chastise all the members of Christs mysticall body Thirdly he subioyneth Whatsoeuer thou shalt binde vpon earth it shall be bound also in the heauens Fourthly whatsoeuer thou shalt loose on earth it shall be loosed also in the heauens that is whatsoeuer punishment thou shalt inflict either of excoÌ„munication suspension interdiction or degradation or whatsoeuer other spirituall Censure for he speaketh without restriction the same shall be ratified by Almighty God whatsoeuer of these thou shalt release the same shall be released in the heauens aboue Vpon which words Origen obserueth no small Orig. tract 6. in Math. difference betweene Peter and the rest of the Apostles because to them the Keyes of one heauen were giuen to Peter of many Whereupon he inferreth they had not authority in such perfection as Peter to bind and loose in all the heauens 5. Our Aduersaryes not doubting of the highest soueraignty M. Reyn-in his CoÌ„ference with M. Hart c. 2. diuis 1. M. Bils in his booke of Christian subiection par 1. fol. 62. 63. Reyn. ibi diuis 2. which by these singular priuiledges are betokened apply some to Christ some to all the Apostles but none peculiar to Peter alone For the first prerogatiue both M. Reynoldes and M. Bilson attribute vnto Christ affirming either him to be the Rocke vpon which the Church is built or the fayth which Peter pronounced of him and not Peter pronouncing the same The second the third and fourth Reynolds extendeth to all the Apostles because to them all the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen were giuen the power of binding and loosing and not only to Peter Silly men who see not how they crosse themselues in their owne answeres For our Sauiour speaking of one matter to one person in one and the same sentence to whomesoeuer he made the first promise to him he made the rest Therefore if he promised the Keyes to all the Apostles vpon them all he promised to build his Church and not vpon Christ Or if he promised to build his Church vpon himselfe to himselfe he promised the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen to himselfe he promised all power of binding loosing which had beene as impertinent to our Sauiours discourse as dissonant from truth For Christ had all that power before euen from the first houre he began to plante his Church he already enioyed those priuiledges not giuen by himselfe as the iurisdiction heere mentioned but imparted by his Father from whome he was sent 6. Againe as those answeres encounter one another The words of Christ import some extraordinary fauour to S Peter alone so they offer violence to the Text ech of them depriuing Peter of that soueraigne dignity which the whole passage of the place conueyeth vnto him For the wordes of Christ are purposly addressed to the person of Peter his name is only changed at this tyme and not any of the other Apostles he is called Rocke and none of the rest he only speaketh and professeth Christ to be the Sonne of the liuing God our Sauiour only nameth him and continually vseth the singular number yea he addeth the name of his Father to distinguish him not only from the Apostles in generall but also from the other Simon And shall not all these particiculer descriptions denote something in Peter more then in the rest If we appeale to the Greeke to the Hebrew especially to the Syriacke text in which Fabri in diction Syro-caldaicolero in c. 2. ad Gala â— language our Sauiour vttered this whole discourse it so euidently sheweth the very first promise to haue beene made to Peter and not to Christ as nothing can be more cleere For he speaking in Syriacke sayd vnto Peter Thou art Cephas and vpon this Cephas will I build my Church where the same word Cephas signifying as Guido Fabritius and S. Hierome testify a Rocke or Stone is vsed in both places And the Greeke wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though different in termination signify the same Wherefore as if Christ speaking in English had imposed vnto Simon the name of a Rocke therupon had sayd Thou art a Rocke and vpon this Rocke will I build my church there would haue beene no doubt but that he had builded his Church vpon Simon the Rocke so neither in this present speaking the same in Syrtacke 7. M. Reynolds not able to resist confesseth at length Rain c. 2. diuis 1. pag. 24. that Fabritius translateth Cephas a Rocke But Fabritius sayth he sheweth further that Cephas signifyeth a Stone also And in the page immediatly following he addeth Cephas in Greeke is expounded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in English signifyeth a Stone Whereupon he counteth this a fit traÌ„slation of the former Syriacke wordes Thou art a Stone and vpon this Stone will I build my Church And what is this but to graunt the substance of the thing and wrangle about wordes For whether Peter were tearmed Rocke or Stone as long as he was that stone that singular stone which after Christ vpholdeth the frame of the militant Church of which the Apostles were part he was the fundamentall Cyr. l. 2. in Ioan c. 2. Cyâ— ep ad Quintum Tertul. l. de praescript Epipha in Ancorato Amb ser 47. Nazianz orat de moder ser Basil l. 2. in Eunomium Aug. in Psal conâ— partem Donati Bils part 1. pag. 62. Stone vpon which both they and all others were built And seeing the foundation is the same to a house which a head to a body he was the head of the whole body of the Church 8. The Fathers generally fortify the same S. Cyril writeth that Christ called Peter by the name of Rocke because on him as on a stedfast rocke or stone immoueable he was to build his Church S. Cyprian sayth Christ chose Peter vpon whome he builded his Church Tertullian tearmeth him Ecclesiae Petram The Rocke or foundation of the Church Reade the like in Epiphanius S. Ambrose S. Gregory Nazianzen S. Basil and S. Augustine of whome M. Bilson most wrongfully and slaunderously writeth That Peter is the Rocke on which the Church is built S. Augustine and others do plainely deny But what if S. Augustine deny it not plainely What if he deny it not at all What if he plainely auouch it and that in diuers places Will you euer giue credit againe to M. Bilsons writings Therfore he vpon the Psalmes sayth O Church that is O Peter because vpon this Rocke wâ—ll I build my Church Read the like vpon the 69. Psalme in his Sermons Our Lord named Peter the foundation of his Church therfore the Church rightly honoured this foundation vpon which the height of the Ecclesiasticall edifice is raysed Againe Only Peter August conc 2. in Psal 30. in Psal 69. Et ser 15. de Sanct. ser 29. qui est 5. de S. Petro Paulo Aug. l. 1. Retract cap. 21. Bils â—
improperly but properly called Sacerdotes sacrifycing Priests And S. Paul teacheth That euery Priest or Bishop is ordained to offer Gifts and Sacrifices To conclude then wheras M. Reynoldes himselfe is faine to yeild That these thinges are linked by nature in relation and mutuall dependance as I may say one of the other the Altar the Sacrifice and the Sacrifycers seeing I haue already proued that we haue true and reall Altars true and proper Priests he cannot deny vs without open shame and contradiction a true reall and proper Sacrifice 12. If we looke into the old Law we shall find that King Dauid in the feruour of his Propheticall spirit speaketh of Christ Thou art a Priest for euer according to the order of Melchisedech which S. Paul often repeateth But what was the order of Melchisedechs Priest-hood Wherein was he a figure and type of Christ M. Bilson recounteth certaine prerogatiues S. Paul mentioneth yet no priuiledge no act of Priest-hood no signe or shew of Sacrifice properly belonging to any Priest But S. Cyprian and Primasius wisely tell vs That the singularity of his order consisted in offering not the bloud of brute beasts but Bread Wine As the holy Ghost also in Genesis witnesseth Melchisedech King of Salem brought forth bread and wine for he was the Priest of the most high Or and he was the Priest of the most high agreeable to the Greeke and Hebrew copyes where both the causall coniunction for as Copulatiue and of necessity inforce that he brought forth bread and wine as a Priest to offer them vnto God And therein the Fathers affirme against M. Bilson That he figured and resembled our Sauiours oblation of the holy Eucharist S. Clemens of Alexandria S. Ambrose S. Cyprian S. Augustine Isidorus S. Hierome cyting to the same purpose many others S. Cyprians words are these Our Lord Iesus Christ offered a sacrifice to God the Father Chrys hom 60. ad pop Nos ministrorum tenemus locum qui verò sanctificat ea immutat ipse est Arno. in Psal 109. Lact. l. 4. Inst ca. 14. Prima in com cap. 5. ep ad Heb. Epiph. haer 55. Aug. in Psal 109. ep 95. ad Inno. l. â— con ad le prophe c. 20. Oecum in cap. 5. ad Hebr. and offered the same that Melchisedech did that is Bread Wine to wit his Body and bloud 13. Moreouer Christ is not only called a Priest according to the peculiar ranke of Melchisedech and therfore must offer a peculiar Sacrifice proper to his order and different from others but he is tearmed also in this kind a Priest for euer So that heerein he continueth both the dignity and function of his eternall Priest-hood because heere by his commandment by his authority by his speciall concurrence with the Priests Prelats of his Church he incessantly offereth vnto his Father his owne body bloud vnder the forms of Melchisedechs Sacrifice For as in the administration of other Sacraments he is the chiefe and principall Agent when we baptize Ipse est qui bapâ—zat He is he that bapâ—izeth sayth S. Iohn when we ordaine or consecrate Priests he is he who consecrateth them In like manner when we celebrate Masse he is he who inuisibly celebrateth he is the chiefe high-priest and we his Ministers he the true and supreme Bishop and we the Suffragans or Substitutes who supply his roome We may then vndoubtedly inferre with Arnobius Lactantius Primasius Epiphanius S. Augustine That the eternity of Christs