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
he in the beginning of Manasses raigne and so to dye about 7. yeares before Iosias yet for all his scanning is driuē to this shift that the many yeares peace after her death must be vnderstood of poore 7. yeares Thirdly if all this happened in Manasses time whom the Chaldeans tooke and carried away prisoner and had much troubled and afflicted the country of Iudaea what neede had Holofernes to enquire so curiously of Achior the Ammonite of the country their Citie people kings and such like seeing they had knowen the country to well before in spoyling and wasting of it as the Iewes by wofull experience had felt OF THE BOOKE OF WISEDOME The Papistes OVr aduersaries reason thus they say that S. Paul Rom. 11.34 vsing this speach who hath knowen the Lordes minde or bene his counseller doth alledge it out of the 4. Chapter of this booke v. 13. Ergo it is Canonicall We aunswere First the Apostle seemeth not in that place to cite any testimonie though the wordes which he vseth may els where be found Secondly though the like wordes are read in the booke of Wisedome yet is it not necessarie the Apostle should borrow them frō thēce but rather they are alledged out of the 40. of Esay 13. Where the Prophet saith who hath instructed the spirit of God or was his counseller And this also is the opiniō of the Rhemistes that S. Paul in that place vseth the Prophets wordes The Protestantes OVr reasons against the authoritie of this booke are these and such like 1 Because this booke is not found in the Hebrue but written onely in Greeke wherefore it is not Canonicall seeing the Iewes had all the oracles of God 2 Philo a Iew is thought by the Papistes them selues to be the author of this booke who liued after Christ in the time of Caligula neither him selfe was a Christian or beleeued in Christ therefore an vnlike man to be a writer of Canonicall Scripture Bellarmine saith it was another Philo who was more auncient Indeed Iosephus maketh mention of a Philo before this time but he was an Heathen and no Iew. 3 If this booke were written by Solomon why is it not extant in Hebrue for Solomon wrote in Hebrue not in Greeke Many of the Papists also do proue that it was not written by Solomon for though Solomon in the 2. Chapter be brought in praying vnto God that is no good argument to proue Solomon the author for the author might speake in the person of Solomon OF THE BOOKE CALLED Ecclesiasticus The Papistes THey haue none but common and generall arguments for the authoritie of this booke as that it was of old read in the church diuerse of the fathers alledged testimonies out of it All this proueth not as we haue shewed before that it was Canonicall but that it was well esteemed and thought of because of many wholesome and good precepts which are conteined in it The Protestantes WE do thus improue the authoritie of this booke 1 The author in the Preface saith that he trāslateth in this booke such things as before were collected by his grandfather in Hebrue and excuseth him selfe because that things translated out of the Hebrue do loose the grace and haue not the same force so then it appeareth that this booke can not be Canonicall being imperfect neither was his grandfathers worke which is now lost to be thought any part of the Scripture seeing he was no Prophet him selfe but a compiler and a collector of certaine things out of the Prophetes 2 He exhorteth his countrymen to take it in good worth and so craueth pardon but the spirit of God vseth not to make any such excuse whose works are most perfect and feare not the iudgement of men 3 This booke saith cap. 46. v. 20. that Samuell prophesied after his death from the earth lift vp his voyce Whereas the Canonicall Scripture saith not that it was Samuell but that Saul so imagined and thought it to be Samuell 1. Sam. 28. And Augustine thinketh it was phantasma Samuelis but a shew onely and representation of Samuell and an illusion of the deuill Lib. ad Dulcitiū quaest 6. For it is not to be thought that the deuill cā disease the soules of any men much lesse of Saints departed OF THE TWO BOOKES OF the Machabees OVr Argumentes against the authoritie of this booke are these ensuing for our aduersaries bring nothing on their part but such Argumentes drawen from testimonies authorities as do generally serue for all the Apocrypha which are aunswered afore 1 Iudas is commended 2. booke chap. 12. for offring sacrifice for the dead which was not commanded by the law neither is it the custome of the Iewes so to do to this day againe they were manifest Idolaters for there were foūd iewels vnder their coates consecrate to the Idols of the Iamnites And our aduersaries graunt them selues that prayer is not to be made for open malefactors dying impenitently 2 Lib. 2. cap. 2. many things are reported of the arke the holy fire the altar the tabernacle which should be hid by Ieremie in a caue and that the Lord would shew the people these things at their returne Here are many things vnlikely and vntrue First it is found saith the text in the writings of Ieremie but no such storie is there found Secondly Ieremie was in prison till the very taking of the Citie and the Citie being taken the temple was spoyled the holy things defaced and carried away how could they then be conueyed by Ieremie Thirdly in their returne they found neither arke nor fire nor any such thing but saith the Iesuite the Iewes in their conuersion to God in the end of the world may haue them againe as though whē they shal beleeue in Christ they will any more looke backe to the ceremonies or rites of the law for what vse then I pray you shall they haue of altar or sacrifice or any such like 3 There is a great disagreeing in the storie betweene the two bookes cōcerning the death of Antiochus Lib. 1. cap. 6. v. 6.16 It is said that Antiochus dyed for grief in Babylon hearing of the good successe of the Iewes Lib. 2.1 ver 16. Antiochus was with the rest of his souldiers slayne in the temple of Nanea and his head cut of throwen forth Chap. 9. the same Antiochus falling sicke by the way dyed with a most filthie and stincking smell cōsumed of wormes How could this man dye thrise in Babylon in Nanea and by the way in a straunge coūtrey It is confessed by the Iesuite that it was the same Antiochus who saith he lost his armie in the temple and sickned by the way and dyed at Babylon But the storie saith that their heads were cut of I thinke thē he could not liue and that he dyed in a straunge country therefore not at Babylon in his bed These things hang not together 4 Further the author of these bookes saith that he
thereof as how he should be crowned with thornes that they should giue him vineger to drinke how the vaile of the temple should be rent darknes should couer the earth for three houres he himself should rise the third day yea she setteth down the very name of the Messiah Iesus Christ. These prophecies came not of the diuell for these mysteries without all doubt were not known to the euill spirits for they were not fully reuealed to the Angels theÌ„selues before the coÌ„ming of Christ. Eph. 3.10 Wherfore we conclude thus that as the gift of prophecying is no sure signe that they are meÌ„bers of the Church elected of God which are endued with it as Christ saith Math 7.22 that many which had prophecied in his name in the day of iudgemeÌ„t should be refused Balaam is set forth as an example of a false Prophet wicked maÌ„ Ep. Iude. 11 so neither is this gift an infallible mark of the Church of God whersoeuer it is fouÌ„d To the second part concerning this miraculous gift which our aduersaries pretend to haue we answere 1. They are but fables which they bring for if al that is reported of Saint Bernard in his life of his miracles and prophecies were true neither S. Paul nor any of the Apostles were to be compared vnto him for number of miracles such casting out of diuels out of men women and children healing of strange diseases foretelling of thinges to come the Gospell almost hath not stranger things of our Sauiour Christ. As for Saint Francis you may gesse by this what spirit he was of that prescribing to his followers a certaine strict order of liuing as to wear no girdle to goe barefoote and such like he called it regulam euangelicam the rule of the Gospell belike making himselfe an other Christ and so bringing in another Gospel for to all Christs Disciples Christs Gospelâ— is sufficient 2. But if they haue any prophecies of credit which they can shew they are such as are reported of Pope Siluester the 2. who had warrant from the diuel that he should not die before he sung Masse in Ierusalem and so it came to passe for hauing sung Masse in a chappell so called he immediately dyed Not much vnlike to this was that of king Henry the 4. who ended his life in a chamber at Westminster called Ierusalem as he had an olde prophecie Edward the 4. also was tolde that his successours name should begin with G. which was the cause of George the Duke of Clarence death his owne brother but the diuelish prophecie notwithstanding tooke place for Richard Duke of Glocester was king after him In like manner