now conclude out of Augustine as hee alleageth out of Cyprian Nec Petrus cum secum Paulus de circumcisione disceptaret postmodum vindicauit sibi aliquid insolenter vt diceret se primatum tenere De baptis 2.2 Howsoeuer it was Peter when Paule reasoned thus with him did not stand vpon his pantofles chalenge any primacie to himselfe But it is very like if there had been any such primacie in Peter of power and iurisdiction a primacie of order wee graunt as Cyprian in that place calleth Peter primum the first that this sharpe reprehension of Paul should either haue been spared or els not done in that vehement manner THE THIRD QVESTION CONCERNING Peter his being at Rome THis question hath two parts first whether Peter were at all at Rome or not Secondly whether he were Bishop of Rome THE FIRST PART WHETHER PETER were at Rome error 38 OVR aduersaries would seeme to prooue it by these and such like arguments 1 Out of that place of S. Peter 1.5.13 the Church that is at Babylon saluteth you Babylon here say they is taken for Rome from whence Peter wrote his Epistle Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 2. de pontif Rhemens argum in 1. Epist. Petri. We answere First it is a sillie argument for them hereby to proue Peters being at Rome for thus much they haue gayned by it that Rome is Babylon and so the seate of Antichrist Reuel 18. Secondly there were two Babylons one in Syria the other in Aegypt from either of which S. Peter might dare his epistle and it is most like that he
power for he was not quickned or restored to life by his humane soule but by his diuine power his soule was ioyned againe to his bodie Augustine also giueth another reason why he cannot be said to be quickned or made aliue in spirit that is in his soule for then he must haue died before in soule But Mors animae peccatum est à quo ille immunis fuit But the death of the soule is sinne from the which Christ was free 2 The Apostle speaketh onely of those which were incredulous and disobedient not of the faithfull such as the Patriarkes were and Prophets Yea sayth Bellarm. they might be vnbeleeuers at the first but after repented before they dyed Ans. Then the Apostles comparison could not hold if any were saued without the Arke for as then eight persons onely were saued all without the Arke perished so now without baptisme and faith of the Church for by baptisme he vnderstandeth not the washing of water but the inward grace of the spirit none can be saued If then any were saued out of the Arke there may now also be saluation out of the Church Augustine also sayth Ii modò qui non crediderunt Euangelio illis intelligantur esse similes qui tunc non crediderunt cum fabricaretur arca They which now beleeue not the Gospell are like to them which beleeued not then while the Arke was in making And they which doe now beleeue and are baptized are like to those which then were saued in the Arke Augustine thinketh therefore that they were incredulous persons and vtterly perished both bodie and soule And so is our opinion 3 The text saith not he went and deliuered but went and preached for Augustine calleth it an absurd thing to thinke that the Gospell was preached to them that were dead which in their life time were incredulous for if the Gospell bee preached in Hell sayth he it would followe that it is not necessarie it should be preached here in the world if men when they are dead may heare it and be conuerted And againe it would ensue sayth he that there should bee a Church in hell for where the word is preached there is a Church Wherefore he concludeth that it must needes be vnderstood of Noah his preaching in the spirit and power of Christ Arcae fabricatio praedicatio quaedam fuit The building of the Arke was a kinde of preaching Epistol 99. So also he expoundeth that 1. Pet. 4.6 The Gospell was preached to the dead Ex circumstantia loci apparet eum intelligere eos qui nunc mortui sunt sed olim in vita Euangelium audiuerunt Commentar in epistol ad Roman 4 The text is not that were in prison but doth better beare this sense that are So the Apostles meaning is this that they which were incredulous and disobedient in time past when Noah in the spirit of Christ or Christ by his spirit in Noah preached to the world were then destroyed in the flood now for their increduliti◠are punished in the prison of hell The Protestants THat the holy Patriarkes Fathers and Prophets dyed in the same faith before the comming of Christ which all true Christians doe now hold and were presently receiued into the ioyes of heauen and not kept in any infernall place or dungeon of darknes thus it is proued 1 They had all faith and beleeued in Christ yea the same faith that is now preached as it is defined by the Apostle Heb. 11.1 They also by this faith obtained remission of sinnes Rom. 4.7 Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen as it is alleadged out of the Psalme Ergo they were blessed but out of the kingdome of God there was no blessednesse to be found therefore they also went to heauen 2 If the heauens were not opened before Christs ascension as the Rhemists affirme then none went to heauen before Christ ascended But that is false Henoch and Elias by their owne confession were taken vp into Paradise so was the soule of the theefe vpon the Crosse. But Paradise is heauen yea the third and the highest heauen as S. Paul calleth it 2. Corinth 12.4 And so Augustine expoundeth that place Voluit Deus Apostolo demonstrare vitam in qua post hanc vitam viuendum est in aeternū The Lord would shew vnto the Apostle that life wherein after this life we shall liue and remaine for euer De Gene. lib. 12.28 These three therefore went to Paradise which is no infernall or place of darknesse but a Celestiall habitation of ioy light and felicitie They were not then in Limbo Patrum in the dungeon of the Fathers Wherefore we conclude there was accesse to heauen before the ascension of Christ. 3 The Fathers and Patriarkes before Christs comming were in Abrahams bosome but that was no infernall place or prison such as they imagine Limbus Patrum to be Augustine proueth that it could not be membrum or pars inferorum a member or part of Hell or any infernall place as the Iesuits hold First the text saith there is magnum chaos a great gulfe a great distance betweene Luk. 16.26 and vers 23. The rich man sawe Abraham a farre off wherefore it is not like that both those places should be infernall Secondly Abrahams bosome was quietis habitatio faelicitatis sinus a place of rest and blisse but so is not any infernall place where there is horror and darknesse Thirdly the place where the rich man was is called Hell or infernall there is no such thing sayd of Lazarus that he was in any lower place but aboue in some high and farre distant place for the rich man is sayd to lift vp his eyes Augustine then concludeth Ne ipsos quidem inferos vspiam scripturarum locis in bono appellatos reperire potui Epistol 99. I doe not finde that this word infernall is taken any where in the scriptures in the good part And therefore the bosome of Abraham being a place of rest sayth he cannot be any infernall place AN APPENDIX OR APPERTINANCE OF THIS question concerning the apparition of Samuel The Papists THey hold opinion that it was the very soule of Samuel that appeared at the error 10 witches house at Endor vnto Saul and vse it as an argument to proue that the soules of the Patriarkes were not in heauen but in some infernall place before Christs comming because Samuel ascended out of the earth Bellarm. De Christ. anim lib. 411. Argum. 1. Because he that appeared to Saul is called Samuel in the text Augustine answereth that the Images of things are called by the names of the things themselues as Genes 41. Pharao sayd he sawe eares of corne and fat and leane kine in his dreame when they were but the images of such things So the diuell because he appeared in the shape of Samuel Samuel himselfe is sayd to be seene Ad Simplicianum lib. 2. quaest 3. Argum. 2. Ecclesiastic 46 It is set downe as a commendation of Samuel
other but all shall not passe through Purgatorie by their owne confession They are driuen to this shift to graunt that vers 13. the fire is taken in one sense namely for the sentence and iudgement of God and vers 15. in another that is for the flames of Purgatorie But who seeth not how absurd a thing this is that in an allegorie the same word and in the same place should be so diuersly taken Thirdly The day shall reueale it that is sayth Bellarmine the day of the Lord at the comming of Christ the Rhemists vnderstand the particular day of euery mans death so well they agree together But it is apparant that this is the meaning that the day that is the time shall declare it for God hath appoynted a time to examine euery mans doctrine by fire which is nothing els but the iudgement of God by the fire of his word whereby euery man in the day of his calling and conuersion shall knowe whether he hath preached aright or not Fulk The Protestants THat there is no such place of Purgatorie after this life but that here onely is the place of repentance and to be reconciled vnto God and that the soules departed are presently either receiued vp to heauen or thrust downe to hell thus it is proued out of the scriptures Argum. 1. The scripture maketh but two kinds of works either good or euill Ecclesiastes 12.14 But two sorts of men he that beleeueth shall be saued he that beleeueth not shall be condemned Mark 16.16 But two places heauen and hell Math. 25. Christ hath but two flockes one of sheepe at the right hand another of goates at the left and he saith to the one Come ye blessed to the other Goe ye cursed There are but two sorts of men therefore but two places Ergo no Purgatorie Bellarm. There shall be indeede at the comming of Christ but two places heauen and hell Purgatorie shall haue an end Ans. First you say your selues that there shall be two infernall places for euer Hell for the wicked and a Limbus for infants that dye vnbaptized and heauen that maketh three and now you say there shall be but two Secondly there are but two places now because there are but two sorts of men for the beleeuers are alreadie passed frō death to life Iohn 5.24 The vnbeleeuers are alreadie condemned Iohn 3.18 Thirdly Augustine consenteth with vs Non est vlli vllus medius locus vt possit esse nisi cum diabolo qui non est cum Christo There is no middle or third place but he must needes be with the diuell that is not with Christ. De peccator remiss merit lib. 1. cap. 28. And againe Tertium locum penitus ignoramus imo nec esse in scripturis sanctis inuenimus The third place beside heauen and hell we are vtterly ignorant of nay wee finde not in scripture that there is any Arg. 2. S. Paul saith that euery man shall receiue the works of his bodie according to that which he hath done either good or euill 2. Cor. 5.10 Therefore there is no place to cleanse and purge the soules of men after this life for then they should not receiue according to the works done in their flesh Bellarmine sayth that euen they whose sinnes are remitted after death doe receiue nothing but that which was done in the flesh for they deserued in their life time to be helped after death Ans. First as for desert we will shewe elsewhere that it hath no place before God neither in this life nor the life to come for the scripture sayth Blessed is he to whom the Lord imputeth no sinne not who deserueth remission of sinnes Rom. 4.6 Secondly this deuised and friuolous distinction doth not stand with the Apostles meaning for he speaketh of things actually done in the flesh not deserued to be done and of the workes of the bodie not of the soule of things perfectly done not begun onely or in choate and he vseth it as a reason to perswade men euen while they liue to be accepted of God vers 9.11 But if there might be any such helpe after death there needeth no such hast presently to be conuerted vnto God Argum. 3. Apocal. 14.13 Blessed are the dead from henceforth that dye in the Lord for they rest from their labours Ergo there is no Purgatorie for all the godly departed are at rest Bellarm. First it is not meant of all the godly but onely of Martyrs which dye for the name of Christ. Ans. As to liue in Christ Iesus is a phrase of scripture signifieth to liue godly in Christ 2. Timot. 3.12 so to dye in the Lord signifieth to dye in the faith of Christ 1. Thessal 4.16 Therefore this place is vnderstood of all the godly Bellar. 2. This word amodò from henceforth is not to be vnderstood straight after their death but straight after the day of iudgement thē they shal be blessed Ans. First by this reason none that are dead in Christ should be happie before that time And yet by your owne confession Martyrs are straightway receiued vp to heauen Secondly S. Iohn vseth this word elsewhere to signifie from this time forward as Iohn 1.51 Christ sayth to Nathanael From henceforth you shall see heauen open Rhemist Thirdly it may be also vnderstood of the soules of Purgatorie that are without danger of sinne and damnation and are put in vnfallible securitie of their saluation with vnspeakable comfort Ans. First so the Saints liuing are blessed being as well without feare of damnation Rom. 8.1 and are assured of their saluation Rom. 8.16 Secondly I pray you what rest or comfort can they haue that endure greater paine then any in this life And how can their consciences be quieted seeing their soules are so afflicted for bodies they haue none whatsoeuer they suffer is in soule how then can ioy and paine comfort and horror be together in the soule Fulk ibid. THE SECOND PART OF THE CIRCVMSTANces and other matters belonging to Purgatorie The Papists error 11 1. THey say it is an article of faith to beleeue that there is a Purgatorie and that he which beleeueth it not is sure to goe to Hell Bellarm. lib. 1. de purgatorio cap. 11. The Protestants WE hold that it is not onely an article belonging to the faith but contrarie to it and that though there were a Purgatorie yet it should not be necessarie to saluation to beleeue it First because the scripture hath not determined it which containeth all things necessarie to saluation Secondly the Greeke Church holdeth it not to this day they confesse no Purgatorie though they pray for the dead it were a hard matter therfore to pronounce them damned Thirdly Augustine doubted of it He sayth that there should be some such place after death non incredibile est it is not incredible vtrum ita sit quaeri potest aut inueniri aut latere fideles potest whether it be so or not
