Secondly they make him much inferiour vnto the other persons for they teach in their French Catechismes that the Father alone is to be adored in the name of the Sonne In cap. 6. 17. Isa in 16. Marc. And Caluin against Gentil saith that the title of creatour belongeth only to the Father and else where that the Father is the first degree cause of life and the Sonne the second And that the In 26. Math. v. 64. Father holdeth the first ranke of honour and gouernement and the Sonne the second where the holy Ghost is either quite excluded from part with the Father and the Sonne or at most must be content with the third degree of honour 9. I beleeue the holy Catholike Church the communion of Saints First where as there is but one Catholike Church one as the Councell of Nice expresly defineth following sundry textes of the word of God they commonly teach that there be two Churches one inuisible of the elect another visible of both good and bad Secondly they imagine it to be holy holy by the imputation of Christes holinesse to the elected Bretheren and not by the infusion of the holy Ghost into the hartes of all the faithfull Thirdly they cannot abide the name Catholike in the true sence of it Catholike that is they wil not beleeue the true Church to haue beene alwaies visibly extant since the Apostles time and to haue bin generally spread into all Countries otherwise they must needes forsake their owne Church which began with Friar Luther and is not receiued generally in the greatest part of the Christian world Finally they beleeue no Church no not their owne in all points of faith but hold that the true Church may erre in some principall points of faith Howe then can any man safely relie his saluation vpon the credite of such an vncertaine ground erring guide may they not then as well say that they doe not beleeue the one Catholike Church because they doe as well not beleeue it as beleeue it And as for the communion of Saints their learned masters doe commonly cassier it out of the Creede and that not without cause For by the Saints vnderstanding as the Apostles did al good Christians whither aliue or departed this world they that deny praier to Saints and for the soules in Purgatory haue reason to reject the common society entercourse that is betweene the Saints and the mutuall honour and help which such good Christian soules doe yeeld and afford one to another 10. The forgiuenesse of sinnes It is not easily to find what is their setled opinion touching the forgiuenes of originall sinne in Infants Some attribute it to Baptisme but that cannot stand with their common doctrine that Sacraments haue no vertue in them to remit sinnes or to giue grace Others say that God without any meanes doth then when they be baptised of himselfe immediately justifie them but that cannot stand in their owne doctrine because Infants want the instrumēt of faith to lay hold on that justice then offered by God and therefore cannot being so yonge take it vnto them Others will haue Infants sanctified in their mothers wombe by vertue of a couenant which they suppose God to haue made with old father Abraham and all his faithfull seruants that forsooth their seede shall be holy But this is most phantastical and contrary to the Scriptures and daily experience for Isaac was the sonne of promise and yet Esau his sonne was a reprobate Dauides father was a Godly Israelite and yet Dauid affirmeth Psal 50. that he himselfe was conceiued in iniquities and we may see whole Countries nowe turned Turkes whose ancestors were good Christians therefore not all the soules of the faithfull are sanctified in their mothers wombes Secondly how euil soeuer they agree about the remission of sinne yet there is a perfect consent among them that such relikes of originall sinne remaine in euery man baptised and sanctified that it infecteth all and euery worke he doth with deadly sinne yea that which remaineth is properly sinne in it selfe though it be not imputed to the party so that sinne is alwaies in them though their sinnes be neuer so well forgiuen And as for the Sacrament of Penance by which we hold al sinnes committed after Baptisme to be forgiuen they doe renounce the benefit of it and are at vtter defiance with it 11. The resurrection of the bodies Whether Farel the first Apostle of the Geneuian Gospel doubted thereof or no let his successor Caluin tell you who answereth Farels letter thus Episto ad Farellum That the resurrection of this our flesh doth seeme to thee incredible no meruaile c. Againe many of them teach that Christ tooke not his bloud againe which he shed vpon the crosse yea some of them are so gracelesse as to say that his pretious bloud wherewith we were redeemed Vide Conradum li. 1. art 20. rotted away on the earth 1600. yeares agoe If then it be not necessary to a true resurrection to rise againe with the same bloud why is it necessary to rise againe with the same bones and flesh the one being as perfect a part of a mans body as the other 12. Life euerlasting First Captaine Caluin holdeth it for very certaine that no soule doth enter into the joyes of heauen wherein consisteth life euerlasting vntill the day of doome 3. Institu 25. sess 6. These be his wordes the soules of the Godly hauing ended the labour of this war-fare doe goe into a blessed rest where they expect the enjoying of the promised glory And that all thinges are holden in suspence vntill Christ the redeemer appeare whose opinion is yet better then was his predecessor Luthers For he teacheth in many places that the soules of the Godly departing from their bodies Enarra in Gen. c. 26. In Ecclesi c. 9. v. 10. haue no sence at all but doe lie fast a sleepe vntill the latter day Take this one for a tast Another place to proue that the dead feele or vnderstand nothing wherefore Salomon thought the dead to be wholy a sleepe and to perceiue nothing at all And againe the sleepe of the soule in the life to come is more profound then in this life And Luther with this one position of his as that famous historiographer Iohn Sleidan recordeth ouerthrewe two points of Popery Li. 9. hist to wit praying to Saintes for they are so fast a sleepe that they cannot heare vs and praying for the dead For they in Purgatory slept also so soundly that they felt no paines A meete foundation surely to build such false doctrine vpon In 20. Luc hom 35. But Brentius is most plaine in this matter who ingeniously confesseth that albeit there were not many among them that did professe publikely the soules to die with the body yet the most vncleane life which the greatest part of their followers did lead doth clearely shewe that in their hartes they thinke no life to be
thereunto requested Wherefore saieth M. PERKINS secondly there is a great difference betweene requesting one to pray for vs and by inuocation to request them that are absent for this is a worshippe that is giuen to them and a power to heare and helpe all that call vpon them Reply First that by inuocation we may pray vnto men S. Augustine teacheth directly grounding himselfe vpon the expresse text of Scripture Locut in Gen. 200. Gen. 48. vers 15. where Iacob commandeth that his name and the name of his fore-fathers be inuocated vpon of the children of Israel And vvhat is inuocation in English but the calling vpon one vvhich is as lawfull as the praying vnto him That we doe them an honour and worship thereby I grant and say that the Saints being better then the liuing are better worthy of that worship then the liuing Further that we assigne them a power to heare them that be absent more then the liuing can doe it is no maruaile for the perfection of their heauenly state requireth that prerogatiue as I haue more then once declared But because this point of their knowledge breedeth the greatest doubt of praying vnto the Saints let S. Augustine a most juditious Doctor and one that was not partiall in that matter deliuering his sentence grounded also vpon holy Scripture be hearkened vnto and followed he treating of the happynesse of Saints in heauen hath these vvordes Lib. 22. de ciuit 29. If the Prophet Helizeus being absent in body did see his seruant Giësy receiuing the gifts which Naaman the Syrian gaue him c. how much more in that spirituall body shall Saints see all thinges not only if they shut their eyes but also from whence they be in body absent this he confirmeth by that sentence of the Apostle 1. Cor. 13. ver 9.10 We knowe in part and in part doe we prophesie but when that shall come which is perfect then shall that be made voide which is in part c. Hence thus reasoneth S. Augustine If the knowledge of this life in such as the Prophets and Apostles were be no more in comparison of the Saints knowledge in heauen then is a little childe compared to a man and this which is in part to that which is perfect then surely if Helizeus and other Prophets did see thinges done farre distant from them yea thinges that were to be done many hundred yeares after their times they being without doubt indued with this admirable knowledge from God howe much abundantly shall all they in heauen enjoy this gift when their bodies shall not hinder them yea they shall not neede bodylie eyes to see thinges absent but with the hart or spirit they shall be present to them 4. Reg. 5. vers 26. as Helizeus was who said was not my hart present when the man returned from his chariot to meete thee Can any thing be more euident or more soundly proued then that the Saints in heauen haue great preheminence aboue all that liued vpon the earth to see and knowe thinges absent and farre distant from them which the same father proueth also by most euident experience in the fifteenth and sixteenth Chapters of his booke intituled de cura pro mortuis agenda And that you may perceiue that that is not the opinion of S. Augustine alone I will joyne the testimonies of three or foure other Fathers with him S. Cyril Patriarke of Hierusalem saith Euen as S. Peter did question Ananias Catach 16 Act. 5. willing him to tell whether he had sold his ground for so much so did the Prophet Helizeus though he were not ignorant of it aske his seruant Giësy whether he had not receiued money of Naaman the Syrian for saith he nothing done euen in the darke is hidden from the Saints S. Basil writeth thus Let a Virgin first of all feare her owne conscience L. de Virginitate and if shee be neuer so solitary yet hath shee her Angell guardian present whose sight shee must not contemne specially when as they haue Angels as it were patterns of virginity but before all Angels let her respect and reuerence her spouse Christ who is present euery where And why did I speake of an Angell for shee hath an innumerable company of Angels present and with them the holy spirits or soules of the Fathers for there is none of these who doth not see all thinges euery where not truly beholding them with corporall eyes but by a spirituall sight pearcing vnto the knowledge of all thinges The same doth S. Athanasius that famous ancient Doctor resolue in his 32. question Quaest 32. See S. Augustine also lib. 20. of the Citty of God the 22. Chapter Teaching that the Saints in heauen doe knowe in particular what is done among the damned in hell And S. Hierome doth proue against Vigilantius that The Saints who followe the Lambe whither soeuer he goeth be excluded from no place and scorneth that dreaming Heretike for imagining that vnlesse the soules of the Martirs did lye houering about their shrines they could not heare their prayers that went thither to pray affirming him therefore to be a monster worthy to be banished into the vttermost câ—asts of the earth Encherines a most holy and learned Arch-bishop of Lyons all most 1200. yeares since confirmeth the same grounding his discourse vpon the same texts of Scripture that S. Augustine did saying If the Prophet Helizeus absent in body did see his seruant Giësy taking gifts howe much more shall Saints in that spirituall body see all thinges not only if they shut their eyes but also from whence they are in body absent For then shall be that perfection of which the Apostle speaketh in part we knowe and in part doe we prophesie 1. Cor. 13. but when that shall come which is perfect it shall be voyded which is in part therefore when that shall come which is perfect and this corruptible body shall no longer cumber the soule but it shall haue a glorious body which shall nothing hinder it shall the Saints then neede the helpe of bodylie eyes to see such thinges which Helizeus absent needed not to behold his seruant The testimonies of so many vvorthy Fathers will I hope suffice to perswade any reasonable man that the Saints in heauen doe very well heare our prayers To these I will joyne that which M. PER. maketh our second objection because it doth fortifie the same Luc. 16. vers 24. Abraham not then in possession of heauenly knowledge after our doctrine but in heauen as the Protestants thinke did heare Diues from hell vvhich is further off from heauen then the face of the earth which we inhabite and therefore more easily might he haue heard any liuing body praying vnto him then he did that rich glutton out of hell M. PERKINS answereth That this is a parable and out of a parable nothing can be gathered but that which is agreable vnto the intent