Valence the Emperour had a blind prophecie that one should raigne after him whose name began with Theod. which made Theodorus to rebell against him but so it came to passe in deede that Theodosius was Emperour after him Such blinde prophecies we denie not but the popish Church hath had many which as you see doo cause murder sedition and bloodshed but other good prophecies comming of GOD wee knowe them not to haue any 3. Wee denie not but that there haue liued some amongst them in their Church which in those dayes were counted Prophets and Prophetisses as Hildegardis anno 1146. likewise Briget Catherine Seuensis whom Bellarmine reckoneth vp amongst others that wrought miracles cap. 14. but concerning these we wil answere as the Iesuite doth for Sibilla a Prophetisse amongst the heatheÌ„ that she prophecied as touching such matters as should fall out to the Church for a testimonie of the faith of the Christians And so to bee counted herein a Prophetisse of the Church rather than of the heathen cap. 15. so wee say that if those three abouenamed were Prophetisses they were of our Church and not theirs for they prophesied of the decay of their Church and raising vp of ours Hildegardis first prophecied of the beginning of Friers and of their destruction saying that in the end when their gifts and rewards ceased they should goe about their houses like hungrie and madde dogges drawing in their neckes like doues Briget prophesied of the Church of Rome that it should be as a body condemned of a iudge to haue the skinne flayne off and the flesh to bee cut in peeces Catherine de Senis speaketh of a reformation of the Church such a renouation of Pastors that the onely remembrance thereof sayth she mâ—keth my spirite to reioyce in the Lord. All these things we see nowe accomplished the sects of Friers in many places put downe the Popish iurisdiction cast out a notable reformation to be wrought in the Church Our aduersaries I thinke haue not to reioyce in these prophecies neither haue any great cause to chalenge them for their Prophets But I will help them a little and bring to their remembrance a notable Prophetisse of theirs in king Henry the 8. dayes which was one Elizabeth Barton a Nun commonly called the holy mayd of Kent who beeing instructed by the Friers fayned as though she had many reuelations she prophecied that if the king proceeded in his diuorce then in question betweene him and Q. Catherine that hee should not be king one yeare no not one moneth But GOD bee thanked hee liued almoste twenty yeares after that by whom many worthy things were wrought for the good of Christs Church This prophetisse was afterward iustly met withall and worthily suffered for her demerites with all her accomplices amongst the which Fisher B. of Rochester was one who thereupon was imprisoned and forfayted his goods to the King If they will bragge of their Prophets let not the holy mayd of Kent be forgotten in any wise 4. Now lastly because they shall not outface vs with a vaine brag of Prophets I will shew what prophesies the Gospell hath beene adorned withall Was not Iohn Husse a Prophet who thus sayd at his death centum reuolutis annis deo respondebitis after an hundred years you shall giue account of this your doing vnto God Likewise Hierome of Prage post centum annos vos omnes cito I cite you all to make answere after an hundred yeares Which prophesie of theirs tooke effect accordingly for both these holy men suffered martyrdome about anno 1416. and iust an hundred yeares after anno 1516. the Lord raysed vp Luther who indeede called the Pope and his doctrine to account Was not Sauonarola a Prophet that sayd one should passe ouer the Alpes like Cyrus who should destroy all Italie and is it not so come to passe for neither Cyrus nor whosoeuer els could haue more layde wast the popish Italian Church then the word of God hath done and the liuely preaching of the Gospell Walter Brute prophecied that the temporalities should be taken from the Clergie for the multitude of their sinnes this Walter liued in king Richards dayes the second Bilney that constant martyr and faythful seruant of God prophecied that many Preachers should
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
yet by the way the Iesuite is deceiued that thinketh it probable that the Popes particular person cannot fall into heresie here you see Marcellinus fell into Idolatrie Liberius subscribed to the Arrians consented to the condemnation of Athanasius as testifieth Ierome confessed by Nicolaus Cusanus and Alphonsus de castro both papists Iuel pag. 164. defens Apolog. Honorius 1. consented to the heresie of Sergius Bishop of Constantinople who was a Monothelite and held that there were not two wills or operations in Christ and so destroyed the two natures That Honorius was a Monothelite Melchior Canus a papist confesseth hee was condemned for an heretike in the 6.7 and 8. generall synodes Bellarmine answereth that the Councels are corrupted or they might be deceiued in iudgement as in a matter of facte or that Honorius onely misliked the speech to say there were two willes in Christ and not the thing See what poore shiftes heere bee to make Honorius no heretike and yet all will not be Pope Stephen the sixt tooke vp Formosus body and cut off two fingers of his right hande and buried him againe in a lay-mans Sepulchre Then followed Rhomanus the first Theodorus the second Iohannes the ninth and restored Formosus with his decrees iudging him to bee lawfull Bishop After them commeth Sergius the third who tooke vp the body agayne cutte off the head and cast it into Tiber. The Iesuite answereth that Stephanus and Sergius erred onely in a matter of fact A goodly cloke to couer the filthines of their Ghostly fathers withall But by your leaue a little doe you not holde it to bee an article of fayth to beleeue the Pope to bee heade of Christes Church Then was it an article of fayth to hold that Formosus was right Pope for at that time there was no other Ergo Stephanus and Sergius erred in fayth defining the contrary All that you can say is this that it was not yet determined and decreed for an article of fayth so to beleeue see I pray you these mennes fayth is pinned vpon Popes sleeues Why masters the rule of fayth is certaine you cannot make new articles of fayth now but onely declare and explane those that are But doe you not thinke that these iollie Popes that would rake the dead out of their graues for their holines might deserue at GODS hand to haue a priuiledge not to erre in fayth Siluester the second was a Necromancer and a Coniurer and therefore fallen from the fayth Bellarmine sayth hee was a good man and all are fables and lyes that are tolde of him and because hee was cunning in Geometrie that ignorant age straightwayes iudged him to bee giuen to Necromancie Thus wee may take the Iesuites worde if wee will But the storie is reported by authors of better credit then Bellarmine as Iohannes Stella Platina Petrus Premonstratens Nauclerus Antoninus Fox pag. 167. Anastasius was a Nestorian heretike whose heresie was this that there are as two natures so also two persons in Christ Alphons de castro lib. 1. de haeresib cap. 4. Celestinus is reported by Laurentius Valla a Canon of Rome to haue been a Nestorian heretike de donation Constantin Now commeth in Pope Hildebrand or rather Heldebrand for hee was a very brand of hell fire called Gregory the seuenth Of whome Benno writeth thus that hee poysoned sixe Popes his predecessors to make himselfe a way to the popedome that hee was a Coniurer a raiser of Diuels and in his rage hee cast the sacrament into the fier But sayth Harding our countrey man though vnworthily Benno was his enemie and wrote of displeasure and Bellarmine thinketh that some Lutherane was the author of the booke which goeth vnder the name of Benno who was Cardinall in this Hildebrands time But Benno onely doth not thus report of him he was openly twise for the same crimes condēned in Councel first at Wormes thē after deposed in the Coūcel at Brixia in Italy Pope Clement 3. elected to succeed him And the said Gregory died in exile of whom Antonius reporteth that before his death he repented him of his insolencie shewed toward the Emperour Henrie the 4. whom with his wife and young child bare foote and bare legd hee had caused three dayes together in extreame frost and colde to waite at his palace gates at Canusium before he could speake with him Yet this Hildebrand for all these insolent cruell and dishonest partes is commended by our papists Harding Bellarmine and other for a deuout Catholike man who did all things of a zeale to the Church By this you may iudge whome our aduersaries count a Catholike man Pope Iohn the 22. affirmed that the soules lie in a traunce till the day of iudgement and feele neither payne nor ioye Harding and likewise Bellarmine answere that this was an error but no heresie Yet in the Vniuersitie of Paris it was condemned for heresie as Gerson writeth Againe sayth Harding he held it only as a priuate opinion But Massaeus sayth that Pope Iohn preached this heresie and sent out preachers to maintaine it Hee was condemned sayth he with his