it may be enquired and it may either be safely found out or remaine hid and vnknowne to the faithfull Enchirid. 69. Augustine saith A faithfull man may safely be ignorant of Purgatorie The Papists error 12 2. THey say they onely goe to Purgatorie that dye in their veniall and light transgressions or which haue their sinnes remitted but not satisfied for the punishment Bellarm. lib. 2. de Purgat cap. 1. The Protestants FIrst we denye that any sinnes are of their owne nature veniall as they affirme for the wages of al sinne without the mercie of God is death Ro. 6.23 Secondly what equitie should there be in this that veniall sinnes should be punished with the hellish fire of Purgatorie that exceedeth al the afflictions of this life yea and a longer time then any man liueth vpon earth for the Pope taketh vpon him to pardon for thousands of yeeres and yet mortall and deadly sinnes as they call them may be satisfied for here where neither the penance can be so grieuous nor so long Thirdly the sinne once remitted there remaineth no punishment Mark 2.5 Christ saith to the sick of the palsie Thy sinnes are forgiuen thee and vers 10. That ye may knowe that the Sonne of man hath authoritie on earth to forgiue sinnes I say vnto thee arise take vp thy bed and walke The releasing him of the punishment of his bodie was a signe that his sinnes also were forgiuen and the sinne being remitted the punishment also ceaseth Wherefore who so leaueth the world without sinne is no more guiltie of any punishment The Papists 3. THe soules in Purgatorie doe neither sinne any more neither can they merite error 13 Ecclesiastes 9.5 The dead knowe nothing at all vers 10. there is neither worke knowledge nor wisedome in the graue Bellarm. cap. 2. The Protestants WE say that if there were any such place as Purgatorie the soules there tormented must needes both increase in charitie and righteousnes because the more they are purged the more pure they are and the lesse drosse is in them and being in vnspeakable torments they cannot choose but tremble and feare yea and also be disquieted in their soules as the Saints were sometime in their afflictions here vpon earth and therefore cannot be without sinne for feare hath painfulnes as the Apostle saith and he that feareth is not perfect in loue 1. Iohn 4.18 Ergo a seruile or slauish feare is sinne That place alleadged doth not onely take away meriting or working from the dead but all knowledge and vnderstanding And it is spoken in the person of the Epicure and sensuall man that thinketh that the dead knowe nothing The Papists 4. THey affirme that the soules in Purgatorie are certaine of their saluation in error 14 the midst of their torments for euery soule departed straight after death receiueth sentence of life or death Bellarm. cap. 4. The Protestants Ans. FIrst that euery soule is iudged presently after death we grant and it maketh strongly against your Purgatorie for the sentence giuen is either of death or life and the sentence being giuen is accordingly executed so that they which receiue sentence of life goe presently to heauen the other to hell For to what purpose els should the sentence be giuen if it be not straightwaies in force So S. Paul saith that they which looke to be clothed with their house from heauen shall not be left naked or vnclothed 2. Cor. 5.2 3 4. But if some soules ordained to life eternall should pause a while in Purgatorie being vnclothed of their flesh they should be left altogether naked hauing not yet receiued their clothing from heauen Secondly where there is securitie of saluation there is the greatest comfort ioy that can be how then can the soules in Purgatorie be so grieuouslie tormented which cannot be els where then in their conscience for as for the whipping scalding freezing of soules in Purgatorie they are but old wiues fables the ioy then of the soule is in the conscience so is the sorowe how then can both these be matched in the soule together to haue vnspeakable ioy as also to feele most horrible paine 5 In these poynts alreadie set downe our aduersaries we see are bold to define certainly of Purgatorie but there are as many poynts and somewhat more which they leaue in doubt and vncertaine First where Purgatorie should bee Bellarmine gesseth it is in the bowels of the earth next to hell cap. 6. so doe the Rhemists Luk. 16. sect 8. But they doe not all agree neither hath their Church defined it Secondly they cannot tell how many yeeres Purgatorie endureth whether an hundred or two hundred or thousands of yeeres Thirdly they can not tell certainly whether it be materiall fire which burneth in Purgatorie but they say it is probable Fourthly neither cā they shew how corporall fire should worke vpon the soules in Purgatorie being spirituall and incorporall Bellarmine cap. 12. Fiftly they are vncertaine whether the diuels or angels be the tormentors in Purgatorie cap. 13. Sixtly whether the paine of Purgatorie be at all time alike or by little and little slaked toward the end and whether it doe exceede all the paines and sorowes of this life they yet remaine vncertaine and are not able to determine Bellarm. lib. 2. de purgat cap. 14. Let vs leaue them therefore with their vncertainties and brainsicke phansies for the vaine inuentions and imaginations of men haue no end but are fitly by the Prophet cōpared to sparkles that leape out thick out of the fire but are soone extinguished Walk saith the Prophet in the light of your fire and sparkes that you haue kindled that is as the sparkes giue but a dimme light for a man to walke by he may stumble and grope about still for all that light euen so no maruaile if the Papists doe wander vp and downe in their imaginations walking by the light and sparkles of their phantasticall and mathematicall fire of Purgatorie THE THIRD PART WHETHER THE PRAIERS OF the liuing or any other workes of theirs doe profite the dead The Papists THeir opinion is that the praiers of the liuing are neither auailable for the Saints in heauen for they neede them not not for the damned in hell for they cannot be helped but onely for the soules tormented in Purgatorie who doe finde great ease say they by the praiers of the liuing and therfore we ought to pray for them Bellar. lib. 2. de purgator cap. 15.18 Rhemist annot 2. Thessal 2. sect 19. Argum. 1. Christ while he liued profited the dead for he raised to life the rulers daughter Math. 9. the widdowes sonne Luk. 7. and Lazarus which were dead therefore euen so the members of Christ ought one to helpe another the liuing the dead Bellarm. cap. 15. Ans. First is not here a strong argument thinke you Christ raised Lazarus and some others from death to life Ergo we ought to pray for the dead for it followeth
not that vpon the miraculous workes of Christ we should build the ordinarie dueties of Christians Augustine would haue told you that Christ is not to be imitated in such workes Non hoc tibi dicit non eris discipulus meus nisi ambulaueris supra mare aut nisi suscitaueris quatriduanum mortuum He saith not vnto thee Thou shalt not be my disciple vnlesse thou walke vpon the sea raise one that hath been dead foure daies But Learne of me for I am humble and meeke Secondly if prayer for the dead be vnto vs as the raising of the dead was to Christ then as all the dead are to be praied for so Christ should haue raised againe all that went then to Purgatorie or els by your conclusion he failed in charitie as we doe now if we pray not for the dead as you beare vs in hand Thirdly though the Saints departed and the faithfull liuing are members of the same bodie and so are bound in loue one to the other yet it followeth not that one should pray for the other They with vs and we with them doe wish and long to see the redemption of the sonnes of God accomplished Reuel 6.10.22.20 But charitie bindeth vs not one to pray for another because we knowe not one the particular needes of another Nay to pray for any departed is against the rule of charitie for loue beleeueth all things and hopeth all things 1. Corinthians 13.7 Wee ought to hope the best of the dead that they are at rest but in praying for them wee presuppose they are in miserie and so neede our prayers therefore wee hope not the best of them as charitie willeth vs. Argum. 2. Iohn 5. vers 16. The Apostle sayth There is a sinne vnto death for the which a man ought not to pray that is deadly sinne wherein a man dyeth without repentance but for other sinnes not vnto death whereof men repent themselues it is lawfull to pray Ergo we may pray for those that are departed not in deadly sinne for this place is properly to be vnderstood of praying or not praying for the dead because so long as a man liueth he may be prayed for because all sinnes are pardonable in this life Rhemist ibid. Ans. First a sinne vnto death is not onely finall impenitencie but sinne also against the holy Ghost such as was the sinne of Iudas and of the Pharisees Secondly though we should vnderstand it of finall impenitencie yet it is but a soâ—y argument some of the dead ought not to be praied for Ergo the rest may Thirdly the text cannot be vnderstood of praying for the dead for the text sayth not If any man see that his brother hath sinned not vnto death but If he see him sinning but the dead doe neither sinne nor are seene to sinne Fourthly whereas you say that all sinnes are pardonable in this life our Sauiour Christ saith contrary that the sinne against the holy Ghost can neuer be forgiuen neither in this world nor in the world to come Plura apud Fulk ibid. The Protestants TO pray for the dead is a worke neither pleasing before God because he hath no where commanded it nor auailable for them that are departed because they haue their iudgement alreadie While we liue let vs one pray for another but when we are gone the praiers of the liuing helpe vs not Argum. 1. The ground of this popish opinion of prayer for the dead is their superstitious deuise of Purgatorie for none els doe they hold it lawfull to pray for but for the soules onely in Purgatorie But there is no Purgatorie as we haue shewed before after this life our purging is onely in this life Christ hath by him selfe purged our sinnes Hebr. 1.3 Christ his bloud is the chiefe and onely purgation of our sinnes there are also other inferiour and ministeriall purgings whereby that onely soueraigne purging is made beneficiall and applied vnto vs as the inward operation and worke of the spirit is compared to fire Math. 3.11 1. Corinth 3.13 There is also a purging fire of affliction compared by the Prophet to fullers sope Malach. 3.3 There also shall be a third purging fire in the day of the Lord 1. Pet. 3.7 when as the corruption and mortalitie of our bodies shall be purged away and then shall our mortalitie put on immortalitie 1. Corinth 15.53 Other Purgatorie after this life we acknowledge none Seeing then that there are no soules in Purgatorie and for none els it is lawfull to pray but for the soules tormented in Purgatorie it followeth that we are to pray for none at all that are dead Argum. 2. No prayer is acceptable to God without faith We must pray without wauering and doubting Iames. 1.6 But so can we not pray for the dead for we cannot tell in what case they are for whom we pray whether they be in heauen hell or purgatorie and therefore we cannot assure our selues that our prayers are heard but must needes pray with great doubting and wauering of the mind Ergo such praiers are in vaine Iames 1.7 Argum. 3. Our praiers profite not the dead because there is no place after this life for repentance or remission of sinnes for this should be the end and intendment of our praier that they might be released of their sinnes and eased of their paine There is no remission of sinnes after death because there is no true repentance repentance there is none because there can be no amendment of life which alwaies followeth repentance for Iohn Baptist that was a preacher of repentance bid not onely the people to repent but to bring forth fruites worthie repentance Math. 3.2.8 So saith the Prophet Ezechiel If the wicked will returne from his sinnes and doe the thing that is lawfull he shall liue and not dye 18.21 There are two parts then of repentance as Isay sayth Cease to doe euill learne to doe well 1. Isay. 16.17 But there is no place of working out of the bodie Ergo then no repentance To this Augustine agreeth Non est apud inferos poenitentia ad salutem proficiens ecce nunc tempus est salutis nunc tempus remissionis In hac vita poenitentiae tantum patet libertas post mortem nulla correctionis est licentia De tempor serm 66. In hell or among the dead there is no repentance vnto saluation behold now is the time of saluation the time of forgiuenes In this life onely haue men libertie to repent after death there is no place for amendment What is become now I pray you of your Purgatorie repentance after this life there is no saluation to be had because there is no remission of sinnes no remission of sinnes because there is no repentance there is no repentance because there is no amendement Rhemist Our Sauiour saith Math. 12.32 that blasphemie against the spirit shal neither be forgiuen in this world nor the world to come Ergo some sinnes may be forgiuen in the world
to come Ans. Mark expoundeth Mathew He saith It shall neuer be forgiuen Mark 3.29 So that not to be forgiuen either in this world or the world to come is nothing els but neuer to be forgiuen for if it be not forgiuen in this life it shall neuer be forgiuen Bellarm. Yea but Mathew must expound Marke because he setteth it downe more fully and Marke doth but abridge the Gospell written by S. Matthew De Purgat lib. 1. cap. 4. Ans. But why should not Mark rather expound Mathew seeing he writ after him and we vse to expound the former writers by the later not contrariwise AN APPENDIX OR AN APPERTINENCE TO this part concerning the burials and funerals of the dead THere are certaine poynts wherein there is no great variance or dissension betweene vs. First we confesse that it is meete and conuenient that the bodies of Christians being departed should after a seemely and comely manner be brought to the graue as Dauid commendeth the men of Iabesh Gilead for burying the bodie of Saul 2. Sam. 2.5 The brethren also tooke the bodie of Stephen buried it Act. 8.2 Secondly it is not to be denied but that lamentatioÌ„ and sorow may be made for the dead obseruing S. Pauls rule that We mourne not as those that haue no hope that is excessiuely 1. Thess. 4.13 where S. Paul doth not simply forbid Christians to sorow but not as the Gentiles The brethreÌ„ also made great lamentation for Stephen Act. 8.2 Thirdly we doe also graunt that according to the diuers customes of couÌ„treys it is not vnlawfull to vse some comely rites and ceremonies in the buriall of the dead not for religion but for orders sake as among the Israelites the mourners were wont to goe about in the streetes Ecclesiast 12.5 And Christ commended the woman in the Gospell for anoynting of him against his buriall Mark 14. But beside these poynts by vs confessed and acknowledged there are other more waightie matters as touching the order of funerals wherein we worthily and iustly dissent from our aduersaries error 16 1 They doe attribute much to the places where men are buried as in Churches and Churchyards but especially vnder the Altar Rhemist as the soules of the righteous doe rest in Christ who is that altar vnder the which the Apostle sawe the soules of Martyrs so for the correspondence to the place in heauen their bodies are commonly layd vnder the altar where the sacrifice of the body of Christ is daylie offered Annot. Apocalyps 6. vers 9. Ans. The altar of the Crosse was the onely place where the bodie of Christ was sacrificed neither need it to be often offered in sacrifice but it sufficed once onely to haue been done Heb. 9.25.27 And in the Communion we acknowledge no sacrifice but of praise and thanksgiuing Heb. 13.15 It is kept onely in remembrance of the death of Christ 1. Cor. 11.25 And how should it be auaileable for the dead seeing it profiteth not all the liuing but onely those that are present which doe eate and drinke the holy elements of bread and wine in remembrance of the bodie and blood of Christ giuen and shed for them So saith the scripture Doe this as oft as you doe it in remembrance of me 1. Cor. 11.25 The doers therefore agents and receiuers haue the present benefite not they which are absent how then can the dead receiue any solace by it It profiteth then not a whit to be layd in Churches or Churchyards or other hallowed places as they call them for all places are alike neither helpeth it the dead to be buried in one place more then another for God shall command the sea and all other places to giue vp their dead Apocalyps 20. The very heathen did confesse as much one sayth It skilleth not humÃne an sublimè putrescam whether I rot vnder or aboue the ground And another thus writeth Coelo tegitur qui non habet vrnam Heauen is a couering to him that hath no other coffin It were a foule shame then for Christians to exceede the very Gentiles in their superstitious conceits Augustine sayth Si aliquid prodest impio sepultura preciosa oberit pio vilis aut nulla If sumptuous funerals profite the wicked then homely or no burials doe hurt the godly Therefore as it helpeth not a wicked man to be buried in one place more then another so it doth not hinder or hurt the godly and righteous man 2 We condemne also their superstitious ceremonies which they vse at their error 17 funerals as the burning of Tapers which signifieth say they that the soules of the dead are aliue Bellarm. de purgator lib. 2. cap. 19. Ans. First this superstitious vse of setting vp candles was directly forbidden in the Elibertine Councel Canon 34. Of the like sort also were other superstitious vsages as the going about of the belman to will the people to pray for their soules the ringing or iangling of bels to bring their soules to heauen with queere songs and other melodie to commit the bodies to the ground and commending their soules to the protection of Saints We denie not but comely and decent orders voyde of superstition may be vsed according to the fashion of the countrey as Iacobs bodie was embaulmed after the manner of the Egyptians Genes 50.2 At the buriall of their Kings the Israelites vsed to burne odors Iere. 34.5 The Iewes manner was to wash the bodies of the dead to winde it vp in a linnen cloth and burie it with spices and odors So our Sauiours bodie was buried after the manner of the Iewes Iohn 19.40 We reade also that Ioseph was put into a coffin or chest Genes 50.26 Of these and the like customes Augustine giueth a rule writing vpon those words in the Gospell Iohn 19.40 As it was the manner of the Iewes to burie Non mihi videtur Euangelista sic frustra dicere voluisse ita quippe admonuit in huiusmodi officijs quae mortuis exhibentur morem cuiusque gentis esse seruandum in Iohann tract 120. Me thinketh the Euangelist sayd not thus without cause hereby letting vs to vnderstand that in performing such dueties of buriall to the dead the manner and custome of euery countrey is to be kept The Iewes also had a custome with some companie or frequencie of people to bring their dead to the ground Eccle. 