he was when it pleased him visible to his Apostles and at other times inuisible and yet was not his man-hood thereby abolished as M. PER. would make vs beleeue no more is it when his body is in many places at once or in one place circumscribed and in the other vncircumscribed For these externall relations of bodies vnto their places doe no whit at all destroy their inward and naturall substances as al Philosophie testifieth wherefore hence to gather that we denie both the Father and the Sonne to be God doth sauour I will not say of a silly wit but of a froward will peeuishly bent to cauill and calumniate Secondly Master PERKINS chargeth vs with disgrading Christ of his offices saying that for one Iesus Christ the onely King lawe-giuer and head of the Church they joyne vnto him the Pope not only as a Vicar but as a fellowe in that they giue vnto him power to make lawes binding in conscience to resolue and determine infallibly the sence of holy Scripture properly to pardon sinne to haue authority ouer the whole earth and a part of hell to depose Kinges to whome vnder Christ euery soule is subject to absolue subjects from the oath of alleageance c. Answere Here is a bed-role of many superfluous speeches for not one of all these thinges if we admitte them all to be true doth conuince vs to haue disgraded Christ of his offices which are these to appease Gods wrath towardes vs to pay the ransome for our sinnes to conquer the Diuell to open the Kingdome of heauen to be supreme head of both men and Angels and such like He may without any derogation vnto these his soueraigne prerogatiues giue vnto his seruants first power to make lawes that binde in conscience as he hath done to all Princes which the Protestantes themselues dare not denie then to determine vnfallibly of the true sence of holy Scripture which the Apostles could doe as all men confesse and yet doe not make them Christes fellowes but his humble seruants to whome also he gaue power properly to pardon sinnes Luc. 24. Ioan. 20. Mar. 16. Matt. 28. Whose sinnes you pardon on earth sbal be pardoned in heauen and finally to them he also gaue authority ouer the whole earth goe into the vniuersall world Ouer part of hell no Pope hath authority and when he doth good to any soule in Purgatory it is per modum suffragij as a suppliant and entreater not as a commander Whether he hath any authority ouer Princes their subjects in temporall affaires it is questioned by some yet no man not wilfully blinde can doubt but that Christ might haue giuen him that authority without disgrading himselfe of it as he hath imparted to him and to others also faculties of greater authority and vertue reseruing neuerthelesse the same vnto himselfe in a much more excellent manner As a King by substituting a viceroy or some such like deputie to whome he giues most large commission doth not thereby disgrade himselfe of his Kingly authority as all the world knowes no more did our Sauiour Christ Iesus bereaue himselfe of his power or dignity when he bestowed some part thereof vpon his substitutes He goes on multiplying a number of idle wordes to small purpose as that we for one Christ the only reall Priest of the newe Testament joyne many secondary Priestes vnto him which offer Christ daylie in the Masse We indeede hold the Apostles to haue beene made by Christ not imputatiue or phantasticall but reall and true Priestes And by Christ his owne order and commandement to haue offered his body and bloud daylie in the sacrifice of the Masse what of that see that question Furthermore he saith for one Iesus the all sufficient mediatour of intercession they haue added many fellowes to him to make request for vs namely as many Saintes as be in the Popes Kalendar yea and many more too For we hold that any of the faithfull yet liuing may be also requested to pray for vs neither shall he in hast be able to proue that Christ only maketh intercession for vs though he be the only mediatour that hath redeemed vs. Lastly saith M. PERKINS for the only merittes of Christ in whome alone the Father is well pleased what was he not well pleased with his Apostles they haue deuised a treasury of the Churches contayning besides the merittes of Christ the ouerplus of the merittes of Saints to be dispensed to men at the discretion of the Pope and thus we see that Christ and his merittes be abolished Answere The good man is somewhat mistaken for we hold not any ouerplus of merits in Saints the which we acknowledge to be by God fully rewarded in heauen but we affirme that some Saints and blessed Martirs haue suffered more paynes in this life then the temporall punishment of their owne sinnes â—eserued Iob 6. v. â— Who therefore might truely say with that just man Iob would to God my sinnes whereby I haue deserued wrath were weighed with the calamitie that I suffer euen as the sandes of the Sea this should be the heauyer Nowe parte of these sufferinges of Gods Saints as being needelesse for their owne satisfaction are reserued in the Churches store-house and may by the high steward of the Church to whome the dispensation of her treasure belongeth he communicated to others as very reason teacheth vs for who is fitter to dispose of any mans goodes then he to whome the charge thereof is giuen by his testament And thus I hope euery reasonable man doth finde vs Catholikes to be farre of from transforming Christ into an Idoll of mans conceite as Master PERKINS dreameth only we see a misconceited man labouring in vaine to deface Christes benefites toward vs to calumniate his chiefe seruantes and to skirmish more against his owne phantasies then against any doctrine of ours He layeth lastly a third kinde of Atheisme against vs for worshipping of God not with such respect as is sutable to his nature For saith he our worshippe is meere will worshippe for the most part without any allowance or commandement of God as Durand in his Rationale in effect acknowledgeth it is a carnall seruice standing of innumerable bodylie rites and ceremonies borrowed partly from the Iewes and partly from the Heathens it is deuided betweene God and some of his creatures in that they are worshipped both with one kinde of worshippe let them paint it as they can c. Answere Ipse dixit Pythagoras hath pronounced his sentence yet you neede not beleeue him vnlesse you list because he fableth so formally doth Durand acknowledge that all our worship is meere will worship and that it hath no allowance of God O egregious and impudent deceiuer For that learned deuout Author Durand doth nothing else in all that booke then set out the Majesty and declared the meaning of the true worship of God vsed daylie in our seruice throughout the whole yeare And therefore doth entitle
their place that there dwell men who make more account of their Princes honour then they doe of Christes And that their meeting in that place cal it what you wil is rather to serue their Prince then to serue Christ. But I haue beene longer in their place of prayer then I thought I come nowe to the men that are elected to serue the Lord there Be not many of them for the whole corps I will not touch such as Ieroboam was glad to choose when he made a Schisme in Israel to wit de extremis populi qui non erant de filijs Leui not lawfull successors of the true Priestes but others of the baser sort of the people and them commonly that are notable either for ignorance or some other odde quality and must they not also fill their good patrons handes with some feeling commodity before they can gette a benefice And so beginning with simonie lincked with perjurie for the poore fellowes must neuerthelesse sweare that they come freely to their benefice are they not like to proceede on holily As for the vowe of chastity the daylie seruice and often fasting which Catholike Priests are bound vnto they by the sweet liberty of the newe Gospell doe exchange into solacing themselues with their yoke-fellowes this of the common sort of their Ministers With their preachers I will not meddle for feare of offence yet if any desire to knowe howe they behaue themselues in other countries they may read the censure of a zealous learned preacher one of their owne compagnions who amongst many other thinges writeth thus of them Menno l. de Christ fide titul de fide mulieris Cananeae When you come to preachers who bragge that they haue the word of God you shall find certaine of them manifest liars others drunkers some vsurers and foule-mouthed slanderers some persecutors and betraiers of harmelesse persons Howe some of them behaue themselues and by what meanes they gette their wiues and what kind of wiues they haue that I leaue to the Lord and them They liue an jdle slouthfull and voluptuous life by fraude and flattery they feed themselues of the spoiles of Antichrist he meaneth the benefices taken from the Papists and doe preach just as the earthly and carnall Magistrate desireth to heare and will permitte c. So much and not a litle more speaketh one great Master of the late reformation concerning his Euangelicall bretheren Are not these goodly lampes of the newe Gospell and likely persons to be chosen by Christ to giue light to others and to reforme the world But peraduenture they haue in some secret corners certaine deuout religious soules who in an austere retired life doe with continuall teares bewaile the sinnes of the rest and make incessant sute vnto the Almighty for a generall pardon of the whole Would to God they had but I feare me that they be of their inuisible congregation or rather none such to be found amongst them For those religious houses which our Ancesters had built for such Godly and vertuous people who forsaking both father mother all their kinne and acquaintance and flying from all the pleasures and preferments which this transitorie world could yeeld them gaue themselues wholy to the holy exercises of humility chastity pouerty and all sortes of mortification these Monasteries I say and all that professed in them a retired religious life the Protestantes haue beaten downe and banished and haue not in their places erected any other for the singuler Godly men or women of their religion Which doth most euidently argue that there is in them smale zeale and rare practise of any such extraordinary piety and deuotion Surely it must needes be a strange Christian congregation that holdeth them for no tollerable members of their common weale whome Christ specially chooseth to serue him day and night and by whose holy example and most feruent prayers all other Christians doe find themselues much edified and mightily protected So that briefly whether you consider the persons that serue God or the place where he is serued or the manner of his diuine seruice the Catholike religion doth in euery point surpasse the Protestant by many degrees Thus much in answere vnto Master PERKINS objection of Atheisme against vs the which I esteemed fittest for this Preface being a matter of so great moment and therefore most worthy to be examined and considered of a part with mature judgement Nowe to the rest of his questions according to his owne order OF THE REALL PRESENCE OVR CONSENTS M. PERKINS Page 185. We hold and beleeue a presence of Christes body and bloud in the Sacrament of the Lordes supper and that no fained but a true and reall presence HITHERTO we agree in wordes but in sence nothing at all For he frameth a strange construction of that real presence which saith he must be considered two waies First in respect of the signes Secondly in respect of the communicants the signes be bread and wine with which Christes body and bloud be present not in respect of place and coexistence but by sacramentall relation that is when the sacramentall signes of bread and wine are present to the hand they doe present to the minde of the receiuer the body and bloud of Christ So that already M. PERKINS vnfained true reall presence is shrunken into a sacramentall relation and only significatiue presence such as may well be of thinges as farre distant the one from the other as the cope of heauen is from the center of the earth a strange reall presence surely The second kinde of presence saith he is in respect of the communicants to whose belieuing hartes he is also really present If you aske whether this be not as odde a kinde of presence as the other was he answereth by going about the bush saying that such as the communion is such is the presence and by the communion you must judge of the presence Ignotum as they say per ignotius He might shortly haue said if he had meant plaine dealing that by your faith you must mount into heauen and take hold on Christ sitting at the right hand of his Father and from thence drawe his righteousnesse and conuey it to your selfe so that both sortes of his true reall presence is made vvithout any nearer meeting of the parties then heauen and earth doe meete togither But let vs giue him the hearing this reall communion is made on this manner God the Father giueth Christ in this Sacrament as really and truly as any thing can be giuen to man and that not peece-meale but whole Christ yet not the substance of the God-head but the efficacy merits and operation are conueyed thence to the man-hood but the whole man-hood both in respect of substance as of merits and benefits is giuen wholy and jointly together And when God so giueth Christ he giueth withall at the same time the spirit of Christ which createth in the hart of the receiuer the instrument of true
article of our beleefe borne of the Virgin Mary No more is there vnto that other specified by M. PERKINS he ascended into heauen and from thence shall he come to judge c for albeit he ascended the fortith day after his resurrection and shall at the last day come from thence to judgement yet betweene those two daies he may be where he will and wheresoeuer else he be it hath no direct repugnance with either branch of that article and therefore it doth but bewray the insufficiency of the Protestants skill in the rules of opposition or repugnances who so confidently auerre such great contrariety to be where there is none at all But Augustine saith Tract 50. in Ioannē Lib. 9. in Ioannem Lib. 2. ad Thras Cont. Eutich lib. 1. cap. 4. that Christ according vnto his Majestie prouidence grace is present with vs to the end of the world but according vnto his assumed flesh he is not alwaies with vs the same doth also Cyril Fulgentius and Vigilius testifie We answere that Christ in deede according vnto that visible forme of a man in which he once liued here vvith his Disciples hath very seldome beene seene vpon earth since his ascension but according vnto that forme of assumed flesh sitteth on the right hand of his Father which answere I take out of Vigilius cited here by M. PER. For he saith that Christ is departed from vs in the forme of a seruant that is according vnto his naturall shape of man but may neuerthelesse be very well with vs vnder the formes of bread and wine in the Sacrament which S. Augustine insinuateth in the very treatise alleaged by M. PERKINS saying that Christ is nowe with vs in foure sortes by Faith by the signe of the Crosse by Baptisme and by the Eucharist where making his manner of being with vs in the Eucharist distinct from his presence both by faith signe and grace doth shewe it to be a reall bodily presence which he teacheth most plainely vpon these wordes of the Psalme adore his foote-stoole concluding thereon Psal 98. that the same flesh which our Sauiour tooke of the blessed Virgin Mary was then and is nowe to be adored in the Sacrament therefore notwithstanding his being in heauen in forme of man he assuredly belieued his naturall body to be really present in the Eucharist So did S. Cyril another of M. PER. authours Libr. 12. cap. 31. who vpon S. Iohn auoucheth Christ by his flesh receiued in the Eucharist to sanctifie the soules and bodies of all communicants and to be wholy in euery one of them to vvhome I will joyne their equall S. Gregory of Nisse who saith Orat. de Paschate like as the God-head doth fill the vvhole vvorld euen so consecration is made in very many places and yet is it but one body so that by these worthy writers judgements Christes ascention to heauen doth not any whit hinder the reall presence of his body in the holy Sacrament And to dispatch here together that which M. PER. repeateth againe and againe that a true body cannot be in two places at once we plainely hold with the holy Fathers that one and the same body may by the omnipotent power of God be in as many places at once as it shall please him to set it That this hath no repugnance vvith true Philosophy shall be proued in the next argument And here by the warrant of Gods word I will proue that Christes body de facto hath beene in two places at once That since the ascension it sitteth at the right hand of God in heauen both we and they confesse but longe after his ascension Actor 9. he appeared bodily vnto S. Paul as he went towardes Damasco ergo his body hath beene in two places at once Caluin turneth himselfe on both sides seeketh all possible meanes to shift from the euidence of this place saying first In cap. 9. Actor Act. 22. vers 15 Act. 26 vers 16. that it was some voice only heard from heauen by S. Paul as at Christes baptisme but Christ was not there really This is said most manifestly against the plaine text God ordained that thou shouldest see the just one and heare a voice out of his owne mouth therefore he vvas really present and Christ saith to this end I appeared vnto thee And S. Paul himselfe vvitnesseth a 1. Cor. 3 vers 1.6 1. Cor. 15. vers 8. that he had seene Christ after his resurrection euen as the other Apostles had done which was in bodily presence in the same b Act. 9. vers 5. 