error by the diuines of Paris in the presence of Philip the French King before he was Pope when he was yet but a priuate Doctor But the contrary is proued by B. Iewel that he was Pope 13. yeares before Philip was king Iuell defens apolog p. 667. Pope Iohn the 23. denied the life to come and the resurrection of the body And this heresie was openly obiected against him in the Councel of Constance Bellarmine and Harding before him answere that he was not the rightful Pope for there were three at that time and therefore might erre But Platina sayth that he was chosen at Bonoma by the consent of all the Cardinals ex Iuel pag. 671. Lastly Pope Eugenius the 4. was condemned and deposed as an heretike in the Councel of Basile Where the Iesuite hath no other answer then by condemning the Councel as Schismatical to acquite the Pope Lib. 3. de pontif cap. 14. By these examples it may appeare to the indifferent reader that it is no rare nor impossible thing for the Popes of Rome to erre yea become playne heretikes And as for that shift of the Iesuite that they are no longer Popes whē they openly begin to teach heresie this is as Alphonsus sayth In re seria verbis velle iocari to dallie with words in a serious and earnest matter And so euery Bishop shal be as well priuiledged as the Pope and cannot fall into heresie for why may we not say that a Bishop when he is knowen to bee an heretike ceaseth to bee Bishop any longer as the Pope is no longer Pope and so as long as he remayneth Bishop cannot possiblie bee an heretike Surely this is but paltrie and beggarly stuffe 4. Augustine is not a whit afrayd to say Episcoporum literas per sermonem sapientiorem cuiuslibet in eare peritioris per aliorum
effectuall power to euery parte Ephes. 4.15.16 2 It is false that the ciuill magistracie onely concerneth the outward and temporall commoditie onely for vnto Princes also is committed the chiefe care of religion and the worship of God They are to see true religion aduaunced yea to watch ouer Ecclesiasticall ministers and to charge them to looke to their offices the Prince is Gods minister for the wealth both of the soules and bodies of his subiects And therefore Saint Paul exhorteth to pray for Kings and gouernours that wee may liue not onely a peaceable life but in all godlines and honestie 1. Timoth. 2.2 Ergo it is parte of the magistrates office as to procure the peace of the people so to haue a care of their godlie life Wherefore it is false as the Iesuite supposeth that the chiefe ende of the ciuill gouernement is onely outward and temporall Ergo his argument is nothing worth 2 Azariah the high Priest droue Vzziah the King out of the temple when hee would haue burned incense and caused him to goe out of the citie and dwell apart 2. Chron. 26. Iehoiada likewise deposed Athalia 2. King 11. Ergo the Pope may depose wicked and vngodly Princes Bellarmine cap. 8. Answere First wee denie that there is now or ought to bee any such high Priest in the Church of God to haue the chiefe authoritie in spirituall matters as there was in the lawe for hee was the type and figure of Christ who is our high Priest and chiefe Bishop Secondly these examples doe not excuse the Popes tyrannie who hath deposed rightfull Kinges and Emperors and better then himselfe as Pope Zacharie deposed Childericus the French King and set vp Pipinus Gregorie the seuenth set vp Rodolphus against Henricus the fourth the Emperor Pope Paschalis set vp the sonne of the saide Henricus against his father But we will answere more particularly to these examples To the first First it was not the sole act of Azariah the high Priest but there were 80. Priests that ioyned with him beside and they all spake to the King this example therefore maketh nothing for the sole authoritie of the Pope who saith that he may depose the Emperor himselfe without any Councell Innocent 4. Secondly they did not depose Vzziah they onely withstoode him according to the lawe of God because hee vsurped the priests office so ought faithfull Bishops and pastors euen to reproue the greatest Magistrates for the manifest contempt and open breach of Gods lawe Neither did they constraine the King to goe forth before they saw the iudgement of God vpon him for the text saith they compelled him to go forth because the Lord had smitten him they saw the leprosie to rise vp in his face vers 20. This therefore was the extraordinarie iudgement of God and not of the high priest Thirdly he was not deposed from the Kingdome though he dwelt alone his son did execute the office only for him and raigned after him for being a leper by the law he was to dwell apart Leuit. 13.46 Here was nothing done we see by the sole authoritie of the high Priest but they had the manifest and direct lawe of God vnto the which their Kings also were subiect To the second example we answere First Athaliah was a tyrant and an vsurper and ought not to raigne and therefore was iustly deposed Secondly Iehoiada did it not by his owne power but assembled the Fathers and Princes of the land 2. Chron. 22.2 He shewed them the young King and they made a couenant with him Iehoiada onely gaue directions the King being now knowen vnto them vnto the Captaines and gouernours Thirdly they had the flat word of God for that action The Kings sonne must raigne as the Lord hath saide concerning the sonnes of Dauid ver 3. So when the Pope hath any such warrant from God he may doe as Iehoiada did The Protestants THat the Pope or any other person Ecclesiasticall hath no manner of temporall iurisdiction either directly or indirectly ouer Kings Princes Emperors but ought of right to bee subiect to them and their lawes it is thus proued 1 By the same reason whereby the Iesuite proueth that the Pope directlie hath no temporall iurisdiction we will conclude that neither indirectlie can he haue any and so none at all Christ while he liued vpon earth tooke vpon him no temporall iurisdiction either directly or indirectly he refused to bee a King Iohn 6. Nay hee would not bee a Iudge in ciuill matters as in deuiding the inheritance being thereto required Luke 12.13 Hee payed poll money Matth. 17. hee did submit himselfe to the iudgement of Pilate an heathen Iudge therefore seeing Christe vsed no such temporall iurisdiction neither can any Minister of Christe for the seruant is not aboue the Master Onely Antichrist dare presume beyond the example of Christ. 2 The Fathers of Basile doe vrge that place of Saint Peter 1. Epist. 5.2 against Panormitane who had vnaduisedly sayd that the Pope was Lorde of the Church But the Apostle saith Feede the flocke of Christ not by constraint but willinglie not as Lordes ouer the Lordes inheritance verse 3. But the Pope contrariwise vseth all forceable constraining and tyrannicall meanes killing slaying imprisoning deposing those that will not obey him who calleth himselfe chiefe Lorde and Magistrate of the whole Worlde Surely this is Antichrist and not the Minister of Christ or successor of Saint Peter whose counsaile he refuseth to followe and obey 3 Let but the stories of former times bee searched there wee shall finde how wickedly and insolently the Popes behaued themselues towards Kings and Emperors Pope Alexander caused Henry the second to doe penance for Beckets death and to bee displed of the Monkes Innocent the third caused King Iohn to kisse the feet of the Bishop of Canturburie his own subiect Alexander the third did tread vpon Emperor Frederick his neck Pope Innocent spoyled Frederick the second of his Empire caused him to bee poysoned and his sonne Conradus to be beheaded and these Emperors were deposed by the Popes in order Henricus 4. Henricus 5. Frederick 1. Philippus Otho the 4. Frederick 2. and Conradus his sonne It is not good they say to put a sword into a mad mans hand and thinke you not that these Popes vsed the temporal sword very discreetely which they thus vsurped making fooles and slaues of Emperors as Pope Adriane did that rebuked Frederick the first because he held his stirrup on the wrong side and did excommunicate him for setting his name before the Popes in writing Thâ— very insolent diuellish and Antichristian practise of this their temporal power sheweth from what originall it commeth euen from the father of pride Lastly Augustine saith writing vpon those words Rom. 13. Let euery soule be subiect to the higher powers Si quis putat quia Christanus est non sibi esse vectigal reddendum aut tributum aut non esse exhibendum honorem debitum
