then a lot and wise men refuse to commit matters of such consequence vnto the hazard thereof As for that you adde What difference betweene the toungue speaking and the hand writing in regard of testimony saving that hand-writing is the better and more excellent I con you hearty thankes for it For if Divine testimony be the ground and reason of Faith and the word written be Divine testimony as well nay better as you say and more excellent then the word spoken by mouth it followeth that the word written may beget Faith and convert a soule as well as the word by mouth preached Whether you would willingly be of this opinion or no I cannot say sure I am you must of force if you will hold to your owne Premisses This by the way N. N. If it were in doubt or a thing in controversie who should haue the mony that I possesse If I should heare a voice in the aire commanding me to dispose of it to such a person I should still doubt and iustly might whose voyce it were whether Gods or Sathans But if it were once put to a Lot and disposed of to such a person I could never doubt afterwards but that it was done by Gods immediat appointment DEFENCE No could Why I pray you For may not Satan as well haue a hand in a Lot as in a voice in the aire What is not sorcery or divination by Lots a Satanicall invention and may not Satan be a worker in his owne art If he may how am I certaine that the Casuall event is rather of Gods appointment then of Satans The maine error is a conceit you haue that in all Casualties God worketh by his immediate speciall Providence which is vtterly vntrue as wee haue already shewed And I am strongly perswaded that this very opinion was the principall roote out of which sorcery sundry other heathnish soothsayings first grew and by which among simple and superstitious Christians they are yet still maintained and continued But to put you from this conceit let mee intreat you seriously to consider the Lot that Haman cast from day to day and from month to month to know what month or day were fittest for the generall massacring of the Iewes The Lot must needs fall on one day or other it fell as it seemes on the thirteenth day of the twelfth month which is Adar What Must wee now needs say that the hand of God yea the immediat hand of God had appointed that day to that end I trow no for the very same day Haman his whole family with many thousands of the enimies of God were destroyed by the Iewes the Iewes themselues were deliuered Doth not Solomon also speake of theeues who share their pillages and robbers amongst themselues by Lot And did not the Romane souldiers agree to cast Lots who should haue our Saviours seamlesse coat Yet by your opinion when the Lot hath disposed to every one his portion neither the theeues nor the souldiers needed afterwards to doubt but that God by his immediat hand assigned it vnto them and testified by his speciall Providence that hee would haue it so A strange and fearfull assertion directly reversing that law of justice which requireth restitution of whatsoever is wrongfully gotten But to what end all this Forsooth to perswade that a Lot declares will of God as well if not better then his owne voice from heaven Wherevnto I answere no more and I can answere no lesse then the Angell did vnto Satan Increpet te Dominus the Lord rebuke thee for what you say is no lesse then flat blasphemy N. N. Againe it is for the resolution of a doubt namely who shall haue these Cards or that Mony Hence I conclude againe that the vse of Cards and Dice as it is now vsed by our Gamesters is a meere Lottery DEFENCE That in Cards and Dice there is intended the resolution of a doubt is already granted neither is it denied that they are Lots but that they are all Meere Lots 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to driue out one naile with another I conclude against your Conclusion that you haue not yet not never will be able to proue that all Games at Cards and Tables and the like are Meere Lottery N. N. But I leaue mens testimony which may erre and will try it by Scriptures that never erre Prov. 16.33 The lot is cast into lap but the whole disposition thereof is of the Lord. Prov. 10.18 The Lot causeth contentions to cease Such a thing is practized by Gamesters There is a Lot cast what else meaneth the shufling of the Cards and the shakeing of the Dice which I heare Gamesters call for so earnestly The whole disposition therefore is of God If I packe the Cards or cogge the Dice not shufle the Cards or shake the Dice like honest dishonest Gamesters thou wouldst refuse my company at play DEFENCE To let passe that both vnsavoury and vncharitable jest of honest dishonest gamesters yet doing you to wit that there are diverse in this land of farre greater learning then your selfe and of singular both piety and gravity who refuse not at times to recreate themselues at Cards after their more serious studies to let passe I say this pure vnpure iest thus I thinke out of these two passages you would conclude That Lot the whole disposition whereof is of God is a meere Lot But Cards and Dice are such Lots the whole disposition whereof is of God Ergo Cards Dice are meere Lots The Maior you take for granted for you goe not about to proue it The Minor you confirme by two sentences of Solomon and the former part that cards and dice are Lots by the latter because they stint controversies the latter that the whole disposition of them is of God by the former because in euery Lot the whole disposition is of the Lord. This as I take it is or should be the right frame of your argument Which I now come to answere The knot of all lies in the right vnderstanding of the former passage wherein some are of opinion that Extraordinary Lots only or to vse their owne words Singular Miraculous Divine not Civill Lots are meant And then the Assumption is false for all Lots and among the rest cards and dice are not such Lots Others stand precisely vpon these words in the Originall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But every iudgement of it is of Cod and comparing it with the like places affirme that it importeth no more but this that in all things yea even the most vnlikely such as are Casuall Euents and Lots there is a Divine Providence and hand of God Which exposition no way confirmeth your Maior For every Lot wherein God hath a hand is not presently a Meere lot But to answere yet more plainely and fully it is to be obserued that the wise man saith not God disposeth all immediatly but only thus All the disposition