4. Instit 17. § 29. chap. S. Paul demanded of him that appeared who art thou Lord and he answered I am IESVS was not he then present What can be more plainely set downe or is more often repeated in the very text of Scripture yet the blind obstinacy of Caluin was such that not being able to defend but that Christ appeared turneth himselfe the other way and had rather say that S. Paules eye-sight was so much strengthned and made so sharpe that it pearced through the heauens and did see Christ sitting there on the right hand of his Father and so Christ did not descend or was seene out of heauen but S. Paules sight mounted vp thether Reply This doctrine is first repugnant to himselfe vvho scoffeth at vs for maintayning that the Saints in heauen can heare our prayers 3. Instit 20. §. 24. and asketh howe they can haue so long eares and so sharpe eyes as to heare and see so farre off vvhich here notvvithstanding hee attributeth vnto a poore earthly creature nothing comparable to the Saints in heauen But besides that contradiction this his answere is much more absurde then the other For vvhome he imagineth to be so Eagle-eyed that he could see into heauen Act. 9. vers 8. the text vvitnesseth to be strooke starke blinde and not able to see the broad high-vvay before him Againe if that vision had beene through the vertue of S. Paules sight his companions should not haue beene partakers of it Act. 26. vers 13. Act. 9. vers 8. Act. 9. vers 17. but they did both see the light and also heard the voice though not so distinctly as to vnderstand it Further there passed many speaches betweene them Who art thou Lord What wilt thou haue mee to doe c. vvhich doth conuince a sensible and bodily presence Lastly it is said directly that Christ appeared vnto S. Paul in the way not that he had seene him in heauen so that nothing can be more certaine euen by the euidence of Gods vvord then that Christes body hath beene in two places at once as vvell may it be in two thousand or in as many more as it shall please God to imploy it for there is no greater repugnance in reason for being in many places then for being in tvvo at once S. Chrisost S. Ambros Primasius in cap. 10. And as you
haue heard before that S. Augustine and S. Cyrill taught him to be bodily present in as many places as the blessed Sacrament is administred so doe the ancient Expositors of the Epistle to the Hebrewes affirme that Christes body is offered now on many Altars at the same very moment And to cite one of their sentences at large Lib. 3. de sacerdot S. Chrisostome cryeth out O miracle O goodnesse of God! he that sitteth aboue with his Father at the very same instant of time is touched by the handes of all and doth offer and deliuer himselfe to them who are willing to receaue him Homil. 2. ad populū in fine and Helias left his cloake to his disciple Heliseus but Christ ascending left vs his flesh Helias in deede cast his cloake off but Christ both left his flesh to vs and ascending tooke it vp with himselfe By this you see howe farre this most holy and learned Father vvas from arguing as our Protestants are wont to doe his body is ascended therefore it cannot be in the Sacrament Nay saith he most expresly it is both there and here together through Christes power and loue towardes vs. Master PERKINS second reason This bodily presence ouerturneth the nature of a true body whose essentiall propriety it is to haue length breadth and thicknesse and by reason of these three dimensions a body can occupy but one place at once as Aristotle said the propriety of a body is to be seated in some place they therefore that say the body of Christ is in many places at once doe make it no body at all Answere We graunt it to be the intrinsecall nature of a body to haue length breadth and thicknesse so that no body can possibly be vvithout those dimensions but vve denie it to be essentiall vnto a body to be seated in some place For quantity and vbi be two distinct predicaments as the learned knowe quantity being perfect in his owne nature vvithout any relation to the place for quantity hath an absolute and no respectiue essence True it is that a body is by nature fit and apt to be seated in a place vvhich is that that Aristole teacheth of it As a man naturally is apt to bee learned yet actually to bee learned is a meere accident to man and manie men be vvithout it euen so to be actually seated in a place is altogither vvithout the nature of a body in so much as the greatest body of all others to vvit the highest heauen is vvithout a place there being no body vvithout it vvhose extremity may enuiron and compasse in that heauen being the highest body as the nature of a place requireth so that it belongeth not to the essence and nature of a body actually to be in any place and consequently vvhether it be in a place or not in any place vvhether it be in one place or in many places the body remayneth still a true perfect body accomplished vvith all his substantiall partes Againe our faith teacheth vs that the naturall subsistence and person of a man vvhich is much nearer to the nature of man then his seating in a place can be separated from man leauing his vvhole nature entire and perfect as it is in Christ our Sauiour vvhere the full complete nature of man is vvithout his owne naturall subsistence and person it being ingrafted and taken into the person of GOD. Hovve much more easily then may his blessed body be vvithout occupying any place vvhich is farre more extrinsecall to him And touching the taking vp of as great a place as the biggenesse of the body requireth vve hold vpon the same groundes that it is of no such necessity but that the power of God can dispence vvith it For if a body may be in no place at all it may be in as little a roome as it shall please God to enclose it VVhich our Sauiour also very plainely teacheth vvhen he signifieth that it is possible to God Mat. 19. vers 26. Ioh. 20. vers 26. for to passe a Camell through the eye of a needle And Christ himselfe entring into the house vvhere his Disciples vvere assembled the doores being shutte gaue vs a manifest experiment that a true naturall body needeth no space at all to be seated in but may by diuine power passe through other solide bodies so that it remaineth euident to them that haue skill in Philosophie that there is no such repugnance in a true naturall body but that it may be in many places at once or in as litle a place as it shall please God to bestow it And when any of the ancient Fathers say that bodies must needes haue places proportionable to them they meane that according vnto the ordinary course of nature so it must be yet they doe not denie but that God can otherwise dispose of them M. PERKINS third reason Transubstantion ouerthroweth the very supper of the Lord. For in euery Sacrament there must be a signe a thing signified and a proportion betweene them both Good let it be remembred but the Catholikes reall presence taketh all away For when the bread is really turned into the body of Christ then the signe is abolished and there remaineth nothing but the outward formes of bread and wine Answere Not so for there is also the body and bloud of Christ as vve hold and so at the most there is nothing gone but the signe only as he tearmeth the bread but neither is that taken away and then all remaineth whole For not the substance of bread and wine but the outward formes of them are the signe of the Sacrament For they alone doe no lesse represent vnto our minde and vnderstanding the spiritual feeding of our soules by Christes body then if they had the substance of bread vnder them as the similitude of fiery tongues Act. 2. without the true substance of tongues did sufficiently signifie the gift of tongues bestowed vpon the Apostles at the feast of Pentecost Math. 3. And it is not necessary to belieue that the Doue which descended vpon our Sauiour at his baptisme was a true naturall Pigeon but the outward shape of a Doue was sufficient to expresse those Doue-like qualities vvhich were in our Sauiour so the outward shewe of bread and wine although the substance be absent serueth very cōueniently to make vs remember and vnderstand that euen then when we receiue the blessed Sacrament our soules are as spiritually fedde vvith it as our bodies are wont to be with bread and wine or which is signified secondarylie that as bread is made of many graines of corne vnited and compact into one masse and body euen so all vve Christians by receiuing the Sacrament worthily and by the spirit of Christ dwelling in vs are made one misticall body of Christ and should therefore one loue and tender the good of another as members of the same body are wont to doe All this I say the outward forme and shewe
them but an order of eating a morsell of bread and drinking a suppe of vvine in remembrance of his death there had beene no congruity in it For many much meaner men then he had left far greater remembrances and pleadges of their loue behinde them Wherefore the wordes must be taken as they sound and then no creature euer left or could possibly leaue the like token and pleadge of his power and loue to his friendes as his owne body and bloud to be the diuine comfort and foode of their soules And this doth that most eloquent Father S. Iohn Chrisostome both note and dilate Homil. 83 in Math. saying Louers when they depart from them whome they loue are wont to leaue with them for a remembrance of their harty affection some such jewell or gift as they are able but no other creature sauing Christ could leaue his owne proper flesh Homil. 2. ad populū Antioch And in an other place Elias departing from his disciple Eliseus left him his mantle but our Sauiour Christ did leaue vnto vs his owne body An other motiue to perswade that Christes vvordes are to be taken literally is gathered of this that they be a part of Christes Testament and containe a legacy bequeathed vnto vs Christians vvhich kinde of vvordes are alwaies to be interpreted according to their proper signification And it should be the most foolish part in the vvorld vvhen a father doth by his last vvill bequeath vnto one of his sonnes a farme or any certaine portion of good to pleade that the vvordes vvere to be expounded figuratiuely and that he meant only to leaue his sonne a figure of a farme or some signe of a portion vvhich yet the Protestants doe pleade in this most diuine testament of our Sauiour Christ Iesus Thirdly you haue heard before also howe that in the institution of all Sacraments the speaches are to be taken literally and much more in this vvhich is the very marrowe of Christian religion and vvherein errour is most dangerous therefore most requisite it was to haue beene deliuered in such tearmes as vvere to be vnderstood literally Lastly albeit Christ oftentimes spake vnto the multitude in parables and obscurely because of their incredulity yet vnto his Disciples vvhome he vvould haue to vnderstand him he commonly spake plainely or else vvas accustomed to interpret vnto them his harder speaches according to that Math. 13. vers 11. To you it is giuen to knowe the mysteries of the Kingdome of heauen to them it is not giuen and therefore in parables speake I to them But Christ here giueth no other interpretation then that it was the same His body which should be nayled to the Crosse neither did the Disciples aske after any exposition of them vvhich is a plaine signe that they tooke them literally the holy Ghost putting them in minde of that which Christ had taught them before of this admirable Sacrament in the sixt of S. Iohn That he would giue them his flesh to eate and that his flesh was truly meate c. Hitherto I haue prosecuted two reasons for the reall presence one out of the promise of it the other out of the performance and institution of it vvhich are all that it pleased M. PERKINS to produce in our fauour though he had multiplied reasons for his owne party and enlarged them very amply but hath as cuttedly proposed ours loded them also with very many replies wherefore somewhat to supply his default herein I will adde foure more for vs that for a doozen of his we may be alowed to haue halfe a doozen The first of them which is the third in order shall be gathered from the figure of this Sacrament thus The figure or shadowe of any thing is alwaies inferior vnto the thing it selfe as the Image of a man is not to be compared to the man himselfe nor the shadowe to the body but if in the Sacrament there be but bread signifying the body of Christ then should the figure of it be more excellent then it selfe wherefore to auoide that inconuenience it must needs be granted that the body of Christ is there really present which farre surpasseth all the figures of it The minor proposition is to be proued First to omitte all other figures of the blessed Sacrament it is manifest that Manna raigned downe from heauen to feede the Israelites in the desert vvas one of the principall as our Sauiour signifieth comparing Manna and the food which he would giue vs Iob. 6. ver 49. 58. 1. Cor. 10. together and S. Paul plainely teacheth it calling it a spirituall foode and numbring it among the figures which the Hebrewes had of our Sacraments and the proportion betweene the thinges themselues vvith the consent of all ancient Interpreters doth conuince it but Manna farre surpassed the Protestants communion For first being a figure of Christ it prefigured him as theirs doth Psal 77. then it was made of Angels and came downe from heauen theirs commeth out of the ouen made by a baker Againe Manna was so agreeable vnto their taste Sap. 16. that it was in taste vnto euery one euen the most delitious and dainty meate that he could desire theirs is but ordinary wherefore they must needs confesse either that Christes body is really present in the Sacrament or else that the figure of it farre surmounted it the thing it selfe The good fellowes to auoid this inconuenience are content to yeeld vnto the Hebrewes as good and vertuous Sacraments as ours be but that also is most false Collos 2. vers 17. Gal. 4. Iob. 6. ver 49. 58. De ijs qui initiantur misterijs cap. 9. 1. Cor. 10. vers 16. For S. Paul compareth theirs to shadowes ours to the bodie he calleth theirs weake and poore elements And to omit here other testimonies cited before Christ himselfe expresly preferreth the foode which he hath giuen vs before Manna wherevpon S. Ambrose discourseth thus Consider nowe whether be more excellent the bread of Angels or the flesh of Christ which surely is the body of life that Manna was from heauen but this is aboue heauen that of heauen this the Lordes of heauen that subject to corruption if it were kept till the morrowe but this free from all corruption Fourthly the Reall presence of Christes body is proued out of these wordes of S. Paul The Chalice or cuppe of benediction which we blesse is it not the communication of the bloud of Christ And the bread which we breake is it not the participation of the body of our Lord If we receiue and doe participate Christes body and bloud they are certainely there present And the expossition of S. Chrisostome vpon the same place hath stopped vp our aduersaries starting-hole who are wont to say that we indeed doe receiue the bodie of Christ yet not there present but by faith we mount aboue the skies and receiue it there But what saith this holy and learned