12.5 And in the while to vse some admonition to the people concerning death and mortalitie which came in by sinne and of the wrath and mercie of God Syrus interp in Mark 14.3 Neither doe we see why it is not lawfull now among Christians at funerals and burials to haue some godly sermon and exhortation to put the people in mind of their end and to comfort them with the hope of the resurrection as also to giue God thankes for those his faithfull seruants that did glorifie him by their life and by their godly departure This seemeth also to haue been the
of a woman which was a sinner and more setteth foorth his power then otherwise lest he should be thought to haue deriued his puritie from his mother 2 They holde that there was no actuall sinne in the Virgin Marie no not the lest and smallest sinnes which they call venial Rhemist 1. Iohn 1. sect 5. She was especially protected and preserued from sinning by the grace of God Ans. That God is able clearely to rid his children from sinne to preserue them from falling thereinto we denie not but seeing you haue no scripture for this priuiledge that should be bestowed onely vpon Marie to be free from sin but rather the contrary is proued out of scripture That all haue sinned Rom. 3.23 it is too rash and bolde an assertion contrary to the will of God to ascribe any thing to his power He is as able to exempt all from sinning as one vnlesse therefore you can shew some especiall warrant out of Gods word for Maries freedome by your reason all the children of God shall bee freed from sinne as wel as Marie because God is able to doe it The Protestants THat the Virgin Marie was both conceiued in sinne and was also subiect to actuall sinnes in her life as other of the children of God thus out of the scripture we doe declare it 1 How els can the word of God be true that sayth All haue sinned Rom. 3.23 5.12 They will answere that Marie had an especiall priuiledge then let them shew it out of the word of God and we will beleeue otherwise the general conclusion must stand that all haue sinned Againe Marie her self in her song calleth Christ her Sauiour Luk. 1.47 Ergo she was a sinner for how els could she be saued from her sinnes which she had not If they answere as they doe that Christ was her Sauiour onely because hee preserued her from sinne Wee doe thus replie First that a Sauiour in scripture is defined to be he that saueth the people from their sinnes Math. 1.21 not that preserueth onely Secondly if Marie were free from originall sinne as they say she was she needed not a Sauiour to keep her from sinne for she might haue preserued herselfe Arg. 2 Marie dyed Ergo she was a sinner for sinne brought death into the world Rom. 1.5 If she had had no sinne she had not dyed Christ indeede though he were no sinner yet he bare our sinnes and therefore dyed for vs. Christ checked and rebuked his mother Iohn 2.4 Woman what haue I to doe with thee Ergo it seemeth she was not without fault Rhemist answere It was rather a doctrine to others to teach them not to do any thing for respect of kinred against reason then a reprehension to Mary Wee replie But I pray you how could the Apostles learne to beware of that fault if it had beene no fault in Marie How could they be admonished in her if she were not first her selfe admonished And the maner of speech sheweth it was a rebuke Christ saluting her by no other name then if he had spoken to any other woman Argum. 3. The Papists themselues are in a stagger and dare not constantly affirme that Marie was conceiued without sinne but put in this clause as many godly deuout men iudge Rhemist Rom. 5. sect 9. And Bellarmine sayth in maiori parte Ecclesiae piè credi that the greater part of the Church doth so godly beleeue yet he dare not determine vpon it himselfe de cult sanctor lib. 3. cap. 16. But why are they afrayd to holde it as an vndoubted trueth seeing Pope Sixtus hath clearely determined that it was so forbidding the Dominick Friers to preach the contrary and hereupon erected a new holy day of her conception Here then they are driuen to a great straight for either they must abolutely hold that she was not conceiued in sin agaynst the Master of sentences and Thom. Aquinas with other schoolemen or els holde the contrary and so confesse the Pope to haue been in error Augustine sayth beatior Maria percipiendo fidem Christi quà m concipiendo carnem Christi Materna propinquitas nihil Mariae profuisset nisi foeliciùs Christum corde quà m carne gestasset Marie was more happy in perceiuing the fayth of Christ then in conceiuing the flesh of Christ neither had it profited her to be the mother of Christ if she had not more happily borne him in her heart then she did in her wombe But what neede had Marie to beleeue in Christ if she had been pure from her natiuity and had no sinnes to be forgiuen her Augustine yet more playnly sayth Maria ex Adam mortua propter peccatum Adae Adam mortuus est propter peccatum caro domini ex Maria mortua est propter delenda peccata Marie dyed being borne of Adam because of the sinne of Adam Adam dyed because of his owne sinne Christ dyed in the flesh to take away our sinnes Ergo Marie by his sentence was borne in the sinne of Adam THE SECOND PART WHETHER Marie vowed Virginitie before the Annuntiation The Papists error 81 THey would gather and conclude so much out of the answere of Marie to the Angell who told her she should conceaue and beare a sonne How can this be sayth she seeing I know no man That is she plainly declareth she could haue no childe by knowing a man because of her vow for otherwise she needed not haue asked such a question how a woman might haue a sonne promised her if she had maried to haue carnal copulation Rhemist Luk. 1. sect 13. Bellarmin de Monachis cap. 22. Ans. First Ambrose maketh this to be the cause why Marie so answered she had read the prophesie of Esay that a virgin should conceiue bring forth a sonne and therefore knew very wel that this holy childe should be otherwise conceiued then by the knowledge or helpe of man Fulk ibid. Secondly as also the Angel deliuering at once his whole message and shewing what maner of childe it should be euen the Sonne of the most high who should sit on the throne of Dauid and of his kingdome there should be no end that is that the childe should be the Sonne of God she straightwayes conceiued that such a holy seede could not be borne of man and therefore asketh how without man he might be borne Sic Caluin Beza The Protestants THat Marie as she was an entire Virgin before the birth of Christ so that she continued also a Virgin all her life after we doe verily think and condemne their opinion that holde the contrarie but that she vowed or purposed Virginitie before the message of the Angel was brought vnto her it is rashly without scripture nay rather agaynst it affirmed Argum. 1. The text is playne that they had a purpose to consummate their mariage When as Marie was betrothed to Ioseph before they came together Math. 1.18 Ergo there was a meaning to come together if she
from giuing spirit grace remission iustification and thereupon the entrance into the ioyes of heauen that they were but meere shadowes obscurely representing the graces of the new testament whereas the sacraments instituted by Christ contain and giue grace and iustification Rhemist Heb. 10. sect 3. Argum. 1. They were but shadowes of good things not the image of the things themselues Heb. 10.1 They were but shadowes and representations of the sacraments of the new Testament Ergo they had not the same efficacie or power Rhemist ibid. Ans. 1. Their sacraments were onely shadowes of Christs sacrifice not of our sacraments though these come in the place of the other and are answerable and correspondent vnto them Secondly neither doe the sacraments of the new Testament giue grace or iustification but are onely liuely testimonies of grace and reconciliation wrought by the death of Christ. Thirdly their sacraments were as effectuall to assure the Fathers of grace remission of sinnes by Christ as our sacraments are to vs. Fulk ibid. The Protestants WE doe holde and constantly affirme and teach that the Fathers in the law receiued no lesse the truth and substance of Christ by faith in their sacraments then we doe in ours although in respect of more cleere and lightsome signification our Sacraments doe farre exceede theirs and so also may more liuely stirre vp our faith yet the substance and effect both of their sacraments and ours was all one and the very same Argum. 1. S. Paul speaketh plainely that the Israelites did all eate the same spirituall meat and all drinke of the same spirituall rocke and the rocke was Christ 1. Corin. 10.3.4 Therefore Christ was exhibited as well to them in their sacraments as he is in ours Bellarm. answereth They did all eate the same spirituall meate amongst themselues not the same together with vs. So also say the Rhemists that they amongst themselues did all feede of one bread and drinke of the same rocke The Apostle saith not that they and we doe eate and drinke of the selfesame meate and drink Rhemist in hunc lâ—cum Ans. 1. Yes the Apostle saith so in effect that there is one and the selfe same spirituall meate and drinke to vs all both to them and vs for what doe we eate and drink but Christ and so doe they The rock sayth the Apostle was Christ. Secondly Augustine sayth so expreslie that they did eate the same spirituall meate and drinke the same spirituall cuppe that wee doe Quicunque in Manna Christum intellexerunt eundem quem nos cibum spiritualeÌ„ manducauerunt de vtilitat poenitent cap. 2. They which in the eating of Manna did vnderstand Christ did eate the same spirituall meate that we doe Ergo Christ was as well present by fayth to them in their sacraments as hee is to vs in ours THE THIRD PART OF THE Character or badge which as they say is imprinted in the soule by the sacraments The Papists FIrst there is a certayne seale and spirituall marke or badge imprinted by the sacraments in the soules of the receiuers which can neuer bee blotted error 94 out neither by sinne apostasie or heresie 2. but it perpetually remayneth for the cognisance of their christendome and distinction from others that were neuer of Christs folde by which also they are consecrated and deputed to God Thirdly this indeleble Character is giuen by three sacraments onely Baptisme Confirmation Orders which is the cause they are not reiterable nor euer to be receiued but once Rhemist annotat 2. Cor. 1. sect 7. Trident. Concil sess 7. can 9. Bellarm. lib. 2. de sacram cap. 19. Argum. 2. Corinth 1.22 He hath sealed vs and giuen the earnest of the spirite into our hearts Likewise Ephes. 4.30 Grieue not the spirite of God by whom ye are sealed agaynst the day of redemption This sealing is nothing els as they say but an imprinting in the soule of this indeleble marke or Character Answ. First the Apostle speaketh manifestly of the spirituall and inward seale of the spirite of God wherof Baptisme is an outward seale in our bodies Secondly it is an absurde thing to hold that he that hath vtterly and maliciously renounced Christianitie and blasphemed Christ himselfe should still retayne this Character of Baptisme as a cognisance of his christendome Thirdly Baptisme is not reiterable that is to be iterated or repeated not because it leaueth an indeleble character in the mind of the baptized which is but a meere deuise and fansie but because as it sufficeth once to be borne in the flesh so once to be borne agayne and to be regenerate by the spirit of the which regeneration Baptisme is a seale and pledge it is sufficient As for confirmation and orders we acknowledge them to be no sacraments and therefore to haue no such indeleble character The Protestants THat by Baptisme and some other sacraments there is imprinted in the soule a marke or character which can neuer be blotted out no not by Apostasie and that this is the cause why Baptisme cannot be iterated we holde it to bee a meere deuice and inuention of men Argum. 1. Where the end and fruites of Baptisme are vtterly extinguished there can not remayne any character or badge or signe of Baptisme The fruits of Baptisme are repentance and regeneration by the spirite But it is possible for these in some that are baptized to be vtterly lost as in them that fall away by Apostasie they cannot bee renewed by repentance Hebr. 6.6 therefore in such there is not to bee found any character badge or signe of Baptisme which they haue vtterly renounced onely the memoriall thereof is kept before God they being so much worse then they that were neuer baptized because they haue wilfully reiected their profession Argum. 2. The cause why Baptisme is but once to bee giuen is not as they alleadge because it leaueth such a sure mark behind so deeply dyed in the soule that it cannot be blotted out There are other causes that come nearer the truth 1. As God is but one who maketh a couenant with vs in Baptisme and the fayth but one into the which we are entred by that sacrament so Baptisme is one and the same Ephes. 4.5 2. The institution of God is another cause who hath appoynted the other sacrament often to be receiued 1. Corinth 11.25 but for the iteration of Baptisme we haue no such commandement 3. Baptisme commeth in the place of Circumcision as that was but once administred so likewise it must be in the other 4. In Baptisme God maketh a perpetual couenant with vs which he alwayes remeÌ„breth therfore neede not to be put in minde by the often vsing of that sacrament These and the like reasons may be alleaged why Baptisme is not often to be required and not that which by them without any ground is pretended Augustine is flat agaynst them for the iteration of confirmation Manus impositio non sicut baptismus repeti non potest Quid