Priest-hood according to the singuler order of Melchisedech still perseuereth in the true Oblation of his body and bloud made at the Altar and offered now in al parts of the world And if we examine the learned Protestant what els can he assigne in which Christ doth exercise at this tyme the proper act of his neuer ending Priest-hood The Sacrifice of the Crosse That remayneth not and in respect of that Oblation and Host once offered as Oecumenius noteth he cannot be called a Priest for euer The prayer and intercession he maketh for vs aboue But this is not any peculiar and proper act of Priest-hood much lesse of any determinate and particuler order The vertue and efficacy of his bloudy Sacrifice which he still offereth and representeth to his Father But if this euerlasting effect disappoint the new Law of all proper Sacrifices it should by the same reason haue frustrated Act. 4. v. 12. the old For there is no other name vnder heauen giuen to men in which we ought to be saued No other vertue by which our forefathers were sanctifyed then the death of Christ Againe this representation which our Sauiour maketh of his Passion in the sight of his Father is no such Sacrifice whereby he may either chalenge the name or reserue the office of an euerlasting Priest Or if it be any such besides that you applaud the Reall Sacrifice in heauen which in earth you detest seeing this is only exercised among Angels aboue and no act of Priesthood perseuereth amongst men no kingdome of Christs Church no CoÌ„mon-wealth of his people no law of Christianity now flourisheth vpon earth but is vtterly disanulled extinguished and altogeather translated to the Court of heauen according to that of S. Paul Priesthood being translated Heb 7. v. 12. it is necessary also a translation of the Law be made 14. Now if Christian harts can neuer subscribe to these impietyes if we must of necessity graunt that God hath euer some Church some inheritance some chosen Isa 19. v. 21. Prou. 9. 1. Dan. 11. v. 31. Psalm 17. 16. Hier. in Psalm 71. people vpon earth we must needs allow some visible outward proper law by which as his peculiar flock they appertaine vnto him and are combined in mutuall fellowship and society togeather If a Law a Priesthood if a Priesthood a Sacrifice if a Sacrifice what other then this which Isay foresaw The Aegyptians shall know their Lord in that day and worship him in Hosts and guifts c. And there shal be the Altar of our Lord in the midst of Aegypt SalomoÌ„ shaddowed Wisedome hath built an house imolated rictimes mingled wine c. Daniel mentioned calling it the Dayly Sacrifice which Antichrist shall deface and abrogate at least in publike King Dauid specifyed There shal be a sirmament in the earth vpon the tops of Mountaines Where S. Hierome expoundeth Firmament Memorable wheat The Caldaicall translation Supersubstantiall bread The learned Hebricians commonly interprete Placentam tritici A * The Hebrew word Pissathbar signifyeth a Cake of wheat as Reuelinus sayth Cake of wheate substantiall Bread or a sacrifice of Bread So Rabbi Salomon There shall be a Cake of wheat in the earth in the Rab. Saloin â—sa 72. Rab. Achilas in â—undeÌ„ locum Rab. Iona. l. col in Psal 72. Read Gal. l. 10. de area cap. 4. 5. 6. 7. Mal. 1. v. 11. Reyn. c. 8. diuis 4. Bils 4. par pag. 695. Alan de
in heauen Which words Valentine and Apollinaris misconstruing gainsayd the misteâ—ry See Medina introduct in â— p. q. 3. Thâ—op in hunc loc of Christs Incarnation and would needs haue his flesh to haue descended from heauen as his manhood after ascended thither Neyther did they want semblance of places the card of Protestancy to direct them for matching this text with another of S. Paul to the Ephesians they found coherence He that descended the same is also he Ephes c. 4. v. 10. that is ascended And least the obscurity of either might darken their vnderstanding they opened them both by this plaine obuious and euident sentence Primus homo de â— Cor. 15. v. 47. terra terrenus Secundus homo de caelo caelestis The first man of earth earthly the second man of heauen heauenly 19. Let our Ghospellers vaunt as long as they list of the perspicuity and patronage of Scripture neuer can they bring in any controuersy whatsoeuer so many in their behalfe or one so cleare a place as this Or if they could might they not be blinded might they not be inueigled as these impes of Satan were M. Fields opinion is they might We confesse sayth he that neyther conference Field l. 4. c. 19. pag. â—â—4 of places nor consideration of the things precedent and subsequent nor looking into the originalls are of any force vnlesse we find the things which we conceaue to be vaderstood and meant in the places interpreted to be consonant to the rule of fayth And this rule of fayth as he further teacheth must be tryed Field l. 4. ibid. pag. 242. eyther by the Generall practise of the Church the renowned of all ages or the Pastours of an Apostolicall Church Which to omit all other examples is clearly seene in the Translatours of our English Protestants Bible Who although they had skill in tongues studied Scriptures ransacked Originalls examined places yet rouing from the marke M. Field prescribeth most pitiously erred in their vulgar Translation Witnesse hereof 20. D. Reinolds who disputed against it in his Maiesties Rein. in the Conference at Hampt Court p. 45. 46 c. Burges in his Apol. sect 6. Carleile in his booke that Christ went not downe to Hellp 116. 144. Broughton in his epistle to the Counsel presence at Hampton Court M. Burges a man of the same sect who affirmeâ—h That the approued English Protestant translation hath many omissions many additions which sometyme obscureth sometyme peruerteth the sense M. Carleile another brother of this disordred crew hauing discouered many faults in the English Bible of them inferreth That the English Protestants in many places detort the Scriptures from their right sense and shew themselues to loue darknesse more then light and falshood more then truth They haue corrupted and depraued the sense obscured the truth deceaued the ignorant and supplanted the simple Likewise M. Broughton one of the chiefest Linguists amongst our late Precisians who not many yeares ago wrote an Epistle to the Lords of the Counsell which is yet extant desireth them to procure speedily a new translation Because that quoth he which is now in England is full of errours And in his aduertisment of Corruptions he denounceth to the Protestant Bishops Broughtoâ— in his Aduert to the Bishops That their publike translation of Scripturs into English is such as it peruerteth the text of the old Testament in 848. places And that it causeth millions of millions to reiect the new Testament and to runne to eternall flames 21. So that if these rare men furnished with so manifold helpes endued with the knowledge of sundry tongues guided by their owne rules to attaine the right sense and meaning of holy write and allowed by publike authority to translate the same swaâ—ued notwithstaÌ„ding sunke into the gulfe of such detestable errours what shall we thinke of others of meaner talents What hope can any one haue not to stray in this vast wildernes of conferring places And if the English Bible which now is commonly read in Churches and expounded in pulpits be euery where stayned with the spots of pestilent and pernicious falshood in what wofull case are they who credit it as the Oracle of God They who repayre vnto it as to the treasure of life the touchstone of truth They who neither vnderstanding the Greeke Latin or Hebrew ought to appeale in all doubts of fayth to the high Tribunall of this corrupted Iudge Whose sentence as their owne Ghospellers testify is depraued obscured detorted from the right sense deceaueth the ignorant supplanteth the simple peruerteth the text in so many places as it carrieth millions of millions to eternall flames Open therfore your eyes my beloued Countrymen and see in what daunger you liue daunger of receauing the doome of falshood the sentence of death in lieu of the soueraigne verdict of Gods sacred truth 22. Since the first edition of this worke was published I haue seene a certaine abrupt and broken answer secretly spread abroad to many of my former arguments the summe whereof is this That there is a great difference beweene the word of God and man for the later filleth the eare with the sound and the hearers mind with a like conceit cleare or obscure conformable to the signification it beareth but the word of God worketh not only in the eare immediatly but also in the Certaine shifts of the aduersaries refuted hart in such sort that although the exteriour word be darke and ambiguous yet by interiour inspiration it may produce a cleare conceit of the thing signifyed in the hearers mind By which means sayth this Respondent the spirit of God speaking in his diuine word and working interiourly in the hart is the supreme rule or Iudge of all Controuersyes By which meanes it heareth vnderstandeth explaineth and compelleth the Appellants to receaue thâ— sentence giuen By which meanes it causeth infallible certainty vttereth it selfe clearely manifestly condemneth the guilty persons and performeth such thinges as are necessary to the office of a Iudge So he Yet all in couert not deeming his reply polished inough for open view because our question is not what God may do or what his inspiration may produce but what he ordinarily doth and whome he hath established his ordinary Iudge in determining debates what publicke and vniuersal rule what infallible ground or foundation we haue of our beliefe which we ought to follow to which others are bound to submit themselues and by which we are alwayes directed the right way of Truth This is not as I haue shewed the outward word or the inward working of the holy Ghost in the harts of euery particuler man 1. Because the faythfull cannot without some other particuler help be infallibly assured of that inspiration or working of the holy Ghost whether it be naturall or supernaturall from God or not they cannot be infallibly assured that they truly conceaue the sense reuealed and belieue it a right