deserueth with no other then equal disdaine and contempt For it hath abundantly beene manifested to the world that as in the goodnesse of our cause wee are every way superiour vnto you so in all kinde of learning both Humane and Divine wee are no way inferiour to the best of you Howbeit seeing I am put in good hope by some of your best friends that you carry a minde prepared to imbrace the truth if at any time it shall bee discouered vnto you and your selfe haue freely professed vnto mee that your meaning is not any way to contest with me but only to be instructed by me I am content laying aside all advantages whatsoever to enter the lists with you by framing vp a short yet full answere to endeauour your best satisfaction God grant that as it is intended so it may redound first to his glory and then to the reducing of your straying soule from the servitude of Babylon into the liberty of Ierusalem which is from aboue and the right Mother of all true Beleeuers N. N. Catholike grounds for the Article of the Real Presence I. D. This title prefixed vnto your Writing intimateth that you craue resolution in the article as you terme it of the Real Presence and the Grounds thereof For the better performance whereof and to cleare the way of all rubs before vs you may be pleased to know that we denie not either the Presence or the Real Presence of Christ in the Sacrament Not the Presence For seeing therein his Body is delivered receaued eaten as the Scriptures testifie and that can no way be deliuered receaued eaten which is every way absent we cannot but beleeue with the heart confesse with the mouth that Christ is present Nor the Reall presence For seeing Eating betokeneth our Vnion and Incorporation with Christ whereby we are so closely joyned and joynted vnto him that wee are members of his body of his flesh and of his bones certainely vnlesse wee will question either the power of Faith or whether God be able to worke such an effect we cannot well doubt but that the Presence is True and Real not Imaginarie and Fained According herevnto S. Chrysostome Christ offereth himselfe vnto vs in these Mysteries not onely to bee seene but also to be touched and felt And S. Augustin We cannot with our hand feele Christ sitting in heauen but by Faith we may touch him Agreeing therefore in the Thing that there is a Real Presence wherein lies the difference betwixt vs It lies partly in the Manner of Presence and partly in the kinde of Change whereby the Presence is wrought As touching the Manner of Presence wee acknowledge it to bee double the one Sacramentall the other Spirituall The sacramentall is a Relatiue Presence of the thing signified vnto the signes partly for that they are significatiue represent Christ vnto vs even as the word spoken vnto the eare represents the thing signified thereby vnto the minde and partly because they are Exhibitiue God in them offering vs his Sonne vpon condition of Faith And in regard hereof it may also well be called a Pactionall presence The spirituall is a presence of Christ vnto the Faith of the Receauer or which is all one vnto the Receauer by Faith whereby we seeke him not here on earth in with or vnder the Accidents of bread but aloft in heauen where hee sitteth at the right hand of his father For where the carcase is thither saith Christ will the Eagles resort Whence S. Chrysostome He must climbe vp on high whosoeuer commeth to this Body And S. Augustine How shall I convay my hand into heauen that I may hold him sitting there Send thy faith thither and thou holdest him Now if any farther demand how this sacramentall and spirituall presence is wrought I answere it is done by a Change in the Elements of Bread and Wine By a change I say yet not of their Nature and Substance but of their Vse and Vertue For they are now no longer common but consecrated Bread and Wine ordained by Christ to bee effectuall symbols and Pledges of our Vnion and Communion with his Flesh and Bloud So saith Theodoret The visible symbols hath hee honoured with the name of his Body and Bloud not changing their nature but adding grace vnto nature And so the rest of the Fathers But all this little contents you except withall we yeeld you a Corporall and Locall Presence of Christ vnder the Accidents of Bread and Wine and that by way of Transubstantiation Transubstantiation a terme as lately devised so also inconvenient Lately deuised for it is but foure hundred yeares old or thereabouts bâ—ing forged in the Lateran councell vnder Innocent the third Inconvenient for properly it imports a Productiue kinde of Conversion by which one Substance is produced out of another or whereby one Substance is turned into another such as was the turning of Water into Wine by the power of Christ at Cana in Galilee But you vnderstand thereby an Adductiue kinde of Conversion by which as Bellarmine defineth it the Body of Christ which before was only in heaven is now also vnder the Accidents of Bread So that more fitly it might haue beene tearmed Cession or Succession or Substitution or Translocation or some such like rather then Transubstantiation the meaning you giue vnto it being no other then a succeeding of Christs Body into the roome of Bread vpon the abolishing of the Substance thereof Yet is it not so much the Newnesse and Inconvenience of the terme as the Impietie of the Doctrine intended thereby which we condemne For it crosseth the truth of Scripture ouerturneth the Articles of Faith destroyeth the Nature of a Sacrament gainesayeth the perpetuall consent of antiquity and implieth in it innumerable contradictions all which God willing shall in due place be demonstrated In the meane season hauing thus briefly stated the Question I come now to examine the particulars of your Writing and whether the passages you quote in such abundance reach home to that Corporall and Locall Presence which you hold or passe no farther then that Sacramentall and Spirituall Presence which we maintaine N. N. The first ground that Catholike men haue for these and all their mysteries of Christian Faith that are aboue the reach of common sense and reason is the Authority of the Catholike Church by which they were taught the same as Points of Faith revealed from God I. D. If by the first Ground you vnderstand the first introduction vnto Faith I grant the Authority of the Catholike Church to be the first ground that by it wee are taught the same But if thereby you meane as vndoubtedly you doe that highest Principle into which all the Mysteries of Faith are finally resolued and by which the Mind is staied and freed from farther doubting I deny the Catholike Church so to be the first ground For as Bellarmine truly writeth Faith beginneth from