First that they doe not onely signifie but exhibite and represent vnto vs after a liuely manner the spirituall things which are signified Secondly they must haue the institution perpetuall commandement of Christ. Thirdly the sacraments of the new law must succeede in the place of the olde Hereupon we will inferre that there are but two sacraments in the new Testament Baptisme and the Lords Supper Argum. 1. These two alone are not onely signes of heauenly things but seales and pledges vnto vs thereof whereby our fayth is strengthened and our hope confirmed in the promises of God as the remission of sinnes is represented in Baptisme Act. 2.38 the death of Christ shewed foorth in the Eucharist 1. Corinth 11.26 The like commendation is not giuen of any other of their sacraments Argum. 2. Christ onely commaunded these two sacraments to bee vsed for euer in his Church to such spirituall purposes as Baptisme is instituted and commaunded Math. 28.19 the Lords Supper likewise Math. 26. Many other ceremonies Christ vsed himselfe as lifting vp of hands the tempering of clay and spittle his Apostles imposition of hands and anoynting with oyle But he hath not layd his commaundement vpon these ceremonies enioyning vs perpetually to keepe them as he hath charged vs with the other two Argum. 3. The sacraments of the newe Testament succeede in the roume of them of the olde Baptisme standeth in stead of Circumcision the Lordes Supper is come in place of the Paschal Lambe But they cannot shew what old sacraments those fiue other newly inuented confirmation orders penance matrimony extreame vnction doe succeede and supplie Ergo they are none And beside if all these should be sacraments and so seuen in all we should haue more in number then the Iewes had which is not to bee admitted for they had but two ordinary sacraments Circumcision and the Paschall Lambe two extraordinarie as their baptisme in the red sea and the clowde and their eating of the Manna and drinking of the rocke 1. Corin. 10.2.3 So they should haue but foure sacraments for your seuen Other legall rites ceremonies and sacrifices they had and many typical shadowes and significations but no more sacraments then we haue heard Augustine yeeldeth to haue no more sacraments then onely two As Eua was made out of Adams side as hee was asleepe Sic ex latere domini dormientis in cruce manauerunt sacramenta ex quibus formaretur ecclesia So out of the Lordes side sleeping vpon the crosse the sacraments of the Church issued that is water and blood by the which he vnderstandeth the two sacraments THE SECOND PART OF THE order and degree of the sacraments among them selues The Papists error 97 IF any man shall say that these seuen sacraments are of equall dignitie and not one in some respect to be preferred before the other let him be accursed Concil Trident. sess 7. can 3. In diuers respects one sacrament may excell another as Baptisme excelleth the rest because of remission of sinnes thereby effected or as we say represented Orders excell in respect of the minister because they are onely say they conferred by a Bishop Matrimony excelleth in respect of the signification the coniunction of Christ and his Church But simply the Eucharist exceedeth all because of the substance of the sacrament the reall and bodily presence of Christ. Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 28. Answer First that Baptisme and the Eucharist exceede all the other we do easily admit for we holde them to be no sacraments and therefore we stand not vpon their seuerall priuiledges Secondly neither Baptisme is more excellent then the Lords Supper because it representeth the remission of sinnes for that also is insinuated in the other for how can we shew foorth the Lords death which is done in that sacrament vnlesse we call to minde the benefits purchased by his death as remission of sinnes Neither doth the Eucharist goe beyond Baptisme in regard of a more full presence of Christ for he is not otherwise present in one sacrament then in the other presenting himselfe in both spiritually to be apprehended of the worthy receiuer as for that carnal and grosse presence of the body of Christ in the sacrament we acknowledge none as afterward it shall more fully appeare when wee come in order to that question Augustine sheweth that Christ is no otherwise present in the Eucharist then in the preaching of the word for the manner of his presence Eucharistia panis noster quotidianus est quod vobis tracto panis quotidianus est quod in ecclesia lectiones quotidie auditis panis quotidianus est the Eucharist or sacrament of thankesgiuing is our dayly bread that which I handle and preach to you is our daylie bread that which you heare read daylie in the Church is our daylie bread If Christ then be no more really present in the sacrament then in the worde what is become of the preeminence that the one sacrament in that respect should haue aboue the other The Protestants THat the one sacrament should be so much extolled aboue the other namely the Lords Supper to be preferred before Baptisme as the more worthy and excellent sacrament we finde no such thing in the word of God but that both of them are of like dignitie in themselues and to be had equally and indifferently in most high accompt thus it is prooued Argum. 1 They are both commaunded and instituted by the same authoritie of our Lord Iesus Christ neither is one by the first institution aduanced aboue the other Secondly there is the same matter and substance of both sacraments Christ Iesus with all his benefites Thirdly one and the same end of them both which is the increase and strengthening of our fayth in the promises of God Ergo they are both of equall dignitie and worthynes Let them say now which is the more worthy thing Baptisme or the word preached no doubt they will preferre Baptisme for they holde that the sacraments doe giue grace by the worke wrought and so doth not the worde yea they are offended because we say that the sacraments are no otherwaies instruments of our iustification then the word preached is but that the one worketh by the hearing the other by the senses of seeing handling tasting but they all serue to one end namely to beget and increase fayth in vs. This our assertion they vtterly mislike Bellarm. lib. 2. de sacram cap. 2. Whereby it appeareth that they preferre Baptisme before the word We then thus reason out of Augustine He thus writeth Dicite mihi quid plus videtur vobis verbum dei an corpus Christi respondere debetis quod non sit minus verbum dei Tell me which is the chiefer in your opinion the word of God or the body of Christ that is the sacrament of his body ye must answere that the word of God is not inferior Homil. 26. Hence we frame this argument The word of God is equiualent to
and rooted out Et tolli omne illud quod veram habet propriam rationem peccati And all that wholly to be taken away which hath the nature and qualitie of sinne Concil Trident sess 5. For the concupiscence or originall sinne remaining after Baptisme is now no more to bee called sinne In infants then newly baptized there is neither mortall nor veniall sinne Rhemist 1. Iohn 1. sect 5. Argum. The Scripture saith Beholde the lambe of God that taketh away the sinnes of the world Ioh 1.29 Christ doth sanctifie and cleanse his Church by the washing of water through the word Ergo by remission sinnes cleane taken away Rhemist Rom. 4. sect 7. Ans. First if sinne in baptisme were wholly remoued not onely the guilt but the very staine and blot of sinne how commeth it to passe that many which are baptized doe fall afterward into deadly sinnes yea there is no man that liueth without sinne If sinne once haue been vtterly expelled and banished out of the flesh how commeth it in againe if their iustification haue once clearely rid them from sinne how can they be subiect to it againe for the grace of iustification being once obtained can neuer bee lost the giftes of God are without repentance Rom. 11.29 2. The Scripture is true that Christ by his blood cleanseth washeth taketh away our sinnes not by actually purging vs from all corruption but in freely acquiting and discharging of vs before God both of the guilt and punishment of sinne so the Scripture saith Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen and to whom the Lord imputeth no sinne Rom. 4.7.8 Our sinnes therefore may be truely forgiuen though some corruption of sinne doe still remaine in vs. The Protestants THere are three things to bee considered in sinne First the staine or blot corruption or remnant of sinne in vs. Secondly the guilt fault and offence of sinne Thirdly the punishment and stipend due vnto it By our spiritual washing in the blood of Christ whereof Baptisme is a seale both the guilt and punishment of our sinnes are not onely hid and couered in Gods sight as our aduersaries doe falsely charge vs to say but they are truely forgiuen vs for Christs sake and shall neuer be remembred any more But yet there is left in vs some remnant of sinne so long as we liue in this flesh which in the end together with the corruption and mortalitie of the bodie shall bee cleane taken away Argum. 1. If wee say wee haue no sinne wee deceiue our selues and the truth is not in vs 1. Iohn 1.8 Ergo there are none liuing at any time voyde of sinne no not in their Baptisme Saint Paul also exhorteth to bee renewed in minde and to put on the new man and put off the old Ephes. 4.23 Ergo there remaineth some sinne and corruption after Baptisme what neede else this renewing of the minde and putting on the new man afterward Argum. 2. Originall sinne is not taken away in Baptisme therefore some sinne remayneth still And that this originall corruption is properly called sinne and is sin indeede S. Paul sheweth euidently Rom. 7. ver 7 8. where he nameth lust and concupiscence sinne Augustine thus writeth Meminisse debemus peccatorum omnium plenam remissionem fieri in Baptismo hominis verò qualitatem non totam continuò mutari We must remember that all our sinnes are fully remitted in Baptisme but the quality of man that is the corruption and staine or blot of sinne is not wholly chaunged THE SECOND PART WHETHER BAPtisme serue onely for remission of sinnes past not for the sinnes also to come The Papists error 108 CHristes death applyed to man by Baptisme wypeth away al sinnes past for new sinnes other remedies be dayly requisite Rhemist Heb. 10. sect 4. The councell of Trent holdeth them accursed that thinke all sinnes to be forgiuen fide Baptismi suscepti by faith of Baptisme receiued sess 7. can 10. Heereupon their saying ariseth that Baptismus est prima tabula post naufragium that Baptisme is the first boord of refuge after shipwracke Poenitentia est secunda tabula post naufragium penance is the second boord of refuge So that if a man do fall after Baptisme he must vse other helpes and meanes for the remission of sinnes for Baptisme is not auaileable for sinnes afterward committed Bellarm. cap. 18. Argum. It is impossible saith the Apostle for them that haue beene once lightened and tasted of the heauenly grace if they fall away to bee renewed by penance Heb. 6.6 that is they which fall away from faith and grace after Baptisme cannot be baptized againe or be illuminated or renouated by so easie a cleansing of sinnes as the Sacrament of Baptisme did yeeld Ergo Baptisme is not auaileable for remission of sinnes which men fall into afterward Bellarm. cap. 18. Ans. The Apostle speaketh not of this or that kinde of Repentance but generally of all shewing that there is no hope of remission nor grace to repent left for those which fall into the grieuous sinne of Apostasie which hee heere describeth for they crucifie againe the Sonne of God and make a mock of him ver 6. And that the Apostle vnderstandeth the sinne of Apostasie the sinne against the holy Ghost it appeareth by comparing that other place Heb. 10.29 with this for there they are said to tread vnder foote the sonne of God and to despite the spirit of grace The Apostle then cutteth off such from all hope of grace and repentaunce not onely barreth them from some speciall kinde of repentance The Protestants THe externall act of Baptisme neither wipeth away sinnes going before or comming after but it is the inward working of the spirite of God which by the vertue of Christs death testified and shewed forth in Baptisme that washeth away our sinnes And Baptisme is a seale of remission of sinnes for the confirmation of our faith euen of those which are committed after Baptisme as well as of sinnes done before and although the ceremonie of Baptisme be not repeated yet the vertue of Gods spirit testified thereby remaineth to our liues end Argum. 1. Mark 16.16 He that shall beleeue and be baptized shall bee saued Wee reason thus Baptisme is a seale of that faith whereby men are saued or to the which saluation is promised but that faith beleeueth remission of all sinnes both past and to come therefore Baptisme also sealeth vnto vs the remission of all our sinnes going before or following after Argum. 2. Baptisme is a signe and seale of our mysticall washing in the blood of Christ But all our sinnes both before and after are washed away by the blood of Christ Ergo Baptisme doth assure vs of a perfit remission of all our sinnes So saith Augustine Eodem lauacro regenerationis verbo sanctificationis omnia prorsus mala hominum regeneratorum sanantur etiam quae posterius humana ignorantia aut infirmitate committuntur By the same
138. Out of Christs side dying vpon the Crosse issued the sacraments of the Church namely Baptisme and the Eucharist He draweth not both water and wine to signifie one sacrament but applyeth them to both THE FIFTH QVESTION OF THE wordes of consecration The Papists THese words say they This is my body to be spoken ouer the bread and the error 119 like ouer the wine This is the new testament in my blood are the very forms of the Sacraments and words of consecration which being vttered immediatly the elements are changed into the body and blood of Christ wherefore these words are not to be read historically for the instruction of the people but they are onely consecratory wordes to be pronounced ouer the elements Rhemist 1. Cor. 11. sect 11. Bellarm. lib. 4. de sacram cap. 13. Argu. If these were not the onely words of consecration This is my body and if presently vpon the vttering of these words the body of Christ was not present then should not the words of Christ be true Bellarm. ibid. The Protestants 1. WE acknowledge no such consecration at all by vertue whereof the elements are conuerted and transubstantiate into the body of Christ as we haue before shewed A consecration we graunt which is a setting apart of the elements which before were common to holy vses and by the vetue of Christs institution to be made vnto vs signes of holy things Secondly those are not the onely words of consecration This is my body and This is the cup of my blood and yet Christs wordes shall be true for we must not dismember the sentence Christ saith Take eate ye this is my body it is then made his body to be taken and eaten by taking then and eating the elements also are consecrated not onely by saying of the words ye must not then diuide the words of the institution for then they shall no more consecrate then if you should pronounce but two of your consecratory words as This is or My body and leaue out the rest Thirdly that these are not the onely words of consecration it appeareth because both the bread was broken and distributed and the Cuppe also before Christ spake those words as Math. 26.26 for first Christ saith Take eate and Take and drink before he said either This is my body or This is my blood neither can ye well tell yourselues which are your consecratory wordes for the Cup whether those that Mathew setteth downe This is my blood of the newe testament or as Luke hath This Cup is the new testament in my blood Nay Bellarmine vseth an other forme beside these Hic est calixâ—sâ—â— guinis This is the Cup of my blood Bellarm. cap. 13. Fourthly we conclude then that not onely these words but al the rest belonging to the institution are to be rehearsed in the Sacrament both to instruct the people that they may know the right vse of the Sacrament and they help also with the rest of the whole action of taking eating drinking praying thankesgiuing to consecrate and make the SacrameÌ„t as we haue shewed more at large before controu 11. quest 1. part 2. to that place we referre the Reader THE SIXT QVESTION OF THE PROPER effect and vse of the Lords Supper The Papists THey doe generally holde that this Sacrament was not properly ordeined error 120 for remission of sinnes neither that the Sacrament hath any such vse but it serueth onely as a preseruatiue against sinne Trident. Concil sess 13. can 5. Bellarm lib. 4. de sacram cap. 17. Secondly they teach that faith is not sufficient to prepare vs for the Communion and although a man be neuer so contrite quantumcunque se contritos existiment yet they must be throughly purged and absolued from their mortall sinnes before they come to communicate Concil Trident. sess 13. canon 11. Bellarm ibid. Argum. 