and approaching receiue it with pure lips S. Augustine That Christ carried his owne body in his owne hands when he said This is my body and that secundum literam according to the letter and so as King Dauid could not carrie himselfe Which two points are worthilie noted because the Apostles eat with their corporall mouthes what Christ held in his corporall hands In fine S. Cyril saith We doe not deny our selues with assured faith and sincere charity to be spiritually conioyned to Christ but that we haue no manner of coniunction with him according vnto the flesh this truely we deny 15. Is it not strange M. Sparkes should vaunt of all these learned Writers within eight hundred years when all disclaime his false imputation when all confesse the Reall Presence not only to fayth but also to the mouth Bils 4. par pag. 754. 755. c. to the tongue to the lips to the hands to the flesh to the bowells of all Communicants Is it not as strange M. Bilson should goe about to defeate these and the former authotityes with his accustomed sleight of Seales Sacraments bearing the names of the things themselues For if the outward seales onely were receaued into the mouth the outward seales only were eaten by fayth bare figures and seales nourish the soule seeing the same flesh the same bloud the same body the same Mediatour of God and Man Christ Iesus which is belieued by fayth is auouched as you see to be receaued into the hands mouths harts bowels of the faythfull Deny then M. Bilson the true reall flesh to the mouth of the body deny it also to the mouth of the soule and so become a Manichee a Marcionist a denyer of Christ Or giue leaue at least to them and other Heretikes to subuert by like sophistry the chief principles of our beliefe LiceÌ„ce them to expound by sound of names without sense of wordes whatsoeuer is written of the true flesh bloud and body of our Lord of his Incarnation Passion and glorious Resurrection 16. What pretense then can any Protestant make vnlesse he open the gate to a floud of blasphemyes why he should delude such ineuitable proofes Why he should discredit so many lights Lampes and Ornaments of the Church and preferre the hard wrested construction of some new fangled teachers before such vndeniable texts of Fathers and testimonyes of Scripture Perchance he may pretend with D. Bilson and D. Sparkes the impossibilty inconueniency and contradictions our doctrine Bils 4. par pag. 790. 794. 795. 796. Sparks p. 180. sequentibus implyeth To which I might answere Philosophers Infidells obiected such stuffe against the true IncarnatioÌ„ and Passion of our Lord I might say that he yieldeth assent to diuers articles of our fayth more contrary and repugnant to the reach of our naturall reason as to the mistery of the holy Trinity to the fecundity of our B. Lady remayning a Virgin to the Resurrection of putrifyed and decaied flesh c. I might also reply that we should not measure the works of the Almighty by the weakenes of our feeble vnderstanding as S. Basil singulerly teacheth against Eunomius by the example of the Emmet Basil Epist â—68 But what if I demonstrate the Reall Presence to be possible conuenient and without any repugnance or contradiction at all 17. To begin with the possibility of our conuersion or Transubstantiation We do not as M. Bilson iniuriously fathereth vpon vs make the creature the Creatour or the dead Bils 4. par pag. 729. element of bread the Sonne of God We only teach the bread and wine to be changed into the flesh bloud of Christ And that one substance may be turned into another yea and bread into flesh experience it selfe aboundantly teacheth For the bread which we eate and wine which we drinke by the naturall heat and concoction of our stomacke is conuerted into the flesh and bloud of man the same effect had the food which Christ receaued Likewise the graine of seed sowed in the ground altereth in nature buddeth vp into a faire eare of Corne. Wax cast Niss orat cate ca. 37. Damas l. 4 defi c. 14. Irenaus l. 5. cap. 2. Chryshom de Euâ—h Centurywrit c. 4. col 4â—6 Ambro de init myst cap. 9. Cyr. Iero. cate 4. mystag into fire is melted consumed and turned into fire Which similitudes the Fathers of former ages haue vsed to illustrate this mistery S. Gregory Nissen and S. Iohn Damascen the first S. Irenaeus the second S. Chrysostome the third who annexeth thereunto that as Nothing of the substance of Wax remaineth so heere the Misteryes are consumed by the substance of the body By which passage if the Century-writers may be credited S. Chrysostome doth seeme to confirm TransubstaÌ„tiation S. Ambrose whome they likewise reproue for not writing well of the same matter sometime coÌ„pareth the substantiall mutatioÌ„ of bread in the Eucharist to the creation of heauen and earth of nothing Otherwhile to the conuersion of the Rod of Moyses into a serpent of bloud into water water into bloud and the like S. Cyrill of Hierusalem conuinceth it by the miraculous change our Sauiour made of water into wine disputing thus Christ confirming and saying this is my bloud who Gauden tract 2. de Exo. will euer doubt and say it is not his bloud He once conuerted water into wine in Cana of Galily and is he not worthy to be belieued that he hath changed wine into bloud S. Gaudentius hath the like who flourished within the 400 yeares after Christ He that produceth bread out of the earth of bread againe maketh Greg. Nyssen oracate cap. 37. his owne body for he is both able and promised it and he that made of water wine maketh of wine his owne bloud S. Gregory Nissen We rightly belieue the sanctifyed bread to be changed by the word of God into the body of the Sonne of God S. Ambrose Thou sayest perhaps to me I see another manner of thing How Ambro. lib. de â—js qui iniâ— myst cap. â— then tellest thou me that I receaue Christs body Then this is yet to be established by vs. And how many exampls may we vse to proue 〈…〉 is not that which nature framed but that which the blessing consecrated and that the power of blessing ouer commeth nature because by blessing euen the very nature it selfe is changed Behould that is not sayth S. Ambrose which nature made but what did nature make The substance of bread what becommeth of it It is changed quoth he how by blessing into what Into that which the blessing consecrateth What it that The body of Christ for he tooke Ciryl ep ad Colas bread blessed and sayd This is my body S. Cyrill of Alexandria who succeeded them in the next age God condescending to our frailtyes instilleth into the thinges offered the power of life Conuertens ea in veritatem propriae carnis onuerting
them into his true and proper flesh that the body of life may be in vs as a certaine quickening seed Eusebius Emissenus The inuisible Euseb Emiss ser de cor Domi. Cyp. de coens Dom. Priest Christ Iesus turneth by his word with a secret power the visible creatures into the substance of his body and bloud saying Take and eate for this is my body S. Cyprian who liued before any of these This bread which our Lord gaue to his Disciples not in outward apparence but in nature changed by the omnipotency of the word is made flesh The like he hath in other places In so much as a famous * Vrsin in commonef cuiusdam Theol. de sacra Coen Aug. ser citato à Bedain c. 10. â— Cor. Humfrey Iesu pâ— 2â— ca. 5. pag. 626. Matth. 4. v. â— ProtestaÌ„t confesseth That in Cyprian are many sayings which seeme to conforme TraÌ„substantiation S. Augustine and sundry others euidently also graunt our Reall mutation or Transubstantiation of the elements Which doctrine Gregory the Great and Augustin our Apostle brought into England as D. Humphrey teacheth and the Diuell himselfe acknowledged to be possible when he sayd vnto Christ Dic vt lapides isti panes fiant Commande that these stones be made bread 18. Secondly if we respect the conueniency it was meet we should really eate and really drinke of the reall victime truly slaine and offered for vs. It was meet that he who became our companion in the manger our teacher in the Temple our Priest at the Altar our price sacrifice and ransome on the Crosse should likewise be our food and sustenance at the table It was most meet that he who imparted his owne diuine person and all the riches of his Godhead by Hypostaticall vnion to the flesh and bloud of a pure and vnspotted man should also coÌ„municate the same flesh and bloud and all the treasures of his diuine and human nature to the soules and bodyes of As our first Parents were not infected by a Metaphoricall but by a true eating of the accursed Tree so we cannot be healed by a Metaphoricall but by a tru eating of the Tree of life NisseÌ„ orat catech ca. 37. Ignatius Ep. ad Ephes Athan. de huâ—â—atur suscep Cyril in Io. â—p ad Calosy â—re 1. 4. c. â—4 l. 5. c. 2 alibi Cyr. Alex. 1. 