without Christ are vnprofitable neither can they be fruitfull at any time but onely in Christ who alone is the Substance and Foundation of them all Wherevpon I conclude that those ancient Sacraments of the Iewes directly looked vnto Christs and prefigured him but were not properly Figures of ours No were What say you then to the Fathers who affirme they were I say two things first that their Authoritie is not a sufficient ground to build our Faith vpon as we haue elsewhere shewed at large For it is but Humane testimonie and argueth as your owne Thomas saith not necessarily but only probably Neither is it reason seeing your selues so often sleight and reiect it even in those points wherein many times they consent that you should so peremptorily vrge it vpon vs and binde vs absolutely to beleeue all they say I say secondly that the Fathers calling the Sacraments of the old Law Figures of ours meane not that they were bare and naked signes without the truth but that in them the thing signified was more darkly and implicitly shadowed then in ours Or rather that they were Figures corresponding vnto ours in the same sense that the Apostle S. Peter intendeth it when he calleth Baptisme the Antitype of Noahs Arke For vnderstanding whereof you are to knowe that Types or Figures are sometimes compared with that truth or thing whereof they are Samplars as where the Holy place of the Tabernacle is said to bee the Antitype of Heauen figured thereby Sometime with some other Secondary samplar and Figure of the same thing as in this place of Peter where Baptisme is made the Antitype of that deliuerance which befell the Church by the Arke in the generall deluge of waters So that the Arke properly was not ordained to be a Figure of Baptisme but both it and Baptisme represent vnto vs our Salvation from the danger both of sinne and death by Christ Iesus therein mutually respecting and answering one the other The same may you also say of the Cloud and the Passing through the Red sea of Manna and the Rock and all the rest And that thus the Fathers heare one for all who to vse your owne words spake in the sense of them all This Bread saith S. Augustine which came downe from heauen Manna signified this Bread the Altar of God signified They were Sacraments divers in signes but in the thing signified alike Heare the Apostle I would not saith hee haue you ignorant Brethren that all our Fathers were vnder the cloud and all passed through the sea and all were baptized by Moses in the â—loud and in the sea and all eat the same spirituall meat The same spirituall I say but another corporall because they Manna We another thing But the same spirituall that we yet our Fathers not their Fathers to whom wee are like not to whom they were like And hee addeth And they all dranke the same spirituall drink They one thing we another as touching the visible nature yet the selfe same in the signifying spirituall vertue For how the same drinke They dranke saith he of the spirituall Rock following them and the Rock was Christ. Thence the Bread thence the drinke The Rocke Christ in the signe true Christ in the Word Flesh. Thus S. Augustine But if the Fathers serue not your turne you haue the Fathers of the Fathers even Christ himselfe and his holy Apostle S. Paul who both affirme that Manna was an expresse figure of this Sacrament And if Manna why not by the same proportion other Sacraments also Indeed now you dispute not Topically but Apodictically you cannot but prevaile if it be true that you say But what are the words I pray you wherein this may appeare Certainely none at all For neither the one nor the other either expresly or implicitly make it a Figure of this Sacrament but of Christ himselfe and his Flesh. For as for the sixt of Iohn it is cleare that our Saviour speaketh not therein of the Eucharist or of Sacramentall Manducation but only of the Spirituall eating of his Flesh by Faith I saith he am the Bread of life hee that commeth vnto mee shall not hunger and hee that beleeueth in me shall neuer thirst Where although to continue the Allegorie hee might haue said He that eateth me shall not hunger and he that drinketh me shall not thirst yet hee chose rather to vse the words of Comming and Beleeuing to teach vs that hee speaketh not of an Oral eating and drinking by the Mouth but only of a Spirituall by Faith And this is so plaine that Bellarmine himselfe confesseth these words Properly not to belong vnto the Sacrament but to the faith of the Incarnation Againe that Eating is meant without which there is no life Except saith hee yee eat the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his Blood there is no life in you But without Sacramentall eating a man may haue life in him Spirituall eating therefore is meant And thus also doe sundry of your owne Rabbies vnderstand this place as namely Gabriel Cusan Cajetan Tapper Hesselius Iansenius and others As for that place of S. Paul it is evident that the Apostle putteth no difference betweene the old Sacraments and the New saue only in regard of the externall signes for otherwise he affirmeth the same thing to be Signified and Exhibited in both to wit Christ. And so doth S. Augustine vnderstand it They did eat the same spirituall meat saith he it had sufficed to haue said they did eat a spirituall meat but he saith the same I cannot finde how we should vnderstand the same but the same that wee doe eat And againe Whosoeuer in Manna vnderstand Christ did eat the same spiritual food that we doe But whosoever sought only to fill their bellies of Manna which were the Fathers of the vnfaithfull they haue eaten and are dead so also the same drinke for the Rock was Christ. Therefore they drank the same drinke that we doe but spiritual drink that is which was receiued by Faith not which was drawne in with the Body If happily you stand vpon those words These things are types vnto vs you may knowe that hee saith not they were types of our Sacraments but Examples to vs that we sin not as they did For as they perished in the wildernesse notwithstanding their Sacraments so may we doing as they did notwithstaÌ„ding ours Which argument if that you say be true would be of no force at all For the Corinthians might thus haue replied though their Sacraments availed not them yet ours may vs because ours are Substance theirs but Shadows But enough of the Antecedent Yet before I proceed to the Consequence some of your By-speeches are also to be examined First you say that Bread aud Wine was mysteriously offered to Almighty God by Melchizedeck But both the Original and your Vulgar translation made authenticall by the Councell of Trent