I pray you whether our merchants be admitted to traffick safely in Spaine if their religion be knowen The seruants of God amongst you can neither enioy houses lands libertie or life which yoke also was layd a long time vpon this land till it pleased God to haue mercie on vs for the which his name be blessed 3. Againe many yeares agoe euen in Augustines and Ambrose his time all Churches were ioyned to Rome before Antichrist was yet reuealed Ergo. This is not the Character of Antichrist Bellarmin ibid. Answere First they were ioyned then in common consent of religion not as subiects by compulsion but voluntarie because at that time Rome in the chiefest poynts of Religion was in the right fayth 2. But of late dayes in the Councel of Constance not yet 2. hundred yeares agoe it was made an article of faith to beleeue that the Pope was the head of the Vniuersal Church yea about the yeare 600. the title of Vniuersal Bishop first began to be appropriate to Rome whereby was insinuated that all Churches in the world should be vnder the obedience thereof Lastly we haue the testimonie of one of their Popes themselues who saith plainly that hee is the forerunner of Antichrist which would bee called Vniuersall Bishop lib. 4. epistol 32. See then by his testimony the title of Vniuersality and exacting of obedience of other Churches is the character marke of Antichrist THE FOVRTH PART CONCERNING the generation and original of Antichrist The Papists error 60 THey doe reiect those olde fancies concerning Antichrist as that hee should be borne of a Virgin by helpe of the diuel that hee should haue the diuell to his father that he should be a diuell incarnate or that hee should bee Nero raysed from the dead Refusing these fables they haue found out one as foolish Our Rhemists holde that Antichrist shal be borne of the tribe of Dan. Bellarm. dare not say so but he thinketh that he shall come of the Iewes stock and be circumcised and be taken of the Iewes for their Messiah cap. 12. 1. That he shall come of the tribe of Dan thus they would prooue it Genes 49.17 Dan shal be a serpent by the way biting the horse heeles Ierem. 8.16 The neying of his horses is heard from Dan. And Apocal. 7. where 12. thousand of euery tribe are reckoned onely Dan is left out because belike Antichrist should come of that tribe Rhemist 2. Thess. 2. sect 8. Answere Bellarmine confuteth all these reasons the first hee saith with Hierome to be vnderstood of Sampson who came of the tribe of Dan the second place is of Nabuchadnezzers comming to destroy Ierusalem as Hierome also expoundeth it to the third he sayth that Ephraim is left out as well as Dan yea and so is Manassâ—h too because the tribe of Ioseph is named for his two sonnes but Dan is left out because Leui is reckoned in his place Wee may see now how well they agree when one Iesuite confuteth another Bellarmin cap. 12. 2. Bellarmine standeth much vpon that place Iohn 5.43 If an other come in his name him will ye receiue But sayth he the Iewes will receiue none but of their owne kinred and whom they looke for to be their Messiah Ergo. Antichrist must come of the Iewes ibd Answere This place we haue shewed before part 1. of this question to be vnderstood of false prophets amongst the Iewes such as mention is made of Act. 5. as Theudas and Iudas and not of any one false prophet so Iohn 10. where Christ compareth himselfe which is the true shepheard with the hireling he vnderstandeth all hirelings though he speake in the singular number The Protestantes THat it is a very fable and cousoning deuice of heretikes to make men beleeue that Antichrist shall come of the tribe of Dan or of the stock of the Iewes thus we shew it 1. It is out of doubt that the nation of the Iewes shall bee conuerted vnto God and mercy shal be shewed againe to the remnant of Israel Rom. 11.25 confessed also by the papists But if one come which shall reedifie the temple and restore the sacrifices and circumcision such an one as the Iewes shall take for their Messiah who seeth not that by this meanes the Iewes will bee more hardned hauing now their owne hearts desire their temple Messiah circumcision and their conuersion would be greatly hindred nay quite and clean ouerthrowen 2. If Antichrist should come of the Iewes it is like that his seate should bee at Ierusalem and that the temple shall be built agayne by him but that cannot be for the temple as Daniel prophesieth shall lie desolate euen vnto the ende Dani. 9.27 Ergo. he shall not come of the Iewes More of this in the next parte THE FIFT PART CONCERNING THE seate and place of Antichrist The Papists BEllarmine holdeth opinion that Antichrist shall haue his imperiall seate at Ierusalem and reedifie and build againe the temple yea for a while commaund error 61 circumcision to be vsed and obserued Bellarm. cap. 13. lib. 3. de pontif Rhemist 2. Thessa. 2. sect 11. 1. Apocal. 11.8 the Citie of Antichrist is called the great Citie where our Lord was crucified But Christ was crucified at Ierusalem Ergo. Answere First it cannot be so vnderstood for ver 2. Ierusalem is called the holy Citie ver 8. This great Citie is called Sodome and Aegypt how can the same Citie be capable of such contrary names How can that be called an holy Citie where the abomination of desolation shall be and the seate of Antichrist Secondly Augustine in Apocal. homil 8. vnderstandeth by the great Citie and the streetes thereof the middest of the Church And by the great citie verie fitly is vnderstood the large iurisdiction of the Pope who sayth hee is head of the great citie and Catholike Church Whose seate we see is at Rome by authoritie of which citie Christ was put to death and by Antichrist the Pope Christ also is persecuted in his members Fulk annotat Apocalyps 11. sect 2. 2. Apocalips 17.16 the tenne hornes that is tenne kings amongst whom the Romane Empire shall bee deuided shall hate the scarlet whore that is Rome and burne it with fire how then shall it bee the seate of Antichrist Bellarm. Answere The text is plaine that the same kingdomes that before had giuen their power to the beast and were subiect to the whore of Babilon shall after make her desolate and eate her flesh which thing we see in part to be accomplished already that many princes haue redeemed their necks from Antichrist his yoke Fulk Apocal. 17. sect 3. It is not necessary therefore to bee done all at one time but one after another 3. 2. Thessal 2. he shall sit in the temple of God but at that time the Iewes onely had a temple the Christians yet had none and the Apostle speaking of the Church of God did of purpose refrayne this name lest the Church of Christians
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
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
many that shal be condemned in the day of Iudgement haue had power to do straunge workes Math. 7.22 23. 2 What better argument can wee haue of this then common experience For the Popes haue registred in their Calendars notorious wicked meÌ„ and traitors to their Princes as saints and holy men Such an one was Thomas Becket who som hundreth yeers was worshipped as a saint by the name of S. Thomas of Canterbury and yet was a plaine traitour to his prince Fox page 225. And therefore his shrine was iustly put downe in King Henrie the 8. dayes Richard Scroope of York was openly in armes against Henry the fourth Thomas Earle of Lancaster a rebell against Edward the second yet both are the popes canonized saintes Elizabeth Barton was called the holy Maide of Kent and fayned that she had many reuelations yet was found to be a traitour executed these are the popes saints And on the other side they haue condemned the true saintes and Martyrs of God and accursed them to the bottomlesse pit of Hell as they delt most wickedly with Iohn Husse that zealous seruant of God vpon whose head they set a crowne of paper pictured with deuilles as if he were giuen into the power of SataÌ„ But we do iudge of these holy men as the scripture teacheth which sayth that they are blessed which dye in the Lord Apocal. 14.13 Their good life holy profession and constant death and martyrdome declaâ—â—d no lesse and that assurance which God gaue them of their election as it appeared in that worthy Martyr doctor Barnes who being brought to the stake sayeth thus vnto the people If saintes do pray for vs I trust to pray for you within this halfe houre who at the same time vttered his opinion that not withstanding to pray vnto saintes was against the worde of God although it should be granted that they pray for vs. Let them now be ashamed to say still that the pope cannot erre in Canonizing saints who condemneth good men and iustifieth the wicked according to the common saying Many are worshipped for saints in heauen whose soules do burne in Hell Thirdly Augustine thus writeth of this matter Per has humanorum cordium tenebras res multùm miranda dolenda contingit vt eum nonnunquam quem iniustum putamus iustiu tamen est auersemur hominem bonum tanquam malum affligamus quem nescientes amamus By reason of the darkenes and ignorance of mens heartes a pitifull and strange thing many times falleth out that we should hate a man whome we take to be a wicked and vngodly one and yet he is a righteous man and so wee punish a good man for a bad whom we notwithstanding do vnwittingly loue for his goodnes tract in Iohan. 