other miracle is of record in the life of that deuout Father S. Bernard Lib. 2. cap. 3. This holy man caused a vvoman who had beene many yeares possessed with a wicked spirit that did strangely torment her to be brought before him as he vvas at Masse and then holding the consecrated Host ouer the womans head spake these vvordes Thou wicked spirit here is present thy judge the supreame power is here present resist and if thou canst he is here present who being to suffer for our saluation said Nowe the Prince of this world shall be cast forth and pointing to the blessed Sacrament said This is that body that was borne of the body of the Virgin that was streatched vpon the Crosse that lay in the Sepulcher that rose from Death that in the sight of his Disciples ascended into Heauen therefore in the dreadfull power of this Majesty I command thee wicked spirit that thou depart out of this handmaide of his and neuer hereafter presume once to touch her The Deuill was forced to acknowledge the Majesticall presence and dreadfull power of Christes body in that holy Host and to gette him packing presently wherefore he must needes be greatly blinded of the Deuill that knowing this miracle to be vvrought by the vertue of Christes body there present vvill not yet beleeue and confesse it But nowe let vs vvinde vp all this question in the testimonies of the most ancient and best approued Doctors S. Ignatius the Apostles Scholler saith I desire the bread of God Epist 15. ad Rom. heauenly bread which is the flesh of the Sonne of God S. Iustine declaring the faith of the Christians in the second hundreth yeare after Christ vvriteth to the Emperor Antonine thus Apol. 2. We take not these thinges as common bread nor as common wine but as Christ incarnate by the word of God tooke flesh and bloud for our saluation euen so are we taught that the foode wherewith our flesh is by alteration nourished being by him blessed and made the Eucharist is the flesh and bloud of the same Iesus incarnate S. Ireneus Iustins equall proueth both Christ to be the Sonne of God Li. 4. con Haeres cap. 34. the creatour of the vvorld and also the resurrection of the bodies by the reall presence of Christes body in the blessed Sacrament so assured a principle and so generally confessed a truth was then this point of the reall presence Homil. 5. in diuers Origen that most learned Doctor saith When thou takest that holy foode and that incorruptible feast when thou enjoyest the bread and cup of life when thou doest eate and drinke the body and bloud of our Lord then loe doth our Lord enter vnder thy roofe Thou therefore humbling thy selfe imitate this Centurion and say O Lord I am not worthy that thou shouldest enter vnder my roofe c. De coena Domini S. Cyprian The bread that our Lord deliuered vnto his Disciples being not in outward shewe but in substance changed was by the omnipotent power of the word made flesh Catech. 4. mist S. Cyril Patriarke of Hierusalem doth most formally teach our doctrine saying When Christ himselfe doth affirme of bread This is my body who afterward dareth to doubt of it and he confirming and saying This is my bloud Who can doubt and say this is not his bloud And a little after doth proue it saying He before changed water into wine which commeth neare to bloud and shall he be thought vnworthy to be beleeued that he hath changed wine into his bloud wherefore let vs receiue with all assurance the body and bloud of Christ for vnder the forme of bread his body is giuen vs and his bloud vnder the forme of wine Orat. 2. de Paschate S. Gregory Nazianzene speaking of the blessed Sacrament sayeth Without shame and doubt eate the body and drinke the bloud and doe not mistrust these wordes of the flesh c. S. Iohn Chrisostome Patriarke of Constantinople perswadeth the same thus Homil. 83 in Math. Let vs alwaies beleeue God and not resist him though that which he saith seeme absurd to our imagination which we must doe in all thinges but specially in holy misteries not beholding those thinges only which are set in our sight but hauing an eye vnto his wordes For his word cannot deceiue vs but our sences may most easily be deceiued wherefore considering that he saith This is my body let vs not doubt of it at all but beleeue it Againe a Hom. 61 ad populū what shep-heard doth feede his flocke with his owne flesh Nay many mothers giue out their children to be nursed of others but Christ with his owne flesh and bloud doth feede vs. b Itē hom 3. in epist ad Ephes It is his flesh and bloud that sitteth aboue the heauens that is humbly adored of the Angels And c Homil. 24. in 1. ad Corin. he that was adored of the wise-men in the manger is nowe present vpon the Altar d Hom. 83 in Math. 60. ad populum And not by faith only or by charity but in deede and really his flesh is joyned with ours by receiuing this holy Sacrament S. Ambrose e Libr. 4. de Sacrament c. 4. Thou maist perhaps say that my bread is but common bread this bread is bread in deede before the wordes of the Sacrament but when consecration commeth of bread it is made the body of Christ And if you demand further howe there can be any such vertue in vvordes he doth answere That by the word of God heauen and earth were made and all that in them is and therefore if Gods word were able of nothing to make all thinges howe much more easily can it take a thing that already is and turne it into an other S. Hierome Let vs beare and beleeue that the bread which our Lord brake Epistol ad Hedib quaest 2. and gaue to his Disciples is the body of our Lord and Sauiour * Epist ad Heliodorū Cont. Aduers legis Prophe lib. 2. c. 9. And God forbidde saith he that I should speake sinistrously of Priestes who succeeding the Apostles in degree doe with their holy mouth consecrate and make Christes body S. Augustine The mediatour of God and men the man Iesus Christ giuing vs his flesh to eate and his bloud to drinke we doe receiue it with faithfull hart and mouth although it seeme more horrible to eate mans flesh then to kill it and to drinke mans bloud then to shedde it Againe a In psal 65. 93 The very bloud that through their malice the Iewes shedde they conuerted by Gods grace doe drinke And vpon the 98. Psalme he doth teach vs to adore Christes body in the Sacrament vvith Godly honour where he saith Christ tooke earth of earth for flesh is of earth and of the flesh of the Virgin Mary he tooke flesh in which flesh he walked here
Fathers plaine sentences for the Sacrifice of the Masse to make his poore abused followers beleeue that vvhen they approue the Sacrifice of the Masse as they doe very often and that in most expresse tearmes as you shal heare hereafter that then they meane some other matter Much more sincerely had he dealt if he had confessed with his owne Rabbins that it was the common beleefe of the world receiued by the best Schoole-men That in the Masse a Sacrifice is offered to God for remission of sinnes as a Lib. 4. Instit ca. 18. §. 1. Caluin doth deliuer vvhich b De captiuit Babilon c. 1. Luther graunteth to be conformable vnto the saying of the ancient Fathers And one c Li. cont Carolostadianos Alberus a famous Lutheran speaketh it to the great glory of his Master Luther that he vvas the first since Christes time who openly inueighed against it this yet is more ingenious and plainer dealing to confesse the truth then with vaine colours to goe about to disguise it And that the indifferent reader may be vvell assured howe Luther an Apostata Friar could come vnto that high pitch of vnderstanding as to soare vnto that which none sithence Christes time neither Apostles nor other could reach vnto before him let him reade a speciall treatise of his owne Cocleus Vlenbergius Intituled of Masse in corners and of the consecration of Priestes which is extant in the sixt Tome of his workes set out in the German tongue and printed at Ienes as men skilfull in that language doe testifie In his workes in â—â—tin printed at Wittenburge of the older edition it is the seauenth Tome though somewhat corrected and abridged there I say the good fellowe confesseth that entring into a certaine conference and dispute with the Diuell about this Sacrifice of the Masse Luther then defending it and the Deuill very grauely arguing against it in fine the Master as it was likely ouercame his Disciple Luther and so setled him in that opinion against the Sacrifice of the Masse that he doubted not afterward to maintayne it as a principle point of the newe Gospell and is therein seconded by the vvhole band of Protestants This is no fable but a true history set downe in print by himselfe through Gods prouidence that all the vvorld may see from vvhat authority this their doctrine against the blessed Sacrifice of the Masse proceedeth And if they vvill beleeue it notwithstanding they knowe the Deuill to be the founder of it are they not then most vvorthy to be rejected of God and adjudged to him vvhose Disciples they make themselues vvittingly and of their owne free accord Nowe to the difference OVR DIFFERENCE M. PERKINS Page 207. THey make the Eucharist to bee a reall and externall Sacrifice offered vnto God holding that the Minister of it is a Priest properly in that he offereth Christes body and bloud to God really and properly vnder the formes of bread and wine we acknowledge no such Sacrifice for remission of sinne but only Christes on the Crosse once offered Here is the maine difference which is of such moment that their Church maintayning this can bee no Church at all for this pointe raseth the foundation to the very bottome vvhich he vvill proue by the reasons follovving if his ayme faile him not Obserue that in the lawe of Moyses there vvere three kinde of proper Sacrifices one called Holocaust or vvhole burnt offeringes the second an Host for sinne of vvhich there were also diuers sortes the third an Host of pacification Holocaustes vvere vvholy consumed by fire in recognizance and protestation of Gods Soueraigne dominion ouer vs Hostes for sinne vvere offered as the name improteth to appease Gods vvrath and to purge men from sinne Hostes of pacification or peace vvere to giue God thankes for benefits receiued and to sue for continuance and increase of them Nowe vve following the ancient Fathers doctrine doe hold the Sacrifice of the Masse to succeede all these sacrifices and to contayne the vertue and efficacy of all three to vvit it is offered both to acknowledge God to be the supreame Lord of heauen and earth and that all our good commeth from him as vvitnesseth this oblation of his deare Sonnes body who being the Lord of heauen and earth vvillingly suffered death to shewe his obedience to his Father Secondly it is offered to appease Gods vvrath justly kindled against vs sinners representing to him therein the merit of Christes passion to obtaine our pardon Thirdly it is offered to God to giue him thankes for all his graces bestowed vpon vs and by the vertue thereof to craue continuance and encrease of them These points of our doctrine being openly laide before the eyes of the world M. PER. seemeth to reproue only one peece of them to wit That the Sacrifice of the Masse is no true Sacrifice for remission of sinnes and not joyning issue with vs but vpon that branch only he may be thought to agree vvith vs in the other two to wit that it is a proper and perfect kinde of whole burnt offering and a Sacrifice of pacification at least he goeth not about to disproue the rest and therefore he had need to spit on his fingers as they say and to take better hold or else if that were graunted him which he endeauoureth to proue he is very farre from obtayning the Sacrifice of the Masse to be no true and proper kind of Sacrifice For it may well be an Holocaust or Host of pacification though it be not a Sacrifice for sinne But that all men may see howe confident we are in euery part and parcell of the Catholike doctrine we will joyne issue with him where he thinketh to haue the most aduantage against vs and will proue it to be also an Host for remission of sinnes and that aswel for the dead as for the liuing which is much more then M. PER. requireth and by the way I will demonstrate that this doctrine is so farre off from rasing the foundation of Christian religion that there can be no religion at all vvithout a true and proper kinde of Sacrifice and sacrificing Priestes But first I will confute M. PER. reasons to the contrary because he placeth them foremost Hebr. 9. v. 15.16 ca. 10. vers 10. The first reason The holy Ghost saith Christ offered himselfe but once therefore not often and thus there can be no reall offering of his body and bloud in the Sacrament of his supper the text is plaine True but your arguing out of it is somewhat vaine For after your owne opinion it is the Priest that doth offer the Sacrifice of Christes body in the Lordes supper and therefore though Christ offered it but once as the Apostle saith yet Priests appointed by him may offer it many times Doe yee perceiue howe easily your Achilles may be foiled the good-man not looking belike for this answere saith nothing to it but frameth another in