els would not Calvin haue cavilled at those words Vnlesse a man be borne againe of Water c. Is not the doctrine of the blessed Sacrament necessary Yet how many expositions of this is my Body So is that of Iustification yet twenty expositions of Scripture about the formall cause thereof So also is the doctrine of the Trinity and of Christs Divinity and humanity yet Ebionits Arians Nestorians Eutychians Valentiâ—ians Monothelites and Apollinarists holding heresies against them proue them all to their thinking out of Scripture Ergò Scripture is not so easy as I make it For where all things are plaine there men commonly agree I. D. The truth is being demanded the rule of Faith I named the Scripture and being farther demanded a rule whereby to know the sense of Scripture I answered two things First that all things necessary to salvation are so expresly and plainly set downe that there needs no farther rule secondly that those places which are more obscure are to be expounded by those that are more plaine and that sense which disagreeth is to bee reiected that which agreeth may safely be admitted Safely I say for although haply it may not be the right yet dangerous it cannot be as long as it accords with the Analogy of Faith This I declared somewhat at large in the writing sent to Mr Bayly which I perceaue hath come to your hands also yet satisfies not Otherwise you would not thus dispute against it But know you against whom you dispute Certainly not against me only but the ancient Fathers who affirme the same that I doe For touching the Perspicuity of Scripture in things necessary thus St Augustine In those things which are openly laid downe in Scripture are to be found all things which containe Faith and manners of liuing to wit Hope and Charity And St Chrysostome All things necessary are open and manifest so that there needed not homilies or Sermons were it not through our owne negligence And Cyril of Alexandria To the end they might be knowne to all both small and great he hath delivered them vnto vs in such familiar speech that they exceed no mans capacity So the rest And this is so true that your Gregory of Valentia confesseth it Such verities saith he concerning our faith as are absolutely and necessarily to be knowne and beleeued of all men are plainly taught in the Scriptures themselues So Sixtus Senensis also and others of your side As touching the interpretation of darker places by the plaine thus Saint Basil those things which seeme to bee ambiguous and obscurely spoken in some places of holy writ are enlightned by those which in other places are open and perspicuous And St Augustine There is nothing almost among these obscurities but in other places one may finde it most plainly delivered And St Chrysostome The Scripture every where when it speaketh any thing obscurely interpreteth it selfe againe in another place And this is the common voice of all the rest So that the answere I gaue you being no other then that wich I had learned of the Fathers you cannot reiect it but you must reiect the Fathers with all But let vs heare your reason The Doctrine say you of Baptisme of the Eucharist of Iustification of Christs two natures are necessary yet some texts vpon which they are grounded be litigious Grant it be so yet some againe are clear and evident That Christians are to be baptized what more plaine then that Goe teach all nations Baptizing them That the Eucharist is to be administred and receiued is clear by the institution of our Saviour and the practise of his Apostles That wee are iustified by Faith without the workes of the law wee haue the evident testimony of Saint Paul That Christ is God the very first words of Saint Iohns Gospell testifie In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and that word was God And lastly that hee is Man also what more expresse then those words of Saint Paul There is one God and one Mediator betweene God men the Man Christ Iesus If other places be not so plain they are to be expounded by these or the like But it may be your Doctrine of Baptisme is the absolute necessity thereof vnto salvation If so then certainely that place of S. Iohn is not cleare enough for it For it is not necessary it should be vnderstood of Christian Baptisme which was not yet instituted or it must be meant of those that are Adulti such as Nicodemus was to whom our Saviour spake In like manner if your doctrine of the Eucharist be Transubstantiation neither is that other place plaine enough for it For it is manifest both by the circumstances of the Text and the testimonie of the Fathers that the Relatiue This hath reference to Bread Now Bread in proper speech cannot bee Body as your owne men confesse Then is it so tropically and consequently no Transubstantiation The same doe I say of the errours about Iustification which should particularly haue beene shewed if you had quoted any particular place As for those Hereticks they were such as the Prophet speaketh of who in seeing saw and yet perceaued not hauing closed their eyes that they might not see And therefore it is a foule fault in you to excuse their obstinacy by charging the Scriptures with obscurity That Rule is sufficient which is able to convince the Conscience and satisfie all those who loue the truth and are ready to acknowledge it when it is made known though it stop not the mouths of refractary stubborne Hereticks This perhaps your living judge by vertue of fire and fagot may bee able to effect but the other if evidence of Scripture cannot nor he nor his Church will ever be able to performe More of this see in the Treatise sent to Mr Baylie N. N. If as I write to M. Baylie you may not relye too much on the authority of the Fathers because of their differences in opinions much lesse may you vpon the authority of our men being worse divided For they differ not in essential points we doe They wrote not so bitterly one against another as we doe Lastly they differed in matters as yet vndefined by a generall Councell and so not dangerous but wee haue no Councells nor any other meanes to decide our causes So that you cannot knowe which of vs giueth the true sense of Scripture I. D. That the Fathers are no way a sufficient ground of Faith I haue so strongly proued vnto M. Baylie that me thinkes none of you is in hast to answere it Among the rest of my reasons this I confesse was one that they varied so much in opinion one from another yea and are now made to vary from themselues through your intolerable abusing of them This I declared at large wherevnto for farther evidence I now adde an example or two S. Ambrose or whosoever is author of