10. in â—o c. 13. Spaâ—kes in his answer to M. Iohn d'Albins pag. no. 257. his faithfull seruants The wisedome of God requireth that as our Forefathers and we were first impoisoned not by the desire but by the true and real eating of the forbidden apple so we should be cured by the true and substanciall feeding of this blessed fruit For S. Gregory Nissen proueth After the manner of the poyson so likewise the medicine must enter into our bowells the vertue therof be traÌ„sfused into all partes of the body 19. Againe the poyson which Adam receaued was a venemous fountaine of a double contagion ioyntly infecting both body and soule two wounds it inflicted it defiled our soule with sinne our body it enthralled to death and corruption What could be more behoofull for our Redeemer then to prepare a medicine against both these wounds A medicine to wash our soules from sin and rayse our body from dust to beautify the one with grace and cloath the other with incorruptioÌ„ And what could sooner worke this admirable cure then the glorious flesh of this holy Sacrament Which is not only the Ocean of Grace but the medicine of immortality the preseruatiue as S. Ignatius calleth it against death The first fruites of glory as Athanasius writeth The liuely and reuiuing seed of our bodyes as S. Cyrill sayth The pledge the earnest the hope or expectation of Immortall life as Irenaeus affirmeth According to that of Christ He that eateth my flesh drinketh my bloud hath life euerlasting and I will rayse him at the later day The body then must eate his flesh and drinke his bloud that it may partake the benefit of Resurrection our soule by fayth might enioy the dowryes of blisse But this terrestriall nature of our body cannot as S. Cyrill of Alexandria teacheth be aduanced to immortality except the body of naturall life be conioyned vnto it 20. Yet D. Sparkes maugre S. Cyril or whosoeuer els obstinatly persisteth that the body of Christ cannot be really conioyned with ours Because Christ is ascended into heauen sitting at the right hand of his Father and the heauens must Bils 4. par pag. 788. 789. c. Ioan. 20. Read S. Aug. ep 3. ad Volus Amb. l. 10. in cap. 24. Luc. Hila. l. 3 de Tri. Iustin q. 117. Cyril l. 12. in Io. c. 53. Bede Theoph. Euthym. Ruper boc loco whoproue Christs entrance the dores being shut containe him vntill the restitution of all thinges As though good Syr he could not be at the same tyme in diuers places to wit in heauen sitting on the right hand of his Father and heere vpon earth in euery consecrated hoast not naturally as the Fathers copiously quoted by M. Bilson constantly teach but supernaturally by the power of him vnto whome nothing is impossible For so he hath wrought many wonderfull workes aboue the course of nature He came forth of the Virgins wombe preseruing her virginity rose out of the sepulcher not remouing the stone entred into his Disciples the dore being shut ascended to his Father not deuiding the heauens when he penetrated them But as in these examples diuers bodyes were supernaturally in one place so by the same supernaturall power one body may likewise be at the same tyme in diuers places for it is a common Axiome approued by Philosophers that Contrariorum eadem est ratio Amongst contraryes the same reason holdeth on both sides Moreouer we are instructed by fayth that the single person of Christ is vnited to most distinct diuers natures to the nature of God and to the nature of man that the sole essence of God is in three persons really distinct that one and the selfe same moment of eternity is answerable correspondent to most different and contrary tymes to tyme past tyme present and tyme to come But as one person sustaineth diuers natures one nature is communicated to diuers persons one moment coexisteth to diuers Amb. orat in Auxen Aeges l. 3. de exid vrbis Hieros cap. 2. â—o Dams orat de B. Virgine tymes why cannot one body be resident in diuers places 21. Els how could our Sauiour after his Ascension haue met S. Peter flying the persecution of Rome as S. Ambrose and Aegesippus record How could he haue descended to honour the funeralls of our B. Lady as S. Iohn Damascen and Nicephorus witnesse How could he appeare to S. Paul as in the 9. Chap. of the Actes of the Apostles in the 22. and 23. For in none of these apparitions could he Calu. in c. 9. act l. 4. Instit c. 17. §.
to the multitude of externall seales Not the same least one and the selfe same thing which you abhorre should be at the same tyme in sundry places Not seuerall vnlesse you make many seuerall and distinct Communions not all to partake as S. Paul sayth of the 1. Cor. â—oâ— Bils 4. par pag. 7â—0 711 712. c. same bread And therfore when neyther of these retraites will serue M. Bilsons last craft and subtilty is That Christ is present in the Sacrament not mixing his substance with the elements but entring the harts of the faithfull Then tell me I beseech you how doth he enter Accidentally by some supernaturall quality infused into our soules Or Substantially by the entrance of his substance it selfe What Accidentally Then the Holy Eucharist is not as S. Paul waiteth The Communion of the bloud and participation of the body of our Lord but the participation only of your 1. Cor. 10. new created accident Of which I likewise demand whether the same or distinct accidents be produced in euery soule and so entangle you in all the former briars What Substantially How then doth the substance enter Whole or deuided into parts If by parts the glorious body of Christ should be mangled disfigured and remayne imperfect If whole the whole substance should be at the same tyme in diuers places cherishing the soules of diuers persons Besides how is he who sitteth at the right hand of his Father substantially vnited with vs vpon earth Can he enter our soules as M. Bilson dreameth not departing from the heauens and can he not enter the Hoast as Catholikes teach not departing from thence 4. M. Sparkes perchance will be more dexterous and expert in auoyding these difficulties As intricate and perplexed euery whit For he not contented with Christs spirituall Sparks p. â—16 presence only by faith auoucheth him to be also truly and really present to the harts of the faithfull Yet with such a strang and hidden presence as no tearmes can expresse no wit conceaue For answere M. Sparkes in what sort is Christ really present Withall his locall dimensions or without dimension Without is to destroy * Sparkes pag. 110. Vvhitaker cent 2. q. 5. c. 7. fol. 389 Spark pag 114. 115. 116. as you vrge against vs the nature of his body With all his dimensioÌ„s is impossible without penetration of Christs body with the body of his Communicant without multiplication rarefaction condensation and many other in your Shoole condemned absurdities Also how conioyne you Christ with vs Are our harts by the communion aduanced to heauen to be really vnited to him aboue or doth he descend to be personally conioyned with vs vpon earth Without a reall coniunction no Reall Presence by fayth can be framed much lesse such a Reall Presence as you imagine of Christs body broken and bloud shed of his passible and crucified body and bloud shed long since vpon the Crosse and not of his glorified and impassible body which now existeth Especially when you affirme in the same place That the body once broken and bloud shed haâ—h not beene really at any tyme iterated nor can be Are you not heere entrapped in your owne discourse Do not these words imply most palpable contradiction Is it possible for that which neyther really is nor really can be to be really present Doth not Aristotle and all Philosophers accord that Prius est esse quà m esse praesens A thing must first be before it can be present What leuity then what ignorance is this M. Sparkes in you and your fellows who auouch Christs body broken to be really present and not to be at all 5. Poore deceaued soules I lament your misery who in no trifling matters credit such triflers as mind not what they say nor how they write so they dazell the eyes and inueigle the harts of their vnhappy followers Yet least their hideous outcries fright the simple from imbracing the truth I will make answer to the residue of their pretended Calumnies Bils 4. par p. 731. c. Exod. 7. Matth. 11. Gen. 18. Aug. epist 23. Amb. l. 4. de Sacram. c. 3. 4. Orig. in 15. Matth. Ioan. 6. Gen. 49. Psal 77. Matth. 6. The greek hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Hebrew Segula 6. First M. Bilson and his Sect-mates often argue That the Eucharist is called by S. Paul and the ancient Fathers bread the Chalice wine euen after Consecration I graunt that for diuers causes the elements retaine these names First because they were bread and wine before as Araons rod was sayd to deuour the rods of the Aegyptians when they were Serpents The men healed by Christ were termed Blind Lame Deafe and Dead when they Saw Walked Heard and were Reuiued because such they had byn before Secondly because they reserue the outward formes of bread and wine as the Three that appeared to Abraham in humaine shape were called men whereas they were Angels Thus S. Augustine is to be vnderstood thus S. Ambrose thus Origen in the places cited in the margent where they attribute vnto the sacrament the name of bread Thirdly it is termed Bread for that it coÌ„teyneth the Bread of life The true Bread which came downe from heauen Christ Iesus And therfore called in Scripture Fat bread Bread of Angels Supersubstantiall bread according to the Greeke Hebrew copies S. Hierome nameth it Egregious and most singuler Hier. in c. 6. Matth. Iere. 11. v. 19. Aug. l. 1. loquutio in Gen. n. 138. 178. 172. quaest 34. in Exod. bread And Ieremy the Prophet alluding hereunto calleth his true body Bread without any Epithete saying Mittamus lignum in panem eius Let vs fasten the wood on his Bread Lastly it is called Bread after the Hebrew phrase which stileth all sorts of meats by the name Lechem Bread as in the 34. of Genesis 4. Regum 6. Witnesse also S. Augustine in his speaches vpon Genesis and Exodus 7. But M. Bilson produceth some ancient writers who do not only giue vnto the Eucharist the name of bread but determinately auow the nature and substance of bread to abide after consecration Among whome Gelas coÌ„t Eutichen Gelasius leadeth the way writing thus against Eutiches The Sacraments which we receaue of the body bloud of Christ are a diuine thing and by them we are made partakers of the diuine nature and yet for all that ceaseth not the substance or nature of bread and wine to be Then Theodoret The mysticall signes do not after Theod. dialog 2. sanctification depart from their owne nature For they remaine in their former substance figure and shape I answere They are sayd to remaine because they perseuer still in vertue power and efficacy For the outward formes and qualities which continue haue the same operations and worke the same effects which the substances before performed Or because the accidents which abide haue a miraculous yet substantiall manner of being not stayed not