first and not so perfect as the last but it is a more speedy and ready vvay to the later and consisteth in the obseruation of some suâ—h extraordinary vvorkes that be not commanded of God as necessary to saluation but commended as thinges of more excellency and left vnto our free choise vvhether vve vvill vndertake them or no. For example God forbiddeth vs to commit adultery but he doth not command vs to professe virginity and to liue alwaies a single life the vvhich yet he recommendeth and exhorteth vs to embrace saying Math. 19. vers 12. Ibidem vers 21. There be some that make themselues Eunuches for the Kingdome of heauen adding He that can take it let him take it so he forbiddeth to steale but counsaileth only to sell all we haue and to giue it to the poore and to followe him Out of which and the like places of holy Scriptures we gather that there be diuers blessed good vvorkes vvhich are not commanded by any precept yet counsailed and perswaded as thinges of greater perfection which are also called workes of supererogation by a name taken from these vvordes Lucae 10. vers 35. Quicquid supererogaueris vvhere the good Samaritane told the Inne-Keeper that whatsoeuer he should lay out ouer and besides that vvhich he had giuen him should be repayed him at his retourne These vvorkes of perfection and supererogation the Protestants may not abide in shewe forsooth of profound humility because all that we can doe is nothing in respect of that which we ought to doe but in deede vpon enuy and malice towardes religious men and women the lustre and fame of whose singuler vertue doth mightily obscure and disgrace their fleshly and base conuersation vvho commonly passe not the vulgar sort in any other thing but in tongue and habit M. PERKINS in his second conclusion alloweth only vnto our Sauiour Christ workes of supererogation because he alone fulfilled the lawe wherefore saith he his death was more then the lawe could require at his handes being innocent But if I lifted to take aduantages as he offereth them I could tell him that although the lawe could exact nothing at Christes handes hee being God and aboue the lawe yet al that euer Christ did was commanded him by his Father and therefore by a certaine vncertaine rule of M. PER. to wit That no worke commanded can be a worke of supererogation he could not doe any worke of supererogation being bound to doe all he did by commandement of his heauenly Father whome he was bound to obey But to come to the point of our difference we hold that there be many workes of perfection vnto which no man is bound neuerthelesse whosoeuer shall performe any of them they shall haue a greater crowne of glory in heauen for their reward M. PER. goeth about to disproue it by prouing that no man can fulfill the lawe of God in this life much lesse doe workes of supererogation I say that he taketh not a direct course to improue our position For albeit a man could not fulfil that law yet may he doe many of those workes of perfection for a man may lead a chaste life yet sometime in a passion fall out with his neighbour and hurt him in word or deede or sweare and so offend in choller for this sometime hapneth and then the workes of perfection not commanded being done by such a one may the sooner purchase him pardon and be great helpes to him towardes the fulfilling of the lawe wherefore Master PERKINS erreth in the very foundation of his proofes notwithstanding we will heare his arguments because they serue to fortifie an other odde sconce or bulwarke of their heresie to wit That it is impossible to keepe Gods Commandements The first he propoundeth in this sort In the morall lawe two thinges are commanded first the loue of God and man secondly the manner of this loue Nowe the manner of louing of God is to loue him with all our hart and strength Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God Lucae 10. vers 27. with all thy hart and with all thy soule and with all thy strength and with all thy thoughts c. As Bernard said The measure of louing God is to loue him without measure and that is to loue him with the greatest perfection of loue that can befall a creature Hence it followeth that in louing God no man can posssibly doe more then the lawe requireth and therefore the performance of all vowes and of all other duties come to short of the intention and scope of the lawe Answere To loue God with all our hart and strength c. may be vnderstood in two sorts The first is to loue him so intirely that we loue no other thing with him in any such degree as may not well stand with his loue and also that in Gods seruice when his honour shal so require we are ready to imploy our vvhole strength hart and life and in this sence euery good Christian doth loue God with all his hart and may doe besides his bounden duty therein many other good vvorkes because the precept being affirmatiue doth not binde for all times but only nowe and then when occasion so requireth Secondly the wordes may be taken to signifie that we should alwayes with all the powers of both body and minde and that at the vttermost straine loue honour and serue God and so taken it is fulfilled in heauen but cannot be performed on earth by any mortall creature with ordinary grace because we must sleepe and eate sometimes and doe many other thinges besides though not contrary to the same loue In the first sence we are commanded to loue God with all our hart c. And in the second it is no commandement but only a marke for vs to ayme and leuell at but no man vnder sinne is bound to attayne vnto it To that of S. Bernard I answere that to loue God as much as he is to be loued is to loue him infinitly which none can doe but only God himselfe If he meane that we must loue God without measure then he is to be vnderstood that in the loue of God there be not as in the matter of other vertues two extreamities too little and too much only there may be too little but there cannot be too much yet there is a certaine measure or degree to which euery one is bound to attaine whither if he haue gotten he loueth God with all his hart as before hath beene declared Now beyond that degree the perfecter sort of Christians doe mount and so much the more by howe much they doe proceede in that perfection yet in this life they can neuer attaine to loue God so feruently and so perfectly but that they may alwaies encrease and loue him more and more so there is not a prefixed meere-stone or limit of louing God in which sence only we may truly say that God is to be loued without measure but that
who delighteth not to cauill vpon wordes vnderstanding our meaning to be very farre off from attributing any iote of Gods honour vnto any Saint or any other thing whatsoeuer cannot be justly offended with our tearmes of religious worshippe giuen to Saintes when as he is before-hand giuen to vnderstand that we take religious to signifie not that which is proper to God but those religious gifts which be in godly men Hence also it followeth most perspicuously what intollerable wrong they doe vs that call vs Idolaters or say that we robbe God of his honour and giue it vnto Saintes For vve say and repeate it a thousand times ouer and ouer and declare it as plainely as can be that it is the most haynous crime in the vvorld to giue any such soueraigne honour as is due to God only vnto eyther Angels or Saintes to vvit to esteeme them to be infinitly mighty vvise or good or to bee the Creatours or supreame Gouernours of heauen and earth or briefly to be the authors of any supernaturall or naturall excellency or perfection These and such like pointes of Diuine honour we ascribe not to any creature but say that the Saintes are Gods creatures and seruants and doe receiue all that they eyther be or haue or Gods liberallity yet we hold it not to derogate any whit from the due honour we owe vnto God to yeeld such honour and worship vnto his Saints and seruants as he hath made them worthy of Nay rather we doe not a litle honour God himselfe when we worship Godly men for his diuine gifts bestowed vpon them and vvhen vvee thinke that because they haue faithfully serued him on earth they are nowe in heauen in high fauour with him and can sooner obtaine any reasonable suite of him then other mortall men vvho are subject to many infirmities Neyther doe wee diminish any thing at all Christ our Sauiours mediation by making the Saintes our intercessours For as shall bee hereafter declared at large we attribute no point of Christes mediation to them but only range and place the Saints intercession with the prayers of other good men liuing on earth and vvith our owne although in a different degree of perfection their 's being farre better then ours yet all are made in Christes name and are effectuall through the merits of his Passion But one may here object howe then doe Catholikes affirme and say that the Saints are their hope and refuge and howe can they desire them To haue mercy vpon them and to helpe them vvhich seeme to be thinges proper to God alone and to Christ our redeemer I answere first that these speeches in good sence haue beene vsed by most auncient learned and circumspect Authours and that by imitation of the holie Scriptures For holy Iob saith Haue mercy on me haue mercy on me Iob 19. 1. Thess 2. vers 18. Cap. 15. vers 30. 1. Cap. 9. vers 19. at least you my friendes And Saint Paul calleth the Thessalonians His hope his joy and crowne of glory and desireth the Romans to helpe him in their prayers and saith to the Corinthians that he became all thinges to all men that he might saue all vvith diuers such like So that no discreet man ought to condemne such speeches to the Saints if they bee vttered vvith a good meaning to vvit that they taking compassion of our frailty and misery doe by their gratious intercession helpe to procure our pardon and to obtayne at Gods bounteous handes through the merit of Christes passion all such heauenly graces as vve stand neede of Albeit as I haue sayed such tearmes haue been very vvell vsed in all antiquity yet in these our captious dayes I could vvish that Catholikes vvould vse them very sparingly for feare of scandalizing the poore deceaued Protestants Obserue lastly that by the outward manner and externall shewe of worshippe it cannot be sufficiently discerned whether it be Diuine Religious or Ciuill for as we kneele to God so doe we also on our knee honour the King 1. Reg. 24. vers 10. and his Councell As Dauid did adore King Saul prostrate on the earth But the difference consisteth chiefly in the inward conceite and disposition of the minde and so whether we kneele or no if we prostrate our harts before God inclining it vnto him as to the Authour of all thinges infinitly perfect we doe him Godly honour So if we kneele to any Saints or before any picture of a Saint in honour of the Saint acknowledging in our harts the Saint to be a very holy creature indued with many great graces of God and dearely beloued of him we doe but duly worshippe the Saint as kneeling to the King and in our harts confessing him to be the supreame Gouernour vnder God of the temporall state of his Kingdome vve doe but our duties vnto our King To conclude it is not the outward fashion of worshippe that maketh it proper to God or Man when as kneeling to one may be also in dirision of him as when Pilates souldiers kneeled to Christ but the inward conceite and inclination of the judgement and hart And therefore they are very simple that reprehend Catholikes of Idolatry for kneeling before pictures when as they kneele not to the picture it selfe no more then Protestants kneele vnto that part of their seate or to the wall that is before them but they doe kneele to God as to their soueraigne Lord and to the Saint as to an holy personage whose prayer to God for them they humbly request Nowe to the maine point in controuersie M. PER. denyeth That any ciuill worshippe in bending of the knee or prostrating of the body is to be giuen to either Saints or Angels and much lesse any religious worshippe as namely inuocation signified by any bodily adoration for that saith he is the honour of God himselfe by what name soeuer you call it And this is all he saith for ought I can see touching the worshipping of Saints We on the other side say that vve may both bend the knee and prostrate the body to any Angell or Saint in heauen and with a religious inclination and obeysance of our harts worshippe them for their excellent supernaturall gifts and that this kinde of worshippe is much inferior vnto the honour proper to God yea that it is infinitly lesse then that as hath beene already declared M. PER. hath one only shadowe of a reason why we must not yeeld any ciuill worship vnto the Saints Because saith he they be absent from vs and we vse not to worshippe men that be absent ergo Which is most easily confuted and that two wayes First if we say as vve vvill proue afterward that though they be farre distant from vs in place yet they see and knowe all the honour that vve present to them and so are they morally present and as so present may be vvorshipped Secondly that we may truly honor them who are absent corporally by lifting vp our
of Gods seruants OF INTERCESSION OF SAINTS OVR CONSENT M. PERKINS Page 258. OVr consent I will set downe in two conclusions The first conclusion The Saints departed pray to God by giuing thankes to him for their owne redemption and for the redemption of the whole Church of God vpon earth The second conclusion The Saints departed pray generally for the state of the whole Church THE DISSENT THey hold that the Saints in heauen doe make intercession for particular men and that hauing receiued particular mens prayers they present them vnto God but this doctrine doe we flatly renounce vpon these groundes and reasons Esay 63. vers 16. The Church saith to God doubtlesse thou art our Father though Abraham be ignorant of vs and Israel knowe vs not Nowe if Abraham knewe not his posterity neither Mary nor Peter nor any Saint departed knowe vs and our estate and consequently they cannot make particular intercession for vs. To this vve answere two wayes first vvith S. Hierome vpon the same place that to knowe one is taken there for to like and approue him and his doings Psal 1. as it is very often in holy Scripture Our Lord knoweth the way of the just Item Christ vvill answere to them that were workers of iniquity Math. 7. vers 25. I knowe yee not as also to the foolish Virgins I knowe yee not that is I like you not euen so Abraham and Iacob could not then knowe that is approue the doing of those their wicked and degenerate children Secondly vve answere that Abraham and the holy Patriarkes vvere vntill Christ had by his passion paide their ransome not yet in the possession of heauenly joyes but detayned in a place of rest by the learned commonly called Lymbus Patrum To this second answere M. PER. replyeth If they say that Abraham was in Lymbo which they will haue to be a part of hell what joy could Lazarus haue in Abrahams bosome and with what comfort could Iacob say on his death bedde O Lord I haue wayted for thy saluation We rejoyne that albeit Lymbo be thought to be vnder the earth yet is it as farre remote from hell as the depth of the earth will giue it leaue for the place of Purgatory is betweene hell and it Further that in Lymbo there was no payne but a quiet expectation of their deliuerance from thence and translation into heauen vvhich brought them great joy besides the good company of many millions of holy soules that there attended the same happy houre of their deliuerance of all vvhich Lazarus vvas partaker being carryed into Abrahams bosome I vvill here omit that M. PER. in this very question maketh this matter of Lazarus but a parable and thereby not fit to confirme any point of doctrine in his owne judgement To the second place I say that Iacob might haue great comfort to thinke vpon his saluation vvhich should be accomplished in Christs time for Abraham who was father of them Ioh. 8. vers 56. 2. Reg. 22. vers 20. rejoyced to see Christs dayes which he sawe and was glad as our Sauiour himselfe testifieth The second reason Huldah the Prophetesse telleth Iosias that he must be gathered to his fathers and put in his graue in peace that his eyes might not see all the euill which God would bring on that place Therefore the Saints departed see not the state of the Church on earth this conclusion Augustine confirmeth at large To this vve answere first that the Prophetesse when shee saith he should not see the euill of that place meaneth no more then that he should be after his death in such a place of rest and contentment that it should not grieue and vexe him to see the just punishment of his owne Country Secondly it may be said of Iosias who dyed long before Christ as it is of Abraham that he vvas to remayne in Lymbo vvhen that euill should happen and so should not see it But Augustine saith he doth confirme this conclusion at large VVhy did not the honest man quote the place of S. Augustine as he is wont to doe was it because it would leade vs directly to the discouery of his deceit S. Augustine indeede doth very copiously handle the question what knowledge soules departed haue De cura pro mort ca. 15. 16. and resolueth that soules departed of their owne naturall knowledge doe not vnderstand what is done by their friendes here but that either by the report of other soules that come to them or of Angels that goe betweene or else by the reuelation of the spirit of God in whose presence Saints departed doe continually stand they may very well knowe that which is here done and thus much of S. Augustine in this place afterward you shall heare more of him concerning his opinion of the knowledge that Saints haue of our affaires The third reason of M. PERKINS No Creature Saint or Angell can be a Mediatour for vs to God sauing Christ alone for in a true Mediatour there must be three thinges First that the word of God must reueale and propound him vnto the Church Surely I should thinke that he must first be a perfect Mediatour before he be propounded for such a one Secondly a Mediatour must be perfectly just so as no sinne be found in him at all Such be all Saints in heauen Thirdly a Mediatour must be a propitiator that is he must bring to God some thing that may appease and satisfie his wrath for our sinnes so did Moyses vvhen he appeased Gods wrath justly kindled against the sinnes of the Israelites in the wildernesse thus might a man quickly answere M. PER. argument of his Mediatour But to explicate this matter more clearely and particularly I say that a Mediatour may be taken two waies First he may be called a Mediatour that doth in any sort imploy himself betweene two parties to agree them vvhether it be by perswasion or intreaty vvhether by letter or word of mouth and so is it commonly taken and that according vnto the proper signification of the word Secondly a Mediatour may be taken in an other sence not for euery one that vseth meanes of attonement but for him only that to make the agreement betweene the parties is content to pay the debt himselfe and to satisfie for al other damages and detrimentes and in this sence doth S. Paul say 1. Tim. 2. vers 5. That we haue one Mediatour the man IESVS Christ who gaue himselfe a redemption for all Note the latter vvordes and you shall see this my distinction of Mediatour to be gathered out of the Apostles owne wordes For saith he we haue one Mediatour that gaue himselfe a redemption for all that is that tooke the debts of all our sinnes vpon his owne shoulders and satisfied fully for all see here expressed the second kinde of Mediatour Nowe in the beginning of the Chapter he desireth that intercessions and prayers be made of the Christians for all men