truth of which three questions while I endeavour to resolue not so much with heat and vehemence of passion as strength and evidence of reason let me entreat you all Right Worshipfull Reverend and beloued Christian brethren but for the space of one houre to lay aside all preiudice and to heare with indifference what I can say When I haue done if my resolutions appeare to be grounded vpon sound and convincing arguments I hope you will according to your duties readily yeeld vnto the truth if otherwise every one may still abound in his owne sense and yee haue free liberty to carry home the same opinion ye brought hither with you In the meane season I beseech the Lord to direct your hearts and to giue you a right iudgement in all things The first Quere is whether preaching in this place be distinguished from reading In resoluing whereof I will not be so peremptory as some are only I will shew what I conceiue and vpon what grounds This I conceiue that Preaching here is no other then the publike Reading of Moses and I conceiue so vpon these grounds because there appeareth nothing in the words to force a distinction but rather something importing an identity That there is nothing to enforce a distinction appeares if either yee consider the context and reason of the words or the text it selfe and the forme of words vsed therein First therefore as touching the Context It is manifest by this particle For that these words are inferred as a reason vpon some thing premised Thus. Some of the beleeuing Pharisees had taught the brethren at Antioch that except they were circumcised and together with the faith of Christ obserued the ceremonie of Moses they could not be saved Whereof after much altercation and dispute the Apostles being advertized they summon a counsell at Ierusalem to stint the quarrell In it Saint Peter expresly affirmeth that salvation is impossible by the law and that the grace of Christ is of it selfe every way sufficient which sentence Saint Iames hauing readily approved he adds withall that for the setling of the Churches peace it would not be amisse to write vnto the beleeuing Gentiles that they abstaine from pollutions of idols from fornication from things strangled and from blood For saith he Moses of old time hath in every Citty them that preach him being read in the Synagogues every Sabbath day Now how comes in this For and what is that conclusion whereof this is a reason Heere I finde difference of opinions but among them all three seeme to me to bee most probable Of them all take which you list and the publike Reading of Moses alone will bee a sufficient proofe thereof The first opinion is Saint Chrysostoms in whose iudgement Saint Iames would proue this conclusion that it is altogether needlesse to write vnto the beleeuing Iewes touching abstinence from these things And why is it needlesse Because they perfectly know these things already But how came they to the knowledge of them By hearing Moses publikely read in the Synagogues every Sabbath day for he in such cleare expresse tearmes hath deliuered the same that whosoeuer heareth cannot but take notice thereof as besides sundry other places you may see in Num. 25. and Lev. 17. which you may pervse at your better leasure The second opinion is of the French translators this Ye may not thinke that by this decree the law of Moses will be vilipended or disesteemed Why Because the Reading of Moses saith the marginall note will not be discontinued in the assemblies of the beleeuing Iewes neyther will the beleeuing Gentiles make scruple to assist them therein The third and last is the common opinion and carries with it best likelyhood this We must for a while condescend to the beleeuing Iew in observation of the ceremonie least wee scandall them and cause them to stagger in the faith The reason because they know by the weekely reading of Moses that it is his ordinance to whom they are so strongly addicted that they cannot yet without danger to their faith be weaned from him And thus take which of these conclusions you please and the sole reading of Moses is a sufficient proofe thereof You will say so is interpretation also I denie it not only I affirme that from the context or reason of the words yee cannot force a distinction betweene Preaching and Reading No more can you from the Text and the forme of words vsed therein Indeed if the words were in the originall as Hieron to whom wee are referred englishes them debellatum esset the warre were ended For thus he renders them Moses was both read and preached then which a plainer distinction cannot bee Whether so reading he intended the advantage of his cause I will not say Demortuis nil nisi bene he was while hee liued a graue and reverend preacher Howbeit the originall reads otherwise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hee hath them that preach him being read Beza turnes it thus cum legatur seeing he is read others thus in that or inasmuch as hee is read Which how it can inforce a distinction I see not rather it imports the contrary that Preaching here is no other then Reading So seemeth the Syriack also to vnderstand it Moses hath Caroze Haralds or Criers in the Synagogues who read him every Sabbath day And indeed the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here vsed whence also Caroze as Casauhon thinketh fetcheth its pettigree properly imports the art of a Praeco or Crier Now Praeco a crier as Whitaker obserueth Recitat edicta non exponit barely reads or recites his Princes edicts doth not expound them If then I should say the King hath in every towne those that preach or publish his proclamations being openly read by the Towneclarke vpon market dayes could any man of sense or vnderstanding distinguish the preaching or publishing of the proclamation from the publike reading thereof No more can he Preaching from reading in this place for the case is exactly the same Adde herevnto that such Preaching euen in the judgement of the adversarie is here meant as was ever performed in every Synagogue vpon every Sabbath day Now that Moses of old was read in the Synagogues every Sabbath day it is cleare in my text So is it also Act. 13.27 the voices of the Prophets are read every Sabbath day But that Moses in every Synagogue every Sabbath day was interpreted and Sermons made vpon him doth not appeare and I thinke will hardly be proued For as for those places where in mention is made of exhortation after reading they are to little purpose inasmuch as they only show what sometimes and vsually not what was alwaies done In the Sabbatticall yeare vpon the feast of Tabernacles the law was commanded to be read of expounding there is no mention at all Nay seeing then the whole law was intirely to be read it seemes very probable that