of colours but only white the most true natiue colour so our Reformers admit all manner of Doctrine and in this present all sorts of Confession but that which is most important and beneficiall for their soules 1. They allow the Confession of sinnes to God in generall 2. The Confession of some sinnes in particuler to a learned Minister to receaue comfort and direction from him 3. The Confession of certaine enormo us crimes publikely made in the sight of the congregation for their satisfaction and terrour of others 4. The Confession of priuate iniuries to the party offended to be reconciled to him But the Confession of all particuler faults to a lawfull Priest to receaue pardon and absolution they vtterly disauow Wherein to proceed more perspicuously they chiefly deny three principall points First the power in Priests to absolue from sinnes Secondly the necessity of sinners to confesse Thirdly the necessity of numbring euery particuler offence All which notwithstanding I will clearly deduce out of that soueraigne Commission Christ gaue to his Apostles when breathing vpon them he sayd 2. Receaue yee the holy Ghost whose sinnes yee forgiue they Iohn 20. v. 23. are forgiuen and whose sinnes yee retaine they are retayned For by this passage it is euident that authority is giuen to the Priests of Gods Church not only to preach the Ghospell and denounce retention to the impenitent remission to the Sparkes P. 323. Fulke in c. 20. Ioan. sect 4. 5 Math 28 Mar. 16. Ioan. 20. penitent belieuer as D. Sparkes D. Fulke with their adherents perfidiously wrest the words but absolute power is granted vnto them as the Vicars and Vicegerents of Christ truly to remit and pardon sinnes 1. Because commission to preach was giuen before in S. Matthew S. Marke 2. That was extended to all Teach all nations this is restrayned to some alone who submit their faults to the keyes and censure of the Church Whose sinnes yee remit c. 3. Forgiuenes of sinnes in heauen is not alwayes annexed to the Preachers exhortation it is to the absolution of the Priest if no obstacle hinder it in the party absolued 4. The Preachers voyce declareth on earth what God hath already persormed in heauen but heere quite contrary God ratifieth in heauen what the Priest by his mynisteriall power pronounceth vpon earth The Iudgment Hila. Can 26. in Mat. Chrâ— hom 5. de verbis Isa Vidi Dominum or sentence on earth sayth S. Hilary goeth before that which is giuen in heauen Heauen sayth S. Chrysostome borroweth principall authority of iudging from the Earth So as it cannot be the meere vocation to preach but some other extraordinary and singular Iurisdiction which our Sauiour here bequeathed to his Apostles 3. A Iurisdiction signified before by the power of keys which are chiefly giuen to magistrates and rulers of Cittyes not to betoken thinges already locked or vnlockt but to open and shut as occasion requireth A Iurisdiction for the due exercise whereof the Sacrament so a Aug. l. 2. cont Parm. c. 13. Greg. l. 4. Com. in l. ReguÌ„ c. 5. Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 19. S. Augustine and others tearme it of Ordination was instituted b Chrys hom 85. in Ioan. Greg. Niss ora de lap Isa 44. v. 12. Cyr. lib. 12. c. 56. in 10. Atha ser in illaverba Profecti in pagum Hier ep ad Hedibi Bafil quaest breuib inter 288. Leo ep 91 ad Thâ—oâ— Pacian ep 1. ad Sym. pro. Ambr. de poenic l. x. c. 2. 7. Chris l. 3. de Sacer. Spirituall grace infused the Holy Ghost purposely imparted and imparted after a speciall manner of insufflation or breathing on them to denote that the breath of his Priests pronouncing the words of absolution should disperse and dissolue the mists of sinne according to that of the Prophet Esay I haue disolued like a cloud thy sins This ceremony then was vsed to declare the effect of extinguishing sinne the Holy Ghost was giuen to manifest the cause by whom it is abolished For as S. Cyril sayth It is neyther absurd nor yet inconuenient that they forgiue sinnes who haue the Holy Ghost For when they pardon or retaine sinns the Holy Ghost pardoneth or retayneth sinnes by them and that they doe two wayes by Baptisme first afterwards by Penance 4. Lastly that this rare prerogatiue graunted to Priests was not only by the mystery of the word to declare but by the authority of the keyes to forgiue sinnes many other of the Fathers directly teach S. Athanasius tearming it Power giuen by our Sauiour to Paiests to loose sinnes S. Hierome S. Basil S. Leo Pacianus haue the like S. Ambrose expresly proueth this authority in Priests of remitting sins against the Nouatians cuen ouer them to whom they denyed the ministery of absolution albeit they graunted the benefit of preaching S. Chrysostome extolling the dignity of Priests aboue Kings and Angels amplifyeth the same after his fashion with this goulden streame of wordes They that inhabite the earth and conuerse thereon to them comission is giuen to dispense those thinges that are in heauen To them that power is giuen which Almighty God would not communicate either to Angell or Archangell For to â—hem it is not sayd whatsoeuer yee shall bind in earth shal be bound in heauen c. Earthly Princes indeed haue also authority to bind but the bodyes only but that * Sacerdotum vinculum ipsam eâ—i im animam contingit atque ad caelos vsque peruadit c. binding of Priests which I treate of toucheth the very soule it selfe and reacheth euen to the Heauens In so much as whatsoeuer the Priestes performe beneath the very same Almighty God doth aboue and the sentence * SeruoruÌ„ sententiam Dominus confirmat of the seruant our Lord doth confirme And what is this truly elso but that the power of heauenly things is graunted by God vnto them Whose sinnes soeuer sayth he yee shall retaine they are retained What power I beseech you can be greater then this The Father gaue all power to the Sonne but I see the same power deliuered altogeather by the Sonne vnto them Wherefore as Christ had a speciall power of pardoning sinnes distinct from his power of preaching so had the Apostles to whome he gaue al power committed vnto him as S. Chrysostome auoucheth and our Sauiour himselfe witnesseth when before he imparted this authority he mentioneth his owne commission Ioan. 20. v. 22. saying As my Father sent me I also send you 5. The power of Priests to remit sinnes being thus established it remaineth I declare how Confession to a Priest the second point which our Aduersaryes deny is heerein implyed M. Fulke sayth Neither doth it follow of M. Fulke in c. 20. Io. sect 5. any necessity that men are bound to submit themselues to the Iudgment of Priests if they haue authority to forgiue sinnes But S. Augustine more ancient more holy more
learned then he is of a contrary mind Let no man deceaue himselfe and say I do pennance secretly I do it in the sight of God God who Aug. 50. bom bom 49. pardoneth me knoweth I doe it in my hart Then without cause was it sayd Those things which you loose on earth shall be loosed in heauen Then without cause were the keyes giuen to the Church of God Do we frustrate the Ghospell Do we euacuate the word of Matth. 18. v. 18. c. 26. v. 19. Christ As though all these thinges were in vaine if by God alone without the help and ministery of the Priest our sinnes could be remitted For as the Commandment our Sauiour gaue to his Apostles to baptize saying Goe teach all Nations baptizing them c. had beene wholy in vaine if all men were not bound to receaue the Sacrament Matth. 28. â— 19. of Baptisme if any entrance to Christianity any badge or cognizance of a Christian could be obtained without this lauer and regeneration of water and the holy Ghost Againe as the authority he gaue them to preach were to little purpose if men not sufficiently instructed Marc. 16. v. 15. were not obliged thereby to giue eare to his word so idle and in vaine were the commission he granted to his Apostles to retaine and forgiue sinnes if all who offended after Baptisme be not tyed to submit and make knowne their offences vnto them which for two seuerall reasons they are bound to do 6. The first is mentioned by Boetius If thou desire the Boetius de Consola l. 1. prosa 4. help of thy Phisitian it is requisite thou discouer thy disease But as many as are swollen with the impostume of sinne ought to seeke remedy for the recouery of their soules Therefore it is necessary they lay open their soares to the spirituall Phisitians appointed for their cure The second reason is because Priests are made by the vertue of this Commission not only Phisitians but spirituall Iudges also to vnderstand the quality and haynousnes of our crymes to know what medicinable peÌ„nance they should apply to discerne what sinnes are to be remitted and Arist 8. Polit. what retained Now seeing Aristotle teacheth and naturall reason approueth it to be true That it is impossible for them to iudge discreetly who haue no knowledge of the case all that are entangled with the snares of sin must giue notice of them to the Priests tribunall whome God hath placed in iudgment-seat to pronounce in his person sentence of absolution 7. And least any should gainesay with Caluin this Nazi ora ad Ciues timore perculsos Hier. epad Helio Aug. l. 20. de ciu Dei cap. 9. Apoc. 20. iudiciall power graunted to Priests besides the words of Christ which clearely conuince it the authority of the Fathers maketh it vndenyable S. Greg. NazianzeÌ„ auerreth That the law of Christ hath subiected Princes to his Throne and Empyre S. Hierome sayth That Priests hauing the keyes of the kingdome of heauen iudge as it were before the day of iudgment S. Augustine vpon these wordes of the Apocalips I saw seates and those that sate vpon them and iudgment was giuen vnto them writeth thus This may not be thought to be spoken of the last iudgment but by the seates are meant the Rulers thrones of the Church and the Persons themselues by whome they are gouerned And for the iudgment giuen them it cannot be better explained then in these words Whatsoeuer yee bind on earth shal be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer yee loose on earth shall be loosed in Heauen 8. Hence we inferre the exact enumeration of all Sparks p. 329. 