1. They that receiue the Communion are one body as they are partakers of one bread 1. Cor. 10.17 but they which are in any greeuous and deadly sinne are not liuely members of Christ and of his mysticall body therefore the sacrament doth not profit them at all Bellarm. ibid. Ans. 1. Neither doe we affirme that men ought rashly presumptuously to come to the Lords table but to repent them throughly of their sinnes and to haue a stedfast and liuely faith in Christ who cannot be said thus preparing themselues to remaine in their sinnes neither yet are they so fully acquited of them that they need not to receiue the Sacrament to their comfort and to strengthen their faith in the hope and assurance of the remission of sinnes Secondly wherefore all this hindreth not but that they should be true members of Christs body euen hauing a troubled conscience and labouring vnder the burthen of their sinnes for the weake and sicke parts of the bodie are they therfore no partes at all because of their infirmities Augustine saith very wel Non filios diaboli faciunt quaecunque peccata peccaÌ„t enim et filij Dei In quibus non est fides filij sunt Diaboli Euery sin maketh not a man the childe of the deuil for the Children of God also sinne but they which haue no faith are the sonnes of the Deuill Ergo all sinnes cut not men off from the body of Christ but onely the want of faith they then that haue sinned and doe repent them and come with faith are still the sonnes of God and members of Christs body Argum. 2. There is not one and the same proper vse and end of diuerse Sacraments but Baptisme is receiued for remission of sinnes Ergo the Eucharist is not for that end Bellarm. ibid. Ans. 1. The death of Christ and so remission of sinnes purchased by the same is properly represented vnto vs in both Sacraments yet in a diuerse respect for as to be borne is one thing to be fed and nouâ—â—shed is another yet both worke the same thing in the body though diuersly for the birth giueth life meate and drink preserueth it the same difference is betweene Baptisme and the Lords Supper they both are seales vnto vs of our iustification in the remission of sinnes by Christ but by Baptisme we are initiated regenerate and borne anew and engrafted into the body of Christ. The other sacrament doth confirme encrease and nourish our faith already begun and planted in vs for the remission of sinnes and all other benefits of Christs passion The Protestants FIrst we doe truly affirme and teach that an especiall and principall vse of the Eucharist or Communion is to strengthen and assure our faith of the remission of sinnes and yet we deny not but that it hath other vses beside for as in Baptisme not onely the washing away of our sinnes is shewed forth but it also betokeneth our dying to sinne and rising to newnes of life Ro. 6.3.4 So in the Lords supper whole Christ with all his benefites is exhibited vnto vs as it is a pledge vnto vs
olde blinde latine translation then the authenticall Greeke text the words in the originall are Euery spirite that confesseth not Iesus Christ not euery spirite that dissolueth And this may appeare to bee the true reading by the opposition in the former verse Euery spirite that confesseth Iesus is of GOD therefore this is the best reading Euery spirite that confesseth not Iesus as being set opposite and contrarie to the other verse Againe the Rhemists vnderstand this place after their owne reading of the dissoluing of the humanitie and diuinitie of Christ not of any such separation of the flesh and blood of Christ as Bellarm supposeth 3 This their deuice of concomitance ouerthwarteth the institution of Christ For he sayth the bread is his body the wine his blood but by their rule the bread is his blood and the wine his bodie And be it graunted that the blood of Christ is in the bread yet how can any man be sayd to drink it in bread We vse to eate bread not to drink bread his blood therefore cannot be there because it cannot be drunke there Argum. 2. Luk. 24.30 Christ brake bread to his disciples Act. 2.42 the Apostles brake bread Ergo to communicate in one kinde is grounded vpon the example of Christ and his Apostles Bellarmin lib. 4. de Eucharist 24. Rhemist Iohn 6.11 And Christ sayth Whosoeuer shall eate this bread shall liue for euer Iohn 6.58 Ergo it is sufficient to receiue in one kinde Answer 1. To the two first places we say that it is not necessary to vnderstand the breaking of bread in the sacrament but the vsuall bread rather which was accustomed in their daylie repasts and feasts after thankesgiuing to be broken Or if we take it for the sacrament the breaking of bread is by a Synecdoche taken for the whole mysterie as it is an vsuall phrase of speech in scripture for otherwise wee will conclude as well that Christ and the Apostles did but consecrate in one kinde which they holde for a great absurditie as that the other receiued but in one kinde But their opinion is that although the people must communicate in one kinde onely yet the Priest must consecrate both Rhemist annotat Iohn 6. sect 11. 2 To the second place wee answere First it is not vnderstoode of the sacramentall eating of Christ but of the spirituall manducation of him which may be done without a sacrament For whosoeuer eateth this bread shall liue for euer but whosoeuer eateth the sacrament shall not liue for euer Secondly seeing the eating and drinking of Christ are so often ioyned in this chapter as vers 53.55.56 they might well know that drinking is here to be vnderstoode though it be not expressed Argum. 3. In many countries there is no wine to bee had as in the cold Northerly countreies and therefore they cannot communicate according to the institution whereupon that there might be an vniformitie in all Churches it is most meete that where wine may bee had they should notwithstanding be content to receiue it in one kinde Bellarmin cap. 28. Also there may arise much inconuenience in graunting the cuppe to the people as in spilling and sheading the wine which after consecration is the blood of Christ Rhemist annot Iohn 6. sect 11. Answ. 1. As in some countries there is no wine to bee had so wee finde that in certaine places and regions of the world there is no bread such as Christ vsed made of wheate or the like grayne as in some places amongst the West Indians they haue a certaine kinde of bread made of rootes called Cazabi as Benzo witnesseth Wherefore by this reason of vniformitie wee should not communicate at all either in bread or wine seeing that as some countreyes are destitute of wine so other are of bread but all this not withstanding the sacrament may be duely administred in all places in both kindes and where they haue neither bread nor wine neither can possibly prouide them they may safely vse such other elements as doe stand them in the like stead as in the place of bread that which commeth nearest to the vse thereof and for wine some other precious liquor that is to be had as in Russia in stead of wine they vse a certaine drink like vnto that which we call Metheglen 2 As for the other reasons of the inconueniences in spilling the wine shaking the cuppe the hanging of it on mens beards other such friuolous allegations as they were no let or hinderance why Christ notwithstanding did not institute the sacrament in both kindes and the Church accordingly obserued it as we reade the Corinthians did communicate in both kindes so ought they to bee no reason why Christians should not receiue in both kindes nowe The Protestants WE holde it to be an Antichristian practise of the Church of Rome to take away from the people the cuppe in the sacrament for although they sometime minister the cuppe to the people yet they vse no consecration ouer it neither giue it as any parte of the sacrament Fulk annotat 1. Corinth 4.10 sect 4. They doe therefore offer great wrong to the people of God in depriuing them of the one halfe of the communion Argum. 1. Iohn 6.53 Christ sayth Except you eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drink his blood you haue no life in you Here wee see both eating and drinking are ioyned together Ergo Christians ought to doe both This place maketh strongly against our aduersaries who doe expound it of the sacramental eating and drinking of Christ. Argum. 2. Christ instituted the sacrament in both kinds giuing charge and commaundement to all Christians in the same manner to celebrate it for he sayth Drinke ye all of this If our aduersaries answere as they doe that this was spoken to the Apostles by the like reason they may say also that when Christ sayd Take eate he spake vnto his Apostles and so the people shoulde neither receiue bread and wine but the Ministers onely Agayne Saynt Paul the best expounder of our Sauiour Christ declareth the right vse of the Lords Supper in both kindes for all Christians for hee writeth to the whole congregation and Church of the Corinthians not to the Pastors and teachers onely and to euery Christian he sayth Let a man examine himselfe and so let him eate of this bread and drinke of this cuppe vers 28. Argum. 3. The Priest that saith Masse you allow to consecrate and receiue in both kindes because hee must expresse liuely the passion of Christ and the separation of his blood from his bodie in the same Rhemist annotat Iohn 6.58 By the same reason all the communicants ought to receiue in both kindes because they doe all shewe foorth the death of Christ and sheading of his blood in the sacrament 1. Corinthian 11.26 And seeing the cuppe is a signe of the blood of Christ shedde for remission of sinnes Math. 26.28 for as much as the thing signified that is
annot Hebr. 7. sect 7. Wherefore they which minister vnder the Gospell are worthilie called Priests which word doth so certainely implie the authoritie of sacrificing that it is by vse made the onely English of Sacerdos Rhemist act 14. sect 3. The Protestants FIrst we hold it to be a great blasphemie to say that the Priesthood sacrifice of Christ vpō the Crosse is not that sacrifice or Priesthood into the which the old sacrifice Priesthood was translated changed The Apostle proueth the contrary for that sacrifice whereby the new Testament is established is that whereunto the old sacrifice and Priesthoode is translated but this is done by the singular sacrifice of Christ who is the suretie of a better testament Hebr. 7.23 Ergo his singular sacrifice vpon the crosse is that whereinto the old Leuiticall sacrifices are changed and no other Againe the Priesthoode after Melchisedechs order is that into the which the old Priesthoode is changed but the Priesthoode of Christ vpon the Crosse was after that order Ergo. But here they are not ashamed to denie that the sacrifice of Christ vpon the Crosse was after Melchisedechs order but doe most impudently and blasphemously affirme that it was after the order of Aaron Heskin lib. 1. cap. 13. And thus euery vile massemonger shall be more properly a Priest after Melchisedechs order then Christ himselfe Secondly none but Christ is a Priest after the order of Melchisedech for vnto whome the Lord saide Thou art a Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedech to him the Lord saith also in the same Psalme Sit thou at my right hand Psal. 110. But this cānot agree to any popish Priest therefore not the other Againe the Apostle maketh this difference betweene the Priesthoode of the lawe and the Gospell because then there were many Priests they being prohibited by death to continue but Christ is the onely Priest of the New Testament because he dieth not Heb. 7 23.24 If they answer as they doe that although there be many Priestes yet it is but one Priesthoode because Christ concurreth with them in the actes of the Priesthoode Rhemist We answer first Christ concurreth with his faithfull ministers in the actes of their Ministerie but no such Priesthoode doe wee acknowledge Secondly so Christ concurred in the actes of the Leuiticall Priesthoode and the sacrifices of the law that were rightly offered wherefore this concurrence of Christ dooth no more take away the multitude of Priests in the Gospell then it did in the lawe Thirdly concerning the name of Priests in their sense as it implieth an authoritie of sacrificing we vtterly abhor it secondly but as it is deriued of the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth an Elder we refuse it not but wish rather that it had not bin abused in cōmō speach to signifie popish sacrificers Thirdly as for the word sacerdos which may be englished a sacrificer we finde it no where in the New Testament giuen to the ministers of the Gospell and so much Bellarmine confesseth cap. 17. And therefore vnfitly and vnproperly agreeth vnto them If some of the fathers haue confounded the names of Sacerdos and Presbyter they are not to be commended The word Sacerdos a sacrificer being a proper name of the Leuitical Priests cannot properly be attributed to the Ministers of the Gospell To conclude this word Priest as it is the English of Sacerdos we doe not approue but as it giueth the sense of Presbyter from whence it is deriued we condemne it not for so it signifieth nothing else but an Elder If common vse of speech haue drawne it to a contrarie sense it would be amended Augustine saith Sacerdotiū Iudaeorum nemo dubitat c. No faithful mā doubteth but that the Priesthood of the law was a figure of the royall Priesthoode in the Church whereby all that pertaine to the bodie of Christ are consecrated He acknowledgeth no other Priesthood abiding in the Church then that whereby all Christians are made Priests to offer spirituall sacrifices vnto God through Christ. THE THIRD QVESTION OF THE VERTVE AND efficacie falsely ascribed to the sacrifice of the Masse The Papists 1. THey blasphemously affirme that it is a sacrifice propitiatorie that is auailable error 130 to obtaine ex opere operato by the very worke wrought remission and pardon of all their sinnes Trident. Concil sess 22. can 3. Argum. Christ himselfe sayth in the institution This is my blood shed for you for the remission of sinnes Ergo the sacrifice of the Masse is auaileable for remission of sinnes Bellarm. lib. 2. de miss cap. 2. The Protestants Ans. FIrst Christ instituted no sacrifice as we declared afore but onely a Sacrament in remembrance of his death and passion Secondly the Sacrament rightly administred serueth to assure our faith of remission of sinnes by the death of Christ but it doth not by it owne vertue conferre remission of sinnes neither profiteth by the worke wrought for the Apostle sayth That without faith it is impossible to please God Hebr. 11.6 wherefore no action is accepted of God not proceeding of faith Argum. The Apostle sayth Where there is remission of sinnes there is no more sacrifice for sinne Hebr. 10.18 Seeing then remission of sinnes is fully obtained by the death and sacrifice of Christ there can be no more sacrifice for sinne Ergo the Masse is no sacrifice for sinne The Papists 2. THe sacrifice of the Masse is not onely propitiatorie for sinnes but auaileable error 131 to obtaine all other benefites as peace tranquilitie health and such like Bellarm. cap. 3. Argum. S. Paul willeth That prayers and intercessions should be made for all men especially for Kings that we may leade a godly and a peaceable life 1. Timoth. 1.1 These are the prayers which are made in the celebration of the Masse Bellarm. The Protestants Ans. FIrst the Apostle speaketh generally of al prayers made by whomsoeuer as it appeareth vers 8. Therefore this place is vnfitly applied to the praiers of Priests in the Masse Secondly this place proueth that temporall benefites are obtained by faithfull prayers not by the sacrifice of the Masse which S. Paul neuer knewe Thirdly Augustine indeed expoundeth this place of the publike prayers of the Church vsed in the administration of the Sacrament for he calleth it Domini mensam the Lords table not the altar he meaneth nothing lesse then your popish Masse Argum. It is contrarie to the institution of Christ to applie the Sacrament for any such temporall or external vse It was ordained to be receiued in remembrance of Christs death to assure vs by faith of remission of sinnes and other spirituall blessings not to giue vs assurance of health peace life prosperitie for the obtaining of such blessings according to the will of God other meanes are appoynted The ministerie of the Sacraments no more serueth for such vses then the preaching of the word THE FOVRTH QVESTION FOR WHOM THE sacrifice of