99. Ergo the iudgement of men is vncertaine and the best may be deceiued in iudging of others who are bad and who good THE SECOND QVESTION CONcerning the adoration of Saints THis question hath three partes First whether saintes are to be adored Secondly of the diuerse kindes of adoration Thirdly concerning the worship due vnto holy men liuing as the kissing of feete and such like THE FIRST PART WHETHER SAINTS are to be adored and worshipped The Papists THey doubt not to affirme that there is a kynde of Religious woorshippe due vnto Saintes not that great Religious woorshippe which is proper error 25 vnto God but a kinde somewhat lesse and inferiour to that yet a religious adoration which is the meane or middest betweene that highest worship due vnto God and ciuill honour which is giuen vnto men So this is their sentence that religious worship is due both to God and to the saints heerein onely say they the difference is the more religious worship belongeth onely to God the lesse vnto the saintes Bellarm. cap. 12. lib. 1. de Sanctor beatit Argum. 1 The Psalmist saith Adore his footestoole Psal. 99.5 and Heb. 11.21 Iacob adored the top of his rod Ergo it is lawfull to adore creatures Bellarm cap. 13. Rhemist annot 11. Heb. sect 9. Answer In the first place by the footestoole is vnderstood the Tabernacle with the Arke the Prophet saith not Adore his footestoole but At or before his footestoole for we deny not but that we may kneele downe and fall prostrate in adoring of God before such thinges but none is to be adored but God In the same place the Apostle saith that Iacob worshipped toward the end of his staffe that is leaning vpoÌ„ his staffe The vulgar latine readeth corruptly adorauit fastigium baculi He worshipped the end of his staffe for then the Greek preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were superfluous And Augustine expoundeth it aright saying that Iacob by faith worshipped God vpon the end of his staffe quaest in Gen. 162. Fulk annot Heb. 11. sect 9. Argum. 2. Nabuchadnezzar bowed himselfe to Daniel and caused odors to be offered vnto him and worshipped him who for so doing was not reproued of the Prophet Ergo Saints are to be worshipped Bellar. ibid. Rhemens annot Apocal. 19 sect 5. Ans. 1 The offering of sacrifice is a worship by our aduersaries owne confession proper to God though they graunt most grossely that it is lawfull to offer incense to the images of saints Bellarm. cap. 13. The King therefore commanding in this place sacrifice to be offred to Daniel did attribute vnto him the godly worship and therefore no doubt he was reproued of Daniel though the text make no mention of it Bellarmine by offering of sacrifice here wold vnderstand the bringing of gifts Ans. This is shewed afterward verse 48. Howe the King made Daniel a great man and gaue him great gifts and the offering of presents is but a part of ciuil honor but the King here doth yeeld religious worship to Daniel 2 It appeareth verse 47. that the King was reproued by Daniel and forbidden to worship him and commaunded onely to worship God because the King confesseth that Daniels God is a God of Goddes and therefore onely to bee worshipped The Protestants WE can finde in the worde of God but two kindes of worship or adoration a religious worship only due vnto God and a ciuill honour vsed amongst men As for the Angels and saints we do honour them with loue not with seruice We do also reuerence the holy men vpon earth as the Prophetes and Apostles were in times past with a ciuill adoration or worship of loue not with a religious seruice There is also a due reuerence estimatioÌ„ of such things as are sanctified to holy vses as of the Tabernacle Arke Altar Sacrifice in the Law such now are the Sacraments which are duely to be reuerenced yet not to be adored or kneeled vnto So we conclude that all religious seruice and worship belongeth onely vnto God and it were great idolatrie to giue it to any other Fulke annot Apocal. 19. sect 5. Argum. 1. The scripture is plaine Math. 4 10. Thou shalt worship 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
lauer of regeneration and word of Sanctification all the sinnes in men regenerate are healed yea euen those which by humane ignorance afterward are committed Non vt baptisma quoties peccatur toties repetatur sed quia ipso quod semel datur fit vt non solum anteà verùm etiam posteà quorumlibet peccatorum venia fidelibus impetretur Not that Baptisme so oft as a man sinneth is to bee repeated but by vertue of that which is once giuen it commeth to passe that the faithfull haue remission of their sinnes not onely before but also after Ergo Baptisme hath it force not onely for the present but it reacheth vnto the time following THE THIRD PART OF THE LIBERTIE and priuiledges obtained by Baptisme The Papists 1. THey haue defined that a man by Baptisme is not onely debitor fidei sed etiam vniuersae legis Christi implendae error 109 not onely a debter of the faith but is made a debter to performe the whole law of Christ Concil Trident. sess 8. can 7. that is Baptisme is not onely a signe of free iustification by faith neither doth he which is baptized professe himselfe onely by faith to bee iustified but partly also by his workes and the keeping of the commandements of Christ. The Protestants Ans. IN Baptisme wee make profession of our obedience to die vnto sinne and rise vp to newnes of life Rom. 6.2 yet not thereby to bee iustified but in being baptized wee shew our faith and hope onely to looke for remission of sinnes and saluation of our soules by the death of Christ. Argum. 1. Circumcision in place whereof Baptisme is giuen to vs is called by the Apostle a seale of the righteousnes of faith Rom. 4 11. not of the righteousnes of workes much more then is Baptisme which is a Sacrament of the Gospell a pledge vnto vs of the iustice of faith Argum. 2. By Baptisme we are freed from the curse of the lawe for it is a Sacrament of the death of Christ and of all the benefites thereof and Christ by his death hath borne for vs the curse of the lawe Galath 3.13 But if by Baptisme we binde our selues to the obseruance of the lawe to bee iustified and finde life thereby we must needes fall into the curse because we are not able to keepe the commandements Wherefore seeing Baptisme deliuereth vs from the curse it also exempteth vs from the workes of the lawe The Papists error 110 2. ALthough Christians are bound by solemne vow in Baptisme to walke in obedience before God and to keepe his commandements yet are they not therefore freed and exempted from the obseruance of the lawes and ordinances of men the which they are bound in conscience to keepe and vnder paine of damnation Bellarm. cap. 16. The Protestants BAptisme onely bindeth vs to keepe the commandements of God and so far forth also to obey men as they commaund things lawfull but wee must not be brought in bondage to mens traditions and obseruations seeing we are the Lords free men and by Baptisme consecrate to his seruice Argum. Math. 28.19 Goe and teach baptizing them c. and teaching them to obserue all that I haue commanded you Ergo Baptisme bindeth vs onely to the obseruation of Gods precepts 1. Corinth 7.23 Yee are bought with a price be not the seruants of men Baptisme is a signe of the death of Christ the price of our redemption Ergo wee are freed from all meere humane seruice in receiuing of Baptisme For this cause is it called the Baptisme of Christ Augustine saith Paulus dixisse legitur euangelium meum baptismum autem Christi nemo Apostolorum ita vnquam ministrauit vt auderet dicere suum Paul is read to haue said My Gospell but neuer any of the Apostles durst call the Baptisme of Christ their Baptisme Ergo seeing it is the Baptisme of Christ and we are onely baptized in his name not in our owne name or the name of men wee must onely hope to bee saued by faith in him and become his seruants wholly THE SEVENTH QVESTION OF THE difference betweene the Baptisme of our Sauiour Christ and the Baptisme of Iohn The Papists THe Baptisme of John they say was of another kinde then Christs Baptisme was neither was it sufficient without Christs Baptisme nor had the error 111 like force or efficacie as his Baptisme had and therefore such as had been baptized of Iohn were afterward admitted to Christs Baptisme Concil Trident. sess 8. canon 1. Bellarm. lib. 1. de baptis cap. 20.21 Argum. 1. Matth. 3.11 Iohn himselfe saith I baptize you with water but hee shall baptize you with the holy Ghost Ergo Iohns Baptisme and Christes not all one for Iohns Baptisme gaue not the holy Ghost Bellarm. ibid. Ans. Iohn speaketh not of diuerse Baptismes but of diuerse operations and ministeries in one and the same Baptisme for Iohn as all other ministers doe did but giue water and Christ working together with them giueth the holy Ghost But it will be answered that Iohn saith not he dooth baptize but hee shall baptize Ergo Christ did not baptize together with Iohn by his spirite Ans. The same Iohn in another place speaketh of Christ in the present tense Iohn 1.33 This is hee which baptizeth with the holy Ghost Ergo Christ did both then baptize with his spirite and afterwards also more manifestly when the giftes of the spirite began to bee shed forth more plentifully vpon men Argum. 2. Saint Paul baptized twelue men at Ephesus with Christs Baptisme that had receiued Iohns before Act. 19.4.5 Ergo Iohns Baptisme was not the same that Christs was Bellarm. Ans. There can be no such thing gathered out of that place for those words in the fifth verse When they heard this they were baptized in the name of the Lord Iesus are part of the narration which Paul maketh of Iohns manner of Baptisme so that the sense is this they that heard Iohns doctrine were baptized in the name of the Lord Iesus It is not so to be read as though they were baptized againe of Paul but he laieth onely his hands vpon them that had before receiued the Baptisme of Iohn The Protestants THat Iohns Baptisme was not diuerse from Christs Baptisme but was all one with it in propertie and effect and that they which were baptized by Iohn were baptized into the name of Christ and therefore needed not againe to bee baptized thus it is made manifest out of Scripture Argum. 1. Iohns Baptisme differed not in the matter of the Sacrament for he baptized with water as Christs Apostles did There was also the same forme of both the word of God for Iohn also taught the people to beleeue in Iesus Christ that was to come Act. 19.4 There was also the same scope and ende of Iohns Baptisme For hee preached the Baptisme of repentance for remission of sinnes Mark 1.4 Ergo it was the same with the Baptisme of Christ. Argum. 2. If