330. 331. grieuous crimes the third point M. Sparkes impugneth For as they that haue many strifs in law to be determined by the examination and sentence of the Iudge ought to vnfold them al in particuler to receaue his iudgment and verdict of them so they that are burdened with sundry faults which be offences and iniuryes committed against God if they will come to an attonement with him they must make them all knowne to such as are ordained to reconcile them to his fauour to such as participate to vse S. Gregoryes words the principality of Diuine iudgment Greg. ho. 26. in Eâ—ang who in place of God may detaine sinnes to some release them to others When a souldiour hath receaued many woundes in warre it is not inough to tell his Surgeon or Phisitian in generall manner that he is wounded but he must shew Aug. serm 66. de tem the seuerall woundes and dangers of them or els no wise Surgeon will venter to apply his plaisters or vndertake to cure them euen so it is not sufficient for such as are wounded in Soule with diuers deadly sinnes to complaine in generall that they are grieuous sinners but they must particulerly specify the number quality and haynousnes of euery mortall crime that their spirituall Phisitian may thereby discerne what holsome salue whatsatisfactory pennance what good counsell and aduise he should minister vnto them And therfore S. Gregory Nyssen sayth That as in corporall infirmityes there are sundry kindes of Nyss epist ad Episco Mytil S. Tho. in Supplem ad 3. p. q. â— art 2. medicines according to the diuersity of diseases so whereas in the disease of the soule there is great variety of affections sundry sorts of medicinable cures ought to be adhibited The reason heereof S. Thomas alleadgeth because one disease is more dangerous by the contagion of another and that medicine which is holesome to that may be noyson to this kind of infirmity So that by the approued doctrin of both these learned writers euery penitent ought to make a particuler rehearsall of all haynous faults euen of such as be secret and hidden To which the same S. Gregory vehemently Nyss orat in muliereÌ„ peccatrie Audacter inquit osteÌ„de illi quaesunt recondita animi arcana taÌ„quam oeculta vulnera medico retege Hier. super Mat. cap. 16. exhorteth in another place that thereby the Priest may be perfectly acquainted with the whole state of their soules vnderstand the manifold varietyes of their spirituall diseases For as S. Hierome sayth Then the Bishop or Priest knoweth who is to be bound and who is to be loosed when he heareth the variety of sinnes 9. And this manner of confessing all particuler offences is that which Christ commanded which the figures of the old Testament betokned which the Apostles meÌ„tioned which in al succeeding ages hath byn deuoutly obserued in the Church of God Touching Christs commandment I haue already shewed that it is impossible for Priests to pronounce iudiciall sentence impossible to apply soueraigne medicines impossible to know what they should loose what retaine and consequently this Commission bootles vnles the Penitent were bound distinctly to name his sinnes vnto him Concerning the figures I let passe the confession God exacted of Adam of
by which they hoped demanded and often obtayned the fruits of their requests Listen to S. Hierome listen to S. Gregory Nazianzen both which you produce to bewray their doubtfulnes S. Hieromes words are these Farewell O Paula and support with the help of thy prayers the feeble old age of thy worshiper These S. Gregory Nazianzens calling vpon S. Basil O Diuine and sacred head behold vs from aboue and the instigation of my flesh giuen me as an instruction from God eyther aswage with thy prayers or moue me to beare coragiously Did these men doubt Or S. Bernard who often assureth vs of Bern. serm 3. in vigil Nat. ser de B. Virg. quae incipit Signum magnum Bafil in 40. Mart. Cyp. lib. de habit Virg. Ruffin l. â— hist c. 33. the help of our B. Lady Or S. Basil exhorting vs to inuok the 40. Martyrs Whosoeuer is oppressed with any misery let him repayre to these and who soeuer reioyceth let him pray tothese the one that he may be freed from euill the other that he may perseuere in his prosperous courses Or S. Cyprian who requested the Virgins or Nuns of his time in whose coÌ„mendation he wrote to remember him after their departure when their Virginity should begin to be honoured Or Theodosius the Emperour who as Ruffinus witnesseth clad in sacke-cloath lay prostrate at the Tombes of the holy Apostles and Martyrs and craued help by the assured intercession of Saints Or any of those whome I recited before whose speaches cannot be eluded by any doubtfull florish or figure of Rethorike much lesse the suites they make vnto the Saints in heauen a PrudeÌ„ in hym 4. 8. 10. Casar-August August quaest 108. ser 18. de Sanct. to obtaine pardon for their sinnes b Noz or at in Athâ—n To be directed in the warfare and combate of this life c Bern. in vigil Petr. Paul To incline the hart of our Iudge in their behalfe d Prud. hym 2. in D. Lauren. To be sooner released the bonds of our mortality e Amb. or at â— in morte fratris Nazi ora in Basil To be receaued by them into the Tabernacles of blisse f August lib. medit cap. 24. Nazian in S. Cypri Ambros exhor ad virg Paul Nola. in Car ad Cytherium August lib. 22. de Ciuit. Dei cap. â— To bewafted by their prayers and merits to the hauen of perpetuall peace Such and many such like requestes they made which were no. wholy frustrate as the miracles wrought in accomplishing their desires giue testimony vnto vs. 7. S. Gregory Nazianzen writeth of a Virgin bewitched with diuelish charmes to be deflowred by her Louer who prayed to our Blessed Lady and was deliuered from his wicked inchantements S. Ambrose of S. Iulian who obtayned a sonne by the intercession of S. Laurence Paulinus of Martinian who escaped imminent danger of death by the help of Saint Felix Saint Augustine of Palladia who praying to S. Stephen was healed of a grieuous disease Of a blind woman who receiued her sight Of the daughter of one Bassus a Syrian restord to life And sundry other miracles wrought by the Reliques memory and inuocation of selfe-same happy and glorious Protomartyr 8. Which argueth M. Field of more then vnshamfastnes Field l. 3. c. 20. fol. 109. 110. Kemnitius exam p. 3. p. 211. of insolent malepartnes in slandering S. Augustine That he dareth not pronounce but inclineth to that opinion that the Saints doe not particulerly see know and intermeddle with humane thinges If Saint Augustines owne words here quoted cannot free him from so vile a reproach let Kemnitius M. Fieldes fellow Protestant be heard he alleadgeth S. Field loco citato Augustine inuocating S. Cyprian and blusheth not to adde These thinges Augustine without the warrant of Scripture yielding to tymes and custome Yet D. Field once downe the banke Whitgift in his defence against the reply of Cartwright of modesty slideth to the bottome of audacious impudency and immediatly writeth The Church of God neuer desined otherwise how soeuer Hierome in his passion agaynst Vigilantius seeme to say the contrary Not Hierome M. Field in his passion but your owne Sect-mates in their sober writinges shall conuince you of falshood and testify the same vvith him D. Couel in his exam pag. 120. Fulk in his Reioynder p. 5. 6. agaynst the Rhem. Test in 2. Petr. c. 1. sect 3. Kemn in exam p. 3. pag. 200. Sparkes p. 33. Cent. Cen. 3. Col. 83. c. 9. M. Whitgift late Archbishop of Canterbury Almost all the Bishops sayth he and writers of the Greeke Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with Doctrines of Free-will of merit of inuocation of Saints and such like The same is auouched by D. Couell M. Fulke sayth I confesse that Ambrose Augustine and Hierome held Inuocation of Saintes to be lawfull And in another place In Nazianzen Basill and Chrysostom is mention of Inuocation of Saints Kemnitius the Lutheran before named Inuocation of Saintes quoth he at length about the yeare of our Lord 370. by Basil Nissen and Nazianzen began to be brought into the publike asseÌ„blyes of the Church D. Sparkes chargeth Origen or some other vnder his name With a grosse Popish prayer to Iob. The Centurists doe the like acknowledging moreouer this vniforme doctrine in many other who liued about the 300. yeares after Christ saying There are manifest steps of Inuocation of Saints in the Doctours of that auncient age And in the Centuries following they accuse Athanasius Basil Nazianzen Ambrose Prudentius Cent. Cen. 4. c. 4. Col. 296. 297. VVhitaker in his ans to the 4. reason of Comp. Ibid. in his ans to the 5. reason Epiphanius and Ephrem of the same errour Finally when blessed Campian vrged this approued custome of the ancient Fathers Whitaker answered The old and inueterate practise of inuocating Saints in prayers we little regard although this were an ancient custom yet it flowed from humane superstition not from Diuine authority And a little after speaking of Prudentius who florished within the 400. yeare after Christ he sayth Prudentius I graunt as a poet sometymes called vpon the Martyrs whose Acts he describeth in verse and the superstitious custome of praying to Saints had now taken deepe roote in the Church which as a Tyrant haled sometymes the holy Fathers into the same error 10. What thinke you now M. Field was S. Augustine was S. Ambrose were all these learned Fathers here cited and the whole Church which they guided of this beliefe or no that the Saints in heauen see and intermeddle with humane affayres Or were all these mirrours of wit learning and sanctity not only superstitiously as your Ghospellers tax them but foolishly sottish also as you would make them to call vpon such as they thought had no sense or feeling of their necessities Dare you auouch That Inuocation of Saints preuayled not in