question but that they heare all prayers made by vvhosoeuer to them and obtayne very many of their requests And as S. Gregory saith What doe they not see Lib. 12. Moral cap. 13. who see him that seeth all thinges yea contayneth all thinges within himselfe Yet M. PER. blusheth not to say that it is but a forgery of mans braine to imagine that the God-head is such a cleare glasse representing all thinges because it should then followe that the Angels who behold Gods face should be ignorant of nothing but the Angels haue learned some thinges of the Church as S. Paul witnesseth therefore they see not all thinges in God To this we answere that in God all thinges are represented and shine more brightly then in their owne naturall places yet doth not God communicate and reueale all thinges vnto euery body there present but his diuine nature in three persons Christ God and Man with all other naturall and ordinary thinges from the cope of heauen to the center of the earth are seene of euery Cytizen of heauen though with a different degree of clearenes but of Gods counsels concerning the gouernement of the world so much is only knowne vnto either Angell or Men as appertayneth vnto their state and that when it belongeth vnto them therefore the Angels might well not knowe many thinges belonging to the gouernement of the Church vntill they sawe it accomplished and therefore might be said to haue learned some such thing of the Church But as we haue said before it properly appertayneth vnto the state of Saints in heauenly blisse to knowe their friendes reasonable requests made vnto them or else their conditions should not be so perfect but that they might in equity require the bettering of it and consequently they could not be so throughly contented as their estate of perfect felicity in heauen doth demande and thus much of M. PER. reasons To which I will here adde one argument commonly vsed by the Protestants though M. PER. for the weakenesse of it perhaps thought best to omit it it is taken ab authoritate negatiuè which Schollers knowe to be naught worth Math. 11. vers 28. Christ saith come yee vnto me all yee that labour and be burdened and I will refresh you he saith not goe to the Saints but come to me I answere neither doth he say doe not goe to the Saints and therefore here is nothing against vs. We goe to Christ for remission of our sinnes which lye more heauy then a talent of lead vpon our backes and through our redeemers merits doe we craue pardon of them but to moue more effectually this our redeemer and God his father to haue pitty vpon vs we humbly desire the Saints his best beloued seruants to speake a good vvord in our behalfe acknowledging our selues vnvvorthy to obtayne any thing at Gods handes through our owne vngratefull wickednes Now that our Sauiour Christ IESVS doth very well like and approue the mediation of others euen to himselfe may be gathered out of very many euident texts of holy Scripture Math. 8. vers 13. for he at the intercession of the Centurion cured his seruant and * Math. 9 vers 2. seing the faith of them that brought a man sicke of the palsey before him he healed the sicke man and a Luc. 4. vers 38. at his disciples request cured S. Peters mother in lawe And vvhen the vvoman of Chanaan sued vnto him for her daughter b Math. 15 vers 23. he answered her not a word before his disciples had besought him for her by which and many such like recorded in the Gospell euery man that is not wilfully blinde may well see that the intercession of others for vs doth much preuaile euen with our soueraigne intercessor and mediator Christ IESVS himselfe nowe to his authorities Lib. 3. cōt Parmenia cap. 3. The first is out of S. Augustine Christian men commend each other in their prayers to God And who prayeth for all and for whome none prayeth he is the one and true mediatour I answere these wordes be rather for vs for approuing and confessing our Sauiour Christ to be the only mediatour of redemption as we haue already declared they teach that all Christians may commend themselues each to others prayers Nowe the Saints departed be Christians I trust as good as we or rather farre better therefor all other Christians may very well in S. Augustines judgement commend themselues vnto the Saints holy prayers because each one may commend himselfe to any others prayers Concerning the word Mediatour S. Augustine neuer attributeth it vnto any sauing only to our Sauiour taking it alwaies in the second signification aboue named to which three thinges are properly required according to S. Augustine first that he pray for all and that none pray for him which property M. PER. toucheth but misquoteth the place for it is in lib. 2. cap. 8. cont Parmenianum The second property and the most necessary of all is that he pay the full price and ransome of all our sinnes and that his redemption may in equall ballance counterpoise the grieuousnesse of our sinnes which is taken out of diuers places of Scripture The third which is the ground of al the rest is that the Mediatour be both God and Man that participating of both natures he may be as it vvere a naturall middle or meanes to reconcile the two Extreames and so as Man be able to suffer something to appease Gods wrath and as God to giue to that suffering of his man-hood infinite value making thereby Christs sufferinges more then sufficient to pay for the redemption of an hundred vvorldes if neede had beene And these proprieties gathered out of c Lib. 9. de ciuitate cap. 15. alibi S. Augustine and other Fathers will put downe M. PER. odde deuise of proprieties of a Mediatour all which make nothing against the intercession of Saints who be not in that sence to be called mediatours and yet cease not to pray for vs let vs then goe on M. PERKINS citeth secondly another sentence out of S. Augustine where he bringeth in our Sauiour saying Tract 22. in Iohan. Thou hast no whether to goe but to me thou hast no way to goe but by me Answere S. Augustine there alludeth vnto those vvordes of our Sauiour I am the way the truth and the life and saith that for life and truth vve haue no other way to seeke vnto but vnto Christ vvho according vnto his diuinity is truth and life vnto the vvorld And in this high degree of redemption and mediation he was the only way vnto his Father for neither the Gentiles by their morall vertues nor Iewes by the power of their law could without him leade them to God All this is very good doctrine but no whit more against praying to Saints then against commending of vs one to anothers prayers or vsing any other meanes of saluation as S. Augustine vpon
for the amendment of their liues or else they should be the most foolish judges that euer vvere appointed vpon earth Wherefore seing that the Apostles had authority to forgiue sinnes and vvere in discretion to admmister the same vnto penitent sinners it must needes followe necessarily that the penitent should confesse all his sinnes in particular vnto them and that authority was to continue in the Church for euer it being giuen to the Apostles for the due gouerning of the Church and to the comfort of al sinners which should neuer fayle to be vntill Christes last comming to judgement They to defeate all this discourse answere That Christ gaue not his Apostles authority to pardon any mans sinnes but only to declare that their sinnes were pardoned if with true repentance and faith they receiued the preaching of the Gospell This interpretation first is repugnant to the text vvhich in expresse tearmes hath Whose sinnes yee shall remit or pardon not vvhose sinnes yee shall declare to be remitted Secondly it hath that Whose sinnes yee shall forgiue they are forgiuen to wit euen then when they remit them and not that they were remitted before as he should haue said if he had giuen them authority only to declare them to be remitted Thirdly the metaphor of keyes giuen vnto them doth demonstrate that power was giuen them to absolue and not to declare only they were absolued because keyes are giuen to open or shut dores and not to signifie that eyther the dores are already open or shall be vpon condition Lastly the Ministers pronouncing of men absolued should be very rash and friuolous if they doe not truly absolue them For if he pronounce them absolutely to be absolued without good assurance of their faith repentance he should but lie and if he doe pronounce them absolued conditionally if they beleeue aright and be truly penitent then vvere his absolution in vaine for it depending vpon their faith and repentance and not vpon the Ministers pronouncing it bringeth no further assurance then they had before yea they themselues being of the faithfull could not be ignorant of so much before to wit that he was free from sinne and needed not his absolution Nowe that the Apostles then and Bishops and Priests their successours euer sithence did truly absolue men from their sinnes and were not like to cryers only proclaymers thereof see first S. Chrysostome who saith That such power was giuen here to men Lib. 3. de Sacerdot which God would neuer giue to Angels who yet had power to pronounce saluation to penitent sinners Secondly That Priestes haue such power of binding and loosing ouer the soules as Kinges haue ouer their subjects bodyes vvhich is truly to binde or to loose them and not only to declare them bound or loosed Thirdly he saith expresly That the Priestes among the Iewes had power to purge the leprosie or rather to try whether they were purged from it or no but it is graunted vnto our Priestes not only to discerne whether the body be purged from leprosie or no but playnely to purge our soules from the filth of sinne S. Ambrose in diuers places proueth directly against the Nouatians that Christ gaue power to Priestes to remit sinnes Lib. 1. de Poenitent c. 2. 7. The Nouatians denyed not but that one might preach the Gospell vnto such sinners that vvere relapsed and promise them pardon too if they repented but would not haue the Priests to reconcile them vnto the Church by the Sacrament of Penance denying that Priestes had any such power ouer such sinners but that they must leaue them to God alone vvhich the holy Doctor confuteth by these places of Scripture Math. 16. vers 19. cap. 18. vers 18. Ioh. 20. vers 23. Whatsoeuer yee forgiue in earth shall be forgiuen in heauen Epist ad Heliodor S. Hierome saith God forbidde that I should speake any euill of them who succeeding in the Apostolike degree doe with their sacred mouth make the body of Christ and by whome we are made Christians who hauing the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen doe in a certayne manner judge before the day of judgement Lib. 20. de ciuit c. 9. S. Augustine doth define in these wordes Whatsoeuer yee shall binde vpon earth shal be bound in heauen that authority is giuen vnto the rulers of the Church to judge in spirituall causes and not only to declare Hom. 62. in Euang. S. Gregory vpon these vvordes Whose sinnes you forgiue c. Behold saith he the Apostles are not only made secure of themselues but haue power giuen them to release other mens handes and doe obtayne a prerogatiue of the heauenly judgement that in Gods steede they may forgiue to some their sinnes and binde some others and truly the Bishops nowe doe hold the same place in the Church they receiue authority to binde and to loose c. By this you may see in part vvith what fore-head M. PERKINS affirmed that for a thousand yeares after Christ there was no mention of the Sacrament of Penance and more you shall see shortly if that first I shall note out of the Scripture it selfe both the acknowledgement of receite of that power to reconcile and absolue and the practise and commandement of confession S. Paul acknowledgeth and declareth 2. Cor. 5. vers 18. 20. that God had giuen vnto them the ministery of reconciliation and addeth that they be Gods Legates and therefore exhorteth them to be reconciled but they that be sent Ambassadours vvith full commission to reconcile men vnto their Prince must knowe both howe grieuously they haue offended and what recompence they are willing to make vvhich must needes be by their owne confession Nowe for the practise of confession by the first Christians Act. 19. vers 18. 19. it is recorded That many of the faithfull came confessing and declaring their deedes and many that had followed curious actes brought their bookes and burned them in the presence of al the rest Note here both particular confession made vnto S. Paul of the seuerall deedes and factes and not in generall that they vvere sinners as the very vvordes doe witnesse Confessing their deedes that is vvhat they had done in particular And againe howe should he haue knowne their study of curious bookes if they had not told their sinnes in particular some Protestants conuinced by the text say That they confessed some of their sinnes in particular but not all But I meruaile how they came by the knowledge of that for vvhy should they confesse some more then others and the vse of Scriptures is by the naming of sinnes indefinitely to signifie all as when we pray Forgiue vs our sinnes we meane all our sinnes and when it is said of Christ He shall saue his people from their sinnes it is meant that he shall saue them not from some of their sinnes but from al. Lastly touching the commandement S. Iames doth charge vs a Iac.