Masse is not of that nature for it is made by the ministerie of man for euery one of their sacrificing Priests is able to make the bodie of Christ but this bodie which Christ had to offer was made onely by God without the helpe of man as the Apostle saith Againe say if you dare that the bodie which you offer is the true Tabernacle and temple of God for then it would followe that God dwelleth in temples made with hands that is by the ministerie of man contrarie to the Scriptures seeing you affirme that the bodie of Christ is no otherwise present but by the ministerie of the Priest And what a goodly Tabernacle is this for God thinke you which you shut vp in a pixe and hang vp in your Churches A mouse may eate it the fire may consume it corruption may take it would God suffer his Tabernacle thus to be defiled Wherefore vpon these premises we conclude that what you offer in your popish sacrifice cannot be the proper gift belonging to Christes Priesthoode Argum. 3. The Apostle saith Hebr. 13.10 Wee haue an altar whereof they haue no power to eate which serue in the Tabernacle Ergo we haue not onely a common table to eate meere bread vpon but a verie altar in the proper sense to sacrifice Christs bodie vpon Rhemist annot Hebr. 13. sect 6. Ans. First the Apostle speaketh of the sacrifice of Christs death whereof we are made partakers by faith which they can reape no benefite by which remaine in the ceremoniall obseruations of Leuiticall sacrifices Christ therefore is our Priest altar and sacrifice for verse 12. the Apostle maketh mention of the suffrings of Christ he meaneth not then the Communion table which is vnproperly called an altar or any materiall altar beside but the altar onely of Christs death Secondly if wheresoeuer in Scripture this worde altar is read it must be taken for a proper materiall altar we shall haue also a material altar in heauen Apoc. 8.3 which I am sure they wil not grant Thirdly the Apostle saith We haue an altar which is but one whereas popish altars are many it cannot therefore be vnderstoode of such altars The Protestants THat there are spirituall sacrifices remaining yet vnto Christians in the exercise of religion we doe verily beleeue being so taught by the Scriptures such are the sacrifices of praise and thankesgiuing Heb. 13.15 The sacrifice of almes and distribution verse 16. the mortifying also of the flesh is a kinde of crucifying and so a spirituall sacrifice Galat. 6.14 And in this sense wee denie not but that the Sacrament may be called a sacrifice that is a spirituall oblation of praise and thankesgiuing but that there is a proper and externall sacrifice as in the lawe of Goates and Bullocks vpon the crosse of the bodie of Christ so in the Eucharist of the same bodie and flesh of Christ we doe hold it for a great blasphemie and heresie Argum. 1. The very flesh and true naturall bodie of Christ is not as wee haue shewed before at large in such carnall and corporall manner present in the Sacrament therefore it cannot in the Sacrament be sacrificed and offered vp Argum. 2. This sacrificing of the bodie and blood of Christ is contrarie to Christs institution for he saith onely Take yee eate yee drinke yee he saith not Sacrifice yee or lift vp and make an oblation of my bodie Neither doe those wordes hoc facite doe this giue them any power to sacrifice for to whome he saith Eate yee drinke yee to the same also he saith Doe yee Wherefore if doe yee be as much as sacrifice yee all Christians for whome it is lawfull to eate and drinke the Sacrament by this rule haue authoritie to sacrifice Againe the words are Doe this in remembrance We remember things absent and which are alreadie done and past if then there be a present sacrifice in the Sacrament of the bodie of Christ it cannot properly be said to be a memorie of his sacrifice Argum. 3. The Apostle saith that Christ neede not to offer himselfe often but that he hath done once in the end of the world Heb. 9.26 And with one offering hath hee made perfite for euer them that are sanctified 10.14 Ergo Christ cannot be sacrificed againe for that were to make his sacrifice vpon the crosse imperfect Bellarmine answereth that the Apostle here speaketh of the bloodie and painefull sacrifice of Christ vpon the crosse which was sufficient once to bee done but this taketh not away the vnbloodie sacrifice which is but an iteration of the former whereby the fruite and efficacie of that first oblation is applied vnto vs Bellarm. lib. 1. de miss cap. 25. Ans. First the Apostle excludeth all manner iterations of the sacrifice of Christ for otherwise if Christ should now bee often howsoeuer sacrificed the difference would not hold betweene the sacrifices of the lawe which were often done and the sacrifice of Christ which was once to be performed for their sacrifices were also in a manner iterations and commemorations of the sacrifice of Christ. The Apostle then thus reasoneth They had many iteratiue and commemoratiue sacrifices of Christs death Ergo we haue not now Secondly that is but a foolish and false distinction of the bloodie and vnbloodie sacrifice as they vnderstand it for there can be no proper vnbloodie sacrifice of Christ neither could he be offered vp otherwise then by dying Heb. 9.27.28 Therefore he is not offered vp in the Sacrament because now he dyeth not Thirdly neither neede wee inuent a new kinde of sacrifice for the application of Christs death for to that end Christ hath appointed the preaching of the word and instituted the Sacraments wherby the death of Christ with al the benefites thereof are most fruitefully applied vnto vs Galath 3.1 1. Corinth 11.26 Argum. 4. Augustine in a certaine place allegorizing the parable of the prodigall child thus writeth Vitulum occidit quando in sacramento altario memoriam passionis in mente renouauit He slew the fat calfe when hee renewed in the Sacrament of the altar the memorie of his passion in his minde Hee calleth it the Sacrament not the sacrifice of the altar and it onely bringeth to our minde the memorie of Christs passion and sacrifice there is then no oblation or sacrifice in the Sacrament but onely a commemoration of Christs sacrifice which we denie not AN APPENDIX OR THIRD PART OF the name and office of Priestes The Papists AS they doe falsely teach and perswade that there is yet remaining a proper error 129 externall sacrifice for Christians vnder the Gospell so also they maintaine a sacrificing Priesthoode And further they say that the Leuiticall Priesthoode was not translated into the sacrifice of Christ vpon the crosse but is properly turned into the Priesthoode and sacrifice in the Church according to Melchisedechs rite in offering vp the bodie and blood of Christ in the formes of bread and wine Rhemist
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