the Church of Field lib. 3. cap. 20. God when these Pastours and Prelats vpheld it as lawfull When it had taken deepe roote and haled the holy Fathers into that errour Dare you professe that the members agreed not with their head the Sheepe with their Shepheards the people with their Priests Dare you thinke that any presumed to contradict that which Augustine in Affricke Ambrose in Italy Hierome in Palestine Epiphanius at Cyprus Chrysostome at Constantinople Basil Nazianzen Nisien Athanasius in other parts of Greece countenanced and supported Or if any disallowed this generall and vniuersall practise tell vs who they were shew vs but one in the first 600 yeares besides Vigilantius whose name for that cause is billited in the house of Heretikes and fameblotted with euerlasting ignominy 11. Morouer both reason equity perswadeth that as the faythfull vpon earth make one Church one This is proued by S. August l. 20. de Ciuit. Dei c. 9. People one Common-wealth with the Saints in heauen as we are all members of the same body sheepe of the same fould as we all liue in the family and houshold of one Mayster all are gouerned guided by one headpastour and shepherd so it is expedient we should haue mutuall fellowship and society togeather mutuall CoÌ„munion and participation of benefits mutuall and interchangeable offices of loue charity duty reuerence honour and submission We of duty should sue to them they of charity pray for vs we honour and prayse their felicity they helpe and relieue our misery we lay open our pouerty and wants they supply with the abundance of their merits For if this reciprocall loue and communication of benefits be practised betweene the Cittyzens of euery Citty subiects of euery Kingdome seruants of eâ—ery house if the Corinthians exhibited it to their brethren vpon earthâ— how much more may we expect from the 2. Cor. 8. vers 14. blessed soules in heauen we that are called to the inheritance of their Kingdome we that are not pilgrims and strangers but Cittyzens of Saints houshould-seruants of God 12. Lastly we read in holy Writ that the liuing doe fruitfully inuocate the liuing vpon earth The children of Israel intreated the prayers of Samuel S. Paul of 1. Reg. 7. v. 8. Rom. 15. 1. Thes 5. Colos 4. Ephe. 6. lob vlâ— the Romans Thessalonians Colossians Ephefians And God commanded some to repayre to holy Iob saying Goe to my seruant Iob he shal pray for you Yea was it pleasing to God was it auaylable to others to pray to him yet liuing in misery and shall it not profit vs to inuocate him novv raygning in glory Was it no fault in S. Paul to pray vnto the faythfull exiled from the face of their Spouse and can it be no lesse then high treason in vs and treason agaynst his Diuine maiesty to cal vpon them now blessed vvith the fruition and sight of his countenance To call vpon the Apostles and Martyrs of Christ to call vpon the immaculate Virgin mother of God Are they dead to vs because they liue to him and liue a more perfect pure and happy life Agreable to that of S. Matthew cited Matt. 22. Cyr. l. 6. cap. 10. Cal. lib. 3. Inst c. 20. Rey. l. 1. de Ido Rom. Hec. c. 3. to this purpose by S. Cyril of Alexandria I am the God of Abraham Isaac and Iacob the God of the liuing and not of the dead albeit Caluin scornfully taunteth often at theÌ„ by the name of deadmen 13. M. Reynolds seeketh to shew a reason vvhy vve pray to the liuing and not to the departed Because sayth he the liuing may vnderstand our griefes eyther by word or message the Saints can haue no notice of them Therefore they cannot make particuler intercession for vs or we vse any supplication to them But if I proue they may haue perfect intelligence of our affayres if by the same meanes and by far more assured then the liuing with vs vvhat vvill he then say What shield vvill he find to saue himselfe What shift to eschevv the force of my argument Tvvo vvayes he and others assigne of knovvledge to the liuing By word or sight in presence by message or report in absence Both these are ascribed to the Saints in heauen They vnderstand our afflictions by vvord and sight vvhen being as Ambrose and S. Hierome teach they may be by incredible svviftnesse and celerity of motion euery vvhere present and conuersant Amb. l. de viduis Hierom. l. con Vigil amongst vs being as S. Ambrose addeth Beholders of our life and actions they see our distresse and heare the coÌ„plaints vve make They knovv our estate by message also and report of others By the report sayth S. Augustine of the soules vvho depart from hence and by the report Aug. l. de cura pro mortuis of the Angels Gods trusty messengers and our Faythfull Guardians vvho haue daily intercourse betvveene them and vs. 14. Or if these meanes vvill not suffice the ordinary vvayes by vvhich mortall men take notice of our occurrents there are yet two others more sure then these by vvhich the Saints stil resident in heauen haue certaine knowledge of our outward actions inward thoughts as farre forth as it may be needfull for vs and expedient to them The one insinated by Saint Hierome and Saint Hier. ep 2. con Vigil Greg. l. 12. moral c. 13. 16. Gregory the Great is that the Saintes behold them in the brightnes of God as in a fayre replendent glasse in which the beames of all creatures their nature and perfections more clearly shine then in themselues according to that of S. Gregory What can they be there ignorant of where Naz. orat fun in sor Gorg. Aug. l. de cura pro mortuis cap. 15. Luc. 15. 7. Mat. 18. 10. Mat. 22. 30. Luc. 20. 36. Apocal. 1. 26. 27. Mat. 19. 28. they know him who knoweth all things Another mentioned by S. Gregory Nazianzen and S. Augustine is by the speciall fauour and reuelation of God who openeth to them as to his entire friendes whatsoeuer is behoofull for them to know And that by one or both these meanes the blessed soules vnderstand our affayres we euidently proue First because the Angels in heauen know them they reioyce at the secret conuersion and repentance of a sinner therefore they know it They haue such care of their Wardes as it is written See you despise not one of these little ones for I say to you their Angels in heauen alwayes doe see the face of my Father Therefore they know the estate of their pupils they know the wrong we offer vnto them or else in vayne are we threatned to feare it The same I conclude of the Saints vvho by Christ himselfe are likened vnto Angels vvho rule gouerne and raygne ouer vs who must the chiefest of them giue doome and iudgement of our actions therefore they knovv them Secondly the nature of
We contrary wise teach that actual concupiscence much lesse habituall is no sin at all vnles the allowance and approbation of our will concurre thereunto which S. Iames auoucheth in his Catholike Epistle Euery one is tempted of his owne concupiscence abstracted and allured afterward concupiscence when it hath conceaued bringeth forth sinne Iac. 1. v. 14. 15. Lo heere the act of concupiscence first tempting to sinne before it be formally sinne therefore of it selfe it is no sinne neither are the suddayne motions and suggestions therof culpable except we some way yield vnto them which our thrice learned and euer worthy admired S. Augustine of set purpose inculcateth in diuers places in his Aug. l. 5. cont Iul. c. 5. fift booke against Iulian and cyting that very text of S. Iames he sayth Truly in these wordes the brood is distinguished from that which breedeth or bringeth forth for concupiscence is that which breedeth the brood is sinne but concupiscence begetteth not vnles is conceaue it conceaueth not vnles it induce that is gayneth the assent of the willer to perpetuall euill When therefore it is striuen against this commeth to passe that it may not conceaue Augu. de ciuit Dei l. 1. c. 25. Idem ep 200. ad Asel Iâ—em l 2. de Gen cont Maâ—i c. 4. Cyril l. 4. c. 5â— Chrys ho. 13. in ep ad Rom. Basil l. de virg l. const Monast c. 2. Ambr. l. de Sacram. regen Hier. ep ad Ocea or trauell with sinne In his booke of the Citty of God That rebellion of concupiscence which dwelleth in our dying members c. how much lesse is it without fault in the body of him that consenteth not if it be without fault in the body of him that sleepeth In his epistles If we consent not to those disordered motions we need not say to our Father which is in heauen forgiue vs our trespasses In his second booke of Genesis against the Manichees Sometyme reason doth stoutly resist and bridle concupiscence euen stirred vp which when it is performed we fall not into sinne but with some wrastling are crowned With S. Augustine accord S. Cyrill S. Chrysostome S. Basil S. Ambrose S. Hierome and all the ornaments both of the Greeke and Latin Church as Caluin the Proto-sectary of this our vnfortunate age fully witnesseth writing of Concupiscence in these wordes Neither is it needfull to labour much in searching what old writers haue thought heerein for as much as only Augustine may be sufficient for it who hath faythfully and with great diligence gathered all their iudgments therefore let the Readers gather out of him such certainty as they shall desire to learne of the opinion of antiquity And then immediatly setting downe what S. Augustine taught of this matter and wherein he dissented from him There may seeme sayth he to be this difference betweene him and vs that he when he graunteth that the faythfull so long as they dwell in a mortall body are so holden bound with lusts Calu. l. 3. instit c. 3. §. 