9.4 or for the easing of our conscience to man also as to him whom we haue offended Math. 5.24 Or to any other faithfull man the Minister or some other that we may be holpen and comforted by our mutuall prayers Iam. 5.16 There are also two kinds of publique confession either of the whole congregation together Nehem. 9.3 or of some one or more that make publique confession of their sinne for the satisfying of the congregation whom they haue offended which belongeth to Ecclesiasticall discipline 2. Corinth 2.6 But this particular confession of all sinnes yea of them that are secret and to none but the Priest is an Antichristian yoke and too heauie for Christians to beare Arg. 1. It is not necessarie to make confession at all vnto men the Prophet Dauid confessed onely vnto God Against thee O Lord onely haue I sinned Psal. 51.4 Augustine also sayth Quid mihi cum hominibus vt audiant confessiones meas quasi ipsi sanaturi sint languores meos What haue men to doe to heare my confessions as though they were able to heale my sores Confess lib. 10.3 Argum. 2. If a man otherwise cannot finde ease of conscience but will open his sinnes to men it is not alwaies necessarie he should seeke to the Minister though it be most cōueniēt if he be a fit man any other faithful godly man may serue for so the Apostle biddeth vs Acknowledge our faults not to the priest but one to another Iam. 5.16 Whereupon Augustine writeth Peccata nostra debemus non solùm Deo sed etiam sanctis Deum timentibus confiteri We must confesse our sinnes not onely to God but to men also that feare God He sayth not Sacerdotibus onely to the Priests Homil. 12. Argum. 3. Such a particular enumeration of sinnes is not necessarie neither is it possible It sufficeth where our sinnes are kept from our sight to say with the Prophet Cleanse me from my secret sinnes Psal. 19.12 Augustine sayth Quot habes in corde compunctiones facinorum tot habe illic punctiones confessionum Looke how many sinnes doe pricke thy conscience so must thy confession be It is an vncomfortable doctrine to teach men to labour to remember all their sinnes and to make a particular catalogue of them they haue worke enough to be eased of those sinnes that lye heauie on the heart AN APPENDIX OF OTHER CIRCVMSTANCES of Auricular confession The Papists 1. THis order and custome of Confession they hold to be a diuine ordinance error 14 no humane tradition Concil Trid sess 14. can 6.8 The Protestants THey are neuer able to shewe that it had any diuine institution but it was a meere deuise and inuention of men First we reade that Nectarius a good Bishop of Constantinople did abrogate this custome of Confession vpon this occasion which had before time been vsed in that Church for it was found out that a certaine woman of the citie vnder this pretence of confession had vnlawfull companie with the priest to whom she confessed whereupon the good man abolished that custome seeing more harme then good to come by it And this act of his was approued by that famous preacher Chrysostome who succeeded him in that see but if it had been the ordinance of God it ought not for some abuse to haue been abolished Augustine also sayth Si deest sacerdos confiteatur proximo If a priest cannot be had let a man confesse to his neighbour Ergo to confesse to a priest is no certaine ordinance of God for then might it not be changed The Papists 2. IT is necessarie that euery man should confesse to his owne parish priest error 15 Thom. ex Tileman Heshus loc 7. err 46. The Protestants YEa but Augustine sayth Sacerdos vt perfectus medicus primùm sciat curare peccata sua tum detergere aliena The priest as a cunning phisition must first know how to cure his owne sinnes before he can helpe another De salutaribus docum cap. 50. And in another place Quaerat sacerdotem scientem ligare soluere ne ambo cadant in foueam Let him seeke a priest that knoweth how to bind and loose lest both fall into the ditch De poenitent cap. 10. But such an one cannot be had in euery parish for many times the parish priest is worse then he that commeth to be confessed such an one Augustine sayth is not to bee taken and therefore men should not in that case bind themselues to their popish priest The Papists 3. IT is enough for men once a yeere in the time of Lent to confesse themselues error 16 Concil Trid. sess 14. can 8. The Protestants AVgustine sayth contrarie Non tantum laici sed etiam sacerdotes vna die esse non debent sine poenitentia Not onely lay men but not priests ought to be one day without repentance In Apocal. hom 2. His reason is because they can not be one day without sinne THE SEVENTH QVESTION of satisfaction THis question containeth these parts First whether the sinne being forgiuen there remaine any punishment 2. Whether the temporall punishment of this life may be redeemed by good workes 3. Whether the wrath of God may be satisfied for sinne and the punishment due vnto the same 4. Whether one man may satisfie for another of these now in their order THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE PVNISHment remaine the sinne being once pardoned The Papists error 17 THey doe affirme that it may stand with the iustice of God to forgiue the sinne committed yet reserue the punishment Concil Triden sess 14. can 14. Argum. The Lord forgaue vnto Dauid the sinne of adulterie and murder which he had committed yet he punished him in the death of his child 2. Sam. 12.13.14 Bellarm. lib. 4. cap. 2. The Protestants Ans. THat crosse was laid vpon Dauid not as a punishment of his sinne but as a fatherly correction or chastisement to exercise him make him more carefull for the time following as Augustine sayth writing vpon the same example Subsecutus est illius comminationis effectus vt pietas hominis in illa humilitate exerceretur atque probaretur The effect of the threatning immediatly followed that Dauids godlines might thereby be tried and proued He saith not that Dauid might thereby be punished Argum. Christ sayd to the sicke of the palsie Mark 2.5 Sonne thy sinnes are forgiuen thee Whereby our Sauiour would haue them to vnderstand that the sinne being once forgiuen the sicknes of the bodie which was the punishment of sinne could not continue for the cause being remoued the effect ceaseth The afflictions of this life are the louing corrections of God to admonish vs not plagues to punish vs as Augustine sayth well Tota miseria generis humani dolor medecinalis non sententia poenalis The miserie of man is but a medicinall griefe not a sentence of punishment In Psalm 138. THE SECOND PART WHETHER THE TEMPOrall punishment of this life may be redeemed
sed ad arbitrium Dei orationes sanctorum Sinnes are not loosed or retained at the pleasure of men but according to the will of God and praiers of his Church The Papists error 24 2. THe satisfactorie and meritorious workes of the Saints which doe abound being communicable and applicable to the faithfull that want are the very ground of the indulgences and pardons of the Church and the very treasure thereof and to be dispensed according to euery mans neede by the pastors of the Church 2. Corinth 2. sec. 5. Coloss. 1. sect 4. The Protestants HEre are many blasphemies and vntruthes couched together 1 That a mans penalties may exceede and bee greater then his sinnes and so his abounding may supplie another mans want for thus the Rhemists say which cannot stand with the iustice of God to punish a man more then he hath deserued And it is contrarie to the Scriptures Enter not into iudgement with thy seruant for in thy sight shall none that liueth be iustified Psalm 143.2 And Iob saith If the Lord should call him to account he should not answere one to a thousand 9.3 2 How can the Church gouernours dispense the merites of one to another Who made them stewards of another mans good Yee say also the contrarie your selues That the abounding passioÌ„s of the Saints are applicable to others by the sufferers intention Rhem. 1. Colo. 2.2 Then not by the Churches dispensation 3 It is a great blasphemie that one may bee holpen by another mans merites and it doth derogate from the death of Christ whose onely merites are the treasure and storehouse of the Church The most righteous man that euer was can but saue his owne soule Ezech. 14.14 And that onely by Christ. Augustine saith Vnusquisque pro se rationem reddet nec alieno testimonio quisquam adiuuatur apud Deum vix sibi quisque sufficit c. Euery man shall giue account for himselfe before God no man is holpen by the testimonie of another the testimonie of his owne conscience doth hardly suffice for himselfe The Papists 3. THe dispensing of pardons and indulgences is onely committed they say error 25 to the chiefe magistrates the Popes and Bishops and as the Bishops in their Diocese haue especiall cases reserued to themselues wherein inferiour Priests are not to deale so the Pope hath also his proper reseruations wherein other Prelates are not to meddle Concil Trident. sess 14. cap. 7. The cases reserued to the Pope are 51. in number Fox pag. 785. The Bishop of Paris ann 1515 reserued these cases to himselfe to dispense in murder witchcraft sacrilege heresie simonie adulterie ex Tileman Heshus loc 9. de poeniten err 63. Likewise the yeares of their pardons are limited Bishops may not exceede 40. dayes pardon the Pope may be lauish in his hundreds and thousands yea and this reseruation of cases standeth not onely with the externall policie of the Church but is of force euen before God Concil Trident. sess 14. cap. 7. The Protestants WE will not much contend with them about reseruation of cases for wee acknowledge no such power to giue pardons or indulgences either in superior or inferior Priests yet wee will shew how this deuise of theirs standeth not with their owne doctrine Argum. 1. It is a greater power to remit the sinne then to release the punishment but euery Priest hath the greater power as they say to remit sinnes yea as fullie as hath the Pope himselfe Allen in his booke of pardons cap. 2. Ergo why haue they not the lesse power which is by indulgence to dispense with the punishment And that of these two the remission of sinnes is the greater it is confessed by the Rhemist 2. Corinth 2. sect 6. Argum. 2. In the point of death the reseruation of cases hath no place but at that time euery Priest may absolue from all manner sinnes and punishment Concil Trident. sess 14 cap. 7. But euery houre is with some and ought to be with all the point of death because we are vncertaine when it commeth and therefore ought alwaies to be in a readines Therefore euen by their owne rule euery Priest hath at all times authoritie to absolue in all cases Againe if those words of Christ be spoken to all ministers and preachers of the Gospell Iohn 20.22 Whose sinnes ye reteine c. which cannot bee denied to them all then is committed equally that power of binding and loosing which is exercised by the preaching of the word THE NINTH QVESTION OF THE ceremonies and circumstances of penance The Papists error 26 1. THey enioyne their penitent Clients to poll their heads and their women to weare a vaile to goe in black to put on sackcloth to looke sowrely and such like presumptions they haue concerning the habite of those that doe penance Bellarm. lib. 1. de poenitent cap. 22. The Protestants OVr Sauiour cleane contrarie biddeth his Disciples not to looke sowrely nor to disfigure themselues when they fast and repent or to shew any other outward token of their sorrow but to doe it secretly betweene themselues and God to wash their face to annoynt themselues with oyle that it appeare not to men that they fast Matth. 6.16.17 Augustine also answering a certaine obiection that young men newly married might make How can I shaue my head or change my habite saith thus Vera conuersio sufficit tibi sine vestimentorum commutatione The true conuersion of the heart may suffice thee without changing of thy vesture The Papists error 27 2. THey enioyned them to fast bread water certaine dayes in the weeke to lie hard to absteine from marriage or to doe some great almes deedes to satisfie for their sinne Bellarm. ibid. to goe a pilgrimage and such like workes of penance were prescribed them The Protestants TRue repentance consisteth not in such outward exercise of the bodie but is a conuersion rather of the heart It was the manner of hypocrites idolatâ—rs and superstitious men to seeke to appease their Gods with afflicting of their flesh as the Gentiles did cut their hayre Deut. 14.1 Baals Priests did launch their flesh 1. King 18.28 Argum. What is to be thought of such punishing of the carkasse Saint Paul sheweth Coloss. 2.23 He calleth it voluntarie religion or superstition in not sparing the bodie when men doe not vse such outward exercises of fasting and abstinence for the chastisement of the flesh to subdue it to the spirit but with an opinion of meriting thereby preferring them before the faith and conuersion of the heart as the papists doe Augustine saith Non sit satis quòd doleat sed ex fide doleat non semper doluisse doleat Let it not suffice to bee sorrowfull but let his sorrowe proceede of faith and let it grieue him that hee is not alwaies grieued for his sinne So then true repentance is especially an inward worke of fayth rather then an exercise of the body and it ought alwayes