vulgar tongue or that all thinges necessary to be beleeued to saluation are contained in the Scriptures To be short not one article of their religion which is contrary to ours is contained in this Creede of the Apostles therefore to affirme as de doth all necessarie pointes of religion to be contained in this Creede is to cast their owne religion flat to the ground and to teach that not one point of it is to be beleeued this Creede may neuerthelesse be called the key and rule of faith because it containeth the principall pointes of the Christian religion and doth open as it were the doore vnto all the rest and guide a man certainely vnto the knowledge of them by teaching vs to beleeue the Catholike Church 1. Tim. 3. vers 15. Ioh. 16. vers 13. which being the piller and ground of truth directed and guided by the spirit of truth will alwaies instruct her obedient children in all truth necessary to saluation Then saith Master PERKINS The eternal truth of God the creatour shal depend on the determination of the creature Nothing lesse for Gods truth is most sincere and certaine in it selfe before anie declaration of the Church but vve poore creatures that are subject to mistaking and errour should not so certaynelie vnderstand and knowe that truth of God vnlesse he had ordained and appointed such a skilfull and faithfull Mistris and interpreter to assure vs both what is his word and what is the true meaning of it Like as pure gold is not made perfect in it selfe by the Gold-smithes touch-stone but other men are thereby assured that it is true and pure gold euen so the word of God doth not borrowe his truth from the Church but the true children of God are by the holie Church assured which is the same his word If we did hold as we doe not that the written vvord contayneth all pointes of doctrine necessarie to saluation yet vvere it most necessarie to relie vpon the Catholike Churches declaration both to be assured which bookes of Scriptures be Canonicall which not whereupon S. Augustine a man of farre better judgement then any of these daies said Con. Epist Iud. cap. 5. that he would not beleeue the Gospell vnlesse the authority of the Church moued him thereunto as also to vnderstand them truly because the wordes of holy Scripture without the true meaning and sence of them doe but deceiue men and leade them into errour and to that end haue alwaies beene and yet are by Heretikes abused to drawe others after them into destruction The like may be said of other ancient Creedes and confessions of faith which holding the Apostles Creede did adde some fewe pointes vnto it namely such as were in those daies called into question by Heretikes of greater fame and who were followed of many not touching in particuler diuers other articles generally beleeued of all true Christians or else by some fewe and obscure men only questioned Wherefore to argue that no other pointes of faith are to be beleeued but such as are expressed in ancient Creedes is to cut of a great part of our faith Lastly it is most vntrue to say that those ancient Fathers and Councels knewe not of these articles of faith by him mentioned for they haue most plainely taught them in their writinges yea and expresly condemned of heresie most of the contrary positions nowe againe reuiued and holden by the Protestantes as in those seuerall questions I haue before proued Touching beleeuing in the Church which he thrusteth in by the way we vse not that phrase as the very Creede sheweth following therein S. Augustine with others who hold that to beleeue in a thing is to make it our creatour by giuing our whole hart vnto it in which sence we beleeue not in Saintes nor in the Church albeit some other ancient Doctors take the wordes to beleeue in not so precisely but say that me may beleeue in the Church in Saintes that is beleeue certainely that the Catholike Church is the only true company of Christians and that to the lawfull gouernours thereof it appertaineth to declare both which bookes be Canonicall and what is the true meaning of all doubtfull places in them so we beleeue the Saintes in heauen to heare our prayers to be carefull to pray for vs to be able to obtaine by intreaty much at Gods handes in whose high fauour they liue Thus much in answere vnto that which M. PER. objecteth in generall nowe to that he saith in particuler He chargeth vs first with the breach of the third article Conceiued by the holy Ghost Which saith he is ouerturned by the transubstantiation of bread and wine in the Masse into the body and bloud of Christ for here we are taught to confesse the true and perpetuall incarnation of Christ beginning in his conception and neuer ending afterward Answ Here is a strange exposition of the Creede Is Christes incarnation perpetuall and not yet ended then it is true to say that Christ is not yet incarnate as we may say truly that a man is not borne vntill his birth be accomplished and ended But to the present purpose because Christes incarnation beganne at his conception cannot bread be turned afterward into his body how hangeth this together Belike he meanes that Christes body was but once conceiued and that was by the holy Ghost in his mothers wombe therefore it cannot afterward be made of any other thing This to be his meaning he declares in the question of the Sacrament but it is too too simple and childish For we hold him not to be so conceiued by bread as he was by the holy Ghost who was the efficient cause of his conception but that the same body that was cōceiued by the holy Ghost is made really present in the Sacrament by transubstantiation of bread into it which hath no opposition at al with this article as I haue more largely proued in the foresaid question And whereas he saith further cleane besides the purpose of this article that Christes body hath the essentiall properties of a true body standing of flesh and bone we grant the same but when he addeth that local circumscription cannot be seuered from a body he is deceiued for the greatest body of all others which is the highest heauen is not circumscribed by any place because there is no other body without it whose extreamities might compasse in and circumscribe that body of the highest heauen And when he saith that to be circumscribed in place is an essentiall property of euery quantity and that quantity is the common essence of euery body he makes himselfe but a common mocking-stocke vnto euery simple Logitian who knoweth that no accident such as euery quantity is can be of the essence and nature of a substance such as Christes body is Neither would any man say that cared what he said that to be circumscribed in a place is essentiall to euery quantity when all numbers that be quantities
haue no relation vnto any place neither is it of the essence of any quantity to be actually circumscribed by a place but it is a property flowing out of the essence of one only kinde of quantity to be apt and fit to be circumscribed and compassed about with a place And naturally all bodies except the highest heauen haue one place out of which they passe as S. Augustine said when they come into another but by the omnipotent power of God any body may be separated from his place or be in as many places at once as it shal please God to seate it because to be circumscribed with a place actually is a meere accident vnto a substantiall body and without the nature of quantity and God may not without blasphemie be disabled to seperate a substance from an accident By this is confuted also his second instance Christ is ascended into heauen and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father therefore his body is not really and locally in the Sacrament This followeth not because it is in both places at once as S. Chrisostome in expresse tearmes teacheth Chris lib. 3. de Sacerd O miracle O goodnesse of God! he that sitteth aboue with his Father at the very same instant is touched with the handes of all men and giueth himselfe to them that will receiue and embrace him See more of this in the question of the blessed Sacrament where M. PERKINS citeth the very same authorities which he here repeteth see my answere to them there Thirdly he reasoneth thus In that we beleeue the Catholike Church it followeth that it is inuisible because thinges seene are not beleeued We answere that the persons in the Catholike Church are and euer were visible euen to Iewes and Heathens who persecuted them but the inward indowmentes of those persons that is their faith hope and charitie their assistance by Gods spirit and such like Christian qualities are inuisible and to be beleeued And euen as a man is truly said to be visible though he consist aswell of an inuisible soule as of a visible body so the Church is visible for the visible persons visible teaching and administring of Sacraments in it albeit the inward qualities of it be not visible His last objection against vs out of the Creede is That the articles of remission of sinnes resurrection of the body and life euerlasting containe a confession of speciall faith For the meaning of them is thus much I beleeue the remission of mine owne sinnes and the resurrection of mine owne body to life euerlasting Answere That is not the meaning vnlesse you adde some conditions to wit I beleeue the remission of my sinnes if I haue duly vsed the meanes ordained by our Sauiour for the remission of them which is after Baptisme the Sacrament of Penance Item I beleeue I shal haue life euerlasting if I keepe as Christ willed the yong-man to keepe Gods commandements or at the least if I doe die with true repentance Nowe whether I haue done or shall doe these thinges required of me I am not so well assured as that I can beleeue it for I may be deceiued therein but I haue or may haue a very good hope by the grace of God to performe them Neither is there any more to be gathered out of S. Augustine as some of the wordes by himselfe here alleaged doe conuince For he requireth besides faith that we turne from our sinnes conforme our will to Gods will and abide in the lappe of the Catholike Church and so at length we shall be healed See the question of certainety of saluation Note also by the way the vncertainetie of M. PER. doctrine Pag. 270. 275. concerning this point for he holdeth that it is not necessary to haue a certaine perswasion of our owne saluation but that it is sufficient to haue a desire to haue it and that doctrine he putteth there as he saith himselfe to expound the Catechismes that propound faith at so high a reach as fewe can attaine vnto yet here and else where the good man forgetting himselfe chargeth vs to crosse the Creede because we doe not wrest faith vp to so high a straine and so in heate of quarelling often expoundeth this contrary to his owne rule Nowe for proofe of S. Augustines opinion herein whome he only citeth take these two sentences for the two points he speaketh of For the first that we be certaine by ordinary faith of our saluation let this serue Of life euerlasting De bono perseuer cap. 22. De correct grat cap. 13. which God that cannot lie hath promised to his children no man can be secure and out of danger before his life be ended which is a tentation vpon earth Secondly that a man once truly justified may afterward fall We must beleeue saith this holie Father that certaine of the children of perdition doe liue in faith that worketh by charity and so doe for a time liue faithfully and justly they were then truly justified and yet afterward doe fall and that finally because he calleth then the children of perdition Thus much in answere vnto that which Master PERKINS objecteth against our religion out of the Creede which as you haue seene consisteth wholy vpon his owne forced exposition and vaine illations Hence he proceedeth to the tenne Commandements But before I followe him thither I may not omitte here to declare howe the Protestant Doctors doe fouly mangle and in manner ouer-turne the greatest part of the Creede Obserue first that according to their common doctrine it is not necessary to beleeue this Creede at all because it is no part of the written word secondly that Caluin doubteth whether it were made by the Apostles or no Cal. lib. 2. Instit cap. 16. sess 18 being then no part of the written word not made by the Apostles it must by their doctrine be wholy rejected Nowe to the particulers 1. Concerning the first article I beleeue in God the Father almighty maker of heauen and earth they doe erre many waies First they doe destroy the most simple vnitie of the God-head Confess fidei gener by teaching the diuine essence to be really distinguished into three persons If the diuine nature be really distinguished into three there must needes be three diuine essences or natures ergo three Gods Caluin also saith In actis Serueti pag. 872. that the Sonne of God hath a distinct substance from his Father Melancthon that there be aswell three diuine natures as three persons in locis de Christo Secondly they ouerthrowe the Father in the God-head by denying the Sonne of God to haue receiued the diuine nature from his Father as Caluin Beza and Whitakers doe See the Preface Thirdly howe is God almightie if he cannot doe all thinges that haue no manifest repugnance in them But he cannot after the opinion of diuers of them make a body to be without locall circumscription or to be in two places at once which notwithstanding some others of