of his abasing and humiliation Fulke annot in hunc locum as S. Paul saith That he made himselfe of no reputation and tooke vpon him the forme of a seruant Philip. 2.7 The Protestants THat Christ our Sauiour by the vertue of his death did ouercome hel and the deuill we doe verily beleeue which may be called a discent into hell that he also suffered the torments of hell vpon the crosse and so descended into hell for vs to abide that bitter paine which we had deserued to suffer eternally we doe also holde and teach for what rather may be called hell then the anguish of soule which he suffered when he being God yet complained that he was forsaken of God Furthermore if descending into hell be taken according to the Hebrew phrase For entring into the state of the dead so we also graunt that Christ descended into hell Fulk Act. 2. sect 11. But for the descending of Christ into hell after your sense to deliuer the Patriarkes from thence when you can proue it out of Scripture we will yeelde vnto you 1. The soule of Christ which he committed into his Fathers hands was in Paradise where he promised the theefe should be with him Luke 22.43 How then could his soule be three daies in hell as you affirme from the time of his death to his resurrection Fulke Luke 11. sect 4. Bellarm. answereth that it was not impossible that the soule of Christ should be in two places at once cap. 15. which is an answere not worthy to be answered for who hath taught them so boldly to builde their phantasies vpon Gods power hauing no warrant not assurance of his wil May not the Vbiquitaries by the same reason proue the omnipresence of Christs humanity because he is able to make his soule and body to be in many places at once as well as in two and so consequently by his power which is infinite as well in all places as in many 2. We beleeue that the Patriarkes and godly Fathers were in heauen or Paradise as well before the resurrection of Christ as after for in as much as they were iustified by faith in his blood they receiued the same crowne and reward of righteousnes that we doe being iustified by the same meanes This we haue proued more at large controu 9. quest 1. Wherefore seeing there were none in hell which they call Limbus Patrum to be deliuered there was no such cause why Christ should descend into hell Therefore he descended not to deliuer the Patriarkes that remained in darkenes 3. They agree not among theÌ„selues about this article of Christs descension to deliuer the Patriarkes Andradius saith it caÌ„not be proued out of Scripture but Bellarmine and our Rhemists doe bring their best arguments for it out of Scripture they alleadge also diuers causes of his descension the Romane Catechisme rendreth two reasons one to set the Patriarkes at liberty the other to manifest the power and vertue of his death in hell but that S. Paul saith was sufficiently manifested and made knowne vpon the crosse Colos. 2.15 Thomas Aquinas beside these addeth a third that as Christ died for vs to free vs from death so it was conuenient that he should descend into hell to deliuer vs from the descension into hell as though Christ by his death did not fully deliuer vs from eternall damnation Some other holde that Christ went thither to suffer the torments of hell that he might fully pay our raunsome by suffering the whole punishmeÌ„t due vnto mankinde but this is a very grosse and erronious opinion for Christ suffered fully in body and soule vpon the Crosse when he cried Consummatum est It is finished that is he had fully appeased the wrath of God by his sufferings Augustine saith plainely that he knew not what good Christ wrought for the iust soules that were in the bosome of Abraham when he descended into hell a quib eum secundum beatificaÌ„ praesentiam diuinitatis nunquam video recessisse From whom I finde hee was neuer absent or withdrew himselfe by the blessed presence of his diuine power Ergo in his iudgement Christ descended not to deliuer the Patriarkes And concerning the soule of Christ he writeth flatly Si mortuo corpore anima latronis ad Paradisum mox vocatur quempiam adhuc tam impium credimus qui dicere audeat quoniam anima Saluatoris nostri triduo illo corporâ—ae mortis apud inferos custodiae mancipetur If the soule of the theefe straightway being gone from the body was called vp to heauen is there any man so wicked to say that the soule of our Sauiour was kept three daies in the prison of hel By his sentence then the soule of Christ passed straight to heauen and descended not to hell AN APPENDIX CONCERNING the place of Hell The Papists THe place where damned spirites are tormented they say is about the center of the earth the lowest of all places and nothing lower then it Bellarm. de error 102 Christi anima lib. 4. cap. 10. Their Limbus Patrum the place of darkenes where the Fathers were before Christ is say they in the highest parte and as it were the brimme of hel Rhemist Luke 1â— 22 Betweene these two places there is a great gulfe or space and there is Purgatory Rhemist Luk. 16. sect 8. Wherefore they conclude veros inferos esse loca subterranea That the subterrestriall and infernall places doe properly make hell Bellarm. cap. 8. And so hell should be properly a place of punishmeÌ„t because of the farre distance from heauen whereas not so much the distance of place as the absence of Gods spirite and losse of his fauour maketh it a place of horror and miserie Argum. 1. Math. 12.40 As Ionas was three daies and three nights in the belly of the Whale so the sonne of man must be in the hart of the earth but the graue is not in the hart but the brimme of the earth Ergo we must needes vnderstand Hell which is in the midst of the earth Bellarm. cap. 12. Ans. 1. This place cannot otherwise be applied then to signifie the burial of Christ and his abode in the graue and his rising againe the third day of his soule it cannot properly be meant for Christ saith he will giue them the signe of Ionas in himselfe but a signe is conspicuous visible and apparent how could then the descending of his soule be a signe vnto them which they knew not neither could see But the laying of his body into the graue and the remaining there to the third day they were all eye witnesses of Also there is great affinity betweene the two Greeke words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a signe which is there vsed Math. 12.40 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth sepulchrum a graue the one word being fitly deriued of the other what better 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then could he giue them then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his owne graue or Sepulchre Secondly to
congregate or called to condemne such open wickednes as if neuer any heresie had been condemned but in a Synode or Councel Cont. 2. epistol Pelag. lib. 4. cap. 12. This is that heretical opinioÌ„ as they call it which the Councel of Constance condemned in Iohn Husse him together with it because he said That an heretike whatsoeuer he be ought first to be instructed and taught with Christian loue gentlenes by the holy scriptures by reasons drawn out of the same before he suffer corporall or bodily punishment Fox pag. 610. articul 18. Which his saying is grounded vpon that rule of the Gospell Math. 18.15 That if we see one offend we should first tell him priuatly then before 2. or 3. lastly declare it to the Church and if he will not heare the Church that is by scripture conuincing him then continuing obstinate let him be as a publicane This rule the papists kept not in their bloudie persecutions here in England They put many hundreds to death were not able to coÌ„uince any one of heresie but in disputation were themselues put to silence and made ashamed Their onely arguments were the fire and fagot 3 Againe they vsed vnlawfull waies and vniust in sifting and examining by error 104 cruel tormeÌ„ts the poore innocents brought before them neither shewing accusers nor witnesses Iohn Browne Martyr appearing before Warrham and Fisher two bloudsuckers was burned with hot coales his bare feet being set vpon theÌ„ Fox p. 1292. Cutbert Symsons fingers were grated with an arrow and he himself piteously racked to be made betray his innoceÌ„t brethren p. 2032. Tomkins hand was burned by Bonner till the sinewes sparkled againe pag. 1533. And these were the witnesses and accusers that were brought against them This was cleane contrarie to the law of Moses At the mouth of two or three witnesses shall he that is worthie of death dye Deuteron 17.6 Augustine saith Quis iudex accusantis sumat personam c. What Iudge would take vpon him to be an accuser Our Lord Christ knewe Iudas to be a theefe sayth he yet because he was not accused he did not cast him off He counteth it a very vnnaturall thing for the Iudge to be an accuser and to proceede without witnesses which although in some criminall cases is more tolerable yet in the cases of life and death ought in no wise to be vsed The same iudgement also Augustine giueth of that cruell custome of tormenting men to conuince them by their own mouth which was inuented by the heathen but neuer more cruelly practised then among the papists Hoc intolerabile est saith he rigandum fontibus lacrymarum cum propterea torqueat iudex accusatum ne occidat nesciens innocentem fit per ignorantiam vt tortum innocentem occidat quem ne innocentem occideret torserat How intolerable a thing is it and to be much lamented that while the Iudge tormenteth the partie accused lest vnwittingly he should put an innocent man to death it falleth out that he adiudgeth to death a man both innocent beside tormented whom lest he should slay as an innocent he before put to torment His meaning is that when a man is put to the racke or otherwise tortured that he might confesse the truth and cleere himselfe it commeth to passe that through extremitie of the payne he maketh himselfe guiltie and so the innocent is both wrongfully tormented and vniustly put to death Which kind of forcing men by torture though in some dangerous cases as of high treason and such like where there is great perill in the concealing of the truth and no other way to sift it out may be admitted yet to vse it as an ordinarie course as the papists did and in causes of religion it is to too shameful and of all Christians to be abhorred 4 Where haue they learned so hotly and fiercely to pursue simple men and women to death for none or very small offences which they notwithstanding error 105 falsely