thus Isti significati sunt ad Timotheum c. These of whome the Apostle speaketh are signified in another place to Timoth. 2.2.19 The foundation of God remaineth sure the Lorde knoweth who are his Ergo this assurance and confidence is common though not in the like measure to all faithfull Christians Augustine also saith Quia non secundum merita nostra sed illius misericordiam firma est promissio nemo debet cum trepidatione praedicare vnde non potest dubitare Because the promise remaineth stedfast not by our workes but his mercie we must not with trembling and fearefulnes pronounce that whereof wee cannot doubt No maruaile then if Papists doubt of their saluation because their confidence is built vpon their workes but if they would with the faithfull of God renounce their owne workes and be content to submit themselues to the faith of Christ they would not thinke it so strange a thing for Christians to haue a full and stedfast perswasion of their saluation THE SECOND PART OF THE BENEFIT of our vocation to the which belongeth the knowledge of sinne and the lawe THE FIRST QVESTION of sinne THe partes of this question are these first of originall sinne secondly of the difference of sinnes thirdly of veniall sinnes fourthly whether all sinnes be remissible fiftly whether God bee the author of sinne sixtly whether the workes of the not regenerate are sinne THE FIRST PART OF originall sinne The Papists error 59 COncupiscence which wee also call originall sinne remaining after Baptisme is not properly a sinne nor forbidden by commaundement till it raigne in vs and wee obey the desires thereof it is called sinne because it is the matter effect and occasion of sinne Rhemist Rom. 6. sect 6. Concil Trident. sess 5. Argum. Iam. 1.15 Concupiscence when it hath conceiued bringeth forth sinne Ergo it is not sinne of it selfe but when the consent of will commeth sinne is engendred Rhemist The Protestants Ans. THe argument followeth not concupiscence bringeth forth sinne Ergo it is no sinne nay it shall the rather bee sinne as one serpent bringeth forth another so both the mother and daughter are sinne for euill fruites doe shew an euill tree Argum. Saint Paul saith that concupiscence is flatly forbidden by the law which saith Thou shalt not lust Rom. 7.7 And vers 17. He calleth it sinne dwelling in vs though it doe not reigne in vs Ergo it is properly sinne Augustine saith Omnium malorum reatu caret qui baptizatur non omnibus malis He that is baptized is cleared from the guilt of all euils or sinnes but not from the euils themselues Dimittuntur in Baptismo omnia peccata originaliter tracta ignoranter vel scienter adiecta All sinnes are forgiuen in Baptisme both originall and committed ignorantly or wittingly Therefore originall sinne is no otherwaies taken away in Baptisme then other sinnes are but the guilt onely of other sinnes is remitted in Baptisme the blot or staine remaineth still Ergo originall sinne ceaseth in respect of the guilt for neither it nor any other sinnes shall be imputed vnto those which are iustified in Christ But it is a sinne still as the rest are Augustine also dare call it a sinne Concupiscentia peior est ignorantia Concupiscence is worse then ignorance And in another place Ignorantia in ijs qui intelligere noluerunt peccatum est in ijs qui non potuerunt poena peccati But ignorance is in them which are able to learne sinne in those that cannot a punishment of sinne If ignorance be sinne concupiscence worse then ignorance is much more THE SECOND PART OF THE difference of sinnes The Papists SOme sinnes are deadly or mortall because all that doe them are worthie of error 60 damnation others bee veniall that is to say pardonable of their owne nature Rhemist Rom. 1.11 Argum. Sinne when it is finished bringeth foorth death Iam. 1.15 Ergo not all sinne but that which is consummate and perfited is mortall Rhemist ibid. The Protestants Ans. OVt of this place it is gathered that there are degrees of sinne and that the more heynous sinne is worthie of more grieuous death and condemnation but that concupiscence or other lesse sinnes deserue not death it is not hence proued seeing the Scripture saith That the wages of all sinne is death Rom. 6.23 Argum. That no sinne is veniall or pardonable of it owne nature but that the least deserueth death if God should deale with vs according to the exact rule of his iustice it thus appeareth First if all sinnes are not mortall Christ died not for all sinnes for he by his death did satisfie onely for sinnes that deserued death but Christ died for all sinnes Iohn 1.19 Secondly all transgression of Gods lawe is sinne and deserueth the curse of God Galath 3.10 But all sinne is the transgression of the lawe 1. Iohn 3.4 Augustine and other of the fathers doe vse this terme of veniall sinnes but not in their sense as though any sinne in it owne nature deserued pardon but by veniall sinnes they vnderstand the lesser and smaller faultes which are more easilie forgiuen at Gods hand then the greater Sunt venialiae peccata there are certaine veniall sinnes without the which a man cannot liue saith Augustine Propter omnia peccata baptismus inuentus est propter leuia oratio dominica For all sinnes Baptisme is a remedy and the Lords praier for the lesse De symbolo lib. 1.6 By veniall sinnes he vnderstandeth the smaller sinnes which are not pardonable in their owne nature for then it were not necessarie to aske forgiuenes for them in the Lords praier they would vanish away of themselues Wherefore wee cannot receiue this popish distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes as they vnderstand it as the Scripture vseth to speake wee doe not greatly mislike them that is by grace and mercie in Christ all sinnes euen the greatest are not onely pardonable but pardoned vnto vs Isay 1.18 But vnto the wicked and impenitent euery sinne is mortall they shall euen by their idle words be condemned Matth. 12.36.37 THE THIRD PART OF THOSE which they call veniall sinnes The Papists error 61 1. SInne is voluntarie otherwise it is no sinne and therefore the passions that are in men hauing not the consent of wil are farre from sinne and are not imputed to any man neither for them neede hee say vnto God Forgiue vs our sinnes Rhemist Rom. 7. sec. 8.9 The Protestants SInnes done without consent of the inward man are neuer imputed but this must be vnderstoode onely of the regenerate in whome there is a new man borne of the spirite Argum. That inuoluntarie lustes which arise in the heart not hauing the consent of will are in their nature sinne it is euident by Saint Pauls words Rom. 7.20 If I doe that I would not then is it not I any longer that doe it but sinne that dwelleth in mee he calleth it sinne though he consent not vnto it
Augustine saith Peccata negligentiae vel ignorantiae melius accusantur vt pereant quà m excusantur vt maneant meliusque purgantur inuocato Deo quà m firmantur irritato Deo The sinnes of negligence and ignorance are better accused and confessed then excused better by praying to God to purge them then by prouoking God to confirme them Ergo forgiuenes must be asked at Gods hand for inuoluntarie sinnes sinnes of ignorance The Papists 2. THe motions of the flesh in a iust man whereunto the minde of man consenteth not cannot any whit defile the operations of the spirite but error 62 make them often more meritorious for the continuall combate that hee hath with them for it is plaine that the operations of the flesh and the spirite doe not concurre together to make one act Rhemist Rom. 7. sect 10. The Protestants Ans. THough the operations of the flesh concurre not with the spirite in any one act yet doe they hinder the workes of the spirite from perfection and therefore defile them Argum. Rom. 7.19 Saint Paul saith The good that I would doe I not Did not concupiscence euen in this blessed Apostle hinder the proceedings of the spirit when it kept him from doing that good which he desired and whereas he cryeth out and desireth to bee deliuered from that lawe of his members vers 24. it is not like that any merite or good thing can be obteined by it for then hee should rather haue beene desirous to haue giuen it entertainement still Augustine thus writeth of these smaller and lesse sinnes Quibus peccatis licet occidi animam non credamus ita tamen eam veluti quibusdam pustulis deformem faciunt vt eam ad amplexum sponsi sine grandi confusione venire non permittant By the which sinnes though the soule bee not slaine yet the face is deformed as with pimples that shee dare not without great blushing draw neere vnto her spouse Let them tell me now what great glorie is obteined by this corruption in our members THE FOVRTH PART WHETHER all sinnes be remissible The Papists ALL sinnes are pardonable so long as the committers of them bee in case error 63 to repent as they are so long as they liue in this worlde It is great blasphemie therefore which the Caluinists vtter that Apostasie and certaine other sinnes of the reprobate cannot be forgiuen at all in this life Rhemist 1. Iohn 1.5 sec. 4. And therefore they say that blasphemie against the spirite is saide to bee irremissible because it is hardlie forgiuen And they define sinne against the holy Ghost to bee nothing else but finall impenitencie Rhemist Matth. 12.4 The Protestants FIrst sinne against the holy Ghost is not finall impenitencie euery one indeede that so sinneth is finally impenitent because hee shall neuer haue the grace to repent But our Sauiour Christ meaneth some speciall sin in calling it blasphemie against the holy Ghost for many a wicked man may die impenitently and yet not blaspheme Augustine better defineth this sinne Cum quis aduersus gratiam ipsam qua reconciliatus est Deo inuidentiae facibus agitatur When a man maliciously doth oppugne that grace whereby he was reconciled to God lib. 1. de serm in mont 41. But most perfitly is this sinne described Heb. 10.29 where there are set downe three circumstances that make this sin first the person he must be such an one as hath been lightened with grace and been in outward appearance sanctified therefore Iewes Turkes or Infidels cannot commit this sinne because their mindes were neuer illuminate by the truth Secondly his affection must bee considered which is most deadly and hatefull in the highest degree blaspheming the spirite and despiting the same crucifying and persecuting Christ againe as it were Heb. 6.6 Wherefore they which offend of ignorance or infirmitie and weakenes or which fall not into horrible blasphemies are not guiltie of this sinne Thirdly it is the trueth which they hate and detest which sometime they loued and were thereby sanctified They count the blood of the testament as an vnholy thing Blasphemie then against the holy Ghost is an horrible hatred and detestation of the trueth and grace of Gods spirite whereby hee that now blasphemeth was before illuminate Secondly this sinne not onely easily shall not be forgiuen but not at all as our Sauiour saith Neither in this worlde nor the world to come Math. 12.32 And it is impossible for them to bee renewed by repentance Heb. 6.6 Wherefore it is a great blasphemie in the Papists so contrarie to the Scripture to affirme that blasphemie against the spirite may be forgiuen THE FIFTH PART WHETHER God be the author of sinne The Papists error 64 NO sinne standeth with the will or intention of God but is directly against it Rom. 3. sect 4. And therefore Christs death was Gods act no otherwise then by permission Act. 3. sect 2. Neither is God the author of sinne otherwise then by permission and withholding of his grace Iam. 1.13 Rhemist The Protestants Ans. 1. ALL sinne is against the will of God reuealed in his worde although nothing can come to passe contrarie to the determinate and secret will of God Secondly God did not onely permit the Iewes to worke their malice vpon Christ but most holily and most iustly he vsed their malice to bring his purpose to passe for the text is That Christ was deliuered vp according to the determinate counsell of God Act. 2.23 which must needs be more then a bare permission Thirdly although God be not any moouer vnto sinne yet as a iust iudge he not onely permitteth but leadeth into temptation those whom in iustice he deliuereth vp to Sathan Argum. It is a petition which we dayly rehearse in the Lords praier Lead vs not into temptation Likewise Rom. 11.8 God gaue them the spirite of compunction These speeches of leading and giuing implie an actiue power in God not a passiue and permissiue onely for how is it possible that God being omnipotent should permit or suffer any thing to be done in the world conâ—â—â—ry to his will Augustine vpon those words of Dauid concerning Shemei Let him alone what know I if God haue sent him to curse Not saith he that God bad him curse for then his obedience should be commended Sed quod eius voluntatem proprio suo vitiomalam in hoc peccatum iudicio suo iusto occulâ—o inclinauit But because God by his iust and secret iudgement did incline his wil being corrupt of it selfe vnto this mischiefe Loe he saith inclinauit he did incline his wil which is more then permisit he did suffer him THE SIXT PART OF THE WORKES of those which are not regenerate The Papists THe works done before iustification although they doe not proceed of faith are not properly to be called sinnes neither doe they deserue the wrath of error 65 God Concil Trident. sess 6. can 7. Andrad Tilem loc 4. er 6. The Protestants THe
opera be expiatoria The Papists THe workes of charitie and mercie as almes deedes and such like haue error 89 force to extinguish our sinnes as Saint Peter saith Charitie doth couer a multitude of sinnes Epist. 1.4.8 Rhemist ibid. The Protestants Ans. THe Apostle speaketh of mutuall charitie amongst our selues whose propertie is to couer a multitude of our neighbours offences as Solomon saith Prou. 10.11 Hatred stirreth vp contentions but loue couereth trespasses what is this to the extinguishing of our sinnes before God Argum. It is an abominable and blasphemous opinion that any man by his workes should be able to redeeme his sinnes for the Scripture saith that by himselfe Christ hath purged our sinnes Heb. 1.3 If hee haue wholly done it by himselfe he hath not giuen this power and force of redemption to any other meanes If they vnderstand by the force of extinguishing sinnes the meanes onelie of applying Christs merites in that sense faith onely is saide to saue vs Ephes. 2.8 Augustine Si merita nostra aliquid facerent ad damnationem nostram veniret sed non venit ad inspectionem meritorum sed remissionem peccatorum If our merites were auailable to any purpose God should come to our condemnation but hee commeth not to behold our merites but to forgiue vs our sins Ergo by our merites our sinnes are not forgiuen THE THIRD ARTICLE WHEther our works be meritorious The Papists error 90 GOD giueth as well euerlasting life and glorie to men for and according to their workes as he giueth damnation for the contrary works Rhemist Rom. 2. sect 2. And men by their workes proceeding of grace doe deserue or merite heauen and the more or lesse ioy in the same 1. Corinth 3. sect 2. Argum. 1. He will render to euery man according to his workes Rom. 2.6 Euery man shall receiue his reward according to his labour Here we see the kingdome of heauen is a retribution hyre wages for workes Ergo our works are the value price worth and merite of the same Rhemist Answ. Our labors and workes are a measure of the reward according to the which God doth mete out and render vnto his Saints of the heauenly reward but they are no meritorious or deseruing cause thereof The reward is of mercie not of desert of grace not of merite for life eternall is the meere gift of God through Iesus Christ Rom. 6.23 But the wages of sinne is death Where the Apostle doth set a manifest difference betweene the reward of the righteous and the iust recompence of the wicked for life eternall is the free and gracious gift of God not deserued but eternall damnation is the due debt of sinne Wherefore the Papists doe bid open battell to the Apostle in saying that the one is as due by debt as the other Argum. 2. Saint Paul sayth 2. Timoth 4.8 that there is a crowne of righteousnes layd vp for him which God the iust iudge shal giue him Ergo the crown is giuen not of mercie but of iustice as a wages and iust recompence to the Apostle Answ. God rendreth heauen as a iust Iudge not to the merite and worthines of our workes but to the merite and worthines of Christ and as due to vs by his promise made to vs in Christ. The reward therefore of heauen is of the mercie of God who hath freely promised it vs in Christ It is of his iustice in that he is faythfull and iust in keeping of his promise made to vs. So that it is a debt not in respect of any desert in vs but in regard of his owne promise As Augustine sayth Debitorem ipse se dominus fecit non accipiendo sed promittendo Non ei dicitur redde quod accepisti sed redde quod promisisti God hath made himselfe a debtor by promising not by receiuing any thing at our handes We say not to him render that thou hast receiued but giue that which thou hast promised in Psalm 83. The Protestants WE confesse a necessary vse of good workes As first they doe serue as notable meanes and instruments to set forth Gods glory by Math. 5.16 Secondly by them also our fayth is shewed published and made knowen for the good example of others Iam. 2.18 Thirdly our own conscience also is thereby quieted and our election daylie made more sure vnto vs we doe grow and increase in the certainty and assurance thereof 1. Pet. 1.10 But we acknowledge no power force or efficacie at all in them to deserue and merite any thing at the hands of God neither doth the scripture in any place so speake Argum. 