10. that they cannot but lust yet dareth not call that disease sinne but being content to expresse it by the name of weaknes he teacheth that then only it becommeth sinne when either worke or consent is added to corruption or apprehension that is when will yieldeth to the first desire but we account the very same for sinne that man is tickled with any desire at all against the law of God I need no more The opinion and iudgment of all antiquity touching concupiscence by Caluins confession is to be taken out of Augustine Augustine auoucheth it no sinne without the consent of the will as himselfe also confesseth Augustine therefore and all antiquity agree with vs in this point against himselfe and his confederates by Caluins owne confession 3. But I will not only beare downe my aduersaryes by Caluins testimony and authority of Ancient Fathers Concupiscence without consent proued by reason to be no sin I will wage also reasons with them I aske what sinne the instigation of coÌ„cupiscence is if it vnwillingly inuade vs or be checked and restrained by vs Originall or Actuall Not Originall because that equally infecteth all this is more violent more exorbitaÌ„t in some theÌ„ others according to the various coÌ„plexion disposition of the persoÌ„s that is of one essence and nature in euery sinner this of diuers one of wrath another of lust the third of reueng c. that neither is nor can be any act but a defect or priuatioÌ„ only this is a personall act in him that coueteth therfore it is not Original sinne distilled from another Nor Actuall Aug. l. 3 de lib. arb c. 18. for we cannot sinne actually against our will No man as S. Augustine teacheth is sayd to sinne in that which he cannot auoyd Therfore the vnuoluntary motions which maugre our will often assault vs cannot be truly sins Our opponents reply it is sufficient they were once voluntary in their origen that is in Adam But it is false that Adam euer voluntarily consented to the personal motions of coÌ„cupiscence which arise in vs neither was our will coÌ„prehended in him as head of his posterity in any other thing then in keeping or casting of the armour of original iustice from himselfe and vs therin only his will was our assent his perseuerance our crown his reuolt our fall his transgressioÌ„ our sin in other acts or desirs of ours which are not of their owne nature faulty though free his voluntary disobedience cannot make them faulty And although I should graunt that they willingly proceed from him as the voluntary cause of all our euills yet that is not inough to make vs now guilty of the outrage committed to say we once sinned in the cause wheron it depended for you may be faulty in the cause and yet incurre no sin when the effect falleth out For example the Maister commandeth his seruant or solliciteth his friend to murder his enemy without doubt he grieuously offendeth when he giueth that charge or vseth such wicked perswasions yet if after he hartily repent before it be atchieued and do his vttermost to recall and hinder the effect although the Lesâ—â—â—â— l. 2. de iure iust c. 13. â—ub 3. Molits de Restit tract 2. disp 73â— censure of excommunication and irregularity sometyme may yet the guilt of sinne neuer can be incurred when the slaughter is committed contrary to his mind the reason is because he hauing recouered the grace and fauour of God by his sorrow and repentance cannot be depriued of it against his will If this be true in the effectes once caused by our owne counsayle or aduise how true is it in the motions caused in vs by the consent of another And if actuall coÌ„cupiscence may be without sinne much more habituall which is nothing so ill as that for the euill habits of mortall and deadly sinne may comply with grace the euill acts can neuer
S. Luke confirmed by S. Paul And yet our Sacramentaries reiecting the agrement approbation of them al endeauour to interpret it by far more hard hidden passages Others do not only misconster but vtterly deny most apparent places vndeniable testimonyes For is there any thing more often inculcated or more largly amplifyed by the Prophets then the glory of the Messias and benefites we were to receaue by the comming of Christ Is there any thing more euidently expressed by the EuaÌ„gelists then his genealogy his natiuity his humane pedegree from the line of Dauid Yet Faustus the Manichee had his eyes darkned as S. Augustine testifyeth with presumptuous arrogancy that he sayd Searching the Scrippures Aug. lib. 16. con Paust cap. 2. 14. lib. 12. c. 2. lib. 2. cap. 2. I find there no Prophesyes of Christ The Prophets fortel nothing of him the Ghospell mentioneth not his temporall birth or procreation from man Howbeit sayth S. Augustine he euery where auoucheth himselfe the sonne of man But as Faustus was thus blinded and would not see a mistery so cleare what if Protestants be blinded in an article of Faith no lesse cleare and perspicuous We found not in Scripture the predictions of Christ neither do they discerne the Aug. ep 165. ad Donat Church of Christ as plainely described as Christ himself For in the Scriptures sayth S. Augustine we learne Christ in the Scriptures we learne the Church And then How doe we belieue we haue receaued out of the diuin writings Christ manifest Aug. epist 48 ad vinâ—eÌ„t Rogat â— vnles we haae also receaued from thence the Church manifest Truly we haue receaued it so manifest as all Nations see it all nations flocke vnto it all reuerence and obey it by the direction of Scripture only they see it not who would be ignoraÌ„t of nothing by their search of Scripture They see not I say the Catholike vniuersall Church visibly dispersed thoughout all the world lineally descended from the Apostles infallibly assisted by the spirit of God c. often recommended in holy Write vnto vs. 16. Secondly I might alleadge the copiousnes of Gods sacred word how some one 〈…〉 is often tymes so fruitfully impregned that as it is deliuered by the diuine Math. 7. v. 18. Interpreters of many true litterall senses so it is brought forth by priuate expositors with the vntimely birth of sundry heresyes Let that sole text of S. Matthew serue for an example A good â—ee cannot yeild euill fruits c. For by this a Hier. l. 2. aduers Iouin Iouinian vnderpropped his fornamed fancy That a good and iust man could not produce the fruits of sinne The Pelagians b Aug. l. 2. de nup. concup cap. 26. from thence concluded That the good sacred tree of Marriage that the pure and faithfull married couple cannot â—ngender euill Children infected with the contagiou of originall sin Others c Aug. l. 1. de grat Christ c. 18 of that crew by the force of the same wordes and those that follow Nor an euill tree yeild good fruits peruersly inferred That the good tree of Free-will might of it selfe without Gods grace procreate the fruits of goods works as the euill tree blossometh the fruits of euill Others d Aug. l. 3. cont lit Petil. capâ—â— 44. either Pelagians or Donatists picked from thence That a good Priest could not minister wrongfully the Sacrament of Baptisme nor an euill Priest rightly Out of the same clause e Hier. â—â— coÌ„ment ad hunc loc Aug. in disp 2. cont Fortunat the Manichees strained their impious dotage That some men were good by nature could not be euill some euill by nature and could not be good From whence also the Caluinists gathered two pernicious heresyes The * See both these obiections proposed answered in the 21. 27. Controuersy one That man being an euill tree hath no freewill to be conuerted to God ayded by his grace nor to cooperate thereunto before he be iustifyed The other That as the fruits do only declare the goodnes of the tree and do not make it good or bad so the vertuous and pious workes of the iust are meere signes and remonstrances but no true causes of their inherent iustice If this short heauenly saying through the rashnes of willfulmen hath bred so many false constructiours alâ— which notwithstanding were bolstened with other the like misapplyed passages how can Protestants presume to ayme aright at the marke of Truth in all questions controuerâ—ed by this vncertaine rule of expounding Scripture by Scripture alone 17. Thirdly I might produce the diuersity not only of the literall but of the literall and figuratiue speaches and demand of our Aduersaryes how the Collatours should discerne the one from the other when the words should be literally when figuratiuely vnderstood Origen was more skillfull in tongues more diligent in reading more wise in obseruing the course and connexion Basil hom 3. in Hex stâ—â— in Gonesim of Scripture then euer any Protestantâ— and yet S. Basil noteth him of grosse ouersight in imagining figures and Allegoryes in the first of Genesis in lieu of the letter â—estorius on the contrary side was dazelled with the letter instead of the figure in that speach of S. Iohn Dissolue Ioan. 2. v. 19. yee this Temple and after three dayes I will rayse it againe Whereby he contended that the Sonne of God only dwelled in Christ as in his Temple Marcions stroue for Rom. 5. v. 20. Ioan. 1. v. 14. Philip. 2. v. 7. Haeb. 4. v. 15. Rom. 8. v. 3. Matth. 3. v. â—â— the pure letter where S. Paul writeth The law hath entred that sinne may abound Munichaeus dreamed of a figure where S. Iohn sayd The word is made flesh that is as he proued by conference of sundry places in the habit likenes and similitude of flesh The Iacobits were illuded with the grossnes of the letter when they baptized or rather seared with burning yrons their sect-mates in their foreheads because it is written in the 3. of S. Matthew He shall baptize you in the Holy Ghost and fire Eutychius the Patriarcke of Constantinople was beguiled with the inanity of a figure when impugning the corporall resurrection of our flesh he expounded of a subtile spirituall and ethereall body that which S. Paul spake of a true naturall 18. And the matter is the harder not to be mistaken heerein because some tyme in the selfe same sentence one and the selfe same word ought here properly there metaphorically be expounded as learned Maldonate wisely obserueth Mald. in eum loc Matth. 8. v. 22. Ioan. 3. v. 13. in that saying of Christ Let the dead bury their dead or not to depart from the chiefest articles of fayth of which I haue hitherto spokeÌ„ The like is shewed in S. Iohn No man hath ascended into heauen but he that descended from heauen the Sonne of man who is