them hold to be possible In colloq Marpurg art 29. Li. 1. cont Scargum cap. 14. as Zwinglius Oecolampadius Andreas Volanus c. Fourthly though we beleeue God to be maker of heauen and earth yet neuer none but blasphemous Heretikes held him to be true authour and proper worker of al euil done vpon earth by men Such neuerthelesse be Bucer Zwinglius Caluin and others of greatest estimation among the Protestantes See the Preface 2. And in IESVS Christ his only Sonne our Lord. They must needes hold Christ not to be Gods true naturall Sonne which denie him to haue receiued the diuine nature from the Father againe they make him according to his God-head inferiour to his Father See the Preface 3. Borne of the Virgin MARY Many of them teach that Christ was borne as other children are Dialog de corpore Christi pag. 94. De consil part 2. 276. with breach of his Mothers virginity as Bucer and Molineus in vnione Euangelij part 3. and Caluin signifieth no lesse in harmo sup 2. Math. vers 13. 4. Suffered vnder Pontius Pilate crucified dead and buried Friar Luther with a great band of his followers doth toughly defend that the God-head it selfe suffered which to be blasphemy Musculus doth proue in his booke of the errours of Luthers Schollers yet Beza with all them that hold Christ to haue beene our mediatour according to his diuine nature can hardly saue themselues from the same blasphemy For the chiefest act of Christes mediation consisteth in his death if then the God-head did not suffer that death it had no part in the principal point of Christs mediatiō Hither also appertaine all these their blasphemies to wit that Christ was so frighted with the apprehension of death that he forgotte himselfe to be our mediatour yea refused as much as in him lay to be our redeemer Item that he thought himselfe forsaken of God and finally despaired See the Preface 5. Descended into hel the third day he arose againe from the dead It is worth a mans labour to behold their goodly variety of expositions about Christs descending into hell 2. Apolog. ad Sanct. Beza followed of Corliel our Country-man thinkes this to haue crept into the Creede by negligence and so the French Hugonots and Flemish Gues haue cast it cleane out of their Creede but they are misliked of many others who had rather admit the wordes because they be found in Athanasius Creede and also in the old Roman Creede expounded by Ruffinus but they doe most peruersly expound them Caluin saith that Christes suffering of the paines of hell on the Crosse is signified by these wordes but he pleaseth not some others of them because Christes suffering and death also goeth before his descending into hel and the wordes must be taken orderly as they lie Thirdly diuers of them will haue it to signifie the laying of Christes body in the graue but that is signified plainely by the word buried Wherefore some others of them expound it to signifie the lying of his body in the graue three daies which M. PER. approueth as the best but it is as wide from the proper and literall signification of the wordes as can be For what likenesse is there betweene lying in the graue and descending into hell Besides Caluin their great Rabbin misliketh this exposition as much as any of the rest Lib. 2. Instit ca 16. sess 8. and calleth it an jdle fancy Fourthly Luther Smideline and others cited by Beza art 2. doe say that Christes soule after his death went to hell where the Diuels are there to be punished for our sinnes thereby to purchase vs a fuller redemption which is so blasphemous that it needes not any refutation As ridiculous is another receiued of most Protestantes that Christes soule went into Paradise which well vnderstood is true For his soule in hell had the joyes of Paradise but to make that an exposition of Christes descending into hell is to expound a thing by the flat contrary of it Al these and some other expositions also the Protestants haue deuised to lead their followers from the ancient and only true interpretation of it to wit that Christ in soule descended vnto those lower partes of the earth where all the soules departed from the beginning of the world were detained by the just judgement of God till Christ had paide their ransome and were not admitted into the kingdome of heauen before Christ had opened them the way thither 6. Concerning Christes resurrection they doe also erre For whereas a resurrection is the rising vp of the very same body that died with all his naturall partes they denie Christ to haue taken againe the same bloud Cal. in 27. Math. Perkins pag. 194. In cap. 24. Lucae which he shed in his passion and yet is the bloud one notable part of the body Caluin also affirmeth it to be an old wifes dreame to thinke that in Christes handes and feete there remaine the print of nailes and the wound in his side notwithstanding that Christ shewed them to his Disciples and offered them to be touched of S. Thomas 7. About Christes assension into heauen they doe somewhat dissent from the truth For some of them say that Christs body did not pearce through the heauens by vertue of a glorious body least they should thereby be compelled to graunt that two naturall bodies may be together in one place and therefore as well one true body in two places at once but that broad gappes were made in the lower heauens to make him way to the highest which is very ridiculous and more against true Philosophy they say also 1. Cor. 15. vers 21. Coll. 1 18. that he was not the first man that entered into the possession of heauen which is flat against the Scriptures that call Christ the first fruites and first begotten of the dead Thirdly they locke Christ so closely vp in heauen Beza in c. 2. actorum that they hold it impossible for him to remoue thence at any time before the last judgement for feare they should otherwise be inforced to confesse that his body may be in two places at once which is to make him not Lord of the place but some poore prisoner therein And as for Christs sitting on the right hād of his Father they are not yet agreed what it signifieth See Conrad L. 1. ar 25 de concor Caluinist L. 2. Insti c. 14. ss 3. Caluin plainely saith that after the later judgemēt he shal sit there no longer That God shal then render to euery man according to his workes as holy Scripture very often doth testifie al the packe of them doth vtterly denie 8. I beleeue in the holy Ghost First Caluin and his followers who hold the holy Ghost to haue the God-head of himselfe and not to haue receiued it from the Father and the Sonne must consequently denie the holy Ghost to proceede from the Father and the Sonne In the Preface as hath beene else where proued
faith by which the hart doth really receiue Christ by resting vpon the promise which God hath made that he will giue Christ and his righteousnesse vnto euery true beleeuer Nowe then when God giueth Christ and his benefits and man by faith receiueth the same there riseth an vnion betweene them not forged but reall and so neare that none can be nearer and being a reall vnion there is a reall communion and consequently a reall presence of Christ to the hart of him that receiueth the Sacrament in faith And thus farre saith he doe we consent with the Romish Church It may well be that you agree herein with the Romish Church that is with some apish counterfeit of the Roman but the true Roman Church condemneth all that phantastical kinde of receiuing as you your selfe declare in the wordes following But before we come vnto them let vs note by the way some strange points of doctrine shall I say or rather dreaming of our conceited Masters the Protestants Who euer yet heard in true diuinitie that the God-head considered apart by it selfe had merits to conuey to the man-hood as M. PER. here teacheth for merits belong to an inferior in respect of his superior of whome he meriteth now the God-head is not inferior to any as all but Arrians confesse Againe howe can whole Christ be giuen to man as M. PER. first affirmeth if the substance of the God-head be not giuen as presently after he declareth for the substance of the God-head is the principal part of Christ who is both God man Moreouer how is Christes substance as well as his benefits made ours or really present to our faith if vve be made partakers only of his righteousnesse which may as euery man knoweth well be without any bodily presence of his besides that fiction of his that faith is created in our hart at the same instant that we receiue the Sacrament is very absurd For as all the world witnesseth a man must be indued vvith faith before he goe to receiue that Sacrament or else he presenteth himselfe most vnworthily vnto that holy table Lastly if simple men silly women should not receiue this Sacrament vntill they vnderstood M. PER. doctrine of sacramentall relation of his reall vnion and communion made by speciall faith in it as no man should receiue before he knoweth what and howe he is to receiue then surely they should neuer receiue it the manner of it is so intricate and so farre passing their capacity I may not omit here that which I clipped off in M. PER. discourse to make it the more perspicuous to wit that Christes benefits are bestowed vpon some by Gods imputation only vpon others they are bestowed by a kind of propagation which M. PER. cannot expresse fitly but doth resemble it thus As one candle is lighted by another and so the light of one is conueied vnto twenty candles euen so the inherent righteousnes of euery beleeuer is deriued from the store-house of righteousnesse which is the man-hood of Christ this I say I could not but let the gentle reader vnderstand that he may cōsider howe slippery vnconstant the man is in his owne doctrine In the question of justification it is high treason to confesse any inherent righteousnesse in vs. Pag. 66. For as he there saith it doth rase the very foundation of religion there only he alloweth of a certaine strange reall imputation of Christes justice vnto vs but here hauing belike forgotten that euer he said any such word he teacheth besides that imputatiue an inherent righteousnesse to be cōueied from Christ into euery righteous mans soule With whome will this man agree trowe you that cannot agree with himselfe Let vs nowe come vnto the maine point of our dissent which M. PER. deliuereth thus we differ not touching the presence it selfe but only in the manner of presence For though we hold a reall presence of Christes body and bloud in the Sacrament yet we doe not take it to be locall bodily or substantiall but spirituall and mysticall first to the signes by sacramentall relation then to the communicants by faith alone On the contrary the Church of Rome maintaineth a locall bodily and substantiall presence of Christes body and bloud by a change and conuersion of the bread and wine into the said body and bloud which they beleeue to be wrought by the vertue of Christes wordes pronounced ouer the bread and wine by a lawfull Priest intending to doe that which Christ at his last supper instituted and commanded him to doe Master PERKINS reasons to the contrary be these This corporall presence ouerturneth sundry articles of faith For we beleeue that the body of Christ was made of the pure substance of the Virgin Mary and that but once namely when it was conceiued by the holy Ghost But this cannot stand if the body of Christ be made of bread vnlesse we beleeue contraries that the body was made of the Virgin and not of the Virgin made once and not once but often We read not in our Creede made of the Virgin Mary but borne of her nowe there is great difference betweene made and borne For a house is made of a Carpenter but is not borne of him but the vvord made vvhich may also in good sence be vsed being fitter to cloake the fallacy Master PERKINS cared not to straine a little curtesie vvith the articles of our beleefe and to thrust in made in stead of borne But let this prety jugling-tricke passe and to his argument I answere that the appearance of this contrariety proceedeth either out of meere ignorance of our doctrine or else out of the equiuocation of this word made For we hold that Christes blessed body is but once made if made be taken for to be fashioned and formed newe from the beginning so was it but once made of the pure bloud of the immaculate Virgin Mary but may be againe and againe well made present vnder this or that forme or on this or that altar which hath no shadowe of contrariety with the other For euery mans body vvhich is but once made in his mothers vvombe may afterward a thousand times be made present in one or diuers places Nowe when we say with the ancient Fathers that of bread is made the body of Christ the sence is that the substance of bread is turned into the body of Christ so that then there is no more the substāce of bread vnder the formes of bread but Christes body which succeedeth in place of it therefore the bread is said to be turned vnto Christes body and Christes body to be made of bread not that any part of the bread remaineth changed into Christes body or that Christes body is a newe created and framed but because that by that very action wherewith the bread is remoued out the body is brought into that place the one is said to be made of the other so that here is nothing contrary vnto that