1. If man consider his deserts he shall finde that he is worthy of nothing but death To vs sâ—yth the Prophet belongeth shame Dan. 9.9 There is nothing els by debt due vnto vs as Augustine also sayth Nihil praecesserat in meritis nostris nisi vnde damnari deberemus Nothing goeth before in our merites but that whereby we ought iustly to be condemned And agayne Omne peccatum nostrae est negligentiae omnis virtus sanctitas est Dei indulgentiae All euill and sin in vs is of our owne negligence all goodnes and holines of the free mercy of God Si misericordiae domini multae multus egò in meritis If the mercies of God be many my merites are many Gods mercies are our merites our due debts are nothing els but punishment for sinne Argum. 2. Betweene the desert or merite and the wages or recompence there ought alwayes to be some proportion a like stipend for a like labour But heauen without comparison exceedeth the worthines of our workes Ergo it is not giuen as a debt but as a free gift therefore the Apostle sayth that the afflictions that are present are not worthy of the glory that shall bee reuealed Rom. 8.18 Augustine sayth Quà m paruo constat regnum coelorum duob minutis emit vidua regnum coelorum How little doth the kingdome of God stand vs in a certaine widow for two mites bought the kingdome of heauen Shall we think that the widowes casting in of two mites deserued the kingdome of heauen Farre be it from vs so to think it is then a gift of â—auour and mercie not wages of debt Argum. 3. Saint Paul sayth Fayth is counted to him for righteousnes that worketh not Rom. 4.5 If it be of grace it is no more of workes for then grace were no more grace If of worke then not of grace for then worke were no more worke Rom. 11.9 We see that the righteousnes of fayth or of grace and the righteousnesse of workes cannot stand together nor be matched one with the other Our aduersaries haue here two euasions First they graunt that the beginning of our iustification which they call the first iustification is meerely of Gods grace neither can we haue any acceptable works before we are iustified but in the second iustification which is the increase of the former iustice a man may merite
the holy and blessed babe in the constitution both of bodie and soule excelled the common condition of all other infants for as he was voyd of originall sinne so he was without the effects and fruites thereof which doe shewe themselues in children for neither suffered he the like pangs and infirmities in bodie being in his infancie as other children doe that are vexed and tormented in bodie neither was he subiect to the vnreasonable and brutish motions of the minde which are in children Therefore Augustine sayth Hanc ignorantiam animi infirmitatem quam videmus in paruulis nullo modo fuerim in Christo paruulo suspicatus This kind of ignorance and infirmitie of minde which is in children I cannot thinke to haue been in the babe Christ. And what ignorance and infirmitie he meaneth afterward he expresseth Cum motibus irrationabilibus perturbantur nulla ratione nullo imperio cohibentur When their brutish and vnreasonable motions come vpon them they are ruled neither by reason nor any other gouernment These infirmities both in bodie and soule wee denye to haue been in Christ and yet we doubt not to conclude that as Christ grewe in stature of bodie as Augustine sayth Mutationes aetatum perpeti voluit ab ipsa exorsus infantia He passed through the ages of mans life beginning with his infancie so likewise as the scripture sayth he increased in wisedome Luk. 2.52 AN APPENDIX OF THE MANNER of Christs birth The Papists THey say Christ came out of his mothers wombe the clausure not stirred as error 99 he passed thorow the doores when he came in to his disciples the doores being shut Iohn 20.19 and as he passed thorow the stone arising out of the Sepulchre Rhemist annot Iohn 20. sect 2. Bellarm. de Eccles. lib. 4. cap. 9. The Protestants 1. IT can neuer be proued that Christs bodie came either thorowe the wood of the doores or thorowe the stone of the Sepulchre or clausure of his mothers wombe And concerning the last the scripture is euident to the contrarie where it is sayd that our Sauiour Christ was presented to the Lord according as it is written Euery male that first openeth the matrix c. Luk. 2.29 2. We graunt that both the birth of Christ his rising out of the graue his comming in the doores being shut was strange and miraculous because one substance gaue place to another for a time and after the passing of his bodie the place remained whole and shut as before but not in the very instant of passing The red sea gaue place to the Israelites while they passed and closed together againe so did the prison doores open miraculously to the Apostles Act. 5.19 An incredulous Iewe seeing the eare of Malchus so soone healed would not haue thought that Peters sword went betweene it and his head as we are sure it did So we say concerning the birth of Christ that the place gaue way while he passed and closed vp afterward againe as before Augustine bringeth in Christ thus speaking Ego viam meo itineri praeparaui and a little after transitu meo illius non est corrupta virginitas I made a way for my selfe out of the wombe neither by my passage was her virginitie lost Christ had a way out of his mothers wombe but if the clausure had not giuen place there had been no way made Againe he sayth Spatia locorum tolle corporibus nusquam erunt quia nusquam erunt nec erunt Take away space of place from bodies and they shall be no where and if they be no where then are they not at all But the Papists in saying that Christ went thorow the very substance and corpulence of things doe take away from his bodie his proper place for two substances cannot be in one place and therefore they destroy the nature of his bodie THE THIRD PART WHETHER CHRIST suffered in soule The Papists THey vtterly denie that Christ felt any paine or anguish in soule vpon the error 100 Crosse otherwise then for griefe of his bodily torments but doe charge them with horrible blasphemie that doe so affirme Rhemist Math. 27. sect 3. 1. The scripture doth ascribe the worke of our redemption and reconciliation only to the blood of Christ vpon the Crosse Coloss. 1.20 Ephes. 1.7 Ergo the death of the bodie of Christ without any further anguish in soule was sufficient Bellarm. de Christi anima lib. 4. cap. 8. Ans. 1. By the blood of Christ vpon the Crosse must needes bee vnderstood all the parts and circumstances of his passion both his sufferings in bodie and soule for if it should be vnderstood properly the blood of Christ onely were sufficient and so his bodie and flesh should be excluded and if the shedding of his blood be taken simply we shal finde that it was no part of his death for his side was pearced whereout issued water and blood after he had yeelded vp the ghost and all the torments of death were past yea after he had vttered these words vpon the Crosse It is finished that is he had payd the full raunsome for mankind Iohn 19. vers 30.34 Wherefore by his blood must be vnderstood by a Synecdoche when one part is taken for the whole all the other paines and torments which he suffered in his flesh Secondly yea and the paines of the soule to are by that speech fitly expressed for the blood of euery creature is the life thereof Genes 9.4 Leuit. 17.14 But the soule is the life of man Ergo not vnproperly by the shedding of Christs blood euen the vexation and at the last the expiration of his soule and so his whole passion both in body and soule is signified Wherefore as in those places alleadged we read the blood of Christ or the blood of the Crosse so otherwhere in more generall termes the Apostles call it The dying of Christ 2. Cor. 4.10 And the suffrings of Christ 1. Pet. 4.13 Argum. 2. If Christ when he cried out vpon the Crosse O God my God why hast thou forsaken me had felt the wrath of God and despaired of his help he should most greeuously haue sinned Bellarm. ibid. Ans. 1. It cannot be that Christ thus cried out for the paine of bodily death for then he had beene of greater infirmitie then many of his seruants that in the midst of extreme torments neuer complained And therefore it must needs be the burthen of the wrath and curse of God that he endured for our sinne that made him so to cry out vpon the crosse 2. Neither doth it follow that Christ vttered those words in despaire but only to shew the great anguish trouble and perturbation of his spirite being vpon the crosse considered now as a meere man his diuine nature and power repressing and hiding it selfe for a time and although in the vexation of his soule he thus cryed out yet he was not altogether left comfortlesse in spirite in that he said My God
my God which wordes must needs declare an inward confideÌ„ce and assured trust in God The Protestants WE holde it was necessary for our redemption that Christ should not onely suffer bodily paines but also feele the very anguish and horror of soule that as by his death we are redeemed both body and soule so he should pay the ransome for both in his body and soule 1. That our Sauiour suffered great anguish in soule the scripture testifieth for before his suffring in his body vpon the crosse being in the garden he saith of himselfe My soule is heauy vnto death at the same time being grieuously troubled he sweat water and blood and last of all hanging vpon the crosse he cryed out By those effectes it is euidently proued that there was a greater feare in him then of the death of the body for many holy Martyrs haue without any shew of such griefe endured horrible torments in the flesh and therefore consequently it followeth that those things proceeded from the griefe of his soule as the Apostle sheweth Heb. 5.7 He offered vp praiers with strong crying and teares to him that was able to saue him from death and was heard in that which he feared If it had beene onely feare of bodily death what need such strong cries with teares And the text is plaine that he was heard that is saued froÌ„ the death which he feared but he was not saued from the bodily death for he died and gaue vp the ghost wherefore it was the great horror of soule that caused him to feare Bellarm. answereth for all this that it was the bodily death which he feared but not of necessitie because he could not otherwise choose but willingly he would abide this brunt also of the feare and sorrow of death Voluit poenam maeroris timoris subire vt redemptio esset copiosae And heerein he exceedeth all other men that haue suffered for they are ridde from feare because God giueth them greater comfort and they regarde not the present torment but Christ willingly and of his owne accord drew himselfe into this agonie of feare Ans. 1. That Christ as he was God had determined and set it downe to dye for the world it is not to be doubted of but that as he was man he had not a desire to escape death as being ignorant of Gods determination it is contrary to the Scriptures which make mention of his earnest praier that he made thrice that the cup might passe Math. 26. Therefore Christ willingly entred not into that agony of feare in his humane desire but as submitting himselfe and his will in obedience to his fathers will 2. He is contrary to him selfe in saying that Christs bodily sufferings were sufficient for our redemption and yet graunteth that Christ vt redemptio esset copiosa That our redemption might be more full would abide also the smart of the feare of death If he feared but the bodily death as he saith yet was he troubled in soule and therefore besides bodily paine he suffered anguish in his soule Argum. 2. Act. 2.24 Whom God hath raised vp saith S. Peter and loosed the sorrowes of death for it was impossible that he should be holden of it Ergo Christ suffered the sorrowes of death and felt the wrath of God which caused those sorrowes The vulgare Latine hath the sorrowe of hell solutis dolorib infernâ— which pincheth the Papists very sore for how could Christ be loosed from the sorrowes of hell if first he had not beene helde of them That which Bellarmine answereth that Christ loosed the sorrowes of hell for others which were to be deliuered is but a poore shift for the text is plaine It was impossible that he that is Christ himselfe should be stil holden of it it is spoken of the holding of Christ and not of any other Argu. 3. The prophet Esay saith He was wounded for our sins and broken for our iniquities the chastisement of our peace was vpon him and with his stripes are we healed Esay 53.5 But we could haue no peace with God vnlesse all the punishment due vnto vs for our sinne had beene vndertaken by Christ wherefore seeing we by our sinne had deserued to be punished both in body soule it was necessary that our redeemer should be wounded and broken wholly for vs for how els by his stripes should we wholly be healed Augustine thus reasoneth against Felicianus the Arrian and proueth that Christ tooke not onely humane flesh but an humane soule Si totus homo periâ—â— c. If man wholly were lost saith he he had wholly need of a Sauiour and if he wholly needed a Sauiour Christ by his comming wholly redeemed him therefore Christ tooke vpon him the whole nature of man both body soule for if since the whole man hath sinned Christ onely had taken our flesh the soule of man should still remaine guiltie of punishment haec Augustine cont Felician cap. 13. By the same reason we proue it was necessary that Christ should suffer both in body and soule by the which Augustine inferreth that Christ tooke both body and soule he did assume them both to redeeme both But he redeemed vs not in being borne for vs or walking or preaching heere vpon earth although these were preparations to his sacrifice but by dying and suffering for vs Ergo he suffered both in body soule the punishmeÌ„t due vnto sinners They grauÌ„t that Christ suffered anguish in soule yet not properly in the soule but onely for the bodily death which was no part of the punishmeÌ„t of the soule which consisted in the very sense and feeling of Gods wrath and the torments of hell due vnto mankinde for their sinnes This punishment of the soule ought also necessarily to haue beene vndertaken by Christ being the redeemer both of body and soule THE FOVRTH PART WHETHER CHRIST descended in soule into hell to deliuer the Patriarkes The Papists THey doe beleeue that Christ according to his soule went downe to hell to error 101 deliuer the Patriarkes and all iust men there holden in bondage til his death Rhemist Act. 2. sect 12. Argum. 2. He that ascended is he that descended first into the lowest parts of the earth Ephes. 4.9 that is into hell the which is the lowest place in the earth Bellarm. cap. 12. Ans. 1. The earth it selfe is in respect of the world the lowest part so that here one parte of the earth is not to be compared with another but the whole earth in respect of the high heauens hath the name of the lower partes so is it taken Psal. 139. ver 15. Thou hast fashioned me beneath or in the lower partes of the earth But Dauid I trust they will not say was borne in hell because he speaketh of the lower partes of the earth consul Bez. in hunc locum So that by the descending of Christ into the lowest partes of the earth is meant nothing els but the lowest and extreamest degree