saith Let him deny himselfe Himselfe What meanes he by that There are two sorts of men for as S. Paul distinguisheth there is a Spirituall and there is a Naturall man The Spirituall man is he who is borne a new of water and the holy Ghost by grace is become a new creature a new man transformed into the image of Christ. The naturall man is he that is as yet vnregenerate hath nothing in him but nature the corruption thereof bearing only the image of the old Adam Must the spirituall man deny himselfe No verily so farre forth as he is spirituall for so doing he should disclaime and disesteeme the very grace of God by which hee is whatsoeuer he is It is the Naturall man then that must be denied Now in the Naturall man there is first Nature and then the corruption of nature By Nature I vnderstand the powers faculties of the soule such as are the Vnderstanding and the light of reason whose office is to discerne truth from falsehood and the Will vnder which also I comprehend Passions and Affections whose dutie is to pursue that which is good and to shun that which is evill The corruption of nature is that which in Scripture is called flesh concupiscence and is commonly known in the Church by the name of Originall sinne because it is traduced vnto vs from our parents and wee are polluted therewith in every part both of soule and body from our very conception and birth Now which of these two must be denied I answer both yet not both alike but the corruption of Nature simply and absolutely and Nature it selfe only in some respect First then Nature it selfe must bee denied What simply and absolutely as the corruption of Nature No by no meanes â—oâ— it is the good creature of God without it neither are we capable of blessednesse nor can bee schollers in the schoole of Christ. Nature is not opposite but subordinate vnto Grace and Grace destroyeth not nor abolisheth but healeth and perfecteth Nature Neither is it without cause that God spoiling man of his supernaturals for sinne only wounded him in his naturals and left vnto him both a light in his Vnderstanding and a liberty in his Will By the light of reason the invisible things of God euen his eternall Power and Godhead are clearely scene there is no nation so barbarous but partly by inbred principles partly by the booke of the creatures knowe him By the same light of reason doe we in part also know the will of God for the law morall is written in our hearts by nature and how many excellent precepts of moralitie doe we finde in the writings of meere naturall men Finally even in the matter of the Gospell reason seeth thus farre that it is not vnpossible if God will and vpon this ground Iustin Martyr Tertullian Arnobius Lactantius Athenagoras Augustin anciently and Aquinas Vives Mornay of late haue attempted to proue by reason the truenesse of Christian religion As for the Will it is yeelded of all hands that in matters morally good it hath free liberty and may of it selfe either chuse it or refuse it at pleasure So that hitherto Nature the power thereof is no way to bee denied or disclaimed Wherein then Surely in things meerely supernaturall For that which is aboue reason cannot be comprehended by reason and that which passeth the reach of nature caÌ„not be attained only by the power of nature The naturall man saith S. Paul perceaueth not the things of God nor can knowe them because they are spiritually discerned In these things reason is starke blinde and seeth nothing Search the writings of the subtilest and sharpest Naturalist and ye shall finde in them of Christ and his Gospell nor palme nor footstep Here therefore reason must bee denied and as a woman may not speake in the Church so must reason also be silent in things supernaturall In things not revealed it must be contented not to know docta ignorantia est it is a learned ignorance In things revealed it must beleeue without and aboue reason reason must bee captived vnto the obedience of faith And as where the naturall Philosopher endeth there the Physitian begins so where naturall reason stoppeth divine Faith must come in place Otherwise if reason will needs be prying into Gods arke and search into those mysteries that are aboue the reach thereof it is the corruption of reason and no marvaile if it become vaine and foolish in her imaginations Yea when men in their curiosity thinke themselues most wise then are they most infatuated And as Ixion in the fable embraceing a cloud insteed of Iuno begat Centaures thereon so they entertaining their owne fancies insteed of divine veritie bring forth nothing but monsters of errors and strange opinions What I say of reason must be vnderstood of the will also in spirituall matters the one wanteth light to see and the other strength to doe It is not in him that willeth nor in him that runneth but in God that sheweth mercy for as we haue already demonstrated neither can we will of our selues without preventing grace nor doe when wee haue willed without pursuing grace So that if a man will be no more then the scholler of Nature he cannot be the scholler of Christ. For as nature is vnable both to know the mysteries which Christ teacheth and to doe the duties which he requireth so doth Christ command vs to renounce our naturall abilities to come as infants vnto the kingdome of heauen But if Nature it selfe must be denied much more the Corruption of Nature For as the Scripture saith Corruption cannot inherit vncorruption and without holinesse it is impossible to see God Now the leprosie of Originall Corruption not only infects the inferiour part of the soule as Papists dreame but spreads it selfe to every part even the superiour also For as for the mind it is not only blind and ignorant but Corrupt also and full of vanity it savoureth not the things of God but they seeme vnto it meere folly As for the will it is not only vnable to performe spirituall duties but full of hardnesse also and perversnesse and vntowardensse vnto any thing that is good Finally the inferiour part is but a shop of all turpitude outragiousnesse full of nothing else but tempestuous tumultuous vnruly and sinfull lusts These all as the Scripture saith must be crucified must be mortified must be killed that is must vtterly be renounced and denied if wee will bee the followers of Christ. And reason For the flesh lusteth and fighteth against the spirit by reason whereof the good wee would doe we cannot doe and the evill wee would not doe wee doe They that walke after the flesh saith St Paul are not in Christ but they that walke after the spirit And they that liue after the flesh shall die neither can any man liue vnlesse by the spirit