called heresie Was it heresie for Iames Brewster to heare one Sweeting to reade many good things out of a certaine booke or for the same Sweeting when as the sayd Iames should say Now the sonne of the liuing God helpe vs to answere Now almightie God so doe yet for these heresies were they both condemned and burnt in Smithfield Anno. 1511. Fox pag. 818. A woman of Auspurge had like to haue been burned for asking a priest that carried the Host to a sicke man with Taper-light what he meant to goe with a light at noone day if Mary the Emperours sister had not made sute for her Anno. 1550. Anno 1525. a Monke burned in France because he had forsaken his abominable order and married a wife pag. 896. Iohannes de Cadurco being at a feast where it was agreed that euery one should bring forth this posie or sentence because he brought forth this Christ reigne in our hearts and prosecuted it out of the scriptures was burned Anno. 1533. pag. 897. A Tailour burned at Paris anno 1549. for working vpon an holy day ex Iohan. Crispin Fox p. 903. Ralfe Hare constrained to abiure for saying before the Bishop of Winchester The Lord is my witnes It is Symbolum Haereticorum saith Winchester a marke to know heretikes by to say the Lord the Lord page 1225. One Thomas Sanpaulinus Matyr because he rebuked a man for swearing was thereupon suspected to be a Lutheran examined condemned and burned at Paris anno 1551. pa. 904. Many such like examples might be produced of holye Martyres which for these and such other great heresies were put to death And as the offences were very smal as we see so their maÌ„ner of proceeding was most cruell void of all humanity They spared not women with childe We haue not forgotten that famous example of their crueltie which shall be remeÌ„bred to their perpetuall shame and infamie Howe they burned 3. simple women in the Isle of Garnsey anno 1556. which had submitted theÌ„selues to their mercie one of the three was great with childe which brast out of her wombe in the midst of the fire and was throwne in againe pa. 1944. They had no compassion of the tender age of children In the towne of Byrbroke while Richard Chapman did pennaunce in the Church beeing inioyned to kneele barefoote and bare legged all the sermon while vppon the colde steps of the Church a little boy for giuing him his hat to kneele vpon was had into the vestrie and piteously scourged pa. 1047. Cruel Bonner burned Richard Mâ—kins a childe of 15. yeeres for speaking against the sacrament of the aultar who notwithstanding at the stake was taught to speak much good of the B. of London and so did pa. 1202. John Fâ—ttie his childe being of 8. yeere oulde for saying to one of the Bishoppes Chaplens that he had Balaams marke was scourged so cruelly that within 14 dayes hee died Nay such was their cruelty they
condemned to death men that were bestraught of their wits as Collins and Cowbridge were burned beeing both franticke see their storie page 1131. Where is now that lenitie and compassion which ought to be in the Ministers of the Gospell Such crueltie was not heard of no not amongst the heathen Yea they breake their owne law which suffereth a man once to abiure his heresie but if afterwarde he be detected he dieth without mercie Fox Anno. 1511. William Carder Agnes Grebil were condemned though they submitted theÌ„selues and promised to be conformable to their religion page 1277. Yet this law of theirs is most vniust and contrary to the gospell which faieth that if thy brother sinne against thee 7. times in a day and 7. times in a day turne againe and say It repenteth me thou shalt forgiue him Luke 17.4 Yet these men will forgiue but once and not that neither But S. Paul saith An heretike after once or twise admonition reiect Bellarm. his best answer is by denying the text saying that it was not so red in former times but thus after once admonition de laicis cap. 22. There was more clemencie vsed in Augustines time for then Bishops did not prouoke the Magistrate to execute whom they had condemned but did entreat the Magistrate to shew compassion vnto Heretikes not straight wayes to punish them with death Ne sic vitam istam finiant saith Augustine per supplicium vt ea finita non possint finire supplicium Least they should so end this life by punishment that the life being ended they should neuer end their punishment Epist. 54. And in another place sic eorum peceata compesce vt sint quos poeniteat peccasse Epist. 159. So restraine their sinnes that they may yet remaine to repent them of their sinnes In those daies therefore men were not by and by punished with death to preuent their repentance as in time of poperie but their repentance was expected to deliuer them from the sentence of death Thus much of this question as likewise of the whole controuersie and thus far also concerning such controuersies as are moued about the Church militant heere vpon earth which wee haue hitherto prosequuted by the Lords gracious assistaunce In the next place we are to deale in those controuersies which concerne the other part of the Church triumphant in heauen 1. Timoth. 6.16 Soli Deo immortali Patri Filio cum spiritu sancto sit honor imperium sempiternum THE SECOND BOOKE OR CENTVRIE CONTAINING AN OTHER LARGE HVNDRETH OF POPISH errors and many of them foule heresies deuided into six seuerall Controuersies CONCERNING THE ESTATE OF THE CHVRCH TRIVMPHANT IN Heauen and the Sacraments of the Church Militant vpon earth Jmprinted at London by Thomas Orwin for Thomas Man 1592. ILLVSTRISSIMO ET INclytissimo Domino Comiti Essexio non tam generis claritate quam virtute sua nobili de re literaria studiosisque omnibus semper optimè merito Dominoque mihi multis nominibus colendissimo SCite illud Nobilissime Comes ab Epicharmo olim dictum perhibetur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Qua sententia monet neruos atque artus esse sapientiae noÌ„ temere credere Idque pulchrè depingi solet oculatae manus effigie vt ne vel manu contrectare vel pugillo premere id est mentis consensu iudicio approbare audeamus quod noÌ„ prius penitus exploratuÌ„ habuerimus Hoc sequi coÌ„siliuÌ„ si nostrates voluissent papicolas volo et pontificiae haereseâ—s sectatores Anglos si singula ad trutinam expeÌ„dissent prius ad quae postea admouerunt manus non tam temere imprudenter callidis doctoribus aurem praebuissent nec tam facile cito a sana doctrina desciuissent Multi enim apud nos sunt imperiti homunciones indoctae mulierculae quanquam doctos etiam aliquos et satis cordatos viros ex isto genere agnouerim qui nec scientia armati nec animi proposito stabiles nescientes lethale non minutim guttatim sorbillarunt sed plenò gutture hauserunt venenum dum nihil probantes vel examinantes se papisticae superstitionis astutijs illaqueari passi sunt Haec dum meeum seriò cogito altiùs tanquam ex animi spècula prospiciens contueor non ex alijs initijs quaÌ„ temeritatis ignorantiae hoc taÌ„ magnum malum enatum exortum video Jgnorantiae est quòd veritate spreta neglecta errores sponte liberè imbiberuÌ„t amplexati sunt temeritatis verò quòd se nullo delectu habito seditiosis impijs magistris in disciplinam tradere voluerunt Qui non Epicharmi philosophi humanum sed Pauli Apostoli diuinum consilium respuunt qui sic monet Omnia probate quod bonum est tenete Contra istos etiam satis nos cautos dedit dominus Christus sic praemonens Cauete a Prophetis mendacibus qui veniunt ad vos in vestimentis ouium sed intrinsecus sunt lupi rapaces Cum igitur multos quoruÌ„daÌ„ insidijs deceptos in fraudem illici in errores toto impetu praecipitari cernerem idque non alij principio quaÌ„ ipsorum ignorantiae tribuendum esse operae precium facturum duxi si quis papisticae superstitionis capita in synopsin quandam coÌ„ijcere studeret et passim verae fidei ex scripturis adhibens antidotum vniuersam doctrinam pontificiam vno intuitu conspiciendam proponeret Hoc opus tam necessarium cum diu expectassem dum aggrederentur alij cum neminem huc animum applicasse aut id in animo habere perspexeram Ego tandem prodij è multis millibus ad hoc onus sustinendum minimè omnium idoneus Qui me operam meam non perditurum sed aliquid Ecclesiae commodi allaturam mihi persuaseram si in isto opere desudareÌ„ vt haberent nostrates quo aduersus haeresin pontificiam instructiores esse possint NumeruÌ„ si quis quaerat haereseâ—n quas Romana ecclesia orbi nostro propinauit mensuram omnem modum superant ad immensam molem excrescunt Trecentos ego plures hoc opere percurri errores pontificios nec omnes tamen complexus sum Varro scriptor ille copiosus vir multae lectionis vt scribit August philosophorum sectas vsque ad ducentas octoginta octo numerauit et receÌ„suit Sed a papistis huius seculi erroruÌ„ varietate multitudine veteres illi superantur Scripsit non multis abhinc annis libellum Tilemannus quidaÌ„ Heshusius qui sic inscribitur Sexcenti errores pontificij Geminauit ille duplum effecit numeruÌ„ hunc quem nos secuti sumus Trecentos nos malumus quam sexcentos ponere Non quòd non putem tot vitijs corruptelis superstitionem pontificiam scatere vel non posse tot colligi illius synagogae errores Sed id feci iaÌ„ partim quia praecipua capita maximè proseâ—ui