shall be saved and no other Ye see brethren what a large field I haue to expatiate in but the time forceth me to be briefe In other Churches vpon whom the Crosse now lieth heauily this theam perhaps requires a larger handling yet is it not vnseasonable in this our peace to touch it in a few words in regard of the hopes of our enimies and our owne feares if need be to prepare vs for the Crosse. And thus much of the second counsell The third and last is let him follow me This many happily would thinke and many indeed doe thinke to be all one with comming after Christ for what is it to follow but to come after Were it so then were I here to make an end But I suppose there is a farther matter intended in it and therefore let me intreatâ— your patience to adde a word or twaine concerning it Wee are to follow Christ non pedibus sed affectibus not with our feet but with our hearts and affections and we are to follow him Docentem Ducentem both teaching leading vs. For it might be demanded if we must deny our owne selues that is our reason and wills with all their ability and power who then shall direct vs who shall guide vs For our minds being blind we cannot of our selues see the way and our wills being in bondage vnto sin we cannot walke in the way Wherevnto Christ readily returneth this plaine answere Follow me I will be your Teacher I will be your Leader First then Christ is our Teacher even hee who is every way most sufficient to teach He is the eternall word of his eternall Father the very Truth it selfe and the substantiall Wisdome of God He is made of God the grand Counseller of the Church the Angell of the covenant the Apostle of our profession the only Prophet and Doctor of the Church He came out of the bosome of the Father and knoweth all his counsells in him are hid all the treasures of wisdome and knowledge and he hath received the Spirit without measure Being therefore such a Teacher him are we to follow and we are to follow his teaching Audiendo credendo by hearing and beleeuing whatsoever he saith The divine oracle from heaven expressely commandeth vs to heare him This is my beloved sonne in whom I am well pleased heare yee him And our Saviour affirmeth that whosoever are his sheepe heare his voice and will not heare the voice of any other implying that whatsoever heareth him not is none of his sheepe But it is not sufficient to heare vnlesse we also Beleeue that is assent to all that he saies assuring our selues that whatsoever hee affirmes is true and whatsoever he commands is iust To beleeue is the first ground of Christianity He that beleeueth not cannot vnderstand the mysteries thereof O portet discentem credere he that will be a scholler must beleeve his Master if hee will not hee deserues to bee turned out of schoole Christ will not be argued with be it aboue reason or seeme it against reason yet will he be absolutely beleeued And reason for being God who neither can deceiue nor be deceived his bare word is more certaine then a thousand demonstrations Certainely they are none of Christs sheepe that doe not Beleeue and without Faith it is impossible to please God to be iustified in his sight or to obtaine life everlasting Therefore whosoever will come after Christ must thus follow him docentem teaching So must he also Ducentem follow him Leading Hee leadeth and guideth vs two waies Spiritu Exemplo inwardly by his Spirit outwardly by his example By his Spirit first For as Saint Paul saith As many as are lead by the spirit of God are the sonnes of God but if any haue not the spirit of Christ he is none of his Now as the word of Christ sounds outwardly to the eare so doth the Spirit of Christ speake inwardly to the heart He helpeth our infirmities and after a secret and vnconceivable manner suggesteth and putteth good motions into our minds exhorting and persuading vs to the practice of all holy and good duties Which direction of the spirit we are to follow Obediendo by obedience Not to obey the good motions of the Spirit is to resist him to greeue him and to quench him but to cherish the sparke that he hath kindled in vs and to yeeld obedience vnto his holy inspirations and perswasions this is indeed to follow him Which if we doe not wee are yet in the flesh and if wee bee in the flesh we are not in Christ Iesus for they only are in Christ who walke not after the flesh but after the Spirit As Christ leadeth by his Spirit so doth hee also goe before vs by his Example Longum iter per praecepta breve efficax per exempla the way of precept is long and tedious but of example short and effectuall But whose example are we to follow Mans It is not safe for be he neuer so good yet may he erre himselfe and mislead vs. Gods That indeed is safe because he cannot erre nor misguide vs but he is invisible cannot be seene Therefore he became man that being visible in the flesh he might giue vs example Which we are to follow imitando by imitation For as Augustine saith Summa religionis est imitari quem colis It is a chiefe point of religion to imitate him whom wee worship But wherein are we to imitate him In creation of the world in redeeming mankind in meriting for others In working miracles and the like as it is reported of that mad Salmoneus Qui nimbos non imitabile fulmen Aere cornipedum cursu simularat equorum who would needs counterfeit Iupiters thundring and lightning by driuing his chariot over a copper bridge darting torches at the faces of men No if wee would burst our selues with pride we cannot imitate God in these things Potestas subiectionem maiestas exigit admirationem neutra imitationem saith Bernard the power of God requireth subiection his maiesty admiration neither imitation How then Appareat Domine bonitas tua cui possit homo quia ad imaginem tuam creatus est conformari let thy goodnes o Lord appeare wherevnto man being created after thine owne image may be conformed To be breefe wee are to imitate Christ in all those holy duties which hee commandeth and whereof he hath made himselfe an example They are all summed vp in one word Obedience this hee commanded this he practised And he practised it both actiuely and passiuely and in both is he to be imitated He obeyed the law of his father the Morall law as being the sonne of Adam the Ceremoniall as being the sonne of Abraham And this actiuely exampling vs to walke even as he walked in all duties by God enioyned vs. It would bee too long to particularize in all those
the preaching of the Church as touching the Proposition of things to be beleeued but not as the reason of beleeuing For they who propound the doctrine of Faith withall admonish that that doctrine is revealed from God and that God not themselues is to be beleeved And what Is not the holy Catholike Church it selfe an Article of the Creed If it bee why should the rest of the Articles need to be sustained by an higher Principle more then it For if you may be bold to question any of them vntill it be resolued by the Churches authoritie I hope I may be as bold to question the Churches authoritie vntill it be warranted by some farther Principle I demand therefore why you beleeue the Church Because forsooth her authority is infallible And how know you that it is infallible Here of necessity you must either vouch her owne testimonie or betake you to some other thing To stick vpon her testimonie without farther enquirie is absurd For seeing her voice is not the first veritie that being the Prerogatiue of him only who is from all eternity her veracity must needs bee as doubtfull as her infallible authority And indeed this as a very learned Divine exemplifieth it were as if one whose authority is questioned taking vpon him to bee a law-giuer should first make a law and thereby giue himselfe power and afterward by vertue of that power exercise authority over others But if to establish the Churches authority you seek out of her to some other thing as suppose the Scriptures for so I remember you answered me being demanded the same Question then haue I obtained what I would namely that the Church is not the first ground of Faith because by your owne confession there is a former to wit the Scripture Neither is it true that Catholike men hold the Churches authority to be the first Ground For although some pretended Catholikes those I meane who call themselues Roman catholikes may so conceaue of their Church vnderstanding by the Church the Roman church yet neither are they true Catholikes neither is the Roman church the Catholike church neither doe any true Catholikes ground their Faith so True catholikes they are not because they hold a new Faith not that which Catholikely hath beene held in all ages as appeareth by those twelue new Articles lately added to the Creed vnknown vnto the purer times of the Primitiue church Neither is the Roman church the Catholike Church Not in regard of time for Christ had his Church when Rome was not yet Christian. Nor in respect of place for Catholike is Universall Roman Particular that the Church of the whole world this of one Citie or Diocese only Nor lastly in regard of her authority ouer al other Churches for that which she challengeth is but vsurped the Church of Africk in a Councell of two hundred and seuenteene Bishops of whom S. Augustine was a principall with much indignation reiected it and the Greeke church hitherto could never be drawne to acknowledge it And as for those that are true Catholikes they build not their Faith vpon so weake a Ground but rest both it and the Church her selfe vpon the Scriptures The Apostle S. Paul buildeth the whole Houshold of God vpon no other foundation then that of the Prophets and Apostles Knowe thou saith Origen that Christ alwaies appeareth on the mountaines and hills to teach thee that thou seeke him no where but in the mountaines of the Law and Prophets And the Auhor of the imperfect worke on Mathew The Lord knowing the confusion of things that would happen in the latter daies commandeth that such Christians as will receaue assurance of faith fâ—ie to no other thing but the Scripture And Tertullian Take from Hereticks that which they haue common with the heathen that they be content to stint all questions by the scriptures only and they cannot stand And S. Hierom The church of Christ hath for her cities the Law the Prophets the Gospell Apostles she passeth not beyond her limits that is the holy scriptures S. Augustine in the scriptures we learne Christ in the scriptures we learn the Church And againe I say not if we but if an Angell froÌ„ heauen shall deliuer any thing of Christ or his Church or of faith manners besides that which ye haue receiued in the Scriptures of the Law and Gospell let him be accursed And againe he affirmeth that the Church is to be proued by the Canonical bookes of Scripure and nothing else and that they only are the Demonstration of our cause the very foundation and ground plot whereon we are to build N. N. For proofe of this ground Saint Augustine handleth this matter in a speciall booke to his friend Honoratus deceiued by the Manichees as himselfe also sometimes had bin and he entituleth his booke De vtilitate credendi His discourse is this Suppose that wee now first of all did seeke vnto what Religion we should commit our soules to bee purged and rectified Without all doubt wee must begin with the Catholike Church for that shee is the most eminent now in the world there being more Christians in her this day then in any other Church of Iewes Gentiles put together And albeit among these Christians there be Sects and Heresies and all of them would seeme to be Catholikes and doe call others besides themselues Hereticks yet all grant that if wee consider the whole Body of the World there is one Church among them more eminent then all other and more plentifull in number and as they which know her doe affirme more sincere also in the truth But as concerning truth wee shall dispute more afterward now it is sufficient for them that desire to learne that there is a Catholike Church which is one in it selfe wherevnto diverse Heretickes doe faine and devise divers names whereas they and their Sects are called by peculiar names which themselues cannot deny Whereby all men that are indifferent and not letted by passion may vnderstand vnto what Church the name Catholike which all parts desire and pretend is to bee given Thus St Augustine c. I. D. So maine a point as is the last resolution of faith ought to haue beene better warranted then by the single authority of one Father who how eminent soever hee was in his time yet is not his sole word of strength enough to beare vp such a weight Why did you not vouch the testimony of Saint Paul or Saint Peter or some other of the holy penmen of Gods booke which cannot deceiue you then Saint Augustine or any other of the antient Fathers who both haue erred themselues and may mislead you But thus it is with Papists the more the shame the bare name of a Father swayes them more then the clearest passage of holy writ Howbeit this I say not as if we feared the triall of the Fathers for be it known vnto you wee haue more